Tag Archives: Windmill Hill

WHO’S RACHEL LUNNON?

Leave a reply
Rachel Lunnon
Rachel hard at work for you at City Hall

Having scoured the list of candidates at the forthcoming local and mayoral elections in Bristol, we’re happy to confirm there’s not much to get excited about. Just the usual bunch of swivel-eyed loons standing for colour-branded parties committed to more-of-the-same except with different people doing what council officers say instead.

The reds are offering more-of-the-same but with more talk of equality and diversity; the Greens are offering more-of-the-same but with more promises of segregated cycle lanes; the yellows are doing more-of-the-same but with no more mayor and the blues are offering more-of-the-same with even more-of-the-same.

The exception to all this crap is Rachel Lunnon who’s running for Burning Pink in Windmill Hill. Burning Pink are an Extinction Rebellion splinter group who accuse politicians of “treasonous betrayal” and are demanding that local councils actually honour their climate emergency declarations and act now on ecological collapse and social breakdown. Burning Pink have a variety of other demands too. Most of which would make the average local authority bureaucrat shit their grotty y-fronts. 

The headline demand, however, is that local councils immediately declare open rebellion against the government! Which, at least, should keep Bristol City Council’s senior leadership team gainfully employed and prevent them squandering another £100m on daft vanity projects.

Rachel said on Facebook yesterday:

Democracy is broken. Our system makes a mockery of representation, with well meaning reformists unable to make real change. I’m fed up with big promises but lack of action on: city-wide clean air, the climate and ecological emergency, and affordable housing. Meanwhile high-rise development and building on green spaces disproportionately affect South Bristol without solving anything. I’m ready to listen to what local issues are affecting you, and what solutions you want.

We urge all Windmill Hill residents to vote for Rachel and for open rebellion against the government. It’s got to be more fun than three years of useless centrist dad explaining why he can’t do any of the things he promised hasn’t it?

Vote early. Vote often. Vote open rebellion against the government .

REVEREND’S HARA KIRI ELECTION PLAN

4 Replies
REVEREND'S HARA KIRI ELECTION PLAN

Is Bristol’s Labour Group at the council, led by the Reverend Rees, attempting to commit some weird form of RITUAL POLITICAL SUICIDE before the local elections next May? What other explanation is there for the STUPID DECISIONS and CRAZED OUTBURSTS emanating from the Reverend Mayor and his daft councillors?

The Reverend has already pissed off loads of communities throughout the city who are unlikely to vote for him or his party next year. These include WHITCHURCH where he’s proposed running a ring road through the community past a primary school; HOTWELLS, ASHTON and SOUTHVILLE where he wants to build his corporate high rise wet dream on their doorstep; STOKE BISHOP where he’s allowed their open space to be fenced off by Cotham School; TOTTERDOWN where his councillors voted through, contrary to the Local Plan, a hideous 15 storey tower block on the Bath Road; KNOWLE where he’s backed another tower block and WINDMILL HILL and BEDMINSTER where the Reverend’s been unable to get any grip on unruly private developers at Bedminster Green.

Then there’s the Reverend’s thicko cabinet sidekick, Kye “The” Dudd’s treatment of the FLY PROBLEM in Avonmouth. The Dudd has courted voters by variously accusing residents of planting dead flies to create a FAKE PROBLEM; blaming the flies on DOMESTIC WASTE left on St Andrews Road and, even, claiming there’s NO FLY PROBLEM and that fly levels in Avonmouth are the same as other areas of Bristol. A claim recently rubbished by the BBC who did their own tests for their ‘Inside Out West’ documentary slot.

Remarkably, things now seem to be TAKING A TURN FOR THE WORSE for Labour. At September’s Full Council, the Reverend, behaving like the last officer standing on a Pacific island as GIs storm the beach, raged about “SABOTAGE” by opposition councillors before burnishing his ANTI-UNION CREDENTIALS by refusing to allow his council to be involved in the Climate Strike on 20 September. The Reverend’s Labour colleague, Tom “Charming” Brooks, then PLUMBED FURTHER DEPTHS while responding to a petition from 3,979 voters calling for a moratorium on 5G rollout.

Rather than calmly quote scientific sources to rationally dispute the petitioners health claims, the Horfield councillor launched into a DEMENTED RANT instead. The petitioners were “naive people who had been taken in by MALICIOUS MISINFORMATION” and “conspiracy theorists fuelled by
fake news and misinformation” and were “PEDDLING PSEUDO-SCIENCE using technical sounding words to confuse people”. However, Brooks dismally failed to cite ANY EVIDENCE to support his insults. Instead, he argued, he was right because he had “the ability to Google and was also as an engineer working in risk and safety”.

Lib Dem, Green and, even, Tory councillors were much CANNIER and CALMER towards this large group of potential voters. Explaining they accepted Public Health England’s view on 5G for now but agreed the health situation should be monitored as the technology was rolled out.

That’s another 4,000 votes down the pan for Labour next May then

 

SUPER STUPID SUPERHIGHWAY

Leave a reply

Crash! Victoria Park cycle path latest …

The latest effort by Sustrans/Bristol City Council Sustainable Transport Team to build a POINTLESS road through Victoria Park for cyclists as part of a ‘Filwood Quietway’ has even been slammed by Bristol Cycling Campaign for having “no noticeable benefits” for cycling!

The original plan – that had to be hastily pulled by former Labour transport boss Mark “Dead Duck” Bradshaw after HUNDREDS of locals and park users objected – proposed a pointless five metre wide road through the park that provided priority for cyclists commuting through the park.

Now, following another poorly publicised local consultation, Bristol City Council has put a new plan before a Bristol City Council planning committee proposing a pointless three metre wide road through the park with pedestrian priority. This too, following a planning consultation in August when we were all away, is HUGHLY UNPOPULAR with locals and park users who know a shoddy compromise when they see one.

As do the Bristol Cycling Campaign, it seems. Last time around they created a torrid and aggressive public row with park users after they accused them of being part of a mysterious CAR LOBBY operating out of Windmill Hill.

This time around the cycling campaign seem to have finally noticed that this is a plan for a ROAD TO NOWHERE that concretes over one of the city’s finest parks so that cyclists can arrive at a dead end half way down York Road on the New Cut. From where there’s NO MEANS of crossing the river to get to the Quietway’s stated final destination in the centre.

The reality slowly dawning on everyone is that this section of “quietway” is a sloppy VANITY PROJECT from underemployed and unskilled sustainable transport hobbyists at Bristol City Council who are desperate to spend government grant money by March next year regardless of whether it benefits the city.

Scrap this stupid path through our green space now and send the money back to the government.

REES AND BRADSHAW: A WARNING FOR THE FUTURE

Leave a reply

It’s been announced today that the council is withdrawing its plan to build a 4.5m wide road through Victoria Park for the benefit of posh cycle lobbyists in West Bristol.

This is the article we intended to publish in the next issue of The BRISTOLIAN on the issue. We leave it here as a warning to the Reverend Rees, and his idiot cabinet sidekick for transport, Mark “BEAR” Bradshaw, and any other Labour Party vandal who think they can fuck with our open space.

Try it and we will make you pay …

VICTORIA PARK: DIRECT AND TO THE POINT

There’s dark mutterings about “direct action” emerging from Windmill Hill and Totterdown if the Rev Rees, Mark “BEAR” Bradshaw and the cycle lobby fanatics running their transport department go ahead with their plan to build a road for cyclists through Victoria Park.

The economics of this are pretty straightforward. How much extra money is the Rev Rees prepared to throw at a pointless £500k cycling project to secure it? Five per cent? Ten Per cent? £50k doesn’t go far in repairs and security these days does it? Metrobus has reputedly spent more than £1m securing their Stapleton allotments site from protestors.

And remember, while the £500k for the road may come from central government, Rees will have to find any overspend on the project from his own shot-to-fuck council budgets. So if Rees wants to take the piss out of local residents; local residents can easily take the piss back and hit him where it really hurts – in the wallet.

To the barricades park lovers!

VICTORIA PARK PLANNING: FUNNY BUSINESS

1 Reply

Dick Ed: road builder-in-chief

There’s some FUNNY BUSINESS going on with the Bristol City Council’s planning application to itself to build an inane cycle superhighway through Victoria Park.

The application appears to be a joint effort between Sustrans and the council’s Sustainable Transport Team headed up by “DICK” Ed Plowden, a career civil servant. Although many of us struggle to tell the difference between the local civil engineering outfit for cycling and Dick Ed’s department.

When Dick Ed’s minions originally uploaded the planning documents for their road on 28 November for comment by the public prior to a planning decision later this month, there were NO REPORTS relating to the impact on the ecology or biodiversity of Victoria Park. However, this was rectified last Thursday when these documents miraculously appeared.

Even more miraculously, the date listed for the uploading of these the documents that only appeared on 6 January was November 28. Creating the impression that the documents had been available to the public for SIX WEEKS when they hadn’t. How has this sleight-of-hand been allowed to happen and who authorised MISLEADING THE PUBLIC and a quasi-statutory planning committee in this way?

Naturally Bristol Sutrancity Council responded ‘NO‘ to “Section 13 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation” on their application form as to whether there is a reasonable likelihood of [biodiversity] being affected adversely. Although, due to some CONVENIENT OVERSIGHTS, this isn’t really borne out by their limited (and late) report.

Hall: long term prat

“Dick” Ed Plowden the man responsible for making this application arrived in Bristol as a lower middle manager for John Prescott’s HOPELESS Government Office of the South West (GOSW). A bizarre provincial civil service outpost based at Temple Quay that mainly served as a  repository for lower ranking civil servants who couldn’t really make the grade in London. Another alumni of the department is the Green Party’s Red Trouser fan-in-chief, Darren “TAMMANY” Hall.

In those days Plowden’s specialism was in CRIME REDUCTION. Then he waltzed into a senior transport manager role at Bristol City Council, apparently thanks to his experience of making a stately cycle commute to work from his large suburban pile in Knowle every day.

Judging by his approach to planning applications, former crime fighter, Dick Ed, isn’t much interested in reducing crimes in low-level local government corruption. In fact he’s helping create it!

SICK COUNCILLORS PUT PARK ON ROAD TO RUIN

9 Replies

jon-wellington-1462720144

SPADstic and Lazy in happier times before they decided to fuck up one of the city’s parks and become objects of mass derision

We have an early entrant for our IDLE SELF-PUBLICIST COUNCILLOR of the year award. Please step forward Labour’s councillor for Windmill Hill, “Lazy” Lucy Whittle.

LIVID RESIDENTS of Windmill Hill and Totterdown – fuming over her and her politically ambitious colleague Jon “SPADstic” Wellington’s top secret plan to build a bloody great ROAD through their beloved Victoria Park – were desperately emailing Lazy Lucy in December only to be greeted by an out of office message.

“Thank you for contacting me, I am currently on SICK LEAVE but expect to be able to return to work within a few weeks, hopefully at the end of December,” bleated Lucy.

Fair enough. We all get ill and can’t work. But wait! What should pop through residents’ doors in late December/early January but a copy of the South Bristol Voice newspaper featuring a ‘Your councillors’ column written by none other than LAZY LUCY, merrily wittering away, without a care in the world, about the awfulness of the cuts she’ll be voting to implement this year.

What type of STRANGE ILLNESS is this that afflicted Lazy Lucy over the Christmas holidays? Too ill to reply to residents’ emails but well enough to write an article promoting herself and taking advantage of free PR in the local freesheet? Truly, an extraordinary condition.

Lazy Lucy and sidekick, SPADstic, may be trying to avoid residents after they supported a SECRET three month public consultation by cycling and concrete charity, Sustrans, into the so-called ‘Filwood Quietway’ through Victoria Park.

This is basically a plan – going to a planning committee next week – for a FIVE METRE WIDE ROAD for cyclists to SPEED through the park on. And, despite Lazy and SPADstic’s comprehensive three month consultation over the summer, virtually no residents knew anything about it!

Unless, that is, they happened to wander into a BICYLE REPAIR GAZEBO in Victoria Park on the afternoon of Wednesday 31 August or they were invited to a few mysterious PRIVATE, invitation-only meetings with the mendacious pair of Labour councillors and Sustrans’ posh engagement manager, Anais “Nincompoop “Leger-Smith.

To add INSULT TO INJURY, Lazy Lucy even used her South Bristol Voice PR column in October to discuss her road-through-the-park plan in vague terms, telling residents, “we are really interested in what the community thinks. So do let us know your thoughts,” a week after the consultation CLOSED!

Lazy Lucy also gave the road Labour’s SUPPORT in her column, telling residents, “[SPADstic and I] see this as an improvement to Bristol’s cycling infrastructure that will bring benefits to communities along its route.”

Now SPADstic, apparently alone and abandoned by sickly Lazy Lucy, and desperate to salvage his six-month car crash career is attempting a REVERSE FERRET at the kind of furious speeds cyclists will soon be doing across his local park.

As hundreds of objections pour in from residents – as they finally find out about the road SPADstic forgot to tell them about – SPADstick is desperately issuing VAGUE and PISS WEAK promises to support the residents he deliberately sidelined and ignored during the three month consultation.

Too little; too late we say. Why did Lazy Lucy and SPADstic DELIBERATELY allow this plan get to a planning committee before telling residents? And why – if their consultation with Anais NIncompoop from cycling’s concrete kings – has been such a comprehensive listening exercise, are HUNDREDS of residents and every community group and school in the area UP IN ARMS about it?

The plan needs to go back to the drawing board and these idiot councillors need to apologise to their residents for their appalling conduct and start doing their jobs properly. Or else.

PARK’S SUPER HIGHWAY HORROR

8 Replies

Crash! The new VIctoria Park

Crash! The new look for VIctoria Park

Uproar south of the river as Sustrans – the cycling psychobabble lobby group for lycra clad middle class loudmouths – announces they intend to build a FIVE METRE WIDE cycling ‘superhighway’ across the southern section of VICTORIA PARK.

Naturally, this crazed idea to create a HIGH-SPEED cycle route across the flat area of the park – ideal for playing sports and games in an otherwise hilly park – is wholly supported by the management crackpots of the council’s transport and parks departments.

The decision to proceed with the highway – laughably branded a ‘QUIETWAY‘ to disguise the obvious cycling racetrack qualities of the proposal – was taken after Sustrans held a consultation “one Wednesday afternoon in the park when no one was there”!

When the absence of people actually consulted for their HAREBRAINED SCHEME was pointed out to Sustrans, they hurriedly contacted a few members of the park’s community group, VPAG (Victoria Park Action Group).

They told Sustrans the path should be no wider than THREE metres and needed to clearly encourage cyclists to understand this is a was SHARED ROUTE with all park users, pedestrians, pets, children and an inner city community short of safe, open space. Rather like the current low-tech under-engineered pathway already does!

This, of course has been entirely ignored by this arrogant sustainable transport charity for snooty people. Instead their five metre wide OVER-ENGINEERED SUPERHIGHWAY plan gives the green light to anti-social middle class loudmouths in lycra to hammer through the park at speed shouting, screaming and even attacking any dogs, children or adult who might get in their way as they race to and from their city centre creative non-jobs.

This selfish scheme must be stopped in favour of a scheme that takes account of all park users and the wider community – not just the commuting needs of a wealthy, loudmouthed lobby of twats.

#walrustrial: COUNCIL’S BENT ASBO SHOCKER!

6 Replies

All facts as heard in open court …

Can anyone explain why Lib Dem councillor for Knowle, Gary “FUCKBUCKET” Hopkins, and the Lib Dem’s chief whip and councillor for Windmill Hill, MARK BAILEY, were invited to attend a confidential ASB (anti-social behaviour) case meeting on 12 November 2013?

A confidential meeting chaired by the boss of the Safer Bristol Partnership, GILLIAN DOUGLAS, and a meeting that another Knowle councillor, CHRIS DAVIES, was invited to but sent his apologies for after being supplied detailed minutes. Avon & Somerset POLICE OFFICERS also attended the meeting along with COUNCIL MANAGERS from Pollution Control, Licensing and Planning as well as a city council lawyer.

Can anyone then explain why a case conference convened to discuss events at 20 Knowle Road in the Windmill Hill Ward was allowed by Ms Douglas and a city council lawyer to discuss various HEARSAY ALLEGATIONS raised by these Lib Dem councillors about an entirely different property – The Gothic Mansion on Redcatch Road in Knowle?

And can anyone further explain why issues to do with the property in Knowle Road that had been agreed as ‘NFA’ (no further action required) at an ASB meeting without councillors, lawyers or Ms Douglas present on 28 May 2013 were inexplicably reopened at this case meeting on 12 November when councillors attended and Ms Douglas appeared in the chair?

Then perhaps someone can explain why SENSITIVE and CONFIDENTIAL information obtained by Bristol City Council’s licensing team using COVERT SURVEILLANCE methods was shared with these councillors? And why sensitive FINANCIAL INFORMATION obtained by city council officers relating to the owners of Knowle Road and Redcatch Road was shared with councillors? And why sensitive POLICE INTELLIGENCE was also shared with these councillors?

Can anybody imagine councillors being invited to attend housing case meetings? Adult care case meetings? Or social services case meetings?  Does anyone believe they’d be invited to sit in on criminal investigations by the police?

What on earth has been going on here? The council’s own guidelines contained in the council’s constitution under the ‘Protocol forMember/Officer Relations’ explains what should happen in very plain and simple language:

 6. COUNCILLOR INVOLVEMENT IN CASEWORK

 CONVENTION

6.1: Officers must implement council policy within agreed procedures. An individual councillor cannot require an officer to vary this and cannot take a decision or instruct an officer to take action. The councillor’s role in relation to case work is:

– to be briefed or consulted where there is a need to know;

– to pursue the interests of individuals by seeking information, testing action taken and asking for the appropriateness of decisions to be reconsidered.

A councillor’s entitlement to be involved is based on the “need to know” and determined in accordance with conventions 2 and 3.

Access to files may need to be denied or restricted if one of the exceptional circumstances in convention 2.1 and 2.2 applied. Any access then allowed may need to be “managed access” (as described in convention 2).

COUNCILLORS

Councillors should avoid becoming unduly involved in individual cases and operational detail, except within clear procedures. Involvement in legal proceedings and audit investigations carries special dangers of prejudicing the case, and of personal embarrassment.

OFFICERS:

Officers should take the lead in pointing out where the boundaries lie in particular areas, recognising that:

– councillors legitimately adopt different approaches;

– councillors may legitimately pursue non-ward issues (for example, a city-wide community of interest);

– the special local knowledge of particular councillors may be useful to a particular case.

Officers should point out to the councillor when a restriction on the need to know may apply, explore entitlement with the councillor and, in cases of doubt, consult the monitoring officer.

Chief officers should ensure that their staff know how to obtain appropriate senior management support (particularly out of hours) when the extent of a councillor’s involvement is an issue that needs to be clarified.

And to avoid any doubt, here’s the relevant sections of Convention 2.1 and 2.2 mentioned above:

 CONVENTION

2.1 Every councillor has the right to information, explanation and advice reasonably required to enable them to perform their duties as a member of council (the “need to know”) but not where:

– there is an over-riding individual right of confidentiality (for example, in a children’s or employment matter)

CONVENTION

2.2 Councillors are normally entitled to be given information on a confidential basis, the exceptions being:

– an over-riding council interest (for example, protecting its legal and financial position); and

– natural justice (for example, giving an individual the chance to respond to allegations).

Isn’t it becoming increasingly obvious that Bristol City Council managers are operating a private ASBO service for the benefit of serving councillors?

#walrustrial: CITY COUNCIL DISASTER PENDING …

5 Replies

‘No’, Councillor Gary Hopkins, watercolour & crayon, 2013, guriben

‘No’, Councillor Gary Hopkins, watercolour & crayon, 2013, guriben

More extraordinary scenes at BRISTOL MAGISTRATES COURT on Monday when the legendary #walrustrial recommenced after a Christmas break.

The trial, ostensibly a prosecution of a short let home – the MANSION HOUSE on Knowle Road, Totterdown – for noise pollution, has turned into something of a forensic analysis of the conduct of the city council’s environmental health department and especially the malign influence Councillor Gary “FUCKBUCKET” Hopkins seems to be able to exert over their work.

Monday saw more bad news for the council when an EXPERT WITNESS for the defence on noise pollution took the stand and DEMOLISHED the council’s utterly crap evidence based on lost log books and zero sound recordings.

This was followed by a BIZARRE summing up from the council’s barrister – paid handsomely by you, dear reader – in which she accused Andrew Forsey of the Mansion House of writing the BRISTOLIAN!

This is obviously a pile of evidence-free bullshit, which shows just how WEAK the council’s case is if they have to focus a prosecution for noise pollution on YER LOCAL SMITER rather than any evidence of, er … Actual noise!

The council barrister then went on to distance herself from her own star witness, Mansion House next door neighbour and RACIST Jonathan Ross. And then finished with a flourish by privately accusing the defence of “VINDICTIVENESS” after it transpired that an anonymous complaint had been made to the NSPCC and social services regarding Ross’s racist language towards a child.

Nice to see the city council speculating on the identity of ANONYMOUS complainants in respect of child SAFEGUARDING allegations don’t you think?

The magistrates then adjourned for three hours to consider a verdict only to return and announce they were unable to reach one and were therefore adjourning the court until 9 FEBRUARY.

Presumably buying themselves some time to work out a way to find the defendants GUILTY despite a key prosecution witness, council boss Mark Curtis admitting under oath that the whole prosecution was in fact a VENDETTA against the defendants and there being no evidence of noise pollution at the Mansion House at all!

Watch this space …