Author Topic: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?  (Read 9832 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tobes

  • Regents
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4951
MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« on: February 28, 2012, 10:09:55 PM »
Quote
Winning over the critics

“We’ll always face opposition,” says McCloud. “And our view has been in Oxford, as it was in Stroud, to involve local residents in the design, change the design correspondingly and hopefully win them round. And that process is reasonably collaborative with residents, it involved around four to six months work and several meetings.

“With the Gorse Hill project, if that comes off – we’re still waiting to hear – we plan to have a much more extensive and deeper consultation process.”

Discussions with the local community are key to a successful development, he says, but the system can make this a challenge.

 “The great problem with development is that one negotiates in good faith with landowners and councils and agencies. By the time you get to speak to residents – the numbers are a done deal. It would be lovely to start the process by working with communities and residents.”

Read more: http://www.primelocation.com/articles/kevin-mccloud-grand/#ixzz1niULhRaZ


Is it fair to say that it sounds like an admission that all 'consultation' involves is asking the residents as to the scent and shade of the turd which will be filling the formerly green open space, rather than whether they want it at all?

Saying that consultation has happened is a gulf apart from it MEANING anything, eh?

 :'(


I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it - [attributed to] Voltaire... 'Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessita' - William of Occam.... 'You have a right to feel offended, but just cos you are offended doesn't mean you are right'

Offline Geoff Reid

  • Twitter: @Geoff_Reid
  • Active But Odd
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10109
  • Gender: Male
  • Bald as a chimps arse
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #1 on: February 28, 2012, 11:50:29 PM »

I agree with your summary Tobes.

I wonder how cllr's Bluh & Perkins will re-interpret and spin Kev's remark to mean something entirely different.

His meaning seems transparent to me though - the 'done deal' is arranged behind closed doors long before the taxpaying, and in this case land-owning, public get the first noxious whiff of the approaching blight.

Offline jennyb

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1813
  • Gender: Female
  • Kareen
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #2 on: February 29, 2012, 05:56:36 AM »
And when the developer is the local authority it is a done deal from the outset .
It takes wisdom to know what you know and wisdom to know what you don't know and when to call in those who do. Often the people who do know will advise that evidence and research are very helpful when making decisions. Who knows it might even save a bit of money.

Offline Muggins

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8535
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #3 on: February 29, 2012, 08:43:44 AM »
"We’ll always face opposition,” says McCloud. “And our view has been in Oxford, as it was in Stroud, to involve local residents in the design, change the design correspondingly and hopefully win them round. And that process is reasonably collaborative with residents, it involved around four to six months work and several meetings."

Not to be misled here, I think the residents he talks about are the 'potential' residents of the houses to be built rather than the site plans. In his Ferndale programme, he didn't seem to speak much to the people who lived around the site, actually calling them nimbys, he didn't seem to have proper discussion with the local councillors, calling them numpty's (or some such)  and being extremely rude to them in full council in their presence.  But once the prospective tenants (very carefully chosen) from the waiting list, he was seen discussing some of the aspects of his design with them, he made the very basic mistake of not providing storage.  Only I think the back doors that didn't open from the outside problem was not amended.

I would say it was hardly good practice with nobs on!
Oi! Listen mush. Old eyes, remember? I’ve been around the block a few times. More than a few. They’ve knocked down the blocks I’ve been around and rebuilt them as bigger blocks. Super blocks. And I’ve been round them as well.  The Doctor (Night Terrors)

Offline Des Moffatt

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 337
  • Hello !
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #4 on: February 29, 2012, 02:47:29 PM »
Actually Muggins, Muggins, a better name for us than you.
We had a television crew visit the site three times and at their request I rounded up Jim and Kevin and they consumed a couple of house of our time with the cameras allegedly running. Told us hand on heart that they worked for Channel 4 and not Kevin Macloud. Came a second and third time and consumed more of my time, said they would be using the material I gave on camera, I arranged for a visit to the most disadvantaged neighbour, on and on it went all the time being assured it would not be edited in Kevin Macloud favour.
They gave me three release forms to sign and get signed by Jim and Kevin which I duly did, I still have them and even though I phoned the guy to offer to post them I could get no answer.
In retrospect we were treated as simpletons whose opinion was of no matter whatever.
We must have done something right though, we didn’t go over the top like Peter G nor did we blame the mostly homeless people who live in the monstrous blot that Macloud visited on the community we represent.
Readers should know this is what he does, he is but a tabloid telly presenter using tactics, lawful tactics may be, but tactics no better than News of the World journalists.
He has his supporters it must be said, including members of my own family but then a lot of people bought the News of the World as well.



Offline Muggins

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8535
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #5 on: February 29, 2012, 03:32:53 PM »
Based on my experience with Northern development, developers in any shape or form are the biggest time wasters ever. I sited this at the Leadership conference last week. (At which our leader must have left before I left at 11am, on Facebook he was on his way to some other meeting in London - good Leadership conference I thought, without theLeader there! What did he learn from it?)

We were talking about commissioning and then contracting out, and I gave my opinion that this would not work for communities, local people, without rock solid contracts and solid gold enforcement - far too long arm, especially when it came to contractors.  They welcome you in with smiles and obliging tones, offer you tea and biscuits, charm personified - then they say they will keep in mind all you say, how delightful it is to meet people living so close and caring for their environment.

But the minute their door slams behind you, any paperwork goes straight in the bin and they forget you've been and carry on in exactly the way they were going to anyway.   which usually was how they wanted to do it regardless of any planning restrictions.

I never could figure out whether councillors and/or officers were complicit in that........I certainly wondered who had shares in brick and tarmac companies. Some of what they did was unmitigatedly spiteful and unjustified.

All decisions thereafter are left to chance and made by the guy driving the bulldozer on the day.
Oi! Listen mush. Old eyes, remember? I’ve been around the block a few times. More than a few. They’ve knocked down the blocks I’ve been around and rebuilt them as bigger blocks. Super blocks. And I’ve been round them as well.  The Doctor (Night Terrors)

Offline Geoff Reid

  • Twitter: @Geoff_Reid
  • Active But Odd
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10109
  • Gender: Male
  • Bald as a chimps arse
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #6 on: February 29, 2012, 04:31:48 PM »
Had a memory nerve tickled by this thread:

Quote
"IT is a curious paradox that many councillors, on the one hand, can spend time righting the plight of wronged constituents, but, on the other, cannot see what is morally wrong or the judicial pitfalls of the sort of fake consultations far too often carried out by the council, the government and other local authorities.

Such consultations push people into a quiet frenzy of frustrated impotence and a rejection of a political system that sails under the name of democracy – a dangerous mix that invites the intervention by populist extreme right-wing parties.

Enquiries by this newspaper show that although the council pledged to residents earlier in the year that they would be consulted before sites were sold off, this has hardly happened."


http://www.camdennewjournal.com/letters/2011/jul/cnj-comment-it%E2%80%99s-dangerous-make-mockery-consultation

In Swindon's multiple cases of faux-consultations a right-wing administration is responsible for encouraging political planning blight and producing an attendant democratic deficit. 

Legacy politics, when exercised by those who, (in my opinion), often display sociopathic behaviour, really f*cks a town up in more ways than one.

Developers, on the other hand, develop simply for the money.  Celebrity developers use their celebrity to enhance their access to the influential, access to land and, it seems, access to free public money.   I wonder what bigger developers must think about Mr McLouds compnay being given free land, tax payers money, and other developers section 106 money, but it doesn't seem commercially fair to them, doesn't seem to be providing any 'value' for the Borough of Swindon and it certainly isn't going to enhance the lives of those already resident in Gorsehill.....

....but what this will enhance is Mr McClouds personal fortune.  The council leadership might think it will enhance their political portfolio of 'Delivered Dreams'.  I beg to differ.

Offline Muggins

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8535
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #7 on: February 29, 2012, 04:46:42 PM »
Quote "Such consultations push people into a quiet frenzy of frustrated impotence and a rejection of a political system that sails under the name of democracy – a dangerous mix that invites the intervention by populist extreme right-wing parties.2

Which is exactly why two successive governments have brought in legislation to localise decisions and engage more people. funny how so many threads come back to this fact!

As the housing associations still seem to have money to spend, (proabably grants) and use developers to build their houses, then developers don't mind the giving away of land and all the rest of it.  It's Borough policy (unless it's changed) not to charge S106 money on social housing development.

It's win win win for everyone except those poor people who have to live with it and put up with traffic, noise, dust and the time it takes to actual build is no fun either. You've given all the wins in your posting Geoff.

The big loss is to wildlife and democracy. And our quality of life (and in my opinion our health) of course.
Oi! Listen mush. Old eyes, remember? I’ve been around the block a few times. More than a few. They’ve knocked down the blocks I’ve been around and rebuilt them as bigger blocks. Super blocks. And I’ve been round them as well.  The Doctor (Night Terrors)

Offline Tobes

  • Regents
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4951
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #8 on: February 29, 2012, 07:10:18 PM »
Quote
Developers, on the other hand, develop simply for the money.  Celebrity developers use their celebrity to enhance their access to the influential, access to land and, it seems, access to free public money.   I wonder what bigger developers must think about Mr McLouds compnay being given free land, tax payers money, and other developers section 106 money, but it doesn't seem commercially fair to them, doesn't seem to be providing any 'value' for the Borough of Swindon and it certainly isn't going to enhance the lives of those already resident in Gorsehill.....

That's a summary in a nutshell!

Using celebrity and a spurious green agenda doesn't make building on an open space bequeathed to the people of Swindon any less unwelcome, does it?

 :WTF:

Still, this is a public forum, so Macleod or any of his researchers (who must make up a chunk of the unregistered guests visiting these threads each day) are more than welcome to come and have their say, if they think that this is something more than an overt bit of profiteering at our expense.

 :popcorn:
« Last Edit: February 29, 2012, 11:42:06 PM by Tobes »
I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it - [attributed to] Voltaire... 'Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessita' - William of Occam.... 'You have a right to feel offended, but just cos you are offended doesn't mean you are right'

Offline Mart

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5249
  • Where's my cow?
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #9 on: February 29, 2012, 07:35:37 PM »
Which is exactly why two successive governments have brought in legislation to localise decisions and engage more people. funny how so many threads come back to this fact!

That's the problem really.

If a particular set of circumstances or part of society needs legislation to make sure people behave themselves there should be red lights and sirens squarking all over it.

The legislation does not in itself alter the mindset of the people 'exploiting' the given set of circumstances, they still want to look after number 1. They do not pause and reflect on their behaviour, they instead turn their energies to circumventing the new legislation. They move a fecking sight quicker than legislation though.

All the time that situations such as this can be dealt with under the 'all within the rules' people will continue to get shafted.

This deal is absolutely legal. It's shit, it's exploitative, it's greasy and does none of those who facilitated it any credit.

I thought better of Kev, he was in my top 10 of decent geezers, however in my view he is tainted by association.

I wonder if he feels compromised, I wonder if he feels compromised enough.

Lebensraum, that'll be it.

Retired golfer extradited to Texas for flogging ifFy batteries, allegedly, lunatic Jihad obsessed hook handed lunatic cannot be extradited. That's legal as well. So it's OK.
Sometimes I think you have to march right in and demand your rights, even if you don’t know what your rights are, or who the person is you’re talking to. Then, on the way out, slam the door.

Offline Mellon

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1907
  • Gender: Male
  • Whatever it is , I didn't do it!
    • Mellons Blog
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #10 on: February 29, 2012, 08:20:26 PM »
This reminds me of Justin Tomlettesons behaviour when he used the tadpole development as a way of securing part of the votes in Abbey meads.

And of course the withdrawal of the central planning thing on the council's website. Sorry to change the direction slightly but based on the evidence its going the same way oh and didn't they also knuckle under?
"Duct tape is like the force. It has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the world together."

Offline simonsaid

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2
  • Hello !
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #11 on: February 29, 2012, 09:19:28 PM »
I think the Council are relishing the limelight. Kevin McCloud is a massive coup. But what happens if it is rejected? Will he find another town centre green space? St Marks Rec?!

Offline Greengirl

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 68
  • Hello !
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #12 on: February 29, 2012, 09:34:17 PM »
Which is exactly why two successive governments have brought in legislation to localise decisions and engage more people. funny how so many threads come back to this fact!

That's the problem really.

If a particular set of circumstances or part of society needs legislation to make sure people behave themselves there should be red lights and sirens squarking all over it.

The legislation does not in itself alter the mindset of the people 'exploiting' the given set of circumstances, they still want to look after number 1. They do not pause and reflect on their behaviour, they instead turn their energies to circumventing the new legislation. They move a fecking sight quicker than legislation though.

All the time that situations such as this can be dealt with under the 'all within the rules' people will continue to get shafted.

This deal is absolutely legal. It's shit, it's exploitative, it's greasy and does none of those who facilitated it any credit.

I thought better of Kev, he was in my top 10 of decent geezers, however in my view he is tainted by association.

I wonder if he feels compromised, I wonder if he feels compromised enough.

Lebensraum, that'll be it.

Retired golfer extradited to Texas for flogging ifFy batteries, allegedly, lunatic Jihad obsessed hook handed lunatic cannot be extradited. That's legal as well. So it's OK.

That's it in a nutshell Mart.- the legislators try to sort out something then those that caused the problem use their whiles to appear to stay this side of the law ( when actually continuing to operate  on the other side).

There is no real wisdom or compassion towards the electorate. It is all about power struggles and greed.

There is equally no wisdom or compassion in our legal system otherwise your final paragraph wouldn't be so pertinent.

This is not behaviour to be proud of.

Offline Geoff Reid

  • Twitter: @Geoff_Reid
  • Active But Odd
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10109
  • Gender: Male
  • Bald as a chimps arse
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #13 on: February 29, 2012, 10:45:27 PM »

I disagree with Simonsaid. Kevin McCloud is not a massive coup.

He, his development company and Swindon Borough Councillors could have produced something very special, genuinely innovative, ecologically sound and popular...somewhere in the Borough, if they had all acted very differently and involved the resident owners of most of Swindon's brown and green space, (that's us by the way), but they didn't.

They again took the wifi'asco route of subsidising private venture with public money and giving away publically owned assets for the mere possibility of personal political gains.

We're already hearing the same justifications for ploughing ahead with pillaging pickards field, (and its surroundings), as we did when it was deemed 'essential' that a further £250,000 was given to digital city: "the project will stall if we don't put public money in", "the development isn't commercially viable unless we give away the land" and, (this one fairly makes me want to puke), "the developer has already invested a lot of money in this project".

So?, businesses risk their own, or (borrowed), money all the time but when did we accept an obligation to insure them against their own speculative ventures?, obviously we didn't - that stinking and corrosive burden is being thrust on us again and again by Cllr Bluh and his ever more adventurous vanity spends and giveaways.



  It's sickening really.

Offline Muggins

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8535
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #14 on: March 01, 2012, 08:00:47 AM »

"I think the Council are relishing the limelight. Kevin McCloud is a massive coup. But what happens if it is rejected? Will he find another town centre green space? St Marks Rec?!"

No, I sincerely hope that he will find another town - full stop.

It's not a coup, he's only here because they are suckers - and low on anything to claim that is remotely green. (apart from recycling)
 
The Pillage Village - and excellent name for this development, Geoff. 
Oi! Listen mush. Old eyes, remember? I’ve been around the block a few times. More than a few. They’ve knocked down the blocks I’ve been around and rebuilt them as bigger blocks. Super blocks. And I’ve been round them as well.  The Doctor (Night Terrors)

Offline Tobes

  • Regents
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4951
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #15 on: March 01, 2012, 10:30:08 AM »
The 'Pillage Village' - hehehe  ;D - mind you, not so sure SBCs media team or MacCleods researchers will be so keen...

The point about MacMoney MacCleod is that his expertise would have been far better used tackling a site like Regents: I'd really have relished the idea of him doing something there to get a better community balance and to have used some genuinely innovative ideas there. If MacCleod is such a genius, why doesn't SBC work with him to come up with a solution to The Mechanics? Or MacCleod could be contracted to help solve the Wichelstowe mess or.... there are quite a few examples of challenging projects a really talented developer could have been given. Building on an open plot of land certainly isn't one of them, community resistance aside, that is.

In fact, given that there are dozens of empty council owned retail premises, why not 'gift' some of those with potential for conversion into apartments?

MacCeods skills seem to lie in his usage of new materials, his ability to look at developments as community sites rather than just collections of stand-alone buildings. He has energy, enthusiasm and a genuine belief in doing what he sees as the right thing. I have a natural urge to want to like and support the guy, as he stands for what I generally believe should be a better kind of development philosophy. But all of that positive stuff doesn't offset the fact that this land was bequeathed the people of Swindon as a piece of open land. I'm surprised that he feels his philosophy and apparent outlook can square with that basic fact. It makes me wonder how much of Mr MacCleods image is a media construct and how much is real.

From a council perspective, I'm sure MacCleod has been granted this project for purely PR reasons. The council hope that his pseudo-green credentials and generally positive media profile will help ameliorate the fall-out which they would have got if they'd made a similar deal with any other developer.

Never underestimate the old-boys club either. It seems he probably moves in the same social and business circles which have resulted in other similarly favourable deals for those deemed to have the SBC approved Midas Touch. Perhaps he ought to be aware of The Hunt Effect?
I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it - [attributed to] Voltaire... 'Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessita' - William of Occam.... 'You have a right to feel offended, but just cos you are offended doesn't mean you are right'

Offline Outoftowner

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1632
  • Gender: Male
  • Hello !
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #16 on: March 01, 2012, 10:53:40 AM »
Some very good points there Tobes. Why not modify the content slightly and send it direct to Mr. MacCleod? It is a direct appeal to the side of him that knows what is the right thing to do.
What's it all about?

Offline Rochelle

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 286
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #17 on: March 01, 2012, 11:01:41 AM »
With you on all of that Tobes...

The Campaign group is mobilising its forces.
Anyone who is interested please pm me.

Offline Tobes

  • Regents
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4951
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #18 on: March 01, 2012, 11:50:47 AM »
Quote
Community consultation24 February 2012

You've got lots of questions...
Now come and hear the answersCommunity Consultation
Saturday 10 March 2012 at 10am-2pm
at Gorse Hill Junior School
Avening Street, Swindon SN2 8BZ

(Please park in Chapel Street car park)We hope local people will take part in discussion groups about the park improvement, recreation facilities, housing, and community development proposals. At the first open public event, we will be asking everyone who comes along whether they'd like to remain involved as the project moves forward. We will also look to work closely with resident groups and local communities to ensure that the plans reflect local aspirations and needs.

For more information please contact Dave Aston on 01249 466052 or email david.aston@greensquaregroup.com.

Except, as we now know from Kevin's own lips from the quote that begins this thread, that this is an empty and sterile exercise in PR, NOT 'consultation'...?  :-\

'We will also look to work closely with resident groups and local communities to ensure that the plans reflect local aspirations and needs.'

I have a simple answer and suggestion to that: Drop the project Kevin. The residents don't need the development or want it.  Swindon doesn't need a development on green open space. Go and concentrate your efforts on a site which needs your help - rather than a green field site which was convenanted to the people of the town as an open space to be enjoyed by all - not just your accountant.

 ???
I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it - [attributed to] Voltaire... 'Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessita' - William of Occam.... 'You have a right to feel offended, but just cos you are offended doesn't mean you are right'

Offline Geoff Reid

  • Twitter: @Geoff_Reid
  • Active But Odd
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10109
  • Gender: Male
  • Bald as a chimps arse
Re: MacLeod admits 'consultation' is essentially a lie?
« Reply #19 on: March 01, 2012, 12:39:54 PM »

Tobes, you mentioned Wichelstow: Many readers may not be aware that a substantial piece of Wichelstowe, including pre-installed ( at our considerable expense) infrastructure is also being gifted to the companies constructing the Pickards Field Pillage Village.

What is an acre of land, with infrastructure and guaranteed planning permission, worth these days? :popcorn: