Author Topic: Save Lower Shaw Farm  (Read 56498 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Keith

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 125
  • Gender: Male
  • Cllr. for Shaw and Nine Elms
    • West Swindon In Touch
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #160 on: November 24, 2006, 09:09:12 PM »
I have since found out from where the amended motion originated, but would betray the author's confidence if I went into further detail. Whilst unusual, no harm or offence has been committed.
I suspect the Labour group regret the way they manhandled the introduction of an amended motion, and I hope the chamber will not be witnessing such a performance again.

Let's not be pessimistic about this. This is an opportunity for LSF to capitalise on the recent media coverage, and to raise awareness of the services it offers.
I would rather not go into too much detail, but the current plan is for a working group to be formed involving all interested parties in order to work out the best way forward.

Offline Alan Hayward

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 126
  • Gender: Male
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #161 on: November 24, 2006, 10:44:58 PM »
however am i right in thinking that this land was original purchased by a labour council for the development of houses and is it not the fact that the goverment stipulated how many houses the council have to put up in swindon?

so is it the councils fault or the govements fault we are losing green space?

Whichever party purchased it is immaterial. It is in the past. Why do posters on here have to play politics all the time? Grrrr. Keep it up and I won't bother coming back again. Let's stick with issues and what is right for the people of Swindon and our children, eh?

To answer your question it is both.

Firstly because the government are dishing out the numbers (via the South West Regional Assembly and SWERDA) for new houses caused by the exodus from London. Swindon gets lumbered with a very high percentage of the SW's quota because nobody fights for our green space in the SWRA and the small towns and rural counties are over represented.

Secondly a previous council (Thamesdown in this case) promised the land at LSF as a farm in perpetuity. This council can decide where the new houses go. Take Coate and LSF as very poor unpopular options. Even Jean Saunders doesn't care less (relatively speaking) about the land east of the A419. So why blow away the greenery that mean something to the residents?

PS very very good, objective and thoughtful column by Tom Morton about LSF in today's Adver. It is not online yet, if I get a minute I will type it in.
'Twas brillig and the slithy toves did gyre and gimbal in the wabe

Offline Alan Hayward

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 126
  • Gender: Male
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #162 on: November 24, 2006, 11:37:41 PM »
Here you go then.

Typed in by my good lady Joy - thank you - the loveliest woman on planet Earth (and she is all mine).

Swindon Advertiser

Friday 24th November 2006

Tom Morton...gets a few things off his chest

What a farce over the farm

"The business case only points one way. We should be able to market the site as high quality housing.  The farming aspect is not greater than you would find on an allotment."

These words, from Coun Nick Martin, kicked off the whole Lower Shaw Farm rumpus, which as we know looks to have a more secure future now than a few weeks ago.

The plan back then appeared to be concrete the lot, slap up nice new houses, trouser £2m, and chuck that money into more worthy things like schools.

When explaining why Swindon Council's now happy to come up with a compromise plan, the leader Roderick Bluh mentioned one of the positive results after the negotiations, meetings and discussions was that the "valuable work" that goes on at the farm would be able to contine.

This has come about because even though only a maximum of a third of the farm's land would be sold off, there would still be a lot of money made, so the beancounters have their realised assets, and the arty lot still have their farm.  Ideally, it looks like a win for all concerned.

But think it through a little more carefully.  There are a lot of questions that need to be put to bed.

Firstly, if you can make close to £2m by selling off a third, why would you aim to make £2m by selling off the whole?  You wouldn't bother.  Local authorities have to jump through many hoops to achieve Best Value (with all the hideous, jargonesque subtexts that those unnecessary capital letters imply), but if this new deal makes the money we've been told it should, the first plan was quite frankly cobblers, not only because it undervalued what's there, but it would have deprived Swindon of something that, as attested to in the Adver's letters page recently has given and does give great joy to hundreds of people.

And that is a decision with no value at all.

Secondly, how have we jumped from "an allotment" to "valuable work"?  Was it an ill-conceived plan to sell of the farm in the first place?

In some ways it would be quite cheering if public opinion had helped sway the official line, but in fact that would mean that the rulers at the council were unaware of what was going on in their own backyard.

And that is a cause for concern, because if you only know the worth of something on paper, you're clearly going to make some duff decisions.

Or, is the ruling cabinet split on certain subjects? Again, that's tolerable fact of life - better that the council is headed by people with personal opinion than 12 automatons - but you'd think that you'd work out something approaching a party line before going public on a pretty big issue, not afterwards.

Thirdly, if the council has always been happy to ensure the farm's continued existence, why not start from a position where it would continue, rather than from one where it would be obliterated?

In retrospect, the whole thing now looks like classic local authority bargaining.  You see it all the time - and all over the country - at budget-setting time, which will kick off again next month.

The council threatens to cut a group's funds by say £200,000, and so when the cut is only £100,000, the group is relieved and keeps quiet but the council has saved 100 large ones at an easy swoop.

So let's hope all will be well at the farm, let's hope that all the negotiations in future do end in such a way that the best case scenario (less than a third of farmland lost, farm continues, people happy) comes to pass, and let's hope that it's a story with a happy ending.

But let's hope that when the local authority next looks at turnings its assets - which don't forget belong to us, the taxpayers and the people - into money, it's done in a more coherent and measured way rather than initially presenting it as a done deal with an insult thrown in, which degenerates into a backtrack and a U-turn.
'Twas brillig and the slithy toves did gyre and gimbal in the wabe

Offline Alan Hayward

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 126
  • Gender: Male
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #163 on: November 25, 2006, 12:01:19 AM »
Oh by the way.

Hello Simon  8)
'Twas brillig and the slithy toves did gyre and gimbal in the wabe

shorty

  • Guest
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #164 on: November 25, 2006, 01:43:12 AM »
alan,

you ask why people come one here to play politics. we don't play politics but most of us seem to enjoy being political.

there are few arenas in swindon where this sort of debate can be held and this site happens to be the best there is. this is because whilst we may be discussing political issues the site is not political.

for example the likes of zpw and I may disagree on some fairly important issues we can agree about the sham of the national identity register. this is very healthy as it allows people an open and sometimes brutally honest debate.

the media in swindon is generally biased - the adver edits letters, publishes letters from the same people time and time again - we all know who they are, and yet if I write to them to raise awareness of a major balls up by the government they don't do anything about it. all the adver wants to do is slag off the council and by association the rest of the town.

admittedly tom mortons column was one of his better ones - but he is still exhibiting his bias. if I were A journo I would have ripped the p*ss out of the labour group for being so disorganised.

anyone who didn't atttend the council on thursday would have a pretty sanitised view of what really happened if they went on the advers article and as such have no idea what a bunch of idiots the labour councillors appeared to be.

that is why some of us like talking politics - this is an honest site and people generally speaking are truthful with what they say on here. if you don't like politics why do you get involved in things like the civic trust ? or the shaw forest And didn't you stand for election yourself ?

also, I for one believe that our mp's and councillors should be held to account - this site allows people to do that and as you will have noticed some of them even post here - where else does that happen ? shame our mps don't seem too keen - perhaps the questions are too hard - or the bandwagon they were riding moved in the wrong direction.

anyway - I would urge you to enter into the spirit of the debate - you never know you might enjoy it.

Offline Alan Hayward

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 126
  • Gender: Male
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #165 on: November 25, 2006, 02:06:06 AM »
Hello shorty

Thanks for the personal and direct reply. Good to meet you.

I come from a different angle. One that is apolitical and (hopefully) more objective.

I hate the dogma of political parties, posturing and stance. That is the main reason why this country has become so trashed in the last thirty years (and yes - since Maggie got in). We have degenerated into feudalism (and Brian Burrows - what a star - will back me up on this).

You are quite right, I stood as an independent candidate at the last General Election. I treated it as a learning curve. The lesson I learnt was that most people are (or act as) stupid, ignorant, selfish and lazy. Unless you can rouse them off of their sofas and away from their televisions then really they cannot give a ****. Sometimes they can't help it because they, their way of life  - or their families - are personally threatened. Shaw Forest was a very good example. LSF is another.

There really are only a very few people who care about anything in this country and will do so for the common good. Unfortunately they are in a very small minority. Many masquerade as though they are trying to and those people are politicians. In my experience that is more to do with kudos, power and personal gain. Wasters.

I know Rod Bluh personally and I have to say that he is a breath of fresh air in Swindon. I'm no Conservative (with a big C), but then I don't really think he is either. He is a pragmatic realist. It just so happens that the Conservatives are in the ascendant at the moment.

The problem is that until we have a Cabinet of Rod Bluhs then in Swindon we shall suffer some of the idiots who populate the cabinet.

As for the Adver, I don't really care what their take is on things. If you are intelligent and aware you can sieve the real news out from the journalist's write up. Even better, get active and talk to the people involved yourself.
'Twas brillig and the slithy toves did gyre and gimbal in the wabe

Offline Matt Holland

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3
  • Gender: Male
    • Lower Shaw Farm
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #166 on: November 25, 2006, 09:30:54 AM »

Alan said:

Quote from: Alan Hayward
Taking the bigger Swindon picture, LSF may well be "saved" with a new lease for twelve months/twelve years/twelve minutes or whatever and hopefully will continue in its proposed smaller envelope. But there is still the very real issue of loss of green space and overdevelopment. Matt may well be happy with whatever is finally thrashed out but it still irks me enormously that we will probably lose yet more West Swindon greenery to more housing (whatever "eco-executive" - is that possible? - form it takes).

And Tig answered:

Quote
true i agree
however am i right in thinking that this land was original purchased by a labour council for the development of houses and is it not the fact that the goverment stipulated how many houses the council have to put up in swindon?

so is it the councils fault or the govements fault we are losing green space?


Alan, you are missing a point because you have made an assumption instead of asking a question or getting information before you express your anger, disappointment, or whatever it is.
 
Tig is right. LSF, along with 5 other farms in this area (that I used to milk cows and make hay on) was bought by compulsory purchase in the 1970s by the then Thamesdown Council for the express purpose of the development and expansion of Swindon. LSF was not used for the early development, so our predecessors and we got to lease it from SBC and were part of a group that helped make plans to make the western expansion (ie. West Swindon) as 'green' as possible. Note the many hedgrows, grassy bits, play areas, etc..
 
Once LSF was going strong, it was thought appropriate, even by LSF residents, to have development nearby or even in its environs, of eco-projects, eco-housing, co-housing, etc. (but not your 'eco-executive', which sounds like a made up sneer and which I've never heard of before nor seen written, so where did you get it from, as you appear to quote it?)
 
Let's stay idealistic but also be reasonable about things.




Offline Geoff Reid

  • Twitter: @Geoff_Reid
  • Active But Odd
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10109
  • Gender: Male
  • Bald as a chimps arse
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #167 on: November 25, 2006, 09:41:10 AM »

Whichever party purchased it is immaterial. It is in the past. Why do posters on here have to play politics all the time? Grrrr. Keep it up and I won't bother coming back again. Let's stick with issues and what is right for the people of Swindon and our children, eh?


Like it or not, politics runs through LSF's history from the very begining apparently, and whilst it's future is largely in the hands of politicians, discussion is inevitably going to contain more than a drizzle of politics.

This made me chuckle though Alan....

Quote
Why do posters on here have to play politics all the time? Grrrr. Keep it up and I won't bother coming back again

Pick your dummy up and get on with it....  ;D


Offline Alan Hayward

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 126
  • Gender: Male
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #168 on: November 25, 2006, 09:44:15 AM »

Pick your dummy up and get on with it....  ;D

Fair point. Perhaps I should clarify.

Party politics. I haven't got any issue with the small p type.

 ::)
'Twas brillig and the slithy toves did gyre and gimbal in the wabe

Offline ZPW

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1318
  • Bob Wright better do a stellar job
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #169 on: November 25, 2006, 06:21:58 PM »
First.
Thanks matt for clarify lots of stuff.
I know the angry wasps of this forum have been guilty of snapping at each other, even I have felt the whisk of a baseball bat breeze by my ears. there's been a lot of sniping at the EssBeeSee and an assumption that they are either up to no good or intellectually impaired.


The account of Thursday's jamboree at Council served to confirm lots of predujices gave lots of glee, some spiteful ( I speak of myself, I speak of myself).

Two things matter to me.
1. LSF continues.
2. Swindonians benefit.

It appears that in the face of the hurricane decent behaviour has been dogged and I think that whether we agree or not with the outcome ( which is yet to be clear, there's time, there's time) that we have to say that Rod Bloo,Gav.the rocker and you and Andrea should get a free pass to the new slide at the Oasis.

I do NOT want this under my elbow endorsement of Rod Bloo to reslut in the re-appearance of his poxy icon.


To Alan.
Hello again.

I'm not with you...
This is a political forum in that people posts things that are political, things that discuss the relations between humans and their society...
Sometimse people post drivel, stuff about Andrew Lloyd Weber for instance.

What is your point?
There seems to be a veritable rash of Tories on here, but that is probably because there is a rash of tories in EssBeeSee. Sometimes the Lab. peep post, but who knows? Ther are a lot of aliases on here.

And you said
Quote
You are quite right, I stood as an independent candidate at the last General Election. I treated it as a learning curve. The lesson I learnt was that most people are (or act as) stupid, ignorant, selfish and lazy. Unless you can rouse them off of their sofas and away from their televisions then really they cannot give a ****. Sometimes they can't help it because they, their way of life  - or their families - are personally threatened. Shaw Forest was a very good example. LSF is another.

To which I say; hold on a mo'.
You run the risk of sounding  alot like a Tory,' we know what is best for them' that kind of thing.
Most people don't appear to give a toss, because they haven't been given cause to be concerned.
Their bar is lower than yours, but it's there.



To Shorty.
Hello Shorty.

To Tig.
Excellent view of the mtg on Thursday, helped me no end, it's easy to forget the point of an arguement when one is caught up in the malicious delight of watching people squirm. You kind of slapped me 'round the head.
Top.

To Joy.
Thnaks for the posting.
Tom Morton seems to have taken Tig's clarity of the the situ. and applied it to a decent precis.







Offline Tig

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 321
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #170 on: November 25, 2006, 08:27:16 PM »

Whichever party purchased it is immaterial. It is in the past. Why do posters on here have to play politics all the time? Grrrr. Keep it up and I won't bother coming back again. Let's stick with issues and what is right for the people of Swindon and our children, eh?


just to set the record straight with every one, this site is for the people of swindon and it is up to the people of swindon as to the direction it goes
at the moment it is political and i'm  sure that will change again and again, i hope to see this site go in waves and each time i log on there is a different ambience.
as the saying goes this forum life is what you make it

shorty

  • Guest
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #171 on: November 27, 2006, 12:01:13 AM »
Alan, you say
Quote
I know Rod Bluh personally and I have to say that he is a breath of fresh air in Swindon. I'm no Conservative (with a big C), but then I don't really think he is either. He is a pragmatic realist. It just so happens that the Conservatives are in the ascendant at the moment.

The problem is that until we have a Cabinet of Rod Bluhs then in Swindon we shall suffer some of the idiots who populate the cabinet.


If you speak to some of the rest of the cabinet (as I have done and will continue to do at every opportunity) you will find as I have they are very similar to Cllr.Bloo (joke!) not all of them are the old style tories which is refreshing although you would never believe it if you read the press.

Quote
As for the Adver, I don't really care what their take is on things.

you really should because other people - real people - do read it and they do believe what they read - this is not a good situation because there is no other vehicle with which to promote the truth - it is not as though there is a telegraph, times or grauniad with which a comparison can be drawn and a truer picture can be built up - just the adver - a sad provincial little rag that thinks negative news is really good and if you can spin something down - then go for it.

I may not be a fan of everything the council does - but if you look at the figures being produced by the council and then correlate them against what is reported in the adver - you will see the council is actually doing pretty well against the average - even on the headline sickness figures - they are actually down by a third and improving !!!

I just wish we could have a more open an honest debate about things - spin should have gone the same way as Peter Mandleson - out of the country - but the likes of the adver are still thinking it is 1997.

Long live free speech - long live open debate - long live talkswindon !

Offline Geoff Reid

  • Twitter: @Geoff_Reid
  • Active But Odd
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10109
  • Gender: Male
  • Bald as a chimps arse
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #172 on: November 27, 2006, 11:57:21 PM »
Shorty highlights the fundamental difference between a venue like Talkswindon, other 'chat' forums and newspapers.

It is commerce.

Newspapers must sell copy to survive, and good news rarely sells well.....

Chat forums tend to rely on advertising to cover the operating costs, and as such always worry about maintaining an 'acceptable' image to current and prospective advertisers.

Neither medium is ideally suited to the promotion of truly unhindered personal expression, freedom of speech and the exchange of ideas.

Talkswindon, on the other hand, is unfettered by the restraints of commercial 'acceptability', does not need to sell copy, doesn't sell advertising space, accept sponsorship or levy any fees to it's members for their use of the forum.

Nor will it ever do so. 


I feel kind of sorry for forum owners who need to make money from their forums to keep them, and for journalists who are so busy pimping out their words for pennies, that the thought of giving them away for free is probably an alien concept to them.......

....and don't get me started on where eDemocracy projects go wrong.


   

   

Offline Jean

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 850
  • Gender: Female
    • Jefferies Land Conservation Trust
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #173 on: November 28, 2006, 08:58:05 AM »

Why do posters on here have to play politics all the time? Grrrr. Keep it up and I won't bother coming back again. Let's stick with issues and what is right for the people of Swindon and our children, eh?


just to set the record straight with every one, this site is for the people of swindon and it is up to the people of swindon as to the direction it goes
at the moment it is political and i'm  sure that will change again and again, i hope to see this site go in waves and each time i log on there is a different ambience.
as the saying goes this forum life is what you make it

Just out of interest, if it is okay for the politicians to display their logos, why was my Save Coate logo removed?  Did it offend someone?

Jean
Live simply so that others might simply live

Offline Tig

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 321
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #174 on: November 28, 2006, 10:17:02 AM »

Why do posters on here have to play politics all the time? Grrrr. Keep it up and I won't bother coming back again. Let's stick with issues and what is right for the people of Swindon and our children, eh?


just to set the record straight with every one, this site is for the people of swindon and it is up to the people of swindon as to the direction it goes
at the moment it is political and i'm  sure that will change again and again, i hope to see this site go in waves and each time i log on there is a different ambience.
as the saying goes this forum life is what you make it

Just out of interest, if it is okay for the politicians to display their logos, why was my Save Coate logo removed?  Did it offend someone?

Jean

to my knowledege it wasn't removed, it is not something we would do.there has been no objections and i have no idea why it disappeared, reload it and see what happens if there is still a problem email it to admin and we can host it on the server

Offline Lynda

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
    • NO2ID Swindon
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #175 on: November 28, 2006, 01:46:37 PM »

Why do posters on here have to play politics all the time? Grrrr. Keep it up and I won't bother coming back again. Let's stick with issues and what is right for the people of Swindon and our children, eh?


just to set the record straight with every one, this site is for the people of swindon and it is up to the people of swindon as to the direction it goes
at the moment it is political and i'm  sure that will change again and again, i hope to see this site go in waves and each time i log on there is a different ambience.
as the saying goes this forum life is what you make it

Just out of interest, if it is okay for the politicians to display their logos, why was my Save Coate logo removed?  Did it offend someone?

Jean

to my knowledege it wasn't removed, it is not something we would do.there has been no objections and i have no idea why it disappeared, reload it and see what happens if there is still a problem email it to admin and we can host it on the server

Ditto to Tig's comment.
No logo removal done.

Lynda  NO2ID 07802 151464  Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Offline Geoff Reid

  • Twitter: @Geoff_Reid
  • Active But Odd
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10109
  • Gender: Male
  • Bald as a chimps arse
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #176 on: November 28, 2006, 04:37:00 PM »

All sorted  :)

I have no idea where her old one went, but I nicked it from Savecoate.org and reloaded it.

She's all happy again now  :)

Offline ZPW

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1318
  • Bob Wright better do a stellar job
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #177 on: December 02, 2006, 05:48:51 PM »
Joustin a bit too late Time sees LSF's contribution to literature in Swindon as a jolly good thing

Quote
Coun Justin Tomlinson, the lead member for leisure, recreation and culture, also welcomed the Arts Council grant.


Swindon has  been awarded recognition by the Arts Council for Matt's work on the literature festival.

I may have taken some of this out of context, but actually - I don't think so.
here's the link. Allegedly.

http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/swindonnewsheadlines/display.var.1052596.0.reasons_to_read_more.php

Offline Geoff Reid

  • Twitter: @Geoff_Reid
  • Active But Odd
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10109
  • Gender: Male
  • Bald as a chimps arse
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #178 on: August 09, 2007, 03:59:52 PM »

Bump.

It's been quiet on the LSF front for quite a while, what's the news then ?


Offline Woodchopper

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25
Re: Save Lower Shaw Farm
« Reply #179 on: August 09, 2007, 07:07:25 PM »
 ;)

More importantly what deal did Roderick Bluh do over Lower Shaw Farm, we have never been told, have we?

 ;)