Skip to content

Ashton Vale TVG poison chalice or vote winner for new mayor

May 14, 2012

Inevitably the Ashton Vale TVG saga and the monster stains-buries at Ashton Gate will feature in the Mayors election. Wily candidates will either steer completely from the predictable questions on which way they stand or come out clearly in favour of a side of the fence that they judge will get the most votes.
Probably there will be a lot of fence sitting.
Although this TVG issue is but one of many citywide decisions, a new mayor ought to get a grip on it and not fence straddle, because is this not the much trumpeted raison d’etre for the new mayor that the self-annointed business leaders lecture us simple residents about? Namely that a new mayor will be go-ahead, forward thinking, opportunistic, visionary etc etc… (insert any business cliche from the Idiots guide to Entrepreneurs). No prizes for guessing that the business boffins will demand a massive building programme destroying the greenbelt, so no TVG for these merchants.
Its quite clear that the business bosses think a new mayor is now open season for a profit bunfest, all in the worthy name of jobs for the people of course. And so the endless chase for growth will see them lobby and pressure the new political elite in Bristol, the process has no doubt already started. Nothing new in buying yourself influence either, been done at Westminster for centuries.
Well here’s my lobbying and its free of corruption and bribes on my zero budget. I’d like to hear a mayoral candidate say:
NO to the endless unsustainable growth that the greed merchants demand.
NO to the destruction of the last remaining green belt.
YES to Ashton Vale TVG that finally and unequivocally defines an inviolable boundary to the urban city within which no greed merchant can demand special favours.
YES to a sustainable community-driven green city that looks to a future beyond the short term demands of the profit driven money-men.

And one other lobby thing Mr or M/s Mayor to be, bin the BRT Bonkers Ridiculous Titzup bendy bus concrete highways not-very-rapid transport system. This obselete before-it-starts bus that can’t go backwards will be the single most massive drain on the mayoral purse.

Advertisements
19 Comments
  1. Paul Bemmy Down permalink
    May 14, 2012 1:43 pm

    A simple question. Will this new mayor be able to overide, set aside, ignore, the Core Strategy which is the citys’ blue print for the next ten years.

  2. thebristolblogger permalink
    May 14, 2012 9:46 pm

    Some of the potential mayoral candidates – Ferguson, Williams, Abraham and Rees – were asked about Ashton Vale on the Politics Show West a couple of weeks ago.

    Ferguson gnomically said the stadium needed to be built but that it probably wouldn’t be at Ashton Vale. Abraham raged that Ashton Vale residents wouldn’t accept his unlawful imposed compromise and announced a stadium would happen at Ashton Vale anyway when he’s mayor and Marvin the Labour Party Android – the man who’s going to bring the city together – said a stadium needed to be built at Ashton Vale because it’d make Bristol look good. Presumably that means aging, white, south Bristol communities aren’t included in the android’s rainbow vision of Bristolian togetherness then?

    Can’t remember what Williams said but it was probably bollocks.

  3. May 14, 2012 10:28 pm

    As I recall Williams favoured the stadium ie he talked bollocks.

  4. May 14, 2012 10:37 pm

    williams called the TVG vexatious………
    Abraham probably thinks the JR’s vexatious.

    New mayor can ignore core strategy ..only a bunch of rules.

  5. Richard Lane permalink
    May 14, 2012 10:42 pm

    Hey Vowlesy
    What are you doing discussing the stadium when you live in Knowle and shouldn’t have a say on the subject? You also helped (or claimed to) decide the green party policy for the Southville ward, also from outside the area. So you talk bollocks as well, a hypocritical sort of bollocks.

  6. Richard Lane permalink
    May 14, 2012 10:51 pm

    I can’t wait for a new mayor that will stand up and recognise these tiny pressure groups for what they are, tiny.
    For years the likes of Pip Sheard, and Tony Dyer have courted and received more than their share of the power process by projecting their thoughts onto whatever council committee they can, while pretending to represent more than is possible. For example: TFGB should read Transport Not For Greater Bristol, because PIp Sheard heads it.

    Sacredspring
    The core strategy was set up after consultation with different groups andcouncil members.
    Those groups are not representative of the Bristol public, they are representative of tiny pressure groups that are politically motivated, they won’t have such a big say now and are pissy because of that.

  7. May 15, 2012 7:15 am

    Mr lane, the new mayor was voted in by a tiny percentage of the eligible votes.
    A tiny minority of very wealthy business leaders are rubbing hands sniffing a profit bonanza.
    A minority of non local football heads think a monster hypermarket is wonderful.

    And a disaster for the city was narrowly averted when a small number of activists stopped the council filling in the docks for a motorway in the 70’s.

    You continue to target local residents as part of a yobbo hate campaign.
    If you were more confident of the pro’s of your arguments you wouldn’t need to resort to yobbo talk.

  8. Paul Bemmy Down permalink
    May 15, 2012 9:21 am

    As I recall, the Core Strategy was accepted by all parties which would sort of make it quite representative. If a mayor can disregard any part of this at their whim, what is the point of councillors making any decision? As for pressure groups, are we really to believe that our new mayor will not be open to influence, perhaps even from their mates, and consultations should actually carry more weight because they give everybody a chance to voice an opinion, just a referendum. I’m hoping Helen Holland will stand. I’m betting whoever gets to represent Labour will win, and although she is pro stadium, she is very much anti Link Road.

  9. harryT permalink
    May 15, 2012 9:48 pm

    This is great. Mayoral campaining barely started and potential candidates are already offering to subvert legal processes for votes.

    Has no one leant any lessons from Peter Abrahams and Simon Cook ? It is only a matter of days since BCC admitted illegality and bias over the AV TVG matter.

    The TVG matter is a legal process. Anyone who acts to overule the legal rights of AV residents to benefit the commercial interests of BCFC and/or Vence/Lansdown/Pontin is going to find themselves in deep trouble.

  10. Richard Lane permalink
    May 16, 2012 9:37 pm

    Sacredspring
    Your comment: “You continue to target local residents as part of a yobbo hate campaign.
    If you were more confident of the pro’s of your arguments you wouldn’t need to resort to yobbo talk”, this an out and out utter lie.

    I have not targeted any local residents with, any sort of yobbo behaviour, to suggest so is delving even lower in your accusations than you normally stoop. I don’t hate any of the local residents, though if I did, you would be the closest to it. In fact, I’ve only mentioned one local resident in my statement.

    I see your latest attack as proof that my pro mayoral arguments have made you revert to your usual tactic when you’ve been outdone. Your weak arguments based on the hatred of anyone with the guile to earn more than you, have poisened your mind, so as usual you revert to attacking the poster.

  11. Richard Lane permalink
    May 16, 2012 9:54 pm

    Paul
    How bist after the dissapointment?

    My references to pressure groups influencing policy making, was made using the fact that we constantly have local government with no real overall power. As a result, small groups have pressurised the local council and recieved more say in affairs as a result.
    There is nobody in this world that would convince me that a very small group of local residents could wield as much influence as those in Southville. Theymust be the most proactive group of residents anywhere in Bristol, with the fewest Bristolians within that group.

    The core strategy was accepted by all parties, what I’m saying is, who influenced it? It certainly was not the apathetic public that’s for sure.

    As for those like sacredspring, moaning about how few voted, now he knows what it’s like to have affairs dictated by an active few that could be bothered to vote.
    No doubt, if the vote had been in the negative, he’d have claimed a victory for democracy.

  12. May 17, 2012 12:48 am

    As a result, small groups have pressurised the local council and recieved more say in affairs as a result.
    There is nobody in this world that would convince me that a very small group of local residents could wield as much influence as those in Southville. Theymust be the most proactive group of residents anywhere in Bristol, with the fewest Bristolians within that group.

    Local residents get to have a say in what happens where they live, so what? Most normal democratic people would encourage that.
    I’d be more concerned over the power and influence excerted by a very small number of wealthy individuals who don’t reside in the Mayoral area and some who don’t even reside in the country. They flash the cash, demand the favours and get the fawning attention and unquestioning loyalty of their political servants and occasionally unhinged footsoldiers.

  13. Richard Lane permalink
    May 17, 2012 10:06 pm

    Sacredspring

    Unhinged footsoldiers, are those that throw accusations about as if they’re going out of fashion, make mindboggling statements to try and justify their ramblings and positively refuse to admit that they are completely wrong in every one of their deluded accusations.

    You are correct that democracy would be good if all local residents had a say in their respective areas. Unfortunately it’s not all local people that do get a say, the democratic process is hijacked by power mad individuals that form groups with like minded individuals, consult with other like minded people, yet believe they speak for the majority, due to their insular existence.

    You constantly refer to people that don’t reside in a certain community and their influence over that area, yet don’t condone other peoples involvement in that area even though they are also non resident. Your stance is hypocritical to say the least.
    Not one of the individuals that are trying to influence events and prevent investment into the area of greater Bedminster are willing to invest anything other than their time for their political beliefs. Yet you will accept their involvement with open arms, while fighting to stop investment into the area from other non residents.

    Now would you for once do the decent thing and highlight the statements that I’ve made, which prove that I have conducted a hate campaign against any individuals or used yobbo type language.
    You try to gain some sort of moral high ground in your comments, yet these only serve to show how unmoral you actually are.

    I expect the usual ignoring of questions, followed by a moralistic statement and the usual attack on the person, rather than the post.

  14. May 18, 2012 8:05 am

    The Ashton Vale TVG is a test case for local residents having a say in their community. In the absence of any other form of local representation I’m not sure that Mr Lane is sure of what he is ranting about.

    Mr Lane thinks the only important person is the moneybags investor who doesn’t live in the areas he wants to profit from.

    And The new mayor is hardly going to be the model democratic figure that Mr Lane demands, a Mayor in the pockets of the self-elected business leaders? Executive decisions in favour of a distant gold digger disregarding locals?
    Mr Lane’s benevolent dictator regime of the business tycoon a model figure that communities can aspire to?
    I think not.
    Go back to your armchair.

  15. Paul Bemmy Down permalink
    May 19, 2012 11:48 am

    Hi Rich. Not too disappointed, not good enough to survive in the Prem. so life goes on. More disappointed at being insulted by a Green Cllr. Gus Hoyt who claims the party I have voted for, UKIP, have a “repugnant” policy on immigration. Now my guess is he was playing to his own gallery, and knows nothing about UKIPs’ policy, but it shows the dilemma of having great enviromental concerns both on a planet wide scale and locally. Who do you vote for? The Greens would seem the obvious choice, but you then are supporting all the “lefty” stuff that goes with it. Now I’m not an academic, but there does seem a contradiction in not wanting your countryside built on, yet at the same time calling a policy of controlled immigration “repugnant”. Perhaps Gus, or someone else, will explain.

  16. Richard Lane permalink
    May 21, 2012 10:33 pm

    Sacredspring

    You have not answered a single point that I put to you in your latest jumbled response.

    Paul

    Were you asking me if I voted for a green party candidate? If so I most certainly did not.
    Prior to my dealings with these people, I used to hold some sort of belief that they were moralsitic and had the greater good of the environment at heart. I have since found that those I’ve had the misfortune to cross swords with, are the most deceitful, twisting, coniving immoral people I’ve ever dealt with. That list includes estate agents and solicitors, of which both are way above the greens as decent human beings in my estimation.

    If I had the opportunity to vote for a UKIP candidate, then I would seriously consider it.
    If we did have a controlled immigration policy, then we most certainly would not have had the situation where the RSS were deciding where the new housing for the uncontrolled immigration that we had, should be going.

  17. May 22, 2012 7:17 am

    Bitter and twisted rant from mr lane taking his cue from Sexton tasting defeat.
    Fortunately not everyone subscribes to his whining hatred. I’ve always had a good word to say for the long suffering fan, except when they regress to the yobbo.

    The easy targets for Lane’s unhinged demonisation are the true Bristolians who stand up for theirs and their neighbours human rights.

  18. Richard Lane permalink
    May 22, 2012 10:36 pm

    Sacredspring

    You’re even more deluded than I thought, true Bristolians! who’s that then? Pete the cockney, Chris U, George F, Ben Barker or 70% of the residents of Southville that hail from further afield?
    You invite rants and I’ve given you two sentences of reasoned truthful descriptions of certain people involved in this subject that I’ve dealt with. You on the other hand have done nothing but fire off a tirade of spiteful bitter rants from the offset, including derogatory childish pictures.
    Evidence of defeat is where, when challenged, the response is to ignore the challenge and deflect from the points raised, by spouting even more derogatory rubbish, somewhat like a spoilt child scalded for being naughty.

    I on the other hand am more than willing to discuss any points raised and will always answer questions posed of me, unlike yourself.

    Let’s see if you can reply to just one of the points I raised, about people from outside the area influencing the process, ie: why it’s OK for Tony D, Pete C, and Glenn V, to influence events or have a say but not someone supporting the schemes.

  19. May 23, 2012 7:44 am

    When it comes to protecting the environment and the last remnants of wetland SSSI in Bristol then anyone is welcome in my book.
    The distant moneybags investor and the fellow supporters from across the globe who don’t know or care about the local environment are the enemies of a sustainable city.

Comments are closed.