Posted by: Malcolm Dobson, Langside on 11:35am Wed 29 Oct 08
It's a pity that the Evening Times are still publiciseing Go Ape's defamatory and mis-leading comments about SPP
It's a pity that the Evening Times are still publiciseing Go Ape's defamatory and mis-leading comments about SPP
Posted by: GlasgowBob, Glasgow on 12:10pm Wed 29 Oct 08
[quote][bold]Malcolm Dobson[/bold] wrote:
It's a pity that the Evening Times are still publiciseing Go Ape's defamatory and mis-leading comments about SPP[/quote] Agree, and it suits the Go Ape hypocrits to manufacture a side show to detract from their own illegal attempts to create revenue from a public park donated to the people of Glasgow for general public use.
Malcolm Dobson wrote:
It's a pity that the Evening Times are still publiciseing Go Ape's defamatory and mis-leading comments about SPP
Agree, and it suits the Go Ape hypocrits to manufacture a side show to detract from their own illegal attempts to create revenue from a public park donated to the people of Glasgow for general public use.
Posted by: Mo Daniels, Mount Florida on 12:28pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Finally this project is moving forward. I cant wait to use the facility with friends and family. Slow progress, but it will be well worth the wait.
Finally this project is moving forward. I cant wait to use the facility with friends and family. Slow progress, but it will be well worth the wait.
Posted by: gkar, Glasgow on 12:52pm Wed 29 Oct 08
[quote]"The council claims the scheme will promote exercise, but at £41 a go it won't be much used to hard pressed families.[/quote]
Exactly, this park was donated to everyone in Glasgow and cordoning off an area so that some private company came make profits is obscene.
Unfortunately the previous poster doesnt quite understand that the park is not just for those that can afford to use it but for everyone in the city.
If they set a precedent by agreeing this to go ahead then what other companies will be attracted to build in pollok park? And will the council ignore the people again and again. Its a peaceful place in the middle of the city and thats how it should stay.
"The council claims the scheme will promote exercise, but at £41 a go it won't be much used to hard pressed families.
Exactly, this park was donated to everyone in Glasgow and cordoning off an area so that some private company came make profits is obscene.
Unfortunately the previous poster doesnt quite understand that the park is not just for those that can afford to use it but for everyone in the city.
If they set a precedent by agreeing this to go ahead then what other companies will be attracted to build in pollok park? And will the council ignore the people again and again. Its a peaceful place in the middle of the city and thats how it should stay.
Posted by: gkar, Glasgow on 12:54pm Wed 29 Oct 08
[quote][bold]Malcolm Dobson[/bold] wrote:
It's a pity that the Evening Times are still publiciseing Go Ape's defamatory and mis-leading comments about SPP[/quote] One wonders why people pay for a paper full of council propaganda. The Evening Times should stick up for its readers or it may find that there wont be many people left reading it.
Malcolm Dobson wrote:
It's a pity that the Evening Times are still publiciseing Go Ape's defamatory and mis-leading comments about SPP
One wonders why people pay for a paper full of council propaganda. The Evening Times should stick up for its readers or it may find that there wont be many people left reading it.
Posted by: Seymour Hope, Glasgow on 1:07pm Wed 29 Oct 08
The people of Glasgow will suffer from the precident set if Go-Ape goes ahead. The agreements set in place by the Maxwell family have not been considered. We ask the National Trust to be brave and make a decision to follow up their objection. As for the Council using the common good fund to subsidise lunches we ask them to be held accountable for missusing funds. We also sak Glasgow Council to show where the car parking charges from Pollok Park are fed back into the common good fund.
The people of Glasgow will suffer from the precident set if Go-Ape goes ahead. The agreements set in place by the Maxwell family have not been considered. We ask the National Trust to be brave and make a decision to follow up their objection. As for the Council using the common good fund to subsidise lunches we ask them to be held accountable for missusing funds. We also sak Glasgow Council to show where the car parking charges from Pollok Park are fed back into the common good fund.
Posted by: Freshairfiend, Glasgow on 1:16pm Wed 29 Oct 08
[quote][bold]Mo Daniels[/bold] wrote:
Finally this project is moving forward. I cant wait to use the facility with friends and family. Slow progress, but it will be well worth the wait.[/quote] My, what an exciting life you must lead.
Mo Daniels wrote:
Finally this project is moving forward. I cant wait to use the facility with friends and family. Slow progress, but it will be well worth the wait.
My, what an exciting life you must lead.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 1:46pm Wed 29 Oct 08
[italic]Save Pollok Park say the 1939 Conservation Act, drawn up between the Maxwell Family who gifted the park to Glasgow, the council and the National Trust for Scotland states the Trust must give consent on any park development.[/italic]
[italic]Campaigners called upon Andy Whiteman, an expert on Common Good land laws, who said that because the park belongs to the people of the city the council would need legal permission to lease or sell it.[/italic]
Not if your a lABOUR luvvie, as it shows the party is above the law, lawless, outlaws, yet are voted in to Govern.
Hmmmm Labour of Mafia - can anybody tell the difference?
Besides, if the Labour Party are oblivious to the laws, by-laws or legislation, and have nobody to control them when they have broken rules, does it surprise anybody that the peoople in the respective parliamentary constituencies and municipal wards they are elected to serve are just as bad as them?
Neds are mostly found in the traditional Labour heartlands - an irony or what?
Save Pollok Park say the 1939 Conservation Act, drawn up between the Maxwell Family who gifted the park to Glasgow, the council and the National Trust for Scotland states the Trust must give consent on any park development.
Campaigners called upon Andy Whiteman, an expert on Common Good land laws, who said that because the park belongs to the people of the city the council would need legal permission to lease or sell it.
Not if your a lABOUR luvvie, as it shows the party is above the law, lawless, outlaws, yet are voted in to Govern.
Hmmmm Labour of Mafia - can anybody tell the difference?
Besides, if the Labour Party are oblivious to the laws, by-laws or legislation, and have nobody to control them when they have broken rules, does it surprise anybody that the peoople in the respective parliamentary constituencies and municipal wards they are elected to serve are just as bad as them?
Neds are mostly found in the traditional Labour heartlands - an irony or what?
Posted by: HGlasgwegian, Glasgow on 1:46pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Nobody from Labour at the meeting. Councillors and MSPs from the SNP, Greens, Lib Dems and Tories but not a single representative from Labour.
Says it all really.
Nobody from Labour at the meeting. Councillors and MSPs from the SNP, Greens, Lib Dems and Tories but not a single representative from Labour.
Says it all really.
Posted by: gavin48, Glasgow on 1:49pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Andy Wightman is regarded as a very knowledgeable person on Common Good Lands and Funds. Check out his various publications to see this mans knowledge. He states that by any legal definition Pollok PArk is Common Good Land, as such the terms to its gift can not be amended without the decision of a Sheriff, this is also the opinion of a QC consulted on these matters. Further as Common Good Land any income generated from it must go into the Common Good Fund, so the lease from Go Ape should go to this fund. Incidentally the parking paid at the Burrell should also go to this fund, at present it does not.
Andy Wightman is regarded as a very knowledgeable person on Common Good Lands and Funds. Check out his various publications to see this mans knowledge. He states that by any legal definition Pollok PArk is Common Good Land, as such the terms to its gift can not be amended without the decision of a Sheriff, this is also the opinion of a QC consulted on these matters. Further as Common Good Land any income generated from it must go into the Common Good Fund, so the lease from Go Ape should go to this fund. Incidentally the parking paid at the Burrell should also go to this fund, at present it does not.
Posted by: SPAMALOT, southside on 2:10pm Wed 29 Oct 08
[quote][bold]Mo Daniels[/bold] wrote:
Finally this project is moving forward. I cant wait to use the facility with friends and family. Slow progress, but it will be well worth the wait.[/quote] Cannie wait tae wreck it ya clown
Mo Daniels wrote:
Finally this project is moving forward. I cant wait to use the facility with friends and family. Slow progress, but it will be well worth the wait.
Cannie wait tae wreck it ya clown
Posted by: willie mac, Arden on 3:20pm Wed 29 Oct 08
The park was donated to the public and it should not be hived off to some private business.
Glasgow councilors have been given very bad press for being on the take and with all their support for this enterprise one has to wonder exactly what is going on.
The park was donated to the public and it should not be hived off to some private business.
Glasgow councilors have been given very bad press for being on the take and with all their support for this enterprise one has to wonder exactly what is going on.
Posted by: wild wadi, kirkie on 4:22pm Wed 29 Oct 08
"The council claims the scheme will promote exercise, but at £41 a go it won't be much used to hard pressed families.
Won't be much use for well off families either at that price.
"The council claims the scheme will promote exercise, but at £41 a go it won't be much used to hard pressed families.
Won't be much use for well off families either at that price.
Posted by: mulross, Glasgow on 4:36pm Wed 29 Oct 08
[quote][bold]Mo Daniels[/bold] wrote:
Finally this project is moving forward. I cant wait to use the facility with friends and family. Slow progress, but it will be well worth the wait.[/quote] Don't get too excited Mo - despite the arrogant assertion of the"GCC spokeswoman" (obviously not preparede to be identified)there are a number of legal obstacles blocking the way.
If you [bold]really[/bold] "can't wait" to use the facility then there is already one in place at Aberfoyle. No great distance from Glasgow either by car or bus. Transport costs should be no hindrance to those able to afford the prices Go Ape charge
Mo Daniels wrote:
Finally this project is moving forward. I cant wait to use the facility with friends and family. Slow progress, but it will be well worth the wait.
Don't get too excited Mo - despite the arrogant assertion of the"GCC spokeswoman" (obviously not preparede to be identified)there are a number of legal obstacles blocking the way.
If you
really "can't wait" to use the facility then there is already one in place at Aberfoyle. No great distance from Glasgow either by car or bus. Transport costs should be no hindrance to those able to afford the prices Go Ape charge
Posted by: jonny bond, glasgow on 5:14pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Glasgow has more parks than facilities for youths to enjoy it seems resonable to try to do something about that. Otherwise gangs of youths will decend on public parks all year round. Then nobody will get any pleasure from seeing cripled swans doing the distressed swan lake. In a seperate argument which backs my point there are three areas of glasgow where murder is the no1 killer of young adults possibly because there is not much else to do. Go ape have defo bought someone off the question is who for how much and can we get him and send him to do his community service in one of the three aforementioned areas.
Glasgow has more parks than facilities for youths to enjoy it seems resonable to try to do something about that. Otherwise gangs of youths will decend on public parks all year round. Then nobody will get any pleasure from seeing cripled swans doing the distressed swan lake. In a seperate argument which backs my point there are three areas of glasgow where murder is the no1 killer of young adults possibly because there is not much else to do. Go ape have defo bought someone off the question is who for how much and can we get him and send him to do his community service in one of the three aforementioned areas.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 5:17pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Interesting that the "Save Pollok Park" statement is given the same treatment as the "Go Ape" statement / letter released yesterday on the E.T. Website. . . . .
When if you look at todays E.T. Paper edition the "Save Pollok Park" statement is clearly completely merged into the article, with no real way of making it stand out.
Wonder why this is ?
As for the absence of any labour council repesentation at the meeting, along with the National Trust for Scotland who agreed to attending, then changed their minds 2 hours before the meeting - deciding not to attend, one can only speculate on why this is ?
Clearly there is alot of pressure on the National Trust as the main organisation who must consent to this "Go Ape" Project going ahead.
Clearly, the labour council in all it's wisdom is doing it's best to hide the fact that the National Trust has not come out openly in favour of "Go Ape!"
Also, the information that G.C.C.intended on using the revenue from "Go Ape" to put towards it's LES budget, and not the "Common Good" fund which it is supposed to go into, if legislation means anything to New Labour.
So, really there is far more to this story, and labours quotations, or press releases are only just touching on this hot potato......
We the public know the facts, and as more information comes out - the labour council is being pushed further into the corner.
Ultimately I will not be happy until the people of Glasgow whom this Park belongs to, along with the National Trust for Scotland and the Maxwell Family tell all those councillors involved to hang their heads in shame, and sit on the naughty step.
The passing of this application by Glasgow Planning Department without any real, and fully transparent consultation exercise says alot about how muc hour democratic rights are being trampled on.
The people of Glasgow must speak out in particular to The National Trust for Scotland,
and to ensure that this application does not go ahead in the flawed, and corrupt circumstances which it has done up until now.
Interesting that the "Save Pollok Park" statement is given the same treatment as the "Go Ape" statement / letter released yesterday on the E.T. Website. . . . .
When if you look at todays E.T. Paper edition the "Save Pollok Park" statement is clearly completely merged into the article, with no real way of making it stand out.
Wonder why this is ?
As for the absence of any labour council repesentation at the meeting, along with the National Trust for Scotland who agreed to attending, then changed their minds 2 hours before the meeting - deciding not to attend, one can only speculate on why this is ?
Clearly there is alot of pressure on the National Trust as the main organisation who must consent to this "Go Ape" Project going ahead.
Clearly, the labour council in all it's wisdom is doing it's best to hide the fact that the National Trust has not come out openly in favour of "Go Ape!"
Also, the information that G.C.C.intended on using the revenue from "Go Ape" to put towards it's LES budget, and not the "Common Good" fund which it is supposed to go into, if legislation means anything to New Labour.
So, really there is far more to this story, and labours quotations, or press releases are only just touching on this hot potato......
We the public know the facts, and as more information comes out - the labour council is being pushed further into the corner.
Ultimately I will not be happy until the people of Glasgow whom this Park belongs to, along with the National Trust for Scotland and the Maxwell Family tell all those councillors involved to hang their heads in shame, and sit on the naughty step.
The passing of this application by Glasgow Planning Department without any real, and fully transparent consultation exercise says alot about how muc hour democratic rights are being trampled on.
The people of Glasgow must speak out in particular to The National Trust for Scotland,
and to ensure that this application does not go ahead in the flawed, and corrupt circumstances which it has done up until now.
Posted by: Roy Batty, Glasgow on 5:38pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Do you know something. I wish GCC would do more consulation as well...if only to stop you lot of raving bloody nutters boring us to death every effing article I read.
Do any of you work????
Do you know something. I wish GCC would do more consulation as well...if only to stop you lot of raving bloody nutters boring us to death every effing article I read.
Do any of you work????
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 5:39pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Even those who are for this "Go Ape" addition in Pollok Park must now surely be realising that despite Pollok Park seeming like an ideal location with all its acres of forrestry,
the facts of the dodgy way in which this whole proposal came about, and was subsequently passed by G.C.C.'s planning department are far from above board.
The suitability of the location may have been less of an issue had the consultation with the public of been fully open from the outset.
But - ultimately G.C.C. can only blame itself for the huge level of public opposition against both itself, and "Go Ape"
Yes, there are the more miltant extemists - which I certainly would not associate with.
The democratic process as flawed as it is - must be the main, if not the only route we take in voicing our concerns to our councillors, and politicians.
Clearly over the years people have done themselves no favours when abandoning their own responsibilities and rights in approaching their councillors and politicians at their surgeries, writing to, and phoning them.
Even with public demonstations, petitions, and marches, strikes and picket lines we still have to keep fighting for our causes.
But - lets use, not abuse our rights.
Equally lets ensure that when we have any objections, dislikes or complaints that we voice them sooner rather than later . . . .
as, clearly the level of public apathy, depression, and hopelessness in society today has done little to achieve, or help us reach our aspirations.
Let us not give up hope - it is at times like this when we face so many uncertaintys that we must raise our voices even louder, and speak out for those who are not heard.
Let us ensure that we fight for what we believe in, and maintain what little democtatic rights we have, before we lose them.
Even those who are for this "Go Ape" addition in Pollok Park must now surely be realising that despite Pollok Park seeming like an ideal location with all its acres of forrestry,
the facts of the dodgy way in which this whole proposal came about, and was subsequently passed by G.C.C.'s planning department are far from above board.
The suitability of the location may have been less of an issue had the consultation with the public of been fully open from the outset.
But - ultimately G.C.C. can only blame itself for the huge level of public opposition against both itself, and "Go Ape"
Yes, there are the more miltant extemists - which I certainly would not associate with.
The democratic process as flawed as it is - must be the main, if not the only route we take in voicing our concerns to our councillors, and politicians.
Clearly over the years people have done themselves no favours when abandoning their own responsibilities and rights in approaching their councillors and politicians at their surgeries, writing to, and phoning them.
Even with public demonstations, petitions, and marches, strikes and picket lines we still have to keep fighting for our causes.
But - lets use, not abuse our rights.
Equally lets ensure that when we have any objections, dislikes or complaints that we voice them sooner rather than later . . . .
as, clearly the level of public apathy, depression, and hopelessness in society today has done little to achieve, or help us reach our aspirations.
Let us not give up hope - it is at times like this when we face so many uncertaintys that we must raise our voices even louder, and speak out for those who are not heard.
Let us ensure that we fight for what we believe in, and maintain what little democtatic rights we have, before we lose them.
Posted by: People Power on 5:42pm Wed 29 Oct 08
[quote][bold]Roy Batty[/bold] wrote:
Do you know something. I wish GCC would do more consulation as well...if only to stop you lot of raving bloody nutters boring us to death every effing article I read. Do any of you work???? [/quote]
Nobody forces you to read the comments - you clearly choose to do so.
Just as nobody forces you to come onto the E.T. Website. You choose to do so.
So, before you go criticising us expressing our democratic rights on this forum, maybe you should get on with your work, and stop skiving on this >
Roy Batty wrote:
Do you know something. I wish GCC would do more consulation as well...if only to stop you lot of raving bloody nutters boring us to death every effing article I read. Do any of you work????
Nobody forces you to read the comments - you clearly choose to do so.
Just as nobody forces you to come onto the E.T. Website. You choose to do so.
So, before you go criticising us expressing our democratic rights on this forum, maybe you should get on with your work, and stop skiving on this >
Posted by: Roy Batty, Glasgow on 5:42pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Aw for crying out loud.
Is that the lecture over PP.
Away you and raffle your doughnut!!
Aw for crying out loud.
Is that the lecture over PP.
Away you and raffle your doughnut!!
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 5:44pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Aye, I'm raffling it for a good cause S.P.P. LOL ;-)
Any takers,
Tickets cost £41 ( the same as a day out at "Go Ape!"
Aye, I'm raffling it for a good cause S.P.P. LOL ;-)
Any takers,
Tickets cost £41 ( the same as a day out at "Go Ape!"
Posted by: Roy Batty, Glasgow on 5:55pm Wed 29 Oct 08
[quote]So, before you go criticising us expressing our democratic rights on this forum[/quote]
Aye, but can ye no express your democratic views a bit less effusively.
Talking of which...where's Sidney Merrybottom
So, before you go criticising us expressing our democratic rights on this forum
Aye, but can ye no express your democratic views a bit less effusively.
Talking of which...where's Sidney Merrybottom
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 6:03pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Come on - we all need a bit of diversity and eccentricity. Just because I don't agree with someone doesn't mean I respect them much less.
If you don't like my long winded rants, or spiels no one forces you to read them.
Without the posters here who injected the sarcasm, and cynicism in equal measures the E.T. discussions and comments to its articles would be pretty dull and dry.
Come on - we all need a bit of diversity and eccentricity. Just because I don't agree with someone doesn't mean I respect them much less.
If you don't like my long winded rants, or spiels no one forces you to read them.
Without the posters here who injected the sarcasm, and cynicism in equal measures the E.T. discussions and comments to its articles would be pretty dull and dry.
Posted by: Jane Newlands, Glasgow on 6:03pm Wed 29 Oct 08
I agree with Roy Batty. How may people from Pollok and south side use Pollok park? None of you that don't support it have a life honest to goodness, and most of you are eejits trying to put their weight about.
Eh, how many folk fae can afford to go to Aberfoyle? You know how far that is? I suggest you get a map.
Go ape
I agree with Roy Batty. How may people from Pollok and south side use Pollok park? None of you that don't support it have a life honest to goodness, and most of you are eejits trying to put their weight about.
Eh, how many folk fae can afford to go to Aberfoyle? You know how far that is? I suggest you get a map.
Go ape
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 6:17pm Wed 29 Oct 08
This has little to do with the existing "Go Ape" in Aberfoyle.
This is about the proposal for a "Go Ape" within Pollok Park, so lets not confuse the two locations.
As for affordability that is just one issue.
As for those commenting here being[italic] "eejits trying to put our weight about"[/italic]
That proves my very point that the level of public apathy is rife, and those who clearly do not care about what happens within their cities are all too often lucky enough to be more financially comfortable, labourites.
Or,
People who simply do not take as much interest in their community.
The "Save Pollok Park" group actually came out of a co-joining of Community Council members.
So, please do not suggest this group, or its followers are [italic]"eejits[/italic] "
We are merely exercising the democratic rights we have been given to speak out about what we believe in.
We do not force this down people throats, preach it to people like ministers do on street corners.
We do not force people into the Public meeting held, they come of their own free will.
Equally all those commenting / posting here are doing the same.
If campaigning for what people believe to be right is so wrong, then clearly Jane you will make a perfect councillor / politician......
Lets not speak our own mind, lets conform to the masses ( i.e. a political party.) lets not speak up so as to offend, or upset anyone.
And, lets not dig up any dirt on our councillors or politician, I mean they have feelings too.
If the political process was not so flawed, and the decisions taken by our council were not as secretive, insulting, damaging, we'd all be alot better off. And, we wouldn't be in Glasgow either.
This has little to do with the existing "Go Ape" in Aberfoyle.
This is about the proposal for a "Go Ape" within Pollok Park, so lets not confuse the two locations.
As for affordability that is just one issue.
As for those commenting here being
"eejits trying to put our weight about"
That proves my very point that the level of public apathy is rife, and those who clearly do not care about what happens within their cities are all too often lucky enough to be more financially comfortable, labourites.
Or,
People who simply do not take as much interest in their community.
The "Save Pollok Park" group actually came out of a co-joining of Community Council members.
So, please do not suggest this group, or its followers are
"eejits "
We are merely exercising the democratic rights we have been given to speak out about what we believe in.
We do not force this down people throats, preach it to people like ministers do on street corners.
We do not force people into the Public meeting held, they come of their own free will.
Equally all those commenting / posting here are doing the same.
If campaigning for what people believe to be right is so wrong, then clearly Jane you will make a perfect councillor / politician......
Lets not speak our own mind, lets conform to the masses ( i.e. a political party.) lets not speak up so as to offend, or upset anyone.
And, lets not dig up any dirt on our councillors or politician, I mean they have feelings too.
If the political process was not so flawed, and the decisions taken by our council were not as secretive, insulting, damaging, we'd all be alot better off. And, we wouldn't be in Glasgow either.
Posted by: Jane Newlands, Glasgow on 6:32pm Wed 29 Oct 08
It is a PUBLIC park, and we only hear from one side usually, if people could be bothered (but they can't) there would probably be more support for it. I go to Pollok Park regularly and it is not overrun with people having a nice walk, in fact it mostly inhabited by older people or young families. Oh, don't forget the young ones that come in droves early evening to annoy all and sundry.
It is a PUBLIC park, and we only hear from one side usually, if people could be bothered (but they can't) there would probably be more support for it. I go to Pollok Park regularly and it is not overrun with people having a nice walk, in fact it mostly inhabited by older people or young families. Oh, don't forget the young ones that come in droves early evening to annoy all and sundry.
Posted by: People Power on 6:34pm Wed 29 Oct 08
On other point of reference to make for those who did not atend - a certain male Lib Dem councillor who attended the meeting - ( front row) happened to be asleep, or had his eyes shut a good amount of the time.
Shows just how much interest he showed.
The very same councillor - doesn't even have regular surgeries in usual venues, like all the other councillors.
Yet another reason why people tend to get annoyed at the way councillors abuse the perks of their jobs, and don't always do as much as they could, or should be doing for their constituents.
On other point of reference to make for those who did not atend - a certain male Lib Dem councillor who attended the meeting - ( front row) happened to be asleep, or had his eyes shut a good amount of the time.
Shows just how much interest he showed.
The very same councillor - doesn't even have regular surgeries in usual venues, like all the other councillors.
Yet another reason why people tend to get annoyed at the way councillors abuse the perks of their jobs, and don't always do as much as they could, or should be doing for their constituents.
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 6:41pm Wed 29 Oct 08
People Power what nonsense you speak:
[italic]"This has little to do with the existing "Go Ape" in Aberfoyle.
This is about the proposal for a "Go Ape" within Pollok Park, so lets not confuse the two locations."[/italic]
Yes lets not confuse - REMOVE ALL of the photos of Aberfoyle on the SPP website and all the derogatory and libellous comments made about Aberfoyle on the same site.
Read any of the forums on the site and you'll see that the campaigners frequently use the names of Go Ape personnel in derogatory comments about their intentions or business acumen.
[italic]"We do not force this down people throats, preach it to people like ministers do on street corners."[/italic]
Don't know what you've got against ministers, however the campaign has been a lot more viceferous than that.
[italic]"If the political process was not so flawed, and the decisions taken by our council were not as secretive, insulting, damaging, we'd all be alot better off. And, we wouldn't be in Glasgow either."[/italic]
Away and take your not so hidden polotical agenda elsewhere. ITS A PUBLIC PARK and the people have voted for Go Ape and will get to swing their way through the trees.
The bad publicity SPP planned against and carried out poisonously has backfired rightly.
Als the ET is getting the poison now despite having highlighted the SPP campaign over many many articles.
People Power what nonsense you speak:
"This has little to do with the existing "Go Ape" in Aberfoyle.
This is about the proposal for a "Go Ape" within Pollok Park, so lets not confuse the two locations."
Yes lets not confuse - REMOVE ALL of the photos of Aberfoyle on the SPP website and all the derogatory and libellous comments made about Aberfoyle on the same site.
Read any of the forums on the site and you'll see that the campaigners frequently use the names of Go Ape personnel in derogatory comments about their intentions or business acumen.
"We do not force this down people throats, preach it to people like ministers do on street corners."
Don't know what you've got against ministers, however the campaign has been a lot more viceferous than that.
"If the political process was not so flawed, and the decisions taken by our council were not as secretive, insulting, damaging, we'd all be alot better off. And, we wouldn't be in Glasgow either."
Away and take your not so hidden polotical agenda elsewhere. ITS A PUBLIC PARK and the people have voted for Go Ape and will get to swing their way through the trees.
The bad publicity SPP planned against and carried out poisonously has backfired rightly.
Als the ET is getting the poison now despite having highlighted the SPP campaign over many many articles.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 6:43pm Wed 29 Oct 08
[quote][bold]Jane Newlands[/bold] wrote:
It is a PUBLIC park, and we only hear from one side usually, if people could be bothered (but they can't) there would probably be more support for it. I go to Pollok Park regularly and it is not overrun with people having a nice walk, in fact it mostly inhabited by older people or young families. Oh, don't forget the young ones that come in droves early evening to annoy all and sundry.[/quote]
I think you will find the reason being is that most people have to work for a living.
Those who do use it may well be retired, or families ( who can work shift patterns.)
That still doesn't change the fact that the addition of a facility like "Go Ape" is not for the right reasons, in the right location, nor has the consideration or offering of this plan to "Go Ape" been done with the PUBLIC's views taken on board.
A flawed consulation process.
An alleged improper useage of the takings by the Council into its LES budget.
No official agreement from The National Trust for Scotland.
and. . . .
Thousands of signatures on a petition which had little bearing or impact on the Councils decision.
How much to people have to do to have their voices heard, and ensure that the democratic process is not abused by councillors - more interested in the financial gain, and less interested in the Public rights, and overall conservation of the Park.
Jane Newlands wrote:
It is a PUBLIC park, and we only hear from one side usually, if people could be bothered (but they can't) there would probably be more support for it. I go to Pollok Park regularly and it is not overrun with people having a nice walk, in fact it mostly inhabited by older people or young families. Oh, don't forget the young ones that come in droves early evening to annoy all and sundry.
I think you will find the reason being is that most people have to work for a living.
Those who do use it may well be retired, or families ( who can work shift patterns.)
That still doesn't change the fact that the addition of a facility like "Go Ape" is not for the right reasons, in the right location, nor has the consideration or offering of this plan to "Go Ape" been done with the PUBLIC's views taken on board.
A flawed consulation process.
An alleged improper useage of the takings by the Council into its LES budget.
No official agreement from The National Trust for Scotland.
and. . . .
Thousands of signatures on a petition which had little bearing or impact on the Councils decision.
How much to people have to do to have their voices heard, and ensure that the democratic process is not abused by councillors - more interested in the financial gain, and less interested in the Public rights, and overall conservation of the Park.
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 6:44pm Wed 29 Oct 08
[quote][bold]People Power[/bold] wrote:
On other point of reference to make for those who did not atend - a certain male Lib Dem councillor who attended the meeting - ( front row) happened to be asleep, or had his eyes shut a good amount of the time. Shows just how much interest he showed. The very same councillor - doesn't even have regular surgeries in usual venues, like all the other councillors. Yet another reason why people tend to get annoyed at the way councillors abuse the perks of their jobs, and don't always do as much as they could, or should be doing for their constituents. [/quote] Honestly PP you are astounding! and you think anyone will respect you for the quick way you personally attack people who even in their small way tried to support you. And you expect everyone to think the campaign has conducted itself with no ill-feeling to those who disagreed?
People Power wrote:
On other point of reference to make for those who did not atend - a certain male Lib Dem councillor who attended the meeting - ( front row) happened to be asleep, or had his eyes shut a good amount of the time. Shows just how much interest he showed. The very same councillor - doesn't even have regular surgeries in usual venues, like all the other councillors. Yet another reason why people tend to get annoyed at the way councillors abuse the perks of their jobs, and don't always do as much as they could, or should be doing for their constituents.
Honestly PP you are astounding! and you think anyone will respect you for the quick way you personally attack people who even in their small way tried to support you. And you expect everyone to think the campaign has conducted itself with no ill-feeling to those who disagreed?
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 6:48pm Wed 29 Oct 08
I see the NTS didn't attend the meeting as planned. Very wise to distance themselves from these nutty campaigners.
Its all gone so badly wrong for SPP and so it should!
I see the NTS didn't attend the meeting as planned. Very wise to distance themselves from these nutty campaigners.
Its all gone so badly wrong for SPP and so it should!
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 6:53pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Luggie,
This is not about people liking me or not.
This is about me exercising my right to express my opinions, and simply saying what I saw. People can make their own minds up - clearly you have.
Just because councillors attend such meetings, does not by any way mean they are fully supportive of the cause.
Politics and hypocrisy go hand in hand, and any fool who doesnt see that clearly doesn't realise that politicians change their stance, and pitch at any given time to suit the time, and place.
You only have to look at the way councillors, and politicians alike would go out of their way to help you, or ( win your vote) pre- election. Yet, they conveniently sit on the fence, or play their cards close to their chest at other times.
The nature of politics is everyone being out for themselves. However much we are meant to believe that we're having our views represented - the level at which councillors, or politicians will go out of their way to help or respond to us, the electorate is highly variable, and at times pathetic.
Luggie,
This is not about people liking me or not.
This is about me exercising my right to express my opinions, and simply saying what I saw. People can make their own minds up - clearly you have.
Just because councillors attend such meetings, does not by any way mean they are fully supportive of the cause.
Politics and hypocrisy go hand in hand, and any fool who doesnt see that clearly doesn't realise that politicians change their stance, and pitch at any given time to suit the time, and place.
You only have to look at the way councillors, and politicians alike would go out of their way to help you, or ( win your vote) pre- election. Yet, they conveniently sit on the fence, or play their cards close to their chest at other times.
The nature of politics is everyone being out for themselves. However much we are meant to believe that we're having our views represented - the level at which councillors, or politicians will go out of their way to help or respond to us, the electorate is highly variable, and at times pathetic.
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 6:55pm Wed 29 Oct 08
So let me get this right PP. Its ok for you to personally attack a chap who was sleepy and extend by making libellous and derogatory remarks about his practice?
lets hear it...
So let me get this right PP. Its ok for you to personally attack a chap who was sleepy and extend by making libellous and derogatory remarks about his practice?
lets hear it...
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 6:55pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Did you know for sure if he was supporting the cause?
Did you know for sure if he was supporting the cause?
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 6:57pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Well.....?
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 6:58pm Wed 29 Oct 08
tumbleweed going by.
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 6:59pm Wed 29 Oct 08
...and again....
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 7:01pm Wed 29 Oct 08
People Power wrote:
[italic]"a certain male Lib Dem councillor who attended the meeting - ( front row) happened to be asleep, or had his eyes shut a good amount of the time. Shows just how much interest he showed. The very same councillor - doesn't even have regular surgeries in usual venues, like all the other councillors. Yet another reason why people tend to get annoyed at the way councillors abuse the perks of their jobs, and don't always do as much as they could, or should be doing for their constituents."[/italic]
and later
[italic]This is about me exercising my right to express my opinions, and simply saying what I saw.[/italic]
So you saw him abuse the perks of the job?
People Power wrote:
"a certain male Lib Dem councillor who attended the meeting - ( front row) happened to be asleep, or had his eyes shut a good amount of the time. Shows just how much interest he showed. The very same councillor - doesn't even have regular surgeries in usual venues, like all the other councillors. Yet another reason why people tend to get annoyed at the way councillors abuse the perks of their jobs, and don't always do as much as they could, or should be doing for their constituents."
and later
This is about me exercising my right to express my opinions, and simply saying what I saw.
So you saw him abuse the perks of the job?
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 7:03pm Wed 29 Oct 08
You aren't People Power. Rename yourself Some People are Abusive.
You aren't People Power. Rename yourself Some People are Abusive.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 7:05pm Wed 29 Oct 08
I happen to know for a fact that this chap - who shall remain nameless has no surgeries in any community centres, libaries etc.
Has not attended any community council meetings of one of the community councils within the ward he serves for over a year.
Councillors serving their wards and those within them ought to do as much as they can to make themselves available to represent the views of their voters.
This councillor is far from the best of the four for the ward he serves within.
So, this is me simply expressing what people have a right to - when the people who are voted in, being payed a salary, by our taxation do not carry out their job as thoroughly is it should be.
This was merely a side issue which I was pointng out, not one which has any more relevance than the main issue itself.....
Point being if we're going to be as apathetic, and listless about standing up for what we believe in, is it any wonder our councillors end up dozing off when our views are being represented.
I happen to know for a fact that this chap - who shall remain nameless has no surgeries in any community centres, libaries etc.
Has not attended any community council meetings of one of the community councils within the ward he serves for over a year.
Councillors serving their wards and those within them ought to do as much as they can to make themselves available to represent the views of their voters.
This councillor is far from the best of the four for the ward he serves within.
So, this is me simply expressing what people have a right to - when the people who are voted in, being payed a salary, by our taxation do not carry out their job as thoroughly is it should be.
This was merely a side issue which I was pointng out, not one which has any more relevance than the main issue itself.....
Point being if we're going to be as apathetic, and listless about standing up for what we believe in, is it any wonder our councillors end up dozing off when our views are being represented.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 7:11pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Anyway, since when was I answerable to you, or any other posters here. Cut out the wind ups, small talk and lets focuss on the real issue in question here.
The Meeting of dedicated supporters of the "Save Pollok Park" Group, and the rising level of public opposition to Go Ape, and G.C.C.
Anyway, since when was I answerable to you, or any other posters here. Cut out the wind ups, small talk and lets focuss on the real issue in question here.
The Meeting of dedicated supporters of the "Save Pollok Park" Group, and the rising level of public opposition to Go Ape, and G.C.C.
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 7:32pm Wed 29 Oct 08
The biggest doze was when the campaigners didn't respond to the consultation. Rising levels - don't care consultations over, we won (I want Go Ape) and I'm afraid you'll just have to respect the decision. And if you or anyone attempt to hijack democracy then you WILL be answerable and will not get your way.
The biggest doze was when the campaigners didn't respond to the consultation. Rising levels - don't care consultations over, we won (I want Go Ape) and I'm afraid you'll just have to respect the decision. And if you or anyone attempt to hijack democracy then you WILL be answerable and will not get your way.
Posted by: Johnny Punchclock, Glasgow on 7:37pm Wed 29 Oct 08
I think it's shameful that the protesters have just washed their hands of responsibility for the threats and criminal damage. No doubt we'll see more of this in the future. This is one of the reasons why I'm glad I'm anonymous - imagine if someone said they disagreed with the protestors and their name and address got known!
Anyway - if people think that the Council don't have the let powers to let the Go Ape people set up in the park, let the protesters ask the Sheriff to put a stop to it.
As far as I'm concerned, if Go Ape can make a go of it, that will prove that it's a popular enough project to carry on. If it goes bust, that's fair enough too. Or maybe Go Ape could team up with Tesco? Now there's a thought!!!
I think it's shameful that the protesters have just washed their hands of responsibility for the threats and criminal damage. No doubt we'll see more of this in the future. This is one of the reasons why I'm glad I'm anonymous - imagine if someone said they disagreed with the protestors and their name and address got known!
Anyway - if people think that the Council don't have the let powers to let the Go Ape people set up in the park, let the protesters ask the Sheriff to put a stop to it.
As far as I'm concerned, if Go Ape can make a go of it, that will prove that it's a popular enough project to carry on. If it goes bust, that's fair enough too. Or maybe Go Ape could team up with Tesco? Now there's a thought!!!
Posted by: Johnny Punchclock, Glasgow on 7:38pm Wed 29 Oct 08
I hope people Power is looking after her blood pressure when she reads my earlier comment!
I hope people Power is looking after her blood pressure when she reads my earlier comment!
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 7:51pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Aw, thanks - Johnny boy, didn't know you cared. How sweet of you!
Nah, my B.P. is tickety boo thanks to you!
As, the laughter you give me, at your attempts to wind me up is great for unwinding me, cheers!
You only show how much your clutching at straws, and scraping the bottom of the barrel at your attempts to gather any mud to sling.
May the truth of this whole matter prevail and justice be served to the people of Glasgow, and beyond.
Clearly the facts of this hot topic are emerging that were not apparent before, and if SPP are divulging what the Council had under wraps before then all the better.
This is not a fight, battle or some kind of contest. The [italic]"Protesters"[/italic] as you put it are ordinary people, pro-active members of their community councils ( myself included) and just have stronger views and opinions than those of others who maybe dare I say - don't care what happens either way ? WOWEE!
So, lets not nit pick, or turn this into a contest. It is simply a public spirited, community serving, fact gathering group who want to make sure all the stipulations, and rules are being followed before "Go Ape" goes ahead.
There you go, nothing to it really!
Have a nice night ;-)
Aw, thanks - Johnny boy, didn't know you cared. How sweet of you!
Nah, my B.P. is tickety boo thanks to you!
As, the laughter you give me, at your attempts to wind me up is great for unwinding me, cheers!
You only show how much your clutching at straws, and scraping the bottom of the barrel at your attempts to gather any mud to sling.
May the truth of this whole matter prevail and justice be served to the people of Glasgow, and beyond.
Clearly the facts of this hot topic are emerging that were not apparent before, and if SPP are divulging what the Council had under wraps before then all the better.
This is not a fight, battle or some kind of contest. The
"Protesters" as you put it are ordinary people, pro-active members of their community councils ( myself included) and just have stronger views and opinions than those of others who maybe dare I say - don't care what happens either way ? WOWEE!
So, lets not nit pick, or turn this into a contest. It is simply a public spirited, community serving, fact gathering group who want to make sure all the stipulations, and rules are being followed before "Go Ape" goes ahead.
There you go, nothing to it really!
Have a nice night ;-)
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 9:21pm Wed 29 Oct 08
Hey Johnny, Luggie - Whassup ? Cat got your tongue ?
Was just starting to warm up to your watter patter.
Wonder if "Go Ape" would of got this far if Tommy Sheri-tan from the Republic of Pollokuba had still been in power ?
We'll just never know, shame that - LOL ;-)
Hey Johnny, Luggie - Whassup ? Cat got your tongue ?
Was just starting to warm up to your watter patter.
Wonder if "Go Ape" would of got this far if Tommy Sheri-tan from the Republic of Pollokuba had still been in power ?
We'll just never know, shame that - LOL ;-)
Posted by: Smeeagain, Lanarkshire on 9:54pm Wed 29 Oct 08
[quote][bold]Roy Batty[/bold] wrote:
Do you know something. I wish GCC would do more consulation as well...if only to stop you lot of raving bloody nutters boring us to death every effing article I read. Do any of you work???? [/quote] Roy, are you on the run?
Roy Batty wrote:
Do you know something. I wish GCC would do more consulation as well...if only to stop you lot of raving bloody nutters boring us to death every effing article I read. Do any of you work????
Roy, are you on the run?
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 10:00pm Wed 29 Oct 08
[quote][bold]Smeeagain[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Roy Batty[/bold] wrote: Do you know something. I wish GCC would do more consulation as well...if only to stop you lot of raving bloody nutters boring us to death every effing article I read. Do any of you work???? [/quote] Roy, are you on the run? [/quote]
Nah Smeeagain,
he's on the randan, up sh*t creek (otherwise known as the Clyde) without a paddle!!!!
Smeeagain wrote:
Roy Batty wrote: Do you know something. I wish GCC would do more consulation as well...if only to stop you lot of raving bloody nutters boring us to death every effing article I read. Do any of you work????
Roy, are you on the run?
Nah Smeeagain,
he's on the randan, up sh*t creek (otherwise known as the Clyde) without a paddle!!!!
Posted by: murdo, partick on 12:05am Thu 30 Oct 08
Agree with people power, If one attends a meeting and front rows he should have the decency to stay awake and add to the debate. As he is a long serving leader of the GCC Lib Dems he should be an expert on the Common Good Fund as he has wined and dined at a lot of functions paid out of the Common Good Fund.
If he is unfit to participate he should resign and allow a new fit councillor to take his place.
As for Luggie please do a van gothe and keep to the subject and dont drivel nobody here likes your banter it just wastes spaceand shows you up.
Agree with people power, If one attends a meeting and front rows he should have the decency to stay awake and add to the debate. As he is a long serving leader of the GCC Lib Dems he should be an expert on the Common Good Fund as he has wined and dined at a lot of functions paid out of the Common Good Fund.
If he is unfit to participate he should resign and allow a new fit councillor to take his place.
As for Luggie please do a van gothe and keep to the subject and dont drivel nobody here likes your banter it just wastes spaceand shows you up.
Posted by: gavin48, Glasgow on 8:23am Thu 30 Oct 08
I belive the main issues here are actually about Common Good Land which Pollok Park is, and respect for due process.
Under the terms of the gift to Glasgow of the Park, it is clearly stated that and development must have the approval of the NTS and the Maxwell family. GCC has neither. In fact it failed to even consult them until after the planning application was lodged. The have also failed to exercise their stewardship of Common Land in a proper manner. They can not just ignore the law as it relates to common land. This is best evidenced by there statement that monies from the lease would go to Land services, legally it belongs to the Common Fund and should be paid into this fund.
I ask if the "consultation" was so good how come GCC failed to act on the express conditions of the Gift of Pollok Park.
This is a very important issue not just as regards Go Ape and Pollok Park but all Common Good both in Glasgow and across Scotland.
I belive the main issues here are actually about Common Good Land which Pollok Park is, and respect for due process.
Under the terms of the gift to Glasgow of the Park, it is clearly stated that and development must have the approval of the NTS and the Maxwell family. GCC has neither. In fact it failed to even consult them until after the planning application was lodged. The have also failed to exercise their stewardship of Common Land in a proper manner. They can not just ignore the law as it relates to common land. This is best evidenced by there statement that monies from the lease would go to Land services, legally it belongs to the Common Fund and should be paid into this fund.
I ask if the "consultation" was so good how come GCC failed to act on the express conditions of the Gift of Pollok Park.
This is a very important issue not just as regards Go Ape and Pollok Park but all Common Good both in Glasgow and across Scotland.
Posted by: remybear, glasgow on 9:55am Thu 30 Oct 08
bunch of uneducated numpties-who said it will be £41 A GO --------------aberfo
yle is £20 so i wonder where the figures come from guess its from those people looking to object---im also guessing it was the same mob of muppets that objected to the M77 and they wasted their time then too
bottom line is go ape will happen and you will need to live with it
and i suggest you got get educated and then find a job because tree-hugging is over-rated
bunch of uneducated numpties-who said it will be £41 A GO --------------aberfo
yle is £20 so i wonder where the figures come from guess its from those people looking to object---im also guessing it was the same mob of muppets that objected to the M77 and they wasted their time then too
bottom line is go ape will happen and you will need to live with it
and i suggest you got get educated and then find a job because tree-hugging is over-rated
Posted by: HGlasgwegian, Glasgow on 3:47pm Thu 30 Oct 08
Some really bizarre statements here.
The people have not 'voted' for Go Ape. No vote has ever been taken. Nicola Sturgeon made a good point when she said that the planning system is not a democratic process.
True, there was a form of consultation but it did not reach the users of Pollok Park - not surprising because it consisted of one notice posted on one lamppost outside the park.
I understand that some people are a little fed up of the campaign. It has been dragging on, we are all aware of that. I also understand that the issues have become much more complex than simply the granting of planning permission.
I can even understand why some people may feel that claims that are being made, with regard to misinformation coming from the council or abuse of common good land and resources, must be exaggerated.
I would like to believe they are exaggerated myself but I don't think they are.
The people involved in Save Pollok Park are not members of the green ink brigade. They are rational, intelligent people with an insight into council and legal processes. One is a fomer senior planner with GCC, the campaign is also being advised by a QC. So they are not 'loonies' by any means, or extremists.
Some really bizarre statements here.
The people have not 'voted' for Go Ape. No vote has ever been taken. Nicola Sturgeon made a good point when she said that the planning system is not a democratic process.
True, there was a form of consultation but it did not reach the users of Pollok Park - not surprising because it consisted of one notice posted on one lamppost outside the park.
I understand that some people are a little fed up of the campaign. It has been dragging on, we are all aware of that. I also understand that the issues have become much more complex than simply the granting of planning permission.
I can even understand why some people may feel that claims that are being made, with regard to misinformation coming from the council or abuse of common good land and resources, must be exaggerated.
I would like to believe they are exaggerated myself but I don't think they are.
The people involved in Save Pollok Park are not members of the green ink brigade. They are rational, intelligent people with an insight into council and legal processes. One is a fomer senior planner with GCC, the campaign is also being advised by a QC. So they are not 'loonies' by any means, or extremists.
Posted by: mulross, Glasgow on 3:57pm Thu 30 Oct 08
[quote]The people involved in Save Pollok Park are not members of the green ink brigade. They are rational, intelligent people with an insight into council and legal processes. One is a fomer senior planner with GCC, the campaign is also being advised by a QC. So they are not 'loonies' by any means, or extremists.[/quote]
Well said HG. Thesed people are certainly better educated and more articulate than some of the Go Ape supporters who post on here.
[quote]bunch of uneducated numpties-who said it will be £41 A GO --------------aberfo
yle is £20 so i wonder where the figures come [/quote]
No idea where the "£41" comes from but wouldn't be surprised if it a misprint by the ET. However, quoting the figure of "£20 a go" is just as misleading as that is the price for a child who [bold]must[/bold] be accompanied by a participating adult for whom the price is £25 a go.
So, if a child is taken to Go Ape then the parent/adult has to fork out £45 for that one child to "have a go".
The people involved in Save Pollok Park are not members of the green ink brigade. They are rational, intelligent people with an insight into council and legal processes. One is a fomer senior planner with GCC, the campaign is also being advised by a QC. So they are not 'loonies' by any means, or extremists.
Well said HG. Thesed people are certainly better educated and more articulate than some of the Go Ape supporters who post on here.
bunch of uneducated numpties-who said it will be £41 A GO --------------aberfo
yle is £20 so i wonder where the figures come
No idea where the "£41" comes from but wouldn't be surprised if it a misprint by the ET. However, quoting the figure of "£20 a go" is just as misleading as that is the price for a child who
must be accompanied by a participating adult for whom the price is £25 a go.
So, if a child is taken to Go Ape then the parent/adult has to fork out £45 for that one child to "have a go".
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 10:17pm Thu 30 Oct 08
Luggie, thanks for reminding me of the [bold]"And You Did Not Respond"[/bold] You Tube video, ( 22/01/08 Meeting) to which I take no absolutely responsibility for.
See: http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=SN0RiLccR
_4
or pollokpark.org
However based on the way the senior councillor from LES was heckled, by a far bigger, more rowdy audience back on the [bold]22 January '08'[/bold] and, when far less of the facts had come to pass....
Clearly now at the most recent meeting, [bold]28 October '08'.[/bold] far more factual information has come to light.
Quoting The Missing City:
[italic]Save Pollok Park say the 1939 Conservation Act, drawn up between the Maxwell Family who gifted the park to Glasgow, the council and the National Trust for Scotland states the Trust must give consent on any park development.
Campaigners called upon Andy Whiteman, an expert on Common Good land laws, who said that because the park belongs to the people of the city the council would need legal permission to lease or sell it.[/italic]
As it is this most recent meeting had no hecklers, or real decent from the audience,and only selected questions were asked.
3 Councillors spoke briefly, and 1 MSP gave their views.
Also, as I said previously:
[italic]"The unfortunate sabotage of the Go Ape park in Aberfoyle is of course to be condemned by all those with any sense of proportion and decency.
The point being is that whoever carried out this act of stupidity, endangering the lives of others clearly needs to be punished.
That saying, all we know is that so far it has been utter speculation over who carried out this vandalism. Nobody know for sure if the person / persons was even affiliated with Save Pollok Park."[/italic]
Finally, Watch this space - there is far more to this story than meets the eye, and all those who attended the most recent Public Meeting at Pollokshaws Burgh Hall can feel proud that they united in solidarity to fight for what they believe belongs to the people of Glasgow.
[bold]HANDS OFF OUR PARKS GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL.[/bold]
Luggie, thanks for reminding me of the
"And You Did Not Respond" You Tube video, ( 22/01/08 Meeting) to which I take no absolutely responsibility for.
See: http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=SN0RiLccR
_4
or pollokpark.org
However based on the way the senior councillor from LES was heckled, by a far bigger, more rowdy audience back on the
22 January '08' and, when far less of the facts had come to pass....
Clearly now at the most recent meeting,
28 October '08'. far more factual information has come to light.
Quoting The Missing City:
Save Pollok Park say the 1939 Conservation Act, drawn up between the Maxwell Family who gifted the park to Glasgow, the council and the National Trust for Scotland states the Trust must give consent on any park development.
Campaigners called upon Andy Whiteman, an expert on Common Good land laws, who said that because the park belongs to the people of the city the council would need legal permission to lease or sell it.
As it is this most recent meeting had no hecklers, or real decent from the audience,and only selected questions were asked.
3 Councillors spoke briefly, and 1 MSP gave their views.
Also, as I said previously:
"The unfortunate sabotage of the Go Ape park in Aberfoyle is of course to be condemned by all those with any sense of proportion and decency.
The point being is that whoever carried out this act of stupidity, endangering the lives of others clearly needs to be punished.
That saying, all we know is that so far it has been utter speculation over who carried out this vandalism. Nobody know for sure if the person / persons was even affiliated with Save Pollok Park."
Finally, Watch this space - there is far more to this story than meets the eye, and all those who attended the most recent Public Meeting at Pollokshaws Burgh Hall can feel proud that they united in solidarity to fight for what they believe belongs to the people of Glasgow.
HANDS OFF OUR PARKS GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL. Posted by: Malcolm Dobson, Langside on 10:23pm Thu 30 Oct 08
People Power wrote - "I was actually surprised at the level of public apathy at the meeting, in that very few people if any actually disrupted or shouted out during proceedings."
Luggie wrote - "To interpret this as apathy is to presume that the campaign is correct and that they were lacking in the energy to support it. Perhaps it wasn't apathy? Perhaps thy have considered all the facts and have decided that this is not a cause worth the actions of the SPP"
I don't think that you should interpret the lack of interruption as apathy - it was a very different sort of meeting from the one back in January. The questions asked showed that people were interested in continuing the fight, & the fact that resolutions were supported unanimously shows that people there were in no doubt about the importance of the cause and in agreement with the way the campaign is being conducted.
Luggie, to suggest that people have "the democratic rights ... to have Go Ape" is bizarre & suggests that you have a very shaky grasp of what democracy means. You might as well say that people have a democratic right to go to the cinema. Go Ape is a commercial entertainment. People don't have a 'right' to it. People do have a democratic right to protest against it if they think that it is the wrong thing in the wrong place.
People Power wrote - "I was actually surprised at the level of public apathy at the meeting, in that very few people if any actually disrupted or shouted out during proceedings."
Luggie wrote - "To interpret this as apathy is to presume that the campaign is correct and that they were lacking in the energy to support it. Perhaps it wasn't apathy? Perhaps thy have considered all the facts and have decided that this is not a cause worth the actions of the SPP"
I don't think that you should interpret the lack of interruption as apathy - it was a very different sort of meeting from the one back in January. The questions asked showed that people were interested in continuing the fight, & the fact that resolutions were supported unanimously shows that people there were in no doubt about the importance of the cause and in agreement with the way the campaign is being conducted.
Luggie, to suggest that people have "the democratic rights ... to have Go Ape" is bizarre & suggests that you have a very shaky grasp of what democracy means. You might as well say that people have a democratic right to go to the cinema. Go Ape is a commercial entertainment. People don't have a 'right' to it. People do have a democratic right to protest against it if they think that it is the wrong thing in the wrong place.
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 10:28pm Thu 30 Oct 08
Malcolm, the democracy aspect its simple, not shaky. The consultation process is complete and Glasgow have voted for Go Ape. Democracy. Its not rocket science.
Malcolm, the democracy aspect its simple, not shaky. The consultation process is complete and Glasgow have voted for Go Ape. Democracy. Its not rocket science.
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 10:30pm Thu 30 Oct 08
[bold]GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL - KEEP YOUR HANDS ON POLLOK PARK AS YOU'VE ALREADY DONE A GREAT JOB OVER tHE YEARS.[/bold]
GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL - KEEP YOUR HANDS ON POLLOK PARK AS YOU'VE ALREADY DONE A GREAT JOB OVER tHE YEARS. Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 10:41pm Thu 30 Oct 08
Okay Malcolm, Perhaps my assessment of the difference of the meeting being a form of public apathy was a bit unfair, I accept that.
italic] "I was actually surprised at the level of public apathy at the meeting, in that very few people if any actually disrupted or shouted out during proceedings."[/italic]
I would therefor say I found it disappointing more people did not feel compelled to raise their hands, or ask questions.
Maybe that was a good thing - as it showed people had more than enough information, and confidence in the "Save Pollok Park" campaign, and where it goes from here.
Clearly as information is power, and with more power to the people - the council must now sit up and listen to the concerns raised at this meeting.
I am just glad that we are living in a society, and country where issues like this can be so freely debated, discussed, and aired without the censorship and dictatorships that suppress and control so many people in places like China.
Our democracy may well be wavering, peoples faith in the democratic process may not be what it was, but as long as we continue to endorse human rights practices, and freedom of speech within reason of taste and decency we cannot be going to far wrong.
Okay Malcolm, Perhaps my assessment of the difference of the meeting being a form of public apathy was a bit unfair, I accept that.
italic] "I was actually surprised at the level of public apathy at the meeting, in that very few people if any actually disrupted or shouted out during proceedings."
I would therefor say I found it disappointing more people did not feel compelled to raise their hands, or ask questions.
Maybe that was a good thing - as it showed people had more than enough information, and confidence in the "Save Pollok Park" campaign, and where it goes from here.
Clearly as information is power, and with more power to the people - the council must now sit up and listen to the concerns raised at this meeting.
I am just glad that we are living in a society, and country where issues like this can be so freely debated, discussed, and aired without the censorship and dictatorships that suppress and control so many people in places like China.
Our democracy may well be wavering, peoples faith in the democratic process may not be what it was, but as long as we continue to endorse human rights practices, and freedom of speech within reason of taste and decency we cannot be going to far wrong.
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 10:41pm Thu 30 Oct 08
NTS declined to be at your meeting - also now in communications with Go Ape. A drop in numbers. The horse is currently being flogged.
NTS declined to be at your meeting - also now in communications with Go Ape. A drop in numbers. The horse is currently being flogged.
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 10:44pm Thu 30 Oct 08
[italic]"I am just glad that we are living in a society, and country where issues like this can be so freely debated, discussed, and aired without the censorship and dictatorships that suppress and control so many people in places like China.
Our democracy may well be wavering, peoples faith in the democratic process may not be what it was, but as long as we continue to endorse human rights practices, and freedom of speech within reason of taste and decency we cannot be going to far wrong."[/italic]
All very well - but you didn't respond to the consultation and you now have the problem of the disgraceful extreme activists who support your cause.
When one doesn't engage properly in democracy this is what happens.
"I am just glad that we are living in a society, and country where issues like this can be so freely debated, discussed, and aired without the censorship and dictatorships that suppress and control so many people in places like China.
Our democracy may well be wavering, peoples faith in the democratic process may not be what it was, but as long as we continue to endorse human rights practices, and freedom of speech within reason of taste and decency we cannot be going to far wrong."
All very well - but you didn't respond to the consultation and you now have the problem of the disgraceful extreme activists who support your cause.
When one doesn't engage properly in democracy this is what happens.
Posted by: People Power on 10:44pm Thu 30 Oct 08
NTS in fact agreed to attend our meeting initially - with two of its representatives expected, and due to attend ( as stated by the panellists of "Save Pollok Park."
But, two hours before the meeting they pulled out and gave no reason for their decision.
That is not the same as them initially declining.
NTS in fact agreed to attend our meeting initially - with two of its representatives expected, and due to attend ( as stated by the panellists of "Save Pollok Park."
But, two hours before the meeting they pulled out and gave no reason for their decision.
That is not the same as them initially declining.
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 10:47pm Thu 30 Oct 08
What on earth are you talking about? Not turning up IS declining and the fact that they gave you no reason speaks for itself.
I'd say Go Ape is playing it very well.
What on earth are you talking about? Not turning up IS declining and the fact that they gave you no reason speaks for itself.
I'd say Go Ape is playing it very well.
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 10:52pm Thu 30 Oct 08
Indeed to say they were going to come and then gave no reason at the last minute is definitely a bad sign for SPP. Only a fool would pretend otherwise.
Interesting that the second motion was to urge NTS to follow through. Not quite the NTS-on-board-with-us aspect previously painted.
Indeed to say they were going to come and then gave no reason at the last minute is definitely a bad sign for SPP. Only a fool would pretend otherwise.
Interesting that the second motion was to urge NTS to follow through. Not quite the NTS-on-board-with-us aspect previously painted.
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 10:53pm Thu 30 Oct 08
The horse is dead. Stop flogging.
The horse is dead. Stop flogging.
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 10:56pm Thu 30 Oct 08
The horse is dead. The ape is rising.
The horse is dead. The ape is rising.
Posted by: mulross, Glasgow on 11:00pm Thu 30 Oct 08
I'd say that Go Ape has shot themselves in the foot rather than "playing it well". The majority of thinking, rational people have recognised their pathetic attempt to discredit the campaigners for what it was - a desperate attempt to cling on to the prize that was almost in their greedy little grasp and is now slipping away from them.
I'd say that Go Ape has shot themselves in the foot rather than "playing it well". The majority of thinking, rational people have recognised their pathetic attempt to discredit the campaigners for what it was - a desperate attempt to cling on to the prize that was almost in their greedy little grasp and is now slipping away from them.
Posted by: Malcolm Dobson, Langside on 11:01pm Thu 30 Oct 08
"The consultation process is complete and Glasgow have voted for Go Ape." One, the consultation process was deeply flawed - & as Nicola Sturgeon said, the planning process is not democracy, & two, more people have signed the petition & turned out for meetings & demonstrations than attended the Council's meeting & responded to the consultation. Why? Because the meeting was by invitation only, & the consultation was stage-managed. If a campaign with no funds & run by volunteers in their spare time can get 700 people to a meeting, why can't the council with all the resources at its disposal? 'Glasgow' (whatever that might mean) has most definitely [bold]not[/bold] voted for Go Ape.
"When one doesn't engage properly in democracy" Luggie, your view of 'engaging' in democracy would seem to be to vote in an election & then believe that those in power can do no wrong. Now that really is apathy.
"The consultation process is complete and Glasgow have voted for Go Ape." One, the consultation process was deeply flawed - & as Nicola Sturgeon said, the planning process is not democracy, & two, more people have signed the petition & turned out for meetings & demonstrations than attended the Council's meeting & responded to the consultation. Why? Because the meeting was by invitation only, & the consultation was stage-managed. If a campaign with no funds & run by volunteers in their spare time can get 700 people to a meeting, why can't the council with all the resources at its disposal? 'Glasgow' (whatever that might mean) has most definitely
not voted for Go Ape.
"When one doesn't engage properly in democracy" Luggie, your view of 'engaging' in democracy would seem to be to vote in an election & then believe that those in power can do no wrong. Now that really is apathy.
Posted by: People Power on 11:02pm Thu 30 Oct 08
[italic]but you didn't respond to the consultation[/italic]
very convenient you should chose to quote, and side with G.C.C. and their LES Executive member who happened to use the very same words.
(22/01/08)
The Consultation was flawed, and completely inadequate, and far from a unanimous verdict on the public wishes.
Luggie, go off and join your L.E.S. chums!
Or those at "Go Ape" - I'm sure their PR Dept will have a job for you there.
Next thing you'll be telling us that your off on a nice wee bus jaunt with Robert Booth & Ruth Simpson to "Go Ape" in Aberfoyle!
Between the apes and the trolls on this forum...Luggie....yo
u Should take to your L.E.S. buddies like a fly to sh*t! ENJOY!
but you didn't respond to the consultation
very convenient you should chose to quote, and side with G.C.C. and their LES Executive member who happened to use the very same words.
(22/01/08)
The Consultation was flawed, and completely inadequate, and far from a unanimous verdict on the public wishes.
Luggie, go off and join your L.E.S. chums!
Or those at "Go Ape" - I'm sure their PR Dept will have a job for you there.
Next thing you'll be telling us that your off on a nice wee bus jaunt with Robert Booth & Ruth Simpson to "Go Ape" in Aberfoyle!
Between the apes and the trolls on this forum...Luggie....yo
u Should take to your L.E.S. buddies like a fly to sh*t! ENJOY!
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 11:19pm Thu 30 Oct 08
There were only 300 at the meeting NOT 700. Well down than before. Petitions are not acceptable in Scottish Government because they don't name the people who didn't sign it (many more)
You've lost. The campaign is over. Its the people behind it who can't cope with that simple fact.
There were only 300 at the meeting NOT 700. Well down than before. Petitions are not acceptable in Scottish Government because they don't name the people who didn't sign it (many more)
You've lost. The campaign is over. Its the people behind it who can't cope with that simple fact.
Posted by: murdo, partick on 12:02am Fri 31 Oct 08
Why not accept the longer the campaign goes on the more hidden facts emerge like abuse of common good funds and land, and the poor consultation results, The real supporters will keep the fight going no matter what is said above
until they get the required result.
The park is for people not would be apes on their rope bridges and zip slides, There are plenty of charites wanting zip sliders and adventurers why not give your money to them and let the park be peaceful. Sqirrels hide their nuts, here they write comments.[quote][quote]quote[/quote] [quote][quote]quote[/quote] [/quote] [/quote]
Why not accept the longer the campaign goes on the more hidden facts emerge like abuse of common good funds and land, and the poor consultation results, The real supporters will keep the fight going no matter what is said above
until they get the required result.
The park is for people not would be apes on their rope bridges and zip slides, There are plenty of charites wanting zip sliders and adventurers why not give your money to them and let the park be peaceful. Sqirrels hide their nuts, here they write comments.
quote
quote
Comment | Read Comments (70)
