Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Richard Garvie Aug 14 2012, 07:52 AM

I've been thinking long and hard for some time about creating a community radio project for West Berkshire, I know I have spoken with some of you already. I want to organise a little get together to discuss things and possibly look to move to the next step, if any of you would like to attend please call me on 07411 488324 or email richard.garvie@googlemail.com.

Posted by: massifheed Aug 14 2012, 09:07 AM

Blimey! Is it election time?

Sounds interesting. Are you talking about a good old FM broadcast radio station, or an internet based streaming version? Are there not huge costs involved with a broadcast radio station mainly due to having to pay for a reserved frequency?

Posted by: Penelope Aug 14 2012, 01:57 PM

You can always power it from the Kennet turbine.

Posted by: user23 Aug 14 2012, 04:34 PM

It's a good idea but I'm not sure if Ofcom would grant a Community Radio Licence for Newbury.

You'd have to demonstrate there was a social need for it, or there was a particular section of the community it would benefit such as a group that spoke a particular language that it would cater for.

Posted by: Newbelly Aug 14 2012, 04:41 PM

Fair point. What need has been identified?

Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 14 2012, 04:55 PM

I've read nothing that suggests it is like that. It seems it is more to do with convincing Ofcom that the station is tenable and there isn't an over subscription from competing communities. I think your criteria would come into play if there was a request from another community that was in the same area.

Posted by: Newbelly Aug 14 2012, 05:10 PM

I don't see what you say and what user23 says as being mutually exclusive.

"Community radio" in its traditional sense seems a bit old hat when there are local commercial stations and Internet radio? I would rather see funding going towards getting more people access to the Internet.

Posted by: Penelope Aug 14 2012, 05:13 PM

What's the business plan?

Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 14 2012, 05:38 PM

The inference was that you had to prove a need, like for an ethnic minority for instance. That doesn't seem to be the message I have read. It seems to be more towards sustainability.


'Local' commercial stations and community radio are to serve different purposes.

I think to win a licence would be a big coup for Newbury district, but to be fair I'd be very impressed if it did get of the ground. In other words, I'm sceptical it will happen.

It seems there are few stations in the area at the moment and an all inclusive youth and young adult project would interesting.

http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/radio-ops/coverage/community-map.pdf

Posted by: Richard Garvie Aug 14 2012, 05:40 PM

Ofcom will accept applications for a five year licence in 2014 for groups in the south east. Some towns / cities have no available frequencies, but there is space here if a group could demonstrate it was sustainable over the period applied for. In the short term, the plan would be to run a few trial broadcasts on fm using a 28 day rsl licence.

Posted by: user23 Aug 14 2012, 06:00 PM

There's certainly space on the "dial" for it.

I'm not sure it could ever fulfil the criteria which you can http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/radio/community/.

Would there be the support in Newbury? I think Source FM in Falmouth have about 80 volunteers to run their station. Could Newbury find that many people willing to give their time for nothing, regularly?

Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 14 2012, 06:03 PM

I'm sure it could fulfil the criteria, but I don't believe there would be enough local support for it.

Posted by: user23 Aug 14 2012, 06:05 PM

I agree, is there the potential listernership in Newbury?

They're not my thing but I bet many are happy with the diet of Michael Bouble and Robbie Williams stations like Heart and The Breeze serve up.

The thing to do, as Richard is trying, is to get those with ideas together.

Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 14 2012, 06:09 PM

Agreed. Nothing gained by not asking the question.

Posted by: Adrian Hollister Aug 14 2012, 06:11 PM

There are so many radio stations around whats the value in adding more generic music with a few local stories? Why not just invest the effort and energy into audio/video community news - perhaps Newbury Today could host it?

Posted by: Newbelly Aug 14 2012, 06:36 PM

From what I see and hear, young people in Newbury (including the "ethnic minorities") all have smart phones and want free wifi in pubs, restaurants and shopping centres. They do not hark after a community radio station and want to stream material that they desire - not what someone else thinks they want to hear.

Posted by: user23 Aug 14 2012, 06:43 PM

Why does the station have to be aimed at young people?

I'd suggest starting a Facebook group to discuss this.

Posted by: Newbelly Aug 14 2012, 07:07 PM

Good idea, and for that, people need access to the Internet.

Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 14 2012, 07:12 PM

There is nothing that says CR should or would be another outlet for mum and dad rock, but community radio could be halfway to a local news service as you described, but judging by the headlines on NT, it wouldn't be the most exciting thing on-air.

Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 14 2012, 07:13 PM

Well if they currently don't, Facebook ain't going to be much use!


Well many town pubs do have access points, I suspect some restaurants do too, but I am not sure what the business case is to encourage more youths in to town so that they may keep their FB status up-to-date.


That is factually true, but if anyone is like me, I still like to listen to 'chance broadcasts'. Perhaps if more people did the same, they wouldn't have thought that Ed Sheeran played his new song at the Olympics closing ceremony!

http://www.gigwise.com/news/75410/ed-sheeran-fans-mistake-pink-floyd-hit-for-new-song


You do have a point though, it would be good if NTC would promote a pervasive internet access service in town, but I see that as another topic. Perhaps a BID thing maybe?

Posted by: Richard Garvie Aug 14 2012, 08:05 PM

I think the main benefit of a community station is what else it can be used for other than broadcasting. A community station can attract much funding, why not use it as a catalyst to revamp a disused building facility into something for greater community use? The Priory in Thatcham was my original thought, but why not the Air Traffic Control Tower at the Common? Split use with broadcast studio's, offices and meeting rooms for local groups and charities to use, a museum on the groad floor etc.

Although the primary function of the station would be to provide a service with local news / information and programming for young people in the evening, the facilities could be used for media training, working with people such as the unemployed / students to improve confidence / speaking skills, provide work placements for people and other bits. There is far greater value than simply providing a platform to broadcast.

It all depends on what backing and support is out there, and a small number of dedicated people to drive the project forward.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 14 2012, 08:12 PM

Doesn't have to be NTC, Holland in particular has a number of community examples; where access was provided by the local people themselves.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 14 2012, 08:14 PM

It certainly provides a great and potentially sustainable real community opportunity, but as you so rightly say, dependent on support.

Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 14 2012, 08:24 PM

I suggested NTC or the BID promote it, not necessarily pay for it; the idea being to be something to offer potential customers and users of the town. Like I hinted, some might find the idea of 'gangs of youths' hanging around simply to use free internet access, less than attractive. Anyway, I think this is another topic.

Posted by: user23 Aug 14 2012, 08:42 PM

If Source FM is anything to go by it will take a lot of dedicated people.

Start a Facebook group for it and what interest it gets.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 14 2012, 09:23 PM

Sorry - I'll shut up again!

Posted by: Simon Kirby Aug 14 2012, 09:24 PM

I'd be surprised if there weren't enough people in and around Newbury who would want to get involved in something like this, but I do wonder what audiance there would be. Like you say, the niche would seem to be rather full. Getting the thing off the ground as an internet radio station might be an idea.

Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 14 2012, 09:49 PM

I'm sorry but suggesting something is for another topic is not the same as telling someone what they should do, if that is what you are getting at. I just think internet access in town is a good idea and a topic that deserves it's own thread, rather than mixing it up here.

Posted by: Penelope Aug 14 2012, 10:40 PM

Yeah the forum police are on your tail. Be getting your own thread next.

Posted by: Newbelly Aug 15 2012, 08:25 AM

So its primary function would be to provide what we already have in abundance through print and digital media?

People want cheap/free Internet access to watch/listen to what they want.

Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 15 2012, 08:35 AM

You might be right, but the commercial syndicated station(s) we have are/is often complained off as being generic. I wonder if there might be space for an 'alternative' style news/ information station. I have my doubts, although people trying new starts that involve community spirited enterprise is a good thing I feel.

Posted by: Penelope Aug 15 2012, 09:39 AM

If you really are serious about this then you should be looking at a central location so staff/volunteers can access easily, premises need only be a small business unit or similar, Stick to internet streaming, don't forget you will need a revenue stream ( to pay expenses and royalties) tech expertise and a constant and steady supplies of volunteers. and above all, start small, remember K.I.S.S. you can always expand later.

Keep content mixed ie; chat, local affairs and music and above all don't let it become a soap box for local politico's and malcontents who want to rant on above disputes with the council.

Posted by: blackdog Aug 15 2012, 10:53 AM

Why must it be for young people? Why not make it for all people?

The young are probably the least likely to want a radio service - as has been pointed out they are more likely to get info from their phone than an old fashioned thing like radio.

The elderly are probably the most in need of a good local news service - many are losing their sight and would welcome an afternoon or mid-morning local news programme.

Keep piped music to a minimum - by all means showcase local bands in the evenings but avoid at all costs getting thought of in terms of the music played - nothing is more likely to narrow the appeal of the station.

Give local groups access and publicity - broadcast events when possible. Events could be anything from a Spring Festival concert, the Remembrance Day service, an open mike at a local pub or a talk to a local society.

Have a local sports programme with commentary on local matches (football, rugby, cricket, etc).

Have regular features on local interest topics - from the activities of local companies in, for instance, science and technology, to local history or the arts.

And provide podcasts for those who can't catch a programme live.

In short, provide a record of life in this town/locality not just another outlet for the record industry.

Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 15 2012, 11:05 AM

All sensible ideas there I think, although a weekly slot to rant at or by authority figures would potentially be a novel and amusing idea!

Posted by: Simon Aug 15 2012, 03:45 PM

I like the idea of this, and I think so would many others. I remember something like this 10 years ago (think it went on to become Kick Fm) where they used volunteers to run the station, produce the shows and be DJ's.

I used to like that as it allowed specific shows such as the rock hour, hop hop shows etc where you could tune in at a specific time to listen to the types of music you don't normally hear on the radio.

Plus the contests were quite good, and more chance of winning with a smaller less commercial audience.

Would love to see this happen, but would be dependent on the right people getting involved

Posted by: Timbo Aug 17 2012, 09:25 AM

Problem is, how many people actually listen to the radio these days? CDs and iPods for the music... BBC News and maybe a local paper for.. well, the news ..

Posted by: blackdog Sep 17 2012, 09:20 AM

From JSH's latest Greenham newsletter:

Community Radio for Newbury and Thatcham


Now that Newbury Sound is no more and regional radio group The Breeze has closed its Newbury studios, plans are being made for a truly local community radio station, run by local people for local people. A meeting is being held in Newbury’s Town Hall on 26th September at 7pm to explain what it’s all about, and how people can get involved.

Volunteers are needed behind the scenes as well as in front of the microphones, so if you are interested in finding out what you can do, please come along.

Please LIKE the Facebook page: www.facebook.com/KennetRadio.
And for more info and to book a free place at the meeting, go to www.kennetradio.com.

Posted by: Baffers100 Sep 17 2012, 02:15 PM

Surely there is a requirement for a good quality radio station? I have 6 pre-sets in my car from when I purchased it (Radio 1, Radio 2, Classic FM, Breeze, Heart and Radio 4).

Some mornings you can flip from station to station and be unable to find something or someone you want to listen to. Classic FM is usually a saviour unless they have some regency style stuff on.
Radio 2 and 4 send me to sleep (perhaps I am not old enough to appreciate them yet), Heart and Breeze have the most annoying jingles (windows, tyres, man and van etc) and their playlists seem to be limited to Take That and Natalie Imbruglia. Radio 1- well now that chubby twirp has left, maybe there will be some decent music in the morning but not likely.

Thing is, you can't be all things to all people and won't be able to please everyone.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 17 2012, 08:50 PM

I've already Liked the page as it happens, but if JSH and the town hall maffia are involved I want nothing to do with it.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 17 2012, 09:45 PM

Hmm, now I'm confised. I thought Richard Garvie was launching Kennet Radio - here's it's Facebook page - http://www.facebook.com/kennet.radi but that's not the same page as the Kennet Radio being promoted by blackdog in association with the Town Council (http://www.facebook.com/KennetRadio) which would appear to be a separate JSH business as he's the domain registra of KennetRadio.com - see http://whois.domaintools.com/kennetradio.com. I assume JSH is paying for the hire of the town hall to promote this thing, I seem to remember them being very particular about the cash they expected for a similar meeting that RG wanted to arrange.

Posted by: user23 Sep 17 2012, 09:52 PM

The second Facebook page says.

"A new radio station is coming to the Newbury / Thatcham area, playing the best music from the 80's, 90's and now... Local news, travel and sport... Contests... Showbiz gossip.."

So it'll be the same as Heart and The Breeze then?

Posted by: Penelope Sep 17 2012, 10:04 PM

Yup.

Posted by: blackdog Sep 18 2012, 12:13 AM

? All I did was post an item from JSH's Greenham newsletter - which I thought others would be interested in - I am not promoting anything - and I am certainly nothing to do with NTC.

But I would be interested to know is who has registered 'Kennet Radio' as a trademark or whatever it's called.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 18 2012, 07:12 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Active_%28radio_series%29

Mike Flex, Mike Channel, "Uncle" Mike Stand, Anna Daptor, and of course Mike Hunt.

The JSH Facebook page has a posting promoting RG's spot on Spalding Radio so I'm guessing they are all in bed together.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 18 2012, 10:19 AM

http://www.facebook.com/KennetRadio/info the offices of KennetRadio are in Newbury Market Place at a postcode shared by the Town Hall.

Posted by: Jonno Sep 18 2012, 10:49 AM

DOMAIN: KENNETRADIO.COM
RSP: LWS
created date: 2012-09-10 13:40:08
updated date: 2012-09-10 13:45:06
expiration date: 2013-09-10 13:40:08
owner-contact: P-SRJ687
owner-fname: swift-hook
owner-lname: julian
owner-street: xx rue ferrade
owner-city: brillac
owner-zip: 16500
owner-country: FR
owner-phone: 003397721xxxx
owner-email: xxxx@swift-hook.com
(I put in the xx's for a bit of privacy - but this is all publicly available info)

Posted by: blackdog Sep 18 2012, 01:55 PM

That's the domain registration - it's the right to use the name 'Kennet Radio' that I was interested in - when it seemed that there were two groups both using it. If RG and JSH are involved in the same project (as appears likely) then the question is irrelevant.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 18 2012, 05:15 PM

It would appear that Julian Swift-Hook registered the incorporation of a private limited company called "Kennet Radio Limited" http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/622bd0ad8eb9ffc7ce8c2391cebd4cb3/compdetails yesterday.

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/2011/old-news-article-17432 last year when some organisation calling itself "Kennet Radio" asked Thatcham town Council for £6,000 of public money for a 28-day trial licence.

Posted by: Penelope Sep 18 2012, 05:21 PM

I would say six k of my money for what seems to be a vanity project seems a tad rich.

Posted by: blackdog Sep 19 2012, 10:39 AM

Then you'll be glad to know that Thatcham TC turned it down.

However, I'd be interested to know why you see it as a vanity project? As more info comes out it is pretty clear that it is just about the only local project with cross-party support with Messrs Garvie, Swift-Hook and Franks all involved. http://www.newbury.net/forum/m-1348006724/

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 19 2012, 11:00 AM

I have a hunch that Simon's message is: 'beware Greeks bearing gifts'. If you know what I mean!

Posted by: On the edge Sep 19 2012, 01:20 PM

I hope I'm wrong - but the opening formalities and the lack of any real detail worry me more than a little. On the face of it, this looks as if its the usual 'top down' approach - this is what we think will be good for you; we do value your involvement, but putting the chair out, pushing leaflets through doors etc. Means we are likey to simply end up with standard commercial radio lite - which at appeals to the oldest rockers in town at least!

Posted by: On the edge Sep 20 2012, 08:46 PM

The is weeks NWN says prospective attendees at the 'public meeting' need to book places. Glad to see good old Socialist practices making a come back! Democracy, but not as we know it.

Posted by: user23 Sep 20 2012, 09:17 PM

It's actually fairly usual for things like this, when the event is held in a reasonably small space and demand isn't known.

Not really sure what you mean about "democracy" either. It's not a political event as far as I can tell.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 20 2012, 09:20 PM

Really? First I've ever seen, save for the political showcases we get in the Corn Exchange.. Seriously, if you are a local politician, you will know exactly how many would turn up to a meeting like this.

Posted by: user23 Sep 20 2012, 09:22 PM

I've been to free meetings, workshops, discussions and the like where you have to book places in advance.

It's to avoid situations such as 100 people turning up to an event that can only host 50.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 21 2012, 06:32 AM

I really hope that is the case. However, the cynic in me suggests otherwise. In this instance, can you really see 100 turn up? If they can't even assess how many will show up at meeting one, bodes ill for assessing audience numbers for the licence negotiation.

Posted by: JeffG Sep 21 2012, 09:11 AM

Booking a place seems eminently sensible to me. Presumably anyone can do this. It's not as though they are trying to exclude anyone.

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 21 2012, 09:11 AM

How do you know?

Posted by: JeffG Sep 21 2012, 09:21 AM

Is this another wind-up?

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 21 2012, 10:05 AM

No. You said: 'It's not as though they are trying to exclude anyone'. I'm just asking how do you know?

Posted by: JeffG Sep 21 2012, 10:50 AM

Ok, I'll bite. Why do you think otherwise?

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 21 2012, 11:36 AM

I don't, but that was the inference made earlier from the person to which you replied. I dunno where this 'on a wind-up' comes from.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 21 2012, 11:45 AM

Just to keep things going - I think otherwise as well on basis that first I'm a cynic and second the lead players are well known local politicians who don't have a good record of involving the community. Certainly they are good at giving tickets for the latest bandwaggon but you'd better behave or we'll throw you off!

Posted by: JeffG Sep 21 2012, 03:53 PM

I can see that they could say to PNG (persona non grata - not Papua New Guinea ce!) that all the tickets were gone, but surely that would be illegal?

(A bit like a seaside landlady turning away someone on racial grounds saying that they were fully booked.)

Maybe some are more cynical than others.

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 21 2012, 03:58 PM

Racism is illegal, but what would be illegal to 'filter' the applications?

Posted by: user23 Sep 21 2012, 07:05 PM

It's an automated online booking system on which anyone can register.

How could they filter people out?

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 21 2012, 07:29 PM

I dunno, I didn't say they would or could, I just questioned whether it would be illegal to do so.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 21 2012, 07:54 PM

If its simply for collecting potential numbers then its expensive overkill.

Posted by: user23 Sep 21 2012, 08:28 PM

Eventbrite, the booking system they used is free.

Why so many negative responses?

It's like you're trying to find fault in what they're doing without really knowing anything about it.

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 21 2012, 08:34 PM

IIRC - you were hardy jumping through hoops at the idea when RG first posed the idea.

Posted by: user23 Sep 21 2012, 08:37 PM

I saidwhich is what seems to have happened.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 21 2012, 08:40 PM

Glad to hear it. Why negative? Look at past threads on this forum which have featured or at least mentioned those involved. Also, as it happens I (along with some others) do know something about this subject and proximity at least. Personally, I think community radio is an excellent media bringing many benefits. However, the secret is in the word community which doesn't sit well with another little word; politics.

Posted by: user23 Sep 21 2012, 08:44 PM

What has this prospective project got to do with politics?

I think this is probably another poorly informed comment along the same likes as "expensive overkill".

Posted by: On the edge Sep 21 2012, 08:53 PM

May be - but no worse than your snide remarks

What don't you understand about politics?

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 21 2012, 08:54 PM

But before that you said:








So you were hardly optimistic about the idea.

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 21 2012, 10:07 PM

Hi guys.

Just to clarify, it is one project. It was my idea and now has support from our local councils and other organisations. Anyone can get involved, and I assure you nobody will be excluded without good reason (such as a broadcasting exclusion order).

If there was evidence to the contrary, I would not wish to be involved.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 21 2012, 10:35 PM

You've signed the secret gagging clause than Richard?

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 22 2012, 12:36 PM

Just a couple more questions Richard:

Can you post please the articles and memorandum of sccoaiation for Kennet Radio Ltd. Can you also please identify the directors of the company.

Can you also please tell me what specific support Kennet Radio Ltd has received from each local council, cite me the minute of the council decision to give that support, and the statutory power under which that support was given.

If directors of Kennet Radio Ltd are also members of those councils that have given support can you also please post the member's declaration of interest registered with that council.

Many thanks.

Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 22 2012, 01:06 PM

[quote name='user23' date='Sep 21 2012, 09:44 PM' post='70652']
What has this prospective project got to do with politics?


Apart from being promoted by the local Labour activist and a Local Lib Dem Councillor? As the previous Government's TV campaign said - politics is in everything......

I would be much happier if the proposal came from people of no political soapbox, and with proven success is the field.

Kick started as local, and had to become less so in order to be commercially viable. Same with 210 in Reading back in the 80's.

I would want to se the business case, especially if any (council)tax money is to be spent.

IMHO these are just the sort of schemes local councils are absolutely useless at operating.

Posted by: Penelope Sep 22 2012, 01:25 PM

Well said, would answer many of my questions as well.

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 22 2012, 01:39 PM

I should not hold your breath whilst waiting for a reply to this though!

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 22 2012, 05:32 PM

Yes, I would imagine JSH was straight on the blower to Richard.

Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 22 2012, 08:58 PM

I rather fear, on past experience, were Richard to ask for that information from NTC/WBC or whoever that he will end up declared vexatious......

Posted by: Penelope Sep 22 2012, 09:03 PM

Hmmm, red Rick and right hook, can't see any bias there, can you?

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 22 2012, 09:55 PM

Funny isn't it. I asked Richard last week what Swift-Half's involvement was with the thing and he hasn't replied to me - he'd have been bellowing on here about the slight if some council clerk hadn't answered his own questions by return.

Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 22 2012, 10:27 PM

Well, he doesn't have to tell you, does he?
Questions are not supposed to be asked about the substance of such a proposal, as that will be deemed negativity.

We have a specialist in local radio, with a proven history of successful schemes, and a leading local figure who also happens to be a councillor. What is to doubt?

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 23 2012, 01:17 PM

Just the fact that anything NTC are associated with seems to turn out to need shall we say - ah hem - slight adjustments or fine tuning just after starting! Not to mention the digging deeper in to the taxpayers pockets than first led to believe!

Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 23 2012, 01:27 PM

With such expertise in the driving seats I am totally confident

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 23 2012, 02:27 PM

Come on Simon, I know you have had issues with NTC but they are simply facilitating the meeting venue and potentially supporting the aims of the project. This meeting on Wednesday is an intial public meeting to establish what interest is out there. With 50 people already declaring an interest, I think the project has legs.

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 23 2012, 02:35 PM

I didn't realise Kennet Radio had been registered as a Ltd company as I certainly have not done. If it has been registered, I'm guessing it has been done so to protect the name against somebody else doing so. Sorry I cannot post the details you ask for.

The leaders of NTC and TTC will be attending the meeting on Wednesday, as will the mayors. At this stage, the only support is in agreeing to establish if the project is viable and NTC have provided a venue.

As I say, I wasn't aware that Kennet Radio had been registered as a Ltd. company. There was a brief discussion when I met with certain parties about establishing a limited company and the four people I would like to see as directors, but as far as I was concerned, this was a step that would take place after the meeting. I'm guessing somebody who was at that meeting has registered the company as a precaution.

As for not answering your questions sooner, you must excuse me as I don't come on here as often as I once did. You have my number Simon, next time you post a question, drop me a text and I will come on and answer it. Alternatively, my email address that links to my mobile is richard.garvie@googlemail.com. If anyone has questions, send them to me and then feel free to post question and response on this site.

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 23 2012, 02:39 PM

Richard I think NTC are more than just facilitating this if JSH is registered at Companies House etc?
Excuse me for being the doubting Thomas here but past history warns me this could mean me having to dig even deeper into my dwindling income if it goes the same as usual projects run by NTC.
Especially with all the cuts required to balance the books is this the correct time to be looking at a project such as this?

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 23 2012, 02:43 PM

In response to NWNREADER:


Apart from being promoted by the local Labour activist and a Local Lib Dem Councillor? As the previous Government's TV campaign said - politics is in everything......

I would be much happier if the proposal came from people of no political soapbox, and with proven success is the field.

Kick started as local, and had to become less so in order to be commercially viable. Same with 210 in Reading back in the 80's.

I would want to se the business case, especially if any (council)tax money is to be spent.

IMHO these are just the sort of schemes local councils are absolutely useless at operating.
[/quote]

I'm a Labour party member, so what? We have Liberal and Conservative supporters who are interested in the project too!!! Can you imagine if every local project was trashed because those keen to see it happen had political affiliations??

On your second point, this is going to be a community / not for profit project which will apply for a community radio licence. This is different to the other examples which use ILR licences (commercial projects).

No council money has been committed, and the business case will be presented at the meeting.

The council will not be operating or be involved in operating Kennet Radio if it goes ahead. I may not even be involved in it's operation. It was my idea to bring it forward, but if there are others who are more suitable to run it, I'm open to that happening.

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 23 2012, 02:49 PM

As I say, this is just going to be a meeting for members of the public to express an interest and look at the details of what needs to happen to make it reality. It literally is an exploratory meeting. At no stage has either local authority said they will be involved or fund the project, they are just being supportive and can see how the project can benefit the residents, businesses and community groups of both towns.

Why don't you all come along? Simon, I'd certainly like to see you there. As for the others who have asked questions, come along and ask them at the meeting.

Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 23 2012, 02:52 PM

'Facilitating'? Do you mean 'hiring the room'? I assume, as a commercial operation the room is not foc? Or are NTC promoting the event?

Maybe a good time for you to brief us on the successful radio schemes you have set up so people can see the project is in safe hands......

Posted by: On the edge Sep 23 2012, 02:57 PM

Sadly, looking up from the grass roots that’s exactly what happens!

Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 23 2012, 06:00 PM

That is not correct, it is just where the FB Page was created.

The Company House listing is http://www.companieslist.co.uk/08217427-kennet-radio-limited

Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 23 2012, 06:06 PM

As a grass-roots community project how can you pick the directors? Surely those nominations should come from the body of interested parties - which will doubtless include those underwriting the costs.

How are such radio schemes funded, so they meet the operating costs?

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 23 2012, 06:32 PM

It's a "not for profit" community project... Look at the OFCOM definition of community radio...

Posted by: Penelope Sep 23 2012, 06:39 PM

What salaries will be drawn, and by whom?

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 23 2012, 06:41 PM

In order to secure a sustainable and secure platform to operating a community radio licence, those who choose a "limited company" method allows for greater security and stability. The four initial directors will be trustees and guardians, to get the project off the ground with additional directors being appointed as the project progresses. Those initial four directors may or may not be involved for the long term, if other potential directors are forthcoming then they may step back at some point, myself included.

My own vision was for the limited company to be replaced by something called the "Kennet Trust" at a later stage. The trust would be responsible for operating not only the radio station, but the facilities and additional projects and benefits that come with this project.

Community radio stations are primarily funded by grants, advertising and sponsorship.

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 23 2012, 06:45 PM

No salaries will be drawn from anyone. As and if the station becomes a full time community radio station, a station manager would be required to run the station and that position would be advertised via radio industry platforms and in the local domain to ensure that the most appropriate candidate was selected.

I don't think any of the people I have involved at this stage would imagine applying for that position due to current responsibilities and roles. I think the best we could hope for would be someone who has experience of running a community or a commercial station. But that whole discussion is a long way down the track. Maybe we will be lucky enough to find a great volunteer during the trial broadcast stage who will end up running it?

Posted by: user23 Sep 23 2012, 06:55 PM

Sounds like a number of things in this community project have already been decided, such as station format and directors.

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 23 2012, 07:08 PM

This is starting to seem as if it is a done thing - the usual we know what you want - we will have a meeting for you to say yes??? Usual local council tactics!

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 23 2012, 07:11 PM

Just answer the questions will you. You said local councils were supporting the project, so substantiate your assertion. If it's a public community project as you claim then publish the documents like I asked. It's like you have something to hide.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 23 2012, 07:20 PM

You didn't even know Left-Hook had formed the company. Publish the articles and memorandum and let us decide for ourselves what form of governance the company has and who stands to profit from it. Who invested the money in the company to launch it?

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 23 2012, 07:22 PM

Decided without Richard it seems, not a very nich way to snatch his brainchild.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 23 2012, 07:34 PM

Do you understand what "not for profit means"? It rather depends on the detail of the company formation - hence the need to see the articles and memorandum - but in general there is no problem paying the directors of a "not for profit", and nor in general is there a problem rewarding share-holders.

The critical OFCOM requirement is that you don't rely on volunteers and advertising revenue for your running costs, so you have to find 25% of your revenue from donars - and trust a bunch of self-serving socialists to tap-up the tax-payer for it.

And "community" has a very broad compass too - I see absolutely nothing in the nature of a radio station that warrants the special attention of local government any more than I'd expect local government to open a sweetshop because of the opportunities to put community messages in the window. What scares the b'jesus out of me is the enthusiasm with which the local politicos have grabbed the initiative to create themselves a media platform, and the involvement of the anti-free-speech Newbury Town Council just puts the tin hat on it.

It'll be like Lord bloody Haw Haw - Newbury calling, Newbury calling...

Posted by: On the edge Sep 23 2012, 08:30 PM

Oh dear. here we go again! Top down, know your place. As someone standing in the Socialist interest, I'm surprised and disappointed that Richard G. seems to be promoting the limited company model - why not a co-operative?

Posted by: Penelope Sep 23 2012, 09:56 PM

Can you imagine it? A talk show on local affairs, someone criticizes NTC, suddenly the doors fly open and there's one of their henchmen "sorry, you can't say that, we are closing you down, go home, switch that thing off". I really can't see it being at all unbiased myself.

Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 23 2012, 10:08 PM

Do you represent the community? Does JSH?
Has there been a community-led call for the service?

You have still not set before us your record of achievement with successful local radio projects


Where do the grants come from? Advertising and sponsorship is not given as a gift - the client expects a return.

http://www.reading4u.co.uk/about-us indicates these schemes take many years to embed

Posted by: blackdog Sep 23 2012, 11:34 PM

I can't say as I am particularly bothered if we have a community radio or not - I don't suppose I'd spend more than an hour a year listening to it - especially if it is music based.

However, I am intrigued by the vehemence of those who seem to wish it dead before it gets going.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 24 2012, 07:35 AM

Don't think anyone has wants to see the idea dead. It's more to do with the promoters; who are past masters at behaving the way you suggest when it suits them. Community involvement means doing things with, not to!

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 24 2012, 07:52 AM

Vehemence from about 5 people. Who cares!

Posted by: On the edge Sep 24 2012, 10:29 AM

Quite so; might that just be because the only thing local politicos care about is themselves? From the scant detail here; this seems to be a commercial venture seeking public subsidy. Nothing wrong with that - just be honest about it.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 24 2012, 10:32 AM

No, it seems like a community radio station which will need funding from some source.


To get that off the ground you'll need some local council involvement.

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 24 2012, 11:09 AM

Having spoken with Julian last night, he has registered a number of potential names that we had previously discussed. Although we hadn't discussed registering company names at this stage, Julian has now done so and directors will be appointed at a later stage when the project gets to a stage where it can start operations.

We haven't even got to the stage where the project is definately going to happen yet. There is a meeting planned for Wednesday night, we will decide where to go next from there.

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 24 2012, 11:14 AM

No director will recieve any renumeration as far as I am concerned. The only paid position that I can see in the future would be a paid station manager position depending on the project gaining a full time community radio licence.

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 24 2012, 11:17 AM

A coop would have been ideal, but it wouldn't be effective with only a few members. My vision was to ultimately create a charitable trust, but a coop may be an option down the road if we attract a decent amount of would be members and the charitable trust option is not viable.

Unfortunately in the community radio world, a limited company is the best way of securing stable project. Have a look at some examples of good and bad community stations and hopefully you will understand why this is the preferred model.

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 24 2012, 11:22 AM

But as an open critic of all of our local authorities when the time requires it, I can't see your point. The councils have agreed to explore the idea further with me and to establish demand, but that isn't going to stop me speaking out when I feel I need to speak out on an issue and I can't see it affecting this project either.

This project is about filling a void created by the loss of our local radio station, which as a commercial venture often struggled financially. By proposing a not for profit community radio station, we can provide a similar service without the overheads and something that won't ever be up for sale to the highest bidder as the licence cannot be transferred from one person to another. Nor will local volunteers ever be completely replaced by paid radio professionals like what happened when Kick FM started.

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 24 2012, 11:28 AM

My own vision for a community radio station in Newbury and Thatcham is a community based service run by local volunteers, providing output for the whole area to listen to and giving local businesses a cheap and affordable solution to promote their business. If we get it right and lots of people tune in during the day, the businesses will see a good return on investment. That's why the service through the day needs to appeal to a wide section of those who live and work here.

As for Reading4u, it's not something I'd like to compare with. I'd compare what my vision is versus Hot Radio in poole, Express FM in Portsmouth, Harborough FM and such like. It's not about playing radio, it's about providing a service that fills a gap in the market.

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 24 2012, 11:30 AM

Hence the reason a public meeting has been called. This is to establish what interest is out there. This isn't a public mouthpiece for local authorities or political parties, it's a community radio station. If it's going to go forward, it needs members of the community to be involved and take it forward.

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 24 2012, 11:36 AM

I think you need to come along to the meeting to find out what the real motives are. My idea was for a community station to raise funds to take on the running of a disused public building and turn it into a much more widely used community facility with a community radio station using just a small part of the building. Meeting rooms and offices for use by community groups and organisations at a low cost, a computer suite / classroom, photography studio, video editing facilities etc.

Rather than taking money from our local councils, this idea was about creating a facility that could assist the local authorities in providing certain services, and also returning a taxpayer owned building into use with no or little cost to the taxpayers as the project would be funded by grants from other funding sources.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 24 2012, 01:22 PM

I certainly hope you succeed, your aims and objectives are laudable and deserve support. However, if it really s simply to gauge 'community' support - the public meeting is a tad late perhaps? After all, much appears to have been decided already, including setting up a company, the construct of the managing organisation etc. There have clearly been deep and meaningful discussions with local politicians, so much so that one was motivated to rush ahead with registration. If you really do want a real community run project - if only polite, would have been nice if the community had been asked first. Fully accept even to have kicked that initial debate off, you would have needed a vision at least. Looks very much that we have a prospectus instead. I apologise for my cynicism, but its borne of experience, and sadly points to 'community involvement' as being channelled into putting the chairs out for meetings and sweeping up after.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 24 2012, 01:26 PM

Why? I know several community projects (not round here) that have needed no funds from the Local Council at all. Of course, one of the key activities of community projects is to secure funding / resourcing streams. That doesn't mean sponging off the Council - far from it.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 24 2012, 01:28 PM

I don't see where in my post I said theat the fundaing came from local govt.

Community projects need cash & to have some chance of getting this they need the support of local govt.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 24 2012, 01:43 PM

No; they don't need the support of local or any other government - even to get funds. If it was felt necessary to have such a sponsor, there are many other, and often more effective and appropriate organisations.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 24 2012, 01:46 PM

clearly not in this case as I'm sure RG would have shunned any tory involvment if at all possible.......

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 24 2012, 03:16 PM

Some issues are beyond party politics. For an effective community radio project, you need to harness all parts of the community, whether that be local authorities, businesses or community groups. The party politics of each and every person who walks through the door should not matter, nor should past differences on local issues etc. This project has the potential to do something special, let's hope that lots of people get involved and take the idea forward.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 24 2012, 03:28 PM

Sincerely, I would second that. So lets just wait and see.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 24 2012, 06:44 PM

Unless I am mistaken Swift-Hook has created a private limited company called "Kennet Radio Ltd" - http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/855fca98d6189b9453f01ecfb0c1028e/compdetails. Are you now prepared to publish the company's articles and memorandum, and the list of directors, or is this information secret? Simple question.

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 24 2012, 07:18 PM

So it has already been decided it is going ahead? Thank you confirming it is another council meeting to state we know what you require but we do need you to nod this through as usual!

Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 24 2012, 07:53 PM

The link does not work (for me, at least).

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 24 2012, 08:28 PM

Hmm, it's failing for me now. Let me see about it.

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 24 2012, 08:32 PM

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/575e64b0b435af1df94adaf8cadf8c5c/companysearch?link=51

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 24 2012, 08:38 PM

You seem to have to search each time, I can't see how to link to the company's page directly. Here.s the information:



You can get this by going to the http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/ web site and clicking through to the WebCheck page and searching for "Kennet Radio" or company number 08217427.

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 24 2012, 09:02 PM

Or just clicking on this link!

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/575e64b0b435af1df94adaf8cadf8c5c/companysearch?link=51

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 24 2012, 09:03 PM

That's giving me "GANDLAKE LIMITED". I think the sessions are timed-out and it's not really possible to link to a page.

Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 24 2012, 09:05 PM

My earlier post giving the info is still live (Post 97) It also shows what a Busy Beaver JSH is......

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 24 2012, 09:11 PM

Sorry, I hadn't seen that. My word, yes, KENNET COMMUNITY BROADCASTING LIMITED as well. So it'll be transmitting in stereo then?

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 25 2012, 02:15 AM

Which bit of RG's earlier reply don't you lot understand?

Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 25 2012, 03:52 AM

Who is that directed at?

Posted by: blackdog Sep 25 2012, 08:28 AM

But it's not a council meeting, it is a meeting of a not-for-profit, non-commercial operation to discuss what can be done with a local radio station and, I'd guess, to start the ball rolling in terms of finding volunteers.

The attitude of several on this thread seems to be that their personal permission is required before anything can be done in Newbury - get real folks, if someone wants to start a radio station they may need permission to use the airwaves, they may need to raise funds from somewhere, but they don't need the agreement of every individual in town.

If they come up with something people want then it will survive, if they get it wrong it won't - simple.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 25 2012, 10:12 AM

Amen.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 25 2012, 10:14 AM

The ones who have ignored/failed to understand RG's answers to their original questions & who have repeated them.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 25 2012, 03:54 PM

I think you've wholly missed the point and certainly about the term 'Community'. Using the term volunteers seems to confirm that.

If this is really to 'gauge support for a Community initiative' - nothing much else need be done, certainly not rushing off to Companies House, determining how many directors etc. in advance. In this instance, that would surely be up to the 'Community' to decide and act upon.

This looks very much like a prospectus for a semi commercial operation - which is seeking public funds / support to cover potential resource gaps. A very traditional mechanisim - used by many other such ventures in the past. It is 'top down', directed, if not managed by the centre. Certainly not 'community'.


All I'm asking for is some honesty here -m lets face it, against what we know already there is no opportunity for any 'community' input into the business model or commercial direction being taken.

Therefore, any community effort will be volunteering type effort akin to people who help un the Hospital Car Service, etc.etc. Nothing at all wrong with that at all and a very good example of voluntary help so not really what community intiatives are really all about.

So its rather silly to suggest that some are suggesting their personal permission is needed to start a radio station. Of course it isn't.

However, certainly as I see it, and how they are elsewhere and on the Continent, Community Projects are just that - lead and managed by the community.

All we need to know is which is this?

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 25 2012, 04:57 PM

The bit about nothing has been decided yet! If JSH is involved then of course it has already been decided your smoke screens do not work any more? All the meeting will be for is to ask for volunteers and to try and make it look as though the taxpayers have requested a local council propaganda radio station even though radio is losing popularity nationally. Bit surprised with all the cuts and savings needed that they are coming forward with this now?
I know they say that it will be self financing but with the council involved I would be amazed if this does not cost the local taxpayers?

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 25 2012, 05:45 PM

I understood him perfectly well. I asked him for some specific information, and he has so far declined to provide it. I draw my own conclusions from that.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 25 2012, 05:48 PM

Hand over your taxes...

Posted by: user23 Sep 25 2012, 06:25 PM

I wonder how many voicing their opinion in this thread will be at the meeting tomorrow night, to do it in person?

Posted by: Roost Sep 25 2012, 06:27 PM

In the absence of anyone else offering the service, I welcome it.

Funny how so many talk but so little action...

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 25 2012, 06:45 PM

It's a fair point User, but I won't be. The Town Council is a tyranical and repressive organisation and I want nothing to do with them or anyone associated with them.

As it is I have nothing against the idea of a local radio station and wouldn't want to do anything to prevent it happening, though it's not something I have any interest in and I very much doubt I'd listen to what I would imagine will be amaterishly produced middle-of-the-road pap. My objections are that 1. the organisers appear to me to be touting for state funding and I fail to see why in the world a hobby station is in the slightest bit deserving, 2., the organisers are local politicos who are able to influence the decision to award state funding, and 3. the close association with the repressive anti-free-speech Town Council makes it likely that the radio station will also be anti-free-speech and used as a platform for pro-Town Hall political propoganda, and I find that unacceptable.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 25 2012, 06:50 PM

Not sure what you mean there Roost. There have been local radio stations, it's just too few people listen to their output and they can't just run as a hobby for the jocks.

What is it in the proposed output that so attracts you to Kennet Radio?

Posted by: user23 Sep 25 2012, 07:12 PM

Fair enough, you continue to moan from the sidelines about not having a say in or being consulted on stuff just because a meeting happens to be held in the same building that houses the Town Council.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 25 2012, 07:14 PM

Presumably we'll see you there as well then?

Posted by: On the edge Sep 25 2012, 07:15 PM

But its apparently being sponsored by a Town Councillor?

Posted by: On the edge Sep 25 2012, 07:17 PM

Can you cite any evidence? What have you ever done?

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 25 2012, 07:35 PM

I'm registered here with my own name, I've been brutally honest about my motivation in being here, and I've never ducked a question from you or anyone else, so I'm comfortable on the sidelines thanks, and I'll shout as loudly as I like.

If this was genuinely a community radio project then I'd be very much more supportive, but I think it's a sham. If it succeeds then great, but ranked in the list of causes deserving of public funding it's way down at the bottom - for context, £6k for a month's temporary licence is not far short of West Berkshire Mencap's funding gap, so tapping up the tax-payer for a hobby station is just ridiculous.

Posted by: user23 Sep 25 2012, 08:14 PM

Why not come to the meeting and say that you think it's a sham?

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 25 2012, 08:20 PM

Like I said in post 152. And in truth my enthusiasm for continuing my vocal criticism of the Town Hall is waning. I feel there's a need to criticise them because what they get up to is not right in a free and fair society and I don't see anyone else doing much to hold them to account, but I'm feeling like I've done my bit now and it's time to move on.

Posted by: blackdog Sep 26 2012, 09:13 AM

No - I think you've totally missed the point about the term 'Community Radio'. Community radio licences are only available to not for profit organisations. There is no commercial opportunity.

http://licensing.ofcom.org.uk/radio-broadcast-licensing/community-radio/

Posted by: On the edge Sep 26 2012, 09:33 AM

Don't think so.

Not for Profit does not equate to community. They are interesting concepts and there vare a couple of water utilities claiming to be not for profit, Arguably OXFAM would say it was 'not for profit. However, they are NOT community organisations.

Conversley, there are 'community' ventures which do have a commercial opportunity - village pubs for instance, more can be cited.

To meet the Regulators rules, the applying organisation must be 'not for profit' - no mention of it being a Community organisation. In fact a Co-operative or a mutual could also fit.

I simply object to the term 'community' being applied to this proposal. It may have community benefit but it isn't a community project.

Posted by: blackdog Sep 26 2012, 04:16 PM

It is a Community Radio proposal ie it will be a radio station that runs under a Community Radio licence. It may not be run by 'the community', whatever that is, but you can't have a Community Radio licence that excludes the word 'community'. Nor will OffCom grant a licence to a community - they want specific individuals to take responsibility. The term has a specific legal meaning under the morass of laws and regulations governing radio transmission in this country.


From the OffCom website:
Community radio licences are for small-scale, not-for-profit radio stations operated for the good of members of the public, or of particular communities, and in order to deliver social gain.

It doesn't have to be run by the community - just for the community. A trust, limited company, co-op etc is merely the way the organisation applying for the licence might be set up - I'm certainly no expert on such matters, but a limited liability company might well be the most sensible approach, one that would minimise risk to the organisers.

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 26 2012, 05:27 PM

So if Julian registered the company, how would I have those documents? I will speak to him tonight, and I'm sure the documents that you ask for will be published. The bottom line is that the name hs probably been registered as a dormant company, to stp somebody else registering it. There is nothing more to it, a number of different and potential names were registered it seems, and it's only to stop others from doing so.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 26 2012, 06:36 PM

And once again you miss the point. Ofcom requires the radio station to source a quarter of its revenue from donations, but it doesn't mean those donations have to come from the state. If you want to run a hobby radio station then great, it sounds like it could be fun, but don't make me pay for your hobby, find the money yourself.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 26 2012, 06:39 PM

If you want to run a hobby radio station then great, it sounds like it could be fun, but don't make me pay for your hobby, find the money yourself.

The same logic could be applied to many pastimes, allotments for instance.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 26 2012, 06:50 PM

And now we have something we can agree on.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 26 2012, 07:09 PM

Problem is it all could get a bit exclusive....

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 26 2012, 07:09 PM

Especially if we were to here a little jingle every time the adverts come on explaining what a wonderful council Newbury has and how we should be proud of our wonderful council. Come election time they probably wouldn't find time to play any music at all?

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 26 2012, 07:11 PM

That isn't a 'hobby radio station'. Do try & keep up.

Posted by: user23 Sep 26 2012, 08:28 PM

Disappointing to see that whilst the public meeting to discuss it was on, people who could have attended were rubbishing the idea on here.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 26 2012, 08:47 PM

I would have thought finding 25% of the revenue from membership subscriptions would make a hobby radio station really quiet exclusive, but the problem would seem to be the outrageous cost of the licence - £6k for a one month trial license? If there really is a community-benefit criterion on obtaining a community radio licence then I'd have thought the licence itself should be free, but it's not the most pressing social injustice I can think of so I really can't be arsed.

I'd have thought the thing to do would be to start the hobby station as an internet station and see if it generates any interest. Relatively cheap and no need for state funding to do that. As it is I really can't see what social need Radio Soft-Wik will serve.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 26 2012, 08:50 PM

I've been rubbishing the sponging parasites who want the tax-payer to fund their hobby, not the idea of community radio.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 26 2012, 10:03 PM

I had a look round to try and work out which one was you - hope you found it interesting.

I found it fascinating. On the face of it, all the right things were being said and promised. There were a good number present. Clearly a lot of preparatory work had been done and discussions on going for quite some time. It seems to be of great personal interest to some LD Councillors and of course the promoter - Richard G. Perhaps the preparatory discussion is practice for next coalition!

As for community - yes, that is down to a miss application of the word by OFCOM. It was similarly applied to the last attempt in Newbury. Real rah rah event - will be interesting to see how this develops, particularly when the work needs to be done and the personal agendas emerge.

Funding won't be as big as a commercial station as much of the presenter timer etc will be donated. They made no bones about asking all the usual channels - Greenham, Councils etc. - wait to see if any do stump up in the present economic circs.

However, for the avoidance of doubt, I hope it does take off and as originally sold.

Anyway User23 - is that roughly right?

NOTE - this Forum even got a mention.

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 26 2012, 10:34 PM

The difference is, as far as I know, is that the council have an obligation to provide allotment space, where as I don't believe that is the case for stumping up money for a local radio station.

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 26 2012, 10:35 PM

Notwithstanding that at a time of austerity, is this the best use of tax payers money and councillor time?

Posted by: On the edge Sep 27 2012, 06:31 AM

In political terms points well made.

Seems that OFCOM are essentially promoting the idea of community radio by offering licences area by area. That does of course stoke demand. Nothing with that, but as mentioned we are in a time of austerity, radio is a 'nice to have' - so the Regulator's role ought only to have been to respond to enquiries and give licence where there was ground roots demand. OFCOM is, of course, a child of Labour!

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 27 2012, 08:49 AM

I certainly hope those who attended came away with a bit more knowledge about what the difference is between community radio licences and ILR / Commercial radio licences (which Kick / Newbury Sound / The Breeze have).

There will be another meeting in four weeks or so to start giving out tasks and getting things done, and obviously to appoint a steering group etc. Nothing is set in stone thus far and anyone can be involved if they so wish. It was great to see the police, people wih previous broadcasting experience and so many other different backgrounds. This project could be a real asset to Newbury & Thatcham and is MUCH MORE than simply a "hobby radio station".

Simon, I really would urge you to come along, it would be right up your street.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 27 2012, 10:44 AM

And they should charge the going rate for doing so.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 27 2012, 11:03 AM

[Edit: sorry, my bad, I misunderstood dannyboy's point. Yes, I pretty much agree with you there dannyboy]

Posted by: On the edge Sep 27 2012, 11:22 AM

Simon have to I say agree! I'll even buy you a pint. (if I can work out who you are)

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 27 2012, 11:23 AM

I understand that they do so, but they are also one of the more expensive councils, but not only that, they seem reluctant to allow people to 'off-load' the cost via self management.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 27 2012, 11:47 AM

Local radio isn't my thing. What I wanted to get involved in was allotment self-management, but Swift-Hook and his Town Council wouldn't even discuss it, and you know how that ended. The Town Council is an abusive and tyranical organisation, I don't ever want anything to do with those basatrds.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 27 2012, 01:19 PM

Point well made and fully understood.

Posted by: blackdog Sep 27 2012, 02:41 PM

The councils are representatives of the community (like it or not, those who could be bothered in the community elected them) - if the proposed radio station offers some genuine benefit to the community (ie the local voters) then it could be argued that some grant funding would not be inappropriate to help it get off the ground (I'd certainly prefer to see their grants going to something like this than the local National Trust as it has in the past). But £6k would be far too much from the town councils - it also seems OTT for a few weeks test transmissions - does this mean they are going to buy the equipment? Or is it the cost of music licensing? Easy answer - don't play so much music.

As for councillor time - their time is their own. They just happen to donate some of it to parish council activities, if they want to get involved in something like this there is no reason why they shouldn't.

The most disappointing aspect to me is that it appears to be only local politicos involved.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 27 2012, 02:56 PM

That is what they are there for.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 27 2012, 03:06 PM

Like most things, I have a feeling people perfer to pay to have it done for them, rather than do it themselves.......

This is why the ludicrous 'Big Society' idea fell flat on its face. Altrusim is a flawed concept.

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 27 2012, 04:25 PM

That might be the case, but Simon alleges that the council actively sort to frustrate such a notion.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 27 2012, 05:40 PM

And I have invited both you and the council on numerous occaisons to come and see some self-managed allotment sites and see how much better managed they are and how much more the allotmenteers enjoy managing their own affairs. Even the Local Government Association recognise that allotmenteers get more from their allotmenteering if they are allowed to manage their own affairs. If you are continually going to bring up the allotments dispute have the curtesy to do some research and offer an informed opinion - start by reading Growing in the Community from the LGA.

The Big Society has fallen flat on its face because state self-interest will not let it out of its box. Yes, people are inured to state coddling - but the state ensures that it stays like that.

Posted by: Penelope Sep 27 2012, 05:59 PM

Well said.

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 27 2012, 06:08 PM

Good point. Just because many wish for someone else to do it, doesn't mean that should be how it is done. Especially when we are not prepared to pay for it through taxation and similar.

This country is living beyond its means, so perhaps we should start to think of a new paradigm.

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 27 2012, 06:17 PM

Nothing against a hobby radio station as a lot of you seem to agree but am against the local council using taxpayers money to part fund it?

As you say Andy we are living beyond our means now is not the time for this expenditure. The council should be looking at it's own expenditure such as letting allotment owners self manage and even more importantly abolishing the, as many see it, superfluous over self important town council?

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 27 2012, 06:18 PM

I'm sure they do run many projects all over the country with nothing but volunteers. But we are in Newbury.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 27 2012, 06:21 PM

I have an idea - approach a local farmer, ask if he has a field lying fallow & ask what he'd rent it to you for.

Work out how many plots you'd get in it & advertise them.

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 27 2012, 06:22 PM

Where it is deeply frowned on by our local authorities especially when it threatens their own existence?

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 27 2012, 06:24 PM

No - where people like to have things done for them.

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 27 2012, 06:27 PM

So the hobby radio station is a non starter then according to your hypothesis?

Posted by: user23 Sep 27 2012, 06:41 PM

I thought it was a great meeting with a good and varied attendance including the NWN, vocal mums, charity groups, local musicians and students. It was a real cross section of the community.

My biggest fear was that the advertised music policy (on the Facebook page) would make it just another bland station playing pop from the past three decades, however there seemed to be enough interest from those who want to do different things to hopefully make it an alternative to what's offered locally now.

There are obviously many challenges for them to overcome before they even get a temporary licence, but at least they're trying.

As for those few getting upset that community leaders are leading the project. You get the impression they don't want anything in Newbury to succeed, so that everyone else will be as miserable as them.

Where were you sitting BTW, I might have been right next to you.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 27 2012, 06:45 PM

No, Radio Swift-Hook will thrive, and if you say different they'll focus their phased array on your house and correct your vexatious thoughts by talking to you through your fillings - http://www.eclectech.co.uk/mindcontrol.php:

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 27 2012, 09:00 PM

Why?

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 27 2012, 09:57 PM

why do you think?

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 27 2012, 11:09 PM

I am asking because I don't understand your point, unless you genuinely think I would do as you describe. I understand that fallow land is left as such to allow it to restore its nutritional properties, I am therefore not sure your suggestion is practical.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 27 2012, 11:30 PM

The GMR ploy!!

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 27 2012, 11:35 PM

What the feck are you talking about, or do you have no idea yourself?

So I'll ask again: what is the point you are trying to make because I don't understand you?

Posted by: On the edge Sep 28 2012, 06:53 AM

You may well have been, in which case I can report that you are quite safe, lucid and surprisingly normal! - next time I'll wear a button hole!

The thing is rolling - so its really up to the 'community' to see its sticks strictly to vision and start to exert control. If so, some chance it might. On the programming front, the bit I'm really interested in, wholly appreciate music is needed (medieval or otherwise) - but certainly would want to see / help make the 'talk' bit far far more than just the phone in or chat type. It would then be very different.

The leadership bit is really down to the overall leadership and governance round here. Have to say, though no where near as bad - I've had issues with the tactics and methods of certain local politicians in the past. Can fully appreciate Simon's position. Certainly in its widest sense that needs sorting - big time. Think its going to take more than the black box, we really need to rid local government of party politics and see if we can't get some real leaders interested. Contrary to Dannyboys earlier comments, society does exist and people will look out for others.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 28 2012, 07:14 AM

Okay, I'll make it simple -


Apparently there is a notion that the council in Newbury scuppers plans for any kind of 'self management' of services as this would undermine their own reason to exist.

Case in point - Allotments. Apparently there is a desire within that community in Newbury to do things their own way & self manage.

So - Sod NTC, why not approach a local farmer, rent an unused field & start your own self managed allotment?

Or, is it in fact a truth, as with Community Radio, that Newbury citizens like to have things done for them, by the council.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 28 2012, 08:04 AM

Were life so simple! Think the word 'some' has a place here.

Main thrust of argument against NTC is that it appears to deliberately sink the ideas of others and promote only its own for the purpose of maintaining power. Wasn't it Lords Hailsham who said UK democracy is an elected dictatorship? That means that us subjects have no other choice than to be so controlled. In marketing terms, the difference between being in an open prison or a cheap holiday camp! I'm h.a.p.p.y.

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 28 2012, 08:34 AM

This is utterly besides the point and a distraction from my point, which is: as a tax payer, I think my councillors should be seeking ways to get the cost of providing things like allotments off the books. In this case, if a society wish to go self-managed, then they should promote it. Much like they seem to be doing with the radio project.

Posted by: blackdog Sep 28 2012, 08:55 AM

But is there a desire within that community? It seems to me that Simon failed in his attempt to introduce self-management because he did not have the support of enough of his fellow allotmenteers.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 28 2012, 10:43 AM

We've been through this. I didn't find anyone who wanted to fight the council, and I can understand that - they're an abusive, vindictive bunch, so why on earth would anyone want to take them on? But 90% of the allotment scoiety members wanted to be involved in the management and maintenance of their site, as long as they weren't going to be bullied by the Powers that Be for saying so.

Like I say, take a look at self-managed sites around the country and read the literature - people enjoy self-managing and the site is better managed. There is nothing different about the people of Newbury, but no one in their right mind wants the hassle of fighting their town council and attracting the disapprobation of their councillors.

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 28 2012, 10:48 AM

Shouldn't the tax payer have a say? Allotemnteers can have their allotment, but they should help off-set the cost. All this is perfectly legal and in line with current policies.

Like I said: "This is utterly besides the point and a distraction from my point, which is: as a tax payer, I think my councillors should be seeking ways to get the cost of providing things like allotments off the books. In this case, if a society wish to go self-managed, then they should promote it. Much like they seem to be doing with the radio project."

How is that not reasonable? Thanks dannyboy for bringing this up again.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 28 2012, 10:49 AM

I agree. As it happens I have found a site to grow veggies on and I'll be sharing it with a few friends because it's bigger than I can manage. The soil is terrible and it's a car-drive from home rather than the one minute walk which I have enjoyed for the last 16 years, but I'm grateful for it. None of that changes anything about the negative social consquences of an oppressive town council that won't engage with the community other than on their own terms, and I see the same forces at work with Radio Swift-Hook.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 28 2012, 11:00 AM

Being a fully paid up member of the Cynics UK could one be forgiven for thinking that the objection to self management of allotments was down to the potential elimination of a council income stream (where overheads can be allocated) simply to ensure there were sufficient funds to start up a community radio station. Of course not.

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 28 2012, 11:23 AM

My understanding was that allotments 'cost' the council; they are subsidised.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 28 2012, 11:32 AM

Agree, but as they've done the accounts. In my view, the 'admin overhead' is wholly unjustified - take that out and there would be an excess of income over expenditure.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 28 2012, 11:33 AM

Nice one.

But no, I don't think NTC are capable of that kind of joined-up thinking. NTC don't want self-management because managing the allotments is what they do, it's worth £100k to them and it's a big chunk of the power over people's lives so they protect it jealously. Cllr Marion Fenn, who is the site steward at Wash Common, was not a supporter of the initiative and that didn't help either.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 28 2012, 11:42 AM

No, they don't cost the council, they cost the tax-payer. The Council spend around £120k one way or another providing the allotments, and it doesn't much matter to the council whether that money comes from the allotmenteers or the tax-payer - it's currently about £20k from the allotmenteers and £100k from the tax-payer. The only thing that matters to the counci is that they keep the pretext of spending £120k, most of which is spent on administration of one kind or another. Unlike WBC, NTC can raise as much money as they like, there is no cap on their precept, the only threat to their gravy train is that the tax-payer might get uppity and demand some kind of belt-tightening, but almost no one knows or cares about the town council, and pretty much anyone who might give a toss is already riding that gravy train and is not going to do anything to stop it. Anyone who does get a bee in their bonnet about their spending is obviously vexatious that's easily delt with.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 28 2012, 05:58 PM

So anywho, Richard, are you able to answer any of this yet? Can you also please say how much Kennet Radio Ltd paid for the use of the NTC council chamber? If it was a free use of the chamber can you please tell me again why NTC wanted to charge you to use the chamber for a public meeting to discuss allotment self-management?

Posted by: JeffG Sep 28 2012, 06:19 PM

Totally random, but why 'anywho' instead of 'anyhow'. Seen this twice now.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 28 2012, 06:27 PM

It's a Homer Simpson thing.

Posted by: user23 Sep 28 2012, 06:30 PM

Good on you for finding a plot to self manage that isn't subsidised by the taxpayer, but you're still moaning, this time about the distance and quality of the soil.

You've also turned this thread about a positive community project into a rant about your own personal circumstances; but then I've continued on that subject, so I'm as much to blame.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 28 2012, 06:42 PM

In fact, once again, it was dannyboy who harped on about the allotment dispute, but those issues are still live. The Town Council is an abusive anti-free-speech organisation that sponges off the tax-payer to serve its own ends, and all of that makes it particularly inappropriate for the Town Council to have any association with hobby radio.

Posted by: user23 Sep 28 2012, 06:56 PM

I'm just pleased to see you're not "sponging off the taxpayer" any more on an allotment that I, as a taxpayer, subsidise.

Anyway, back to the radio stuff, you should come to the next meeting and express your views to see how many agree with you.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 28 2012, 07:08 PM

I'm not so sure that my comments are relevent to local radio as such, my complaint is against the Town Hall involvement, and the Town Hall don't want to hear what I think. So you won't mind if I just air my objections here will you?

Posted by: user23 Sep 28 2012, 07:24 PM

Fair enough.

The majority of the sixty or so participants in the room at the last meeting had nothing to do "the Town Hall". I just thought you might like to express your point of view to them too.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 28 2012, 07:53 PM

Exactly my point. There is no desire. Same as with a community radio station. Ergo it is left to the local politicos to get on with it, not the 'community'.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 28 2012, 07:57 PM

Only to make a point about the reason why it is local politcos who are to the spearhead of the radio project.


If a local radio station is such a boon, why has no resident come up with the idea & brought it as far as the local councillors have?

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 28 2012, 08:04 PM

Councils provide services & we as Tax payers pay for them.


What does Northcroft, the Corn Exchange, etc etc cost? I use neither, yet don't expect them to be self funding.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 28 2012, 08:18 PM

If Swift-Hook were to invite me to address my concerns to his meeting then I'd think about it, but I've been mauled at council meetings before now and I have no intention of standing up in front of an angry mob of lib-dem ya-hoos to try and explain the social problems caused by alienation and disenfranchisment. There are people involved in the project who understand the issues and if Kennet Radio is to succeed as a community radio station then it will need to engage honestly with the whole spectrum of Newbury, and I don't think it has much of a chance of doing that because of the vested interests and their need to control the agenda, but those are the challenges for the station and I'm not greatly fussed one way or another who wins out.

If you're seriously interested in community radio then I'm perfectly happy to have a civilised discussion here about the need for inclusion, and I'd be genuinely interested to hear what you and others have to say about the benefits of community radio, but that discussion will need to touch on our local politicos' problems with free-speech and engagement and if you fall back on trolling and refuse to engage then that really just compounds the problem. What do you say?

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 28 2012, 08:22 PM

I've suggested a bit of an armistice to User. There's clearly some benefit to community radio and it would be good if we could dicsuss that. I'm not interested in going over the allotment issue again, so can we park it now?

Posted by: Penelope Sep 28 2012, 08:34 PM

Normally I would support such a venture, however my primary concern is that it will be used as a platform for certain people to promote their own agenda to their own ends. Fair enough, its just that I don't believe that taxpayer's money should be used to support it.

Posted by: user23 Sep 28 2012, 08:41 PM

You're out of touch if you think the people in the room, containing representatives from the NWN, vocal mums, charity groups, local musicians, students, a Conservative councillor, a Labour candidate and OTE from this forum were "an angry mob of lib-dem ya-hoos".

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 28 2012, 08:47 PM

Community radio stations are not a council obligation at the tax payer expense, especially when things are tight.


Er ... I think one did!


You forgot that abomination on the corner of Market St in your examples.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 28 2012, 10:23 PM

So councils should only provide what they are legally obliged to do so?!?

Never been to see a film either.

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 28 2012, 10:34 PM

Pretty much so when there is 'a war on', but there is no black and white on this.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 29 2012, 02:20 AM

LOL a war - more a meagre partisan flag waving?!?!

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 29 2012, 07:48 AM

Partisan flag waving? What are you on about?

We are seeing people struggling to make ends meet, yet we are paying taxes for things that are not essential; things in some cases that could be done for near free, or by the private sector. I believe councils should be looking to streamline their costs when people in need are being asked to do without.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 29 2012, 08:09 AM

The legal position on this is crystal clear: a parish council must provide a services where there is a statutory duty, and can at its discretion provide a service where there is a statutory power. A parish council may only spend money where there is a statutory power for it to do so, and if there is no explicit statutory power it can also spend money up to a reasonably small limit under a general power such as Section 137 of the Local Government Act where the council believes there will be a public benefit.

There is only one service which a parish council must provide under a statutory duty, and that is allotments, and their duty is to provide allotments to their own parishoners only. A parish council cannot lawfully choose not to provide enough allotments for every parishoners who wants one to have as big a plot as they want, they have an absolute duty to provide their parishoners with sufficient. Note that a parish council may not rent allotments to non-parishoners while parishoners are on the waiting list, and if they do then they can be surcharged by the district auditor for the expense of doing so. It's worth noting that the Resolution of the Newbury Town Council which purportedly enables them to descriminate against parisoners in the letting of allotments is illegal because of their absolute duty to let allotments.

So every parish council must provide allotments if there are parishoners who want one, and everything else a parish council does is optional - graveyards, markets, christmas lights, flower beds, parks, lamp posts, benches, notice boards, bus shelters, clocks, public baths, there are specific statutory powers for them to do all of that stuff and quite a bit more, but it is all optional.

There is no specific power under which a parish can fund community radio. It can use its power under Section 137 of the Local Government Act 1972, but there is a limit to their spending under that power (it's like £5 per parishoners, I can't remember the exact figure) and with all of their grants and their funding of the flood alleviation scheme they are already spending more than the power allows, and so if they were to fund community radio they would either need to rein-in their other spending under their Section 137 power, or the councillors could be personnally surcharged by the district auditor for the overspend.

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 29 2012, 11:32 AM

Not an allotment holder myself but have a couple of friends who are. Unable to quote any figures of course but there was a certain amount of self management interest so I have been informed. But the actions of certain councillors, past and present, made it very clear of what the consequences would be if it was followed through as Simon certainly found out to his cost?

Now of course we have councillors who are being held in a very bad light over recent shenanigans trying to show they are actually doing something for the community they are supposed to represent by bringing in a radio station? Of course no danger to their own existence in this little project and it will only cost the taxpayer but what does that matter as long as they get a bit of kudos back? Not to mention a nice little propaganda machine for future use?

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 29 2012, 11:38 AM

So surely if there is no desire then there is obviously no need for a radio station is there?

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 29 2012, 11:41 AM

Spot on!

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 29 2012, 07:20 PM

I'm not a councillor, and I originally approached Thatcham Town Council not Newbury. This is not an NTC run or managed project.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 29 2012, 07:33 PM

So that was you then asking for £6k. That's not far short of Mencap's funding gap. Don't you think that's obscene in the current climate?

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 29 2012, 07:35 PM

Me thinks he doth protest too much? It is if Swift Hook is involved!

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 29 2012, 07:40 PM

"These aren't the droids you're looking for."

Posted by: Penelope Sep 29 2012, 07:47 PM

Roflmao

Posted by: JeffG Sep 30 2012, 09:55 AM

So long since I saw Star Wars, I had forgotten that quote. (Saw it when it first came out, before it was released over here )

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 30 2012, 11:58 AM

No need at all - a total waste of time & money IMHO.

Posted by: Rusty Bullet Sep 30 2012, 12:24 PM

Regrets...

Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 30 2012, 02:22 PM

I've had a few

Posted by: Richard Garvie Sep 30 2012, 02:48 PM

I believe that a community radio station would be a real asset to the local community, promoting local community organisations, providing local news and sport and also doing a lot to promote local business. Although I was looking for grant funding, a community radio station can attract funding to return a disuesed public building to community use at no cost to the taxpayer and also resulting in a net benefit to the council and it's assets. You know very little about this project, instead of making assumptions, come to a meeting, learn about the aims and benefits and then ask all of the questions you wish. If you are still opposed to it, then I can accept that but please get the facts first.

Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 30 2012, 03:00 PM

Richard. I have asked a couple of times for you to enlighten us as to your past success with (community) radio launches - no reply.

Now I see you are linking the project to another aspiration of yours, a nil-cost community centre.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with scrutiny, and it does mot mean those asking are against the project in mind.

Posted by: Penelope Sep 30 2012, 03:35 PM

Out of interest, which building do you have your eye on?

Posted by: Penelope Sep 30 2012, 03:36 PM

"But then again"

Posted by: user23 Sep 30 2012, 03:50 PM

What makes you think it would be Richard running the project?

It was mentioned at the meeting that £30k p.a may be needed for a project manager.

I guess this might be spent on someone with a proven track record of delivering this sort of thing.

Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 30 2012, 04:12 PM

1. I have not actually made that statement, I believe, but there should be someone who knows what it takes to deliver a successful project in at the beginning. Richard has such claims in his CV, but I have never found the outcome only the input.

2. No idea, but sounds right, plus various perks.

3. Absolutely. I remember when Kick was first mooted the competitor was Bruno Brooks. He clearly had insufficient knowledge of broadcasting

Posted by: Jo Pepper Oct 2 2012, 08:30 AM

I just can not get my head around why we need this; and why RG should be involved. Just stinks of political ambition.

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 2 2012, 11:42 AM

We don't need it. But someone comes along with a well presented idea, uses the word 'Community' and balls start rolling.

Posted by: Cognosco Oct 2 2012, 05:22 PM

And taxpayers cash that we were informed was in short supply suddenly becomes available?

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 2 2012, 05:25 PM

Not everything is funded with your taxes.

Posted by: Cognosco Oct 2 2012, 05:33 PM

How may projects that NTC have got involved has not cost taxpayers money that you can recall?

It is bound to be more of a certainty that it will cost the taxpayer money if Swift Half is involved!

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 2 2012, 06:14 PM

I'll let you figure it out.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Oct 2 2012, 06:43 PM

Dannyboy, there is not a single service provided by NTC that breaks even taking into account revenue against running and direct administration costs, and factor-in the back-office administration that the council don't attribute to anything in particular and the service costs are truely appalling. In the lifetime of the council the market generated enough revenue to pay for its running costs and service personnel, but that's been run at a loss for several years now.

Of course some services should not expect to break even, such as parks and recreation grounds, but running a market at a cost to the tax-payer is lunacy - there are perfectly good shops and supermarkets for everything the market sells, and you can park for free, and if you want to buy knock-off tat there's always e-bay.

The Chrimbo lights are a promotional event fo the town's traders who don't pay the precept, so let the BID put the Chrimbo lights up - I bet they'll do it at considerably less costs and fuss than the Clown Tonsils milk it for.

And of course the allotment service could be run by self-management at zero cost to the tax-payer like it is in many parishes, and if Newbury's allotmenteers are too lazy to do it for themselves then let them pay for the service, that would save the tax-payer £100k.

The Town Council is a gravy train. Toot toot.

Posted by: John C Oct 2 2012, 08:36 PM

As I dont touch farcebook I have no idea as to what is being proposed, also the only radio I listen to would be radio 5 or 5live for a sports event not being televised. Local or community radio should not be funded in any way by local council but I have no complaints about local business supporting it if you can get any of them interested.

Posted by: user23 Oct 2 2012, 08:53 PM

One of the ideas proposed at the meeting was commentaries of local sports teams.

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 2 2012, 09:36 PM

I know this will be hard for you, but services provided by NTC isn't the be all & end all. Thay provide bugger all in the grand scheme of things.

These other things which as I said, are not provided for by taxation.

Oh, & nice to see that you consider the market an outlet for 'knock off tat'.

Posted by: Rowley Birkin Oct 3 2012, 07:25 AM

don't feed the troll

Posted by: John C Oct 3 2012, 08:48 AM

If you read mine properly I said National Radio for non televised events not local events. If I am interested in a local sports event I would go an watch it.

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 3 2012, 09:34 AM

£100k for 'nothing'?


Yes, a bit rude, but I think people know what he means, even if it is untrue. The thrust of the argument was, why is the market run at a loss, or even exist, when there are so many other ways to get a deal?

I think the scandal is the tax pay stumping £800k for the new road surface in the market place, but that was the time of course when we had more money than sense. Some might joke that we still do.

Posted by: Biker1 Oct 3 2012, 09:50 AM

Ah yes, the Christmas Lights!
Are we going to get the same insipid, colourless, dreary lights as in the past few years?
If so, don't bother.
Can we have some new ones with a bit of colour?
EDIT - Ooops, sorry, off topic!

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 3 2012, 10:25 AM

It is nothing in the grand scheme of things.

You'd have to ask the market traders really - maybe they like the way it is.

Posted by: Biker1 Oct 3 2012, 10:40 AM

The traders themselves, I presume, make a profit so who makes the loss? As if I need ask!
I am not surprised if they like it the way it is apparently being subsidised the way they are!

Posted by: blackdog Oct 3 2012, 10:47 AM

The big question is how can NTC lose money by renting out space. What do they spend the money on?

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 3 2012, 10:51 AM

Very easy. Just make it so that the rental income is less than the cost of providing the market.

Posted by: Biker1 Oct 3 2012, 12:00 PM

What are the costs in providing the market to NTC?
Can't be much I would have thought?

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 3 2012, 12:44 PM

I have no idea.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Oct 3 2012, 05:46 PM

You got the thrust, but it was a bit rude and I apologise for that. I didn't say that you could buy knock-off gear at the market, I suggested that you buy knock-offs on e-bay, but I might have given the impression that some market stalls actually sell knock-off gear and that wasn't my intention and I'm sorry if it came over like that. My point was that there is a ready range of retail outlets for all levels of quality and that there is zero justification for spending public money to subsidise the Town Council's market as it provides no discernible public benefit.

Challenging the inefficiency and arrogance at the Town Council has been a thankless and stressful business for me and I'm making an effort to move on now so my numbers aren't bang up to date, but last time I looked the the breakdown was something like this: a declared cost to the tax-payer of £27.6k with revenue £58.0k, running costs £66.1k, staff costs £18.0k (half a full-time equivelent officer), and general overheads £1.5k. I say declared, but you won't find that figure in plain text, you have to tease it out of the accounts and the precept leaflet. In addition to that you need to apportion the council's administrative overheads to the service and that's another £27.2k, so the full commercial cost to the tax-payer of the town council's market management is £54.8k net of revenue. In the £58.0k running costs there is a very large payment to WBC for a cleaning contract though to my knowledge that contract was never put out to tender and has never been debated by the town council.

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 3 2012, 06:43 PM

The market provides a market. You might not think that is a public benefit, but I imagine there are those that do.

The market is Newbury's market, not the councils, but you know this.

Posted by: On the edge Oct 3 2012, 06:47 PM

Don't apologise - you are doing a public service, ironically the one we elect and now actually pay councillors to do! I'm not convinced that we will ever get Government back to where it should be until we tackle the management issue. It can be done; see E.R Davies - History of First Berkshire County Council. and the Chairmanship of Thomas Skurray in the 1930s. Shows what can be done by a real political leader with guts and determination.

Posted by: user23 Oct 3 2012, 07:01 PM

I read your post properly. I was just commenting that it was mentioned that sports commentary might be included.

I'd be interested to know how you would see (for example) both Thatcham Town FC and Newbury RFC if they were playing at the same time.

Posted by: On the edge Oct 3 2012, 07:09 PM

Quite right User23 - local sports commentaries were mentioned, might even say pushed. Strong support on the basis that people who couldn't get out would value such a service. I'm not at all interested in sport - but this did seem to be a good idea, particularly as it might even engender a bit of enthusiasm for more people to get involved.

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 3 2012, 07:21 PM

Some of those teams struggle to get people to stand and watch, let alone, actually talk to a microphone for between 80 and 90 minutes on a cold and wet January afternoon.

A better idea would be for teams to keep the proposed radio station updated with latest scores and scorers from the district, between records being played.

Even better would be for teams to tweet their latest scores and scorers and the station could just reiterate that.

Posted by: On the edge Oct 3 2012, 08:48 PM

With you there. I was just dreaming - get a good commentator, someone who'd make an angling competition entertaining, even if not exactly accurate! We ought to have a few who'd like to try their skills. The scoreboard idea is great as well. I can remember listening to the national ones on the BBC Home Service... we could link that to a 'local pools' - a novel way of raising money for charity. (Sorry - dreaming again!)

Posted by: user23 Oct 3 2012, 09:15 PM

It's a shame that more local sports teams don't tweet their scores.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Oct 3 2012, 10:05 PM

But is there really a potential local radio audiance for sport from Newbury and Thatcham? I mean if there is then fair do's, but I don't see it. Mind you, I can't believe that anyone could possibly want to listent to that self-indulgent pap-fest that is Radio1 and yet it seems there are people who do so I accept that tastes vary, but isn't sport at a local level overwealmingly of interest to the competitors only?

I'd quite like a decent talk radio station, like Radio4 but without the Archers and Woman's Hours, but I can't see a community station knocking out that kind of quality. The absolute very best that Kennet Radio could possibly hope to produce would be something like Radio Berkshire, but then Radio Berkshire already have that covered, and it's not my taste either.

To fill the time between party politicals and Richard reading out the runners and riders from the Racing Post the station's going to fall back on music, and pretty much whatever style it chooses there's already a radio station doing it better already. I'm sure there are local bands, as well as local novelists, essayists, poets, and starey-eyed religeous nut-jobs, willing and able to record sessions for the station, and that might generate some interest from the artists and their mums, but it seems unlikley to produce much of an audiance. If the station were to be entirely funded by vanity self-publishers then that would at least be a viable business model, but it still doesn't make it a community station.

And none of that make it a legitimate sink of public taxes.

And no one has yet engaged seriously with the fecking great elephant that is the political motivation of those seeking to control editorial power over the station. FFS?

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 3 2012, 10:10 PM

Covered sometime ago!

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 4 2012, 01:00 AM

I can't believe that anyone could possibly want to listent to that self-indulgent pap-fest that is Radio1

Oh he is just so funny.....

Posted by: Penelope Oct 4 2012, 08:39 AM

Ahh yes, radio 1, the station for people under the age of 18 with no more than two brain cells to rub together, personally I quite like Radio 2, 3 and 4 and classic, But at home I drag my radio in from off the net.

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 4 2012, 08:42 AM

Ahh yes, radio 1, the station for people under the age of 18 with no more than two brain cells to rub together.

A double act!!

Posted by: Simon Kirby Oct 4 2012, 11:14 AM

No, just middle-aged I guess. T'was ever thus.

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 4 2012, 11:16 AM

not partial to a bit of Lady Gaga then?

Posted by: On the edge Oct 4 2012, 12:07 PM

In pure marketing terms Simon is spot on. There is no significant listener demand - which means both sides of the mike will be very small numbers of people. The technology / broadcasting componets will appeal to some, on a hobby / vanity basis and the listener(s) will necessarily be indulgent supporters. Absolutley nothing wrong with any of that but no more deserving of public subsidy than the Boy Scouts or Methodist Bright Hour.

Posted by: Penelope Oct 5 2012, 04:56 PM

Mr Swift-Hook said that he felt people missed having a local radio station and added: “It’s clear that people do miss the truly local nature of a truly local radio station.

“This is an opportunity to bring back a truly local radio station to Newbury.”

What's not local about the one we have?

Puzzled of Newbury.

Posted by: Cognosco Oct 5 2012, 06:45 PM

Perhaps it doesn't sing the praises of Swift Half enough?

Posted by: user23 Oct 5 2012, 07:09 PM

Most of the programs come from Andover or are networked.

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 5 2012, 09:47 PM

What programs?

Posted by: Simon Kirby Oct 6 2012, 07:04 AM

So anywho, Richard Garvie - you are promoting this radio station as a community thing, so will you now please answer the questions about its financial support and governance which the community have put to you. They're simple straight questions and if you can't provide simple straight answers then I have to conclude that the truth is just too embarrassing. I wouldn't pester, only you've made it quite your own style to do just that and this is all billed as a commuity thing so the community has a right to know, so please, answer the questions:

• Let's see the articles and memorandum of the media companies behind this radio station, with a list of the directors.
• Say whether NTC let the council chamber for the public meeting as a full-price commercial let or as a free gift.
• If the latter explain what your request for a free lettig to hold a public meeting on allotment self management was refused.
• You stated that the locals councils were supporting the initiative, so either retract that statement and explain your misunderstanding, or publish the minutes of those council meetings and the resolutions of those councils to support the station.

No waffle please Richard, just the answers.

Posted by: Cognosco Oct 6 2012, 09:52 AM

Oh! Oh! I can see you being declared vexatious by the Newbury Labour Party very shortly Simon?

Politicians only like putting others on the spot - not being put on the spot? Still I am awaiting Richards reply with bated breath?

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 6 2012, 10:01 AM

If true, that is one for the council, although I'm confident I know the reason. I can't see Richard has any obligation to answer that one.

Posted by: NWNREADER Oct 6 2012, 11:20 AM

I have read that sentence (?) several times and cannot make sense of it, sorry, Simon. If you are asking Richard why the Council turned down a free room re the allotment issue, that is not for him to answer.
As regards him publishing minutes of Councils, again not for him to do and I doubt he has the authority. A better question would be 'Which Councils support the CR project?', then you can ask those Councils for the Minute you seek.
He is still under no obligation to reply, unless he is a Director of a company and you are a shareholder. he would be wise to be open with the community, but he has no obligation.
Plus, we are no more representative of a Community than he is