The ArgusRoyal Pavilion Estate's £14 million funding bid rejected (From The Argus)

Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.

Royal Pavilion Estate's £14 million funding bid rejected

The Argus: Royal Pavilion Estate's £14 million funding bid rejected Royal Pavilion Estate's £14 million funding bid rejected

A bid for £14 million of funding to preserve Brighton’s Royal Pavilion Estate has been rejected.

Brighton and Hove City Council, who submitted the bid, was told yesterday the Heritage Lottery Funding (HLF) money had been turned down.

Last November, Andrew Comben, chief executive of the Dome and Festival, said parts of the estate could close unless they were granted the vital funding.

The HLF funding was instead handed out to Nottingham Castle, Canterbury Cathedral , Plymouth History Centre, Blackpool Museum, Beamish: The North of England’s Open Air Museum and Bath Abbey.

It is unclear what the decision will mean for the planned redevelopment of the Royal Pavilion Estate.

A Royal Estates spokeswoman said they were “disappointed” by the decision but would look at applying for future funding.

She added that the HLF feedback had been “very encouraging” with their trustees noting the high heritage importance of the estate.

Mr Comben said,"Our ambition is to transform and revitalize the Royal Pavilion Estate into a world class heritage site at the heart of Brighton and Hove.

“I am of course disappointed that we have not been successful this time round in bidding for Heritage Lottery funding but we are very encouraged by the feedback given to us by HLF Trustees and delighted they are so supportive of our vision.

“We will continue to work with HLF and all our partners on developing plans for a sustainable future for the Royal Pavilion Estate.”

Janita Bagshawe, director of the Royal Pavilion and Museums, said: “We need to not lose sight of our ambition to transform and revitalize a world class heritage site at the heart of Brighton and Hove.

“We will continue to work with HLF and our partners to develop the long term plan for the Royal Pavilion estate and to secure the funding to do so.

“It is the symbol of the city and deserves to be a place that everyone can experience and enjoy.”

More to come.

Comments (54)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:37pm Wed 28 May 14

rolivan says...

Why don't the go to the Loans Board The Pavilion Estate is a proven business the i360 isn't and yet they have apparently been given funding which brings me onto the fact that everything has gone very quiet on that front.
Why don't the go to the Loans Board The Pavilion Estate is a proven business the i360 isn't and yet they have apparently been given funding which brings me onto the fact that everything has gone very quiet on that front. rolivan
  • Score: 60

1:40pm Wed 28 May 14

spa301 says...

Good point by rolivan. No money (this time) for the most iconic of Brighton's landmarks yet numerous millions are to be poured into the white elephant that will be the i360 (180 of which will be a view of the Channel)
Good point by rolivan. No money (this time) for the most iconic of Brighton's landmarks yet numerous millions are to be poured into the white elephant that will be the i360 (180 of which will be a view of the Channel) spa301
  • Score: 51

1:57pm Wed 28 May 14

Old Ale Man says...

spa301 wrote:
Good point by rolivan. No money (this time) for the most iconic of Brighton's landmarks yet numerous millions are to be poured into the white elephant that will be the i360 (180 of which will be a view of the Channel)
Not just the Channel, you may could see my ouse as well if there are no uvvers in between, that said if there are 200 people all wanting to see land marks instead of the channel this could be a problem and make it topple into regency square!!!
[quote][p][bold]spa301[/bold] wrote: Good point by rolivan. No money (this time) for the most iconic of Brighton's landmarks yet numerous millions are to be poured into the white elephant that will be the i360 (180 of which will be a view of the Channel)[/p][/quote]Not just the Channel, you may could see my ouse as well if there are no uvvers in between, that said if there are 200 people all wanting to see land marks instead of the channel this could be a problem and make it topple into regency square!!! Old Ale Man
  • Score: 2

2:11pm Wed 28 May 14

Mr chock says...

rolivan wrote:
Why don't the go to the Loans Board The Pavilion Estate is a proven business the i360 isn't and yet they have apparently been given funding which brings me onto the fact that everything has gone very quiet on that front.
Mr Comben said,"Our ambition is to transform and revitalize the Royal Pavilion Estate into a world class heritage site at the heart of Brighton and Hove.
they wanted 14 million for what ? i can see the building works going on for the I360 but i look at the royal pavilion and i cant see where 14 million is needed
[quote][p][bold]rolivan[/bold] wrote: Why don't the go to the Loans Board The Pavilion Estate is a proven business the i360 isn't and yet they have apparently been given funding which brings me onto the fact that everything has gone very quiet on that front.[/p][/quote]Mr Comben said,"Our ambition is to transform and revitalize the Royal Pavilion Estate into a world class heritage site at the heart of Brighton and Hove. they wanted 14 million for what ? i can see the building works going on for the I360 but i look at the royal pavilion and i cant see where 14 million is needed Mr chock
  • Score: 6

2:22pm Wed 28 May 14

Lady Smith says...

Old Ale Man wrote:
spa301 wrote:
Good point by rolivan. No money (this time) for the most iconic of Brighton's landmarks yet numerous millions are to be poured into the white elephant that will be the i360 (180 of which will be a view of the Channel)
Not just the Channel, you may could see my ouse as well if there are no uvvers in between, that said if there are 200 people all wanting to see land marks instead of the channel this could be a problem and make it topple into regency square!!!
What on earth are you talking about?
[quote][p][bold]Old Ale Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]spa301[/bold] wrote: Good point by rolivan. No money (this time) for the most iconic of Brighton's landmarks yet numerous millions are to be poured into the white elephant that will be the i360 (180 of which will be a view of the Channel)[/p][/quote]Not just the Channel, you may could see my ouse as well if there are no uvvers in between, that said if there are 200 people all wanting to see land marks instead of the channel this could be a problem and make it topple into regency square!!![/p][/quote]What on earth are you talking about? Lady Smith
  • Score: 11

3:04pm Wed 28 May 14

MikeyA says...

Lady Smith wrote:
Old Ale Man wrote:
spa301 wrote:
Good point by rolivan. No money (this time) for the most iconic of Brighton's landmarks yet numerous millions are to be poured into the white elephant that will be the i360 (180 of which will be a view of the Channel)
Not just the Channel, you may could see my ouse as well if there are no uvvers in between, that said if there are 200 people all wanting to see land marks instead of the channel this could be a problem and make it topple into regency square!!!
What on earth are you talking about?
Gus Elen's most famous song was "If it Wasn’t for the Houses in Between" and is about the little backyards of London houses which are hemmed in by row upon row of other houses in all of the other streets in the neighbourhood.
[quote][p][bold]Lady Smith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Old Ale Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]spa301[/bold] wrote: Good point by rolivan. No money (this time) for the most iconic of Brighton's landmarks yet numerous millions are to be poured into the white elephant that will be the i360 (180 of which will be a view of the Channel)[/p][/quote]Not just the Channel, you may could see my ouse as well if there are no uvvers in between, that said if there are 200 people all wanting to see land marks instead of the channel this could be a problem and make it topple into regency square!!![/p][/quote]What on earth are you talking about?[/p][/quote]Gus Elen's most famous song was "If it Wasn’t for the Houses in Between" and is about the little backyards of London houses which are hemmed in by row upon row of other houses in all of the other streets in the neighbourhood. MikeyA
  • Score: 1

3:42pm Wed 28 May 14

Martha Gunn says...

But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council?

Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.
But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council? Roll on 2015...and then re-apply. Martha Gunn
  • Score: 27

3:52pm Wed 28 May 14

Martin999 says...

Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.
Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park. Martin999
  • Score: 27

3:57pm Wed 28 May 14

brighton bluenose says...

Martha Gunn wrote:
But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council?

Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.
Zzzzzzzzzzz.........
.
[quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council? Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.[/p][/quote]Zzzzzzzzzzz......... . brighton bluenose
  • Score: -31

5:17pm Wed 28 May 14

Martin999 says...

Martin999 wrote:
Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.
Hurray! They also going to add some recycle bins.
[quote][p][bold]Martin999[/bold] wrote: Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.[/p][/quote]Hurray! They also going to add some recycle bins. Martin999
  • Score: 6

5:27pm Wed 28 May 14

Martha Gunn says...

Martin999 wrote:
Martin999 wrote:
Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.
Hurray! They also going to add some recycle bins.
And collect them?
[quote][p][bold]Martin999[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martin999[/bold] wrote: Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.[/p][/quote]Hurray! They also going to add some recycle bins.[/p][/quote]And collect them? Martha Gunn
  • Score: 16

5:31pm Wed 28 May 14

Eugenius says...

Martha Gunn wrote:
But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council?

Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.
Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029.
[quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council? Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.[/p][/quote]Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029. Eugenius
  • Score: -6

5:49pm Wed 28 May 14

Martin999 says...

Eugenius wrote:
Martha Gunn wrote:
But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council?

Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.
Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029.
Yes, but at least the Jubilee Library is something the people of Brighton wanted, whereas the Lewes Road bus lane and the seven dials redevelopment were not.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council? Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.[/p][/quote]Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029.[/p][/quote]Yes, but at least the Jubilee Library is something the people of Brighton wanted, whereas the Lewes Road bus lane and the seven dials redevelopment were not. Martin999
  • Score: 32

5:49pm Wed 28 May 14

Martha Gunn says...

Eugenius wrote:
Martha Gunn wrote:
But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council?

Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.
Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029.
Beware of Greenspeak!

Do not allow them to bamboozle you.

Only significant grants are for loony Green vanity projects designed to disrupt travel around our city.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council? Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.[/p][/quote]Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029.[/p][/quote]Beware of Greenspeak! Do not allow them to bamboozle you. Only significant grants are for loony Green vanity projects designed to disrupt travel around our city. Martha Gunn
  • Score: 27

5:50pm Wed 28 May 14

Martin999 says...

Martha Gunn wrote:
Martin999 wrote:
Martin999 wrote:
Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.
Hurray! They also going to add some recycle bins.
And collect them?
Oh you council tax payers want everything.
[quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martin999[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martin999[/bold] wrote: Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.[/p][/quote]Hurray! They also going to add some recycle bins.[/p][/quote]And collect them?[/p][/quote]Oh you council tax payers want everything. Martin999
  • Score: 12

6:29pm Wed 28 May 14

pachallis says...

Eugenius wrote:
Martha Gunn wrote:
But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council?

Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.
Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029.
And what funds grants? Woofle dust?

No - grants come from our taxes either directly from the UK government or from Europe as part of our membership fee.

So it's just the greens have been good at getting grants for vanity projects, but then have been abysmal at the implementation - ignored and unenforced 20mph zones; the unused OSR cycle lane; and I can't wait to see the lack of use of the Edward Street uphill cycle lane - all resulting in higher pollution levels in the city centre due to queuing traffic.

All fiascos allegedly funded by grants but we all pay for them!
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council? Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.[/p][/quote]Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029.[/p][/quote]And what funds grants? Woofle dust? No - grants come from our taxes either directly from the UK government or from Europe as part of our membership fee. So it's just the greens have been good at getting grants for vanity projects, but then have been abysmal at the implementation - ignored and unenforced 20mph zones; the unused OSR cycle lane; and I can't wait to see the lack of use of the Edward Street uphill cycle lane - all resulting in higher pollution levels in the city centre due to queuing traffic. All fiascos allegedly funded by grants but we all pay for them! pachallis
  • Score: 13

6:33pm Wed 28 May 14

charlie smirke says...

Eugenius wrote:
Martha Gunn wrote:
But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council?

Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.
Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029.
Are YOU kidding Eugenius?? Nobody believes a single word that comes from any "green" mouth !! You are unscrupulous and grossly incompetent. You have done massive damage to Brighton and there are many who will be overjoyed to see the back of you. I just hope that the rest of the country learns from Brighton's appalling experience and you are never elected anywhere ever again.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council? Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.[/p][/quote]Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029.[/p][/quote]Are YOU kidding Eugenius?? Nobody believes a single word that comes from any "green" mouth !! You are unscrupulous and grossly incompetent. You have done massive damage to Brighton and there are many who will be overjoyed to see the back of you. I just hope that the rest of the country learns from Brighton's appalling experience and you are never elected anywhere ever again. charlie smirke
  • Score: 11

6:58pm Wed 28 May 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

And don't forget that the Lewes Road cycle lane already existed and the only change could have been done for a few thousand quid by a simple traffic order change closing the inside lane for bus use only.
Instead the contractors burned all the white lines off the road damaging the surface which is now breaking up where the old lines were and then the Greens claimed in their PR they had created a cycle route. They hadn't, it had been there for years,
Wasted money, poorly executed project, false claims by councillors bulking up their CVs with ****.
And don't forget that the Lewes Road cycle lane already existed and the only change could have been done for a few thousand quid by a simple traffic order change closing the inside lane for bus use only. Instead the contractors burned all the white lines off the road damaging the surface which is now breaking up where the old lines were and then the Greens claimed in their PR they had created a cycle route. They hadn't, it had been there for years, Wasted money, poorly executed project, false claims by councillors bulking up their CVs with ****. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 16

8:27pm Wed 28 May 14

HJarrs says...

pachallis wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Martha Gunn wrote:
But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council?

Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.
Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029.
And what funds grants? Woofle dust?

No - grants come from our taxes either directly from the UK government or from Europe as part of our membership fee.

So it's just the greens have been good at getting grants for vanity projects, but then have been abysmal at the implementation - ignored and unenforced 20mph zones; the unused OSR cycle lane; and I can't wait to see the lack of use of the Edward Street uphill cycle lane - all resulting in higher pollution levels in the city centre due to queuing traffic.

All fiascos allegedly funded by grants but we all pay for them!
A few more cars and a bit of fracking should sort it eh Patchy?
[quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council? Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.[/p][/quote]Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029.[/p][/quote]And what funds grants? Woofle dust? No - grants come from our taxes either directly from the UK government or from Europe as part of our membership fee. So it's just the greens have been good at getting grants for vanity projects, but then have been abysmal at the implementation - ignored and unenforced 20mph zones; the unused OSR cycle lane; and I can't wait to see the lack of use of the Edward Street uphill cycle lane - all resulting in higher pollution levels in the city centre due to queuing traffic. All fiascos allegedly funded by grants but we all pay for them![/p][/quote]A few more cars and a bit of fracking should sort it eh Patchy? HJarrs
  • Score: -21

9:22pm Wed 28 May 14

HJarrs says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
And don't forget that the Lewes Road cycle lane already existed and the only change could have been done for a few thousand quid by a simple traffic order change closing the inside lane for bus use only.
Instead the contractors burned all the white lines off the road damaging the surface which is now breaking up where the old lines were and then the Greens claimed in their PR they had created a cycle route. They hadn't, it had been there for years,
Wasted money, poorly executed project, false claims by councillors bulking up their CVs with ****.
I suppose the changes don't float the boat of my moanerati friends. Too old to change and too set in their ways if they could.

Lewes Rd was hardly an attractive route, one part so poor a coroner considered it played a part in the death of a young woman cycling.

Since the Lewes Rd cycle and bus routes have been completed, bus and cycle ridership are up. We have the forthcoming improvements to the Vogue Gyratory that will make traversing it that bit safer for cyclists in particular. That should encourage more on their bikes. Good news I am sure you will all agree.

I have no doubt that the new facilities have helped reduce the need for parking on the, soon to be built, Preston Barracks development.

All this an has hardly cost the council tax payer a penny as the council has been so good at getting grant money (even the NHS put up money!) and I recall £400k from B&H buses. A small win for us 40% of householders without a car and those that do own cars that at not so myopic to see them as the only solution.
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: And don't forget that the Lewes Road cycle lane already existed and the only change could have been done for a few thousand quid by a simple traffic order change closing the inside lane for bus use only. Instead the contractors burned all the white lines off the road damaging the surface which is now breaking up where the old lines were and then the Greens claimed in their PR they had created a cycle route. They hadn't, it had been there for years, Wasted money, poorly executed project, false claims by councillors bulking up their CVs with ****.[/p][/quote]I suppose the changes don't float the boat of my moanerati friends. Too old to change and too set in their ways if they could. Lewes Rd was hardly an attractive route, one part so poor a coroner considered it played a part in the death of a young woman cycling. Since the Lewes Rd cycle and bus routes have been completed, bus and cycle ridership are up. We have the forthcoming improvements to the Vogue Gyratory that will make traversing it that bit safer for cyclists in particular. That should encourage more on their bikes. Good news I am sure you will all agree. I have no doubt that the new facilities have helped reduce the need for parking on the, soon to be built, Preston Barracks development. All this an has hardly cost the council tax payer a penny as the council has been so good at getting grant money (even the NHS put up money!) and I recall £400k from B&H buses. A small win for us 40% of householders without a car and those that do own cars that at not so myopic to see them as the only solution. HJarrs
  • Score: -18

9:36pm Wed 28 May 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

Give us the data HJarrs and the source and who has audited the data please. Please ensure the data is a ratio of the number of people in the city between the dates of increase as an increase without context is pointless. Also can you explain what ratio the 40 per cent increase in taxi journeys represents to the reduction in non taxi journeys.
Come on HJarrs, so far the Greens statements have been holier than the Pope so now is your chance to set the record straight.
Give us the data HJarrs and the source and who has audited the data please. Please ensure the data is a ratio of the number of people in the city between the dates of increase as an increase without context is pointless. Also can you explain what ratio the 40 per cent increase in taxi journeys represents to the reduction in non taxi journeys. Come on HJarrs, so far the Greens statements have been holier than the Pope so now is your chance to set the record straight. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 15

9:42pm Wed 28 May 14

HJarrs says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Give us the data HJarrs and the source and who has audited the data please. Please ensure the data is a ratio of the number of people in the city between the dates of increase as an increase without context is pointless. Also can you explain what ratio the 40 per cent increase in taxi journeys represents to the reduction in non taxi journeys.
Come on HJarrs, so far the Greens statements have been holier than the Pope so now is your chance to set the record straight.
You know the source Maxy, you seem happy to quote from it. If there is another traffic survey this year, what is the betting we will see another substantial rise of cyclists and bus passengers.

I seem to recall the moanerati telling us the city would be empty, business would disappear, the city would be ruined. They look pretty silly now.
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Give us the data HJarrs and the source and who has audited the data please. Please ensure the data is a ratio of the number of people in the city between the dates of increase as an increase without context is pointless. Also can you explain what ratio the 40 per cent increase in taxi journeys represents to the reduction in non taxi journeys. Come on HJarrs, so far the Greens statements have been holier than the Pope so now is your chance to set the record straight.[/p][/quote]You know the source Maxy, you seem happy to quote from it. If there is another traffic survey this year, what is the betting we will see another substantial rise of cyclists and bus passengers. I seem to recall the moanerati telling us the city would be empty, business would disappear, the city would be ruined. They look pretty silly now. HJarrs
  • Score: -22

9:47pm Wed 28 May 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

Ahh you mean the unaudited survey carried out by the councils own staff to validate its own project delivered by the same staff.
Therefore completely unreliable.
Don't con the public HJarrs, they aren't as stupid as you think they are.
Ahh you mean the unaudited survey carried out by the councils own staff to validate its own project delivered by the same staff. Therefore completely unreliable. Don't con the public HJarrs, they aren't as stupid as you think they are. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 17

11:38pm Wed 28 May 14

saveHOVE says...

rolivan wrote:
Why don't the go to the Loans Board The Pavilion Estate is a proven business the i360 isn't and yet they have apparently been given funding which brings me onto the fact that everything has gone very quiet on that front.
According to the PWLB to a saveHOVE supporter (when emailed) it is up to BHCC to decide if something constitutes "Infrastructure" that they can loan for. It is if BHCC SAYS it is. Which is wrong. The PWLB only care if the money can be repaid - which of course it can be by increasing taxation if need be or cutting services.

But the petition is still there if anyone cares to add their signature. The month of May was the given target date for the loan agreement to be signed by BHCC and Marks Barfield. The whole thing is depressing.

http://www.change.or
g/en-GB/petitions/pu
blic-works-loan-boar
d-please-refuse-the-
bhcc-loan-request-fo
r-36-2m-for-onward-l
ending-to-brighton-i
360-ltd-to-build-the
-i360-on-brighton-s-
seafront

The Royal Pavilion Estate is genuine tourism infrastructure and why BHCC cannot borrow to do whatever upgrade is needed God only knows. But no.
The citywrecker will get the cash. This city is so kamikaze.
[quote][p][bold]rolivan[/bold] wrote: Why don't the go to the Loans Board The Pavilion Estate is a proven business the i360 isn't and yet they have apparently been given funding which brings me onto the fact that everything has gone very quiet on that front.[/p][/quote]According to the PWLB to a saveHOVE supporter (when emailed) it is up to BHCC to decide if something constitutes "Infrastructure" that they can loan for. It is if BHCC SAYS it is. Which is wrong. The PWLB only care if the money can be repaid - which of course it can be by increasing taxation if need be or cutting services. But the petition is still there if anyone cares to add their signature. The month of May was the given target date for the loan agreement to be signed by BHCC and Marks Barfield. The whole thing is depressing. http://www.change.or g/en-GB/petitions/pu blic-works-loan-boar d-please-refuse-the- bhcc-loan-request-fo r-36-2m-for-onward-l ending-to-brighton-i 360-ltd-to-build-the -i360-on-brighton-s- seafront The Royal Pavilion Estate is genuine tourism infrastructure and why BHCC cannot borrow to do whatever upgrade is needed God only knows. But no. The citywrecker will get the cash. This city is so kamikaze. saveHOVE
  • Score: 6

6:57am Thu 29 May 14

pachallis says...

HJarrs wrote:
pachallis wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Martha Gunn wrote:
But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council?

Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.
Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029.
And what funds grants? Woofle dust?

No - grants come from our taxes either directly from the UK government or from Europe as part of our membership fee.

So it's just the greens have been good at getting grants for vanity projects, but then have been abysmal at the implementation - ignored and unenforced 20mph zones; the unused OSR cycle lane; and I can't wait to see the lack of use of the Edward Street uphill cycle lane - all resulting in higher pollution levels in the city centre due to queuing traffic.

All fiascos allegedly funded by grants but we all pay for them!
A few more cars and a bit of fracking should sort it eh Patchy?
Ah - looks like I hit a nerve - the fanboy had to resort to insults.

Yes - switching PSV vehicles from diesel to CNG is an UN approved way of reducing emissions. Fracking, if done properly, is perfectly acceptable according to the UN.

You really should give up this childish way you fail at supporting this incompetent ideological green-'led' council!
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council? Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.[/p][/quote]Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029.[/p][/quote]And what funds grants? Woofle dust? No - grants come from our taxes either directly from the UK government or from Europe as part of our membership fee. So it's just the greens have been good at getting grants for vanity projects, but then have been abysmal at the implementation - ignored and unenforced 20mph zones; the unused OSR cycle lane; and I can't wait to see the lack of use of the Edward Street uphill cycle lane - all resulting in higher pollution levels in the city centre due to queuing traffic. All fiascos allegedly funded by grants but we all pay for them![/p][/quote]A few more cars and a bit of fracking should sort it eh Patchy?[/p][/quote]Ah - looks like I hit a nerve - the fanboy had to resort to insults. Yes - switching PSV vehicles from diesel to CNG is an UN approved way of reducing emissions. Fracking, if done properly, is perfectly acceptable according to the UN. You really should give up this childish way you fail at supporting this incompetent ideological green-'led' council! pachallis
  • Score: 5

7:28am Thu 29 May 14

HJarrs says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Ahh you mean the unaudited survey carried out by the councils own staff to validate its own project delivered by the same staff.
Therefore completely unreliable.
Don't con the public HJarrs, they aren't as stupid as you think they are.
So why are you happy to quote from the same document? Typical journalist.
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Ahh you mean the unaudited survey carried out by the councils own staff to validate its own project delivered by the same staff. Therefore completely unreliable. Don't con the public HJarrs, they aren't as stupid as you think they are.[/p][/quote]So why are you happy to quote from the same document? Typical journalist. HJarrs
  • Score: -8

7:32am Thu 29 May 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public.
Look what happened.
Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too.
That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public.
He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling.
Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.
Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public. Look what happened. Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too. That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public. He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling. Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 9

8:13am Thu 29 May 14

Thay Qon U says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public.
Look what happened.
Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too.
That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public.
He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling.
Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.
The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council.

HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public. Look what happened. Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too. That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public. He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling. Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.[/p][/quote]The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council. HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published. Thay Qon U
  • Score: -4

8:28am Thu 29 May 14

HJarrs says...

pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
pachallis wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Martha Gunn wrote:
But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council?

Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.
Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029.
And what funds grants? Woofle dust?

No - grants come from our taxes either directly from the UK government or from Europe as part of our membership fee.

So it's just the greens have been good at getting grants for vanity projects, but then have been abysmal at the implementation - ignored and unenforced 20mph zones; the unused OSR cycle lane; and I can't wait to see the lack of use of the Edward Street uphill cycle lane - all resulting in higher pollution levels in the city centre due to queuing traffic.

All fiascos allegedly funded by grants but we all pay for them!
A few more cars and a bit of fracking should sort it eh Patchy?
Ah - looks like I hit a nerve - the fanboy had to resort to insults.

Yes - switching PSV vehicles from diesel to CNG is an UN approved way of reducing emissions. Fracking, if done properly, is perfectly acceptable according to the UN.

You really should give up this childish way you fail at supporting this incompetent ideological green-'led' council!
If only the IPCC report said that. What it does say is that natural gas could be a temporary bridge fuel. Note "could". That is not the strategy being pursued. Oil companies are not investing hundreds of billions just to turn the taps off in 20 years. In the Uk we have already used gas as a bridge fuel. It is high time we used, according to the International Energy Agency, the biggest source of untapped green fuel.

Increasing cycling and bus use in the city is progressing very well Let's hope funding can be found to complete Victoria Gardens, which will link Lewes Rd, Edward St and Sea Front.
[quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: But who on earth would give grants of this size to our incompetent Green Council? Roll on 2015...and then re-apply.[/p][/quote]Are you kidding? We've secured more money in grants than any council administration here has for decades. Last Labour council paid for things using costly Private Finance Initative deals. Jubilee library, while excellent, still had a £50 million debt owing on it in 2011 and I don't think it will actually belong to the city until 2029.[/p][/quote]And what funds grants? Woofle dust? No - grants come from our taxes either directly from the UK government or from Europe as part of our membership fee. So it's just the greens have been good at getting grants for vanity projects, but then have been abysmal at the implementation - ignored and unenforced 20mph zones; the unused OSR cycle lane; and I can't wait to see the lack of use of the Edward Street uphill cycle lane - all resulting in higher pollution levels in the city centre due to queuing traffic. All fiascos allegedly funded by grants but we all pay for them![/p][/quote]A few more cars and a bit of fracking should sort it eh Patchy?[/p][/quote]Ah - looks like I hit a nerve - the fanboy had to resort to insults. Yes - switching PSV vehicles from diesel to CNG is an UN approved way of reducing emissions. Fracking, if done properly, is perfectly acceptable according to the UN. You really should give up this childish way you fail at supporting this incompetent ideological green-'led' council![/p][/quote]If only the IPCC report said that. What it does say is that natural gas could be a temporary bridge fuel. Note "could". That is not the strategy being pursued. Oil companies are not investing hundreds of billions just to turn the taps off in 20 years. In the Uk we have already used gas as a bridge fuel. It is high time we used, according to the International Energy Agency, the biggest source of untapped green fuel. Increasing cycling and bus use in the city is progressing very well Let's hope funding can be found to complete Victoria Gardens, which will link Lewes Rd, Edward St and Sea Front. HJarrs
  • Score: -7

8:30am Thu 29 May 14

HJarrs says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public.
Look what happened.
Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too.
That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public.
He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling.
Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.
Now you are just sore that your argument has been undermined as usual.
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public. Look what happened. Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too. That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public. He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling. Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.[/p][/quote]Now you are just sore that your argument has been undermined as usual. HJarrs
  • Score: -9

8:32am Thu 29 May 14

hoveguyactually says...

Martin999 wrote:
Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.
.....and a site for travellers and asylum seekers.
[quote][p][bold]Martin999[/bold] wrote: Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.[/p][/quote].....and a site for travellers and asylum seekers. hoveguyactually
  • Score: 5

8:33am Thu 29 May 14

HJarrs says...

Thay Qon U wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public.
Look what happened.
Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too.
That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public.
He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling.
Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.
The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council.

HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.
Sorry, no such public assurances given and how could I? I am in no position to affect council tax one way or the other. But don't let that stop you making things up.
[quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public. Look what happened. Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too. That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public. He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling. Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.[/p][/quote]The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council. HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.[/p][/quote]Sorry, no such public assurances given and how could I? I am in no position to affect council tax one way or the other. But don't let that stop you making things up. HJarrs
  • Score: -8

8:39am Thu 29 May 14

hoveguyactually says...

"Increasing cycling and bus use in the city is progressing very well Let's hope funding can be found to complete Victoria Gardens, which will link Lewes Rd, Edward St and Sea Front."

And that, of course, is the problem. The encouragement for more cyclists by the council has added chaos to the city. They are becoming like a plague wherever you go, whether as a motorist or a pedestrian. Let us hope the Greens will get kicked out before they can do any more damage.
I have lived in Brighton all my life but have never known a more smug, wasteful and harmful council.
"Increasing cycling and bus use in the city is progressing very well Let's hope funding can be found to complete Victoria Gardens, which will link Lewes Rd, Edward St and Sea Front." And that, of course, is the problem. The encouragement for more cyclists by the council has added chaos to the city. They are becoming like a plague wherever you go, whether as a motorist or a pedestrian. Let us hope the Greens will get kicked out before they can do any more damage. I have lived in Brighton all my life but have never known a more smug, wasteful and harmful council. hoveguyactually
  • Score: 9

8:51am Thu 29 May 14

brighton bluenose says...

hoveguyactually wrote:
Martin999 wrote:
Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.
.....and a site for travellers and asylum seekers.
Really well thought out post that one......of course the travellers are a Green problem, were never here before them and will burger off if the Greens get voted out won't they?! And as for the 'asylum seekers' (code for immigrants) that you seem so concerned about it was Labour and now the Tories who have let in millions so you would have to be rather thick to blame the Greens for anything to do with asylum-seekers!!
[quote][p][bold]hoveguyactually[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martin999[/bold] wrote: Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.[/p][/quote].....and a site for travellers and asylum seekers.[/p][/quote]Really well thought out post that one......of course the travellers are a Green problem, were never here before them and will burger off if the Greens get voted out won't they?! And as for the 'asylum seekers' (code for immigrants) that you seem so concerned about it was Labour and now the Tories who have let in millions so you would have to be rather thick to blame the Greens for anything to do with asylum-seekers!! brighton bluenose
  • Score: -5

9:17am Thu 29 May 14

pachallis says...

Thay Qon U wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public.
Look what happened.
Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too.
That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public.
He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling.
Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.
The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council.

HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.
Don't forget HJarrs won't admit to being the paid public face of the green party.

He will only admit to being a fanboy, who switched allegiance from Labour to Greens - which says a lot about the calibre of the 'activist' supporters that the Green Party attracts and the lack of any professional public relations capabilities.

HJarrs is very adept at insults; at spreading misinformation, and using various online documents as basis for his claims but when you look at them do not support him at all.

Hence his claims about the UN not approving fracking; his claim about the Green Party supporting a referendum on EU membership, his claim about the Green Party being focussed on the environment. his claim about the usage of the Lewes Road and Old Shoreham Road cycle lanes all turn out to be false.

You just cannot trust a single word that HJarrs posts!

Like Eugenius, Green fanbois are very 'economical with the truth' when it comes to facts about the Green Party (or themselves) and only to blame everyone else for the Green Parties failings.

The good news is that HJarrs apparently has a job (luck employer!) and should, by now, have disappeared off to what he calls 'fiddling with his cursor'. He will probably be back at about 1900hrs to carry on the pro-green bilge production line.

He just doesn't understand that he could actually help the Green Party by keeping quiet and letting the moanaraty (as he calls them) get bored and stop posting.

But as the saying goes, who needs enemies when you have friends like HJarrs!

Remember this article was about the green-'led' council being unable to get funding for developments for the Royal Pavilion.
[quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public. Look what happened. Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too. That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public. He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling. Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.[/p][/quote]The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council. HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.[/p][/quote]Don't forget HJarrs won't admit to being the paid public face of the green party. He will only admit to being a fanboy, who switched allegiance from Labour to Greens - which says a lot about the calibre of the 'activist' supporters that the Green Party attracts and the lack of any professional public relations capabilities. HJarrs is very adept at insults; at spreading misinformation, and using various online documents as basis for his claims but when you look at them do not support him at all. Hence his claims about the UN not approving fracking; his claim about the Green Party supporting a referendum on EU membership, his claim about the Green Party being focussed on the environment. his claim about the usage of the Lewes Road and Old Shoreham Road cycle lanes all turn out to be false. You just cannot trust a single word that HJarrs posts! Like Eugenius, Green fanbois are very 'economical with the truth' when it comes to facts about the Green Party (or themselves) and only to blame everyone else for the Green Parties failings. The good news is that HJarrs apparently has a job (luck employer!) and should, by now, have disappeared off to what he calls 'fiddling with his cursor'. He will probably be back at about 1900hrs to carry on the pro-green bilge production line. He just doesn't understand that he could actually help the Green Party by keeping quiet and letting the moanaraty (as he calls them) get bored and stop posting. But as the saying goes, who needs enemies when you have friends like HJarrs! Remember this article was about the green-'led' council being unable to get funding for developments for the Royal Pavilion. pachallis
  • Score: 0

9:25am Thu 29 May 14

HJarrs says...

pachallis wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public.
Look what happened.
Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too.
That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public.
He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling.
Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.
The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council.

HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.
Don't forget HJarrs won't admit to being the paid public face of the green party.

He will only admit to being a fanboy, who switched allegiance from Labour to Greens - which says a lot about the calibre of the 'activist' supporters that the Green Party attracts and the lack of any professional public relations capabilities.

HJarrs is very adept at insults; at spreading misinformation, and using various online documents as basis for his claims but when you look at them do not support him at all.

Hence his claims about the UN not approving fracking; his claim about the Green Party supporting a referendum on EU membership, his claim about the Green Party being focussed on the environment. his claim about the usage of the Lewes Road and Old Shoreham Road cycle lanes all turn out to be false.

You just cannot trust a single word that HJarrs posts!

Like Eugenius, Green fanbois are very 'economical with the truth' when it comes to facts about the Green Party (or themselves) and only to blame everyone else for the Green Parties failings.

The good news is that HJarrs apparently has a job (luck employer!) and should, by now, have disappeared off to what he calls 'fiddling with his cursor'. He will probably be back at about 1900hrs to carry on the pro-green bilge production line.

He just doesn't understand that he could actually help the Green Party by keeping quiet and letting the moanaraty (as he calls them) get bored and stop posting.

But as the saying goes, who needs enemies when you have friends like HJarrs!

Remember this article was about the green-'led' council being unable to get funding for developments for the Royal Pavilion.
Let's be honest Patchy. You are obsessed with me.

Quite touching really.
[quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public. Look what happened. Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too. That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public. He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling. Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.[/p][/quote]The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council. HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.[/p][/quote]Don't forget HJarrs won't admit to being the paid public face of the green party. He will only admit to being a fanboy, who switched allegiance from Labour to Greens - which says a lot about the calibre of the 'activist' supporters that the Green Party attracts and the lack of any professional public relations capabilities. HJarrs is very adept at insults; at spreading misinformation, and using various online documents as basis for his claims but when you look at them do not support him at all. Hence his claims about the UN not approving fracking; his claim about the Green Party supporting a referendum on EU membership, his claim about the Green Party being focussed on the environment. his claim about the usage of the Lewes Road and Old Shoreham Road cycle lanes all turn out to be false. You just cannot trust a single word that HJarrs posts! Like Eugenius, Green fanbois are very 'economical with the truth' when it comes to facts about the Green Party (or themselves) and only to blame everyone else for the Green Parties failings. The good news is that HJarrs apparently has a job (luck employer!) and should, by now, have disappeared off to what he calls 'fiddling with his cursor'. He will probably be back at about 1900hrs to carry on the pro-green bilge production line. He just doesn't understand that he could actually help the Green Party by keeping quiet and letting the moanaraty (as he calls them) get bored and stop posting. But as the saying goes, who needs enemies when you have friends like HJarrs! Remember this article was about the green-'led' council being unable to get funding for developments for the Royal Pavilion.[/p][/quote]Let's be honest Patchy. You are obsessed with me. Quite touching really. HJarrs
  • Score: -6

9:37am Thu 29 May 14

pachallis says...

brighton bluenose wrote:
hoveguyactually wrote:
Martin999 wrote:
Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.
.....and a site for travellers and asylum seekers.
Really well thought out post that one......of course the travellers are a Green problem, were never here before them and will burger off if the Greens get voted out won't they?! And as for the 'asylum seekers' (code for immigrants) that you seem so concerned about it was Labour and now the Tories who have let in millions so you would have to be rather thick to blame the Greens for anything to do with asylum-seekers!!
@brighton bluenose - of course the problem with 'travellers' is not new.

What is new with the greens is that in 2012 they produced the 'Traveller Commissioning Strategy' - a 92 page document describing who travellers are; their health, wellbeing and education needs; and a section on why residents concerns are unfounded, and a strategy for supporting travellers - all allegedly based upon National and 'Local' policies. I say 'Local' as this is based upon the Greens pre-occupation on supported minorities and st*ffing majorities.

This is the document that includes the infamous 'Impact Assessment' that must be followed before travellers are evicted.:

Where Travellers park on public land, the Police and Traveller
Liaison Service make joint visits to carry out a Community
Impact Assessment of the encampment upon the local area
(community use of the site, biodiversity, historic significance
etc) and carry out welfare checks with the Travellers.

Also any rubbish and fly-tipping from the traveller community is stated as being minimal compared to that of the entire population of Brighton & Hove So I guess about 100 travellers produce similar fly-tipping to over 250,000 residents - so it is not a problem!

So, yes - travellers are not a new problem - it has just been made significantly worse by the Greens and their policy of appeasing minority groups.

For full details of the B&HCC policy see http://www.brighton-
hove.gov.uk/content/
housing/travellers/b
righton-hoves-travel
ler-strategy
[quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hoveguyactually[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martin999[/bold] wrote: Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.[/p][/quote].....and a site for travellers and asylum seekers.[/p][/quote]Really well thought out post that one......of course the travellers are a Green problem, were never here before them and will burger off if the Greens get voted out won't they?! And as for the 'asylum seekers' (code for immigrants) that you seem so concerned about it was Labour and now the Tories who have let in millions so you would have to be rather thick to blame the Greens for anything to do with asylum-seekers!![/p][/quote]@brighton bluenose - of course the problem with 'travellers' is not new. What is new with the greens is that in 2012 they produced the 'Traveller Commissioning Strategy' - a 92 page document describing who travellers are; their health, wellbeing and education needs; and a section on why residents concerns are unfounded, and a strategy for supporting travellers - all allegedly based upon National and 'Local' policies. I say 'Local' as this is based upon the Greens pre-occupation on supported minorities and st*ffing majorities. This is the document that includes the infamous 'Impact Assessment' that must be followed before travellers are evicted.: Where Travellers park on public land, the Police and Traveller Liaison Service make joint visits to carry out a Community Impact Assessment of the encampment upon the local area (community use of the site, biodiversity, historic significance etc) and carry out welfare checks with the Travellers. Also any rubbish and fly-tipping from the traveller community is stated as being minimal compared to that of the entire population of Brighton & Hove So I guess about 100 travellers produce similar fly-tipping to over 250,000 residents - so it is not a problem! So, yes - travellers are not a new problem - it has just been made significantly worse by the Greens and their policy of appeasing minority groups. For full details of the B&HCC policy see http://www.brighton- hove.gov.uk/content/ housing/travellers/b righton-hoves-travel ler-strategy pachallis
  • Score: 0

9:41am Thu 29 May 14

pachallis says...

HJarrs wrote:
pachallis wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public.
Look what happened.
Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too.
That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public.
He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling.
Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.
The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council.

HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.
Don't forget HJarrs won't admit to being the paid public face of the green party.

He will only admit to being a fanboy, who switched allegiance from Labour to Greens - which says a lot about the calibre of the 'activist' supporters that the Green Party attracts and the lack of any professional public relations capabilities.

HJarrs is very adept at insults; at spreading misinformation, and using various online documents as basis for his claims but when you look at them do not support him at all.

Hence his claims about the UN not approving fracking; his claim about the Green Party supporting a referendum on EU membership, his claim about the Green Party being focussed on the environment. his claim about the usage of the Lewes Road and Old Shoreham Road cycle lanes all turn out to be false.

You just cannot trust a single word that HJarrs posts!

Like Eugenius, Green fanbois are very 'economical with the truth' when it comes to facts about the Green Party (or themselves) and only to blame everyone else for the Green Parties failings.

The good news is that HJarrs apparently has a job (luck employer!) and should, by now, have disappeared off to what he calls 'fiddling with his cursor'. He will probably be back at about 1900hrs to carry on the pro-green bilge production line.

He just doesn't understand that he could actually help the Green Party by keeping quiet and letting the moanaraty (as he calls them) get bored and stop posting.

But as the saying goes, who needs enemies when you have friends like HJarrs!

Remember this article was about the green-'led' council being unable to get funding for developments for the Royal Pavilion.
Let's be honest Patchy. You are obsessed with me.

Quite touching really.
Well - obsessed like one would be with a painful boil on the *rse! It will be great when you get lanced.

Always only too pleased to highlight your numerous inadequacies and failings. Are you having a day off work today?
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public. Look what happened. Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too. That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public. He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling. Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.[/p][/quote]The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council. HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.[/p][/quote]Don't forget HJarrs won't admit to being the paid public face of the green party. He will only admit to being a fanboy, who switched allegiance from Labour to Greens - which says a lot about the calibre of the 'activist' supporters that the Green Party attracts and the lack of any professional public relations capabilities. HJarrs is very adept at insults; at spreading misinformation, and using various online documents as basis for his claims but when you look at them do not support him at all. Hence his claims about the UN not approving fracking; his claim about the Green Party supporting a referendum on EU membership, his claim about the Green Party being focussed on the environment. his claim about the usage of the Lewes Road and Old Shoreham Road cycle lanes all turn out to be false. You just cannot trust a single word that HJarrs posts! Like Eugenius, Green fanbois are very 'economical with the truth' when it comes to facts about the Green Party (or themselves) and only to blame everyone else for the Green Parties failings. The good news is that HJarrs apparently has a job (luck employer!) and should, by now, have disappeared off to what he calls 'fiddling with his cursor'. He will probably be back at about 1900hrs to carry on the pro-green bilge production line. He just doesn't understand that he could actually help the Green Party by keeping quiet and letting the moanaraty (as he calls them) get bored and stop posting. But as the saying goes, who needs enemies when you have friends like HJarrs! Remember this article was about the green-'led' council being unable to get funding for developments for the Royal Pavilion.[/p][/quote]Let's be honest Patchy. You are obsessed with me. Quite touching really.[/p][/quote]Well - obsessed like one would be with a painful boil on the *rse! It will be great when you get lanced. Always only too pleased to highlight your numerous inadequacies and failings. Are you having a day off work today? pachallis
  • Score: 4

10:11am Thu 29 May 14

brighton bluenose says...

pachallis wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
hoveguyactually wrote:
Martin999 wrote:
Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.
.....and a site for travellers and asylum seekers.
Really well thought out post that one......of course the travellers are a Green problem, were never here before them and will burger off if the Greens get voted out won't they?! And as for the 'asylum seekers' (code for immigrants) that you seem so concerned about it was Labour and now the Tories who have let in millions so you would have to be rather thick to blame the Greens for anything to do with asylum-seekers!!
@brighton bluenose - of course the problem with 'travellers' is not new.

What is new with the greens is that in 2012 they produced the 'Traveller Commissioning Strategy' - a 92 page document describing who travellers are; their health, wellbeing and education needs; and a section on why residents concerns are unfounded, and a strategy for supporting travellers - all allegedly based upon National and 'Local' policies. I say 'Local' as this is based upon the Greens pre-occupation on supported minorities and st*ffing majorities.

This is the document that includes the infamous 'Impact Assessment' that must be followed before travellers are evicted.:

Where Travellers park on public land, the Police and Traveller
Liaison Service make joint visits to carry out a Community
Impact Assessment of the encampment upon the local area
(community use of the site, biodiversity, historic significance
etc) and carry out welfare checks with the Travellers.

Also any rubbish and fly-tipping from the traveller community is stated as being minimal compared to that of the entire population of Brighton & Hove So I guess about 100 travellers produce similar fly-tipping to over 250,000 residents - so it is not a problem!

So, yes - travellers are not a new problem - it has just been made significantly worse by the Greens and their policy of appeasing minority groups.

For full details of the B&HCC policy see http://www.brighton-

hove.gov.uk/content/

housing/travellers/b

righton-hoves-travel

ler-strategy
Pachallis - that may well be the case but as I understand it the eviction notices are given within days of the travellers landing up somewhere so, unless you can show otherwise, I don't believe they stay particularly longer on any one site now as they did under previous administrations - the actual eviction notice period must still be the same. One thing we can agree on is the mess and filth these people leave behind is disgusting! In a story too long to go into here I have seen a steaming turd left by one of their kids right outside the main entrance plate glass windows of an office block I was working in in T. Wells a few years ago - almost makes me retch even now!!
[quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hoveguyactually[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martin999[/bold] wrote: Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.[/p][/quote].....and a site for travellers and asylum seekers.[/p][/quote]Really well thought out post that one......of course the travellers are a Green problem, were never here before them and will burger off if the Greens get voted out won't they?! And as for the 'asylum seekers' (code for immigrants) that you seem so concerned about it was Labour and now the Tories who have let in millions so you would have to be rather thick to blame the Greens for anything to do with asylum-seekers!![/p][/quote]@brighton bluenose - of course the problem with 'travellers' is not new. What is new with the greens is that in 2012 they produced the 'Traveller Commissioning Strategy' - a 92 page document describing who travellers are; their health, wellbeing and education needs; and a section on why residents concerns are unfounded, and a strategy for supporting travellers - all allegedly based upon National and 'Local' policies. I say 'Local' as this is based upon the Greens pre-occupation on supported minorities and st*ffing majorities. This is the document that includes the infamous 'Impact Assessment' that must be followed before travellers are evicted.: Where Travellers park on public land, the Police and Traveller Liaison Service make joint visits to carry out a Community Impact Assessment of the encampment upon the local area (community use of the site, biodiversity, historic significance etc) and carry out welfare checks with the Travellers. Also any rubbish and fly-tipping from the traveller community is stated as being minimal compared to that of the entire population of Brighton & Hove So I guess about 100 travellers produce similar fly-tipping to over 250,000 residents - so it is not a problem! So, yes - travellers are not a new problem - it has just been made significantly worse by the Greens and their policy of appeasing minority groups. For full details of the B&HCC policy see http://www.brighton- hove.gov.uk/content/ housing/travellers/b righton-hoves-travel ler-strategy[/p][/quote]Pachallis - that may well be the case but as I understand it the eviction notices are given within days of the travellers landing up somewhere so, unless you can show otherwise, I don't believe they stay particularly longer on any one site now as they did under previous administrations - the actual eviction notice period must still be the same. One thing we can agree on is the mess and filth these people leave behind is disgusting! In a story too long to go into here I have seen a steaming turd left by one of their kids right outside the main entrance plate glass windows of an office block I was working in in T. Wells a few years ago - almost makes me retch even now!! brighton bluenose
  • Score: 1

11:06am Thu 29 May 14

Thay Qon U says...

HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public.
Look what happened.
Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too.
That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public.
He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling.
Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.
The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council.

HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.
Sorry, no such public assurances given and how could I? I am in no position to affect council tax one way or the other. But don't let that stop you making things up.
Sorry I was trying to put you in the frame for the imminent plaudits once the "above target" Council Tax collection figures are eventually published.

HJ don't hide your light under that bush get your press release out before JK & Huge-egotist take all of the credit on this inevitable good news story (here's a link to a template to help get you started http://www.wikihow.c
om/Write-a-Press-Rel
ease ) ........here are some possible bullet points:- "best collection rate ever for BHCC" "this additional CT income means that Social Services expenditure can be protected" "in addition to the improved CT collection for 2013-14 we (the Green Party) have also managed to make substantial inroads into the £16.5m+ accumulated arrears from previous years" "indications are that the Greens financial management will result in a freeze in Council Tax for 2015-16"
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public. Look what happened. Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too. That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public. He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling. Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.[/p][/quote]The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council. HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.[/p][/quote]Sorry, no such public assurances given and how could I? I am in no position to affect council tax one way or the other. But don't let that stop you making things up.[/p][/quote]Sorry I was trying to put you in the frame for the imminent plaudits once the "above target" Council Tax collection figures are eventually published. HJ don't hide your light under that bush get your press release out before JK & Huge-egotist take all of the credit on this inevitable good news story (here's a link to a template to help get you started http://www.wikihow.c om/Write-a-Press-Rel ease ) ........here are some possible bullet points:- "best collection rate ever for BHCC" "this additional CT income means that Social Services expenditure can be protected" "in addition to the improved CT collection for 2013-14 we (the Green Party) have also managed to make substantial inroads into the £16.5m+ accumulated arrears from previous years" "indications are that the Greens financial management will result in a freeze in Council Tax for 2015-16" Thay Qon U
  • Score: 0

11:50am Thu 29 May 14

Gribbet says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
And don't forget that the Lewes Road cycle lane already existed and the only change could have been done for a few thousand quid by a simple traffic order change closing the inside lane for bus use only.
Instead the contractors burned all the white lines off the road damaging the surface which is now breaking up where the old lines were and then the Greens claimed in their PR they had created a cycle route. They hadn't, it had been there for years,
Wasted money, poorly executed project, false claims by councillors bulking up their CVs with ****.
As if you'd ever let us forget about that Lewes Road cycle lane. I'll bet you probably mumble about the Lewes Road cycle lane in your sleep.
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: And don't forget that the Lewes Road cycle lane already existed and the only change could have been done for a few thousand quid by a simple traffic order change closing the inside lane for bus use only. Instead the contractors burned all the white lines off the road damaging the surface which is now breaking up where the old lines were and then the Greens claimed in their PR they had created a cycle route. They hadn't, it had been there for years, Wasted money, poorly executed project, false claims by councillors bulking up their CVs with ****.[/p][/quote]As if you'd ever let us forget about that Lewes Road cycle lane. I'll bet you probably mumble about the Lewes Road cycle lane in your sleep. Gribbet
  • Score: -6

11:59am Thu 29 May 14

HJarrs says...

Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public.
Look what happened.
Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too.
That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public.
He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling.
Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.
The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council.

HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.
Sorry, no such public assurances given and how could I? I am in no position to affect council tax one way or the other. But don't let that stop you making things up.
Sorry I was trying to put you in the frame for the imminent plaudits once the "above target" Council Tax collection figures are eventually published.

HJ don't hide your light under that bush get your press release out before JK & Huge-egotist take all of the credit on this inevitable good news story (here's a link to a template to help get you started http://www.wikihow.c

om/Write-a-Press-Rel

ease ) ........here are some possible bullet points:- "best collection rate ever for BHCC" "this additional CT income means that Social Services expenditure can be protected" "in addition to the improved CT collection for 2013-14 we (the Green Party) have also managed to make substantial inroads into the £16.5m+ accumulated arrears from previous years" "indications are that the Greens financial management will result in a freeze in Council Tax for 2015-16"
So, now you admit to making up the business about public assurances. Very sad.
[quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public. Look what happened. Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too. That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public. He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling. Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.[/p][/quote]The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council. HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.[/p][/quote]Sorry, no such public assurances given and how could I? I am in no position to affect council tax one way or the other. But don't let that stop you making things up.[/p][/quote]Sorry I was trying to put you in the frame for the imminent plaudits once the "above target" Council Tax collection figures are eventually published. HJ don't hide your light under that bush get your press release out before JK & Huge-egotist take all of the credit on this inevitable good news story (here's a link to a template to help get you started http://www.wikihow.c om/Write-a-Press-Rel ease ) ........here are some possible bullet points:- "best collection rate ever for BHCC" "this additional CT income means that Social Services expenditure can be protected" "in addition to the improved CT collection for 2013-14 we (the Green Party) have also managed to make substantial inroads into the £16.5m+ accumulated arrears from previous years" "indications are that the Greens financial management will result in a freeze in Council Tax for 2015-16"[/p][/quote]So, now you admit to making up the business about public assurances. Very sad. HJarrs
  • Score: -6

12:02pm Thu 29 May 14

HJarrs says...

pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
pachallis wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public.
Look what happened.
Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too.
That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public.
He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling.
Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.
The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council.

HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.
Don't forget HJarrs won't admit to being the paid public face of the green party.

He will only admit to being a fanboy, who switched allegiance from Labour to Greens - which says a lot about the calibre of the 'activist' supporters that the Green Party attracts and the lack of any professional public relations capabilities.

HJarrs is very adept at insults; at spreading misinformation, and using various online documents as basis for his claims but when you look at them do not support him at all.

Hence his claims about the UN not approving fracking; his claim about the Green Party supporting a referendum on EU membership, his claim about the Green Party being focussed on the environment. his claim about the usage of the Lewes Road and Old Shoreham Road cycle lanes all turn out to be false.

You just cannot trust a single word that HJarrs posts!

Like Eugenius, Green fanbois are very 'economical with the truth' when it comes to facts about the Green Party (or themselves) and only to blame everyone else for the Green Parties failings.

The good news is that HJarrs apparently has a job (luck employer!) and should, by now, have disappeared off to what he calls 'fiddling with his cursor'. He will probably be back at about 1900hrs to carry on the pro-green bilge production line.

He just doesn't understand that he could actually help the Green Party by keeping quiet and letting the moanaraty (as he calls them) get bored and stop posting.

But as the saying goes, who needs enemies when you have friends like HJarrs!

Remember this article was about the green-'led' council being unable to get funding for developments for the Royal Pavilion.
Let's be honest Patchy. You are obsessed with me.

Quite touching really.
Well - obsessed like one would be with a painful boil on the *rse! It will be great when you get lanced.

Always only too pleased to highlight your numerous inadequacies and failings. Are you having a day off work today?
Patchy, thought you would be interested in this...

"Climate mitigation consistent with the Cancun Agreement requires a reduction of emissions rates below that of NGCC plants by the middle of this century (Figure 7.7, Section 7.8.2 and Figure 7.9, Section 7.11), but natural gas may play a role as a transition fuel in combination with variable renewable sources (Levi, 2013)."

IPCC, Working Group III, Mitigation of Climate Change, Chapter 7, Energy Systems.

Hardly a UN strategy for fracking.
[quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public. Look what happened. Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too. That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public. He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling. Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.[/p][/quote]The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council. HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.[/p][/quote]Don't forget HJarrs won't admit to being the paid public face of the green party. He will only admit to being a fanboy, who switched allegiance from Labour to Greens - which says a lot about the calibre of the 'activist' supporters that the Green Party attracts and the lack of any professional public relations capabilities. HJarrs is very adept at insults; at spreading misinformation, and using various online documents as basis for his claims but when you look at them do not support him at all. Hence his claims about the UN not approving fracking; his claim about the Green Party supporting a referendum on EU membership, his claim about the Green Party being focussed on the environment. his claim about the usage of the Lewes Road and Old Shoreham Road cycle lanes all turn out to be false. You just cannot trust a single word that HJarrs posts! Like Eugenius, Green fanbois are very 'economical with the truth' when it comes to facts about the Green Party (or themselves) and only to blame everyone else for the Green Parties failings. The good news is that HJarrs apparently has a job (luck employer!) and should, by now, have disappeared off to what he calls 'fiddling with his cursor'. He will probably be back at about 1900hrs to carry on the pro-green bilge production line. He just doesn't understand that he could actually help the Green Party by keeping quiet and letting the moanaraty (as he calls them) get bored and stop posting. But as the saying goes, who needs enemies when you have friends like HJarrs! Remember this article was about the green-'led' council being unable to get funding for developments for the Royal Pavilion.[/p][/quote]Let's be honest Patchy. You are obsessed with me. Quite touching really.[/p][/quote]Well - obsessed like one would be with a painful boil on the *rse! It will be great when you get lanced. Always only too pleased to highlight your numerous inadequacies and failings. Are you having a day off work today?[/p][/quote]Patchy, thought you would be interested in this... "Climate mitigation consistent with the Cancun Agreement requires a reduction of emissions rates below that of NGCC plants by the middle of this century (Figure 7.7, Section 7.8.2 and Figure 7.9, Section 7.11), but natural gas may play a role as a transition fuel in combination with variable renewable sources (Levi, 2013)." IPCC, Working Group III, Mitigation of Climate Change, Chapter 7, Energy Systems. Hardly a UN strategy for fracking. HJarrs
  • Score: 0

12:21pm Thu 29 May 14

Thay Qon U says...

HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public.
Look what happened.
Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too.
That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public.
He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling.
Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.
The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council.

HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.
Sorry, no such public assurances given and how could I? I am in no position to affect council tax one way or the other. But don't let that stop you making things up.
Sorry I was trying to put you in the frame for the imminent plaudits once the "above target" Council Tax collection figures are eventually published.

HJ don't hide your light under that bush get your press release out before JK & Huge-egotist take all of the credit on this inevitable good news story (here's a link to a template to help get you started http://www.wikihow.c


om/Write-a-Press-Rel


ease ) ........here are some possible bullet points:- "best collection rate ever for BHCC" "this additional CT income means that Social Services expenditure can be protected" "in addition to the improved CT collection for 2013-14 we (the Green Party) have also managed to make substantial inroads into the £16.5m+ accumulated arrears from previous years" "indications are that the Greens financial management will result in a freeze in Council Tax for 2015-16"
So, now you admit to making up the business about public assurances. Very sad.
Yes apologies it was your doppleganger Eugenius.

Here's a C&P of the earlier thread from early Feb 2014:-

Eugenius wrote:
Council tax collection is ahead of where it was at in 2009/10 under the last administration, who also set a less ambitious target for themselves. As you well know that's a cumulative percentage so 84% isn't bad for December with 3 months to the end of the financial year.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public. Look what happened. Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too. That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public. He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling. Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.[/p][/quote]The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council. HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.[/p][/quote]Sorry, no such public assurances given and how could I? I am in no position to affect council tax one way or the other. But don't let that stop you making things up.[/p][/quote]Sorry I was trying to put you in the frame for the imminent plaudits once the "above target" Council Tax collection figures are eventually published. HJ don't hide your light under that bush get your press release out before JK & Huge-egotist take all of the credit on this inevitable good news story (here's a link to a template to help get you started http://www.wikihow.c om/Write-a-Press-Rel ease ) ........here are some possible bullet points:- "best collection rate ever for BHCC" "this additional CT income means that Social Services expenditure can be protected" "in addition to the improved CT collection for 2013-14 we (the Green Party) have also managed to make substantial inroads into the £16.5m+ accumulated arrears from previous years" "indications are that the Greens financial management will result in a freeze in Council Tax for 2015-16"[/p][/quote]So, now you admit to making up the business about public assurances. Very sad.[/p][/quote]Yes apologies it was your doppleganger Eugenius. Here's a C&P of the earlier thread from early Feb 2014:- Eugenius wrote: Council tax collection is ahead of where it was at in 2009/10 under the last administration, who also set a less ambitious target for themselves. As you well know that's a cumulative percentage so 84% isn't bad for December with 3 months to the end of the financial year. Thay Qon U
  • Score: 0

12:28pm Thu 29 May 14

HJarrs says...

Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public.
Look what happened.
Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too.
That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public.
He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling.
Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.
The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council.

HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.
Sorry, no such public assurances given and how could I? I am in no position to affect council tax one way or the other. But don't let that stop you making things up.
Sorry I was trying to put you in the frame for the imminent plaudits once the "above target" Council Tax collection figures are eventually published.

HJ don't hide your light under that bush get your press release out before JK & Huge-egotist take all of the credit on this inevitable good news story (here's a link to a template to help get you started http://www.wikihow.c



om/Write-a-Press-Rel



ease ) ........here are some possible bullet points:- "best collection rate ever for BHCC" "this additional CT income means that Social Services expenditure can be protected" "in addition to the improved CT collection for 2013-14 we (the Green Party) have also managed to make substantial inroads into the £16.5m+ accumulated arrears from previous years" "indications are that the Greens financial management will result in a freeze in Council Tax for 2015-16"
So, now you admit to making up the business about public assurances. Very sad.
Yes apologies it was your doppleganger Eugenius.

Here's a C&P of the earlier thread from early Feb 2014:-

Eugenius wrote:
Council tax collection is ahead of where it was at in 2009/10 under the last administration, who also set a less ambitious target for themselves. As you well know that's a cumulative percentage so 84% isn't bad for December with 3 months to the end of the financial year.
Apology accepted.
[quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public. Look what happened. Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too. That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public. He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling. Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.[/p][/quote]The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council. HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.[/p][/quote]Sorry, no such public assurances given and how could I? I am in no position to affect council tax one way or the other. But don't let that stop you making things up.[/p][/quote]Sorry I was trying to put you in the frame for the imminent plaudits once the "above target" Council Tax collection figures are eventually published. HJ don't hide your light under that bush get your press release out before JK & Huge-egotist take all of the credit on this inevitable good news story (here's a link to a template to help get you started http://www.wikihow.c om/Write-a-Press-Rel ease ) ........here are some possible bullet points:- "best collection rate ever for BHCC" "this additional CT income means that Social Services expenditure can be protected" "in addition to the improved CT collection for 2013-14 we (the Green Party) have also managed to make substantial inroads into the £16.5m+ accumulated arrears from previous years" "indications are that the Greens financial management will result in a freeze in Council Tax for 2015-16"[/p][/quote]So, now you admit to making up the business about public assurances. Very sad.[/p][/quote]Yes apologies it was your doppleganger Eugenius. Here's a C&P of the earlier thread from early Feb 2014:- Eugenius wrote: Council tax collection is ahead of where it was at in 2009/10 under the last administration, who also set a less ambitious target for themselves. As you well know that's a cumulative percentage so 84% isn't bad for December with 3 months to the end of the financial year.[/p][/quote]Apology accepted. HJarrs
  • Score: -2

12:35pm Thu 29 May 14

pachallis says...

HJarrs wrote:
pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
pachallis wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public.
Look what happened.
Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too.
That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public.
He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling.
Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.
The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council.

HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.
Don't forget HJarrs won't admit to being the paid public face of the green party.

He will only admit to being a fanboy, who switched allegiance from Labour to Greens - which says a lot about the calibre of the 'activist' supporters that the Green Party attracts and the lack of any professional public relations capabilities.

HJarrs is very adept at insults; at spreading misinformation, and using various online documents as basis for his claims but when you look at them do not support him at all.

Hence his claims about the UN not approving fracking; his claim about the Green Party supporting a referendum on EU membership, his claim about the Green Party being focussed on the environment. his claim about the usage of the Lewes Road and Old Shoreham Road cycle lanes all turn out to be false.

You just cannot trust a single word that HJarrs posts!

Like Eugenius, Green fanbois are very 'economical with the truth' when it comes to facts about the Green Party (or themselves) and only to blame everyone else for the Green Parties failings.

The good news is that HJarrs apparently has a job (luck employer!) and should, by now, have disappeared off to what he calls 'fiddling with his cursor'. He will probably be back at about 1900hrs to carry on the pro-green bilge production line.

He just doesn't understand that he could actually help the Green Party by keeping quiet and letting the moanaraty (as he calls them) get bored and stop posting.

But as the saying goes, who needs enemies when you have friends like HJarrs!

Remember this article was about the green-'led' council being unable to get funding for developments for the Royal Pavilion.
Let's be honest Patchy. You are obsessed with me.

Quite touching really.
Well - obsessed like one would be with a painful boil on the *rse! It will be great when you get lanced.

Always only too pleased to highlight your numerous inadequacies and failings. Are you having a day off work today?
Patchy, thought you would be interested in this...

"Climate mitigation consistent with the Cancun Agreement requires a reduction of emissions rates below that of NGCC plants by the middle of this century (Figure 7.7, Section 7.8.2 and Figure 7.9, Section 7.11), but natural gas may play a role as a transition fuel in combination with variable renewable sources (Levi, 2013)."

IPCC, Working Group III, Mitigation of Climate Change, Chapter 7, Energy Systems.

Hardly a UN strategy for fracking.
I agree it is not a UN strategy FOR fracking, but confirmation that fracking can play a role in mitigating emissions whilst we migrate to sustainable by switching to methane. If fracking is done safely then what is the problem?

Not the simplistic green party view of 'No Fracking' and 'Fracking damages the environment'!

Now get back to work you slacker!
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Insulting the public or opposition is the last resort of a politician on the back foot. Mr Cameron tried doing it when it looked like UKIP were surging ahead and it just enraged the public further due to his arrogance and refusal to listen to the public. Look what happened. Ignore HJarrs, he devoted his life to Labour, got disillusioned and moved to the Greens only to find they are loathed too. That's damaging to a man's ego who when you keep making judgements of error, hence the anger and insults to the public. He should be angry with a own party, as all external targets set for councils have been failed by the Green council from council tax collection to recycling. Ignore the PR claims, the public aren't as stupid as they arrogantly believe.[/p][/quote]The reference to The Green Council failing to hit the target for Council Tax is a bit premature as despite the full year target for 31st March 2014 being some 2 months ago the percentage achieved against the (reduced from previous years, presumably to account for the impacts of the Welfare Benefits changes)target figures have still not been published on the BHCC web-site- so much for Jason Kitcat's & Penny Thompson's claims about BHCC being an Open Data 'beacon' council. HJarrs made public assurances in an Argus comment response in January that, despite the December target not being met, all would be well by year-end, so let's hold judgement until the figures have been published.[/p][/quote]Don't forget HJarrs won't admit to being the paid public face of the green party. He will only admit to being a fanboy, who switched allegiance from Labour to Greens - which says a lot about the calibre of the 'activist' supporters that the Green Party attracts and the lack of any professional public relations capabilities. HJarrs is very adept at insults; at spreading misinformation, and using various online documents as basis for his claims but when you look at them do not support him at all. Hence his claims about the UN not approving fracking; his claim about the Green Party supporting a referendum on EU membership, his claim about the Green Party being focussed on the environment. his claim about the usage of the Lewes Road and Old Shoreham Road cycle lanes all turn out to be false. You just cannot trust a single word that HJarrs posts! Like Eugenius, Green fanbois are very 'economical with the truth' when it comes to facts about the Green Party (or themselves) and only to blame everyone else for the Green Parties failings. The good news is that HJarrs apparently has a job (luck employer!) and should, by now, have disappeared off to what he calls 'fiddling with his cursor'. He will probably be back at about 1900hrs to carry on the pro-green bilge production line. He just doesn't understand that he could actually help the Green Party by keeping quiet and letting the moanaraty (as he calls them) get bored and stop posting. But as the saying goes, who needs enemies when you have friends like HJarrs! Remember this article was about the green-'led' council being unable to get funding for developments for the Royal Pavilion.[/p][/quote]Let's be honest Patchy. You are obsessed with me. Quite touching really.[/p][/quote]Well - obsessed like one would be with a painful boil on the *rse! It will be great when you get lanced. Always only too pleased to highlight your numerous inadequacies and failings. Are you having a day off work today?[/p][/quote]Patchy, thought you would be interested in this... "Climate mitigation consistent with the Cancun Agreement requires a reduction of emissions rates below that of NGCC plants by the middle of this century (Figure 7.7, Section 7.8.2 and Figure 7.9, Section 7.11), but natural gas may play a role as a transition fuel in combination with variable renewable sources (Levi, 2013)." IPCC, Working Group III, Mitigation of Climate Change, Chapter 7, Energy Systems. Hardly a UN strategy for fracking.[/p][/quote]I agree it is not a UN strategy FOR fracking, but confirmation that fracking can play a role in mitigating emissions whilst we migrate to sustainable by switching to methane. If fracking is done safely then what is the problem? Not the simplistic green party view of 'No Fracking' and 'Fracking damages the environment'! Now get back to work you slacker! pachallis
  • Score: 1

12:59pm Thu 29 May 14

Fairfax Aches says...

for pity's sake will you two just get a room and end all this repressed hom-erotic tension once and for all!
for pity's sake will you two just get a room and end all this repressed hom-erotic tension once and for all! Fairfax Aches
  • Score: 1

1:22pm Thu 29 May 14

pachallis says...

Fairfax Aches wrote:
for pity's sake will you two just get a room and end all this repressed hom-erotic tension once and for all!
Only problem is that I might not be able to stop myself from putting him out of his left-wing green-inspired misery for good!

It's a bit like the scene from the Pink Panther when Dreyfus imagines he is strangling Clouseau.

That's it - I'll have to start calling him Clouseau!
[quote][p][bold]Fairfax Aches[/bold] wrote: for pity's sake will you two just get a room and end all this repressed hom-erotic tension once and for all![/p][/quote]Only problem is that I might not be able to stop myself from putting him out of his left-wing green-inspired misery for good! It's a bit like the scene from the Pink Panther when Dreyfus imagines he is strangling Clouseau. That's it - I'll have to start calling him Clouseau! pachallis
  • Score: 1

1:39pm Thu 29 May 14

brighton bluenose says...

pachallis wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
hoveguyactually wrote:
Martin999 wrote:
Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.
.....and a site for travellers and asylum seekers.
Really well thought out post that one......of course the travellers are a Green problem, were never here before them and will burger off if the Greens get voted out won't they?! And as for the 'asylum seekers' (code for immigrants) that you seem so concerned about it was Labour and now the Tories who have let in millions so you would have to be rather thick to blame the Greens for anything to do with asylum-seekers!!
@brighton bluenose - of course the problem with 'travellers' is not new.

What is new with the greens is that in 2012 they produced the 'Traveller Commissioning Strategy' - a 92 page document describing who travellers are; their health, wellbeing and education needs; and a section on why residents concerns are unfounded, and a strategy for supporting travellers - all allegedly based upon National and 'Local' policies. I say 'Local' as this is based upon the Greens pre-occupation on supported minorities and st*ffing majorities.

This is the document that includes the infamous 'Impact Assessment' that must be followed before travellers are evicted.:

Where Travellers park on public land, the Police and Traveller
Liaison Service make joint visits to carry out a Community
Impact Assessment of the encampment upon the local area
(community use of the site, biodiversity, historic significance
etc) and carry out welfare checks with the Travellers.

Also any rubbish and fly-tipping from the traveller community is stated as being minimal compared to that of the entire population of Brighton & Hove So I guess about 100 travellers produce similar fly-tipping to over 250,000 residents - so it is not a problem!

So, yes - travellers are not a new problem - it has just been made significantly worse by the Greens and their policy of appeasing minority groups.

For full details of the B&HCC policy see http://www.brighton-

hove.gov.uk/content/

housing/travellers/b

righton-hoves-travel

ler-strategy
P'S - 1. I would have thought it pretty obvious that waste and fly-tipping is minimal compared to the overall population of B+How and the immediate area so I don't understand your point as you seem to be in agreement with the council;
2.It is surely common-sense that the council should have an actual policy on this recurring issue?!
[quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hoveguyactually[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martin999[/bold] wrote: Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.[/p][/quote].....and a site for travellers and asylum seekers.[/p][/quote]Really well thought out post that one......of course the travellers are a Green problem, were never here before them and will burger off if the Greens get voted out won't they?! And as for the 'asylum seekers' (code for immigrants) that you seem so concerned about it was Labour and now the Tories who have let in millions so you would have to be rather thick to blame the Greens for anything to do with asylum-seekers!![/p][/quote]@brighton bluenose - of course the problem with 'travellers' is not new. What is new with the greens is that in 2012 they produced the 'Traveller Commissioning Strategy' - a 92 page document describing who travellers are; their health, wellbeing and education needs; and a section on why residents concerns are unfounded, and a strategy for supporting travellers - all allegedly based upon National and 'Local' policies. I say 'Local' as this is based upon the Greens pre-occupation on supported minorities and st*ffing majorities. This is the document that includes the infamous 'Impact Assessment' that must be followed before travellers are evicted.: Where Travellers park on public land, the Police and Traveller Liaison Service make joint visits to carry out a Community Impact Assessment of the encampment upon the local area (community use of the site, biodiversity, historic significance etc) and carry out welfare checks with the Travellers. Also any rubbish and fly-tipping from the traveller community is stated as being minimal compared to that of the entire population of Brighton & Hove So I guess about 100 travellers produce similar fly-tipping to over 250,000 residents - so it is not a problem! So, yes - travellers are not a new problem - it has just been made significantly worse by the Greens and their policy of appeasing minority groups. For full details of the B&HCC policy see http://www.brighton- hove.gov.uk/content/ housing/travellers/b righton-hoves-travel ler-strategy[/p][/quote]P'S - 1. I would have thought it pretty obvious that waste and fly-tipping is minimal compared to the overall population of B+How and the immediate area so I don't understand your point as you seem to be in agreement with the council; 2.It is surely common-sense that the council should have an actual policy on this recurring issue?! brighton bluenose
  • Score: 0

1:39pm Thu 29 May 14

PorkyChopper says...

HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
And don't forget that the Lewes Road cycle lane already existed and the only change could have been done for a few thousand quid by a simple traffic order change closing the inside lane for bus use only.
Instead the contractors burned all the white lines off the road damaging the surface which is now breaking up where the old lines were and then the Greens claimed in their PR they had created a cycle route. They hadn't, it had been there for years,
Wasted money, poorly executed project, false claims by councillors bulking up their CVs with ****.
I suppose the changes don't float the boat of my moanerati friends. Too old to change and too set in their ways if they could.

Lewes Rd was hardly an attractive route, one part so poor a coroner considered it played a part in the death of a young woman cycling.

Since the Lewes Rd cycle and bus routes have been completed, bus and cycle ridership are up. We have the forthcoming improvements to the Vogue Gyratory that will make traversing it that bit safer for cyclists in particular. That should encourage more on their bikes. Good news I am sure you will all agree.

I have no doubt that the new facilities have helped reduce the need for parking on the, soon to be built, Preston Barracks development.

All this an has hardly cost the council tax payer a penny as the council has been so good at getting grant money (even the NHS put up money!) and I recall £400k from B&H buses. A small win for us 40% of householders without a car and those that do own cars that at not so myopic to see them as the only solution.
The frightening thing is, you actually believe their propaganda.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: And don't forget that the Lewes Road cycle lane already existed and the only change could have been done for a few thousand quid by a simple traffic order change closing the inside lane for bus use only. Instead the contractors burned all the white lines off the road damaging the surface which is now breaking up where the old lines were and then the Greens claimed in their PR they had created a cycle route. They hadn't, it had been there for years, Wasted money, poorly executed project, false claims by councillors bulking up their CVs with ****.[/p][/quote]I suppose the changes don't float the boat of my moanerati friends. Too old to change and too set in their ways if they could. Lewes Rd was hardly an attractive route, one part so poor a coroner considered it played a part in the death of a young woman cycling. Since the Lewes Rd cycle and bus routes have been completed, bus and cycle ridership are up. We have the forthcoming improvements to the Vogue Gyratory that will make traversing it that bit safer for cyclists in particular. That should encourage more on their bikes. Good news I am sure you will all agree. I have no doubt that the new facilities have helped reduce the need for parking on the, soon to be built, Preston Barracks development. All this an has hardly cost the council tax payer a penny as the council has been so good at getting grant money (even the NHS put up money!) and I recall £400k from B&H buses. A small win for us 40% of householders without a car and those that do own cars that at not so myopic to see them as the only solution.[/p][/quote]The frightening thing is, you actually believe their propaganda. PorkyChopper
  • Score: 1

1:49pm Thu 29 May 14

pachallis says...

brighton bluenose wrote:
pachallis wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
hoveguyactually wrote:
Martin999 wrote:
Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.
.....and a site for travellers and asylum seekers.
Really well thought out post that one......of course the travellers are a Green problem, were never here before them and will burger off if the Greens get voted out won't they?! And as for the 'asylum seekers' (code for immigrants) that you seem so concerned about it was Labour and now the Tories who have let in millions so you would have to be rather thick to blame the Greens for anything to do with asylum-seekers!!
@brighton bluenose - of course the problem with 'travellers' is not new.

What is new with the greens is that in 2012 they produced the 'Traveller Commissioning Strategy' - a 92 page document describing who travellers are; their health, wellbeing and education needs; and a section on why residents concerns are unfounded, and a strategy for supporting travellers - all allegedly based upon National and 'Local' policies. I say 'Local' as this is based upon the Greens pre-occupation on supported minorities and st*ffing majorities.

This is the document that includes the infamous 'Impact Assessment' that must be followed before travellers are evicted.:

Where Travellers park on public land, the Police and Traveller
Liaison Service make joint visits to carry out a Community
Impact Assessment of the encampment upon the local area
(community use of the site, biodiversity, historic significance
etc) and carry out welfare checks with the Travellers.

Also any rubbish and fly-tipping from the traveller community is stated as being minimal compared to that of the entire population of Brighton & Hove So I guess about 100 travellers produce similar fly-tipping to over 250,000 residents - so it is not a problem!

So, yes - travellers are not a new problem - it has just been made significantly worse by the Greens and their policy of appeasing minority groups.

For full details of the B&HCC policy see http://www.brighton-


hove.gov.uk/content/


housing/travellers/b


righton-hoves-travel


ler-strategy
P'S - 1. I would have thought it pretty obvious that waste and fly-tipping is minimal compared to the overall population of B+How and the immediate area so I don't understand your point as you seem to be in agreement with the council;
2.It is surely common-sense that the council should have an actual policy on this recurring issue?!
My point about leaving rubbish and fly-tipping is that on a per-capita basis the travellers are probably a lot worse than the average resident.

And having a policy is a great idea - but it doesn't mean that is necessarily to the benefit of the residents; and especially if it turns Brighton & Hove into a magnet for every possible traveller - not 'New Age' or other's looking to have a cheap holiday by the seaside by claiming to be 'travellers'.

The policy document does clearly state that these other groups are not covered by the policy and so, should, be evicted from public land immediately.
[quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hoveguyactually[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martin999[/bold] wrote: Breaking news........funding rejected so the Green Party are going to flatten it and replace it with a cycle path and skate board park.[/p][/quote].....and a site for travellers and asylum seekers.[/p][/quote]Really well thought out post that one......of course the travellers are a Green problem, were never here before them and will burger off if the Greens get voted out won't they?! And as for the 'asylum seekers' (code for immigrants) that you seem so concerned about it was Labour and now the Tories who have let in millions so you would have to be rather thick to blame the Greens for anything to do with asylum-seekers!![/p][/quote]@brighton bluenose - of course the problem with 'travellers' is not new. What is new with the greens is that in 2012 they produced the 'Traveller Commissioning Strategy' - a 92 page document describing who travellers are; their health, wellbeing and education needs; and a section on why residents concerns are unfounded, and a strategy for supporting travellers - all allegedly based upon National and 'Local' policies. I say 'Local' as this is based upon the Greens pre-occupation on supported minorities and st*ffing majorities. This is the document that includes the infamous 'Impact Assessment' that must be followed before travellers are evicted.: Where Travellers park on public land, the Police and Traveller Liaison Service make joint visits to carry out a Community Impact Assessment of the encampment upon the local area (community use of the site, biodiversity, historic significance etc) and carry out welfare checks with the Travellers. Also any rubbish and fly-tipping from the traveller community is stated as being minimal compared to that of the entire population of Brighton & Hove So I guess about 100 travellers produce similar fly-tipping to over 250,000 residents - so it is not a problem! So, yes - travellers are not a new problem - it has just been made significantly worse by the Greens and their policy of appeasing minority groups. For full details of the B&HCC policy see http://www.brighton- hove.gov.uk/content/ housing/travellers/b righton-hoves-travel ler-strategy[/p][/quote]P'S - 1. I would have thought it pretty obvious that waste and fly-tipping is minimal compared to the overall population of B+How and the immediate area so I don't understand your point as you seem to be in agreement with the council; 2.It is surely common-sense that the council should have an actual policy on this recurring issue?![/p][/quote]My point about leaving rubbish and fly-tipping is that on a per-capita basis the travellers are probably a lot worse than the average resident. And having a policy is a great idea - but it doesn't mean that is necessarily to the benefit of the residents; and especially if it turns Brighton & Hove into a magnet for every possible traveller - not 'New Age' or other's looking to have a cheap holiday by the seaside by claiming to be 'travellers'. The policy document does clearly state that these other groups are not covered by the policy and so, should, be evicted from public land immediately. pachallis
  • Score: 0

2:01pm Thu 29 May 14

PorkyChopper says...

hoveguyactually wrote:
"Increasing cycling and bus use in the city is progressing very well Let's hope funding can be found to complete Victoria Gardens, which will link Lewes Rd, Edward St and Sea Front."

And that, of course, is the problem. The encouragement for more cyclists by the council has added chaos to the city. They are becoming like a plague wherever you go, whether as a motorist or a pedestrian. Let us hope the Greens will get kicked out before they can do any more damage.
I have lived in Brighton all my life but have never known a more smug, wasteful and harmful council.
Before long, we will have our very own version of that buffoon in London. "Trafficdroid" The one who surrounds himself with cameras and aggressively confronts car and bus drivers, and fellow cyclists. He dresses all in black and deliberately rides slap bang in the middle of the road, inconveniencing other road users, then starts haranguing them when they come within a metre of him. He's a right prat. https://www.youtube.
com/user/Sonofthewin
dsInc/videos
[quote][p][bold]hoveguyactually[/bold] wrote: "Increasing cycling and bus use in the city is progressing very well Let's hope funding can be found to complete Victoria Gardens, which will link Lewes Rd, Edward St and Sea Front." And that, of course, is the problem. The encouragement for more cyclists by the council has added chaos to the city. They are becoming like a plague wherever you go, whether as a motorist or a pedestrian. Let us hope the Greens will get kicked out before they can do any more damage. I have lived in Brighton all my life but have never known a more smug, wasteful and harmful council.[/p][/quote]Before long, we will have our very own version of that buffoon in London. "Trafficdroid" The one who surrounds himself with cameras and aggressively confronts car and bus drivers, and fellow cyclists. He dresses all in black and deliberately rides slap bang in the middle of the road, inconveniencing other road users, then starts haranguing them when they come within a metre of him. He's a right prat. https://www.youtube. com/user/Sonofthewin dsInc/videos PorkyChopper
  • Score: 3

2:02pm Thu 29 May 14

PorkyChopper says...

Fairfax Aches wrote:
for pity's sake will you two just get a room and end all this repressed hom-erotic tension once and for all!
Turn the ice cold hoses on them!
[quote][p][bold]Fairfax Aches[/bold] wrote: for pity's sake will you two just get a room and end all this repressed hom-erotic tension once and for all![/p][/quote]Turn the ice cold hoses on them! PorkyChopper
  • Score: 5

10:40am Fri 30 May 14

ken standing says...

The plans for the Pavilion estate were largely to get more revenue out of it .... inserting restaurants and cafes and 'retail opportunities' at several locations ..... they did not improve its historical presentation - in fact damaged it with modernistic changes.

The threat to 'close down' parts of it sounds like shroud waving. Why can't it tick over as it is? It is the biggest 'heritage' draw to Brighton so it would be very counter-productive to restrict access in any way.
The plans for the Pavilion estate were largely to get more revenue out of it .... inserting restaurants and cafes and 'retail opportunities' at several locations ..... they did not improve its historical presentation - in fact damaged it with modernistic changes. The threat to 'close down' parts of it sounds like shroud waving. Why can't it tick over as it is? It is the biggest 'heritage' draw to Brighton so it would be very counter-productive to restrict access in any way. ken standing
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree