Who’s this irate councillor
looking concerned in the pages of the Nazi
Post? Step forward Paul “Wolfie” Smith, Labour’s cabinet housing
supremo. He’s “SHOCKED” and has “LAUNCHED A BLISTERING ATTACK”
on the University Hospitals Trust Bristol, who run the BRI, for leaving 20 of
their 36 flats on Eugene Street empty “WHILE PEOPLE ARE SLEEPING IN THE
STREETS”.
The homes are currently empty as the hospital was refused planning permission for A MULTI-STOREY CAR PARK on the site by the council in March and are now appealing against the decision. However what the fuming councillor isn’t telling us is that the homes in question were sold for A FAST BUCK to the hospital by the council in 2008 for, er, “REDEVELOPMENT PURPOSES“.
And who on Earth was running the council in 2008 selling off our
council homes? Step forward our dear old friends in the angry and irate LABOUR PARTY. Then under the clueless
leadership of one of Wolfie’s old colleagues Peter “HOPELESS” Hammond and his deputy – one of Wolfie’s current
colleagues – prize-winning councillor HRH
HELEN OF HOLLAND.
More news drifts in regarding
the slow but inexorable OUTSOURCING of the whole of the city’s planning system
and its oversight to private firm Arup.
We already know that Arup have been, for some time, supplying agency
staff to the council’s planning department to specialise in ‘MAJOR PROJECTS’. Then came the news
that Arup were involved in developing the Reverend’s options for his ‘Western
Harbour’ plans at the Cumberland Basin.
So it should come as little surprise to learn that Arup were also
involved in drawing up BRISTOL’S LOCAL
PLAN. Specifically, the private firm were responsible for SITE ALLOCATIONS and POLICY DEVELOPMENT for this detailed
development blueprint for the city that WILL
MAKE LOTS OF PRIVATE INTERESTS LOTS OF MONEY.
When will we get the chance to
vote on a manifesto promising to hand our city’s planning system over to
multi-national companies looking to make a profit?
We’re pleased to exclusively unveil
the city’s latest HIGH TECH INNOVATION, especially for the international export
market, from “the changemakers” – our amazing city leaders and
exciting local business innovators. A round of applause, please for the AVONMOUTH
INVISI-BALE!
It’s incredible! A bale of refuse derived fuel (RDF) which is clearly THERE and VISIBLE to the majority of humans, animals and insects but is,
somehow, TOTALLY INVISIBLE to the
Invisi-bale’s owners, large government agencies, councils, regulators, the press
and politicians. How do they do it? And get away with it?
Who cares? Because the Avonmouth Invisi-bale lets large corporate waste
companies get away with UNLAWFULLY storing
huge amounts of POLLUTING RDF
outside their premises. An innovative approach that allows the companies to
make BIGGER PROFITS at a cost to
local PEOPLE’S HEALTH AND WELL-BEING.
“It’s a win-win,” the Reverend Rees told us, “the
Invisi-bale is the latest exciting NATIONAL
AND INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITY in Bristol entirely at the expense
of Avonmouth residents. I am proud of Bristol’s growing global recognition for
innovation and our record in developing a THRIVING
ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY that can make big money for important
high net worth individuals. Blessed are the changemakers”
The Mayor for the Merchant
Venturers and the Port of Bristol, Tory Bowels, has personally applauded the
Reverend for his creativity and innovation. He told us, “the Avonmouth
Invisi-bale is great way to fuck over the plebs and make a shit load of money
for my wealthy Tory friends. Hurrah!”
The DISDAIN and DISREGARD that the Reverend Rees and his
council boss friends hold for our elected councillors and the public was on
full display when the Reverend decided to REFUSE to answer public questions at
a Full Council Meeting because some of them may have proved HIGHLY
EMBARRASSING.
The Reverend’s senior managers went to work for the
mayor convincing councillors and our idiot Lord Mayor Jos “Halfwit”
Clark that ‘rules’ PREVENTED the Mayor answering public questions during
a general election. Councillors eagerly accepted this ‘advice’ from their
expert officers, apparently oblivious to the fact NOTHING in national
nor local election guidelines prevents either mayors or council leaders
answering public questions at meetings during an election.
To add insult to injury, at this very same council
meeting where council officers were busily INVENTING RULES on behalf of
their coward mayor, councillors were asked to consider an updated ‘Member –
Officer Protocol’. A document outlining how councillors and council officers
needed to treat each other with ‘RESPECT‘! Might this reasonably include
the expectation that council officers tell councillors the truth about election
rules?
However, the real kick in the teeth came the next day
when council officers used the council’s official Twitter account to PUBLISH
A PHOTO OF THE REVEREND and his cabinet sidekick, Anna Keen, promoting some
crap mayoral initiative in Southmead in direct contravention of, er, ELECTION
GUIDELINES TO COUNCIL OFFICERS. These simple guidelines state,
“councils should ‘not publish any material which, in whole or in part,
appears to be designed to affect public support for a political party’”.
How could council officers possibly not think a photo
of two senior members of the Labour Party PROMOTING their initiative in
the middle of a general election would not appear designed to affect public
support for Labour?
Encouraged by Ms Townsend and the usual suspects from parish’s OFSTED
‘Needs Improvement’ Dave Spart Academy, a small unrepresentative minority of
the congregation, sacrilegiously opposed to free market innovation, sensible
change and inclusive growth, are behind another silly whispering campaign from
the pews.
They are opposing our shared congregational vision, in partnership with
expert corporate developers and consultants from London, for
competitively-priced chipboard homes and a cleaner air new road on the surplus
scrubland of church-owned St Marvin’s Meadows. This is an innovative
transformational future proofing project vital to our shared ‘One Parish
Vision’, championed by my good friend and shadow Parish Committee member, Mr
Sweetland, ably assisted by the good Christians of consulting firm Arup
on a highly competitive day rate.
This project will challenge the climate emergency, address the parish’s
housing crisis and provide homes for decent Christian parishioners able to
financially support our growing church and exploit fair admissions at St
Snoot’s Academy, the parish’s OFSTED ‘outstanding’ high performing religious
secondary school. As my mentor the Texan psychotic preacher and notorious
anti-communist homophobe, the Pastor Righteous Loon says, “crisis and
emergency are the Lord’s way to improve the bank balances of the worthy.”
The campaign opposing this, meanwhile, is promoting a number of
JFK-style conspiracy theories. For example, we all already know that St
Marvin’s Meadows is a flood plain but this will not be a problem according to
Mr Molton, our parish’s regeneration services professional kept on a generous
retainer to ignore problems such as this. Indeed, as Mr Molton very cleverly
pointed out at one of our closed meetings in London with our secret investor
team, “Floods never did Noah any harm.”
Campaigners’ complaints that moving the St Marvin’s bypass out of open
countryside, better suited to inclusive climate emergency residential homes
with sensational countryside views, and closer to St Marvin’s Meadows and
nearby council housing are similarly without merit. As are complaints that this
is in any way a “done deal”. Our friends at Arup and our secret
investors have simply supplied us with an objective factual appraisal that is
inarguably correct and the only sensible way forward if we want to solve
parish’s housing crisis and stand down the climate from its emergency status.
However in order to better demonstrate this, I am setting up an
objective and independent panel of myself, Mr Molton, Mr Sweetland, Parishioner
Mr Savage – who you all know for running unsuccessfully for election to the
parish committee on 58 separate occasions – and Parish Committee Chairman, Mr
Jackson. Together we will independently appraise the option and confirm it is
going ahead in everybody’s best interests. This should spell the end of any
further noise on this matter from the back pews.
Which local Academy Trust is
charging its schools at least EIGHT PER CENT of their core income for “central
services” – one of the highest figures in the country? Step forward the
VENTURERS TRUST, the hopelessly underperforming education wing of the Society
of Wealthy Old White Men (Surely Merchant
Venturers? Ed.)
Last year the greedy COLSTON
TOENAIL WORSHIPPERS charged their eight schools eight per cent of their
general annual grant (GAG) – the funding each academy gets from the Department
for Education. These charges are for
‘BUSINESS SERVICES’ such as human resources, financial services, legal
services, educational support services, property services and, of course, “PR AND COMMUNICATIONS”. The kind of
lucrative work, incidentally, that the toenail trustees and their wealthy mates
specialise in!
However, while charging our schools and children TOP WHACK FOR MARGINAL CRAP, the Toenail Trust has been struggling
on a number of fronts. In OFSTED terms, THREE
of its schools are currently rated as INADEQUATE
and another “REQUIRES IMPROVEMENT”.
Meanwhile, the chair of the Trust, Anthony Browne, DISAPPEARED over the summer following an expensive spot of LEGAL BOTHER. Although the precise cost
of this little escapade is yet to be revealed.
We do, however, know that the trust’s EIGHT SCHOOLS were charged £1.53M
FOR CENTRAL SERVICES in 2017-18 and this was about nine per cent of the £17
million received from the general annual grant that year. Oddly, the previous
year, the schools had been charged less than HALF THIS AMOUNT, a comparatively small £633,000. Where did all
this extra public cash collected by WEALTHY
TRUSTEES WITH LAVISH LIFESTYLES go in this age of austerity?
The same accounts also show that the Toenail Trust’s chief executive, HILARY MACAULEY, personally trousered
£145-£150,000. Just under £150,000, which the Department for Education has said
should only go to leaders for “EXCEPTIONAL”
performance.
