Anyone recognise this market? Options

[spartacus]

What a bustling market... plenty of stalls all nicely lined up... can't be Newbury



How many years ago was this for goodness sake? For a local paper selling local news they really do have a dearth of 'stock photos of Newbury' to use on the website articles. How much effort does it take to just go to the town hall and take a photo of the market sometime during this century? Rather than rely on this ancient stock photo from days gone by

Our crappy market is giving away jute bags

[nerc]

This was taken in 1999/2000.

The market was full and had a large waiting list at that time.

I remember the Market Manager Brian Newman who was awarded with a shield from the National Market Traders Federation for his turnaround of the whole market and being nominated as Market Manager of the Year on 2 separate years.

I believe they used the waiting list to open a Sunday Market in Northbrook Street which lasted for a couple of years.

[Simon Kirby]

I didn't think the people of Newbury cared so much for the Jute bag..

[On the edge]

Why can't we just admit its finished. Real market forces at work here, suppliers aren't coming because buyers don't use; so game over surely? It must still cost to administer and sweep up after, resource that our hard pressed council could redeploy elsewhere. Sure, I can understand why some like to see it just like they enjoy seeing old steam engines and such like, but nostalgia could be satisfied simply by running a few stalls out at Christmas. Frankly, the present draggle tailed weekly show is doing no good for anyone, least of all our image building for a vibrant town centre. This week there wasn't even a fruit and veg presence and the market was smaller than ever, yet the town was still busy and active, which says it all really.

[Simon Kirby]

Why can't we just admit its finished...

If Newbury Town Council saw themselves as a public service provider then yes, the market would have closed when it became uneconomical ans started to cost the tax-payer, but Newbury Town Council doesn't operate as a public service provider, it operates as a business and its "services" are nothing more than a pretext for the administration, because the more administration the more important the councillors, and the cost isn't an issue because the town council just levies whatever precept it likes and no one minds or even notices because in general if you're engaged enough in parish politics to know what's going on then you also know perfectly well how the council will victimise you if you say anything.

[x2lls]

You are all wrong.

It must be true.

http://www.newbury.gov.uk/index.php

[blackdog]

If Newbury Town Council saw themselves as a public service provider then yes, the market would have closed when it became uneconomical ans started to cost the tax-payer, but Newbury Town Council doesn't operate as a public service provider, it operates as a business ...

I fail to see your argument here? Businesses close operations when they become unprofitable whereas publc service providers commonly subsidise uneconomical activities eg theatres, sports grounds, and, in this case, a market.

[On the edge]

I fail to see your argument here? Businesses close operations when they become unprofitable whereas publc service providers commonly subsidise uneconomical activities eg theatres, sports grounds, and, in this case, a market.

Ah, socialisim comes to Newbury at last!

Presumably we ought to be coughing up to keep BHS alive

[The Hatter]

We aren't subsidising sports though are we, otherwise the football club would be safe.

[On the edge]

We aren't subsidising sports though are we, otherwise the football club would be safe.

I suppose that's exactly the point. Is it really the role of the local Council to subsidise any activity? Facilitate, yes, but not subsidise. For instance, I'd rather go to the dentist than watch a football match. If we, the public, really do want live theatre, sport etc we'd be willing to pay for it. For instance, if the football club have actually organised themselves into a self managed group and are really arguing with their landlord; nothing wrong with that. Indeed, it's a lesson for the market; if the traders think it's viable, then come together and make it work; they don't need the dead hand of the Council to do that!

[Simon Kirby]

I fail to see your argument here? Businesses close operations when they become unprofitable whereas publc service providers commonly subsidise uneconomical activities eg theatres, sports grounds, and, in this case, a market.

The Charter Market isn't a public service, there are other shops in town. Parks, allotments, cemearies, public toilets, libraries - these are public services because there is generally no commercial alternative and the collective provision of these services is appropriate in a civilised society. If the Charter Market was run at no public cost then I'd have no objection in principle to the town council renting out pitches, but there is a public cost, and it is fundamentally wrong for a public authority to subsidise a commercialoperation that has no public service benefit.

For the town council however their concern is not the provision of public services, it is the creation of administration opportunities, and if it takes £20k of tax-payers money to generate the pretext for a sub-committee and another £50k of back-office busy work then of course they're going to spend that £20k -it's all about power, prestige, and vanity for them.

[Lolly]

You are all wrong.

It must be true.

http://www.newbury.gov.uk/index.php

Quite a swish looking web site with some interesting commentary, particularly regarding the role of the Mayor .... I always thought the only 'power' that the Mayor had was akin to the chair of a Parish Council i.e.the casting vote. It seems however that the 'ceremonial' aspect of the role could allow for a wide degree of 'behind the scenes' influence. At least engagements and reports are published, although the reports seem to be a little in arrears.....

[On the edge]

Quite a swish looking web site with some interesting commentary, particularly regarding the role of the Mayor .... I always thought the only 'power' that the Mayor had was akin to the chair of a Parish Council i.e.the casting vote. It seems however that the 'ceremonial' aspect of the role could allow for a wide degree of 'behind the scenes' influence. At least engagements and reports are published, although the reports seem to be a little in arrears.....

I think the operative word is could. Yes, his attendance at various events does provide a mechanism for the behind the scenes nod and a wink activity. Frankly, most democratically minded people find that somewhat abhorrent. The other interesting point, heavily stressed is the mention of the Sovereign and order of precedence. So we have a 'constitutional monarch', who rules via the ceremonial Lord Lieutenant of an abolished County and a 'Mayor' whose real function and purpose is vested with another real and proper authority! We pay rather heavily for the continuance of this nonsense. After all, if it was so good, why was it abolished in the first place? Frankly, for me, if the inference of great influence is correct, then it stinks.

[nerc]

From memory i think back in 1999/2000 the Market was making a very good profit, however i cant view the accounts from that period.
As a market trader at the time i am sure the market was making a very good profit and would still be if it was allowed to operate as it was at that time.

[blackdog]

We aren't subsidising sports though are we, otherwise the football club would be safe.

So the football teams playing at Northcroft and other WBC/parish parks, the cricket teams at Nebwury, Donnington and others aren'y playing on council owned grounds? Many amateur teams rely totally on council subsidised facilites.

[blackdog]

Ah, socialisim comes to Newbury at last!

Local councils have been subsidising activities for 100 years and more - it's hardly a new thing.

Presumably we ought to be coughing up to keep BHS alive

Well we do seem to be subsidisiing Debenhams through reduced business rates.

[blackdog]

I think the operative word is could. Yes, his attendance at various events does provide a mechanism for the behind the scenes nod and a wink activity. Frankly, most democratically minded people find that somewhat abhorrent. The other interesting point, heavily stressed is the mention of the Sovereign and order of precedence. So we have a 'constitutional monarch', who rules via the ceremonial Lord Lieutenant of an abolished County and a 'Mayor' whose real function and purpose is vested with another real and proper authority! We pay rather heavily for the continuance of this nonsense. After all, if it was so good, why was it abolished in the first place? Frankly, for me, if the inference of great influence is correct, then it stinks.

The county council was abolished, not the county. Berkshire has been around since Saxon times, the county council lasted just over 100 years.

[On the edge]

The county council was abolished, not the county. Berkshire has been around since Saxon times, the county council lasted just over 100 years.

A fine distinction Blackdog! In effect, you are saying administrative boundaries have no value. I'd not disagree, because this means that the idea of stripping out all the 'services' from local government and delivering them all by national agencies would be far more practical. That would mean having no WBC at all, a very small compact NTC which comprised of a Mayor and Councillors to the County's Lord Lieutenant.

[On the edge]

Local councils have been subsidising activities for 100 years and more - it's hardly a new thing.


Well we do seem to be subsidisiing Debenhams through reduced business rates.

I quite agree, but aren't we supposed to be moving to letting market forces reign? That's what our true blue Newbury electors have been voting for isn't it?

However, I suspect that if push came to shove, the majority of Newbury's charge payers would rather see Debenhams stay in the town than the motley collection of tents appearing on market days.

Quite apart from the question of cost, the market isn't set up as a 'heritage' style operation, and the 1950s trading arrangements are really more an embarrassment than a draw to the town; so reducing the effect of the BiD.

[Simon Kirby]

From memory i think back in 1999/2000 the Market was making a very good profit, however i cant view the accounts from that period.
As a market trader at the time i am sure the market was making a very good profit and would still be if it was allowed to operate as it was at that time.

Something like 2007 I think. That was a bad year for NTC. A couple of relatively benign lib dem councillors were replaced with a couple of quite awful tories and the culture at the council, which had always been pretty defencive, declined considerably around then.

There are a number of factors that contributed to the decline in the market and its fallng into the red, but essentially it all comes doen to the cpuncil's inability to recognise and accept any fault or failing in itself, and the more defencive the council becomes the more hopelessly inept it becomes.