'Controversial' Kidderminster Library gallery move given go-ahead (From Kidderminster Shuttle)
Get involved! Send your photos, video, news & views by texting KS NEWS to 80360 or e-mail us
'Controversial' Kidderminster Library gallery move given go-ahead
11:15am Friday 28th September 2012 in News
By William Tomaney
KIDDERMINSTER Library’s top-floor gallery and meeting rooms will be moved to make way for offices with the piano moved to the town hall.
Worcestershire County Council has given the go-ahead to the controversial option which will see the new offices for social services staff occupy the top floor.
The library gallery will be relocated to the first floor which is home to the main library and the Steinway grand piano will be moved to Kidderminster Town Hall.
Kidderminster Gallery Friends, who met with county council staff yesterday to discuss the proposals, had previously said the option was “completely unacceptable” to gallery users and local art and music groups.
The county council claims the selected option was supported by 65 per cent of the 82 consultation respondents - 53 people - over the other option which would have seen a smaller gallery remain on the top floor in its current purpose-built position.
Howard Martin , friends member, said the council, however, had ignored 600 people who signed a petition to keep the gallery as it is.
Council officers say if the change of use plans win planning permission it could save the authority £206,000 per year. The plans are part of the library and learning service's bid to save £1.8 million from its budget over three years.
Steve Wilson, county council arts officer, said: “Having a higher profile designated space should give the gallery more of a focus than previously and I look forward to seeing exhibitions there in the future.”
Conservative councillor John Campion , cabinet member with responsibility for libraries and learning service, said: “We understand this has been a controversial issue but we have listened to everyone’s concerns.
“Its been heartening so many people have come out and displayed their passion for their local library and gallery.
“I am grateful to everyone who attended the engagement sessions and expressed their views and I’m even more pleased we have been able to agree a proposal the majority of respondents supported.”
Comments(91)
HowardM
says...
12:08pm Fri 28 Sep 12
I think the comments of the County Council Arts Officer demonstrates he doesnt have a clue what the issues are on this matter! If he wants to contact the Friends, we will brief him.
Neville Farmer
says...
3:26pm Fri 28 Sep 12
John Campion's comments are dishonest, insulting and patronising.
Last night he triumphantly tweeted "#ourday" and "time for a beer" on having beaten back the 600 petitioners who didn't want to see the hundreds of thousands of pounds of lottery money invested in the gallery squandered.
He attacked decent campaigners for not wanting change. A snide and dishonest comment.
We all understand the need for change. What we don't want was his kind of cultureless, visionless change. The sort of change that has ripped the heart out of a community.
As I warned the Friends of Kidderminster Gallery last week, his faked consultation used the classic ploy of a councillor for whom defeating others is paramount - offer two equally unacceptable options and then suggest that the few people who made a choice represent all those hundreds who couldn't sign up to either. At the same time, he deliberately tried to drive a wedge between library users and gallery users as though they were different people.
He must be feeling very smug at having defeated the people of Kidderminster in his grand plan to wreck this town. What will it take for the good Conservative party members of Wyre Forest to be a little more choosy about the candidate they vote for. Contrary to John Paul's comments, the rest of us are desperate for change.
Last night he triumphantly tweeted "#ourday" and "time for a beer" on having beaten back the 600 petitioners who didn't want to see the hundreds of thousands of pounds of lottery money invested in the gallery squandered.
He attacked decent campaigners for not wanting change. A snide and dishonest comment.
We all understand the need for change. What we don't want was his kind of cultureless, visionless change. The sort of change that has ripped the heart out of a community.
As I warned the Friends of Kidderminster Gallery last week, his faked consultation used the classic ploy of a councillor for whom defeating others is paramount - offer two equally unacceptable options and then suggest that the few people who made a choice represent all those hundreds who couldn't sign up to either. At the same time, he deliberately tried to drive a wedge between library users and gallery users as though they were different people.
He must be feeling very smug at having defeated the people of Kidderminster in his grand plan to wreck this town. What will it take for the good Conservative party members of Wyre Forest to be a little more choosy about the candidate they vote for. Contrary to John Paul's comments, the rest of us are desperate for change.
Frank Owen
says...
3:34pm Fri 28 Sep 12
Why is anyone surprised?
Both the District Council and the County Council have a fine history of completely ignoring the wishes of the public and doing whatever they want.
Both the District Council and the County Council have a fine history of completely ignoring the wishes of the public and doing whatever they want.
Stephen Brown
says...
4:03pm Fri 28 Sep 12
It's a disgraceful decision and an insult to the people of Wyre Forest and the arts community.
There were alternatives that would still, in the view of the Friends, have realised savings and kept the Gallery in the current location albeit changed. We were prepared to compromise but if you believe what the council claim, they have listened, we have not, and we are against change and not prepared to compromise.
Well what have we ended up with? We are back where we are in May and the council claimed they have listened - what an absolute joke!
It's the council that needs to change - they are the paid and elected servants of us, it is not the other way round, and I hope people remember that at next year's council elections.
Folks you have council leaders (John Campion) who think it is acceptable to go on twitter and gloat and bleat about their victory like this is some kind of game to them. This is the type of person we have elected to represent us.
Except it is not a game - this is actually about public facilities, funded by us the taxpayers being abused by those in authority and them wrecking them and people's lives with it. There are groups who use the gallery that have spent years doing what they do, building up an audience and international standing which at the stroke of a pen and smug smile from some in the council has all gone.
The Friends are determined to carry on the fight. This is NOT over by a long way!
There were alternatives that would still, in the view of the Friends, have realised savings and kept the Gallery in the current location albeit changed. We were prepared to compromise but if you believe what the council claim, they have listened, we have not, and we are against change and not prepared to compromise.
Well what have we ended up with? We are back where we are in May and the council claimed they have listened - what an absolute joke!
It's the council that needs to change - they are the paid and elected servants of us, it is not the other way round, and I hope people remember that at next year's council elections.
Folks you have council leaders (John Campion) who think it is acceptable to go on twitter and gloat and bleat about their victory like this is some kind of game to them. This is the type of person we have elected to represent us.
Except it is not a game - this is actually about public facilities, funded by us the taxpayers being abused by those in authority and them wrecking them and people's lives with it. There are groups who use the gallery that have spent years doing what they do, building up an audience and international standing which at the stroke of a pen and smug smile from some in the council has all gone.
The Friends are determined to carry on the fight. This is NOT over by a long way!
FranOb
says...
4:04pm Fri 28 Sep 12
I doubt they can make the Corn Exchange suitable for such a valuable piano.
This will be opposed at County Council!
This will be opposed at County Council!
Neville Farmer
says...
4:50pm Fri 28 Sep 12
Just the quality of the air in the corn exchange will affect the piano but add in the fact that the acoustics are pretty poor and you have a real problem.
Just a couple of weeks ago, the boy Campion wrote that there were no proposals to move the piano, which means either they hadn't considered this important matter or he was lying. I leave it to others to decide which, though either demonstrates incompetence and contempt for music, for culture and for his constituents.
Just a couple of weeks ago, the boy Campion wrote that there were no proposals to move the piano, which means either they hadn't considered this important matter or he was lying. I leave it to others to decide which, though either demonstrates incompetence and contempt for music, for culture and for his constituents.
John Campion
says...
5:26pm Fri 28 Sep 12
The #ourday was part of a public service twitterthon recording life in local govt, not a gloat.
It's seems Neville (liberal) and Stephen (green) are quick with the name calling in this apparently non political campaign. The County Council have to save money within the library service, and that includes Kidderminster. 1300 users a day use Kidderminster library, and their views are important. The fact remains the friends of the gallery are not willing to compromise, and so expects the rest of the library services to contribute to savings when the gallery won't.
The county council have drastically changed the proposals from the ones that were previously put forward, including a new dedicated gallery. We are and have listened, but ultimately were have to make savings so we can continue to deliver a comprehensive library service across our 21 sites.
And for the record th idea of moving the piano came from th first engagement not the library service.
It's seems Neville (liberal) and Stephen (green) are quick with the name calling in this apparently non political campaign. The County Council have to save money within the library service, and that includes Kidderminster. 1300 users a day use Kidderminster library, and their views are important. The fact remains the friends of the gallery are not willing to compromise, and so expects the rest of the library services to contribute to savings when the gallery won't.
The county council have drastically changed the proposals from the ones that were previously put forward, including a new dedicated gallery. We are and have listened, but ultimately were have to make savings so we can continue to deliver a comprehensive library service across our 21 sites.
And for the record th idea of moving the piano came from th first engagement not the library service.
Stephen Brown
says...
5:54pm Fri 28 Sep 12
Sorry John it was a gloat, you may try and defend it now but a gloat is a gloat, people see it for what it is despite what you may try and present it as now. I suggest in future that you think before posting on twitter and don't try and then hide behind some quasi political excuse and blame others for name calling to smoksecreen the issue. It really is pathetic.
The fact is the council has not engaged, not listened, and in reality we are no further on in this debate than we were in May. You may try and kid yourselves and others that you have 'listened' but by no definition in the English language as I understand it has anyone in the council 'listened'. You mistake 'listen' for 'propaganda'.
You could have still made the 'savings' you want, we were happy to talk to you about making option B work (our compromise) but the council has taken a POLITICAL decision to ignore the overwhelming weight of public opinion to save the gallery based on the views of 53 people you say you talked to in an inconsistently managed 'engagement' event'. Probably because it suits the council - especially as 'you' see this as 'winning' something political rather than 'co-operating' with the community for the common good - as your gloating tweet exposed.
The fact is the council has not engaged, not listened, and in reality we are no further on in this debate than we were in May. You may try and kid yourselves and others that you have 'listened' but by no definition in the English language as I understand it has anyone in the council 'listened'. You mistake 'listen' for 'propaganda'.
You could have still made the 'savings' you want, we were happy to talk to you about making option B work (our compromise) but the council has taken a POLITICAL decision to ignore the overwhelming weight of public opinion to save the gallery based on the views of 53 people you say you talked to in an inconsistently managed 'engagement' event'. Probably because it suits the council - especially as 'you' see this as 'winning' something political rather than 'co-operating' with the community for the common good - as your gloating tweet exposed.
John Campion
says...
6:47pm Fri 28 Sep 12
Stephen my twitter account is public and people can judge for themselves. The #ourday campaign was being run across twitter ... I certainly do not gloat, it is about what is best for the community we serve, and continuing to deliver a comprehensive library service I believe has to continue to be that priority.
Gobby Robby
says...
7:22pm Fri 28 Sep 12
I heard that when John posted 'time for a beer' the new street pastors were worried that Stephen Clee might be out on the town so wisely postponed there debut till next week ;-)
neilhar
says...
8:15pm Fri 28 Sep 12
@ John Campion "it is about what is best for the community we serve,"
Is this why, when you kicked Julian phillips from cabinet, you decided it was in the best interests of the community that you serve to install yet another Tory yes puppet in his place? Seeing as many of the community that you serve have repeatedly asked you to embrace democracy, how come you did not go for an opposing member of the chamber?.
You are a hypocrite John and a complete sham. The smug smile permanently etched across your face is smugger than the smuggest politician in the land. Jeremey Hunt.
You do nothing in the name of this community. You do it in the name of your political group. None of your protestations, sorry personal attacks, are yet to prove me wrong.
I wonder which debacle will come next.
I don't trust you Mr Campion. Not a good position for our council leader to be in is it?
Is this why, when you kicked Julian phillips from cabinet, you decided it was in the best interests of the community that you serve to install yet another Tory yes puppet in his place? Seeing as many of the community that you serve have repeatedly asked you to embrace democracy, how come you did not go for an opposing member of the chamber?.
You are a hypocrite John and a complete sham. The smug smile permanently etched across your face is smugger than the smuggest politician in the land. Jeremey Hunt.
You do nothing in the name of this community. You do it in the name of your political group. None of your protestations, sorry personal attacks, are yet to prove me wrong.
I wonder which debacle will come next.
I don't trust you Mr Campion. Not a good position for our council leader to be in is it?
Gobby Robby
says...
8:42pm Fri 28 Sep 12
Come on now Neil, nobody's smugger than Jeremy *unt. You'd have to be on a daily drip of incredibly strong LSD to reach Jeremy's permanently wild eyed manic grinning smugness ;-)
DOEPUBLIC
says...
11:21pm Fri 28 Sep 12
Sorry Mr Campion IMO you bottled it. Clearly some engagements were valued more than others. All under a promise of walking the talk. A disgrace.
John Herbert Smith
says...
12:45am Sat 29 Sep 12
I wish the whole electorate viewed this website as I think they'd soon change who they voted for!
John Herbert Smith
says...
12:46am Sat 29 Sep 12
PS: Be careful guys otherwise your comments will be axed - like in the Clee articles.
JamesHall
says...
6:40am Sat 29 Sep 12
The problem is that this once again undermines the art community.
It means that classical music concerts will not be held beyond November because Option A kills off the acoustics and controlled climate to house the piano.
The manor in which WCC has engaged the arts community all along has been awful. They have no respect for the opinion of the people who would use these spaces and whilst the Friends Group has been formed with the clear objective to enter discussions, the Council has just ploughed ahead with its plans to destroy the top floor and swept the artists aside.
This worries me because if they continue to alienate the artists in this manor how can they expect us to work with them to provide exhibitions and music.
This is just a downward spiral towards an artless town full of empty shops and a library full of offices.
It means that classical music concerts will not be held beyond November because Option A kills off the acoustics and controlled climate to house the piano.
The manor in which WCC has engaged the arts community all along has been awful. They have no respect for the opinion of the people who would use these spaces and whilst the Friends Group has been formed with the clear objective to enter discussions, the Council has just ploughed ahead with its plans to destroy the top floor and swept the artists aside.
This worries me because if they continue to alienate the artists in this manor how can they expect us to work with them to provide exhibitions and music.
This is just a downward spiral towards an artless town full of empty shops and a library full of offices.
jon cooper
says...
12:46pm Sat 29 Sep 12
This whole Gallery issue has been a sorry state of affairs from Day 1.
Whether anyone agrees or not with Worcestershire County Council's proposals to make savings of £1.8million from the county library service alone; i can assure you they were very serious about the repercussions on the other libraries throughout the county should the gallery within Kidderminster Library remain in its current location.
To put it crudely - LIBRARIES WOULD HAVE BEEN CLOSED !!!!
Bearing this in mind it begs the question as to whether it's deemed fair and acceptable to expect our neighbouring communities to sacrifice their library to enable 'The Gallery' to remain at its current home ?
Throughout the county, libraries are sadly facing cut backs: they're either being downsized or relocated to counteract WCC's quite appalling deficit. Libraries are obviously a very important frontline service that are used by many; and for ONLY this reason, i hope this particular decision will now lift pressure off the county library service as a whole !
Whether anyone agrees or not with Worcestershire County Council's proposals to make savings of £1.8million from the county library service alone; i can assure you they were very serious about the repercussions on the other libraries throughout the county should the gallery within Kidderminster Library remain in its current location.
To put it crudely - LIBRARIES WOULD HAVE BEEN CLOSED !!!!
Bearing this in mind it begs the question as to whether it's deemed fair and acceptable to expect our neighbouring communities to sacrifice their library to enable 'The Gallery' to remain at its current home ?
Throughout the county, libraries are sadly facing cut backs: they're either being downsized or relocated to counteract WCC's quite appalling deficit. Libraries are obviously a very important frontline service that are used by many; and for ONLY this reason, i hope this particular decision will now lift pressure off the county library service as a whole !
Stephen Brown
says...
2:37pm Sat 29 Sep 12
@Jon Cooper:
The Hive is sucking £1million a year out of the same budget, no talk of cutbacks there, plenty of staff too, in fact, it is ringfenced and there has been a considerable increase in spending over the old Worcester foregate street library I would well imagine.
When other communities challenged the downgrading of their own libraries in Worcestershire at no time was a threat ever made to them that it would mean closures eleswhere, yet with Kidderminster it is brandished like a weapon, and predictably it was the line taken by John Campion in our meeting with him on Thursday.
There were options on the table that would have realised the 'savings' the council requires in Kidderminster library - their own option B and one suggested by the Friends, Option C - they chose to ignore both and even refused to discuss them with us.
The savings to which they refer are not savings in the library budget but savings in the social services budget, some of which will be transferred to the library to make it look like a library saving (68k per year actually- that is what we are talking about in this context, not £1.8million they keep peddling as if Kidderminster in some way has to bear the full brunt of it. And isn't it interesting they can find £300k to make this happen in building changes and also spend £200k on the Ashmolean in Broadway when our Gallery is being sacrificed for the sake of £68k)
So instead, they prefer to rely on an unrepresentative and poorly conducted enagement event where 53 people allegedly said they prefer option A. Go ask anyone who went to the engagement event who understands this issue how that engagement event was undertaken - they will tell you it was pretty shambolic and the council staff uninformed which in my view renders their engagement event fatally flawed. Further, their other rationale was because a paid officer of the council (arts officer - so hardly someone impartial) said it was the best option. Apparantly the social services staff too prefer it (a lie so far as I am concerned as they have not asked them or consulted with the appropriate trade union). Finally, their other excuse is that they haven't the staff to police option B or option C (remember option B was their own option) and pathetically they said they have no 'communication devices' for staff working on different floors to make it work (something they do have at the hive in worcester and lets not forget that it was the council who made the staff redundant in Kidderminster).
In terms of promises to consult, and to listen; they did not. Only last week on 24th September the council publicly promised no decision would be made until they had spoken to all groups (Shuttle - something they also said earlier in Sept publicly) yet at the meeting with the Friends on Thursday 27th Sept (3 days later) within 3 minutes of the meeting starting, called to discuss the proposals and despite assurances in writing from the council beforehand they had taken our comments on board, they announced that they had already chosen option A (not sure at what council meeting that was agreed) and that planning permission would be submitted and had the brass neck to blame the Friends for them choosing option A because we had not met with them before that same meeting Disgraceful conduct!.
The sorry state of affairs you refer to, is, in my opinion, council arrogance, council intransigence, council dishonesty and council political manipulation of the issue to ensure John Campion does not end up out of favour with his Tory colleagues on WCC and done purely for political gain.
The ultimate decision was NOT about money as there were several options available to them that would save the money.
So, believe the council propaganda if you like, but having been involved in this from day one1, I actually see what is really going on here - Campion face saving and using platitudes towards consultation to achieve it and WCC point scoring over local communities.
We know WFDC is a Cabal but at County it's worse - what they actually have there is a Junta. One started by the now disgraced George Lord and now seemingly being carried on at all levels by the current administration, some of whom were in Lord's Cabinet.
The Hive is sucking £1million a year out of the same budget, no talk of cutbacks there, plenty of staff too, in fact, it is ringfenced and there has been a considerable increase in spending over the old Worcester foregate street library I would well imagine.
When other communities challenged the downgrading of their own libraries in Worcestershire at no time was a threat ever made to them that it would mean closures eleswhere, yet with Kidderminster it is brandished like a weapon, and predictably it was the line taken by John Campion in our meeting with him on Thursday.
There were options on the table that would have realised the 'savings' the council requires in Kidderminster library - their own option B and one suggested by the Friends, Option C - they chose to ignore both and even refused to discuss them with us.
The savings to which they refer are not savings in the library budget but savings in the social services budget, some of which will be transferred to the library to make it look like a library saving (68k per year actually- that is what we are talking about in this context, not £1.8million they keep peddling as if Kidderminster in some way has to bear the full brunt of it. And isn't it interesting they can find £300k to make this happen in building changes and also spend £200k on the Ashmolean in Broadway when our Gallery is being sacrificed for the sake of £68k)
So instead, they prefer to rely on an unrepresentative and poorly conducted enagement event where 53 people allegedly said they prefer option A. Go ask anyone who went to the engagement event who understands this issue how that engagement event was undertaken - they will tell you it was pretty shambolic and the council staff uninformed which in my view renders their engagement event fatally flawed. Further, their other rationale was because a paid officer of the council (arts officer - so hardly someone impartial) said it was the best option. Apparantly the social services staff too prefer it (a lie so far as I am concerned as they have not asked them or consulted with the appropriate trade union). Finally, their other excuse is that they haven't the staff to police option B or option C (remember option B was their own option) and pathetically they said they have no 'communication devices' for staff working on different floors to make it work (something they do have at the hive in worcester and lets not forget that it was the council who made the staff redundant in Kidderminster).
In terms of promises to consult, and to listen; they did not. Only last week on 24th September the council publicly promised no decision would be made until they had spoken to all groups (Shuttle - something they also said earlier in Sept publicly) yet at the meeting with the Friends on Thursday 27th Sept (3 days later) within 3 minutes of the meeting starting, called to discuss the proposals and despite assurances in writing from the council beforehand they had taken our comments on board, they announced that they had already chosen option A (not sure at what council meeting that was agreed) and that planning permission would be submitted and had the brass neck to blame the Friends for them choosing option A because we had not met with them before that same meeting Disgraceful conduct!.
The sorry state of affairs you refer to, is, in my opinion, council arrogance, council intransigence, council dishonesty and council political manipulation of the issue to ensure John Campion does not end up out of favour with his Tory colleagues on WCC and done purely for political gain.
The ultimate decision was NOT about money as there were several options available to them that would save the money.
So, believe the council propaganda if you like, but having been involved in this from day one1, I actually see what is really going on here - Campion face saving and using platitudes towards consultation to achieve it and WCC point scoring over local communities.
We know WFDC is a Cabal but at County it's worse - what they actually have there is a Junta. One started by the now disgraced George Lord and now seemingly being carried on at all levels by the current administration, some of whom were in Lord's Cabinet.
jon cooper
says...
3:20pm Sat 29 Sep 12
I don't believe in propaganda from ANY local authority or ANY political group for that matter Stephen; but WCC's intentions were very, very clear to me regarding the county library service.
Do you honestly believe that the county council have no deficit whatsoever to bridge ? Do you honestly think that WCC would not carry out the threat of library closures ? If you do, then i strongly urge you to look up the meaning of propaganda !
Do you honestly believe that the county council have no deficit whatsoever to bridge ? Do you honestly think that WCC would not carry out the threat of library closures ? If you do, then i strongly urge you to look up the meaning of propaganda !
Neville Farmer
says...
6:00pm Sat 29 Sep 12
I accept what John says about his tweeting, though it was, like almost everything he does, ill-judged to put it there. As to saying the Friends weren't willing to compromise, that is blatantly untrue and typically patronising.
John's idea of choice is that he offers us two unworkable ideas and if we don't choose one of them, it's our fault. It's how he and his group do consultation.
It is also interesting that he accuses everyone else of playing party politics without noticing that we come from every party and many from no party. He only comes from one. The rest of us are working together with non-party political groups because we are in touch with the people of Wyre Forest while he merely finds them an obstruction to his grand plan.
Don't be fooled, Jon Cooper, the choice as to how WCC cuts money is theirs and theirs alone. John Paul is, as usual, trying to drive a wedge between people to divert attention from his group's policies.
Remember, his Wyre Forest cabinet just freely spent tens of thousands of pounds creating a completely unwanted arboretum on the Wribbenhall side of the river in Bewdley. They did it without consulting the town council and did enforced land swaps with residents at great expense to you and me. Meanwhile, they laid off staff and say they can't afford to maintain the established parks and gardens as well as they did.
Equally, the county has ring-fenced hundreds of millions of pounds for the Hartlebury incinerator (PFI money initially) that we will all be paying Mercia Waste for long after it fails to operate effectively. The cost of this, the county cabinet is currently concealing from both the public and opposition councillors in case they find out how bad a deal it is for us. They will only publish the figures when it is too late for an independent audit.
WCC make these decisions and bounce cash from one budget to another. There's no doubt this is difficult, but do not think for one second that cost saving decisions on libraries are the fault of anyone - neither central govt nor us - but John Campion and his team at County Hall.
John's idea of choice is that he offers us two unworkable ideas and if we don't choose one of them, it's our fault. It's how he and his group do consultation.
It is also interesting that he accuses everyone else of playing party politics without noticing that we come from every party and many from no party. He only comes from one. The rest of us are working together with non-party political groups because we are in touch with the people of Wyre Forest while he merely finds them an obstruction to his grand plan.
Don't be fooled, Jon Cooper, the choice as to how WCC cuts money is theirs and theirs alone. John Paul is, as usual, trying to drive a wedge between people to divert attention from his group's policies.
Remember, his Wyre Forest cabinet just freely spent tens of thousands of pounds creating a completely unwanted arboretum on the Wribbenhall side of the river in Bewdley. They did it without consulting the town council and did enforced land swaps with residents at great expense to you and me. Meanwhile, they laid off staff and say they can't afford to maintain the established parks and gardens as well as they did.
Equally, the county has ring-fenced hundreds of millions of pounds for the Hartlebury incinerator (PFI money initially) that we will all be paying Mercia Waste for long after it fails to operate effectively. The cost of this, the county cabinet is currently concealing from both the public and opposition councillors in case they find out how bad a deal it is for us. They will only publish the figures when it is too late for an independent audit.
WCC make these decisions and bounce cash from one budget to another. There's no doubt this is difficult, but do not think for one second that cost saving decisions on libraries are the fault of anyone - neither central govt nor us - but John Campion and his team at County Hall.
neilhar
says...
7:54pm Sat 29 Sep 12
@ Coops: It's been clear from the start John that you are with Kim Jong Campion on this one. This is much much worse than the car park or travellers site debacles (you notice the charges going up again?), the lies over the civic centre intentions and cash, the leisure centre debacle is only just starting and the Stephen Clee controversy is going to run and run. They pushed Julian out for having some moral fibre and a backbone and then went and stuck another Tory yes puppet instead of an opposing member into the seat.
Allan B'stard has got nothing on these people. A television commissioning editor would laugh one out of his office if one pitched this lot to him. And it's been going on since they won power in WF.
Stephen is right, even after he tells you all about it, it's his campaign so from the horses mouth too, you still come back and defend your position. Sorry my dear dear friend, but you Have fallen for the propaganda this time. And it is propaganda.
Still no national press? Still no audit commission? Still no standards committees, local or national? Still no way to arrest the propensity for balls ups that they stumble to one after another.
Please John, it's time to wake up. Everything they do here is about them. Campion clinging onto power, Hart getting into Westminster, Garnier going over to Lush's safe seat it seems.
It's all ludicrous...
Allan B'stard has got nothing on these people. A television commissioning editor would laugh one out of his office if one pitched this lot to him. And it's been going on since they won power in WF.
Stephen is right, even after he tells you all about it, it's his campaign so from the horses mouth too, you still come back and defend your position. Sorry my dear dear friend, but you Have fallen for the propaganda this time. And it is propaganda.
Still no national press? Still no audit commission? Still no standards committees, local or national? Still no way to arrest the propensity for balls ups that they stumble to one after another.
Please John, it's time to wake up. Everything they do here is about them. Campion clinging onto power, Hart getting into Westminster, Garnier going over to Lush's safe seat it seems.
It's all ludicrous...
jon cooper
says...
8:33pm Sat 29 Sep 12
@Neville Farmer:
Call me foolish if you like, but can you please explain to me the compromise in this explaination of the ambitions of this particular campaign:-
"Its, (The Friends), aim is to meet Worcestershire County Council as a collective body to make sure plans to move the top floor gallery space and piano elsewhere in Kidderminster Library are not put forward again".
Foolish i might be, but that little passage that appeared in a previous edition of The Shuttle certainly explains the policy of this campaign, and i cannot for the life of me see where the compromise exists here.
As i've witnessed previous so called public consultations, i realise 100% how dubiously they are conducted. I think it's fair to highlight the fact that no matter what public feeling might be, local authorities tend to go with their original plans anyway.
The library review is just one in a long line of controversial decisions that have hit the communities of Wyre Forest and the county of Worcestershire in recent years. I still take the threat of the closure of our libraries very seriously, and i'm sorry but i see the survival of our libraries as a much more important issue as it will surely affect a wider section of the public than retaining The Gallery within Kidderminster Library in its current form.
As you know Neville, the county library situation is already a fragile one !
Call me foolish if you like, but can you please explain to me the compromise in this explaination of the ambitions of this particular campaign:-
"Its, (The Friends), aim is to meet Worcestershire County Council as a collective body to make sure plans to move the top floor gallery space and piano elsewhere in Kidderminster Library are not put forward again".
Foolish i might be, but that little passage that appeared in a previous edition of The Shuttle certainly explains the policy of this campaign, and i cannot for the life of me see where the compromise exists here.
As i've witnessed previous so called public consultations, i realise 100% how dubiously they are conducted. I think it's fair to highlight the fact that no matter what public feeling might be, local authorities tend to go with their original plans anyway.
The library review is just one in a long line of controversial decisions that have hit the communities of Wyre Forest and the county of Worcestershire in recent years. I still take the threat of the closure of our libraries very seriously, and i'm sorry but i see the survival of our libraries as a much more important issue as it will surely affect a wider section of the public than retaining The Gallery within Kidderminster Library in its current form.
As you know Neville, the county library situation is already a fragile one !
DOEPUBLIC
says...
8:42pm Sat 29 Sep 12
Also with the context that Mr John Campion is responsible for representing the Wyre Forest with regard the WCC 'Think Local' strategy. When this was launched in Kidderminster, local responses to library developments were given as prime examples of the approach to be followed. However, it was clear at the time, that this was not consistent with the Kidderminster context. Thus doubt was expressed at how things would progress. The response was the reassurance, to trust that people will be listened to and that the politicians would start walking the talk. The events that have subsequently followed stand as evidence as to the reality.
jon cooper
says...
9:06pm Sat 29 Sep 12
@Neil: I haven't fallen for any so called propaganda. Having spoken to an individual who is not political, but purely has close ties with Kidderminster Library, and read with my own eyes the proposals put forward by WCC i am big enough and ugly enough to gauge my own opinion without the influence from anyone with any political influence - i'm sure you understand what i mean.
And i'll add this; i am fully aware of the previous actions of the local Conservatives, as well as the actions of some of their opponents: But sometimes, just sometimes Neil, it is possible that an issue that is touted about as propaganda could have actual fact connected to it, and i believe this to be the case with the possible changes within the county library service.
And i'll add this; i am fully aware of the previous actions of the local Conservatives, as well as the actions of some of their opponents: But sometimes, just sometimes Neil, it is possible that an issue that is touted about as propaganda could have actual fact connected to it, and i believe this to be the case with the possible changes within the county library service.
Neville Farmer
says...
12:21am Sun 30 Sep 12
you're not foolish, Jon, but that one sentence is not proof of failure to compromise. It was the preferred position but the Friends were happy to discuss ways of making money out of the gallery and performance space to make up some of the shortfall. there was also a suggested alternative plan, which was rejected. These thing may not have been reported in the Shuttle but most things are not.
jon cooper
says...
11:53am Sun 30 Sep 12
Neville; with respect, there was no real room to compromise. No one wanted to see the gallery axed, not even WCC: BUT it has to be explained very clearly that they have an extremely dire deficit that needs to be addressed ! Of course there are other avenues they should follow in order to save money, but again they are very, very clear on where they wish to save £1.8million - the county library service - of which 'The Gallery' within Kidderminster Library comes under their control.
The original plan of moving the gallery space to the second floor was deemed unacceptable by 'The Friends' because the current gallery is engineered towards a better acoustic quality. There were understandable fears a relocated gallery would lose the unique aspect of its acoustics, but these fears were unfounded because WCC stated quite clearly that the relocated gallery space would benefit from the employment of an acoustics engineer.
The result from the original plan would have meant that 'The Gallery' would have been retained within Kidderminster Library, (albeit at a smaller capacity), as well as the much talked about Steinway piano.
Since the original proposal was opposed, and the gallery decision was put on 'hold', the gallery has sadly become engaged in a battle of wills in my eyes. It's safe to say that WCC have put a lot of time and money into presenting two more options towards the galley issue. Both options were reasonable and there were always staff on hand to explain both 'Option A & B', and to guide people through the intricate plans on display at Kidderminster Library.
For some unbeknown reason, an 'Option C' was conjoured up by the 'Friends' campaign, to counteract 'Options A & B' proposed by the authority who have their hands on the public purse - WCC !
From the original rejected proposal on Day 1 to the latter proposals of 'Options A & B', it is clear there was NO compromise from the campaign, and the result from all of this is where 'The Gallery' is sadly at today !
Now this is only my opinion, but i feel that the original proposal of relocating the gallery space and piano to the second floor would have been a much more ideal option than what has been impilmented on 'The Friends' this week. For this reason i feel sorry because this issue has been drawn out into a long unnesseccary battle from which there was only ever going to be one winner, something i fear 'The Friends' were unaware of.
The original plan of moving the gallery space to the second floor was deemed unacceptable by 'The Friends' because the current gallery is engineered towards a better acoustic quality. There were understandable fears a relocated gallery would lose the unique aspect of its acoustics, but these fears were unfounded because WCC stated quite clearly that the relocated gallery space would benefit from the employment of an acoustics engineer.
The result from the original plan would have meant that 'The Gallery' would have been retained within Kidderminster Library, (albeit at a smaller capacity), as well as the much talked about Steinway piano.
Since the original proposal was opposed, and the gallery decision was put on 'hold', the gallery has sadly become engaged in a battle of wills in my eyes. It's safe to say that WCC have put a lot of time and money into presenting two more options towards the galley issue. Both options were reasonable and there were always staff on hand to explain both 'Option A & B', and to guide people through the intricate plans on display at Kidderminster Library.
For some unbeknown reason, an 'Option C' was conjoured up by the 'Friends' campaign, to counteract 'Options A & B' proposed by the authority who have their hands on the public purse - WCC !
From the original rejected proposal on Day 1 to the latter proposals of 'Options A & B', it is clear there was NO compromise from the campaign, and the result from all of this is where 'The Gallery' is sadly at today !
Now this is only my opinion, but i feel that the original proposal of relocating the gallery space and piano to the second floor would have been a much more ideal option than what has been impilmented on 'The Friends' this week. For this reason i feel sorry because this issue has been drawn out into a long unnesseccary battle from which there was only ever going to be one winner, something i fear 'The Friends' were unaware of.
HowardM
says...
12:44pm Sun 30 Sep 12
Since the plan is now to move the piano into the Corn Exchange, which, initially, wasn't planned, professional advice on the viability of this is being sought. However initial advice already received indicates this is not a reaslistic option due to the use/capacity of the piano which is for "chamber" only use and is "voiced" specifically for use in the Gallery - it is not suitable for "concert hall" use nor with an orchestra since it isnt manufactured for that purpose! it cannot be altererd to make it so. Therefore it cant be used in the Corn Exchange since its the "wrong" type of piano. Now, since the County Council employ a "specialist" arts officer, wouldnt it be his job to check out things like this before the County decide on an option that isnt deliverable? This is gross negligence by all concerned at WCC and is patently incompetent to recommend an option that isnt deliverable. In industry or commerce people would lose jobs over this level of stupidity.
Full details will be passed to WCC once we have these findings in writing from Steinway, the piano manufaturers.
Full details will be passed to WCC once we have these findings in writing from Steinway, the piano manufaturers.
Stephen Brown
says...
1:51pm Sun 30 Sep 12
The original gallery plans were not acceptable. The current plans are not acceptable.
The plans new and old wanted by the council destroy a purpose built arts facility and acoustically engineered gallery. Nothing the council has put forward at any time matches what is there presently and the sums of money they propose to spend to make it so, cannot match what was originally spent or engineered by design and costed so by default is inferior. To think otherwise is to completely fail to understand what is going on here.
The council never had any intention of putting this out to consultation at any point until they were rumbled by opponents earlier in the year. Go read last years cabinet papers if you don't believe it.
Alternatives were on the table that the council dismissed, well refused to discuss, and that is a FACT.
This simple summary explains the council's position. It is a political decision designed to save necks there.
Jon Cooper is right in one sense that there was no room for a compromise. But not for the reasons he has concluded, and not because the Friends were not prepared to compromise. The Friends IGM had a heated debate about compromise and agreed to explore one of the council's own options in consequence - option B, which for the Friends is a compromise. So any talk of the Friends not being prepared to compromise is way off the mark.
Jon Cooper, if I recall you correctly, you had previously criticised the Friends for having no alternative plans. Yet when we do, you now refer to it as just 'conjured up' by the Friends. That is actually an insult to the wealth of talent involved in the campaign and the knowledge that some people have about the myriad of issues involved in this from art, to music, staffing, finances and planning. Had the council utilised that talent and embraced 'localism' rather than dismiss it, we may now be in a different place.
Ironic it is indeed that WCC only understands 'localism' on its own terms, so in effect, the WCC mantra is actually 'centralism' which goes a long long way to explain how they run the council using the current cabinet by dictat.
This whole issue comes down to money yes. No-one is stupid enough think money isn't an issue.
Here, it is about saving £68k a year off the library budget in Kidderminster (a level of saving that needs, we are told, to be replicated in all 3 main libraries - except Worcester that is). So, in Kidderminster, the sum of £68k is a kick-back from a greater saving of £138k approx (making the £206k that the council have constantly conflated between libraries and social services when in fact it is social services money). To achieve that the council also want to spend £300k on building, which to some is a curious approach, and protect a ring-fenced budget at Worcester's Hive to the bargain.
I am sorry to sound like a broken record here but the council have been dishonest in their approach from the start, and their dishonesty is only barely matched by their arrogance.
They never intended to meet the Friends in a constructive way to achieve a deal. They have now successfully alienated the local arts community and yet arrogantly expect the same arts community to work with them on their plan so they can save face in cabinet.
If people are happy that facilities in Wyre Forest are sacrificed to save some council officers face and then in-turn believe the noise coming from the council about the money and why, that is up to them. But I have to say that in my opinion, anyone believing that is missing the point, and is wrong.
The plans new and old wanted by the council destroy a purpose built arts facility and acoustically engineered gallery. Nothing the council has put forward at any time matches what is there presently and the sums of money they propose to spend to make it so, cannot match what was originally spent or engineered by design and costed so by default is inferior. To think otherwise is to completely fail to understand what is going on here.
The council never had any intention of putting this out to consultation at any point until they were rumbled by opponents earlier in the year. Go read last years cabinet papers if you don't believe it.
Alternatives were on the table that the council dismissed, well refused to discuss, and that is a FACT.
This simple summary explains the council's position. It is a political decision designed to save necks there.
Jon Cooper is right in one sense that there was no room for a compromise. But not for the reasons he has concluded, and not because the Friends were not prepared to compromise. The Friends IGM had a heated debate about compromise and agreed to explore one of the council's own options in consequence - option B, which for the Friends is a compromise. So any talk of the Friends not being prepared to compromise is way off the mark.
Jon Cooper, if I recall you correctly, you had previously criticised the Friends for having no alternative plans. Yet when we do, you now refer to it as just 'conjured up' by the Friends. That is actually an insult to the wealth of talent involved in the campaign and the knowledge that some people have about the myriad of issues involved in this from art, to music, staffing, finances and planning. Had the council utilised that talent and embraced 'localism' rather than dismiss it, we may now be in a different place.
Ironic it is indeed that WCC only understands 'localism' on its own terms, so in effect, the WCC mantra is actually 'centralism' which goes a long long way to explain how they run the council using the current cabinet by dictat.
This whole issue comes down to money yes. No-one is stupid enough think money isn't an issue.
Here, it is about saving £68k a year off the library budget in Kidderminster (a level of saving that needs, we are told, to be replicated in all 3 main libraries - except Worcester that is). So, in Kidderminster, the sum of £68k is a kick-back from a greater saving of £138k approx (making the £206k that the council have constantly conflated between libraries and social services when in fact it is social services money). To achieve that the council also want to spend £300k on building, which to some is a curious approach, and protect a ring-fenced budget at Worcester's Hive to the bargain.
I am sorry to sound like a broken record here but the council have been dishonest in their approach from the start, and their dishonesty is only barely matched by their arrogance.
They never intended to meet the Friends in a constructive way to achieve a deal. They have now successfully alienated the local arts community and yet arrogantly expect the same arts community to work with them on their plan so they can save face in cabinet.
If people are happy that facilities in Wyre Forest are sacrificed to save some council officers face and then in-turn believe the noise coming from the council about the money and why, that is up to them. But I have to say that in my opinion, anyone believing that is missing the point, and is wrong.
jon cooper
says...
4:18pm Sun 30 Sep 12
@Stephen Brown:
I have NOT at one stage insulted this campaign ! Typically you point the finger of accusation at someone insulting a cause because they don't happen to agree with you ! Now you tell me who deals in propaganda ????
You commented: "Jon Cooper, if I recall you correctly, you had previously criticised the Friends for having no alternative plans. Yet when we do, you now refer to it as just 'conjured up' by the Friends".
Well you are incorrect Stephen Brown; i have never criticised the Friends from not having an alternative plan ! Before you start your talent of twisting, all i have to say is that i have been critical of a one dimensional campaign that hasn't shown the slightest interest into the wider issue of what is really important - The County Library Review, and the implications on the county library service: and this is a matter of fact !
Regarding consultations; you, Howard and Neville are fully aware of how inadequate public consultations from local authorities can be. There was only ever going to be one winner here, and the more this campaign dug its heels in, the more obvious the outcome. This doesn't make it right, but it is evident that whatever WCC put across in alternative proposals, the more the defiance !
I'm more than happy to sound like a stuck record - because i normally do - but all of the county's libraries are facing drastic changes to help bridge the deficit. My feelings are that our libraries WILL be relocated, downsized and downgraded anyway, and my opinion appears to hold some water with what is happening with just two of our libraries in the county !
And finally, in reply to the content of your last paragraph Stephen, i am one of those people who are not happy that facilities in Wyre Forest are being sacrificed for whatever the reason. To add to this, i'm not happy that the same gusto has not been applied to other facilties that have been put at risk and have urgently required support in the last 18 months or so from politicians who proclaim to have the best interests of the arts at heart !
But, (and this is the final but), it is interesting to note that despite selected apathy, and with much hard work and diligence, the other artistic groups in the district have got on famously without the interference from politicians who wish to represent us in one form another in the political arena. Perhaps in hindsight, 'The Friends of Kidderminster Gallery' might have found a compromise without the influence of others...
Only my opinion of course !
I have NOT at one stage insulted this campaign ! Typically you point the finger of accusation at someone insulting a cause because they don't happen to agree with you ! Now you tell me who deals in propaganda ????
You commented: "Jon Cooper, if I recall you correctly, you had previously criticised the Friends for having no alternative plans. Yet when we do, you now refer to it as just 'conjured up' by the Friends".
Well you are incorrect Stephen Brown; i have never criticised the Friends from not having an alternative plan ! Before you start your talent of twisting, all i have to say is that i have been critical of a one dimensional campaign that hasn't shown the slightest interest into the wider issue of what is really important - The County Library Review, and the implications on the county library service: and this is a matter of fact !
Regarding consultations; you, Howard and Neville are fully aware of how inadequate public consultations from local authorities can be. There was only ever going to be one winner here, and the more this campaign dug its heels in, the more obvious the outcome. This doesn't make it right, but it is evident that whatever WCC put across in alternative proposals, the more the defiance !
I'm more than happy to sound like a stuck record - because i normally do - but all of the county's libraries are facing drastic changes to help bridge the deficit. My feelings are that our libraries WILL be relocated, downsized and downgraded anyway, and my opinion appears to hold some water with what is happening with just two of our libraries in the county !
And finally, in reply to the content of your last paragraph Stephen, i am one of those people who are not happy that facilities in Wyre Forest are being sacrificed for whatever the reason. To add to this, i'm not happy that the same gusto has not been applied to other facilties that have been put at risk and have urgently required support in the last 18 months or so from politicians who proclaim to have the best interests of the arts at heart !
But, (and this is the final but), it is interesting to note that despite selected apathy, and with much hard work and diligence, the other artistic groups in the district have got on famously without the interference from politicians who wish to represent us in one form another in the political arena. Perhaps in hindsight, 'The Friends of Kidderminster Gallery' might have found a compromise without the influence of others...
Only my opinion of course !
Dynamite Dawson
says...
6:08pm Sun 30 Sep 12
I agree with Jon Cooper if he feels agrieved that the Kiddy Gallery is getting all the attention while the Stourport Civic Centre is left to fend for itself. It does seem that politicians are only interested in saving artistic facilities in Kidderminster rather than Stourport. However, where i'd disagree is that politicians are in some way 'interfering' with the Gallery situation. The Council is desperate to get rid of the Civic Centre and have, as far as I can tell, handed the keys over to the 'artistic groups' concerned. With the Gallery the situation is far more contentious, there was never going to be a solution that made the 'artistic groups' happy, the situation had become political. I don't think you could ever say 'there was only going to be one winner here', we wouldn't achieve anything if we had that attitude.
In short the government has given the Councils of this country an amount of spending cuts they have implement, but at the same time they are giving each and every millionaire a tax cut worth £40,000 each. This means that these cuts are simply to reduce the size of the State, so financial situations are immaterial, the government just want to reduce public services.
In short the government has given the Councils of this country an amount of spending cuts they have implement, but at the same time they are giving each and every millionaire a tax cut worth £40,000 each. This means that these cuts are simply to reduce the size of the State, so financial situations are immaterial, the government just want to reduce public services.
DOEPUBLIC
says...
7:40pm Sun 30 Sep 12
The fact remains that genuine 'engagement' did not take place. IMO WCC should have reviewed the County library facilities with the communities input and presented a way forward for all. Instead the community has been fed a party line and left to discover the reality. Officers present @ the Kidderminster library 'engagement' had the primary intention of seeking rubber stamping, not engagement. There was no real grasp of the context. Questions remained unanswered. IMO the speed of response, shows that the apparent movement creating plan B was not be taken seriously.
jon cooper
says...
8:05pm Sun 30 Sep 12
I wouldn't quite say im aggrieved; i would say that i've been quite amazed that three political heavyweights preach about securing a future for an arts facility in Wyre Forest, and then inturn ignore totally the plight of another section of the arts elsewhere in the district: This is NOT propaganda, it's the absolute truth !
The impact on other libraries within the county has never been mentioned once; which i still find staggering considering the gallery issue comes under the directive of the county library service !
The so called compromise regarding 'The Gallery' is bizarre to say the least. First we have this statement:-
"Its, (The Friends), aim is to meet Worcestershire County Council as a collective body to make sure plans to move the top floor gallery space and piano elsewhere in Kidderminster Library are not put forward again".
And today, Stephen Brown commented:-
"The original gallery plans were not acceptable. The current plans are not acceptable".
In both these short points of view it shows there was NO COMPROMISE on offer whatsoever !
The real conclusion to all of this is that never on God's earth would there have been any form of meeting in the middle unless the campaign itself had the final say in where and what guise 'The Gallery' should take.
Quite sometime ago now a current prominent district and county councillor declared that she didn't envy John Campion the library review; i can see why now !
The impact on other libraries within the county has never been mentioned once; which i still find staggering considering the gallery issue comes under the directive of the county library service !
The so called compromise regarding 'The Gallery' is bizarre to say the least. First we have this statement:-
"Its, (The Friends), aim is to meet Worcestershire County Council as a collective body to make sure plans to move the top floor gallery space and piano elsewhere in Kidderminster Library are not put forward again".
And today, Stephen Brown commented:-
"The original gallery plans were not acceptable. The current plans are not acceptable".
In both these short points of view it shows there was NO COMPROMISE on offer whatsoever !
The real conclusion to all of this is that never on God's earth would there have been any form of meeting in the middle unless the campaign itself had the final say in where and what guise 'The Gallery' should take.
Quite sometime ago now a current prominent district and county councillor declared that she didn't envy John Campion the library review; i can see why now !
LILY B
says...
8:37pm Sun 30 Sep 12
i'm afraid i disagree with you doepublic, when you compare other public consultations over various things in Wyre Forest i think the gallery friends have been very lucky that the council spoke to them at all which lets face it doesnt happen very often.i attended the public consultation, it was advertised,it had very clear plans put forward and there were people there to answer questions so i cant see how you think genuine engagement didnt take place? i spoke to someone there and was told that there was only one booking made for the follwing month so maybe they should have concentrated on trying to get more bookings to show it was a well used facility,this is just IMO.From what i've read on here maybe they shouldnt have dug their heels in regarding the first proposal then at least the piano would still be housed there! surely any councillors that have been involved should have realised what the likely outcome would be instead of using this poor group to help themselves in their electioneering.
Stephen Brown
says...
9:10pm Sun 30 Sep 12
Neither statement precludes a compromise if you read them in context of what has actually gone on.
I don't know how many times I can say it but there were other options which would realise the 'savings' and preserve the surrounding library services. The council chose for its own reasons choosing to ignore alternatives and and come up with excuses based on poor engagement and the rather limited view of the county arts officer who at the end of the day is one of their own. That decision in itself points to political decision making rather than what is in the wider interest of the ciommunity as a whole.
Nothing is black and white in this and my views on the preservation of library services as a whole are well documented because that is why I got involved. So, personally, I am far from myopic on this issue but the fact remains the campaign is about saving the gallery and does not have a wider remit. The clue is in the title 'Gallery Friends'.
At the end of the day it is the council who has decided where and what they cut, and what way they do it. I disagree with their approach as do many others but that does not make our views invalid just because its the council holding the purse strings. It is ultimately about political power and their priorities.
There is much talent in the Friends Group who are capable intelligent passionate people who had many ideas to contribute but were ignored by the council. I have had many conversations with various of them involved in arts and music and they were rarely happy individually or collectively about the manner in which the council dealt with them - hence the reason why they got involved in the bigger group despite concurrent meetings with the council.
In the end it comes down to what you believe and who you believe.
I am bouyed by the fact that the overwhelming majority are more sympathetic to the view of the Gallery Friends than the view of the council in all of this.
I don't know how many times I can say it but there were other options which would realise the 'savings' and preserve the surrounding library services. The council chose for its own reasons choosing to ignore alternatives and and come up with excuses based on poor engagement and the rather limited view of the county arts officer who at the end of the day is one of their own. That decision in itself points to political decision making rather than what is in the wider interest of the ciommunity as a whole.
Nothing is black and white in this and my views on the preservation of library services as a whole are well documented because that is why I got involved. So, personally, I am far from myopic on this issue but the fact remains the campaign is about saving the gallery and does not have a wider remit. The clue is in the title 'Gallery Friends'.
At the end of the day it is the council who has decided where and what they cut, and what way they do it. I disagree with their approach as do many others but that does not make our views invalid just because its the council holding the purse strings. It is ultimately about political power and their priorities.
There is much talent in the Friends Group who are capable intelligent passionate people who had many ideas to contribute but were ignored by the council. I have had many conversations with various of them involved in arts and music and they were rarely happy individually or collectively about the manner in which the council dealt with them - hence the reason why they got involved in the bigger group despite concurrent meetings with the council.
In the end it comes down to what you believe and who you believe.
I am bouyed by the fact that the overwhelming majority are more sympathetic to the view of the Gallery Friends than the view of the council in all of this.
Gobby Robby
says...
11:01pm Sun 30 Sep 12
Just a quick point in defence of politicians here. I've noticed in this interesting debate that if politicians stand aside from an issue they get accused of not doing anything, if they get involved they're accused of 'electioneering'. Seems they can't win.
DOEPUBLIC
says...
11:23pm Sun 30 Sep 12
Lily B, I note your response. However, my comments relate simply to the library process. Your differing experience shows that the engagements were not consistent.It is not clear which particular points of engagement were the one's at which comments were put on the record. Especially to the extent that you became regarded as a consultation respondent. Should one conclude that one's views were only to be accepted if written down ? What if your comments were recorded in an officer's diary rather than a comment card? Should you believe your thoughts would be followed up, as assured, as your questions were unanswered at the time? If you commented before plan B was published what currency did your response have? Why such a difference in numbers between petition and consultation respondents? As an individual I find myself feeling duped. If the council saw plan B as an improvement why reject it? Having read that the 'friends of the library' were actually just 'friends of the gallery' I also feel disappointed. It would seem the library services become devalued due to individual agendas over the communities.
DOEPUBLIC
says...
11:34pm Sun 30 Sep 12
At the engagement event I found officers not politicians attempting to relate their perceptions. It seems to me that the community is to lose out because of confusion over songsheets.
kidderlord
says...
8:52am Mon 1 Oct 12
@John Campion you say that what you do is for the good of the public ....IN THAT CASE RESIGN! and make us all happy.
kidderlord
says...
8:52am Mon 1 Oct 12
@John Campion you say that what you do is for the good of the public ....IN THAT CASE RESIGN! and make us all happy.
HowardM
says...
11:44am Mon 1 Oct 12
I bet WCC are loving this - an arguement between a range of people totally deflecting the debate away from the real issue of the Gallery.
The issues are - it is a unique facility in the West Midlands, of its type, which was custom built to be an arts, performance and exhibition space. It cannot be replicated elsewhere in the Library nor anywhere else in Wyre Forest.
The facilities on offer need to be retained at one location to retain the whole point of the Gallery.
It is not part of the Library service offer, it is part of the arts services in the county which just happens to be located on the top floor of a library building. It should not be funded out of the library budget.
To compare it with Stourport Civic Hall is irrelevant and shows a total failure to understand what the issues are here. The two venues have totally different uses and both need retaining to provide the widest selections of options for entertainment in WF.
The savings to the Library Budget are being made by moving Social Service office staff from rented accomodation into public space, which will be lost to the public - presumably the Council then makes a paper transfer of "rent" from the Social services Budget to the Library Budget? When asked this question, WCC fail to reply!
Again I reitterate my earlier point above - the piano is a Steinway "B" type piano built for purpose and for use in a small (gallery) venue suitable for chamber music. It is neither suitable nor adaptable for use in a venue the size of either the Corn Exchange or Music Room at the Town Hall, with or without an orchestra. In simple terms it wouldnt be loud enough! To use a piano in the Town Hall would require a "C" or "D" type piano. It isnt rocket science to understand that the volume capacity of a piano used in a venue like the gallery wouldnt be the same as used in, for instance, the Royal Albert Hall or Birmingham Symphony Hall.
There is a "presumtion" in the minds of many that the terms, Arts or Gallery, refers to somewhere pictures are hung, and nothing else. That is not so - the Gallery provides multi, integated, mixed uses display, performance and conference space.. Reproviding each of those services elsewhere does not retain the gallery as promised by WCC.
Also depite the "attempt to convince" otherwise by County officers, the accoustics and humidity control in the gallery were not "an accident in design" as claimed, they were designed into the original build at a cost of £300k to be fit for purpose for the protection of the piano and art on display. This will not be replicated in any reprovisioning - it is too expensive.
The apparent abject ignorance and stupidity being displayed by county officers and politicians over this is difficult to comprehend since none of them are idiots. So it must be presumed that they know all this but just dont care and chose to ignore it. The bottom line is they want to save £200k a year and they will destroy a unique, international quality, facility to "win" their arguement. It is civic vandalism by arts Philistines of the highest order which is treating the residents of Wyre Forest with utter comtempt. The removal of a handfull of senior staff or reducing councillors allowances at County Hall would save the money, at a stroke, without damaging an unique and special facility. But taking the "hit" themselves isnt an option when you can put it on to an entire community!
The issues are - it is a unique facility in the West Midlands, of its type, which was custom built to be an arts, performance and exhibition space. It cannot be replicated elsewhere in the Library nor anywhere else in Wyre Forest.
The facilities on offer need to be retained at one location to retain the whole point of the Gallery.
It is not part of the Library service offer, it is part of the arts services in the county which just happens to be located on the top floor of a library building. It should not be funded out of the library budget.
To compare it with Stourport Civic Hall is irrelevant and shows a total failure to understand what the issues are here. The two venues have totally different uses and both need retaining to provide the widest selections of options for entertainment in WF.
The savings to the Library Budget are being made by moving Social Service office staff from rented accomodation into public space, which will be lost to the public - presumably the Council then makes a paper transfer of "rent" from the Social services Budget to the Library Budget? When asked this question, WCC fail to reply!
Again I reitterate my earlier point above - the piano is a Steinway "B" type piano built for purpose and for use in a small (gallery) venue suitable for chamber music. It is neither suitable nor adaptable for use in a venue the size of either the Corn Exchange or Music Room at the Town Hall, with or without an orchestra. In simple terms it wouldnt be loud enough! To use a piano in the Town Hall would require a "C" or "D" type piano. It isnt rocket science to understand that the volume capacity of a piano used in a venue like the gallery wouldnt be the same as used in, for instance, the Royal Albert Hall or Birmingham Symphony Hall.
There is a "presumtion" in the minds of many that the terms, Arts or Gallery, refers to somewhere pictures are hung, and nothing else. That is not so - the Gallery provides multi, integated, mixed uses display, performance and conference space.. Reproviding each of those services elsewhere does not retain the gallery as promised by WCC.
Also depite the "attempt to convince" otherwise by County officers, the accoustics and humidity control in the gallery were not "an accident in design" as claimed, they were designed into the original build at a cost of £300k to be fit for purpose for the protection of the piano and art on display. This will not be replicated in any reprovisioning - it is too expensive.
The apparent abject ignorance and stupidity being displayed by county officers and politicians over this is difficult to comprehend since none of them are idiots. So it must be presumed that they know all this but just dont care and chose to ignore it. The bottom line is they want to save £200k a year and they will destroy a unique, international quality, facility to "win" their arguement. It is civic vandalism by arts Philistines of the highest order which is treating the residents of Wyre Forest with utter comtempt. The removal of a handfull of senior staff or reducing councillors allowances at County Hall would save the money, at a stroke, without damaging an unique and special facility. But taking the "hit" themselves isnt an option when you can put it on to an entire community!
DOEPUBLIC
says...
2:03pm Mon 1 Oct 12
I can confirm that when I attended the second engagement event that the officer had no knowledge of the previous investment in the gallery and the facilities introduced. Plan B would have kept this. However, the small matter of the location of a meeting room for clients appeared to mean removal of some space. This being the case, when it was accepted both social service directorates did not have to be placed in the building. When asked what research had been done for placement in other parts of the region, the response was 'I don't know. When documentation was asked for proving how the plans met concerns, again nothing was available. As HowardM shows with other details, a thorough assessment as to the context was not communicated, either through choice or ignorance. Leaving the level of engagement down to the quality of information the respondent brought to the situation. It's for individuals go conclude why,but sadly the community lives with the outcome.
nicky.griffiths
says...
3:04pm Mon 1 Oct 12
The County Council has just shown its complete disdain for the residents of Kidderminster. They claim they don't have enough money to provide a transport link on Kidderminster Station forecourt but can spend £500,000 on Malvern Link Station which is less busy than Kidderminster. They cannot afford our small purpose built gallery and concert space but can afford £60 million on The Hive in Worcester and £200,000 on a museum in Broadway. Several of our local councillors have aided and abetted them in this and also seem intent on other measures that will strike the final death blow to Kidderminster Town Centre. Moving the leisure centre from its central position, centralising council offices on the outskirts and, in effect, building a totally new town centre at the old Sugar Beet site containing 250 new houses, hotels, pubs, business (including shops) in addition to industrial premises can only take yet more footfall out of the town. Having attended two out of three of the most recent "engagement events", which I notice have suddenly become "consultation", I am amazed at the number of people it is claimed supported the loss of the whole second floor to offices. I did not hear a single voice in support while I was attending. There must have been a sudden rush of supporters filling in cards at the last minute?
Mary79
says...
3:50pm Mon 1 Oct 12
@nicky.griffiths: yea, probably council officers themselves filling the cards in, so they got the result they wanted.
jon cooper
says...
3:59pm Mon 1 Oct 12
HowardM wrote:@Howard:
I bet WCC are loving this - an arguement between a range of people totally deflecting the debate away from the real issue of the Gallery. The issues are - it is a unique facility in the West Midlands, of its type, which was custom built to be an arts, performance and exhibition space. It cannot be replicated elsewhere in the Library nor anywhere else in Wyre Forest. The facilities on offer need to be retained at one location to retain the whole point of the Gallery. It is not part of the Library service offer, it is part of the arts services in the county which just happens to be located on the top floor of a library building. It should not be funded out of the library budget. To compare it with Stourport Civic Hall is irrelevant and shows a total failure to understand what the issues are here. The two venues have totally different uses and both need retaining to provide the widest selections of options for entertainment in WF. The savings to the Library Budget are being made by moving Social Service office staff from rented accomodation into public space, which will be lost to the public - presumably the Council then makes a paper transfer of "rent" from the Social services Budget to the Library Budget? When asked this question, WCC fail to reply! Again I reitterate my earlier point above - the piano is a Steinway "B" type piano built for purpose and for use in a small (gallery) venue suitable for chamber music. It is neither suitable nor adaptable for use in a venue the size of either the Corn Exchange or Music Room at the Town Hall, with or without an orchestra. In simple terms it wouldnt be loud enough! To use a piano in the Town Hall would require a "C" or "D" type piano. It isnt rocket science to understand that the volume capacity of a piano used in a venue like the gallery wouldnt be the same as used in, for instance, the Royal Albert Hall or Birmingham Symphony Hall. There is a "presumtion" in the minds of many that the terms, Arts or Gallery, refers to somewhere pictures are hung, and nothing else. That is not so - the Gallery provides multi, integated, mixed uses display, performance and conference space.. Reproviding each of those services elsewhere does not retain the gallery as promised by WCC. Also depite the "attempt to convince" otherwise by County officers, the accoustics and humidity control in the gallery were not "an accident in design" as claimed, they were designed into the original build at a cost of £300k to be fit for purpose for the protection of the piano and art on display. This will not be replicated in any reprovisioning - it is too expensive. The apparent abject ignorance and stupidity being displayed by county officers and politicians over this is difficult to comprehend since none of them are idiots. So it must be presumed that they know all this but just dont care and chose to ignore it. The bottom line is they want to save £200k a year and they will destroy a unique, international quality, facility to "win" their arguement. It is civic vandalism by arts Philistines of the highest order which is treating the residents of Wyre Forest with utter comtempt. The removal of a handfull of senior staff or reducing councillors allowances at County Hall would save the money, at a stroke, without damaging an unique and special facility. But taking the "hit" themselves isnt an option when you can put it on to an entire community!
You know how local authorities work. They put proposals across for the general public to digest, (they call this consultation i think), the public air their view and then their authority then goes on to totally ignore public opinion and plough on nevertheless: Look at the single-site fiasco and the leisure centre issue in Wyre Forest, do you honestly think WCC are any different ?
I do not treat the written proposals to save £1.8million from the county library service alone as "propaganda", i take the plans of WCC very, very seriously indeed, and with bloody good reason !!!!!
As 'Gobby Robby' should know, i do actually welcome politicians to campaigns such as 'The Gallery'. My problem is - and will always be - that the repercussions on the libraries throughout the county were never ever addressed by the politicians who oppose the Conservatives and who really should know better. Like it or not, and whether it is right or wrong, 'The Gallery' comes under the jurisdiction of the county library service, and they are very serious in using libraries to help bridge the very real deficit !
I totally agree with you that there are alternatives to make savings. A reduction in allowances is an obvious option, but this is never going to happen at either county level or district level whilst the Conservatives hold the upper hand. By potentially sacrificing libraries to keep the gallery is in my view totally and utterly unfair and immoral !
And finally, you commented this Howard:-
"To compare it with Stourport Civic Hall is irrelevant and shows a total failure to understand what the issues are here. The two venues have totally different uses and both need retaining to provide the widest selections of options for entertainment in WF".
I have never compared Stourport Civic Hall to 'The Gallery', what i have tried to highlight is that the passion for the arts is very selective amongst the ranks of certain politicians. This would explain why NO interest has been paid to other artistic facilities that have urgently required support in the last 18 months or so !
"The apparent abject ignorance and stupidity being displayed by county officers and politicians over this is difficult to comprehend since none of them are idiots".
Amen to that Howard...Amen to that !
jon cooper
says...
4:05pm Mon 1 Oct 12
"The County Council has just shown its complete disdain for the residents of Kidderminster".
I think that statement says it all !
I think that statement says it all !
DOEPUBLIC
says...
5:20pm Mon 1 Oct 12
You identify Jon Cooper the key disconnect. Ruling groups that choose not to connect to groups beyond their electoral support and voiceless individuals and groups with no advocacy or advocacy that isn't listened to. So the duty of care from the responsible and professional only surfaces when called to account. The council becomes the politicians business as opposed to a public business served by politicians. Rhetoric with no depth beyond the words. Presently confusion now exists to what counts as engagement and consultation and the consequence of each.
jflawson
says...
5:46pm Mon 1 Oct 12
This situation about public consultation amazes me last week as i sat in public gallery at council meeting opened my eyes.
A decision was made which in my opinion will affect the life of disabled people throughout the town. As i support ICHC one of our councillors who is on the transport consultative comittee commented that he did not receive until saturday the 22/09 paperwork relating to TAXI,S particularly saloon cars , that the matter was and had to be voted on 26/09/12 .All the opposing parties (including Fran) wanted more
time to look at the consequences on what was to voted on but no choice was given to them and there very sound amendment was defeated.
It is the first time i have attended as a member of the public and i shall go again, public consultation i think not what the blue want to do they do whatever the public want.
How many people know that the Audit Comission has been or is soon to be disbanded.
With the wonderful newly opened £10.5 million offices how come the staff from the social securities could not be found space there Why canibalize a perfectly, wonderful, accoustically perfect building, which is considered by the music fraternity to be excellent, there are plenty of other council owned proprties soon to be empty buildings which could be used.Dont say they have to be sold, in a poor market and undoubtably will be sold off cheap not to the benifit of us poor taxpayers.
May i suggest to all people of Wyre Forest next may please please please use your vote for any party other than the the insensitive blue bunch .
A decision was made which in my opinion will affect the life of disabled people throughout the town. As i support ICHC one of our councillors who is on the transport consultative comittee commented that he did not receive until saturday the 22/09 paperwork relating to TAXI,S particularly saloon cars , that the matter was and had to be voted on 26/09/12 .All the opposing parties (including Fran) wanted more
time to look at the consequences on what was to voted on but no choice was given to them and there very sound amendment was defeated.
It is the first time i have attended as a member of the public and i shall go again, public consultation i think not what the blue want to do they do whatever the public want.
How many people know that the Audit Comission has been or is soon to be disbanded.
With the wonderful newly opened £10.5 million offices how come the staff from the social securities could not be found space there Why canibalize a perfectly, wonderful, accoustically perfect building, which is considered by the music fraternity to be excellent, there are plenty of other council owned proprties soon to be empty buildings which could be used.Dont say they have to be sold, in a poor market and undoubtably will be sold off cheap not to the benifit of us poor taxpayers.
May i suggest to all people of Wyre Forest next may please please please use your vote for any party other than the the insensitive blue bunch .
mark.lawley
says...
9:22pm Mon 1 Oct 12
a wonderful example of localism
DOEPUBLIC
says...
10:26pm Mon 1 Oct 12
Plans that lack scrutiny would appear to be the order of the day, in favour of a balance sheet. Clearly it is regarded as none our business, just theirs. Clearly enabling thinking and identifying locality is regarded as matter of data and not involving actual people's lives...........
neilhar
says...
10:42pm Mon 1 Oct 12
Our council mindset.
Left hand - Gallery closes to save £68k from another department's budget.
Right hand - Seeing as we neglected our leisure facilities, let's close them all, borrow another £10mil and build a new one on the edge of town.
Hangs head in disbelief...
Now, until I hear otherwise, I hold ALL parties to blame over the incompetent idiocy that is this district, our council and those that run it.
Ian Miller and all officers. Now is the time to stand up for this district. Or are you all going to just carry on towing the party line?
Left hand - Gallery closes to save £68k from another department's budget.
Right hand - Seeing as we neglected our leisure facilities, let's close them all, borrow another £10mil and build a new one on the edge of town.
Hangs head in disbelief...
Now, until I hear otherwise, I hold ALL parties to blame over the incompetent idiocy that is this district, our council and those that run it.
Ian Miller and all officers. Now is the time to stand up for this district. Or are you all going to just carry on towing the party line?
FranOb
says...
9:19am Tue 2 Oct 12
Neilhar is missing the point as usual!
WFDC did offer to share space at new HQ with WCC, and other partners eg Health but they all prefer to use own buildings because they don't want to pay rent, which is what The Gallery is all about,
The Leisure Centre is about SAVING money by neither employing staff directly NOR paying massive management fees AND getting a State of the Art Centre while hopefully keeping Stourport Leisure Centre
The Friends of the Library Gallery are NOT refusing to accept ANY Office use at theGallery, we are seeking a reasonable compromise which sadly, WCC don't wish to consider!
WFDC did offer to share space at new HQ with WCC, and other partners eg Health but they all prefer to use own buildings because they don't want to pay rent, which is what The Gallery is all about,
The Leisure Centre is about SAVING money by neither employing staff directly NOR paying massive management fees AND getting a State of the Art Centre while hopefully keeping Stourport Leisure Centre
The Friends of the Library Gallery are NOT refusing to accept ANY Office use at theGallery, we are seeking a reasonable compromise which sadly, WCC don't wish to consider!
Red Flag Dan
says...
10:20am Tue 2 Oct 12
I've just taken a look at the contractors that the Council will be using to move the Steinway. Shocking!
http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=HgzEBLa3P
Pk
http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=HgzEBLa3P
Pk
HowardM
says...
12:04pm Tue 2 Oct 12
Talking about Council offices, Leisure Centres and Stourport Civic Hall in the same debate as the Library Gallery is a bit pointless. The first 3 are the responsibility of WFDC, the Gallery is WCC. There is no connection, financial or otherwise, unless you call the connection the fact they are both Tory run councils (tongue in cheek comment). So can we stop talking about unrelated issues and confine this to the civic vandalism of the wanten destruction of a tremendous, international quality peformance facility, unique in Worcestershire and indeed the West Midlands, which is being scrapped to save a couple of hundred thousand pounds a year on a annual budget of £600m. Councils move money around between cost centres all the while - the "savings" here are not being made on the Gallery - it doesnt cost that a year to run and generates an income. The savings are being made by giving up the space to Social Service offices which rent Elgar House who, instead, will pay to rent the Library space. WCC are just moving their own money from one cost centre (Social Services) to another cost centre (Libraries) and saying it contributes to part of the annual Library saving. The actual saving is on rent at Elgar House.
So with that degree of constructive thinking by WCC it isnt beyond the wit of human ingenuity to come up with an alternative plan, across Worcestershire, that produces the same savings but retains the Gallery intact. If the will within WCC exists that is? Evidence suggests otherwise. It points to a definate desire by some to prove a point at all costs and not appear "weak" in not imposing an initially favoured option when all the evidence suggests it is the wrong decision. That is not strength, it is weakness and arrogance and a true statesman (corporately WCC in this case) would now admit defeat and concede the arguement is lost, not impose the decision because the power is held to force it on an unwilling community. That is dictatorship not democracy.
So with that degree of constructive thinking by WCC it isnt beyond the wit of human ingenuity to come up with an alternative plan, across Worcestershire, that produces the same savings but retains the Gallery intact. If the will within WCC exists that is? Evidence suggests otherwise. It points to a definate desire by some to prove a point at all costs and not appear "weak" in not imposing an initially favoured option when all the evidence suggests it is the wrong decision. That is not strength, it is weakness and arrogance and a true statesman (corporately WCC in this case) would now admit defeat and concede the arguement is lost, not impose the decision because the power is held to force it on an unwilling community. That is dictatorship not democracy.
Stephen Brown
says...
12:11pm Tue 2 Oct 12
Fran: as this has gone off subject: in what way does WFDC not having directly employed staff save money exactly? The evidence across the country for outsourcing costs is quite the contrary in the long term historically. It just ends up lining the pocket of companies involved and results in reduced terms and conditions for staff including 'zero hour' contracts - rather than service improvments or all of it being spent on services - not something I would be proud of if I was responsible for it.
Can you also explain what you mean by 'management fees' please?
And to the contrary again, I think Stourport Leisure Centre in the long term is at risk from this proposal and that really bothers me. Such general health and well-being community services should be kept as local as possible but this undermines that absolutely in my view.
Can you also explain what you mean by 'management fees' please?
And to the contrary again, I think Stourport Leisure Centre in the long term is at risk from this proposal and that really bothers me. Such general health and well-being community services should be kept as local as possible but this undermines that absolutely in my view.
jon cooper
says...
4:00pm Tue 2 Oct 12
@Howard:
With the utmost respect, and i can't put it any plainer than this: Although it is totally laudable that three spokesman from three different parties have come together to champion the survival of an arts facility in Wyre Forest, i can't help to comment that i feel it's selective. I have thought this from very early on in this particular campaign, and nothing has happened since that has swayed me to think otherwise.
Of course The Civic Hall doesn't come under the control of WCC, but it is an arts facility that caters for the needs of the whole of Wyre Forest and not just Stourport. The Civic has been desperate for support - even vocal support would have been sufficient - but no support from any political heavyweight has reared its head in 18 months or more !
'The Civic Group' that work on a volunteer basis have turned the fortunes of The Civic Hall around into an arts facility that was once not utilised to its full potential, but is now attracting a large variety of performers week in week out, making The Civic a viable facility to run.
Although i will always believe politicians should get behind campaigns, it is worth noting however that all that has been accomplished at the civic hall has been reached without the aid of political influence, in fact the words "COMPROMISE" and "PATIENCE" has been the main player into where the Civic Hall is today !!!!
I have no argument with the regular campaigners amongst 'The Friends of Kidderminster Gallery', but i feel that the campaign would have been more agreeable with the magic word "COMPROMISE" being involved. I'm sorry Howard, but from what i've read and heard there has been very little compromise, and very little understanding of the possible implications should 'The Friends' refuse to budge from its current home.
Whether anyone likes it or not, the people who are yielding cuts see 'The Gallery' as just one of the facilities to help make the £1.8million from the county library service. And it was never, ever going to be the case that WCC would have seen this to be any different. Look at consultations in Wyre Forest Howard, they're a joke, and nothing whatsoever made me think that WCC would change their opinion of altering the make-up of the current gallery space.
The original proposal of moving the gallery, and the piano to the second floor seemed reasonable. Yes it would have been smaller, but it would have benefitted from an acoustics engineer being employed to keep the unique quality of the gallery in tact. The Gallery, the Steinway would have been kept under one roof albeit in a smaller capacity, and this would have relieved pressure of the threat of cuts to other areas of the county library service; of which a much larger majority of people rely on. The threat from WCC can be deemed as propaganda if some people wish it to be, but i find this train of thought terribly naive !
(PS: The possible proposals for Stourport Sports Centre are very exciting indeed. But i feel very much for the people of Bewdley who i fear will lose this vital frontline service. With the threat of Bewdley Library being re-located, downsized and downgraded; Bewdley is without doubt getting the rough edge of the sword currently).
With the utmost respect, and i can't put it any plainer than this: Although it is totally laudable that three spokesman from three different parties have come together to champion the survival of an arts facility in Wyre Forest, i can't help to comment that i feel it's selective. I have thought this from very early on in this particular campaign, and nothing has happened since that has swayed me to think otherwise.
Of course The Civic Hall doesn't come under the control of WCC, but it is an arts facility that caters for the needs of the whole of Wyre Forest and not just Stourport. The Civic has been desperate for support - even vocal support would have been sufficient - but no support from any political heavyweight has reared its head in 18 months or more !
'The Civic Group' that work on a volunteer basis have turned the fortunes of The Civic Hall around into an arts facility that was once not utilised to its full potential, but is now attracting a large variety of performers week in week out, making The Civic a viable facility to run.
Although i will always believe politicians should get behind campaigns, it is worth noting however that all that has been accomplished at the civic hall has been reached without the aid of political influence, in fact the words "COMPROMISE" and "PATIENCE" has been the main player into where the Civic Hall is today !!!!
I have no argument with the regular campaigners amongst 'The Friends of Kidderminster Gallery', but i feel that the campaign would have been more agreeable with the magic word "COMPROMISE" being involved. I'm sorry Howard, but from what i've read and heard there has been very little compromise, and very little understanding of the possible implications should 'The Friends' refuse to budge from its current home.
Whether anyone likes it or not, the people who are yielding cuts see 'The Gallery' as just one of the facilities to help make the £1.8million from the county library service. And it was never, ever going to be the case that WCC would have seen this to be any different. Look at consultations in Wyre Forest Howard, they're a joke, and nothing whatsoever made me think that WCC would change their opinion of altering the make-up of the current gallery space.
The original proposal of moving the gallery, and the piano to the second floor seemed reasonable. Yes it would have been smaller, but it would have benefitted from an acoustics engineer being employed to keep the unique quality of the gallery in tact. The Gallery, the Steinway would have been kept under one roof albeit in a smaller capacity, and this would have relieved pressure of the threat of cuts to other areas of the county library service; of which a much larger majority of people rely on. The threat from WCC can be deemed as propaganda if some people wish it to be, but i find this train of thought terribly naive !
(PS: The possible proposals for Stourport Sports Centre are very exciting indeed. But i feel very much for the people of Bewdley who i fear will lose this vital frontline service. With the threat of Bewdley Library being re-located, downsized and downgraded; Bewdley is without doubt getting the rough edge of the sword currently).
Gobby Robby
says...
5:36pm Tue 2 Oct 12
Why not put 'The Gallery' in the Civic Centre?
jon cooper
says...
5:55pm Tue 2 Oct 12
'The Gallery' ?
At 'The Civic' ????
Oh my God, i would love to see Fran Oborski's reaction to that :-)
At 'The Civic' ????
Oh my God, i would love to see Fran Oborski's reaction to that :-)
DOEPUBLIC
says...
9:44pm Tue 2 Oct 12
This clearly shows how WCC approached things http://www.cottagemu
sic.co.uk/Friends position.htm
sic.co.uk/Friends position.htm
Dynamite Dawson
says...
10:27pm Tue 2 Oct 12
I agree, why not put the gallery in the civic? Kill 2 birds with one stone.
DOEPUBLIC
says...
3:14am Wed 3 Oct 12
The simple fact is that with John Campion & Co colluding to railroad plan A in the name of saving money, they have actually chosen to waste the money invested in the gallery in the first place. Plan B as well being a waste of money, as there was no intention of approving it. It would seem the sole intention was to dupe the public in favour of WCC ruling party credibility, while also discrediting 'friends of the gallery' When thinking local becomes difficult, they'll not have to look to far from themselves for the barrier to progress.Deliberatel
y choosing to unfriend the community.
y choosing to unfriend the community.
JCaldwell
says...
9:40am Wed 3 Oct 12
I don't stick my head above the parapet that often, some of you know why, but I felt I had to at least make some remarks here about comments made by some of the politico's.
Remark 1: Regardless of whether it is a WFDC issue, a WCC issue or dark side of the moon issue Howard M, Stephen Brown, and Neville Farmer are all supposed to be Parliamentary Spokesmen or Prospective Parliamentary Candidates for Wyre Forest. To date the silence over The Civic from these three has been deafening. Just remember that when it comes to election time, and they all start saying how the love The Civic, and have supported it all along.
At least Mark Garnier, in his role as an MP, has visited events held at the Hall attended meetings, and has offered to help.
Remark 2:
@Howard M
"So can we stop talking about unrelated issues and confine this to the civic vandalism" - your comments in relation to JonCooper asking about the Civic. I don't think that was an attempt to change the subject, but perhaps showing you that the district does not end at the end of the dual carriageway next to Wyre Forest House.
Closing the Civic would be, and still could be if The Civic Group are not successful, viewed as an "act of civic vandalism". That is a statement of Fact.
Remark 3:
@ Howard M
"To compare it with Stourport Civic Hall is irrelevant and shows a total failure to understand what the issues are here."
A clear indication that actually you have no idea what you are talking about!
Both are arts facilities. Both are under threat of closure (until papers are signed The Civic Centre could still go belly up). Both are versatile spaces. Both should be preserved.
Kidderminster seems to have got all the attention (again!) whereas the achievements if a few in Stourport are being ignored! Its as expected the largest part of the electorate is based in Kidderminster and any PPC should know win Kiddy, win the Election! so they all support Kidderminster.
@JonCooper and @ Dyanamite - Thanks for your comments.
@GobbyRobby - Moving the Gallery is an intriguing idea. But correct me if I'm wrong - I get this strange feeling that most people want the Gallery to stay in Kidderminster. (*deliberate wry smile, with tongue in cheek*)
Remark 1: Regardless of whether it is a WFDC issue, a WCC issue or dark side of the moon issue Howard M, Stephen Brown, and Neville Farmer are all supposed to be Parliamentary Spokesmen or Prospective Parliamentary Candidates for Wyre Forest. To date the silence over The Civic from these three has been deafening. Just remember that when it comes to election time, and they all start saying how the love The Civic, and have supported it all along.
At least Mark Garnier, in his role as an MP, has visited events held at the Hall attended meetings, and has offered to help.
Remark 2:
@Howard M
"So can we stop talking about unrelated issues and confine this to the civic vandalism" - your comments in relation to JonCooper asking about the Civic. I don't think that was an attempt to change the subject, but perhaps showing you that the district does not end at the end of the dual carriageway next to Wyre Forest House.
Closing the Civic would be, and still could be if The Civic Group are not successful, viewed as an "act of civic vandalism". That is a statement of Fact.
Remark 3:
@ Howard M
"To compare it with Stourport Civic Hall is irrelevant and shows a total failure to understand what the issues are here."
A clear indication that actually you have no idea what you are talking about!
Both are arts facilities. Both are under threat of closure (until papers are signed The Civic Centre could still go belly up). Both are versatile spaces. Both should be preserved.
Kidderminster seems to have got all the attention (again!) whereas the achievements if a few in Stourport are being ignored! Its as expected the largest part of the electorate is based in Kidderminster and any PPC should know win Kiddy, win the Election! so they all support Kidderminster.
@JonCooper and @ Dyanamite - Thanks for your comments.
@GobbyRobby - Moving the Gallery is an intriguing idea. But correct me if I'm wrong - I get this strange feeling that most people want the Gallery to stay in Kidderminster. (*deliberate wry smile, with tongue in cheek*)
mrs coops
says...
10:30am Wed 3 Oct 12
@ john caldwell....BRILLIAN
T COMMENT ;-D i couldnt agree more,i've agreed with all the comments that jons made regarding the gallery and what you wrote john sums it up. if this issue was purely to do with the gallery then they would have the support of everyone but its not just about the gallery its about ALL 3 towns regarding the library cuts. now i've read comments that have said it should be under the arts service and not the library service but it cant be that as its housed in a library so automatically comes into the cuts that sadly are being made,maybe there should have been an outcry in the beginining at where the galleries location was to be? some of the comments i've read have been very selfish as it might be very unfair to make these cuts full stop but its even more unfair to be soley interested in the gallery when these cuts are going to affect all 3 towns and our library facilities. i understand the gallery friends wanting to save their gallery but it wasnt being closed it was being re-located and the simple fact is is that wyre forest is made up of 3 towns and all these 3 towns should have equal consideration.
T COMMENT ;-D i couldnt agree more,i've agreed with all the comments that jons made regarding the gallery and what you wrote john sums it up. if this issue was purely to do with the gallery then they would have the support of everyone but its not just about the gallery its about ALL 3 towns regarding the library cuts. now i've read comments that have said it should be under the arts service and not the library service but it cant be that as its housed in a library so automatically comes into the cuts that sadly are being made,maybe there should have been an outcry in the beginining at where the galleries location was to be? some of the comments i've read have been very selfish as it might be very unfair to make these cuts full stop but its even more unfair to be soley interested in the gallery when these cuts are going to affect all 3 towns and our library facilities. i understand the gallery friends wanting to save their gallery but it wasnt being closed it was being re-located and the simple fact is is that wyre forest is made up of 3 towns and all these 3 towns should have equal consideration.
Stephen Brown
says...
10:32am Wed 3 Oct 12
JCaldwell: For the record - I am neither a Parliamentary spokesperson or Parliamentary candidate although I understand why some may come to that conclusion given content in the local paper. I am merely a Green Party campaigner who acts as a Green Party spokesperson on isses when required, although I did stand for district council twice among a number of other party candidates.
There has been much debate on these pages, particularly as it relates to the gallery issue, about 'politicians' getting or not getting involved in various campaigns, and being criticised if they do, and criticised if they don't, helping or hindering causes in consequence. Clearly it's wholly subjective and not something I would necessarily agree with but that's just the way things are in life.
Personally, I would like to get involved in all manner of issues that I feel passionate about but like most people I only have so much time. In consequence, I therefore apply myself to things that I feel I can make a proper contribution to given my time. In many other cases if people ask me, then that is also a good starting point generally said if I share their aims.
However, I don't know what you mean by me being 'silent' on the Civic issue as that is not actually correct.
On these very pages I have criticised the council for their actions over the new HQ and its direct inter-relation to the Civic and the issues it has caused there. Politically, the current actions of WFDC are all very convenient for them regarding the new HQ and Civic. I don't agree with what they have done, or how they have done it, or the uncertainty it has created for groups using the Civic or pursuing an interest in securing its future. As I say that's a political view.
On a less political level, and less well publicised probably when it comes to the Civic, you may be interested to note that when I met with John Campion earlier in the year over Wyre Forest libraries (which I am concerned about generally and have made well known here and elsewhere) we discussed at length the future of the Civic. That conversation veered between the WCC role and WFDC role as he does have 2 hats. I made it quite clear to him then that in my opinion, any financial deal that the council struck with those active in securing the Civic future had to be sustainable, viable and offer longer term stability. My view being that the council needed to send a message to those willing to put their own time in as volunteers etc that it wasn't going to be a short term fix just to bale out wfdc from a property portfolio problem. Thus, any funding arrangements had to consider and offer longer term guarantees. In that I did suggest a minimum of 5 years but for them to consider 10 years. Mr Campion's answer was that it was not something they normally do in local Govt (an ironic position to take given tcouncil's willingly sign 25 year deals with private companies for some services) but maybe it could be considered. of course, I don't know, not being involved, if that is so now or where any discussions are at but that was and is my view at least.
Being involved in a voluntary organisation myself I well know the problems short-termism in funding arrangements causes for voluntary organisations. And in the case of the Civic that should be avoided at all costs. Afterall, the council talk about 25 years for their new HQ so why shouldn't they be more long term in the case of funding for groups for buildings they discard from their property portfolio?
especially, as I think it would be a disaster if in a short space of time there would be funding issues for the Civic that render its future uncertain and undoes all the good work put in by the current volunteers etc.
There has been much debate on these pages, particularly as it relates to the gallery issue, about 'politicians' getting or not getting involved in various campaigns, and being criticised if they do, and criticised if they don't, helping or hindering causes in consequence. Clearly it's wholly subjective and not something I would necessarily agree with but that's just the way things are in life.
Personally, I would like to get involved in all manner of issues that I feel passionate about but like most people I only have so much time. In consequence, I therefore apply myself to things that I feel I can make a proper contribution to given my time. In many other cases if people ask me, then that is also a good starting point generally said if I share their aims.
However, I don't know what you mean by me being 'silent' on the Civic issue as that is not actually correct.
On these very pages I have criticised the council for their actions over the new HQ and its direct inter-relation to the Civic and the issues it has caused there. Politically, the current actions of WFDC are all very convenient for them regarding the new HQ and Civic. I don't agree with what they have done, or how they have done it, or the uncertainty it has created for groups using the Civic or pursuing an interest in securing its future. As I say that's a political view.
On a less political level, and less well publicised probably when it comes to the Civic, you may be interested to note that when I met with John Campion earlier in the year over Wyre Forest libraries (which I am concerned about generally and have made well known here and elsewhere) we discussed at length the future of the Civic. That conversation veered between the WCC role and WFDC role as he does have 2 hats. I made it quite clear to him then that in my opinion, any financial deal that the council struck with those active in securing the Civic future had to be sustainable, viable and offer longer term stability. My view being that the council needed to send a message to those willing to put their own time in as volunteers etc that it wasn't going to be a short term fix just to bale out wfdc from a property portfolio problem. Thus, any funding arrangements had to consider and offer longer term guarantees. In that I did suggest a minimum of 5 years but for them to consider 10 years. Mr Campion's answer was that it was not something they normally do in local Govt (an ironic position to take given tcouncil's willingly sign 25 year deals with private companies for some services) but maybe it could be considered. of course, I don't know, not being involved, if that is so now or where any discussions are at but that was and is my view at least.
Being involved in a voluntary organisation myself I well know the problems short-termism in funding arrangements causes for voluntary organisations. And in the case of the Civic that should be avoided at all costs. Afterall, the council talk about 25 years for their new HQ so why shouldn't they be more long term in the case of funding for groups for buildings they discard from their property portfolio?
especially, as I think it would be a disaster if in a short space of time there would be funding issues for the Civic that render its future uncertain and undoes all the good work put in by the current volunteers etc.
HowardM
says...
10:52am Wed 3 Oct 12
Re comments above about selectivity and the Civic Centre - I, like all councillors, am elected to represent a Ward (Broadwaters) - much of my activity is directed in supporting that community. However some issues cross boundries and I am currently involved in 3 such issues, The Library Gallery, The Hospital Campaign and, peripherally, the incinerator issue which overlaps into Wyre Forest. To do them all justice I cant take up every issue on which I have an I opinion - there are 41 other councillors as well!
ICHC and Labour objected to the plans regarding the new offices and their Stourport Councillors have been fighting the corner over the Civic Centre for over two years - as has the Town Council.. Its called division of responsibility and using our resourses to the best effect. My involvement in the issues surrounding the Civic Centre is neither wanted by other councillors in Stourport nor would it be welcomed. If you want councillor involvement and you dont get it there are 9 councillors in Stourport and Areley Kings who were elected to represent you - its to them you should complain. However, on every occasion the issue of the Civic Centre has come up, I have voted for its retention for the community so I havent been "silent" on the issue.
ICHC and Labour objected to the plans regarding the new offices and their Stourport Councillors have been fighting the corner over the Civic Centre for over two years - as has the Town Council.. Its called division of responsibility and using our resourses to the best effect. My involvement in the issues surrounding the Civic Centre is neither wanted by other councillors in Stourport nor would it be welcomed. If you want councillor involvement and you dont get it there are 9 councillors in Stourport and Areley Kings who were elected to represent you - its to them you should complain. However, on every occasion the issue of the Civic Centre has come up, I have voted for its retention for the community so I havent been "silent" on the issue.
jon cooper
says...
3:41pm Wed 3 Oct 12
@Stephen Brown: As you are continually labelled as 'Green Party Spokesman', i think its fair to presume that should the Green's decide to select a candidate in a forthcoming general election, you will be it if you choose to be !
I also have not read or heard real criticism about politicians getting behind campaigns, (only tongue in cheek observations); however, and yet again, i say to you that my opinion is that the political campaigners should have pointed out the alternatives that WCC layed out quite clearly towards the implications to the county library service, of which - like it or not - 'The Gallery' comes under its control ! THAT IS THE PURE CRITICISM !!!!!
The political championing of the arts world within Wyre Forest is clearly selective: Howard and yourself have shown this since 'The Gallery' campaign became public some months ago. Only this past summer it was stated that it was a shame that the same gusto wasn't applied to other facilities, (including the arts within the Civic Centre), of which you answered this:-
"I have not been party to its dealings, (The Civic Centre/Civic Hall), so am unable to comment about its viability in the long term. I do however wish those seeking to secure the future of the civic centre good luck in their efforts and that the right funding package can be put in place to preserve it".
So for you to proclaim today - "I don't know what you mean by me being 'silent' on the Civic issue as that is not actually correct" - is really curious to say the least, particularly when you informed us in the summer that you "have not been party to its dealings, so am unable to comment about its viability in the long term" ?
Just for the record, i am not a huge admirer of Councillor Campion in his role as district council leader. As a cabinet member on Worcestershire County Council however he is clearly responsible for the welfare of the communities of the county, and the frontline services that support them.
Perhaps Councillor Campion is a man who wears "two hats", but i actually do admire him, (shock horror), in supporting the majority of the residents of Worcestershire and not the minority !
I also have not read or heard real criticism about politicians getting behind campaigns, (only tongue in cheek observations); however, and yet again, i say to you that my opinion is that the political campaigners should have pointed out the alternatives that WCC layed out quite clearly towards the implications to the county library service, of which - like it or not - 'The Gallery' comes under its control ! THAT IS THE PURE CRITICISM !!!!!
The political championing of the arts world within Wyre Forest is clearly selective: Howard and yourself have shown this since 'The Gallery' campaign became public some months ago. Only this past summer it was stated that it was a shame that the same gusto wasn't applied to other facilities, (including the arts within the Civic Centre), of which you answered this:-
"I have not been party to its dealings, (The Civic Centre/Civic Hall), so am unable to comment about its viability in the long term. I do however wish those seeking to secure the future of the civic centre good luck in their efforts and that the right funding package can be put in place to preserve it".
So for you to proclaim today - "I don't know what you mean by me being 'silent' on the Civic issue as that is not actually correct" - is really curious to say the least, particularly when you informed us in the summer that you "have not been party to its dealings, so am unable to comment about its viability in the long term" ?
Just for the record, i am not a huge admirer of Councillor Campion in his role as district council leader. As a cabinet member on Worcestershire County Council however he is clearly responsible for the welfare of the communities of the county, and the frontline services that support them.
Perhaps Councillor Campion is a man who wears "two hats", but i actually do admire him, (shock horror), in supporting the majority of the residents of Worcestershire and not the minority !
jon cooper
says...
4:20pm Wed 3 Oct 12
@Howard Martin: I think it would be entirely unfair to bring into question your activities in your particular ward; you have shown very clearly your passion for Broadwaters, Kidderminster, and the services within it.
As Parliamentary Spokesman on behalf of the Labour Party, i guess it's fair to say you have aspirations of one day being Wyre Forest MP. Although you are a Kidderminster based councillor, i have no doubt whatsoever that politicians or folk in general would have had any issue with you showing a more vocal support as a Parliamentary Spokesman for the important facilities in the Wyre Forest area. The Civic, (an arts facility), and the district libraries being two of them.
@Stephen & Howard: There are genuine fears throughout the district and county of the fate of our libraries. The controversial aspect about this whole 'Gallery' affair, is that it's been presented in a one dimensional form. The threat on the county library service is not one to take lightly i fear, and the figure of saving within the county library service itself i believe is a figure that is determined to be reached, and in no way propaganda !
As Parliamentary Spokesman on behalf of the Labour Party, i guess it's fair to say you have aspirations of one day being Wyre Forest MP. Although you are a Kidderminster based councillor, i have no doubt whatsoever that politicians or folk in general would have had any issue with you showing a more vocal support as a Parliamentary Spokesman for the important facilities in the Wyre Forest area. The Civic, (an arts facility), and the district libraries being two of them.
@Stephen & Howard: There are genuine fears throughout the district and county of the fate of our libraries. The controversial aspect about this whole 'Gallery' affair, is that it's been presented in a one dimensional form. The threat on the county library service is not one to take lightly i fear, and the figure of saving within the county library service itself i believe is a figure that is determined to be reached, and in no way propaganda !
Stephen Brown
says...
4:52pm Wed 3 Oct 12
Jon: People can assume what they wish about my status as Green Party spokesperson come any general election but it does not make it so and it does not make me a parliamentary anything. That is a matter for the Green Party. I am however flattered that you confer such potential title on me and that you think others might too (-:
I have not been involved in the Civic issue, that is correct, so I am not party to where things are at, nor have I financial information - so I cannot say whether whatever is on the table now is viable or not. I do however have an opinion on whether the council should offer viability and that has been expressed.
But the point is, it was commented that I have been 'silent' when in fact, from the quote you use, and the above thread, I have not been silent but actually stated a view - and hence also refer people to what I said above about my available time etc.I gave the information about my conversation with Mr Campion because I thought it may be helpful and for information for people as I hope it also demonstrates a view positive for the volunteers looking to secure the Civic's future. My view on CAT's were posted on the Green Party website quite some time ago and in that I did state I prefer long term funding for such community transfers. So again, no silence from me.
I have not been involved in the Civic issue, that is correct, so I am not party to where things are at, nor have I financial information - so I cannot say whether whatever is on the table now is viable or not. I do however have an opinion on whether the council should offer viability and that has been expressed.
But the point is, it was commented that I have been 'silent' when in fact, from the quote you use, and the above thread, I have not been silent but actually stated a view - and hence also refer people to what I said above about my available time etc.I gave the information about my conversation with Mr Campion because I thought it may be helpful and for information for people as I hope it also demonstrates a view positive for the volunteers looking to secure the Civic's future. My view on CAT's were posted on the Green Party website quite some time ago and in that I did state I prefer long term funding for such community transfers. So again, no silence from me.
Gobby Robby
says...
5:04pm Wed 3 Oct 12
I'm beginning to have more & more empathy for politicians. Here we have 3 politicians, two of them not even being Councillors, who have got involved in a local issue only to get lambasted for being evil politicians! As Howard Martin says there are 41 other Councillors who are doing nothing. Personally i'm sympathetic to the compromise position on the gallery but then again this isn't really my bag. Maybe they've made a misjudgment in concentrating too hard on the Gallery, but all three did oppose the closing down of the Civic and the building of the expensive new offices - it failed. Unbelievably we now have Mark Garnier (who wanted to privatise Wyre Forest as a tax loss for his chums) & J Campion (closed the Civic, built the white elephant, badly mishandeled the gallery) being praised!!!!!!! Not to mention all the Stourport Councillors who've done nothing (is that because they're mainly Conservative led Health Concern & they're the new 'nice' party so they don't have to do anything?) getting zero flak. It's like the inverse of 1984 were the people instead of the government turn everything on its head in making 2+2=5.
If I were the unlucky 3 who'd got involved i'd give up. Maybe it's because this being a rural area the people will never give the benefit of the doubt to anyone who isn't a Tory Squire. I think it's safe to say the people know their place round here :-)
If I were the unlucky 3 who'd got involved i'd give up. Maybe it's because this being a rural area the people will never give the benefit of the doubt to anyone who isn't a Tory Squire. I think it's safe to say the people know their place round here :-)
Stephen Brown
says...
5:24pm Wed 3 Oct 12
Back to The Gallery: I have explained that I have more than a single interest in just the Gallery in respect of the library service, and my views on the wider library service in Wyre Forest are documented for people to read. This includes my submission to the recent govt committee inquiry on protecting libraries - so I hope people respect my aspiration to preserve library services and see that in context with this issue.
But the gallery campaign and my and others involvement in it is about the gallery. It might suit some in WCC to conflate issues and smoksecreen the finances and impact but the issue of the gallery is about the gallery. And I state again, it has been subject to misinformation and its impact on libraries by WCC because I believe it suits some in WCC to do so. The WCC threat to hit libraries over the gallery was true but it was based on an abuse of power in my opinion to achieve an end and that in itself rendered any and all consultation meaningless by design.
Without wishing to re-ignite another circular discussion here: The Friends were prepared to compromise, there were alternatives on the table that would be a basis to achieve a satisfactory outcome and WCC chose to ignore them and go for a political fix to save necks and prove a point to deliver on what cabinet agreed last year that was never going to be subject to public scrutiny. That was not the fault of campaigners political, arts based or otherwise. That is solely down to the actions of WCC. That is why the Friends campaign started.
At the end of the day folks can believe what they will and that is up to them and I respect that. But from my involvement, and I am pretty sure from the perspective of the arts community involved, we know what we experienced first hand from WCC, and the comments on here from all contributors of the Friends affirm that; and we all feel they were insincere in their dealings with us in order to achieve an end more to the liking of WCC than anyone else.
But the gallery campaign and my and others involvement in it is about the gallery. It might suit some in WCC to conflate issues and smoksecreen the finances and impact but the issue of the gallery is about the gallery. And I state again, it has been subject to misinformation and its impact on libraries by WCC because I believe it suits some in WCC to do so. The WCC threat to hit libraries over the gallery was true but it was based on an abuse of power in my opinion to achieve an end and that in itself rendered any and all consultation meaningless by design.
Without wishing to re-ignite another circular discussion here: The Friends were prepared to compromise, there were alternatives on the table that would be a basis to achieve a satisfactory outcome and WCC chose to ignore them and go for a political fix to save necks and prove a point to deliver on what cabinet agreed last year that was never going to be subject to public scrutiny. That was not the fault of campaigners political, arts based or otherwise. That is solely down to the actions of WCC. That is why the Friends campaign started.
At the end of the day folks can believe what they will and that is up to them and I respect that. But from my involvement, and I am pretty sure from the perspective of the arts community involved, we know what we experienced first hand from WCC, and the comments on here from all contributors of the Friends affirm that; and we all feel they were insincere in their dealings with us in order to achieve an end more to the liking of WCC than anyone else.
Gobby Robby
says...
5:45pm Wed 3 Oct 12
"so I hope people respect my aspiration to preserve library services and see that in context with this issue" - i'm afraid not Stephen, people will unfortunately see you as an evil politician out to feather your own nest somehow (even though you don't get paid) ;-)
jon cooper
says...
7:33pm Wed 3 Oct 12
@Gobby Robby:-
Point 1: Just where and when has anyone lambasted Howard, Neville and Stephen as being "evil politicians" ?
Point 2: I have NEVER praised John Campion for his handling of the new district council HQ or of the disgraceful way the Civic Centre has been treated since 1974 !!!!!!!
Regarding his role at county council level; it would have been democratically obscene in my view if John Campion and WCC represented a minority at 'The Gallery, whilst potentialy yielding the axe towards the majority throughout the communities of Worcestershire !!!!!!!
The only compromise regarding the gallery that it was to stay where it was Rob ! From the first proposal to options A & B there was no agreeable compromise. Who and where do you think 'Option C' came from ???????
Point 3: Who exactly has praised Stourport Town Council for doing nothing regarding the Civic Centre ? Stourport Town Council are trying to take over the Civic Centre's management !
With regards to the Civic Centre complex, you would be totally staggered to learn who has been the main player in getting the Civic Centre/Civic Hall transferred - former district councillor...JOHN HOLDEN. (Insane isn't it Rob, but a total fact) !
Point 3: Howard Martin did not oppose the closing down of the Civic Centre, it was Howard when leader of Health Concern who originally dreamt up the idea of a single-site complex and rejecting the Civic. Once with Labour, he opposed the move as the wrong move in this economic climate, (I TOTALLY AGREED), and he spoke wonderfully at the debate in February last year ! I even collected signatures on Labour's behalf to veto the single-site complex: HAVE YOU EVER WONDERED WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT LABOUR PETITION Rob ???????
If party politics were taken out of the this debate, common sense would say that the library service is of a much greater importance than 'The Gallery' surely ? To call WCC's library review 'propaganda' is totally and utterly naive and irresponsible to the residents of Worcestershire; this is NOT a one dimensional issue; and i couldn't care less what political party portrays it as one !
Point 1: Just where and when has anyone lambasted Howard, Neville and Stephen as being "evil politicians" ?
Point 2: I have NEVER praised John Campion for his handling of the new district council HQ or of the disgraceful way the Civic Centre has been treated since 1974 !!!!!!!
Regarding his role at county council level; it would have been democratically obscene in my view if John Campion and WCC represented a minority at 'The Gallery, whilst potentialy yielding the axe towards the majority throughout the communities of Worcestershire !!!!!!!
The only compromise regarding the gallery that it was to stay where it was Rob ! From the first proposal to options A & B there was no agreeable compromise. Who and where do you think 'Option C' came from ???????
Point 3: Who exactly has praised Stourport Town Council for doing nothing regarding the Civic Centre ? Stourport Town Council are trying to take over the Civic Centre's management !
With regards to the Civic Centre complex, you would be totally staggered to learn who has been the main player in getting the Civic Centre/Civic Hall transferred - former district councillor...JOHN HOLDEN. (Insane isn't it Rob, but a total fact) !
Point 3: Howard Martin did not oppose the closing down of the Civic Centre, it was Howard when leader of Health Concern who originally dreamt up the idea of a single-site complex and rejecting the Civic. Once with Labour, he opposed the move as the wrong move in this economic climate, (I TOTALLY AGREED), and he spoke wonderfully at the debate in February last year ! I even collected signatures on Labour's behalf to veto the single-site complex: HAVE YOU EVER WONDERED WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT LABOUR PETITION Rob ???????
If party politics were taken out of the this debate, common sense would say that the library service is of a much greater importance than 'The Gallery' surely ? To call WCC's library review 'propaganda' is totally and utterly naive and irresponsible to the residents of Worcestershire; this is NOT a one dimensional issue; and i couldn't care less what political party portrays it as one !
jon cooper
says...
7:33pm Wed 3 Oct 12
@Gobby Robby:-
Point 1: Just where and when has anyone lambasted Howard, Neville and Stephen as being "evil politicians" ?
Point 2: I have NEVER praised John Campion for his handling of the new district council HQ or of the disgraceful way the Civic Centre has been treated since 1974 !!!!!!!
Regarding his role at county council level; it would have been democratically obscene in my view if John Campion and WCC represented a minority at 'The Gallery, whilst potentialy yielding the axe towards the majority throughout the communities of Worcestershire !!!!!!!
The only compromise regarding the gallery that it was to stay where it was Rob ! From the first proposal to options A & B there was no agreeable compromise. Who and where do you think 'Option C' came from ???????
Point 3: Who exactly has praised Stourport Town Council for doing nothing regarding the Civic Centre ? Stourport Town Council are trying to take over the Civic Centre's management !
With regards to the Civic Centre complex, you would be totally staggered to learn who has been the main player in getting the Civic Centre/Civic Hall transferred - former district councillor...JOHN HOLDEN. (Insane isn't it Rob, but a total fact) !
Point 3: Howard Martin did not oppose the closing down of the Civic Centre, it was Howard when leader of Health Concern who originally dreamt up the idea of a single-site complex and rejecting the Civic. Once with Labour, he opposed the move as the wrong move in this economic climate, (I TOTALLY AGREED), and he spoke wonderfully at the debate in February last year ! I even collected signatures on Labour's behalf to veto the single-site complex: HAVE YOU EVER WONDERED WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT LABOUR PETITION Rob ???????
If party politics were taken out of the this debate, common sense would say that the library service is of a much greater importance than 'The Gallery' surely ? To call WCC's library review 'propaganda' is totally and utterly naive and irresponsible to the residents of Worcestershire; this is NOT a one dimensional issue; and i couldn't care less what political party portrays it as one !
Point 1: Just where and when has anyone lambasted Howard, Neville and Stephen as being "evil politicians" ?
Point 2: I have NEVER praised John Campion for his handling of the new district council HQ or of the disgraceful way the Civic Centre has been treated since 1974 !!!!!!!
Regarding his role at county council level; it would have been democratically obscene in my view if John Campion and WCC represented a minority at 'The Gallery, whilst potentialy yielding the axe towards the majority throughout the communities of Worcestershire !!!!!!!
The only compromise regarding the gallery that it was to stay where it was Rob ! From the first proposal to options A & B there was no agreeable compromise. Who and where do you think 'Option C' came from ???????
Point 3: Who exactly has praised Stourport Town Council for doing nothing regarding the Civic Centre ? Stourport Town Council are trying to take over the Civic Centre's management !
With regards to the Civic Centre complex, you would be totally staggered to learn who has been the main player in getting the Civic Centre/Civic Hall transferred - former district councillor...JOHN HOLDEN. (Insane isn't it Rob, but a total fact) !
Point 3: Howard Martin did not oppose the closing down of the Civic Centre, it was Howard when leader of Health Concern who originally dreamt up the idea of a single-site complex and rejecting the Civic. Once with Labour, he opposed the move as the wrong move in this economic climate, (I TOTALLY AGREED), and he spoke wonderfully at the debate in February last year ! I even collected signatures on Labour's behalf to veto the single-site complex: HAVE YOU EVER WONDERED WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT LABOUR PETITION Rob ???????
If party politics were taken out of the this debate, common sense would say that the library service is of a much greater importance than 'The Gallery' surely ? To call WCC's library review 'propaganda' is totally and utterly naive and irresponsible to the residents of Worcestershire; this is NOT a one dimensional issue; and i couldn't care less what political party portrays it as one !
Gobby Robby
says...
8:20pm Wed 3 Oct 12
Point1 - I refer mainly though not entirely to JCaldwell's comment where the 3 are clearly lambasted (also 'the 3' are clearly being put on the defensive throughout even though it isn't them that is the protaganist here).
Point2 - you can't say Campion is in the majority here.Saying that I happen to agree with you on the compromise.
Point 3 - Stourport town councillors may be playing a role in keeping Civic (it's in their interests that is where they meet), i've failed to hear any Stourport District Councillors speak on anything so why are the 3 getting all the flak? Have the Stourport Councillors campaigned for the Gallery? Should Kiddy residents feel agrieved? At the end of the day this is about the gallery and 3 people are getting it in the neck for an issue which is out of their hands.
Point 3 I defer to your point about Howard Martin.
Your point about common sense is disingenious,it is not common sense because people have a different view of what common sense is on this issue. The library service IS greater than the gallery, however you have taken at face value JC's threat that if he doesn't get his way he will close libraries, there were other options. If everyone bowed down to idle threats we wouldn't get anywhere. You can't take party politics out of it, there was a big campaign about the gallery (not something i'm interested in) and the Friends complained vociferously therefore it had become political. If you took party politics out of it the outcome would just be the same. The Conservative led Health Concern Party has also commented on here against Campion's treatment through their spokesman Doepublic but somehow he has escaped criticism.
Mark Garnier getting involved is the most cynical of all. He sees this as 'The Big Society'. He wants most public services to be run by volunteers so that's why he wants it to be a success, its a ground run for him if you like. So in a perverse way it may be good if the Civic fails if it stops Garnier's delusion of the nightmare scenario of The Big Society. And yet despite his cynism and complete disdain for the public services he has been praised???!!!
Point2 - you can't say Campion is in the majority here.Saying that I happen to agree with you on the compromise.
Point 3 - Stourport town councillors may be playing a role in keeping Civic (it's in their interests that is where they meet), i've failed to hear any Stourport District Councillors speak on anything so why are the 3 getting all the flak? Have the Stourport Councillors campaigned for the Gallery? Should Kiddy residents feel agrieved? At the end of the day this is about the gallery and 3 people are getting it in the neck for an issue which is out of their hands.
Point 3 I defer to your point about Howard Martin.
Your point about common sense is disingenious,it is not common sense because people have a different view of what common sense is on this issue. The library service IS greater than the gallery, however you have taken at face value JC's threat that if he doesn't get his way he will close libraries, there were other options. If everyone bowed down to idle threats we wouldn't get anywhere. You can't take party politics out of it, there was a big campaign about the gallery (not something i'm interested in) and the Friends complained vociferously therefore it had become political. If you took party politics out of it the outcome would just be the same. The Conservative led Health Concern Party has also commented on here against Campion's treatment through their spokesman Doepublic but somehow he has escaped criticism.
Mark Garnier getting involved is the most cynical of all. He sees this as 'The Big Society'. He wants most public services to be run by volunteers so that's why he wants it to be a success, its a ground run for him if you like. So in a perverse way it may be good if the Civic fails if it stops Garnier's delusion of the nightmare scenario of The Big Society. And yet despite his cynism and complete disdain for the public services he has been praised???!!!
Gobby Robby
says...
8:34pm Wed 3 Oct 12
Just to further my point about 'you can't take party politics out of it', is the fact that the decision to make the cuts out of public services rather than higher taxes is political. At a time when millionaires are about to have a tax rebate of £40,000, as Dynamite Dawson said, shows that these cuts are ideological to reduce the role of the state. Fair enough but they should at least have said instead of pretending they're for any other reason.
DOEPUBLIC
says...
10:24pm Wed 3 Oct 12
I'm humbled Gobby. I'm just a person that speaks freely as a member of ICHC.
DOEPUBLIC
says...
11:16pm Wed 3 Oct 12
Simply seeking to be a compassionate voice.
HowardM
says...
11:58am Thu 4 Oct 12
"Howard Martin did not oppose the closing down of the Civic Centre, it was Howard when leader of Health Concern who originally dreamt up the idea of a single-site complex and rejecting the Civic. Once with Labour, he opposed the move as the wrong move in this economic climate, (I TOTALLY AGREED), and he spoke wonderfully at the debate in February last year !"
Jon, with respect you are talking complete and utter tosh! The intention of WFDC for nearly 40 years has been to locate onto a single site - it makes complete sense, in the right environment, at the right time. When I was Leader of Council 2003/4 we carried through the partial relocation, agreed in the former Leaders time, of moving two offices into Duke House on a rolling, open ended contract. During that time the intention was to investigate, evaluate and cost the possibility of locating ALL council services onto an expanded Duke House site (including the still unrelocated Green Street offices and depot). THERE WAS NEVER EVER ANY INTENTION TO CLOSE THE CIVIC HALL AND THE CIVIC CENTRE WOULD HAVE BEEN REATAINED IN COUNCIL OWNERSHIP FOR OTHER USE! We did not need to sell it to fund the plan. I would not have allowed closure to happen, as Leader, without alternative and better provision being made in Stourport. Remember, at that time WFDC had nearly £30m on deposit and was getting nearly £3m a year in interest! Thats all been wasted by the Torys - on deposit now £0! To build the new Leisure Centre will need to take on up to £10m of borrownigs - to be re-paid out of Council Tax receipts.
By 2007, when the current administration began the real work on "single site", because of dwindling capital on deposit, the worsening economy and higher priorities for us of better ways to spend money, ICHC (I was still Leader) moved its position against single site in principle, but voted to continue the evaluation of feasibility so as to make a rational judgement on all the facts. As it transpired, the Council business case didnt convince and ICHC continued and hardened its opposition, under my Leadership (mainly because of the intention to dispose of the whole of the Civic Centre site) - that ICHC opposition continued after I left. My opposition of the project followed me to Labour, who had always been against, it didnt suddenly materialise when I got there! Wrong development, wrong place, wrong time, wrong use of money! My position for the last 6 years! That is based on business sense, common sense, affordability and alternative use for the capital. Those are the same reasons I never supported the disposal of the Civic Hall and would never had put that option to council had I continued as Leader after 2004. I will engage on any matter with anyone - debate is good (and remember the majority of WFDC Cllrs are completely silent on everything) but if you want the debate please speak TO me on here, not as if I am some remote entity by referring to me in the third person and making sweeping statements about which you are not privy to the facts - which obviously, I am in a position to refute. But quite frankly there are much more useful ways for me to spend my time trying to serve this community than unpicking, misinformation and inaccurate statements.
Jon, with respect you are talking complete and utter tosh! The intention of WFDC for nearly 40 years has been to locate onto a single site - it makes complete sense, in the right environment, at the right time. When I was Leader of Council 2003/4 we carried through the partial relocation, agreed in the former Leaders time, of moving two offices into Duke House on a rolling, open ended contract. During that time the intention was to investigate, evaluate and cost the possibility of locating ALL council services onto an expanded Duke House site (including the still unrelocated Green Street offices and depot). THERE WAS NEVER EVER ANY INTENTION TO CLOSE THE CIVIC HALL AND THE CIVIC CENTRE WOULD HAVE BEEN REATAINED IN COUNCIL OWNERSHIP FOR OTHER USE! We did not need to sell it to fund the plan. I would not have allowed closure to happen, as Leader, without alternative and better provision being made in Stourport. Remember, at that time WFDC had nearly £30m on deposit and was getting nearly £3m a year in interest! Thats all been wasted by the Torys - on deposit now £0! To build the new Leisure Centre will need to take on up to £10m of borrownigs - to be re-paid out of Council Tax receipts.
By 2007, when the current administration began the real work on "single site", because of dwindling capital on deposit, the worsening economy and higher priorities for us of better ways to spend money, ICHC (I was still Leader) moved its position against single site in principle, but voted to continue the evaluation of feasibility so as to make a rational judgement on all the facts. As it transpired, the Council business case didnt convince and ICHC continued and hardened its opposition, under my Leadership (mainly because of the intention to dispose of the whole of the Civic Centre site) - that ICHC opposition continued after I left. My opposition of the project followed me to Labour, who had always been against, it didnt suddenly materialise when I got there! Wrong development, wrong place, wrong time, wrong use of money! My position for the last 6 years! That is based on business sense, common sense, affordability and alternative use for the capital. Those are the same reasons I never supported the disposal of the Civic Hall and would never had put that option to council had I continued as Leader after 2004. I will engage on any matter with anyone - debate is good (and remember the majority of WFDC Cllrs are completely silent on everything) but if you want the debate please speak TO me on here, not as if I am some remote entity by referring to me in the third person and making sweeping statements about which you are not privy to the facts - which obviously, I am in a position to refute. But quite frankly there are much more useful ways for me to spend my time trying to serve this community than unpicking, misinformation and inaccurate statements.
Gobby Robby
says...
12:37pm Thu 4 Oct 12
Thanks for that Howard, I feel totally vindicated now. I retract my earlier statement to Jon C "I defer to your point about Howard Martin".
Be wary when people say 'an end to party politics' what this has been proved to mean is 'shut up and do what the Tories tell you' ;-)
Be wary when people say 'an end to party politics' what this has been proved to mean is 'shut up and do what the Tories tell you' ;-)
jon cooper
says...
3:37pm Thu 4 Oct 12
I think it's common knowledge Howard that WFDC's intention from the day they stepped inside The Civic in 1974 was to re-locate to Bromsgrove Street in Kidderminster. I seem to recall the longest serving member saying: "until the council bottled it" ?
It probably explains as to why the Civic Centre complex has not benefitted from the care that has been implimented on Kidderminster Town Hall and The Guildhall in Bewdley.
As you're such an advocat of Stourport Civic Centre/Civic Hall Howard, how much capital was set aside to maintain the building when you were leader ?
And as a pioneer of the arts: How many times in the last 18 months in your role as Parliamentary Spokesman for Wyre Forest have you shown support towards the volunteer work that has been apparent by members of 'The Civic Group' trying to secure a future for the arts in Wyre Forest ?
Regarding single-site; when you crossed the floor to Labour: I was in contact with you regarding the single-site issue, (i seem to remember you calling me a "disillusioned Tory") ! You asked me personally to sign the Labour petition to "SUSPEND" the single-site project to allow a full scrutiny to take place. Not only did i sign it, i collected three sheets of signatures to be presented to full council in February 2011, (mostly signatures from "disillusioned Tories like myself) !
As you have explained in detail your opposition to the Conservatives plans on single-site; i ask you again, with respect:
"WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SIGNATURES I COLLECTED ON YOURS AND LABOUR'S BEHALF THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO FULL COUNCIL ALONGSIDE THE UKIP PETITION IN FEBRUARY 2011" ???????
Yes we have "silent" councillors. But i'm not sure what is worse; the silence or the apparent lack of delivery ! Now we have the gallery issue that has been based on not divulging the full intentions of WCC onto the county library service itself.
'The Gallery' issue; the campaign to keep it where it is, (despite the implications on other county libraries - (NO PROPAGANDA), and the alleged passion for the arts in Wyre Forest from political campaigners is so bizarre it's quite unbelievable to comprehend.
When i originally made a comment on this campaign, and when i tried to highlight the real controversy to this issue - the complete and utter disregard to WCC's intentions on our neighbouring libraries - i was accused of making sweeping comments.
I was really concerned that John Campion may have come to a decision based on the implications of the minority rather than the MAJORITY of Worcestershire's communities.
Thank God he has based this library review with sympathy to all the communities in Worcestershire, and this is something that not one political campaigner has shown any concern for whatsoever !
It probably explains as to why the Civic Centre complex has not benefitted from the care that has been implimented on Kidderminster Town Hall and The Guildhall in Bewdley.
As you're such an advocat of Stourport Civic Centre/Civic Hall Howard, how much capital was set aside to maintain the building when you were leader ?
And as a pioneer of the arts: How many times in the last 18 months in your role as Parliamentary Spokesman for Wyre Forest have you shown support towards the volunteer work that has been apparent by members of 'The Civic Group' trying to secure a future for the arts in Wyre Forest ?
Regarding single-site; when you crossed the floor to Labour: I was in contact with you regarding the single-site issue, (i seem to remember you calling me a "disillusioned Tory") ! You asked me personally to sign the Labour petition to "SUSPEND" the single-site project to allow a full scrutiny to take place. Not only did i sign it, i collected three sheets of signatures to be presented to full council in February 2011, (mostly signatures from "disillusioned Tories like myself) !
As you have explained in detail your opposition to the Conservatives plans on single-site; i ask you again, with respect:
"WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SIGNATURES I COLLECTED ON YOURS AND LABOUR'S BEHALF THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO FULL COUNCIL ALONGSIDE THE UKIP PETITION IN FEBRUARY 2011" ???????
Yes we have "silent" councillors. But i'm not sure what is worse; the silence or the apparent lack of delivery ! Now we have the gallery issue that has been based on not divulging the full intentions of WCC onto the county library service itself.
'The Gallery' issue; the campaign to keep it where it is, (despite the implications on other county libraries - (NO PROPAGANDA), and the alleged passion for the arts in Wyre Forest from political campaigners is so bizarre it's quite unbelievable to comprehend.
When i originally made a comment on this campaign, and when i tried to highlight the real controversy to this issue - the complete and utter disregard to WCC's intentions on our neighbouring libraries - i was accused of making sweeping comments.
I was really concerned that John Campion may have come to a decision based on the implications of the minority rather than the MAJORITY of Worcestershire's communities.
Thank God he has based this library review with sympathy to all the communities in Worcestershire, and this is something that not one political campaigner has shown any concern for whatsoever !
Dynamite Dawson
says...
5:35pm Thu 4 Oct 12
So Howard Martin is to blame for the closure of the Gallery and John Campion is the hero?? Jon Cooper claims to be a disillusioned Tory - I wonder what he was like before he became disillusioned!!!! Sounds like John Campion's attack dog!
jon cooper
says...
6:50pm Thu 4 Oct 12
I voted Conservative all my voting life, that was until i became fully aware with how the current Wyre Forest Conservatives dictate in Wyre Forest. From the car-parking review right through to the traveller site debacle, i haven't found any solace in the behaviour of the controlling Conservatives.
I have always cast my democratic right to vote, and i feel everyone should vote for a candidate that they feel would be beneficial, not only to their prospective ward, but for the outlying district.
Since the car-parking review, i have been appalled by the so called democracy in Wyre Forest - of which John Campion is leader. There have been decisions that have been railroaded through without adequate fair consultation, and against the wishes of majority feeling. For many, many reasons i have been a huge critic of Councillor Campion's meaning of democracy within Wyre Forest.
The County Library Review in my opinion is an extremely important issue, and the ramifications from it could affect a huge amount of libraries and the communities that rely on them throughout the county. The original proposal for the gallery was NOT TO CLOSE IT, but to RELOCATE IT, from its current home as i have pointed out all those comments ago !
When John Campion put the gallery proposal on 'hold', i honestly feared the worst. I had a horrible feeling he might show bias, and put an already fragile situation within the county library service in a much bleaker position than it already is.
This whole campaign has been classified as a one-dimensional issue which it clearly isn't ! To dismiss threats onto our county library service from one of our political spokesman as "propaganda" is quite frankly in my view abysmal !
Councillor Campion is in a no win situation regarding the library review. Even Councillor Fran Oborski is on record saying that she doesn't envy John Campion the library review; and as rarely as i ever agree with Mrs Oborski, she has clearly got a point !
As well as the original option of relocation, WCC took the opinions of 'The Friends' into account, and proposed another two options for the gallery question. Kidderminster Library hosted consultation events for people to question the matter in hand - which i attended. The alternative plans, and the events must have cost a substantial amount of money, but what was very, very clear the survival of our library service was paramount !
Is John Campion a hero ? Not in my opinion; he had to base his decision on what was right for the majority.
AND ABOUT TIME TOO !
I have always cast my democratic right to vote, and i feel everyone should vote for a candidate that they feel would be beneficial, not only to their prospective ward, but for the outlying district.
Since the car-parking review, i have been appalled by the so called democracy in Wyre Forest - of which John Campion is leader. There have been decisions that have been railroaded through without adequate fair consultation, and against the wishes of majority feeling. For many, many reasons i have been a huge critic of Councillor Campion's meaning of democracy within Wyre Forest.
The County Library Review in my opinion is an extremely important issue, and the ramifications from it could affect a huge amount of libraries and the communities that rely on them throughout the county. The original proposal for the gallery was NOT TO CLOSE IT, but to RELOCATE IT, from its current home as i have pointed out all those comments ago !
When John Campion put the gallery proposal on 'hold', i honestly feared the worst. I had a horrible feeling he might show bias, and put an already fragile situation within the county library service in a much bleaker position than it already is.
This whole campaign has been classified as a one-dimensional issue which it clearly isn't ! To dismiss threats onto our county library service from one of our political spokesman as "propaganda" is quite frankly in my view abysmal !
Councillor Campion is in a no win situation regarding the library review. Even Councillor Fran Oborski is on record saying that she doesn't envy John Campion the library review; and as rarely as i ever agree with Mrs Oborski, she has clearly got a point !
As well as the original option of relocation, WCC took the opinions of 'The Friends' into account, and proposed another two options for the gallery question. Kidderminster Library hosted consultation events for people to question the matter in hand - which i attended. The alternative plans, and the events must have cost a substantial amount of money, but what was very, very clear the survival of our library service was paramount !
Is John Campion a hero ? Not in my opinion; he had to base his decision on what was right for the majority.
AND ABOUT TIME TOO !
Gobby Robby
says...
7:36pm Thu 4 Oct 12
Good post Jon, you're almost winning me round ;-) You have reedemed yourself after talking 'complete tosh' about Howard Martin
jon cooper
says...
8:52pm Thu 4 Oct 12
"Complete tosh", about single-site ??
Er, not entirely Rob - but let's not hold a "PETITION" about it ;-)
Er, not entirely Rob - but let's not hold a "PETITION" about it ;-)
Dynamite Dawson
says...
10:27pm Thu 4 Oct 12
In my view jon cooper seems to be delighted that the gallery has been as good as demolished. Surely the people of Wyre Forest should be working together not attacking each other. Talk about parochial! Talk about being devisive! I bet John Campion is loving this!!!
Mary79
says...
7:42am Fri 5 Oct 12
the gallery attracts international artists and its importance spreads beyond wyre forest and it is about to be destroyed but some still don’t get it. this debate has been reduced to a farce by depressing and parochial attitudes and attacks on those trying to stop the destruction of the gallery. the tories must be rubbing their hands together with glee that their cuts are seeing the usual infighting between the peasants who are most affected. well done!
LILY B
says...
8:11am Fri 5 Oct 12
The gallery isnt "being closed", it isnt being "as good as demolished" its being re-located! and mary79 maybe if the gallery peasants had shown a bit more consideration for the library peasants then the tories wouldnt be able to rub their hands together with glee. As far as the councils concerned and quite frankly i couldnt care less whose conservative,labour or liberal they had to make savings, they are still in the wrong as no cuts should have to be made but the simple fact is that the gallery is housed in a library so will be included in those cuts. i agree wyre forest residents should stick together but maybe if that had happened in the first place and the gallery friends had been advised to compromise then this issue would have already been resolved .
Mary79
says...
8:14am Fri 5 Oct 12
see, just don't get it........
Gobby Robby
says...
9:54am Fri 5 Oct 12
What ever the merits of this case are, something even worse could be happening. Holy Trinity School is once again applying for the tax payer to pay theeir school fees. If the government can do that why can't they afford to pay for the Gallery and the Civic. Sickening.
HowardM
says...
11:26am Fri 5 Oct 12
Lily B it isn't being "relocated" - its being scrapped as a single entity! The picture hanging will be on a wall elsewhere in the Library - not professionally designed and configured space, as now. The performance space is lost to the Library completely, but the piano will be put in the Corn Exchange to be used as a table (sic), no doubt, when a jumble sale takes place there! That is not dedicated performance space! Also it will be unavailable for use when the adjacent Town Hall Music Room is used for anything else since the bar will be open. Dont know how many times I need to say this but the piano is too small in capacity for either of those rooms (Steinways advice) since it is a "small venue" concert grand - it cant be re "voiced" since its inside workings are custom built for the size of the Gallery, Steinway class both rooms at the Town Hall as large venues. It would be like listening to Judas Priest playing there through 50w amps - totally pointless! And............. every time the piano is moved it needs to be done by Steinway approved piano movers, on a trolly, then re-tuned - conservative (not a word that comes easy to write) cost £300 every time. And.........it needs to be kept in a controlled area with humidity maintained between 40 -60%, there is no humidity control in the Town Hall, (where both temperature and humidity swings are huge) but there is in the Gallery. It, along with accoustics, cost £300k to custom build into the Gallery when that was bult nearly 20 years ago. That is advice from the original architect, not hearsay. No plans exist to replicate that in the Town Hall since the cost would probably be twice what it was last time. So NO LILLY B the Gallery is not being moved, it is being scrapped!
@Jon Cooper - I'm not evading the points in your last post but dont think people with an interest in the Gallery (this blog) want to see you and me debating what did or did not happen in WFDC 8/9 years ago or what exactly my role as Labour Spokesperson is. Happy to give you a full reply to all your points if you email me (you have my address on KHA list) and you can then make my reply public in any forum you wish if you feel it should be in the public domain.
@Jon Cooper - I'm not evading the points in your last post but dont think people with an interest in the Gallery (this blog) want to see you and me debating what did or did not happen in WFDC 8/9 years ago or what exactly my role as Labour Spokesperson is. Happy to give you a full reply to all your points if you email me (you have my address on KHA list) and you can then make my reply public in any forum you wish if you feel it should be in the public domain.
jon cooper
says...
3:52pm Fri 5 Oct 12
@DynamiteDawson: No i am far from delighted about how this gallery issue has panned out. I'd like to have seen the gallery being retained within Kidderminster Library as per the original proposal by WCC. (See reply to LILY B).
Again this IS NOT a single issue question; the ramifications of this decision could have affected more of the communities of Wyre Forest/Worcestershir
e than this single entity at Kidderminster Library.
PS: Thanks for the chuckle accusing me of being John Campion's 'Attack Dog". Brilliant ;-)
@Mary79: Interesting that you accuse me of having a parochial attitude. What is parochial of bringing to attention the wider aspect of the County Library Review that has been strangely omitted from this campaign ????
PS: As you have such a knowledge on the lifestyle of 'The Gallery'; could you please tell us all how many times in the last 12 months has 'The Gallery' been used for musical purposes' eg: To embrace the International Artists you refer to ?
@LILY B: I'm going to cut and paste the original proposal for 'The Gallery' relocation for you to read at your leisure:-
"A flexible meeting room space that supports community requirements will be created on the 1st floor of the library to replicate as far as
possible, existing facilities on the 2nd floor. 2 meeting rooms with partition walls will support the creation of flexible layouts to provide event
and performance space as well as meeting space.
The new, flexible meeting room space on the first floor opens out into the main body of
Library and we will ensure that furniture is easily moveable to facilitate the quick and easy creation of a larger performance or event space.
We anticipate that there will be no change in the size of audience that can be accommodated in the new performance space. The largest
audience would be 90, an increase of 10 on the current available space. Refreshment facilities will be included in the meeting space, along with
storage space for seating.
At present we have 2 meeting rooms with folding partitions separating them with a Tea point total Area= 68.8 sq m. The new scheme will have
3 meeting rooms 2 of which have separating folding screens and with 2 tea point total area = 102.5 sq m in addition the space can be opened
up to the rest of the first floor by pushing the bookcase back.
WE WILL EMPLOY AN ACOUSTIC ENGINEER as part of redesign the first floor space to ensure optimal acoustic performance in the space"
Hope this quells the confusion about WCC planning to scrap 'The Gallery' at the early stages of this incredible issue !
Again this IS NOT a single issue question; the ramifications of this decision could have affected more of the communities of Wyre Forest/Worcestershir
e than this single entity at Kidderminster Library.
PS: Thanks for the chuckle accusing me of being John Campion's 'Attack Dog". Brilliant ;-)
@Mary79: Interesting that you accuse me of having a parochial attitude. What is parochial of bringing to attention the wider aspect of the County Library Review that has been strangely omitted from this campaign ????
PS: As you have such a knowledge on the lifestyle of 'The Gallery'; could you please tell us all how many times in the last 12 months has 'The Gallery' been used for musical purposes' eg: To embrace the International Artists you refer to ?
@LILY B: I'm going to cut and paste the original proposal for 'The Gallery' relocation for you to read at your leisure:-
"A flexible meeting room space that supports community requirements will be created on the 1st floor of the library to replicate as far as
possible, existing facilities on the 2nd floor. 2 meeting rooms with partition walls will support the creation of flexible layouts to provide event
and performance space as well as meeting space.
The new, flexible meeting room space on the first floor opens out into the main body of
Library and we will ensure that furniture is easily moveable to facilitate the quick and easy creation of a larger performance or event space.
We anticipate that there will be no change in the size of audience that can be accommodated in the new performance space. The largest
audience would be 90, an increase of 10 on the current available space. Refreshment facilities will be included in the meeting space, along with
storage space for seating.
At present we have 2 meeting rooms with folding partitions separating them with a Tea point total Area= 68.8 sq m. The new scheme will have
3 meeting rooms 2 of which have separating folding screens and with 2 tea point total area = 102.5 sq m in addition the space can be opened
up to the rest of the first floor by pushing the bookcase back.
WE WILL EMPLOY AN ACOUSTIC ENGINEER as part of redesign the first floor space to ensure optimal acoustic performance in the space"
Hope this quells the confusion about WCC planning to scrap 'The Gallery' at the early stages of this incredible issue !
Arsiep says...
12:07pm Fri 28 Sep 12
!!!!!!