Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 10 2011, 12:24 AM

With talk of the BID, it couldn't happen too soon if you ask me.

In this time of 'austerity', is it right to spend £12,000.00 of public money on some lights for the Clock Tower, and then spend debating time to decide whether to show only yellow, or the colourful rainbow effect!

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?articleID=16966

Posted by: massifheed Jun 10 2011, 07:50 AM

I find the current "rainbow effect" slightly garrish, so a softer yellow scheme would work well in my opinion. The bright purple and blue lights don't enhance it or show it's architectural merit rather than shout "Look at me!"

Posted by: Rosewinelover Jun 10 2011, 08:47 AM

I prefer the multi coloured lights myself, the yellow ones are boring - why don't they just do it completely different at Christmas and special occasions by using 8 different colours instead of 4 to make it different.

Posted by: Richard Garvie Jun 10 2011, 10:14 AM

It's money that was spent for the sake of it. How many more white elephants will be enforced on us for the sake of it?

Posted by: Richard Garvie Jun 10 2011, 10:14 AM

It's money that was spent for the sake of it. How many more white elephants will be enforced on us for the sake of it?

Posted by: Turin Machine Jun 10 2011, 10:47 AM

Like the Millenium Dome. One of yours I believe ?

Posted by: Dodgys smarter brother. Jun 10 2011, 05:40 PM

Wrong Wrong Wrong.

The Millenium Dome was a Tory idea.

John Major gave it the green light, Heseltine sat on the committee to organise what went into it, Hague sat on the committee that estimated visitor numbers and pricing. (He got that right didn't he)? Visitor numbers were projected to be 12 million a year and that was where the problem lay, costs were balanced against that income - which never happened.

When the incoming Labour governemt took over they had the choice of continuing with it, or knocking it on the head. (costs were already overunning)

Had they stopped it they would have been accused of wasting all the money that had been spent up until then, and would likely to have been sued for breaching the contatcs already signed.

They inherited a huge pile of dingo's kidneys and were always going to be damned if they did or damned if they didn't continue with it. Of course, when it did start to go tits-up the Tories put on their Teflon jackets, and their friends in the press made sure it was thought of as being a Labour idea.

However, simple fact remains - The Millenium Dome was a Tory idea, and was insigated and started by the Tories. Let's not start changing history just because some people believe what they read in the tabloids.

Posted by: user23 Jun 10 2011, 08:03 PM

Surely it's a multi coloured elephant?

Posted by: Simon Kirby Jun 10 2011, 09:27 PM

It's completely obscene, but it's all in a day's work for NTC. Time to pull the plug on them - and I mean NTC.

Posted by: Turin Machine Jun 10 2011, 10:59 PM

I think you will find that the Dome project was conceived, originally on a somewhat smaller scale, under John Major's Conservative government, as a Festival of Britain or World's Fair-type showcase to celebrate the third millennium. The incoming Labour government elected in 1997 under Tony Blair greatly expanded the size, scope and funding of the project. It also significantly increased expectations of what would be delivered. Just before its opening Blair claimed the Dome would be "a triumph of confidence over cynicism, boldness over blandness, excellence over mediocrity". In the words of BBC correspondent Robert Orchard, "the Dome was to be highlighted as a glittering New Labour achievement in the next election manifesto".

In other words the Conservatives came up with a modest idea that was then hijacked by the Blair machine and blown out of all preportion. it reminds me of the building of the colloseum (similar idea, give the populace bread snd games and they will love you) It takes the conservatives to get things wrong but it takes Labour to really **** it up !

Posted by: Richard Garvie Jun 10 2011, 11:24 PM

Quite!!!

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 11 2011, 08:29 AM

A bit of spin there: Wikipedia says 'somewhat smaller scale' and you describe that as 'modest', and 'greatly expanding the size, scope and funding of the project' become 'blown out of all proportion'!

But you are right; it was a Labour (or should I say Blair's) vanity project. It also makes me think of the Lib Dem/Tory £2,000,000.00 paving fetish in Newbury, with The Broadway being the epitome of Newbury councils wasting public money.

Posted by: Strafin Jun 11 2011, 11:59 AM

I like the clock tower with the lights on it. It doesn't make me go to that end of town or spend anymore money but I think it looks nice.

Posted by: Richard Garvie Jun 11 2011, 04:02 PM

We could sit and type about blair and major all we like, the fact is that neither now have a say in what happens now. In times of austerity, we should be excercising restraint with funds yet the only severe cuts being made locally are hurting the vulnerable (elderley, disabled and young people / families) the most.

Let's stop the vanity projects and focus on protecting key services.

Posted by: Strafin Jun 11 2011, 05:07 PM

And we've increased the international aid budget by 34% I believe.

Posted by: Jayjay Jun 11 2011, 05:35 PM

We will have to buy the new soft lights and pay to have the fancy coloured ones put into storage. We will also have to pay to have the coloured ones removed, then come Christmas pay again to have them changed over, come January pay to have them changed yet again. Meanwhile we are being told we dont have funds for elderly/disabled.

Posted by: Strafin Jun 11 2011, 06:32 PM

No, the lights are all already installed, it just takes a switch to go from a one colour programme to multicolours.

Posted by: Dodgys smarter brother. Jun 11 2011, 07:01 PM

Well, our total aid budget is over 7 billion. That has to be divided between many countries.

Total U.K. bankers bonuses last year were over 7 billion. That goes to just a few individuals.

At least 50 million of our OA budget is being spent here in the U.K.

Always helps to keep things in perspective.

Posted by: Cognosco Jun 11 2011, 07:29 PM

So if we had stopped the 7 billion foreign aid and paid it as bonuses to the bankers as well as their existing 7 billion bonuses would this mean we could of racked up double our deficit?

The banking and finance industry are the only institutions I know that get paid even when they completely mess up. Except of course our very own WBC.