All your Marple and Stockport property and financial needs under one roof

Author Topic: Those annoying 'A boards'  (Read 22408 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Duke Fame

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1674
Re: Those perfectly acceptable 'A boards'
« Reply #91 on: January 04, 2013, 11:27:35 AM »
Thank you Blue and further thanks to your Grandson.

Sadly, I am aware of the 1980 Highways act that you have guided me to and it does not provide an answer the question.

The RNIB have been campaigning for 12 years through this act to try and get "A" boards banned, nationally. Other than persuading a handful of Councils to devise individual licensing schemes that usually cause more problems than if they'd left the issue alone,and they cost money, they have met with little success. This is mainly because there is nothing enforceable by law in this act that enables them to achieve this. That is what legislation has to be by definition - enforceable by law.

I'd like to come on the course with you and I'd certainly like a ride in wheel's rickshaw but I'm off shortly to find some winter sunshine for a few weeks so perhaps we can discuss when I return in early February.   

As Wheels pointed out, there isn't really a problem, certainly no more so than street furniture, trees etc.

As we have seen, there is no breach of any law, no need to cover anyone's back etc.

Incidently, the current draft required £5m public liability to get a licence, no small retailer would normally need that level of insurance. It's a hammer to crack a non-existent nut.

simonesaffron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 860
Re: Those annoying 'A boards'
« Reply #90 on: January 03, 2013, 10:53:17 AM »
Thank you Blue and further thanks to your Grandson.

Sadly, I am aware of the 1980 Highways act that you have guided me to and it does not provide an answer the question.

The RNIB have been campaigning for 12 years through this act to try and get "A" boards banned, nationally. Other than persuading a handful of Councils to devise individual licensing schemes that usually cause more problems than if they'd left the issue alone,and they cost money, they have met with little success. This is mainly because there is nothing enforceable by law in this act that enables them to achieve this. That is what legislation has to be by definition - enforceable by law.

I'd like to come on the course with you and I'd certainly like a ride in wheel's rickshaw but I'm off shortly to find some winter sunshine for a few weeks so perhaps we can discuss when I return in early February.   

Berni inn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
Re: Those annoying 'A boards'
« Reply #89 on: January 02, 2013, 11:01:39 PM »
In the eyes of the law every un-authorised sign is a violation.

If it costs businesses nothing to register, what is the problem.

Seems like SMBC are covering their backsides, which as a council tax payer can only be a good thing

Duke Fame

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1674
Re: Those annoying 'A boards'
« Reply #88 on: January 02, 2013, 10:15:20 PM »
Wheels, this National Legislation that you refer to where is it, where can I find it ? This the third time of asking. If you can point me to it then I will concede but I can't find any "LEGISLATION". So how can Disability Stockport sue to prosecute a law that doesn't exist ?


Simon

He found it on an app called google.

Maybe you should come to stockport college with me in a couple of weeks and do the european computer driving licence course (ECDL) with me.

Could save petrol by sharing a car.

May be wheels has got a rickshaw to take me in?

Legislation that HAS NOT BEEN VIOLATED!!!

As it happens, Disability Stockport will need to obtain a licence for their hanging sign if plans go ahead.

I can't see what Disability Stockport are moaning about, they just want to make themselves appear important, the council should reduce their budget by whatever it costs to run this scheme.

Incidentally, my old local council in Basingstoke threw together a code of conduct for this sort of thing costing nothing and solving the problem that doesn't really exist & allowing businesses to get on with it without sticking their nose in. It's strange that councils with the lowest budget and least interference also are the wealthiest areas. They don't have a load of whiners who theink the world owes them a living to constantly appease.

Berni inn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
Re: Those annoying 'A boards'
« Reply #87 on: January 02, 2013, 09:12:58 PM »
Wheels, this National Legislation that you refer to where is it, where can I find it ? This the third time of asking. If you can point me to it then I will concede but I can't find any "LEGISLATION". So how can Disability Stockport sue to prosecute a law that doesn't exist ?


Simon

He found it on an app called google.

Maybe you should come to stockport college with me in a couple of weeks and do the european computer driving licence course (ECDL) with me.

Could save petrol by sharing a car.

May be wheels has got a rickshaw to take me in?

Berni inn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
Re: Those annoying 'A boards'
« Reply #86 on: January 02, 2013, 08:48:03 PM »
My grandson just found that on his new tablet.
Hope that is of help simon.

Berni inn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
Re: Those annoying 'A boards'
« Reply #85 on: January 02, 2013, 08:46:13 PM »

simonesaffron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 860
Re: Those annoying 'A boards'
« Reply #84 on: January 02, 2013, 05:56:24 PM »
As we are all being versatile Ill try another way as well.

Wheels, this National Legislation that you refer to where is it, where can I find it ? This the third time of asking. If you can point me to it then I will concede but I can't find any "LEGISLATION". So how can Disability Stockport sue to prosecute a law that doesn't exist ?

In relation to the good Councillor do you agree with the following: Over the last several years she has drawn in excess of £25k per year in allowances from SMBC. Let us put aside what responsibility it was awarded for, she got it. Prior to May 2012 she was also working as a HE Lecturer. Do you think that combining these roles is a good thing for the people of Stockport ? How did she attend daytime meetings for the Council when she was Teaching elsewhere?

2/3 Years ago we had a Councillor in Stockport who worked all week in London. She did it for years,she only came to Stockport for full Council meetings yet she still drew her allowance in full. Is this right ?

wheels

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1461
Re: Those annoying 'A boards'
« Reply #83 on: January 02, 2013, 04:30:34 PM »
Lets try again Duke, its a problem because Disability Stockport will take the Council to Court seeking that they (the Council) implement national legislation. Its no good ranting and raving saying ignore DS all that will happen is that they will win in the Courts and you and I would pay for that.

Now the council have come up with a scheme that will not cost traders anything so whats you problem.

Regarding the 27th as you say only half the traders could be bothered to open and yet there were still 12 A boards out a potential problem to the disabled and those with poor sight. Quite apart from the fact that they are ugly things scattered about our streets.

Duke Fame

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1674
Re: Those annoying 'A boards'
« Reply #82 on: January 02, 2013, 01:48:55 PM »
Simone,

Let me try and explain simply for you.

The DL has to be drawn from the Executive. The Executives Allowance is 14,476.66, the DLs/Ex members Allowance is 16,213.75 thus the difference is 1,737.09 being the amount identified by the independent panel as the value of the DLs role which is limited only to standing in for the leader when he/she is not available.

In previous year the panel showed  the DL allowance as a separate figure.

Now stop trying to suggest I have this wrong I can only think its a lack of understanding on your part rather than being deliberately misleading.


I think you are being misleading Wheels. How much to the position of DL cost us mug council tax payers per yer?



Well Duke I happened to notice there board as I walk along Market St at 9am on 27th and I would think that less than half your 45 business had bothered to open. Would seem they just could not be bothered serving local people.

Whilst you are around Wheels, I'm still interested as to what your point is?

1/2 of the 45 businesses in vicinity were closed and less than  1/2 of those had an A board which together amounts to a little over 3 1/2 sq mtrs in the rather large pedestrianised area of some 800 sq metres.

Remind me why you think we are paying a team of council staff an average of £28k each for 3 years to come up with a solution to what you apear to have proved to be a non-existent problem

wheels

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1461
Re: Those annoying 'A boards'
« Reply #81 on: January 02, 2013, 11:56:06 AM »
Simone,

Let me try and explain simply for you.

The DL has to be drawn from the Executive. The Executives Allowance is 14,476.66, the DLs/Ex members Allowance is 16,213.75 thus the difference is 1,737.09 being the amount identified by the independent panel as the value of the DLs role which is limited only to standing in for the leader when he/she is not available.

In previous year the panel showed  the DL allowance as a separate figure.

Now stop trying to suggest I have this wrong I can only think its a lack of understanding on your part rather than being deliberately misleading.

Duke Fame

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1674
Re: Those annoying 'A boards'
« Reply #80 on: January 02, 2013, 11:11:44 AM »
Well Duke I happened to notice there board as I walk along Market St at 9am on 27th and I would think that less than half your 45 business had bothered to open. Would seem they just could not be bothered serving local people.

Whilst yo are around Wheels, I'm still interested as to what your point is?

1/2 of the 45 businesses in vicinity were closed and less than  1/2 of those had an A board which together amounts to a little over 3 1/2 sq mtrs in the rather large pedestrianised area of some 800 sq metres.

Remind me why you think we are paying a team of council staff an average of £28k each for 3 years to come up with a solution to what you apear to have proved to be a non-existent problem

simonesaffron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 860
Re: Those annoying 'A boards'
« Reply #79 on: January 02, 2013, 11:09:40 AM »
Dear Wheels,
 
Where do you get your information from ? I am intrigued, by the way you've still not told me where you got your information about ..."National Legislation for A boards".  You just ignored my request.

In the political year 2011/12, Cllr Derbyshire, I presume it is her we refer to, claimed the following allowances;

£9554.52 Ordinary Councillors Allowances.

£16,213.76 Special Responsibility Allowance for being Deputy Leader.

Like you say Wheels it is ..."all in the public domain". So which public domain are you looking at ? I thought that there was only one but it seems that you have one to yourself.

Where have you got your figure from - have you been making things up again ?

wheels

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1461
Re: Those annoying 'A boards'
« Reply #78 on: January 02, 2013, 10:07:53 AM »
No I have not made a mess S. The DL allowance on Stockport MBC is £1,800 thats One thousand Eight Hundred, or at least it was then. It might now be £2000.

Its all there for any member of the public to see.

simonesaffron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 860
Re: Those annoying 'A boards'
« Reply #77 on: January 02, 2013, 09:18:50 AM »
I will do that again as I made a mess of it.

Well Simone at the time the current council leader was Deputy Leader the allowance for DL was £1,800pa  so I think most people will understand her need to continue working.



Wheels, I think you've made another mess,

I think you've missed a decimal point out in your sums. Which is easily done but very misleading to readers. The point that I try to make is not really about her two salaries - good luck to her. It is more about her application and commitment to her then role as Deputy Leader of the Council which I am sure you will agree is a responsible job when she had the distraction of another responsible job. The bigger point I would like to press is that local government (which to a large extent governs our lives and the communities that we live in) the length and breadth of the country is and has been in a mess for many years. The reason for this IMHO is that in a large part it is policy managed by part - time over the hill amateurs that often have other jobs as well. At the time we speak of your beloved now Council Leader was on of those two-jobbers. 

I only use the Councillor in example and by all accounts she is very able but she can't be in two places at once. I do not really criticise her but more so the system that allows such a situation.