Posted by: Bob Downie, Glasgow on 3:46pm Wed 3 Sep 08
This one will run and run. No one who was at the January meeting Pollokshaws Burgh Hall can be in any doubt about the strength of local opposition. The council are fully aware that by granting this planning application they are breaking the agreements they had with the Maxwell family and the National Trust that development would require their permission. This has been withheld by both.
The council are cynically hoping that neither will have the resources for a legal challenge.
This one will run and run. No one who was at the January meeting Pollokshaws Burgh Hall can be in any doubt about the strength of local opposition. The council are fully aware that by granting this planning application they are breaking the agreements they had with the Maxwell family and the National Trust that development would require their permission. This has been withheld by both.
The council are cynically hoping that neither will have the resources for a legal challenge.
Posted by: mulross, Glasgow on 4:05pm Wed 3 Sep 08
You're right Bob - this has a long way to run.
No wonder people become apathetic about politics and politicians.
You're right Bob - this has a long way to run.
No wonder people become apathetic about politics and politicians.
Posted by: Brad on 4:09pm Wed 3 Sep 08
This despite Sydney's warning to Ministers!
This despite Sydney's warning to Ministers!
Posted by: BeeSee on 4:11pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Woo Hoo, cant wait for it to open.
Great addition to the parks of Glasgow.
Woo Hoo, cant wait for it to open.
Great addition to the parks of Glasgow.
Posted by: emma, Glasgow on 4:38pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Which part of 900 objections don't they get? It's not a case of NIMBYism, its a case of private companies making money out of something that was given to us all to enjoy - not just those who can afford a £20 go on a swing! Pollok Park won the award without tree swings, it's an asset that should be cherished not ruined.
Which part of 900 objections don't they get? It's not a case of NIMBYism, its a case of private companies making money out of something that was given to us all to enjoy - not just those who can afford a £20 go on a swing! Pollok Park won the award without tree swings, it's an asset that should be cherished not ruined.
Posted by: Stereotypical Glaswegian, Glasgow on 4:38pm Wed 3 Sep 08
I agree with BeeSee's comment.
I am looking forward to this opening — it is ideal for Pollock Park.
If there is a desire to create some new areas of woodland why not move the Police Dog centre — it is in a prime location on the way in towards the Burrell Collection. It doesn't need to be there.
Or perhaps the police social club.
Neither of these are good use of public park space.
They are closed to the public.
The park could make much better use of the peripheral areas — they are in parts quite run down.
Dogs I think should be banned.
At the very least owners should be fined if they don't pick up the dog poop. That is a disgrace not Go Ape wanting to develop an area for use as an activity.
I agree with BeeSee's comment.
I am looking forward to this opening — it is ideal for Pollock Park.
If there is a desire to create some new areas of woodland why not move the Police Dog centre — it is in a prime location on the way in towards the Burrell Collection. It doesn't need to be there.
Or perhaps the police social club.
Neither of these are good use of public park space.
They are closed to the public.
The park could make much better use of the peripheral areas — they are in parts quite run down.
Dogs I think should be banned.
At the very least owners should be fined if they don't pick up the dog poop. That is a disgrace not Go Ape wanting to develop an area for use as an activity.
Posted by: Brad on 4:46pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote]Which part of 900 objections don't they get?[/quote]
Planning permission isn't a popularity contest though. There were far more objections to Tesco's Partick plans and they were also passed.
As I recall there were also a large number of representations in [italic]favour[/italic] of Go-Ape. Now that is unusual!
Which part of 900 objections don't they get?
Planning permission isn't a popularity contest though. There were far more objections to Tesco's Partick plans and they were also passed.
As I recall there were also a large number of representations in
favour of Go-Ape. Now that is unusual!
Posted by: witterquick, Glasgow on 4:57pm Wed 3 Sep 08
A large number of representations in favour of Go-Ape were by people not old enough to smoke or vote. This is a completely outrageous and inexcusable decision, and has completely blown any faith I have in Glasgow City Council, in the Scottish Government, in democracy!
I'd like a full and frank discussion with members of GCC and would like to hear them answer this question more than anything:
What right do GCC have to give planning permission to build on land that doesn't belong to them?
A large number of representations in favour of Go-Ape were by people not old enough to smoke or vote. This is a completely outrageous and inexcusable decision, and has completely blown any faith I have in Glasgow City Council, in the Scottish Government, in democracy!
I'd like a full and frank discussion with members of GCC and would like to hear them answer this question more than anything:
What right do GCC have to give planning permission to build on land that doesn't belong to them?
Posted by: Pete, Glasgow on 5:01pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote]A large number of representations in favour of Go-Ape were by people not old enough to smoke or vote.[/quote]
And there were enough young kids dragged along to protest meetings in 'Go Ape Go Home' t-shirts as I recall. So, your point being?
A large number of representations in favour of Go-Ape were by people not old enough to smoke or vote.
And there were enough young kids dragged along to protest meetings in 'Go Ape Go Home' t-shirts as I recall. So, your point being?
Posted by: mulross, Glasgow on 5:10pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote]As I recall there were also a large number of representations in favour of Go-Ape. Now that is unusual![/quote]
It [bold]is[/bold] unusual - but then a member of a company's PR staff does not usually ask members of her Facebook Group to write to a local authority (at the other end of the country!) supporting a planning application.
Brad - myself and many others read these "letters of support" and the majority (that actually had an address) were from the south of England. Many others were by email and had no address, so should have been automatically discarded.
As I recall there were also a large number of representations in favour of Go-Ape. Now that is unusual!
It
is unusual - but then a member of a company's PR staff does not usually ask members of her Facebook Group to write to a local authority (at the other end of the country!) supporting a planning application.
Brad - myself and many others read these "letters of support" and the majority (that actually had an address) were from the south of England. Many others were by email and had no address, so should have been automatically discarded.
Posted by: calamero, Glasgow on 5:11pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]witterquick[/bold] wrote:
A large number of representations in favour of Go-Ape were by people not old enough to smoke or vote. This is a completely outrageous and inexcusable decision, and has completely blown any faith I have in Glasgow City Council, in the Scottish Government, in democracy! I'd like a full and frank discussion with members of GCC and would like to hear them answer this question more than anything: What right do GCC have to give planning permission to build on land that doesn't belong to them?[/quote] Anyone can apply for planning permssion for land that they do not own, subject to notifying the owner and paying the planning fee. Usually you would reach agreement with the owner before you do as consent would drive up the value of the land after its granted. For a laugh (if you are willing to pay the planning fee) put an application in for redeveloping your neighbour's house or if Sidney has the cash, for redeveloping the city chambers.
witterquick wrote:
A large number of representations in favour of Go-Ape were by people not old enough to smoke or vote. This is a completely outrageous and inexcusable decision, and has completely blown any faith I have in Glasgow City Council, in the Scottish Government, in democracy! I'd like a full and frank discussion with members of GCC and would like to hear them answer this question more than anything: What right do GCC have to give planning permission to build on land that doesn't belong to them?
Anyone can apply for planning permssion for land that they do not own, subject to notifying the owner and paying the planning fee. Usually you would reach agreement with the owner before you do as consent would drive up the value of the land after its granted. For a laugh (if you are willing to pay the planning fee) put an application in for redeveloping your neighbour's house or if Sidney has the cash, for redeveloping the city chambers.
Posted by: Brad on 5:18pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote]What right do GCC have to give planning permission to build on land that doesn't belong to them?[/quote]
That's what the planning system does! Who else would you have giving planning permission? The landowner?!
What right do GCC have to give planning permission to build on land that doesn't belong to them?
That's what the planning system does! Who else would you have giving planning permission? The landowner?!
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 5:26pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]emma[/bold] wrote:
Which part of 900 objections don't they get? It's not a case of NIMBYism, its a case of private companies making money out of something that was given to us all to enjoy - not just those who can afford a £20 go on a swing! Pollok Park won the award without tree swings, it's an asset that should be cherished not ruined.[/quote] If it were down to the likes of BeeSee - and he was the council leader - he would sell remainder of the silver - for a measley few sheckles.
There seems to be an insatiable fetish for the thing to be built in Pollok Park, yet there are numerous sites in the city where this could we welcomed.
The Labour Council listen only to themselves as they have always done - to hell with public opuinion in other words, it comes across as if they believe the public in this city are all stupid.
It also comes across as if the council is skint as a result of mis-management over the years and now its coming back to bite their arse!
emma wrote:
Which part of 900 objections don't they get? It's not a case of NIMBYism, its a case of private companies making money out of something that was given to us all to enjoy - not just those who can afford a £20 go on a swing! Pollok Park won the award without tree swings, it's an asset that should be cherished not ruined.
If it were down to the likes of BeeSee - and he was the council leader - he would sell remainder of the silver - for a measley few sheckles.
There seems to be an insatiable fetish for the thing to be built in Pollok Park, yet there are numerous sites in the city where this could we welcomed.
The Labour Council listen only to themselves as they have always done - to hell with public opuinion in other words, it comes across as if they believe the public in this city are all stupid.
It also comes across as if the council is skint as a result of mis-management over the years and now its coming back to bite their arse!
Posted by: HGlasgwegian, Glasgow on 5:38pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Stereotypical Glaswegian. You can't create new areas of real woodland, at least not for a couple of hundred years. And the North Wood is much much older than that.
Perhaps you missed this story in the Herald about Pollok Park:
http://www.theherald
.co.uk/news/news/dis
play.var.2353699.0.C
itys_oldest_survivin
g_road_found_by_arch
aeology_dig_in_Pollo
k_Park.php
it's worth reading and I would hope the council will take it into account.
Potentially there could be a lot more money in the site as a place of archaeological interest than there is in Go Ape, if money is what matters.
Stereotypical Glaswegian. You can't create new areas of real woodland, at least not for a couple of hundred years. And the North Wood is much much older than that.
Perhaps you missed this story in the Herald about Pollok Park:
http://www.theherald
.co.uk/news/news/dis
play.var.2353699.0.C
itys_oldest_survivin
g_road_found_by_arch
aeology_dig_in_Pollo
k_Park.php
it's worth reading and I would hope the council will take it into account.
Potentially there could be a lot more money in the site as a place of archaeological interest than there is in Go Ape, if money is what matters.
Posted by: jonny bond, glasgow on 5:40pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Never been to pollock park except to go to the burrell but will probably fork out 20 quid once and get to experience its joys for a laugh. Does anybody else feel the killjoy nannys who want to keep the park idylic should wake up and smell the roses. This is 2008 not 1908 so pack up your long johns and grab a pair of trendy shorts and get you fat arses outside for some excitement, remember that you last experienced it 50 odd years ago when you were a child.
Never been to pollock park except to go to the burrell but will probably fork out 20 quid once and get to experience its joys for a laugh. Does anybody else feel the killjoy nannys who want to keep the park idylic should wake up and smell the roses. This is 2008 not 1908 so pack up your long johns and grab a pair of trendy shorts and get you fat arses outside for some excitement, remember that you last experienced it 50 odd years ago when you were a child.
Posted by: I hear your pain, me,me,me on 5:40pm Wed 3 Sep 08
See you down there folks when the destruction & devastation starts & we protesters wont be causing it,that will be done by GO RAPE the peoples parks
See you down there folks when the destruction & devastation starts & we protesters wont be causing it,that will be done by GO RAPE the peoples parks
Posted by: tam-m, southside on 5:52pm Wed 3 Sep 08
the toilet facility problem is easily solved there are plenty of bushes to use.
the toilet facility problem is easily solved there are plenty of bushes to use.
Posted by: Brad on 5:57pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]tam-m[/bold] wrote:
the toilet facility problem is easily solved there are plenty of bushes to use.[/quote] What do apes do?
tam-m wrote:
the toilet facility problem is easily solved there are plenty of bushes to use.
What do apes do?
Posted by: roor06, glasgow on 6:00pm Wed 3 Sep 08
If... This project goes ahead,then,shame on our City Fathers for allowing it...
It will probably end up closed most of the year for Health and Safety reasons,due to our Inclement weather ...
If... This project goes ahead,then,shame on our City Fathers for allowing it...
It will probably end up closed most of the year for Health and Safety reasons,due to our Inclement weather ...
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 6:06pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[italic]Never been to [bold]pollock[/bold] park except to go to the burrell[/italic]
That'll be the new makeover name, or maybe because the writer has hardly been there, it would make sense when it comes to not being able to spell the name of the place.
Wonder if there will be anything left in a few years which will belong to Glasgow.
I doubt it
Glasgow City Jakes - they'll be that Jaked up, they'll have to sell their city chambers - probably torch the place for insurance before demolishing it
Never been to pollock park except to go to the burrell
That'll be the new makeover name, or maybe because the writer has hardly been there, it would make sense when it comes to not being able to spell the name of the place.
Wonder if there will be anything left in a few years which will belong to Glasgow.
I doubt it
Glasgow City Jakes - they'll be that Jaked up, they'll have to sell their city chambers - probably torch the place for insurance before demolishing it
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 6:08pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]Brad[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]tam-m[/bold] wrote: the toilet facility problem is easily solved there are plenty of bushes to use.[/quote] What do apes do?[/quote] Does such behaviour not worthy of an ASBO - you may be viewed as a pervert flasher, for which you'll just have to pish your trousers - or you will be front page news in this paper.
Named and Shamed I think its called
Brad wrote:
tam-m wrote: the toilet facility problem is easily solved there are plenty of bushes to use.
What do apes do?
Does such behaviour not worthy of an ASBO - you may be viewed as a pervert flasher, for which you'll just have to pish your trousers - or you will be front page news in this paper.
Named and Shamed I think its called
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 6:09pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Man, what is up with my grammatical abilities today?
I need a holiday away from this grey patch and this paper.
Man, what is up with my grammatical abilities today?
I need a holiday away from this grey patch and this paper.
Posted by: bigeye, Poaloak on 6:37pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]Brad[/bold] wrote:
[quote]Which part of 900 objections don't they get?[/quote] Planning permission isn't a popularity contest though. There were far more objections to Tesco's Partick plans and they were also passed. As I recall there were also a large number of representations in [italic]favour[/italic] of Go-Ape. Now that is unusual![/quote] Interested to know how many representations there were in [italic]favour[/italic] of Tesco's Partick plan!!!
I think the point that is being overridden here is that the GCC have taken the brown envelope.
Brad wrote:
Which part of 900 objections don't they get?
Planning permission isn't a popularity contest though. There were far more objections to Tesco's Partick plans and they were also passed. As I recall there were also a large number of representations in favour of Go-Ape. Now that is unusual!
Interested to know how many representations there were in
favour of Tesco's Partick plan!!!
I think the point that is being overridden here is that the GCC have taken the brown envelope.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 6:44pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]emma[/bold] wrote:
Which part of 900 objections don't they get? It's not a case of NIMBYism, its a case of private companies making money out of something that was given to us all to enjoy - not just those who can afford a £20 go on a swing! Pollok Park won the award without tree swings, it's an asset that should be cherished not ruined.[/quote]
Bob Downie, Mulross, Emma,
I fully agree with all of your sentiments . . .
It's about time that the Council and Government alike started to listen to the people who voted them in.
We've all seen the U - turns taken in recent months regarding the contravertial hospital charges, and now it looks like the "Council Tax" like the "Poll Tax" before it will be scrapped by the SNP.
So - clearly lessons are being learned to some extent - either that or the councillors / MSP's who have any brains, common sense or gumption are realising what will happen if they defy the Public sentiment & opposition.
Glasgow City Council may have the "Hot Potato" in their hands now, and this could run and run as has been said.
The proof will be in the pudding that is the trifle of councillors who are so often in it for themselves. With too much interest in the perks, and brown envelopes, and ignorance of the public feelings in matters such as this it is high time we fight the level of apathy which is only fuelling the Government getting its own way, time and time again.
Those who have any opposition against this project - plan - and Private Enterprise within our Public space must keep abreast of the details of any future protest or demonstrations.
Those who oppose "Go Ape" yet do not participate, and ensure councillors see the level of opposition for themselves are doing both themselves, and the democratic process a serious injustice.
Speak out and do whatever it takes - even in times of hardship, apathy, depression and the economic downturn we are facing - we must all fight for what we believe is right.
Let us have no room for apathy in todays modern world.
And, let Glasgow City Council see the sense in denying "Go Ape" the rights to build within our public space, once and for all.
Or, I shall seriously never vote in another Labour, SNP or councillor who votes in favour of this project ever again.
Our councillors must realise the consequences of their actions - this is something which they seriously lack. Reasonable judgement, and common sense.
emma wrote:
Which part of 900 objections don't they get? It's not a case of NIMBYism, its a case of private companies making money out of something that was given to us all to enjoy - not just those who can afford a £20 go on a swing! Pollok Park won the award without tree swings, it's an asset that should be cherished not ruined.
Bob Downie, Mulross, Emma,
I fully agree with all of your sentiments . . .
It's about time that the Council and Government alike started to listen to the people who voted them in.
We've all seen the U - turns taken in recent months regarding the contravertial hospital charges, and now it looks like the "Council Tax" like the "Poll Tax" before it will be scrapped by the SNP.
So - clearly lessons are being learned to some extent - either that or the councillors / MSP's who have any brains, common sense or gumption are realising what will happen if they defy the Public sentiment & opposition.
Glasgow City Council may have the "Hot Potato" in their hands now, and this could run and run as has been said.
The proof will be in the pudding that is the trifle of councillors who are so often in it for themselves. With too much interest in the perks, and brown envelopes, and ignorance of the public feelings in matters such as this it is high time we fight the level of apathy which is only fuelling the Government getting its own way, time and time again.
Those who have any opposition against this project - plan - and Private Enterprise within our Public space must keep abreast of the details of any future protest or demonstrations.
Those who oppose "Go Ape" yet do not participate, and ensure councillors see the level of opposition for themselves are doing both themselves, and the democratic process a serious injustice.
Speak out and do whatever it takes - even in times of hardship, apathy, depression and the economic downturn we are facing - we must all fight for what we believe is right.
Let us have no room for apathy in todays modern world.
And, let Glasgow City Council see the sense in denying "Go Ape" the rights to build within our public space, once and for all.
Or, I shall seriously never vote in another Labour, SNP or councillor who votes in favour of this project ever again.
Our councillors must realise the consequences of their actions - this is something which they seriously lack. Reasonable judgement, and common sense.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 6:48pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote:
Man, what is up with my grammatical abilities today? I need a holiday away from this grey patch and this paper.[/quote]
Wouldn't worry too much about your grammatical abilities "Missing City!" If this da*n paper had a spell check and the ability to check & edit your posts the problem of realising a mere spelling error would not exist.
Just thank yourself you didn't refer to the park as "Bollock Park!" LOL ;-)
Goodjob the "P" and "B" are not to close to each other on the keyboard.
The Missing City wrote:
Man, what is up with my grammatical abilities today? I need a holiday away from this grey patch and this paper.
Wouldn't worry too much about your grammatical abilities "Missing City!" If this da*n paper had a spell check and the ability to check & edit your posts the problem of realising a mere spelling error would not exist.
Just thank yourself you didn't refer to the park as "Bollock Park!" LOL ;-)
Goodjob the "P" and "B" are not to close to each other on the keyboard.
Posted by: tam-m, southside on 7:08pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]Brad[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]tam-m[/bold] wrote: the toilet facility problem is easily solved there are plenty of bushes to use.[/quote] What do apes do?[/quote] the apes can dump on the dog walkers from the walkways.at present they are using buckets in the burrell building although the staff are pretending it is a leaky roof.
Brad wrote:
tam-m wrote: the toilet facility problem is easily solved there are plenty of bushes to use.
What do apes do?
the apes can dump on the dog walkers from the walkways.at present they are using buckets in the burrell building although the staff are pretending it is a leaky roof.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 7:12pm Wed 3 Sep 08
The only good thing about "Go Ape" is its name, as the majority of public objectors will "Go Ape" literally if they are ignored,
[bold]And[/bold]
In due course - the councillors will "Go Ape!" when they lose their seats / votes - due to not listening to what their electorate wanted.
So, tell me this how stupid a name can you get - when all it will do is provide a mockery opportunity in the years, and decades to come ?
The only good thing about "Go Ape" is its name, as the majority of public objectors will "Go Ape" literally if they are ignored,
And
In due course - the councillors will "Go Ape!" when they lose their seats / votes - due to not listening to what their electorate wanted.
So, tell me this how stupid a name can you get - when all it will do is provide a mockery opportunity in the years, and decades to come ?
Posted by: HGlasgwegian, Glasgow on 7:34pm Wed 3 Sep 08
jonny bond you must be a wind up merchant. No-one could be that daft.
jonny bond you must be a wind up merchant. No-one could be that daft.
Posted by: Trish, Pollok on 7:49pm Wed 3 Sep 08
I agree with BeeSee's comment.
I am looking forward to this opening — it is ideal for Pollock Park.
____________________
_________________
Well, you obviously don't hail from around these parts so it's rich of you to agree with this atrocity.
Oh yes, it's called Pollok!! Sheesh, at least if you're going to talk p&5h, learn to spell it first :0)
I agree with BeeSee's comment.
I am looking forward to this opening — it is ideal for Pollock Park.
____________________
_________________
Well, you obviously don't hail from around these parts so it's rich of you to agree with this atrocity.
Oh yes, it's called Pollok!! Sheesh, at least if you're going to talk p&5h, learn to spell it first :0)
Posted by: Trish, Pollok on 7:51pm Wed 3 Sep 08
I agree with BeeSee's comment.
I am looking forward to this opening — it is ideal for Pollock Park.
____________________
_________________
Well, you obviously don't hail from around these parts so it's rich of you to agree with this atrocity.
Oh yes, it's called Pollok!! Sheesh, at least if you're going to talk p&5h, learn to spell it first :0)
I agree with BeeSee's comment.
I am looking forward to this opening — it is ideal for Pollock Park.
____________________
_________________
Well, you obviously don't hail from around these parts so it's rich of you to agree with this atrocity.
Oh yes, it's called Pollok!! Sheesh, at least if you're going to talk p&5h, learn to spell it first :0)
Posted by: gavin48, Glasgow on 8:06pm Wed 3 Sep 08
saddened but not surprised by the decision of scottish ministers who have a fairly narrow remit in these matters. For all of those who are happy with the decision may I ask you go and look at the North Wood now before there is any development, remember it and go back a few years after go ape has been running. It is only then that you will be able to appreciate what you have lost.
saddened but not surprised by the decision of scottish ministers who have a fairly narrow remit in these matters. For all of those who are happy with the decision may I ask you go and look at the North Wood now before there is any development, remember it and go back a few years after go ape has been running. It is only then that you will be able to appreciate what you have lost.
Posted by: fireman fan, glasgow on 8:06pm Wed 3 Sep 08
embarrassing when you see how elected officials really work!!!
embarrassing when you see how elected officials really work!!!
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 8:12pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]jonny bond[/bold] wrote:
Never been to pollock park except to go to the burrell but will probably fork out 20 quid once and get to experience its joys for a laugh. Does anybody else feel the killjoy nannys who want to keep the park idylic should wake up and smell the roses. This is 2008 not 1908 so pack up your long johns and grab a pair of trendy shorts and get you fat arses outside for some excitement, remember that you last experienced it 50 odd years ago when you were a child.[/quote]
Aye Johnny Bond,
Speak for yourself, ( assuming you're not a far out spokesperson for G.C.C. or Go Ape ?)
Anybody who has any principles, morals, or common sense will not go near "Go Ape" for love, nor money.
This is about
1. Losing our "Dear Green Space"
2. G.C.C. & The Scottish Parliament MSP's completely ignoring the will of the people, and all the objectors.
3. Giving away publically owned land to a private enterprise, putting "profit before people."
4. Having a planning system which is clearly not designed, or catering for the needs of people in 2008. Planning considerations are so stringent, and rigid they hardly make it easy for people to object, or even kow basic grounds for objection.
5. Disrespecting the wishes of both The Maxwell family, and The National Trust who's interests should have been taken into consideration far more.
The list is endless, and anyone with any morals, or care for what "Dear Green Space" Glasgow has left in the public hands should see this.
So, Johnnny Bond, take your wind ups, or your "fat arse" as you so put it to "Go Ape" in Aberfoyle, and give us all peace.
Go Ape is not welcome in Pollok Park - end of story!
jonny bond wrote:
Never been to pollock park except to go to the burrell but will probably fork out 20 quid once and get to experience its joys for a laugh. Does anybody else feel the killjoy nannys who want to keep the park idylic should wake up and smell the roses. This is 2008 not 1908 so pack up your long johns and grab a pair of trendy shorts and get you fat arses outside for some excitement, remember that you last experienced it 50 odd years ago when you were a child.
Aye Johnny Bond,
Speak for yourself, ( assuming you're not a far out spokesperson for G.C.C. or Go Ape ?)
Anybody who has any principles, morals, or common sense will not go near "Go Ape" for love, nor money.
This is about
1. Losing our "Dear Green Space"
2. G.C.C. & The Scottish Parliament MSP's completely ignoring the will of the people, and all the objectors.
3. Giving away publically owned land to a private enterprise, putting "profit before people."
4. Having a planning system which is clearly not designed, or catering for the needs of people in 2008. Planning considerations are so stringent, and rigid they hardly make it easy for people to object, or even kow basic grounds for objection.
5. Disrespecting the wishes of both The Maxwell family, and The National Trust who's interests should have been taken into consideration far more.
The list is endless, and anyone with any morals, or care for what "Dear Green Space" Glasgow has left in the public hands should see this.
So, Johnnny Bond, take your wind ups, or your "fat arse" as you so put it to "Go Ape" in Aberfoyle, and give us all peace.
Go Ape is not welcome in Pollok Park - end of story!
Posted by: Rutherglen, Glasgow on 8:23pm Wed 3 Sep 08
I enjoy Pollok Park regularly with my autistic son. Either he is going to want to go on it (again and again and again which I simply can't afford) or Go Ape will not permit him on it at all. Either way it's meltdown time and teeth marks all round.
The way the proposal itself has been handled demonstrates some of the worst tendencies of public governance - the assumption of other peoples' property as it's own, that legal burdens on land apply to other people, that public consultation means asking not listening (and frequently not evening asking).
I am absolutely certain that if the Burrell Trustees agree to a commercial leisure use it will prevent them contesting [bold]any [/bold]commercial leisure use on their gifted land in the future. They must consider any consent or objection in the light of the next proposal as much as this one.
If there's a mass of people in favour of this then so be it and we will take our walks elsewhere but if that's not the case why is a seemingly unpopular proposal being so vigorously promoted by Glasgow City Council?
I could think of several reasons, none of which reflect gloriously the spirit of public service.
I enjoy Pollok Park regularly with my autistic son. Either he is going to want to go on it (again and again and again which I simply can't afford) or Go Ape will not permit him on it at all. Either way it's meltdown time and teeth marks all round.
The way the proposal itself has been handled demonstrates some of the worst tendencies of public governance - the assumption of other peoples' property as it's own, that legal burdens on land apply to other people, that public consultation means asking not listening (and frequently not evening asking).
I am absolutely certain that if the Burrell Trustees agree to a commercial leisure use it will prevent them contesting
any commercial leisure use on their gifted land in the future. They must consider any consent or objection in the light of the next proposal as much as this one.
If there's a mass of people in favour of this then so be it and we will take our walks elsewhere but if that's not the case why is a seemingly unpopular proposal being so vigorously promoted by Glasgow City Council?
I could think of several reasons, none of which reflect gloriously the spirit of public service.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 8:59pm Wed 3 Sep 08
The other factor to consider is the way in which the number of "FREE" allocated places are given - begrudgedly, whereby a disclaimer has to be signed, taking all accountability away from ( in this occassion) "Go Ape"
So, really the "FREE" places are not free at all, but conditional, and with rules, and specifications.
Surely with the profit margins such a company makes it should be doing far more to entice those on lower wages - not being so awkward about who its "FREE" places are given, and how they are given.
"Go Ape" will not be getting a penny of my money now, nor in the future. Anyone with any sense of decency, or morals should consider boycotting those companies who's ethics are less than honourable.
Time to let those commercial, and multi-national companies all over the world who pulls their strings. Not the bosses.
Us the public who fund their wages!
The other factor to consider is the way in which the number of "FREE" allocated places are given - begrudgedly, whereby a disclaimer has to be signed, taking all accountability away from ( in this occassion) "Go Ape"
So, really the "FREE" places are not free at all, but conditional, and with rules, and specifications.
Surely with the profit margins such a company makes it should be doing far more to entice those on lower wages - not being so awkward about who its "FREE" places are given, and how they are given.
"Go Ape" will not be getting a penny of my money now, nor in the future. Anyone with any sense of decency, or morals should consider boycotting those companies who's ethics are less than honourable.
Time to let those commercial, and multi-national companies all over the world who pulls their strings. Not the bosses.
Us the public who fund their wages!
Posted by: roor06, glasgow on 9:15pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Money Talks ...
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 9:44pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Except when its Northern Rocks .....
Even more reason to choose carefully who
you give your money to & spend wisely!
Except when its Northern Rocks .....
Even more reason to choose carefully who
you give your money to & spend wisely!
Posted by: roor06, glasgow on 10:15pm Wed 3 Sep 08
It would"nt surprise me if Michael Jackson was behind all this monkey business ...
It would"nt surprise me if Michael Jackson was behind all this monkey business ...
Posted by: jeezoh1, new zealand on 10:30pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Having just read about this it saddens me. When we lived in Hamilton we would take our 3 kids to Pollok Park and the walking'circuit' fair knackered them. When my husband and I dated we would go for long walks around it and (sorry environmentalists) we even carved our name on a tree down by the pond.The kids now love the outdoors and we regularly go walking as a family. We visited all the parks in Glasgow and nothing compared to Pollok park. we even planted Rhodedendrons in our garden here to remember the park. I feel this is the thin end of the wedge. Please don't let this happen Glasgow.
A sad kiwi.
Having just read about this it saddens me. When we lived in Hamilton we would take our 3 kids to Pollok Park and the walking'circuit' fair knackered them. When my husband and I dated we would go for long walks around it and (sorry environmentalists) we even carved our name on a tree down by the pond.The kids now love the outdoors and we regularly go walking as a family. We visited all the parks in Glasgow and nothing compared to Pollok park. we even planted Rhodedendrons in our garden here to remember the park. I feel this is the thin end of the wedge. Please don't let this happen Glasgow.
A sad kiwi.
Posted by: I hear your pain, me,me,me on 10:01am Thu 4 Sep 08
Heard on the news that it has to be ok'd by the National Trust & they are dead set against it so it looks like this will end up in court..
Heard on the news that it has to be ok'd by the National Trust & they are dead set against it so it looks like this will end up in court..
Posted by: max, Glasgow on 10:02am Thu 4 Sep 08
IF GLASGOW COUNCIL DECIDES ONCE AND FOR ALL TO GO AGAINST THE CLEAR WISHES OF THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED THEM IN THEN THEY SHOULD CONSIDER WHAT HAPPENED RECENTLY IN THE GLASGOW EAST ELECTION. THE PUBLIC ARE IN THE MOOD FOR A CHANGE. THERE ARE NO 'SAFE SEATS' LEFT IN THIS CITY.[bold]bold[/bold]
IF GLASGOW COUNCIL DECIDES ONCE AND FOR ALL TO GO AGAINST THE CLEAR WISHES OF THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED THEM IN THEN THEY SHOULD CONSIDER WHAT HAPPENED RECENTLY IN THE GLASGOW EAST ELECTION. THE PUBLIC ARE IN THE MOOD FOR A CHANGE. THERE ARE NO 'SAFE SEATS' LEFT IN THIS CITY.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 11:50am Thu 4 Sep 08
[quote][bold]max[/bold] wrote:
IF GLASGOW COUNCIL DECIDES ONCE AND FOR ALL TO GO AGAINST THE CLEAR WISHES OF THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED THEM IN THEN THEY SHOULD CONSIDER WHAT HAPPENED RECENTLY IN THE GLASGOW EAST ELECTION. THE PUBLIC ARE IN THE MOOD FOR A CHANGE. THERE ARE NO 'SAFE SEATS' LEFT IN THIS CITY.[bold]bold[/bold] [/quote]
AYE MAX LETS KICK SOME A55 AND TRULY SEE OUR COUNCILLORS GROVELLING FOR THEIR SEATS, AND ANY RESPECT THEY HAVE LEFT FROM THE DISGRUNTLED PUBLIC AT LARGE.
OUR POLITICIANS AND COUNCILLORS MAY THINK THEY HAVE THEIR POCKETS LINED TILL THE END OF TIME.
BUT THIS IS ALL SET TO CHANGE WHEN PEOPLE WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE - AND COUNCILLORS / MSP's REALISE WHAT IT IS LIKE TO BE IN THE DOLE QUEUE. WELCOME TO THE REAL WORLD!
max wrote:
IF GLASGOW COUNCIL DECIDES ONCE AND FOR ALL TO GO AGAINST THE CLEAR WISHES OF THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED THEM IN THEN THEY SHOULD CONSIDER WHAT HAPPENED RECENTLY IN THE GLASGOW EAST ELECTION. THE PUBLIC ARE IN THE MOOD FOR A CHANGE. THERE ARE NO 'SAFE SEATS' LEFT IN THIS CITY.
AYE MAX LETS KICK SOME A55 AND TRULY SEE OUR COUNCILLORS GROVELLING FOR THEIR SEATS, AND ANY RESPECT THEY HAVE LEFT FROM THE DISGRUNTLED PUBLIC AT LARGE.
OUR POLITICIANS AND COUNCILLORS MAY THINK THEY HAVE THEIR POCKETS LINED TILL THE END OF TIME.
BUT THIS IS ALL SET TO CHANGE WHEN PEOPLE WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE - AND COUNCILLORS / MSP's REALISE WHAT IT IS LIKE TO BE IN THE DOLE QUEUE. WELCOME TO THE REAL WORLD!
Posted by: Southsider71, Newton Mearns, Glasgow on 10:22am Fri 5 Sep 08
A pity that this has been passed, would have been better in one of the other parks where they already have sports facilities...
A pity that this has been passed, would have been better in one of the other parks where they already have sports facilities...
Comment | Read Comments (43)
