IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

55 Pages V  « < 26 27 28 29 30 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Newbury's CCTV
dannyboy
post Jan 21 2011, 11:08 AM
Post #541


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,054
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (Iommi @ Jan 21 2011, 11:00 AM) *
OK, but that is very defeatist and also makes me wonder why you bother to post at all; hardly anything here will material change anything. It also doesn't explain why you would be so sensitive to Richard Garvie's anti-West Berks rhetoric.

I think it is surprising you find RG's language and attitude more worthy of ridicule than allegations of your tax money being poorly spent, or the council badly managing a project that undermines the security of the town.

I am still convinced you are not impartial in these matters.

No, it is realist, not defeatist attitude. I'm not defeated by it.

My tax money would be & is badly spent full stop.

On local & national levels.

RG still thinks we'd all be on ambrosia if the Labour party were in charge in West Berks. Say what you like about the current council, but don't try & make out it would be any better under a flag of different colour.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Jan 21 2011, 12:37 PM
Post #542


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (dannyboy @ Jan 21 2011, 11:08 AM) *
No, it is realist, not defeatist attitude.

In practical terms, the words have the same meaning.

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Jan 21 2011, 11:08 AM) *
I'm not defeated by it.

It doesn't sound like you are particularly triumphant either, but I insists it doesn't explain why you should be so demeaning to people who might in all probability be deluded that they can change anything. The way our democracy works is that it relies on opposition pressure to be kept in some form of check. The practical effect of stopping what you protests about, is to strip away a part of the political mechanism.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Jan 21 2011, 12:40 PM
Post #543


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,054
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



strip away a part of the party political mechanism.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Jan 21 2011, 12:44 PM
Post #544


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (dannyboy @ Jan 21 2011, 12:40 PM) *
strip away a part of the party political mechanism.

Again, you are playing with semantics, but drawing from your opinion: as that ain't going to change any time soon, we may as well go and debate summut else.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Jan 21 2011, 12:59 PM
Post #545


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,054
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (Iommi @ Jan 21 2011, 12:44 PM) *
Again, you are playing with semantics, but drawing from your opinion: as that ain't going to change any time soon, we may as well go and debate summut else.

Debate an new topic?

Well, RG has always struck me as a televangelist sermonising against the evils of the popish council, so maybe we could do religion?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Jan 21 2011, 01:11 PM
Post #546


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



Hmm, I'm not really religious either!

Anyway, about those CCTVs! tongue.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
admin
post Jan 21 2011, 01:23 PM
Post #547


Advanced Member
***

Group: Administrators
Posts: 59
Joined: 3-March 09
Member No.: 2



QUOTE (Iommi @ Jan 20 2011, 06:12 PM) *
My sources tell me that NWN did get a number of replies. Richard, do you have an email address that people (general public) can contact you on that you are happy for people to use? If so, would you post here or PM it to me?


Just for the record, your 'sources' are wrong. The only letter the newspaper received was from Richard Garvie as mentioned above which is being considered for publication for next week.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Jan 21 2011, 02:09 PM
Post #548


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (admin @ Jan 21 2011, 01:23 PM) *
Just for the record, your 'sources' are wrong. The only letter the newspaper received was from Richard Garvie as mentioned above which is being considered for publication for next week.

I'll have to see about getting my money back from the snitch at NWN then! tongue.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post Jan 21 2011, 02:30 PM
Post #549


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



Anyway, back on topic, it appears that there is more misleading going on surrounding CCTV and potentially further cuts to be made to the capability we previously had in West Berkshire. Didn't Cllr Stansfield say in the paper last week that savings need to be made but "CCTV will certainly not be one of them"?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Jan 21 2011, 02:38 PM
Post #550


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,054
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Jan 21 2011, 02:30 PM) *
Anyway, back on topic, it appears that there is more misleading going on surrounding CCTV and potentially further cuts to be made to the capability we previously had in West Berkshire. Didn't Cllr Stansfield say in the paper last week that savings need to be made but "CCTV will certainly not be one of them"?

At least he comes out with a statement rather than a sentence full of ifs buts & maybes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Jan 21 2011, 05:19 PM
Post #551


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Jan 21 2011, 02:30 PM) *
Anyway, back on topic, it appears that there is more misleading going on surrounding CCTV and potentially further cuts to be made to the capability we previously had in West Berkshire. Didn't Cllr Stansfield say in the paper last week that savings need to be made but "CCTV will certainly not be one of them"?
The only misleading going on seems to be around the number of letters NWN have received on the subject.

In reality it just seems to be one, from yourself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Jan 21 2011, 06:09 PM
Post #552


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (user23 @ Jan 21 2011, 05:19 PM) *
The only misleading going on seems to be around the number of letters NWN have received on the subject.


So Cllr Stansfield's statements that there were no problems with the CCTV transfer were not misleading? If not then everyone else's comments that the whole transfer was a shambles must be misleading. Either way your statement is misleading. blink.gif

QUOTE (user23 @ Jan 21 2011, 05:19 PM) *
In reality it just seems to be one, from yourself.


Has RG claimed otherwise?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Jan 21 2011, 06:15 PM
Post #553


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (blackdog @ Jan 21 2011, 06:09 PM) *
So Cllr Stansfield's statements that there were no problems with the CCTV transfer were not misleading? If not then everyone else's comments that the whole transfer was a shambles must be misleading. Either way your statement is misleading. blink.gif
Depends how you define "problems" I'd guess.

If the transfer was going to plan or was within tolerance one could legitimately say there were no problems.

Seems to me that one person's been on the wind up and others have fallen for it. The moral of the story, don't believe everything you read on a chat forum. From the lack of letters in the NWN post bag it looks like the people of Newbury already know this though.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Jan 21 2011, 06:17 PM
Post #554


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



I've just seen this article http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article...articleID=15702 in which WBC advertise that the bollards in Bartholomew Street will be switched off for a few days - thus letting potential offenders know that they can use this route during pedestrianised hours.

Rather like telling everyone that various CCTV cameras are not being monitored - which they refuse to do as it might let potential offenders know that there is a reduced risk of being caught.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Jan 21 2011, 06:21 PM
Post #555


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



Another CCTV news item:

Cycle shop burgled twice in two weeks http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article...articleID=15683

"Mr Tomlinson said that the police were looking into whether West Berkshire Council’s CCTV cameras had captured the incident."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Jan 21 2011, 06:24 PM
Post #556


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (user23 @ Jan 21 2011, 06:15 PM) *
Seems to me that one person's been on the wind up and others have fallen for it. The moral of the story, don't believe everything you read on a chat forum. From the lack of letters in the NWN post bag it looks like the people of Newbury already know this though.

What b*ll*cks.

No-one fell for anything. Questions were asked and poor answers were supplied, thus fueling speculation. PR is something West Berks Council, in my view, are very poor at.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post Jan 21 2011, 07:16 PM
Post #557


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



The council have confirmed that 24 cameras (out of 40) are now fully operational. That's three less than the last figure I was given. I believe the 24 number was also given at the Town Centre meeting this morning. User23, I have all of the emails from various different parties on CCTV, including the council. If there is no investigation, I will publish it all once the network is operational and you can all make your own minds up.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post Jan 21 2011, 07:20 PM
Post #558


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



I have to say, the paper should be praised for reporting the facts on this issue. I took this up on behalf of traders, the paper would appear to be coming from a public safety point of view and I have to applaud that. The facts are, Cllr Stansfield and our local MP went onto the radio claiming everything was sorted and that the new system was providing a much better service at less cost. Anyone else think Richard Benyon was led down the garden path by his party colleagues on this? Cllr Stansfield claimed everything would be operational on Friday 7th January, it's now the 21st January and still we only have just over half of them working. Either he was misled by the officers, or he didn't check the facts before blowing his own personal trumpet!!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Jan 22 2011, 02:18 AM
Post #559


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Jan 21 2011, 07:16 PM) *
The council have confirmed that 24 cameras (out of 40) are now fully operational.

As a matter of interest - how many cameras were being monitored 12 months ago?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Jan 22 2011, 02:18 AM
Post #560


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Jan 21 2011, 07:16 PM) *
The council have confirmed that 24 cameras (out of 40) are now fully operational.

As a matter of interest - how many cameras were being monitored 12 months ago?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

55 Pages V  « < 26 27 28 29 30 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 27th May 2019 - 03:25 AM