Hengistbury Head Noddy train decision ‘cannot be challenged’ despite nearly 20,000 signature petition

Hengistbury Head Noddy train decision ‘cannot be challenged’ despite nearly 20,000 signature petition

The Hengistbury Head land train in action

Mechanic Alan Barnard

First published in News
Last updated
by

The decision to scrap the current Hengistbury Head land train service cannot be challenged, despite the public outcry.

More than 17,000 people have signed the online petition to save the service, run by 88-year-old Joyce Faris, and hundreds of people have posted messages of support on the land train’s Facebook page.

Many have also emailed leisure and tourism cabinet member Cllr Lawrence Williams to register their objection to the decision.

But a spokesman for Bournemouth council confirmed there was no opportunity for anyone to question the decision, which has not been the subject of any public consultation or discussion.

It is not even a key cabinet member decision, which means there is no mechanism for any councillor to call it in and get it scrutinised.

Even members of the council’s economy and tourism scrutiny panel were unaware of the decision until they read about it in the Echo.

Cllr Bob Chapman, who chairs the panel, confirmed it was not something that had been brought to the attention of panel members.

The council’s stated aim of extending the land train service so that it eventually runs from Alum Chine to Hengistbury Head is also new.

There is no mention of this in the council’s seafront strategy, which was published last year and detailed how the council intended to improve the seafront in the long-term.

A council spokesman said there were around 400 licences involving the parks or seafront and so they were constantly coming up for renewal.

She said the licence for the land train came up for renewal and over the past few years they had asked Mrs Faris to submit a business plan to update the service.

They said she had not done this and so they informed her they wanted to either re-tender it or bring it in-house.

The spokesman confirmed the decision was not subject to consultation or call-in because ‘no significant change’ to the service was planned.

However, she could not confirm it would continue to run 364 days a year, saying this will be subject to a review.

Bournemouth council claim running its own land trains will mean 50 per cent more people will be able to use the service and disabled access will be improved.

It also expects it to generate £45,000 a year.

It said it would be providing new traditionally-styled upgraded trains, which would have increased capacity and shorter waiting times.

Trains will be operated by fully-trained staff with Public Service Vehicle licences and will be accessible to disabled people.

The council said its trains would also use less fuel and result in lower emissions.

They will be wider than the current trains but the council said it was confident this would not impact negatively on the environment.

It has confirmed it will freeze fares for the 2015 season and will introduce new ticketing options and incentives.

Comments (133)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:04am Wed 19 Mar 14

Redgolfer says...

So now Bournemouth Council is a dictatorship, it appears that if this piece is right, just a couple of people have made a decision that over 20,000 people object too and they say it CANNOT be changed.
Even the government of this country makes decision's that are then altered, who do these people think they are, they come into the area as newcomers, decide I like it here and I will have some of that and TRY to change what has run successfully for the last 45 years providing a service for the public, YET there is mention of this change in any discussion with people who decide what and wherefore in this area, absolute Disgrace.
So now Bournemouth Council is a dictatorship, it appears that if this piece is right, just a couple of people have made a decision that over 20,000 people object too and they say it CANNOT be changed. Even the government of this country makes decision's that are then altered, who do these people think they are, they come into the area as newcomers, decide I like it here and I will have some of that and TRY to change what has run successfully for the last 45 years providing a service for the public, YET there is mention of this change in any discussion with people who decide what and wherefore in this area, absolute Disgrace. Redgolfer
  • Score: 170

6:07am Wed 19 Mar 14

Isosceles says...

'It also expects it to generate £45,000 a year.'
Is that net profit after running costs have been deducted or gross profit before running costs?
The article is full of council 'weasel' words.
'It also expects it to generate £45,000 a year.' Is that net profit after running costs have been deducted or gross profit before running costs? The article is full of council 'weasel' words. Isosceles
  • Score: 90

6:12am Wed 19 Mar 14

manyogie says...

45K PA
Not if no one rides on it though!
45K PA Not if no one rides on it though! manyogie
  • Score: 87

6:20am Wed 19 Mar 14

Isosceles says...

manyogie
Interesting - I wonder what they would do if it was boycotted? Just say tut-tut cos it is only taxpayers money (:o))
manyogie Interesting - I wonder what they would do if it was boycotted? Just say tut-tut cos it is only taxpayers money (:o)) Isosceles
  • Score: 62

6:25am Wed 19 Mar 14

Geldon says...

It does seem from the reporting that Mrs Faris was accepting of the decision not to renew the contract and had said it was expected. Also taking into account the stated failure to provide a 'plan' of investment in the service for the future - suggests a lack of 'interest' maybe? There is no mention of family wishing to carry on with the contract and one would think that at 88 maybe Mrs Faris wishes to enjoy the fruits of her many years of labour? I first went on the 'Noddy Train' about 40 years ago and Hengistbury Head is a favorite place to walk - and the train is a familiar and loved sight to many - due to it's character. If Bournemouth Council 'maintain' that character then many more future generations will have just as fond memories of their own 'Noddy Train' that we have of ours? I think the extension of the land train route is a great idea and that can only support visitors and tourism to the new Hengistbury Centre. It is a little misguided to challenge this change surely? It is not as if the facility is being scrapped? It is simply one contractor retiring and another (in this case Bournemouth Council) picking up the job. I of course will miss seeing the little green trains tootling up and down - and it is a shame in a way that Bournemouth Council can't keep the current trains (or at least ones of similar style) in service. That however does not address the need for larger carry capacity, disabled facilities and a train that is adequate to undertake the extended route. Progress has a habit of creating a sense of nostalgia - which can then be voiced as a form of opposition. In this case unfounded opposition ..... sadly. The 'Noddy Train' is dead......... Long Live The 'Noddy Train'!
It does seem from the reporting that Mrs Faris was accepting of the decision not to renew the contract and had said it was expected. Also taking into account the stated failure to provide a 'plan' of investment in the service for the future - suggests a lack of 'interest' maybe? There is no mention of family wishing to carry on with the contract and one would think that at 88 maybe Mrs Faris wishes to enjoy the fruits of her many years of labour? I first went on the 'Noddy Train' about 40 years ago and Hengistbury Head is a favorite place to walk - and the train is a familiar and loved sight to many - due to it's character. If Bournemouth Council 'maintain' that character then many more future generations will have just as fond memories of their own 'Noddy Train' that we have of ours? I think the extension of the land train route is a great idea and that can only support visitors and tourism to the new Hengistbury Centre. It is a little misguided to challenge this change surely? It is not as if the facility is being scrapped? It is simply one contractor retiring and another (in this case Bournemouth Council) picking up the job. I of course will miss seeing the little green trains tootling up and down - and it is a shame in a way that Bournemouth Council can't keep the current trains (or at least ones of similar style) in service. That however does not address the need for larger carry capacity, disabled facilities and a train that is adequate to undertake the extended route. Progress has a habit of creating a sense of nostalgia - which can then be voiced as a form of opposition. In this case unfounded opposition ..... sadly. The 'Noddy Train' is dead......... Long Live The 'Noddy Train'! Geldon
  • Score: -15

6:37am Wed 19 Mar 14

Isosceles says...

Geldon
I see your point but why council run - shouldn't it have been put out to tender?
Geldon I see your point but why council run - shouldn't it have been put out to tender? Isosceles
  • Score: 65

6:58am Wed 19 Mar 14

Redgolfer says...

Geldon wrote:
It does seem from the reporting that Mrs Faris was accepting of the decision not to renew the contract and had said it was expected. Also taking into account the stated failure to provide a 'plan' of investment in the service for the future - suggests a lack of 'interest' maybe? There is no mention of family wishing to carry on with the contract and one would think that at 88 maybe Mrs Faris wishes to enjoy the fruits of her many years of labour? I first went on the 'Noddy Train' about 40 years ago and Hengistbury Head is a favorite place to walk - and the train is a familiar and loved sight to many - due to it's character. If Bournemouth Council 'maintain' that character then many more future generations will have just as fond memories of their own 'Noddy Train' that we have of ours? I think the extension of the land train route is a great idea and that can only support visitors and tourism to the new Hengistbury Centre. It is a little misguided to challenge this change surely? It is not as if the facility is being scrapped? It is simply one contractor retiring and another (in this case Bournemouth Council) picking up the job. I of course will miss seeing the little green trains tootling up and down - and it is a shame in a way that Bournemouth Council can't keep the current trains (or at least ones of similar style) in service. That however does not address the need for larger carry capacity, disabled facilities and a train that is adequate to undertake the extended route. Progress has a habit of creating a sense of nostalgia - which can then be voiced as a form of opposition. In this case unfounded opposition ..... sadly. The 'Noddy Train' is dead......... Long Live The 'Noddy Train'!
So that's the Council position is it Geldon, you cannot have read previous posts on this subject, it has been stated that MRS Faris wants to continue with this service to the PUBLIC, that wants her to continue.
The Council cannot be sure to run the service throughout the year and at what price although they state that prices will be frozen for the first year, anybody thought about the size of this new concept and would you want to be behind this train when it emerges from the prom at Shore Road, if it is the same size as the present one, how can 2 pass each other on the narrow track that is there at present going down to the spit without work being done on a sight of special interest which is Hengistbury Head.
Who states that there is a need for larger carry facility, its been all right for 45 years, Unfounded opposition you say, I would say go take a lie down because in my opinion you are not feeling well, if you take that view and THIS just might be ''the straw that broke the camel's back''.
[quote][p][bold]Geldon[/bold] wrote: It does seem from the reporting that Mrs Faris was accepting of the decision not to renew the contract and had said it was expected. Also taking into account the stated failure to provide a 'plan' of investment in the service for the future - suggests a lack of 'interest' maybe? There is no mention of family wishing to carry on with the contract and one would think that at 88 maybe Mrs Faris wishes to enjoy the fruits of her many years of labour? I first went on the 'Noddy Train' about 40 years ago and Hengistbury Head is a favorite place to walk - and the train is a familiar and loved sight to many - due to it's character. If Bournemouth Council 'maintain' that character then many more future generations will have just as fond memories of their own 'Noddy Train' that we have of ours? I think the extension of the land train route is a great idea and that can only support visitors and tourism to the new Hengistbury Centre. It is a little misguided to challenge this change surely? It is not as if the facility is being scrapped? It is simply one contractor retiring and another (in this case Bournemouth Council) picking up the job. I of course will miss seeing the little green trains tootling up and down - and it is a shame in a way that Bournemouth Council can't keep the current trains (or at least ones of similar style) in service. That however does not address the need for larger carry capacity, disabled facilities and a train that is adequate to undertake the extended route. Progress has a habit of creating a sense of nostalgia - which can then be voiced as a form of opposition. In this case unfounded opposition ..... sadly. The 'Noddy Train' is dead......... Long Live The 'Noddy Train'![/p][/quote]So that's the Council position is it Geldon, you cannot have read previous posts on this subject, it has been stated that MRS Faris wants to continue with this service to the PUBLIC, that wants her to continue. The Council cannot be sure to run the service throughout the year and at what price although they state that prices will be frozen for the first year, anybody thought about the size of this new concept and would you want to be behind this train when it emerges from the prom at Shore Road, if it is the same size as the present one, how can 2 pass each other on the narrow track that is there at present going down to the spit without work being done on a sight of special interest which is Hengistbury Head. Who states that there is a need for larger carry facility, its been all right for 45 years, Unfounded opposition you say, I would say go take a lie down because in my opinion you are not feeling well, if you take that view and THIS just might be ''the straw that broke the camel's back''. Redgolfer
  • Score: 54

7:01am Wed 19 Mar 14

RM says...

I have news for Bournemouth Council - anything can be challenged. I don't live in B'mouth so I can't do much but I would suggest that one of the Residents Associations checks out how to make an official complaint about the Council - there is someone called, I think, the Local Government Ombudsman who can be contacted. There are specific steps that need to be taken to ensure the complaint will be looked at but the details are out there if one of the Associations wishes to take up the cudgel. Any Cllrs involved may like to consider that 2015 is re-election year for them (or not).
I have news for Bournemouth Council - anything can be challenged. I don't live in B'mouth so I can't do much but I would suggest that one of the Residents Associations checks out how to make an official complaint about the Council - there is someone called, I think, the Local Government Ombudsman who can be contacted. There are specific steps that need to be taken to ensure the complaint will be looked at but the details are out there if one of the Associations wishes to take up the cudgel. Any Cllrs involved may like to consider that 2015 is re-election year for them (or not). RM
  • Score: 72

7:07am Wed 19 Mar 14

echor23 says...

Oh Bournemouth council you really are a bunch of sick and pathetic in humane beings aren't you. Mini hitler syndrome is kicking in big time with Bournemouth council!!!
Another decision that they forget that when they are old and can no longer walk they will ask 'hmm how can I see hengistbury head and mudeford'!! It will all come back as karma!!!
Oh Bournemouth council you really are a bunch of sick and pathetic in humane beings aren't you. Mini hitler syndrome is kicking in big time with Bournemouth council!!! Another decision that they forget that when they are old and can no longer walk they will ask 'hmm how can I see hengistbury head and mudeford'!! It will all come back as karma!!! echor23
  • Score: 26

7:11am Wed 19 Mar 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Does this mean it will meet the demand to travel in an unheated open Noddy train in mid November when the rain is driving off the sea like stair rods by a full trained Noddy train driver.Now that's a business plan that only the Beasley gang could come up with.
Does this mean it will meet the demand to travel in an unheated open Noddy train in mid November when the rain is driving off the sea like stair rods by a full trained Noddy train driver.Now that's a business plan that only the Beasley gang could come up with. kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 17

7:22am Wed 19 Mar 14

retry69 says...

We can see it now front page news of those against the loss of the beloved train all dressed in noddy costumes and some Big Ears no doubt, red faced and arms folded,it might even get used on next years proposed typical Echo reader calender
We can see it now front page news of those against the loss of the beloved train all dressed in noddy costumes and some Big Ears no doubt, red faced and arms folded,it might even get used on next years proposed typical Echo reader calender retry69
  • Score: -29

7:28am Wed 19 Mar 14

Lord Spring says...

Bussines plan my donkey.
If I build a house I submit plans I do not resubmitted plans every so often to the council.
And as for bringing in house are they doing the same for those they have let out.
Bussines plan my donkey. If I build a house I submit plans I do not resubmitted plans every so often to the council. And as for bringing in house are they doing the same for those they have let out. Lord Spring
  • Score: 23

7:33am Wed 19 Mar 14

skydriver says...

Since when did Bournemouth become a dictatorship, there reason for not going back is because they have already signed a deal no doubt.
What a happened to small businesses that Bournemouth wanted to attract ? So come along you know all councillors give an answer. Quite simply there was nothing in it for the council so they had to go .
More and more write a letter to Eric Pickles the communities minister, it matters note what side of the political divide your on.
We must NOT let these little people ruin our heritage.
Since when did Bournemouth become a dictatorship, there reason for not going back is because they have already signed a deal no doubt. What a happened to small businesses that Bournemouth wanted to attract ? So come along you know all councillors give an answer. Quite simply there was nothing in it for the council so they had to go . More and more write a letter to Eric Pickles the communities minister, it matters note what side of the political divide your on. We must NOT let these little people ruin our heritage. skydriver
  • Score: 38

7:37am Wed 19 Mar 14

chridrum says...

Last time I looked we lived in a democracy, now we are being dictated to and told we have no means of redress when a poor decision is made.

This decision appears to have been made by a small misguided group who are totally out of touch with the people of Bournemouth.

Can I suggest you drive the seafront train down the spit this weekend and see if it will fit round the bends and be able to pass another one coming the opposite way. All without killing one of the many children learning to ride a bike, skates, scooter, skate board or just walk. It would be a shame to get to November and then realise
a) the train won't fit
b) the customers doesn't want it
c) we can't afford to buy them

So everyone who cares about this needs to e-mail/write to their councillor.
Tell them why you want to retain the current Land Train and that council procedures need to be changed so that this cannot happen again. A service that has successfully run for 45 years can just have it's contact stopped on a whim?

The stated reason of upgrading the service is clearly not required by the users who have demonstrated that it is the heritage quirkiness of the Land Train which most appeals to locals and visitors alike.
I suspect that Joyce Faris who has a close relationship with her customers felt no upgrade was needed, clearly we wholeheartedly agree.

I am afraid it just looks to us (the people who elect the council to represent us) as if the council has done another dirty deal.

This has already come to the attention of national radio, how much more embarrassment does the council want? For the press it has much appeal, a quirky old Land Train run by an 88 year old, known and loved by thousands replaced by a council run plastic theme park train. Bournemouth Council wake up you are becoming a laughing stock, IMAX, Surf Reef .....

Sometimes you just have to admit you are wrong and move on
Last time I looked we lived in a democracy, now we are being dictated to and told we have no means of redress when a poor decision is made. This decision appears to have been made by a small misguided group who are totally out of touch with the people of Bournemouth. Can I suggest you drive the seafront train down the spit this weekend and see if it will fit round the bends and be able to pass another one coming the opposite way. All without killing one of the many children learning to ride a bike, skates, scooter, skate board or just walk. It would be a shame to get to November and then realise a) the train won't fit b) the customers doesn't want it c) we can't afford to buy them So everyone who cares about this needs to e-mail/write to their councillor. Tell them why you want to retain the current Land Train and that council procedures need to be changed so that this cannot happen again. A service that has successfully run for 45 years can just have it's contact stopped on a whim? The stated reason of upgrading the service is clearly not required by the users who have demonstrated that it is the heritage quirkiness of the Land Train which most appeals to locals and visitors alike. I suspect that Joyce Faris who has a close relationship with her customers felt no upgrade was needed, clearly we wholeheartedly agree. I am afraid it just looks to us (the people who elect the council to represent us) as if the council has done another dirty deal. This has already come to the attention of national radio, how much more embarrassment does the council want? For the press it has much appeal, a quirky old Land Train run by an 88 year old, known and loved by thousands replaced by a council run plastic theme park train. Bournemouth Council wake up you are becoming a laughing stock, IMAX, Surf Reef ..... Sometimes you just have to admit you are wrong and move on chridrum
  • Score: 43

7:39am Wed 19 Mar 14

skydriver says...

The article says it will generate £45,000 a year , that's chicken feed , get rid of Cllr Lawrance and there is the saving, no need to get ride of noddy train , and still have the extra revenue.
Reading between the lines I would not be at all surprised if Lawrance, as he didn't mention it to the committee if he has not got some back hander, although difficult maybe to prove.
He should resign NOW. And keep the people of Bournemouth and the tourist happy.
The article says it will generate £45,000 a year , that's chicken feed , get rid of Cllr Lawrance and there is the saving, no need to get ride of noddy train , and still have the extra revenue. Reading between the lines I would not be at all surprised if Lawrance, as he didn't mention it to the committee if he has not got some back hander, although difficult maybe to prove. He should resign NOW. And keep the people of Bournemouth and the tourist happy. skydriver
  • Score: 39

7:47am Wed 19 Mar 14

Lord Spring says...

retry69 wrote:
We can see it now front page news of those against the loss of the beloved train all dressed in noddy costumes and some Big Ears no doubt, red faced and arms folded,it might even get used on next years proposed typical Echo reader calender
I will not fold my arms while posing you can be certain of that.
[quote][p][bold]retry69[/bold] wrote: We can see it now front page news of those against the loss of the beloved train all dressed in noddy costumes and some Big Ears no doubt, red faced and arms folded,it might even get used on next years proposed typical Echo reader calender[/p][/quote]I will not fold my arms while posing you can be certain of that. Lord Spring
  • Score: 11

7:47am Wed 19 Mar 14

fedupwithjobsworths says...

So our un-elected Council Officers are accountable to nobody, so much for local democracy! Perhaps its time for a "Bournemouth Spring" uprising!
So our un-elected Council Officers are accountable to nobody, so much for local democracy! Perhaps its time for a "Bournemouth Spring" uprising! fedupwithjobsworths
  • Score: 33

7:48am Wed 19 Mar 14

High Treason says...

Isosceles wrote:
Geldon
I see your point but why council run - shouldn't it have been put out to tender?
It will probably go to S&D Leisure or BH Live, both back door subsidiaries of the council.
[quote][p][bold]Isosceles[/bold] wrote: Geldon I see your point but why council run - shouldn't it have been put out to tender?[/p][/quote]It will probably go to S&D Leisure or BH Live, both back door subsidiaries of the council. High Treason
  • Score: 27

8:04am Wed 19 Mar 14

rusty james says...

Man oh man. Love the area, love the people, but the council? Who voted for these arrogant cretins?
Man oh man. Love the area, love the people, but the council? Who voted for these arrogant cretins? rusty james
  • Score: 46

8:05am Wed 19 Mar 14

retry69 says...

Lord Spring wrote:
retry69 wrote:
We can see it now front page news of those against the loss of the beloved train all dressed in noddy costumes and some Big Ears no doubt, red faced and arms folded,it might even get used on next years proposed typical Echo reader calender
I will not fold my arms while posing you can be certain of that.
Hello m'lud long time since you responded to a comment of mine,I look on you as my friendly stalker unlike some,I hope you are well?
[quote][p][bold]Lord Spring[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]retry69[/bold] wrote: We can see it now front page news of those against the loss of the beloved train all dressed in noddy costumes and some Big Ears no doubt, red faced and arms folded,it might even get used on next years proposed typical Echo reader calender[/p][/quote]I will not fold my arms while posing you can be certain of that.[/p][/quote]Hello m'lud long time since you responded to a comment of mine,I look on you as my friendly stalker unlike some,I hope you are well? retry69
  • Score: 0

8:09am Wed 19 Mar 14

shoppingnoodles says...

I am one of the many people who e-mailed Cllr Lawrence to express my disgust at this unwanted decision and recieved a generic reply, which was a list of FAQ's. Conveniently missing from this list was exactly how much the trains would cost, the salary cost for the team of PSV qualified drivers and whether the service would be year round, as is the current service.

So the scheme will bring in 45k? That probably won't even pay for one carriage!

I am sick and tired of the embarrassingly poor decisions made by the local councils recently. Councillors have little job training and seem to take little notice of those that actually do (I.e. the planning disasters in Christchurch) or the wishes of the folk they represent. Their costly mistakes are an embarrassment and bring shame on our area.
I am one of the many people who e-mailed Cllr Lawrence to express my disgust at this unwanted decision and recieved a generic reply, which was a list of FAQ's. Conveniently missing from this list was exactly how much the trains would cost, the salary cost for the team of PSV qualified drivers and whether the service would be year round, as is the current service. So the scheme will bring in 45k? That probably won't even pay for one carriage! I am sick and tired of the embarrassingly poor decisions made by the local councils recently. Councillors have little job training and seem to take little notice of those that actually do (I.e. the planning disasters in Christchurch) or the wishes of the folk they represent. Their costly mistakes are an embarrassment and bring shame on our area. shoppingnoodles
  • Score: 37

8:12am Wed 19 Mar 14

xslee says...

Dear Daily Echo,

please amend the headline of this story, or at least report a more accurate view; of course the decision can be changed, it would take all of 30 seconds for Cllr Williams to admit he made a mistake, acknowledge the opinion of nearly 20,000 ratepayers and tourists, and carry on as before.
Dear Daily Echo, please amend the headline of this story, or at least report a more accurate view; of course the decision can be changed, it would take all of 30 seconds for Cllr Williams to admit he made a mistake, acknowledge the opinion of nearly 20,000 ratepayers and tourists, and carry on as before. xslee
  • Score: 36

8:14am Wed 19 Mar 14

Chip in says...

My guess is that Mrs Faris was ground down and drowning in red tape because the goal posts were being moved. How could she have ever presented a suitable winning business plan anyway without knowing what the council intended? I would be interested to learn if the goal posts have now moved sufficiently to prevent Mrs Faris or other members of her family applying in subsequent years. Amongst her many supporters there will be many able to assist in navigating red tape. Will it still be a 12 month licence I wonder? Either way, bad news to so many interested parties should not be relayed in the form of two fingers.
My guess is that Mrs Faris was ground down and drowning in red tape because the goal posts were being moved. How could she have ever presented a suitable winning business plan anyway without knowing what the council intended? I would be interested to learn if the goal posts have now moved sufficiently to prevent Mrs Faris or other members of her family applying in subsequent years. Amongst her many supporters there will be many able to assist in navigating red tape. Will it still be a 12 month licence I wonder? Either way, bad news to so many interested parties should not be relayed in the form of two fingers. Chip in
  • Score: 27

8:29am Wed 19 Mar 14

oversixty says...

Democracy rules?
Democracy rules? oversixty
  • Score: 6

8:45am Wed 19 Mar 14

Geldon says...

Isosceles wrote:
Geldon
I see your point but why council run - shouldn't it have been put out to tender?
Hi - I am not sure of 'Council Protocol' in services such as this - as in the opportunity should have be offered to private firms - but I do wonder if a suitable contractor (other than Mrs Faris of course) could be found locally? And I am sure if a contract was offered to any out of area firm - people would have something to say about that. It makes sense for the Council to take it up I guess as they are already running the seafront land train. Also ... why not Council run?
[quote][p][bold]Isosceles[/bold] wrote: Geldon I see your point but why council run - shouldn't it have been put out to tender?[/p][/quote]Hi - I am not sure of 'Council Protocol' in services such as this - as in the opportunity should have be offered to private firms - but I do wonder if a suitable contractor (other than Mrs Faris of course) could be found locally? And I am sure if a contract was offered to any out of area firm - people would have something to say about that. It makes sense for the Council to take it up I guess as they are already running the seafront land train. Also ... why not Council run? Geldon
  • Score: -1

8:59am Wed 19 Mar 14

BarrHumbug says...

Has anyone thought that the majority of passengers will probably have parked in the HH car park and with trains running from Alum chine or even from just Boscombe the frequency is going to be a lot less than the current Noddy train. This will result in either lengthy queues and waiting times or people just not bothering to wait and walking?
Has anyone thought that the majority of passengers will probably have parked in the HH car park and with trains running from Alum chine or even from just Boscombe the frequency is going to be a lot less than the current Noddy train. This will result in either lengthy queues and waiting times or people just not bothering to wait and walking? BarrHumbug
  • Score: 15

9:02am Wed 19 Mar 14

humbysarah says...

I think Mrs Faris is being made a bit of a scapegoat here. Shame on you Bournemouth Council. You are starting to look like a dictatorship indeed! Will the train even run out of season? Prices frozen for 2015? And then hiked up thereafter to rake in the £45,000 they predict? No impact on the environment from wider trains they say, but what about the impact on the environment of 50% more people visiting the Head? This is typical BC tactics of wringing money out of the tourists at every opportunity regardless of local feeling and environmental impact. I'm fuming.
I think Mrs Faris is being made a bit of a scapegoat here. Shame on you Bournemouth Council. You are starting to look like a dictatorship indeed! Will the train even run out of season? Prices frozen for 2015? And then hiked up thereafter to rake in the £45,000 they predict? No impact on the environment from wider trains they say, but what about the impact on the environment of 50% more people visiting the Head? This is typical BC tactics of wringing money out of the tourists at every opportunity regardless of local feeling and environmental impact. I'm fuming. humbysarah
  • Score: 32

9:05am Wed 19 Mar 14

Geldon says...

Redgolfer wrote:
Geldon wrote:
It does seem from the reporting that Mrs Faris was accepting of the decision not to renew the contract and had said it was expected. Also taking into account the stated failure to provide a 'plan' of investment in the service for the future - suggests a lack of 'interest' maybe? There is no mention of family wishing to carry on with the contract and one would think that at 88 maybe Mrs Faris wishes to enjoy the fruits of her many years of labour? I first went on the 'Noddy Train' about 40 years ago and Hengistbury Head is a favorite place to walk - and the train is a familiar and loved sight to many - due to it's character. If Bournemouth Council 'maintain' that character then many more future generations will have just as fond memories of their own 'Noddy Train' that we have of ours? I think the extension of the land train route is a great idea and that can only support visitors and tourism to the new Hengistbury Centre. It is a little misguided to challenge this change surely? It is not as if the facility is being scrapped? It is simply one contractor retiring and another (in this case Bournemouth Council) picking up the job. I of course will miss seeing the little green trains tootling up and down - and it is a shame in a way that Bournemouth Council can't keep the current trains (or at least ones of similar style) in service. That however does not address the need for larger carry capacity, disabled facilities and a train that is adequate to undertake the extended route. Progress has a habit of creating a sense of nostalgia - which can then be voiced as a form of opposition. In this case unfounded opposition ..... sadly. The 'Noddy Train' is dead......... Long Live The 'Noddy Train'!
So that's the Council position is it Geldon, you cannot have read previous posts on this subject, it has been stated that MRS Faris wants to continue with this service to the PUBLIC, that wants her to continue.
The Council cannot be sure to run the service throughout the year and at what price although they state that prices will be frozen for the first year, anybody thought about the size of this new concept and would you want to be behind this train when it emerges from the prom at Shore Road, if it is the same size as the present one, how can 2 pass each other on the narrow track that is there at present going down to the spit without work being done on a sight of special interest which is Hengistbury Head.
Who states that there is a need for larger carry facility, its been all right for 45 years, Unfounded opposition you say, I would say go take a lie down because in my opinion you are not feeling well, if you take that view and THIS just might be ''the straw that broke the camel's back''.
I take on board all of your comments and observations - a good constructive post. I was really just giving an opinion over an early morning coffee and I appreciate in hindsight that I had not given too much thought to continuity of service and the size of any new land train, or any potential work to Hengistbury Head (which I would not like to see). I briefly read in an article that Mrs Faris seemed 'accepting' of the situation - and no ... I have not read all of the posts.... I do not have time to do that. I maybe 'picked up my scribe' with too much haste and should have pondered the whole situation before posting - as it is clearly wrong to start at any point other than a fully factual definitive one - on here. Your post may have been an opportunity for me to re-consider my original stance and maybe shift to another one via an interesting debate - during which I could have gathered more facts. However I can't really be bothered to interact further with someone who tells me to 'Go take a lie down.....' as I must 'Not be feeling well.....'.
[quote][p][bold]Redgolfer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Geldon[/bold] wrote: It does seem from the reporting that Mrs Faris was accepting of the decision not to renew the contract and had said it was expected. Also taking into account the stated failure to provide a 'plan' of investment in the service for the future - suggests a lack of 'interest' maybe? There is no mention of family wishing to carry on with the contract and one would think that at 88 maybe Mrs Faris wishes to enjoy the fruits of her many years of labour? I first went on the 'Noddy Train' about 40 years ago and Hengistbury Head is a favorite place to walk - and the train is a familiar and loved sight to many - due to it's character. If Bournemouth Council 'maintain' that character then many more future generations will have just as fond memories of their own 'Noddy Train' that we have of ours? I think the extension of the land train route is a great idea and that can only support visitors and tourism to the new Hengistbury Centre. It is a little misguided to challenge this change surely? It is not as if the facility is being scrapped? It is simply one contractor retiring and another (in this case Bournemouth Council) picking up the job. I of course will miss seeing the little green trains tootling up and down - and it is a shame in a way that Bournemouth Council can't keep the current trains (or at least ones of similar style) in service. That however does not address the need for larger carry capacity, disabled facilities and a train that is adequate to undertake the extended route. Progress has a habit of creating a sense of nostalgia - which can then be voiced as a form of opposition. In this case unfounded opposition ..... sadly. The 'Noddy Train' is dead......... Long Live The 'Noddy Train'![/p][/quote]So that's the Council position is it Geldon, you cannot have read previous posts on this subject, it has been stated that MRS Faris wants to continue with this service to the PUBLIC, that wants her to continue. The Council cannot be sure to run the service throughout the year and at what price although they state that prices will be frozen for the first year, anybody thought about the size of this new concept and would you want to be behind this train when it emerges from the prom at Shore Road, if it is the same size as the present one, how can 2 pass each other on the narrow track that is there at present going down to the spit without work being done on a sight of special interest which is Hengistbury Head. Who states that there is a need for larger carry facility, its been all right for 45 years, Unfounded opposition you say, I would say go take a lie down because in my opinion you are not feeling well, if you take that view and THIS just might be ''the straw that broke the camel's back''.[/p][/quote]I take on board all of your comments and observations - a good constructive post. I was really just giving an opinion over an early morning coffee and I appreciate in hindsight that I had not given too much thought to continuity of service and the size of any new land train, or any potential work to Hengistbury Head (which I would not like to see). I briefly read in an article that Mrs Faris seemed 'accepting' of the situation - and no ... I have not read all of the posts.... I do not have time to do that. I maybe 'picked up my scribe' with too much haste and should have pondered the whole situation before posting - as it is clearly wrong to start at any point other than a fully factual definitive one - on here. Your post may have been an opportunity for me to re-consider my original stance and maybe shift to another one via an interesting debate - during which I could have gathered more facts. However I can't really be bothered to interact further with someone who tells me to 'Go take a lie down.....' as I must 'Not be feeling well.....'. Geldon
  • Score: 14

9:06am Wed 19 Mar 14

speedy231278 says...

Perhaps if 20000 people didn't pay their council tax for a while they'd take note?
Perhaps if 20000 people didn't pay their council tax for a while they'd take note? speedy231278
  • Score: 24

9:18am Wed 19 Mar 14

politicaltrainspotter says...

So it's pass the buck time with some un-elected council officer making a statement.So would you trust a council that told us time after time that the Surf Reef would work to run a land train ? Because i don't.

Driver Beesley would take the wrong signal and put the train in the wrong platform.

So in 2015 we have the local elections.Do you really want this administration in power again to bully and dictate.Think hard.

Three cabinet councillors and the CEO have just come back from a holiday in Israel while two of thems ward falls apart.Guess who ?

If 20,000 signatures is not enough to challenge the decision then NOT to put a cross against the conservative candidate at the next local election is.
So it's pass the buck time with some un-elected council officer making a statement.So would you trust a council that told us time after time that the Surf Reef would work to run a land train ? Because i don't. Driver Beesley would take the wrong signal and put the train in the wrong platform. So in 2015 we have the local elections.Do you really want this administration in power again to bully and dictate.Think hard. Three cabinet councillors and the CEO have just come back from a holiday in Israel while two of thems ward falls apart.Guess who ? If 20,000 signatures is not enough to challenge the decision then NOT to put a cross against the conservative candidate at the next local election is. politicaltrainspotter
  • Score: 22

9:18am Wed 19 Mar 14

skydriver says...

xslee wrote:
Dear Daily Echo,

please amend the headline of this story, or at least report a more accurate view; of course the decision can be changed, it would take all of 30 seconds for Cllr Williams to admit he made a mistake, acknowledge the opinion of nearly 20,000 ratepayers and tourists, and carry on as before.
Quite right although I doubt he can use the phrase , I got it wrong, also for all the ago he should be sacked.
[quote][p][bold]xslee[/bold] wrote: Dear Daily Echo, please amend the headline of this story, or at least report a more accurate view; of course the decision can be changed, it would take all of 30 seconds for Cllr Williams to admit he made a mistake, acknowledge the opinion of nearly 20,000 ratepayers and tourists, and carry on as before.[/p][/quote]Quite right although I doubt he can use the phrase , I got it wrong, also for all the ago he should be sacked. skydriver
  • Score: 13

9:20am Wed 19 Mar 14

politicaltrainspotter says...

Apologies.But i expected the £45,000 will go to the loss making Hengistbury Head Visitor Centre..
Apologies.But i expected the £45,000 will go to the loss making Hengistbury Head Visitor Centre.. politicaltrainspotter
  • Score: 10

9:24am Wed 19 Mar 14

Bloss45 says...

Remember the I-Max farce. A "wise" Councillor said about that "use it or lose it !" The public did not want I and so it failed. Will you people in Town Hall never learn? You are there to do what your "customers/fund providers" want not to satisfy your own inflated egos. By all means bring the Bournemouth Land to the bus stop at Hengistbury Head but leave the established community as it is.
Remember the I-Max farce. A "wise" Councillor said about that "use it or lose it !" The public did not want I and so it failed. Will you people in Town Hall never learn? You are there to do what your "customers/fund providers" want not to satisfy your own inflated egos. By all means bring the Bournemouth Land to the bus stop at Hengistbury Head but leave the established community as it is. Bloss45
  • Score: 16

9:24am Wed 19 Mar 14

TWERLY says...

Sounds like Bournemouth CC may have a part time consultant called Vladimir Putin on their books !!
DISGRACE - UN-DEMOCRATIC - NOT ACCEPTABLE - ie DUN deal!!
Sounds like Bournemouth CC may have a part time consultant called Vladimir Putin on their books !! DISGRACE - UN-DEMOCRATIC - NOT ACCEPTABLE - ie DUN deal!! TWERLY
  • Score: 14

9:25am Wed 19 Mar 14

Glashen says...

"The spokesman confirmed the decision was not subject to consultation or call-in because ‘no significant change’ to the service was planned. "
-
Different Trains,
Different Schedule,
No Land Rover Service for deliveries to the beach huts.
New Ticketing options and incentives.
New Staff and Management
No commitment to a 364 day service.
-
You wonder what a significant change would look like, No Train at all? come on Bournemouth Councillors do your job and insist on this decision being scrutinized.
"The spokesman confirmed the decision was not subject to consultation or call-in because ‘no significant change’ to the service was planned. " - Different Trains, Different Schedule, No Land Rover Service for deliveries to the beach huts. New Ticketing options and incentives. New Staff and Management No commitment to a 364 day service. - You wonder what a significant change would look like, No Train at all? come on Bournemouth Councillors do your job and insist on this decision being scrutinized. Glashen
  • Score: 32

9:26am Wed 19 Mar 14

oversixty says...

I have just read my national newspaper this morning which quoted 5 democratic questions that Tony Benn wanted to ask a powerful person-
1-What power have you got?
2-Where did you get it from?
3-In whose interests do you exercise it?
4-To whom are you accountable?
5-How can we get rid of you?

Very appropriate in this case, don't you think?
I have just read my national newspaper this morning which quoted 5 democratic questions that Tony Benn wanted to ask a powerful person- 1-What power have you got? 2-Where did you get it from? 3-In whose interests do you exercise it? 4-To whom are you accountable? 5-How can we get rid of you? Very appropriate in this case, don't you think? oversixty
  • Score: 47

9:26am Wed 19 Mar 14

Lucky Rich says...

BarrHumbug wrote:
Has anyone thought that the majority of passengers will probably have parked in the HH car park and with trains running from Alum chine or even from just Boscombe the frequency is going to be a lot less than the current Noddy train. This will result in either lengthy queues and waiting times or people just not bothering to wait and walking?
Yes & ile bet that the loss of car park revenue of £8 per vehicle per day from the people that would normally get on the train there is not in the councils business plan
Also surely that will mean multiple trains will be trying to pass each over going in different directions all along the prom including the thinner end of southbourne prom. imagine that at the height of the season....
[quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: Has anyone thought that the majority of passengers will probably have parked in the HH car park and with trains running from Alum chine or even from just Boscombe the frequency is going to be a lot less than the current Noddy train. This will result in either lengthy queues and waiting times or people just not bothering to wait and walking?[/p][/quote]Yes & ile bet that the loss of car park revenue of £8 per vehicle per day from the people that would normally get on the train there is not in the councils business plan Also surely that will mean multiple trains will be trying to pass each over going in different directions all along the prom including the thinner end of southbourne prom. imagine that at the height of the season.... Lucky Rich
  • Score: 11

9:30am Wed 19 Mar 14

JackJohnson says...

"Cannot be challenged?"

There's around 20000 who /have/ challenged it. Their opinions are being brushed aside and ignored.
"Cannot be challenged?" There's around 20000 who /have/ challenged it. Their opinions are being brushed aside and ignored. JackJohnson
  • Score: 22

9:43am Wed 19 Mar 14

Redgolfer says...

Geldon wrote:
Redgolfer wrote:
Geldon wrote:
It does seem from the reporting that Mrs Faris was accepting of the decision not to renew the contract and had said it was expected. Also taking into account the stated failure to provide a 'plan' of investment in the service for the future - suggests a lack of 'interest' maybe? There is no mention of family wishing to carry on with the contract and one would think that at 88 maybe Mrs Faris wishes to enjoy the fruits of her many years of labour? I first went on the 'Noddy Train' about 40 years ago and Hengistbury Head is a favorite place to walk - and the train is a familiar and loved sight to many - due to it's character. If Bournemouth Council 'maintain' that character then many more future generations will have just as fond memories of their own 'Noddy Train' that we have of ours? I think the extension of the land train route is a great idea and that can only support visitors and tourism to the new Hengistbury Centre. It is a little misguided to challenge this change surely? It is not as if the facility is being scrapped? It is simply one contractor retiring and another (in this case Bournemouth Council) picking up the job. I of course will miss seeing the little green trains tootling up and down - and it is a shame in a way that Bournemouth Council can't keep the current trains (or at least ones of similar style) in service. That however does not address the need for larger carry capacity, disabled facilities and a train that is adequate to undertake the extended route. Progress has a habit of creating a sense of nostalgia - which can then be voiced as a form of opposition. In this case unfounded opposition ..... sadly. The 'Noddy Train' is dead......... Long Live The 'Noddy Train'!
So that's the Council position is it Geldon, you cannot have read previous posts on this subject, it has been stated that MRS Faris wants to continue with this service to the PUBLIC, that wants her to continue.
The Council cannot be sure to run the service throughout the year and at what price although they state that prices will be frozen for the first year, anybody thought about the size of this new concept and would you want to be behind this train when it emerges from the prom at Shore Road, if it is the same size as the present one, how can 2 pass each other on the narrow track that is there at present going down to the spit without work being done on a sight of special interest which is Hengistbury Head.
Who states that there is a need for larger carry facility, its been all right for 45 years, Unfounded opposition you say, I would say go take a lie down because in my opinion you are not feeling well, if you take that view and THIS just might be ''the straw that broke the camel's back''.
I take on board all of your comments and observations - a good constructive post. I was really just giving an opinion over an early morning coffee and I appreciate in hindsight that I had not given too much thought to continuity of service and the size of any new land train, or any potential work to Hengistbury Head (which I would not like to see). I briefly read in an article that Mrs Faris seemed 'accepting' of the situation - and no ... I have not read all of the posts.... I do not have time to do that. I maybe 'picked up my scribe' with too much haste and should have pondered the whole situation before posting - as it is clearly wrong to start at any point other than a fully factual definitive one - on here. Your post may have been an opportunity for me to re-consider my original stance and maybe shift to another one via an interesting debate - during which I could have gathered more facts. However I can't really be bothered to interact further with someone who tells me to 'Go take a lie down.....' as I must 'Not be feeling well.....'.
Geldon, you must take a very early coffee and maybe were not awake when you made your first remarks but no you compound them by your 08:45 posts, why not Council run you say, I have not got the time to state why not but here are a few, At present I would suspect that the majority of people using this great service, go down to the HH area by car, park in the car park and then use the train, why would they want to come all the way from Alum Chine on the proposed land train, the time it would take, the cost of it, the frequency of the service, would it be a year long thing, the damage you need to the site of HH to be able to get the proposed train up and down on the small track.
I was told a long time ago ''If its not broke, then do not try to fix it'' and surely you would agree 45 years running the train, Mrs Faris MUST be doing something right and they are just a FEW REASON'S why it should NOT be council run, and I was only thinking of your well being in previous comments.
[quote][p][bold]Geldon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Redgolfer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Geldon[/bold] wrote: It does seem from the reporting that Mrs Faris was accepting of the decision not to renew the contract and had said it was expected. Also taking into account the stated failure to provide a 'plan' of investment in the service for the future - suggests a lack of 'interest' maybe? There is no mention of family wishing to carry on with the contract and one would think that at 88 maybe Mrs Faris wishes to enjoy the fruits of her many years of labour? I first went on the 'Noddy Train' about 40 years ago and Hengistbury Head is a favorite place to walk - and the train is a familiar and loved sight to many - due to it's character. If Bournemouth Council 'maintain' that character then many more future generations will have just as fond memories of their own 'Noddy Train' that we have of ours? I think the extension of the land train route is a great idea and that can only support visitors and tourism to the new Hengistbury Centre. It is a little misguided to challenge this change surely? It is not as if the facility is being scrapped? It is simply one contractor retiring and another (in this case Bournemouth Council) picking up the job. I of course will miss seeing the little green trains tootling up and down - and it is a shame in a way that Bournemouth Council can't keep the current trains (or at least ones of similar style) in service. That however does not address the need for larger carry capacity, disabled facilities and a train that is adequate to undertake the extended route. Progress has a habit of creating a sense of nostalgia - which can then be voiced as a form of opposition. In this case unfounded opposition ..... sadly. The 'Noddy Train' is dead......... Long Live The 'Noddy Train'![/p][/quote]So that's the Council position is it Geldon, you cannot have read previous posts on this subject, it has been stated that MRS Faris wants to continue with this service to the PUBLIC, that wants her to continue. The Council cannot be sure to run the service throughout the year and at what price although they state that prices will be frozen for the first year, anybody thought about the size of this new concept and would you want to be behind this train when it emerges from the prom at Shore Road, if it is the same size as the present one, how can 2 pass each other on the narrow track that is there at present going down to the spit without work being done on a sight of special interest which is Hengistbury Head. Who states that there is a need for larger carry facility, its been all right for 45 years, Unfounded opposition you say, I would say go take a lie down because in my opinion you are not feeling well, if you take that view and THIS just might be ''the straw that broke the camel's back''.[/p][/quote]I take on board all of your comments and observations - a good constructive post. I was really just giving an opinion over an early morning coffee and I appreciate in hindsight that I had not given too much thought to continuity of service and the size of any new land train, or any potential work to Hengistbury Head (which I would not like to see). I briefly read in an article that Mrs Faris seemed 'accepting' of the situation - and no ... I have not read all of the posts.... I do not have time to do that. I maybe 'picked up my scribe' with too much haste and should have pondered the whole situation before posting - as it is clearly wrong to start at any point other than a fully factual definitive one - on here. Your post may have been an opportunity for me to re-consider my original stance and maybe shift to another one via an interesting debate - during which I could have gathered more facts. However I can't really be bothered to interact further with someone who tells me to 'Go take a lie down.....' as I must 'Not be feeling well.....'.[/p][/quote]Geldon, you must take a very early coffee and maybe were not awake when you made your first remarks but no you compound them by your 08:45 posts, why not Council run you say, I have not got the time to state why not but here are a few, At present I would suspect that the majority of people using this great service, go down to the HH area by car, park in the car park and then use the train, why would they want to come all the way from Alum Chine on the proposed land train, the time it would take, the cost of it, the frequency of the service, would it be a year long thing, the damage you need to the site of HH to be able to get the proposed train up and down on the small track. I was told a long time ago ''If its not broke, then do not try to fix it'' and surely you would agree 45 years running the train, Mrs Faris MUST be doing something right and they are just a FEW REASON'S why it should NOT be council run, and I was only thinking of your well being in previous comments. Redgolfer
  • Score: 3

9:45am Wed 19 Mar 14

Ms daisy says...

The decision by the council cant be challenged, who decided on this idea and pushed it through in the first place. Im totally disgusted that something like this has been agreed without any redress .Those responible should hang there heads with shame, they are not representing the community or that of Mrs Faris, poor woman 88 years old and pushed to come up with a business plan that would never meet with the councils agreement anyway.
Shame on you Bournemouth council.
The decision by the council cant be challenged, who decided on this idea and pushed it through in the first place. Im totally disgusted that something like this has been agreed without any redress .Those responible should hang there heads with shame, they are not representing the community or that of Mrs Faris, poor woman 88 years old and pushed to come up with a business plan that would never meet with the councils agreement anyway. Shame on you Bournemouth council. Ms daisy
  • Score: 20

10:13am Wed 19 Mar 14

MngsMnr says...

Jeeeez - we'd do better to get a handful of MONKEYS from the fricking zoo.

It really is a waste of time and energy dealing with local councils.
Jeeeez - we'd do better to get a handful of MONKEYS from the fricking zoo. It really is a waste of time and energy dealing with local councils. MngsMnr
  • Score: 19

10:14am Wed 19 Mar 14

B'mth 56 says...

politicaltrainspotte
r
wrote:
So it's pass the buck time with some un-elected council officer making a statement.So would you trust a council that told us time after time that the Surf Reef would work to run a land train ? Because i don't.

Driver Beesley would take the wrong signal and put the train in the wrong platform.

So in 2015 we have the local elections.Do you really want this administration in power again to bully and dictate.Think hard.

Three cabinet councillors and the CEO have just come back from a holiday in Israel while two of thems ward falls apart.Guess who ?

If 20,000 signatures is not enough to challenge the decision then NOT to put a cross against the conservative candidate at the next local election is.
I have just emailed David Cameron to ask how he feels about losing a lot of Conservative voters down here due to the arrogance of officials on this subject. I suggest the other 18,000 odd people who signed the petition do the same.
[quote][p][bold]politicaltrainspotte r[/bold] wrote: So it's pass the buck time with some un-elected council officer making a statement.So would you trust a council that told us time after time that the Surf Reef would work to run a land train ? Because i don't. Driver Beesley would take the wrong signal and put the train in the wrong platform. So in 2015 we have the local elections.Do you really want this administration in power again to bully and dictate.Think hard. Three cabinet councillors and the CEO have just come back from a holiday in Israel while two of thems ward falls apart.Guess who ? If 20,000 signatures is not enough to challenge the decision then NOT to put a cross against the conservative candidate at the next local election is.[/p][/quote]I have just emailed David Cameron to ask how he feels about losing a lot of Conservative voters down here due to the arrogance of officials on this subject. I suggest the other 18,000 odd people who signed the petition do the same. B'mth 56
  • Score: 27

10:18am Wed 19 Mar 14

Kiki1973 says...

Lucky Rich wrote:
BarrHumbug wrote:
Has anyone thought that the majority of passengers will probably have parked in the HH car park and with trains running from Alum chine or even from just Boscombe the frequency is going to be a lot less than the current Noddy train. This will result in either lengthy queues and waiting times or people just not bothering to wait and walking?
Yes & ile bet that the loss of car park revenue of £8 per vehicle per day from the people that would normally get on the train there is not in the councils business plan
Also surely that will mean multiple trains will be trying to pass each over going in different directions all along the prom including the thinner end of southbourne prom. imagine that at the height of the season....
The car park is £1.10 for 24 hours....
[quote][p][bold]Lucky Rich[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: Has anyone thought that the majority of passengers will probably have parked in the HH car park and with trains running from Alum chine or even from just Boscombe the frequency is going to be a lot less than the current Noddy train. This will result in either lengthy queues and waiting times or people just not bothering to wait and walking?[/p][/quote]Yes & ile bet that the loss of car park revenue of £8 per vehicle per day from the people that would normally get on the train there is not in the councils business plan Also surely that will mean multiple trains will be trying to pass each over going in different directions all along the prom including the thinner end of southbourne prom. imagine that at the height of the season....[/p][/quote]The car park is £1.10 for 24 hours.... Kiki1973
  • Score: -3

10:22am Wed 19 Mar 14

oversixty says...

B'mth 56 wrote:
politicaltrainspotte

r
wrote:
So it's pass the buck time with some un-elected council officer making a statement.So would you trust a council that told us time after time that the Surf Reef would work to run a land train ? Because i don't.

Driver Beesley would take the wrong signal and put the train in the wrong platform.

So in 2015 we have the local elections.Do you really want this administration in power again to bully and dictate.Think hard.

Three cabinet councillors and the CEO have just come back from a holiday in Israel while two of thems ward falls apart.Guess who ?

If 20,000 signatures is not enough to challenge the decision then NOT to put a cross against the conservative candidate at the next local election is.
I have just emailed David Cameron to ask how he feels about losing a lot of Conservative voters down here due to the arrogance of officials on this subject. I suggest the other 18,000 odd people who signed the petition do the same.
"I have just emailed David Cameron to ask how he feels about losing a lot of Conservative voters down here due to the arrogance of officials on this subject. I suggest the other 18,000 odd people who signed the petition do the same."


They won't though will they?
The Conservatives will still get in whatever they do in this town!

Fact!
[quote][p][bold]B'mth 56[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]politicaltrainspotte r[/bold] wrote: So it's pass the buck time with some un-elected council officer making a statement.So would you trust a council that told us time after time that the Surf Reef would work to run a land train ? Because i don't. Driver Beesley would take the wrong signal and put the train in the wrong platform. So in 2015 we have the local elections.Do you really want this administration in power again to bully and dictate.Think hard. Three cabinet councillors and the CEO have just come back from a holiday in Israel while two of thems ward falls apart.Guess who ? If 20,000 signatures is not enough to challenge the decision then NOT to put a cross against the conservative candidate at the next local election is.[/p][/quote]I have just emailed David Cameron to ask how he feels about losing a lot of Conservative voters down here due to the arrogance of officials on this subject. I suggest the other 18,000 odd people who signed the petition do the same.[/p][/quote]"I have just emailed David Cameron to ask how he feels about losing a lot of Conservative voters down here due to the arrogance of officials on this subject. I suggest the other 18,000 odd people who signed the petition do the same." They won't though will they? The Conservatives will still get in whatever they do in this town! Fact! oversixty
  • Score: 3

10:25am Wed 19 Mar 14

vinmaster says...

45 years and still running, why would you need to submit a business plan?!
It's not broken so don't fix it..................
......
45 years and still running, why would you need to submit a business plan?! It's not broken so don't fix it.................. ...... vinmaster
  • Score: 26

10:33am Wed 19 Mar 14

Ivan Opinion says...

After all is said and done, It would seem that the decision is made.. .
At best though this is a PR disaster, its shows a council disinterested in the views expressed by the local community. That is not a great start.. This could have been handled better.
I am someone, who along with my family regularly Visits the ‘Head’ and often use the train, I am entirely opposed to this change...But not because it is a change, but because it is an unnecessary change... After all rhetoric has faded away, the new service will simply not offer a distinguishably better service that the current one. It genuinely will not be possible – the existing service is both reliable and much loved.
Businesses rarely last 40 years these days, if one does and the support it still gets is akin to supporting a family member it is best left well alone to do its thing ...
This is a terribly badly judged decision that has bout to light processes that seem not to really be taking the best interests of the people who will use those services fully into consideration.
There is, of course Logic in the council’s thoughts, that must be considered
However that is now, not really the point anymore. It really is such a shame and to not actually be prepared to revisit the situation shows a failure in how to communicate... Locals are genuinely saddened & disappointed by this, and they are right to feel that way.
This really is quite sad.
After all is said and done, It would seem that the decision is made.. . At best though this is a PR disaster, its shows a council disinterested in the views expressed by the local community. That is not a great start.. This could have been handled better. I am someone, who along with my family regularly Visits the ‘Head’ and often use the train, I am entirely opposed to this change...But not because it is a change, but because it is an unnecessary change... After all rhetoric has faded away, the new service will simply not offer a distinguishably better service that the current one. It genuinely will not be possible – the existing service is both reliable and much loved. Businesses rarely last 40 years these days, if one does and the support it still gets is akin to supporting a family member it is best left well alone to do its thing ... This is a terribly badly judged decision that has bout to light processes that seem not to really be taking the best interests of the people who will use those services fully into consideration. There is, of course Logic in the council’s thoughts, that must be considered However that is now, not really the point anymore. It really is such a shame and to not actually be prepared to revisit the situation shows a failure in how to communicate... Locals are genuinely saddened & disappointed by this, and they are right to feel that way. This really is quite sad. Ivan Opinion
  • Score: 20

10:34am Wed 19 Mar 14

Gonetothebeach says...

Of course the decision can be reviewed ('challenged' is probably not the right word as it implies that there might have been a breach of process warranting referral to the standards committee). Not to review what residents and visitors actually want would be a nonsense given the apparent strength of feeling and lack of consultation. Perhaps the fact that the council has allowed 'a spokesperson' to respond in this latest Echo report is leaving the way open for a senior councillor to step in shortly with a politically face saving climbdown.
Of course the decision can be reviewed ('challenged' is probably not the right word as it implies that there might have been a breach of process warranting referral to the standards committee). Not to review what residents and visitors actually want would be a nonsense given the apparent strength of feeling and lack of consultation. Perhaps the fact that the council has allowed 'a spokesperson' to respond in this latest Echo report is leaving the way open for a senior councillor to step in shortly with a politically face saving climbdown. Gonetothebeach
  • Score: 11

10:35am Wed 19 Mar 14

muscliffman says...

It is reported that "The council’s stated aim of extending the land train service so that it eventually runs from Alum Chine to Hengistbury Head...." which in effect means it will offer a similar public service to that traditionally provided by the much missed public Yellow Buses open top No.12 route - except now on the Undercliff rather than the Overcliff

On that basis it would seem wise to suggest that these commercial 'hire & reward' land-trains should now be subject to exactly the same safety rules and regulations that any other public service vehicle (bus/coach) would be - including those which used to be used on the No.12. This would include an initial (PSV) VOSA Certificate of Fitness, conformation with all Road Traffic Act requirements, annual Class 6 VOSA MOT's and six-weekly safety inspections for the vehicles. The Operator (the Council) would have to hold and retain a PCV Operators Licence and register the route with the Department for Transport/VOSA.

The Land Trains would presumably fall at the first hurdle as without countless special exemptions (loop holes!) they could not possibly comply with the Initial VOSA Certificate of Fitness - as required for them to convey the general public on any commercial 'bus' service. I understand these novelty Land Train vehicles are in fact trundling about under very relaxed safety rules and regulations drawn up at a time when they were little more than short distance fair ground rides, and when nobody could foresee them moving onto the provision of long distance commercial public 'bus' services the entire length of Bournemouth seafront.

These novelty fair ground trains are simply not suitable or safe for the grown up full scale commercial bus like role that is now being proposed by Bournemouth Council, regrettably as they say possibly 'an accident waiting to happen'!
It is reported that "The council’s stated aim of extending the land train service so that it eventually runs from Alum Chine to Hengistbury Head...." which in effect means it will offer a similar public service to that traditionally provided by the much missed public Yellow Buses open top No.12 route - except now on the Undercliff rather than the Overcliff On that basis it would seem wise to suggest that these commercial 'hire & reward' land-trains should now be subject to exactly the same safety rules and regulations that any other public service vehicle (bus/coach) would be - including those which used to be used on the No.12. This would include an initial (PSV) VOSA Certificate of Fitness, conformation with all Road Traffic Act requirements, annual Class 6 VOSA MOT's and six-weekly safety inspections for the vehicles. The Operator (the Council) would have to hold and retain a PCV Operators Licence and register the route with the Department for Transport/VOSA. The Land Trains would presumably fall at the first hurdle as without countless special exemptions (loop holes!) they could not possibly comply with the Initial VOSA Certificate of Fitness - as required for them to convey the general public on any commercial 'bus' service. I understand these novelty Land Train vehicles are in fact trundling about under very relaxed safety rules and regulations drawn up at a time when they were little more than short distance fair ground rides, and when nobody could foresee them moving onto the provision of long distance commercial public 'bus' services the entire length of Bournemouth seafront. These novelty fair ground trains are simply not suitable or safe for the grown up full scale commercial bus like role that is now being proposed by Bournemouth Council, regrettably as they say possibly 'an accident waiting to happen'! muscliffman
  • Score: 10

11:03am Wed 19 Mar 14

MikeGB says...

It is typical of this arrogant council, both elected members and senior officers alike, to think they are above public opinion and know what is best for them. Eh wants to sit on a land train all the way from Alum Chine to Mudeford Spit? The existing service is excellent, safe, good value. None of those features seem to be valued by Bournemouth Borough Council, who are profligate with our money, just look at the quality of fittings in the Town hall annexe. Of course they will take the view that this will blow over by the time they come to be re-elected, and we will have lost another gem in what used to be the unique charm of Bournemouth. Do we really want monster trucks on the beach, zip wires from the pier, and ugly orange fins on a concrete monstrosity where trees used to line a car park in Madeira Road?
It is typical of this arrogant council, both elected members and senior officers alike, to think they are above public opinion and know what is best for them. Eh wants to sit on a land train all the way from Alum Chine to Mudeford Spit? The existing service is excellent, safe, good value. None of those features seem to be valued by Bournemouth Borough Council, who are profligate with our money, just look at the quality of fittings in the Town hall annexe. Of course they will take the view that this will blow over by the time they come to be re-elected, and we will have lost another gem in what used to be the unique charm of Bournemouth. Do we really want monster trucks on the beach, zip wires from the pier, and ugly orange fins on a concrete monstrosity where trees used to line a car park in Madeira Road? MikeGB
  • Score: 13

11:25am Wed 19 Mar 14

Beatnik fly says...

High Treason wrote:
Isosceles wrote:
Geldon
I see your point but why council run - shouldn't it have been put out to tender?
It will probably go to S&D Leisure or BH Live, both back door subsidiaries of the council.
Thank you High Treason, been looking for these business names...
[quote][p][bold]High Treason[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Isosceles[/bold] wrote: Geldon I see your point but why council run - shouldn't it have been put out to tender?[/p][/quote]It will probably go to S&D Leisure or BH Live, both back door subsidiaries of the council.[/p][/quote]Thank you High Treason, been looking for these business names... Beatnik fly
  • Score: 5

11:28am Wed 19 Mar 14

TheDistrict says...

This then has been an underhand, closed doors matter from the outset. I cannot believe that no one can explain why this has not gone through the cabinet, in particular those who run the department that operates such facilities on the seafront. How come then did I receive an email from the Seafront Manager listing a FAQ list of questions asked by many, and he giving answers of pat as if it was already done and dusted by the said cabinet. Without being rude, Mrs Faris is at an age where she more than likely needed the planning discussed with her, but I feel the council have not bothered directly with Mrs Faris, and on hearsay have taken verbatum that she wishes to give up. I cannot believe that anyone who has run such a facility, adored by the public, would so lightly give it up without other options in place. I thought we lived in a democratic society, and that even our own council were democratic, therefore, why are'nt the voices of 20,000 plus people being heard, and new negotiation being set up in light of this. Anyone fancy taking over the Town Hall and doing a better job than these Beeley Bullies.
This then has been an underhand, closed doors matter from the outset. I cannot believe that no one can explain why this has not gone through the cabinet, in particular those who run the department that operates such facilities on the seafront. How come then did I receive an email from the Seafront Manager listing a FAQ list of questions asked by many, and he giving answers of pat as if it was already done and dusted by the said cabinet. Without being rude, Mrs Faris is at an age where she more than likely needed the planning discussed with her, but I feel the council have not bothered directly with Mrs Faris, and on hearsay have taken verbatum that she wishes to give up. I cannot believe that anyone who has run such a facility, adored by the public, would so lightly give it up without other options in place. I thought we lived in a democratic society, and that even our own council were democratic, therefore, why are'nt the voices of 20,000 plus people being heard, and new negotiation being set up in light of this. Anyone fancy taking over the Town Hall and doing a better job than these Beeley Bullies. TheDistrict
  • Score: 8

11:31am Wed 19 Mar 14

Ferkster says...

What arrogance from these pathetic people,Bournemouth council you have just proven what a despicable organisation you are. No debate, dictating, lining your own pockets....

come on everyone, write to Councillor 'i have the brains of a 2 year old' Williams, and i mean send a letter. Maybe when he sees all the letters on his doorstep he may realise how hated he is now...

i am actually sad to be a Bournemouthian with this stupid council in power...

DISGUSTED.......
What arrogance from these pathetic people,Bournemouth council you have just proven what a despicable organisation you are. No debate, dictating, lining your own pockets.... come on everyone, write to Councillor 'i have the brains of a 2 year old' Williams, and i mean send a letter. Maybe when he sees all the letters on his doorstep he may realise how hated he is now... i am actually sad to be a Bournemouthian with this stupid council in power... DISGUSTED....... Ferkster
  • Score: 13

11:31am Wed 19 Mar 14

Beatnik fly says...

High Treason wrote:
Isosceles wrote:
Geldon
I see your point but why council run - shouldn't it have been put out to tender?
It will probably go to S&D Leisure or BH Live, both back door subsidiaries of the council.
Thank you High Treason I have been looking for the names of these companies...
[quote][p][bold]High Treason[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Isosceles[/bold] wrote: Geldon I see your point but why council run - shouldn't it have been put out to tender?[/p][/quote]It will probably go to S&D Leisure or BH Live, both back door subsidiaries of the council.[/p][/quote]Thank you High Treason I have been looking for the names of these companies... Beatnik fly
  • Score: 4

11:43am Wed 19 Mar 14

MngsMnr says...

B'mth 56 wrote:
politicaltrainspotte

r
wrote:
So it's pass the buck time with some un-elected council officer making a statement.So would you trust a council that told us time after time that the Surf Reef would work to run a land train ? Because i don't.

Driver Beesley would take the wrong signal and put the train in the wrong platform.

So in 2015 we have the local elections.Do you really want this administration in power again to bully and dictate.Think hard.

Three cabinet councillors and the CEO have just come back from a holiday in Israel while two of thems ward falls apart.Guess who ?

If 20,000 signatures is not enough to challenge the decision then NOT to put a cross against the conservative candidate at the next local election is.
I have just emailed David Cameron to ask how he feels about losing a lot of Conservative voters down here due to the arrogance of officials on this subject. I suggest the other 18,000 odd people who signed the petition do the same.
I too emailed No 10
[quote][p][bold]B'mth 56[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]politicaltrainspotte r[/bold] wrote: So it's pass the buck time with some un-elected council officer making a statement.So would you trust a council that told us time after time that the Surf Reef would work to run a land train ? Because i don't. Driver Beesley would take the wrong signal and put the train in the wrong platform. So in 2015 we have the local elections.Do you really want this administration in power again to bully and dictate.Think hard. Three cabinet councillors and the CEO have just come back from a holiday in Israel while two of thems ward falls apart.Guess who ? If 20,000 signatures is not enough to challenge the decision then NOT to put a cross against the conservative candidate at the next local election is.[/p][/quote]I have just emailed David Cameron to ask how he feels about losing a lot of Conservative voters down here due to the arrogance of officials on this subject. I suggest the other 18,000 odd people who signed the petition do the same.[/p][/quote]I too emailed No 10 MngsMnr
  • Score: 12

11:53am Wed 19 Mar 14

Ferkster says...

speedy231278 wrote:
Perhaps if 20000 people didn't pay their council tax for a while they'd take note?
I am going to pay less now, let the take me to court...lol
[quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: Perhaps if 20000 people didn't pay their council tax for a while they'd take note?[/p][/quote]I am going to pay less now, let the take me to court...lol Ferkster
  • Score: 4

12:09pm Wed 19 Mar 14

B'mth West says...

Have the council recently sent some of its members to North Korea for training ?
Have the council recently sent some of its members to North Korea for training ? B'mth West
  • Score: 11

12:09pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Ferkster says...

18640 signed the petition! 18640 people being ignored and pushed aside by Bournemouth Council!

18640 people wont be voting Conservative in the next election....
18640 signed the petition! 18640 people being ignored and pushed aside by Bournemouth Council! 18640 people wont be voting Conservative in the next election.... Ferkster
  • Score: 15

12:12pm Wed 19 Mar 14

juniperberry says...

Someone tell my why this lessee should expect automatic renewal of a license without having to submit a bus plan when this is standard procedure for any lessee? This lady is disingenuous, she would have been advised a long time before that the existing service service was not going to cut the mustard going forward and that if she wanted to compete she had to play by the same rules as everyone else. In the meantime it looks as if the council have decided that they want to bring this section oft he land train in house to work better with the rest of it. Is Mrs Faris prepared to make the huge investment needed to bring the train and service up to requirements - probably not!
Someone tell my why this lessee should expect automatic renewal of a license without having to submit a bus plan when this is standard procedure for any lessee? This lady is disingenuous, she would have been advised a long time before that the existing service service was not going to cut the mustard going forward and that if she wanted to compete she had to play by the same rules as everyone else. In the meantime it looks as if the council have decided that they want to bring this section oft he land train in house to work better with the rest of it. Is Mrs Faris prepared to make the huge investment needed to bring the train and service up to requirements - probably not! juniperberry
  • Score: -25

12:28pm Wed 19 Mar 14

In Absentia says...

Irrespective of what we all think of this decision, it's a sad fact that the new service will be used by tourists who won't know any different and in time, everyone else will journey on the trains due to the lack of an alternative. This is what you get when one group gets a massive majority on a council and can't be held to account properly.
Irrespective of what we all think of this decision, it's a sad fact that the new service will be used by tourists who won't know any different and in time, everyone else will journey on the trains due to the lack of an alternative. This is what you get when one group gets a massive majority on a council and can't be held to account properly. In Absentia
  • Score: 3

12:41pm Wed 19 Mar 14

ekimnoslen says...

Redgolfer wrote:
So now Bournemouth Council is a dictatorship, it appears that if this piece is right, just a couple of people have made a decision that over 20,000 people object too and they say it CANNOT be changed.
Even the government of this country makes decision's that are then altered, who do these people think they are, they come into the area as newcomers, decide I like it here and I will have some of that and TRY to change what has run successfully for the last 45 years providing a service for the public, YET there is mention of this change in any discussion with people who decide what and wherefore in this area, absolute Disgrace.
Can't be challenged? Who the hell do these jobsworths think they are? They are all public servants paid for and responsible to the people do Bournemouth.
Vote them all out at the next opportunity and elect a council of independents with no axe to grind and the interests of the people at heart.
[quote][p][bold]Redgolfer[/bold] wrote: So now Bournemouth Council is a dictatorship, it appears that if this piece is right, just a couple of people have made a decision that over 20,000 people object too and they say it CANNOT be changed. Even the government of this country makes decision's that are then altered, who do these people think they are, they come into the area as newcomers, decide I like it here and I will have some of that and TRY to change what has run successfully for the last 45 years providing a service for the public, YET there is mention of this change in any discussion with people who decide what and wherefore in this area, absolute Disgrace.[/p][/quote]Can't be challenged? Who the hell do these jobsworths think they are? They are all public servants paid for and responsible to the people do Bournemouth. Vote them all out at the next opportunity and elect a council of independents with no axe to grind and the interests of the people at heart. ekimnoslen
  • Score: 15

12:59pm Wed 19 Mar 14

MngsMnr says...

juniperberry wrote:
Someone tell my why this lessee should expect automatic renewal of a license without having to submit a bus plan when this is standard procedure for any lessee? This lady is disingenuous, she would have been advised a long time before that the existing service service was not going to cut the mustard going forward and that if she wanted to compete she had to play by the same rules as everyone else. In the meantime it looks as if the council have decided that they want to bring this section oft he land train in house to work better with the rest of it. Is Mrs Faris prepared to make the huge investment needed to bring the train and service up to requirements - probably not!
I can assure you whether she had submitted a plan or not, she would have been passed over. Someone I know received the same shoddy treatment by Christchurch council some 15 years ago. For personal reasons between her and someone on the council the decision was made not to renew her license after 3 years. By this time she had built the business up and the council moved her out of her office, and moved one of it's employees in to take over the business. And I know for fact that that decision was made within a few months of her lease expiring.

The same has happened with Avon Beach car park. For years it was leased to the cafe owners. When the council realised it was a nice little earner, they reclaimed the car park and installed parking meters.
[quote][p][bold]juniperberry[/bold] wrote: Someone tell my why this lessee should expect automatic renewal of a license without having to submit a bus plan when this is standard procedure for any lessee? This lady is disingenuous, she would have been advised a long time before that the existing service service was not going to cut the mustard going forward and that if she wanted to compete she had to play by the same rules as everyone else. In the meantime it looks as if the council have decided that they want to bring this section oft he land train in house to work better with the rest of it. Is Mrs Faris prepared to make the huge investment needed to bring the train and service up to requirements - probably not![/p][/quote]I can assure you whether she had submitted a plan or not, she would have been passed over. Someone I know received the same shoddy treatment by Christchurch council some 15 years ago. For personal reasons between her and someone on the council the decision was made not to renew her license after 3 years. By this time she had built the business up and the council moved her out of her office, and moved one of it's employees in to take over the business. And I know for fact that that decision was made within a few months of her lease expiring. The same has happened with Avon Beach car park. For years it was leased to the cafe owners. When the council realised it was a nice little earner, they reclaimed the car park and installed parking meters. MngsMnr
  • Score: 15

1:00pm Wed 19 Mar 14

shoppingnoodles says...

Now I have been informed that the Pier Theatre is being axed and turned into a kiddies play area. This Council seems hell bent on decimating everything that has made Bournemouth great and replacing it with a doomed scheme. Where is this going to stop?
Now I have been informed that the Pier Theatre is being axed and turned into a kiddies play area. This Council seems hell bent on decimating everything that has made Bournemouth great and replacing it with a doomed scheme. Where is this going to stop? shoppingnoodles
  • Score: 10

1:02pm Wed 19 Mar 14

GarrySibbald says...

The obvious compromise that I suggest to the council is to operate the new land train to the end of the Broadway (Hungry Hiker) and let travellers choose whether they want to catch the existing noddy train service to the end of the head. If passengers are heading for the new visitors centre it's only a 100yds down the path and certainly doesn't require a train ride to reach it.
The obvious compromise that I suggest to the council is to operate the new land train to the end of the Broadway (Hungry Hiker) and let travellers choose whether they want to catch the existing noddy train service to the end of the head. If passengers are heading for the new visitors centre it's only a 100yds down the path and certainly doesn't require a train ride to reach it. GarrySibbald
  • Score: 5

1:05pm Wed 19 Mar 14

lympete says...

Embedded in the Bournemouth Borough Council website is a section on Community Right to Challenge. This right enables communities to bid to take over local services they think they can run differently and better.

A Community Group is primarily concerned with the facilities of their own community. The current Hengistbury Head Land Train experience and surrounding environment to me is a "community" which the Council is attempting to change but not, in the opinion of the petitioners, to better for the benefit of the existing users who wish to retain the current arrangements. Bournemouth Borough is not the community in this sense, it is the local Land Train Community which sits within the overall area.

A bid would have to come from an eligible body so the obvious scenario to me would be for the petitioners, beach hut owners, conservation protectors, boat users, cafe, Black House B&B etc, etc. to form a Community Interest Group as an umbrella to employ the existing operators on a not for profit basis, an operation clearly proven to work by the last 45 years results, perhaps even supported by a Friends of the Hengistbury Head Land Train organisation.

The lack of a business plan could be easily rectified with a 45 year history of financial performance which as a reminder has been carried out to provide a SERVICE, a seemingly dying concept, rather than boost the council coffers by inevitable increased charges and presumably less than 364 day per year service.

Continuity would be ensured after the inevitable demise of the otherwise (in folk lore) immortal Mrs Faris and indeed, a Friends support organisation would facilitate additional injection of funds to maintain the equipment as necessary for the foreseeable future.

There must be a process to challenge decisions of the Council when they are not deemed by the electorate to fulfil the local need decided as being required by the Community and I cannot see how the decision of one Councillor can take priority over an open Cabinet debate with invited public consultation on such an emotive subject and now seemingly nationally important matter as the Land Train.

The publication of the statistics and figures which have been relied upon by Cllr. Williams, seemingly alone, to reach HIS final decision should surely also be put in the public domain for scrutiny. If a business plan was required from Mrs Faris, it must surely be required by the Council.
Embedded in the Bournemouth Borough Council website is a section on Community Right to Challenge. This right enables communities to bid to take over local services they think they can run differently and better. A Community Group is primarily concerned with the facilities of their own community. The current Hengistbury Head Land Train experience and surrounding environment to me is a "community" which the Council is attempting to change but not, in the opinion of the petitioners, to better for the benefit of the existing users who wish to retain the current arrangements. Bournemouth Borough is not the community in this sense, it is the local Land Train Community which sits within the overall area. A bid would have to come from an eligible body so the obvious scenario to me would be for the petitioners, beach hut owners, conservation protectors, boat users, cafe, Black House B&B etc, etc. to form a Community Interest Group as an umbrella to employ the existing operators on a not for profit basis, an operation clearly proven to work by the last 45 years results, perhaps even supported by a Friends of the Hengistbury Head Land Train organisation. The lack of a business plan could be easily rectified with a 45 year history of financial performance which as a reminder has been carried out to provide a SERVICE, a seemingly dying concept, rather than boost the council coffers by inevitable increased charges and presumably less than 364 day per year service. Continuity would be ensured after the inevitable demise of the otherwise (in folk lore) immortal Mrs Faris and indeed, a Friends support organisation would facilitate additional injection of funds to maintain the equipment as necessary for the foreseeable future. There must be a process to challenge decisions of the Council when they are not deemed by the electorate to fulfil the local need decided as being required by the Community and I cannot see how the decision of one Councillor can take priority over an open Cabinet debate with invited public consultation on such an emotive subject and now seemingly nationally important matter as the Land Train. The publication of the statistics and figures which have been relied upon by Cllr. Williams, seemingly alone, to reach HIS final decision should surely also be put in the public domain for scrutiny. If a business plan was required from Mrs Faris, it must surely be required by the Council. lympete
  • Score: 29

1:49pm Wed 19 Mar 14

live-and-let-live says...

the dictators have spoken. now we must meekly shut up and go away
the dictators have spoken. now we must meekly shut up and go away live-and-let-live
  • Score: 1

1:52pm Wed 19 Mar 14

skydriver says...

Another question comes to mind, ,what gives this man the sole right to sign off an agreement such as this without consultation with the public finances committee , and the full board of councillors . This am may think he is George Osbourne , but rest assured he is not And therefore subject to scrutiny with the council tax payers money
Another question comes to mind, ,what gives this man the sole right to sign off an agreement such as this without consultation with the public finances committee , and the full board of councillors . This am may think he is George Osbourne , but rest assured he is not And therefore subject to scrutiny with the council tax payers money skydriver
  • Score: 17

1:58pm Wed 19 Mar 14

wildchildthe!st says...

I suppose if the truth was known the majority of the petitioners and those commenting here could not care less about the train and the operator just another excuse for political stirring,pathetic really.
I suppose if the truth was known the majority of the petitioners and those commenting here could not care less about the train and the operator just another excuse for political stirring,pathetic really. wildchildthe!st
  • Score: -36

2:03pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Beatnik fly says...

MngsMnr wrote:
juniperberry wrote:
Someone tell my why this lessee should expect automatic renewal of a license without having to submit a bus plan when this is standard procedure for any lessee? This lady is disingenuous, she would have been advised a long time before that the existing service service was not going to cut the mustard going forward and that if she wanted to compete she had to play by the same rules as everyone else. In the meantime it looks as if the council have decided that they want to bring this section oft he land train in house to work better with the rest of it. Is Mrs Faris prepared to make the huge investment needed to bring the train and service up to requirements - probably not!
I can assure you whether she had submitted a plan or not, she would have been passed over. Someone I know received the same shoddy treatment by Christchurch council some 15 years ago. For personal reasons between her and someone on the council the decision was made not to renew her license after 3 years. By this time she had built the business up and the council moved her out of her office, and moved one of it's employees in to take over the business. And I know for fact that that decision was made within a few months of her lease expiring.

The same has happened with Avon Beach car park. For years it was leased to the cafe owners. When the council realised it was a nice little earner, they reclaimed the car park and installed parking meters.
Would you make a huge investment on a 1 year licence ? What sort of investment would you like to see? And for the record, mrs Faris did put in a business plan, and spent 25k in last 2 year in upgrading their rolling stock. This service responds to the needs of the local community and tourists. When you talk about a council ' bringing a service in house' it simply means they have sub contracted it out to someone else...
[quote][p][bold]MngsMnr[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]juniperberry[/bold] wrote: Someone tell my why this lessee should expect automatic renewal of a license without having to submit a bus plan when this is standard procedure for any lessee? This lady is disingenuous, she would have been advised a long time before that the existing service service was not going to cut the mustard going forward and that if she wanted to compete she had to play by the same rules as everyone else. In the meantime it looks as if the council have decided that they want to bring this section oft he land train in house to work better with the rest of it. Is Mrs Faris prepared to make the huge investment needed to bring the train and service up to requirements - probably not![/p][/quote]I can assure you whether she had submitted a plan or not, she would have been passed over. Someone I know received the same shoddy treatment by Christchurch council some 15 years ago. For personal reasons between her and someone on the council the decision was made not to renew her license after 3 years. By this time she had built the business up and the council moved her out of her office, and moved one of it's employees in to take over the business. And I know for fact that that decision was made within a few months of her lease expiring. The same has happened with Avon Beach car park. For years it was leased to the cafe owners. When the council realised it was a nice little earner, they reclaimed the car park and installed parking meters.[/p][/quote]Would you make a huge investment on a 1 year licence ? What sort of investment would you like to see? And for the record, mrs Faris did put in a business plan, and spent 25k in last 2 year in upgrading their rolling stock. This service responds to the needs of the local community and tourists. When you talk about a council ' bringing a service in house' it simply means they have sub contracted it out to someone else... Beatnik fly
  • Score: 13

2:13pm Wed 19 Mar 14

dyrck says...

juniperberry wrote:
Someone tell my why this lessee should expect automatic renewal of a license without having to submit a bus plan when this is standard procedure for any lessee? This lady is disingenuous, she would have been advised a long time before that the existing service service was not going to cut the mustard going forward and that if she wanted to compete she had to play by the same rules as everyone else. In the meantime it looks as if the council have decided that they want to bring this section oft he land train in house to work better with the rest of it. Is Mrs Faris prepared to make the huge investment needed to bring the train and service up to requirements - probably not!
As I understand it, the land train license is on an annual basis. This makes it very difficult for any company to invest significant amounts of money in upgrading their equipment when it can all be taken away 12 months later.
[quote][p][bold]juniperberry[/bold] wrote: Someone tell my why this lessee should expect automatic renewal of a license without having to submit a bus plan when this is standard procedure for any lessee? This lady is disingenuous, she would have been advised a long time before that the existing service service was not going to cut the mustard going forward and that if she wanted to compete she had to play by the same rules as everyone else. In the meantime it looks as if the council have decided that they want to bring this section oft he land train in house to work better with the rest of it. Is Mrs Faris prepared to make the huge investment needed to bring the train and service up to requirements - probably not![/p][/quote]As I understand it, the land train license is on an annual basis. This makes it very difficult for any company to invest significant amounts of money in upgrading their equipment when it can all be taken away 12 months later. dyrck
  • Score: 10

2:18pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Beatnik fly says...

lympete wrote:
Embedded in the Bournemouth Borough Council website is a section on Community Right to Challenge. This right enables communities to bid to take over local services they think they can run differently and better.

A Community Group is primarily concerned with the facilities of their own community. The current Hengistbury Head Land Train experience and surrounding environment to me is a "community" which the Council is attempting to change but not, in the opinion of the petitioners, to better for the benefit of the existing users who wish to retain the current arrangements. Bournemouth Borough is not the community in this sense, it is the local Land Train Community which sits within the overall area.

A bid would have to come from an eligible body so the obvious scenario to me would be for the petitioners, beach hut owners, conservation protectors, boat users, cafe, Black House B&B etc, etc. to form a Community Interest Group as an umbrella to employ the existing operators on a not for profit basis, an operation clearly proven to work by the last 45 years results, perhaps even supported by a Friends of the Hengistbury Head Land Train organisation.

The lack of a business plan could be easily rectified with a 45 year history of financial performance which as a reminder has been carried out to provide a SERVICE, a seemingly dying concept, rather than boost the council coffers by inevitable increased charges and presumably less than 364 day per year service.

Continuity would be ensured after the inevitable demise of the otherwise (in folk lore) immortal Mrs Faris and indeed, a Friends support organisation would facilitate additional injection of funds to maintain the equipment as necessary for the foreseeable future.

There must be a process to challenge decisions of the Council when they are not deemed by the electorate to fulfil the local need decided as being required by the Community and I cannot see how the decision of one Councillor can take priority over an open Cabinet debate with invited public consultation on such an emotive subject and now seemingly nationally important matter as the Land Train.

The publication of the statistics and figures which have been relied upon by Cllr. Williams, seemingly alone, to reach HIS final decision should surely also be put in the public domain for scrutiny. If a business plan was required from Mrs Faris, it must surely be required by the Council.
People have looked into a Community Enterprise / interest Group for a number of council run sites around Christchurch. There are a huge number of local people behind this campaign for the land train so the council will not be rid of this uprising any time soon, I believe they have a different agenda with regards to this area, and this is just the beginning. The income figures for this service do not add up so their belligerent stance is obviously to hide another agenda.
[quote][p][bold]lympete[/bold] wrote: Embedded in the Bournemouth Borough Council website is a section on Community Right to Challenge. This right enables communities to bid to take over local services they think they can run differently and better. A Community Group is primarily concerned with the facilities of their own community. The current Hengistbury Head Land Train experience and surrounding environment to me is a "community" which the Council is attempting to change but not, in the opinion of the petitioners, to better for the benefit of the existing users who wish to retain the current arrangements. Bournemouth Borough is not the community in this sense, it is the local Land Train Community which sits within the overall area. A bid would have to come from an eligible body so the obvious scenario to me would be for the petitioners, beach hut owners, conservation protectors, boat users, cafe, Black House B&B etc, etc. to form a Community Interest Group as an umbrella to employ the existing operators on a not for profit basis, an operation clearly proven to work by the last 45 years results, perhaps even supported by a Friends of the Hengistbury Head Land Train organisation. The lack of a business plan could be easily rectified with a 45 year history of financial performance which as a reminder has been carried out to provide a SERVICE, a seemingly dying concept, rather than boost the council coffers by inevitable increased charges and presumably less than 364 day per year service. Continuity would be ensured after the inevitable demise of the otherwise (in folk lore) immortal Mrs Faris and indeed, a Friends support organisation would facilitate additional injection of funds to maintain the equipment as necessary for the foreseeable future. There must be a process to challenge decisions of the Council when they are not deemed by the electorate to fulfil the local need decided as being required by the Community and I cannot see how the decision of one Councillor can take priority over an open Cabinet debate with invited public consultation on such an emotive subject and now seemingly nationally important matter as the Land Train. The publication of the statistics and figures which have been relied upon by Cllr. Williams, seemingly alone, to reach HIS final decision should surely also be put in the public domain for scrutiny. If a business plan was required from Mrs Faris, it must surely be required by the Council.[/p][/quote]People have looked into a Community Enterprise / interest Group for a number of council run sites around Christchurch. There are a huge number of local people behind this campaign for the land train so the council will not be rid of this uprising any time soon, I believe they have a different agenda with regards to this area, and this is just the beginning. The income figures for this service do not add up so their belligerent stance is obviously to hide another agenda. Beatnik fly
  • Score: 17

2:54pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Buddles says...

Well,well,well. Not open for discussion or consultation.

Hmmmm!

I am reminded of that famous quote.......

"If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever."

George Orwell
Well,well,well. Not open for discussion or consultation. Hmmmm! I am reminded of that famous quote....... "If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever." George Orwell Buddles
  • Score: 12

3:19pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Flowb0 says...

juniperberry wrote:
Someone tell my why this lessee should expect automatic renewal of a license without having to submit a bus plan when this is standard procedure for any lessee? This lady is disingenuous, she would have been advised a long time before that the existing service service was not going to cut the mustard going forward and that if she wanted to compete she had to play by the same rules as everyone else. In the meantime it looks as if the council have decided that they want to bring this section oft he land train in house to work better with the rest of it. Is Mrs Faris prepared to make the huge investment needed to bring the train and service up to requirements - probably not!
She barely makes profit as it is, runs the service more out of love than anything else. I think you comments will anger many, not just myself. You have obviously never used the train nor have any compassion!!!!
[quote][p][bold]juniperberry[/bold] wrote: Someone tell my why this lessee should expect automatic renewal of a license without having to submit a bus plan when this is standard procedure for any lessee? This lady is disingenuous, she would have been advised a long time before that the existing service service was not going to cut the mustard going forward and that if she wanted to compete she had to play by the same rules as everyone else. In the meantime it looks as if the council have decided that they want to bring this section oft he land train in house to work better with the rest of it. Is Mrs Faris prepared to make the huge investment needed to bring the train and service up to requirements - probably not![/p][/quote]She barely makes profit as it is, runs the service more out of love than anything else. I think you comments will anger many, not just myself. You have obviously never used the train nor have any compassion!!!! Flowb0
  • Score: 13

3:27pm Wed 19 Mar 14

TheDistrict says...

"Community Right to Challenge"

http://www.bournemou
th.gov.uk/CouncilDem
ocracy/Localism/Comm
unityRighttoChalleng
e.aspx?form=CookieCo
nfirm
"Community Right to Challenge" http://www.bournemou th.gov.uk/CouncilDem ocracy/Localism/Comm unityRighttoChalleng e.aspx?form=CookieCo nfirm TheDistrict
  • Score: 6

3:32pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Flowb0 says...

wildchildthe!st wrote:
I suppose if the truth was known the majority of the petitioners and those commenting here could not care less about the train and the operator just another excuse for political stirring,pathetic really.
Thats where you're wrong. It is a beloved service, i remember my grandma taking me on there. It makes me angry to think its going to be scrapped. I signed the petition because i feel strongly about keeping the train. With a comment like that are you sure you don't work for the council!!!!
[quote][p][bold]wildchildthe!st[/bold] wrote: I suppose if the truth was known the majority of the petitioners and those commenting here could not care less about the train and the operator just another excuse for political stirring,pathetic really.[/p][/quote]Thats where you're wrong. It is a beloved service, i remember my grandma taking me on there. It makes me angry to think its going to be scrapped. I signed the petition because i feel strongly about keeping the train. With a comment like that are you sure you don't work for the council!!!! Flowb0
  • Score: 11

3:44pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Molecatcher says...

The decision can't be changed... What kind of place is this. If I had woken up and found myself in Russia, or living in some tinpot third world dictatorship, this would be hard enough to believe, but Bournemouth? Clearly they are having a laugh.
The decision can't be changed... What kind of place is this. If I had woken up and found myself in Russia, or living in some tinpot third world dictatorship, this would be hard enough to believe, but Bournemouth? Clearly they are having a laugh. Molecatcher
  • Score: 10

3:51pm Wed 19 Mar 14

askquestion says...

dictatorship seems to be inherent with this council. from what i have read about this decision, few, if any,councillors were made aware of this decision. that inself, smacks of dictatorship. why the secrecy ? we do know from experience in this twon, that once the council get thier grubby hands on anything, they can only see £££££ signs, and a chance for thier buddies to make a fast buck. i dont believe in the word CANT. and if this council wish to redeem themselves, they could make a start by providing us with the true figures for the cost of the hengistbury head centre ? then people can make a choice to boycott it cant they ? councillors and council employees are accountable to us. the tax/rate payer, and they should forget that at thier peril.
dictatorship seems to be inherent with this council. from what i have read about this decision, few, if any,councillors were made aware of this decision. that inself, smacks of dictatorship. why the secrecy ? we do know from experience in this twon, that once the council get thier grubby hands on anything, they can only see £££££ signs, and a chance for thier buddies to make a fast buck. i dont believe in the word CANT. and if this council wish to redeem themselves, they could make a start by providing us with the true figures for the cost of the hengistbury head centre ? then people can make a choice to boycott it cant they ? councillors and council employees are accountable to us. the tax/rate payer, and they should forget that at thier peril. askquestion
  • Score: 5

3:52pm Wed 19 Mar 14

BmthNewshound says...

This decision may not be able to be challenged but in 2015 Beesley and his side-kicks can be challenged and thrown out of power if people bother to get off their backsides to vote and if opposition groups get their act together.
.
It is often their own arrogance and belief that they cannot be challenged that ultimately leads to the downfall of autocratic politicians like Beesley.
.
This decision may not be able to be challenged but in 2015 Beesley and his side-kicks can be challenged and thrown out of power if people bother to get off their backsides to vote and if opposition groups get their act together. . It is often their own arrogance and belief that they cannot be challenged that ultimately leads to the downfall of autocratic politicians like Beesley. . BmthNewshound
  • Score: 8

3:57pm Wed 19 Mar 14

yousirmesirnosiryousirthankyousir says...

I can’t believe this story is headlines. This whole thing is ridiculous…compani
es lose contracts all the time. I think you have had long enough delivering this service. The train is dated and looks shabby….it’s time we moved on and stop living in the past. Bring on the new service!
I can’t believe this story is headlines. This whole thing is ridiculous…compani es lose contracts all the time. I think you have had long enough delivering this service. The train is dated and looks shabby….it’s time we moved on and stop living in the past. Bring on the new service! yousirmesirnosiryousirthankyousir
  • Score: -29

4:04pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Glashen says...

juniperberry wrote:
Someone tell my why this lessee should expect automatic renewal of a license without having to submit a bus plan when this is standard procedure for any lessee? This lady is disingenuous, she would have been advised a long time before that the existing service service was not going to cut the mustard going forward and that if she wanted to compete she had to play by the same rules as everyone else. In the meantime it looks as if the council have decided that they want to bring this section oft he land train in house to work better with the rest of it. Is Mrs Faris prepared to make the huge investment needed to bring the train and service up to requirements - probably not!
OK, but then what right has the council to monopolise the service for its own operation, if it had done the right thing and put what is a substantial change to the service out for consultation and tender then maybe the conclusion would be that putting it in house was the right course, but a small group of councillors have arbitrarily taken a decision without consultation or comparison.
-
Whilst sentiment does play a part in the opposition so does the strong suspicion that going by the council's track record this will not be a change for the better in the long run.
[quote][p][bold]juniperberry[/bold] wrote: Someone tell my why this lessee should expect automatic renewal of a license without having to submit a bus plan when this is standard procedure for any lessee? This lady is disingenuous, she would have been advised a long time before that the existing service service was not going to cut the mustard going forward and that if she wanted to compete she had to play by the same rules as everyone else. In the meantime it looks as if the council have decided that they want to bring this section oft he land train in house to work better with the rest of it. Is Mrs Faris prepared to make the huge investment needed to bring the train and service up to requirements - probably not![/p][/quote]OK, but then what right has the council to monopolise the service for its own operation, if it had done the right thing and put what is a substantial change to the service out for consultation and tender then maybe the conclusion would be that putting it in house was the right course, but a small group of councillors have arbitrarily taken a decision without consultation or comparison. - Whilst sentiment does play a part in the opposition so does the strong suspicion that going by the council's track record this will not be a change for the better in the long run. Glashen
  • Score: 8

4:05pm Wed 19 Mar 14

wildchildthe!st says...

Flowb0 wrote:
wildchildthe!st wrote:
I suppose if the truth was known the majority of the petitioners and those commenting here could not care less about the train and the operator just another excuse for political stirring,pathetic really.
Thats where you're wrong. It is a beloved service, i remember my grandma taking me on there. It makes me angry to think its going to be scrapped. I signed the petition because i feel strongly about keeping the train. With a comment like that are you sure you don't work for the council!!!!
You don't know ,you are assuming everyone thinks like you.With a comment like that are you sure you are not a village idiot!!!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]Flowb0[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wildchildthe!st[/bold] wrote: I suppose if the truth was known the majority of the petitioners and those commenting here could not care less about the train and the operator just another excuse for political stirring,pathetic really.[/p][/quote]Thats where you're wrong. It is a beloved service, i remember my grandma taking me on there. It makes me angry to think its going to be scrapped. I signed the petition because i feel strongly about keeping the train. With a comment like that are you sure you don't work for the council!!!![/p][/quote]You don't know ,you are assuming everyone thinks like you.With a comment like that are you sure you are not a village idiot!!!!!!!! wildchildthe!st
  • Score: -23

4:53pm Wed 19 Mar 14

spongealot says...

I will look forward to the Council Land Train going from Fishermens Walk to Point House Zig Zag along the narrowest part of the promenade in Poole Bay! That's why they now terminate at Boscombe Pier.

Also, what happens if an emergency vehicle on "Blues & Two's" needs to go along that stretch with an oncoming Council Land Train approaching ?
I will look forward to the Council Land Train going from Fishermens Walk to Point House Zig Zag along the narrowest part of the promenade in Poole Bay! That's why they now terminate at Boscombe Pier. Also, what happens if an emergency vehicle on "Blues & Two's" needs to go along that stretch with an oncoming Council Land Train approaching ? spongealot
  • Score: 8

4:59pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Redgolfer says...

yousirmesirnosiryous
irthankyousir
wrote:
I can’t believe this story is headlines. This whole thing is ridiculous…compani

es lose contracts all the time. I think you have had long enough delivering this service. The train is dated and looks shabby….it’s time we moved on and stop living in the past. Bring on the new service!
AND you SIR are an IDIOT, companies do loose contracts BUT this wonderful service has been going for nearly 45 years, serves the public well, its the arrogance of the council to THINK IT COULD RUN THE SAME SERVICE & TIMETABLE, if they want their wretched train then let it stop at the Hungry Hiker but no it would become a white elephant just like the bus service that use to do that route ???
[quote][p][bold]yousirmesirnosiryous irthankyousir[/bold] wrote: I can’t believe this story is headlines. This whole thing is ridiculous…compani es lose contracts all the time. I think you have had long enough delivering this service. The train is dated and looks shabby….it’s time we moved on and stop living in the past. Bring on the new service![/p][/quote]AND you SIR are an IDIOT, companies do loose contracts BUT this wonderful service has been going for nearly 45 years, serves the public well, its the arrogance of the council to THINK IT COULD RUN THE SAME SERVICE & TIMETABLE, if they want their wretched train then let it stop at the Hungry Hiker but no it would become a white elephant just like the bus service that use to do that route ??? Redgolfer
  • Score: 5

6:07pm Wed 19 Mar 14

AnastasiaB says...

yousirmesirnosiryous
irthankyousir
wrote:
I can’t believe this story is headlines. This whole thing is ridiculous…compani

es lose contracts all the time. I think you have had long enough delivering this service. The train is dated and looks shabby….it’s time we moved on and stop living in the past. Bring on the new service!
Hmmm You sound just like a Council Employee to me. Also you obviously like tacky looking trains that are more suited to Benidorm type places, which is where they came from in the first place.
.
[quote][p][bold]yousirmesirnosiryous irthankyousir[/bold] wrote: I can’t believe this story is headlines. This whole thing is ridiculous…compani es lose contracts all the time. I think you have had long enough delivering this service. The train is dated and looks shabby….it’s time we moved on and stop living in the past. Bring on the new service![/p][/quote]Hmmm You sound just like a Council Employee to me. Also you obviously like tacky looking trains that are more suited to Benidorm type places, which is where they came from in the first place. . AnastasiaB
  • Score: 5

6:07pm Wed 19 Mar 14

AnastasiaB says...

yousirmesirnosiryous
irthankyousir
wrote:
I can’t believe this story is headlines. This whole thing is ridiculous…compani

es lose contracts all the time. I think you have had long enough delivering this service. The train is dated and looks shabby….it’s time we moved on and stop living in the past. Bring on the new service!
Hmmm You sound just like a Council Employee to me. Also you obviously like tacky looking trains that are more suited to Benidorm type places, which is where they came from in the first place.
.
[quote][p][bold]yousirmesirnosiryous irthankyousir[/bold] wrote: I can’t believe this story is headlines. This whole thing is ridiculous…compani es lose contracts all the time. I think you have had long enough delivering this service. The train is dated and looks shabby….it’s time we moved on and stop living in the past. Bring on the new service![/p][/quote]Hmmm You sound just like a Council Employee to me. Also you obviously like tacky looking trains that are more suited to Benidorm type places, which is where they came from in the first place. . AnastasiaB
  • Score: 5

6:28pm Wed 19 Mar 14

GAHmusic says...

Boooo. I can see a man from the council in a top hat with a long mustache tieing mrs Farris to the rails of her own Noddy train as it steams down the line. Who will save her?
Boooo. I can see a man from the council in a top hat with a long mustache tieing mrs Farris to the rails of her own Noddy train as it steams down the line. Who will save her? GAHmusic
  • Score: 1

6:33pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Telscombe Cliffy says...

What do you expect from a council that can't even look after their biggest free asset - the beach. Over the years they have dumped the wrong type of sand and stones/gravel on it and ruined that. Go to the boundary of Poole , go west to see what the sand on the beach used to be like.
What do you expect from a council that can't even look after their biggest free asset - the beach. Over the years they have dumped the wrong type of sand and stones/gravel on it and ruined that. Go to the boundary of Poole , go west to see what the sand on the beach used to be like. Telscombe Cliffy
  • Score: 4

6:43pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Tim Baber says...

I drove the train in the 70's .Today it is the mature veteran I should be were I not individually too lazy to improve. The Noddy train has evolved and improved over 45 years from employing today better drivers than I ever was. To make up for an equally lazy career I used to seek intellectual chit chat for years going as a member of the public gallery to Bournemouth Council. It paid off just about in knowing stuff and seeing people with integrity like Cllr West or Cllr Anne Rey lock horns with groups who sought to rule following secretive or bullying gang culture way too often as far as I could see.
I heard some dreadful examples of bullying from the 80's and 90's, and could sympathise with those so bullied. Let me tell you something a Councillor agreed was true. If the ruling group have something in mind even if it is a brilliant idea the opposition will try to sink it, irrespective of merit.
This they do wrongly believing it is the function of opposition to oppose. Or
Christchurch Council suffered from pragmatic politeness that papered over issues, because there were only ever a handful to oppose and so voting with the ruling group even if it was divisive budget decisions was normal
politeness. Abstentions were a nice touch to show dissent, A contrary vote was, well, contrary and not bothered with as most were of the same ilk.
Now, I lost interest in my 50's when I stopped my local (dot)co(dot)uk website msbnews, but Councillors I knew and respected..Rey, Ratcliffe, or West, say, spoke out though they were overrun...and saw things as they were before the ruling group became riven with disaffection thanks to some humanity showing itself! Councillors are always going to range a bit...they are human and are voted in by humans. But the Council should prevail, for example offering greater wider consideration than a ward councillor when something less welcome is happening. Ward councillors are supposed to know things and then act accordingly....for the good of the whole town or their ward or for the world all open to some margin making.
When ward councillors do not know "stuff" democracy is moving away from "us:.
And today they are saying a decision was made at a sort of "low level"
without therefore any great shall I call it "conspiracy". The arrogance beggars belief. I spent years seeing a different world.
Well. In 2002 and thereabouts I was so worried by manoeuvres to get the Prom Puffer down to Mudeford Beach I challenged the Chairman of the relevant committee. My information came from scrutinising the minutes and agendas and knowing an employee had been measuring the width of the road...a sign supporting the tricky width issue which is and was then very relevant. My msbnews website can still be read with all of this roved by the best source ever..not a politician, not a journalist..but ME.
And now these people have the arrogance to say the "time is right".
You can browbeat a widow under contractual duress but do not say to my ears or eyes a decision "cannot be challenged". In my day a Councillor aggrieved or motivated to help the aggrieved could seek a six person or similar "Menbers Motion". A safety valve in any institution. Now once decided a subject under standing orders can be safe for 6 months without recall...but Standing Orders can be revoked with a simple vote. I have seen these two mechanisms used when convenient many many times. The arrogance to have either acted contrary or spoken contrary to the rules, or
changed the rules by stealth..which Bournemouth seems the first to do.

So if that is the case why all the stealth in 2002 and the same thing now. I was taught the three a priori principles of transparency, accountability and openness. I have seen these lost before and know Governments will do whatever it takes if threatened
by losing control, as monarch programming(dot)com ably testifies
over a really testing decision for any politician to fight for survival.
But the principle is the same, The difference is Monarch programming will be the death of us all. The Council irrevocable and secret decision to do what THEY want to do without dialogue or any trace in the democratic process is proof of being a slave to a new world order. We will see who gets to control Hengistbury Head's former transport concession. This is after the irrevocable virtually secret decision has been made. By the same token politicians are unable to stop the Monarch programming system of
brainwashing because they have failed to democratise the decision even though thousands of people {like me) know it exists and is out of control which if we had openness transparency and accountability we would not be where we are.
I will retract whatever is not right in this view from the Public gallery. But my point is that were I still to go to the Public gallery I would not have learned of this because the normal democratic conventions are running away and hiding behind each other. They will want to build a bridge over the Run next.
I drove the train in the 70's .Today it is the mature veteran I should be were I not individually too lazy to improve. The Noddy train has evolved and improved over 45 years from employing today better drivers than I ever was. To make up for an equally lazy career I used to seek intellectual chit chat for years going as a member of the public gallery to Bournemouth Council. It paid off just about in knowing stuff and seeing people with integrity like Cllr West or Cllr Anne Rey lock horns with groups who sought to rule following secretive or bullying gang culture way too often as far as I could see. I heard some dreadful examples of bullying from the 80's and 90's, and could sympathise with those so bullied. Let me tell you something a Councillor agreed was true. If the ruling group have something in mind even if it is a brilliant idea the opposition will try to sink it, irrespective of merit. This they do wrongly believing it is the function of opposition to oppose. Or Christchurch Council suffered from pragmatic politeness that papered over issues, because there were only ever a handful to oppose and so voting with the ruling group even if it was divisive budget decisions was normal politeness. Abstentions were a nice touch to show dissent, A contrary vote was, well, contrary and not bothered with as most were of the same ilk. Now, I lost interest in my 50's when I stopped my local (dot)co(dot)uk website msbnews, but Councillors I knew and respected..Rey, Ratcliffe, or West, say, spoke out though they were overrun...and saw things as they were before the ruling group became riven with disaffection thanks to some humanity showing itself! Councillors are always going to range a bit...they are human and are voted in by humans. But the Council should prevail, for example offering greater wider consideration than a ward councillor when something less welcome is happening. Ward councillors are supposed to know things and then act accordingly....for the good of the whole town or their ward or for the world all open to some margin making. When ward councillors do not know "stuff" democracy is moving away from "us:. And today they are saying a decision was made at a sort of "low level" without therefore any great shall I call it "conspiracy". The arrogance beggars belief. I spent years seeing a different world. Well. In 2002 and thereabouts I was so worried by manoeuvres to get the Prom Puffer down to Mudeford Beach I challenged the Chairman of the relevant committee. My information came from scrutinising the minutes and agendas and knowing an employee had been measuring the width of the road...a sign supporting the tricky width issue which is and was then very relevant. My msbnews website can still be read with all of this roved by the best source ever..not a politician, not a journalist..but ME. And now these people have the arrogance to say the "time is right". You can browbeat a widow under contractual duress but do not say to my ears or eyes a decision "cannot be challenged". In my day a Councillor aggrieved or motivated to help the aggrieved could seek a six person or similar "Menbers Motion". A safety valve in any institution. Now once decided a subject under standing orders can be safe for 6 months without recall...but Standing Orders can be revoked with a simple vote. I have seen these two mechanisms used when convenient many many times. The arrogance to have either acted contrary or spoken contrary to the rules, or changed the rules by stealth..which Bournemouth seems the first to do. So if that is the case why all the stealth in 2002 and the same thing now. I was taught the three a priori principles of transparency, accountability and openness. I have seen these lost before and know Governments will do whatever it takes if threatened by losing control, as monarch programming(dot)com ably testifies over a really testing decision for any politician to fight for survival. But the principle is the same, The difference is Monarch programming will be the death of us all. The Council irrevocable and secret decision to do what THEY want to do without dialogue or any trace in the democratic process is proof of being a slave to a new world order. We will see who gets to control Hengistbury Head's former transport concession. This is after the irrevocable virtually secret decision has been made. By the same token politicians are unable to stop the Monarch programming system of brainwashing because they have failed to democratise the decision even though thousands of people {like me) know it exists and is out of control which if we had openness transparency and accountability we would not be where we are. I will retract whatever is not right in this view from the Public gallery. But my point is that were I still to go to the Public gallery I would not have learned of this because the normal democratic conventions are running away and hiding behind each other. They will want to build a bridge over the Run next. Tim Baber
  • Score: 3

7:08pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Flowb0 says...

wildchildthe!st wrote:
Flowb0 wrote:
wildchildthe!st wrote:
I suppose if the truth was known the majority of the petitioners and those commenting here could not care less about the train and the operator just another excuse for political stirring,pathetic really.
Thats where you're wrong. It is a beloved service, i remember my grandma taking me on there. It makes me angry to think its going to be scrapped. I signed the petition because i feel strongly about keeping the train. With a comment like that are you sure you don't work for the council!!!!
You don't know ,you are assuming everyone thinks like you.With a comment like that are you sure you are not a village idiot!!!!!!!!
Well as you can read from the all the comments the majority do think like me. Theres no need to get personal is there!!!
[quote][p][bold]wildchildthe!st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Flowb0[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wildchildthe!st[/bold] wrote: I suppose if the truth was known the majority of the petitioners and those commenting here could not care less about the train and the operator just another excuse for political stirring,pathetic really.[/p][/quote]Thats where you're wrong. It is a beloved service, i remember my grandma taking me on there. It makes me angry to think its going to be scrapped. I signed the petition because i feel strongly about keeping the train. With a comment like that are you sure you don't work for the council!!!![/p][/quote]You don't know ,you are assuming everyone thinks like you.With a comment like that are you sure you are not a village idiot!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Well as you can read from the all the comments the majority do think like me. Theres no need to get personal is there!!! Flowb0
  • Score: 6

7:11pm Wed 19 Mar 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Tim Baber wrote:
I drove the train in the 70's .Today it is the mature veteran I should be were I not individually too lazy to improve. The Noddy train has evolved and improved over 45 years from employing today better drivers than I ever was. To make up for an equally lazy career I used to seek intellectual chit chat for years going as a member of the public gallery to Bournemouth Council. It paid off just about in knowing stuff and seeing people with integrity like Cllr West or Cllr Anne Rey lock horns with groups who sought to rule following secretive or bullying gang culture way too often as far as I could see.
I heard some dreadful examples of bullying from the 80's and 90's, and could sympathise with those so bullied. Let me tell you something a Councillor agreed was true. If the ruling group have something in mind even if it is a brilliant idea the opposition will try to sink it, irrespective of merit.
This they do wrongly believing it is the function of opposition to oppose. Or
Christchurch Council suffered from pragmatic politeness that papered over issues, because there were only ever a handful to oppose and so voting with the ruling group even if it was divisive budget decisions was normal
politeness. Abstentions were a nice touch to show dissent, A contrary vote was, well, contrary and not bothered with as most were of the same ilk.
Now, I lost interest in my 50's when I stopped my local (dot)co(dot)uk website msbnews, but Councillors I knew and respected..Rey, Ratcliffe, or West, say, spoke out though they were overrun...and saw things as they were before the ruling group became riven with disaffection thanks to some humanity showing itself! Councillors are always going to range a bit...they are human and are voted in by humans. But the Council should prevail, for example offering greater wider consideration than a ward councillor when something less welcome is happening. Ward councillors are supposed to know things and then act accordingly....for the good of the whole town or their ward or for the world all open to some margin making.
When ward councillors do not know "stuff" democracy is moving away from "us:.
And today they are saying a decision was made at a sort of "low level"
without therefore any great shall I call it "conspiracy". The arrogance beggars belief. I spent years seeing a different world.
Well. In 2002 and thereabouts I was so worried by manoeuvres to get the Prom Puffer down to Mudeford Beach I challenged the Chairman of the relevant committee. My information came from scrutinising the minutes and agendas and knowing an employee had been measuring the width of the road...a sign supporting the tricky width issue which is and was then very relevant. My msbnews website can still be read with all of this roved by the best source ever..not a politician, not a journalist..but ME.
And now these people have the arrogance to say the "time is right".
You can browbeat a widow under contractual duress but do not say to my ears or eyes a decision "cannot be challenged". In my day a Councillor aggrieved or motivated to help the aggrieved could seek a six person or similar "Menbers Motion". A safety valve in any institution. Now once decided a subject under standing orders can be safe for 6 months without recall...but Standing Orders can be revoked with a simple vote. I have seen these two mechanisms used when convenient many many times. The arrogance to have either acted contrary or spoken contrary to the rules, or
changed the rules by stealth..which Bournemouth seems the first to do.

So if that is the case why all the stealth in 2002 and the same thing now. I was taught the three a priori principles of transparency, accountability and openness. I have seen these lost before and know Governments will do whatever it takes if threatened
by losing control, as monarch programming(dot)com ably testifies
over a really testing decision for any politician to fight for survival.
But the principle is the same, The difference is Monarch programming will be the death of us all. The Council irrevocable and secret decision to do what THEY want to do without dialogue or any trace in the democratic process is proof of being a slave to a new world order. We will see who gets to control Hengistbury Head's former transport concession. This is after the irrevocable virtually secret decision has been made. By the same token politicians are unable to stop the Monarch programming system of
brainwashing because they have failed to democratise the decision even though thousands of people {like me) know it exists and is out of control which if we had openness transparency and accountability we would not be where we are.
I will retract whatever is not right in this view from the Public gallery. But my point is that were I still to go to the Public gallery I would not have learned of this because the normal democratic conventions are running away and hiding behind each other. They will want to build a bridge over the Run next.
I agree I think.
[quote][p][bold]Tim Baber[/bold] wrote: I drove the train in the 70's .Today it is the mature veteran I should be were I not individually too lazy to improve. The Noddy train has evolved and improved over 45 years from employing today better drivers than I ever was. To make up for an equally lazy career I used to seek intellectual chit chat for years going as a member of the public gallery to Bournemouth Council. It paid off just about in knowing stuff and seeing people with integrity like Cllr West or Cllr Anne Rey lock horns with groups who sought to rule following secretive or bullying gang culture way too often as far as I could see. I heard some dreadful examples of bullying from the 80's and 90's, and could sympathise with those so bullied. Let me tell you something a Councillor agreed was true. If the ruling group have something in mind even if it is a brilliant idea the opposition will try to sink it, irrespective of merit. This they do wrongly believing it is the function of opposition to oppose. Or Christchurch Council suffered from pragmatic politeness that papered over issues, because there were only ever a handful to oppose and so voting with the ruling group even if it was divisive budget decisions was normal politeness. Abstentions were a nice touch to show dissent, A contrary vote was, well, contrary and not bothered with as most were of the same ilk. Now, I lost interest in my 50's when I stopped my local (dot)co(dot)uk website msbnews, but Councillors I knew and respected..Rey, Ratcliffe, or West, say, spoke out though they were overrun...and saw things as they were before the ruling group became riven with disaffection thanks to some humanity showing itself! Councillors are always going to range a bit...they are human and are voted in by humans. But the Council should prevail, for example offering greater wider consideration than a ward councillor when something less welcome is happening. Ward councillors are supposed to know things and then act accordingly....for the good of the whole town or their ward or for the world all open to some margin making. When ward councillors do not know "stuff" democracy is moving away from "us:. And today they are saying a decision was made at a sort of "low level" without therefore any great shall I call it "conspiracy". The arrogance beggars belief. I spent years seeing a different world. Well. In 2002 and thereabouts I was so worried by manoeuvres to get the Prom Puffer down to Mudeford Beach I challenged the Chairman of the relevant committee. My information came from scrutinising the minutes and agendas and knowing an employee had been measuring the width of the road...a sign supporting the tricky width issue which is and was then very relevant. My msbnews website can still be read with all of this roved by the best source ever..not a politician, not a journalist..but ME. And now these people have the arrogance to say the "time is right". You can browbeat a widow under contractual duress but do not say to my ears or eyes a decision "cannot be challenged". In my day a Councillor aggrieved or motivated to help the aggrieved could seek a six person or similar "Menbers Motion". A safety valve in any institution. Now once decided a subject under standing orders can be safe for 6 months without recall...but Standing Orders can be revoked with a simple vote. I have seen these two mechanisms used when convenient many many times. The arrogance to have either acted contrary or spoken contrary to the rules, or changed the rules by stealth..which Bournemouth seems the first to do. So if that is the case why all the stealth in 2002 and the same thing now. I was taught the three a priori principles of transparency, accountability and openness. I have seen these lost before and know Governments will do whatever it takes if threatened by losing control, as monarch programming(dot)com ably testifies over a really testing decision for any politician to fight for survival. But the principle is the same, The difference is Monarch programming will be the death of us all. The Council irrevocable and secret decision to do what THEY want to do without dialogue or any trace in the democratic process is proof of being a slave to a new world order. We will see who gets to control Hengistbury Head's former transport concession. This is after the irrevocable virtually secret decision has been made. By the same token politicians are unable to stop the Monarch programming system of brainwashing because they have failed to democratise the decision even though thousands of people {like me) know it exists and is out of control which if we had openness transparency and accountability we would not be where we are. I will retract whatever is not right in this view from the Public gallery. But my point is that were I still to go to the Public gallery I would not have learned of this because the normal democratic conventions are running away and hiding behind each other. They will want to build a bridge over the Run next.[/p][/quote]I agree I think. kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 3

7:14pm Wed 19 Mar 14

ShuttleX says...

yousirmesirnosiryous
irthankyousir
wrote:
I can’t believe this story is headlines. This whole thing is ridiculous…compani

es lose contracts all the time. I think you have had long enough delivering this service. The train is dated and looks shabby….it’s time we moved on and stop living in the past. Bring on the new service!
Thank you Cllr Wiiliams for your comment.
[quote][p][bold]yousirmesirnosiryous irthankyousir[/bold] wrote: I can’t believe this story is headlines. This whole thing is ridiculous…compani es lose contracts all the time. I think you have had long enough delivering this service. The train is dated and looks shabby….it’s time we moved on and stop living in the past. Bring on the new service![/p][/quote]Thank you Cllr Wiiliams for your comment. ShuttleX
  • Score: 4

7:17pm Wed 19 Mar 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Tim Baber wrote:
I drove the train in the 70's .Today it is the mature veteran I should be were I not individually too lazy to improve. The Noddy train has evolved and improved over 45 years from employing today better drivers than I ever was. To make up for an equally lazy career I used to seek intellectual chit chat for years going as a member of the public gallery to Bournemouth Council. It paid off just about in knowing stuff and seeing people with integrity like Cllr West or Cllr Anne Rey lock horns with groups who sought to rule following secretive or bullying gang culture way too often as far as I could see.
I heard some dreadful examples of bullying from the 80's and 90's, and could sympathise with those so bullied. Let me tell you something a Councillor agreed was true. If the ruling group have something in mind even if it is a brilliant idea the opposition will try to sink it, irrespective of merit.
This they do wrongly believing it is the function of opposition to oppose. Or
Christchurch Council suffered from pragmatic politeness that papered over issues, because there were only ever a handful to oppose and so voting with the ruling group even if it was divisive budget decisions was normal
politeness. Abstentions were a nice touch to show dissent, A contrary vote was, well, contrary and not bothered with as most were of the same ilk.
Now, I lost interest in my 50's when I stopped my local (dot)co(dot)uk website msbnews, but Councillors I knew and respected..Rey, Ratcliffe, or West, say, spoke out though they were overrun...and saw things as they were before the ruling group became riven with disaffection thanks to some humanity showing itself! Councillors are always going to range a bit...they are human and are voted in by humans. But the Council should prevail, for example offering greater wider consideration than a ward councillor when something less welcome is happening. Ward councillors are supposed to know things and then act accordingly....for the good of the whole town or their ward or for the world all open to some margin making.
When ward councillors do not know "stuff" democracy is moving away from "us:.
And today they are saying a decision was made at a sort of "low level"
without therefore any great shall I call it "conspiracy". The arrogance beggars belief. I spent years seeing a different world.
Well. In 2002 and thereabouts I was so worried by manoeuvres to get the Prom Puffer down to Mudeford Beach I challenged the Chairman of the relevant committee. My information came from scrutinising the minutes and agendas and knowing an employee had been measuring the width of the road...a sign supporting the tricky width issue which is and was then very relevant. My msbnews website can still be read with all of this roved by the best source ever..not a politician, not a journalist..but ME.
And now these people have the arrogance to say the "time is right".
You can browbeat a widow under contractual duress but do not say to my ears or eyes a decision "cannot be challenged". In my day a Councillor aggrieved or motivated to help the aggrieved could seek a six person or similar "Menbers Motion". A safety valve in any institution. Now once decided a subject under standing orders can be safe for 6 months without recall...but Standing Orders can be revoked with a simple vote. I have seen these two mechanisms used when convenient many many times. The arrogance to have either acted contrary or spoken contrary to the rules, or
changed the rules by stealth..which Bournemouth seems the first to do.

So if that is the case why all the stealth in 2002 and the same thing now. I was taught the three a priori principles of transparency, accountability and openness. I have seen these lost before and know Governments will do whatever it takes if threatened
by losing control, as monarch programming(dot)com ably testifies
over a really testing decision for any politician to fight for survival.
But the principle is the same, The difference is Monarch programming will be the death of us all. The Council irrevocable and secret decision to do what THEY want to do without dialogue or any trace in the democratic process is proof of being a slave to a new world order. We will see who gets to control Hengistbury Head's former transport concession. This is after the irrevocable virtually secret decision has been made. By the same token politicians are unable to stop the Monarch programming system of
brainwashing because they have failed to democratise the decision even though thousands of people {like me) know it exists and is out of control which if we had openness transparency and accountability we would not be where we are.
I will retract whatever is not right in this view from the Public gallery. But my point is that were I still to go to the Public gallery I would not have learned of this because the normal democratic conventions are running away and hiding behind each other. They will want to build a bridge over the Run next.
Lovely story.but will the new one have a cheeky little "winky pott"?
[quote][p][bold]Tim Baber[/bold] wrote: I drove the train in the 70's .Today it is the mature veteran I should be were I not individually too lazy to improve. The Noddy train has evolved and improved over 45 years from employing today better drivers than I ever was. To make up for an equally lazy career I used to seek intellectual chit chat for years going as a member of the public gallery to Bournemouth Council. It paid off just about in knowing stuff and seeing people with integrity like Cllr West or Cllr Anne Rey lock horns with groups who sought to rule following secretive or bullying gang culture way too often as far as I could see. I heard some dreadful examples of bullying from the 80's and 90's, and could sympathise with those so bullied. Let me tell you something a Councillor agreed was true. If the ruling group have something in mind even if it is a brilliant idea the opposition will try to sink it, irrespective of merit. This they do wrongly believing it is the function of opposition to oppose. Or Christchurch Council suffered from pragmatic politeness that papered over issues, because there were only ever a handful to oppose and so voting with the ruling group even if it was divisive budget decisions was normal politeness. Abstentions were a nice touch to show dissent, A contrary vote was, well, contrary and not bothered with as most were of the same ilk. Now, I lost interest in my 50's when I stopped my local (dot)co(dot)uk website msbnews, but Councillors I knew and respected..Rey, Ratcliffe, or West, say, spoke out though they were overrun...and saw things as they were before the ruling group became riven with disaffection thanks to some humanity showing itself! Councillors are always going to range a bit...they are human and are voted in by humans. But the Council should prevail, for example offering greater wider consideration than a ward councillor when something less welcome is happening. Ward councillors are supposed to know things and then act accordingly....for the good of the whole town or their ward or for the world all open to some margin making. When ward councillors do not know "stuff" democracy is moving away from "us:. And today they are saying a decision was made at a sort of "low level" without therefore any great shall I call it "conspiracy". The arrogance beggars belief. I spent years seeing a different world. Well. In 2002 and thereabouts I was so worried by manoeuvres to get the Prom Puffer down to Mudeford Beach I challenged the Chairman of the relevant committee. My information came from scrutinising the minutes and agendas and knowing an employee had been measuring the width of the road...a sign supporting the tricky width issue which is and was then very relevant. My msbnews website can still be read with all of this roved by the best source ever..not a politician, not a journalist..but ME. And now these people have the arrogance to say the "time is right". You can browbeat a widow under contractual duress but do not say to my ears or eyes a decision "cannot be challenged". In my day a Councillor aggrieved or motivated to help the aggrieved could seek a six person or similar "Menbers Motion". A safety valve in any institution. Now once decided a subject under standing orders can be safe for 6 months without recall...but Standing Orders can be revoked with a simple vote. I have seen these two mechanisms used when convenient many many times. The arrogance to have either acted contrary or spoken contrary to the rules, or changed the rules by stealth..which Bournemouth seems the first to do. So if that is the case why all the stealth in 2002 and the same thing now. I was taught the three a priori principles of transparency, accountability and openness. I have seen these lost before and know Governments will do whatever it takes if threatened by losing control, as monarch programming(dot)com ably testifies over a really testing decision for any politician to fight for survival. But the principle is the same, The difference is Monarch programming will be the death of us all. The Council irrevocable and secret decision to do what THEY want to do without dialogue or any trace in the democratic process is proof of being a slave to a new world order. We will see who gets to control Hengistbury Head's former transport concession. This is after the irrevocable virtually secret decision has been made. By the same token politicians are unable to stop the Monarch programming system of brainwashing because they have failed to democratise the decision even though thousands of people {like me) know it exists and is out of control which if we had openness transparency and accountability we would not be where we are. I will retract whatever is not right in this view from the Public gallery. But my point is that were I still to go to the Public gallery I would not have learned of this because the normal democratic conventions are running away and hiding behind each other. They will want to build a bridge over the Run next.[/p][/quote]Lovely story.but will the new one have a cheeky little "winky pott"? kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 2

7:40pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Noidear says...

You lot need to understand. Uv been told. Stop complaining. There next plan is to take over Hampshire.
You lot need to understand. Uv been told. Stop complaining. There next plan is to take over Hampshire. Noidear
  • Score: 1

7:41pm Wed 19 Mar 14

ollie47 says...

Geldon wrote:
It does seem from the reporting that Mrs Faris was accepting of the decision not to renew the contract and had said it was expected. Also taking into account the stated failure to provide a 'plan' of investment in the service for the future - suggests a lack of 'interest' maybe? There is no mention of family wishing to carry on with the contract and one would think that at 88 maybe Mrs Faris wishes to enjoy the fruits of her many years of labour? I first went on the 'Noddy Train' about 40 years ago and Hengistbury Head is a favorite place to walk - and the train is a familiar and loved sight to many - due to it's character. If Bournemouth Council 'maintain' that character then many more future generations will have just as fond memories of their own 'Noddy Train' that we have of ours? I think the extension of the land train route is a great idea and that can only support visitors and tourism to the new Hengistbury Centre. It is a little misguided to challenge this change surely? It is not as if the facility is being scrapped? It is simply one contractor retiring and another (in this case Bournemouth Council) picking up the job. I of course will miss seeing the little green trains tootling up and down - and it is a shame in a way that Bournemouth Council can't keep the current trains (or at least ones of similar style) in service. That however does not address the need for larger carry capacity, disabled facilities and a train that is adequate to undertake the extended route. Progress has a habit of creating a sense of nostalgia - which can then be voiced as a form of opposition. In this case unfounded opposition ..... sadly. The 'Noddy Train' is dead......... Long Live The 'Noddy Train'!
If Mrs. Faris decides that she would no longer wish to run her trains, let that be her decision not Bournemouth Council's. Pay the lady the great respect that she deserves, maybe she would like to sell her business? There are many individuals who would love the opportunity to invest in such a business, and carry on this wonderful tradition. What's happened to contracts going out to tender anyway?
[quote][p][bold]Geldon[/bold] wrote: It does seem from the reporting that Mrs Faris was accepting of the decision not to renew the contract and had said it was expected. Also taking into account the stated failure to provide a 'plan' of investment in the service for the future - suggests a lack of 'interest' maybe? There is no mention of family wishing to carry on with the contract and one would think that at 88 maybe Mrs Faris wishes to enjoy the fruits of her many years of labour? I first went on the 'Noddy Train' about 40 years ago and Hengistbury Head is a favorite place to walk - and the train is a familiar and loved sight to many - due to it's character. If Bournemouth Council 'maintain' that character then many more future generations will have just as fond memories of their own 'Noddy Train' that we have of ours? I think the extension of the land train route is a great idea and that can only support visitors and tourism to the new Hengistbury Centre. It is a little misguided to challenge this change surely? It is not as if the facility is being scrapped? It is simply one contractor retiring and another (in this case Bournemouth Council) picking up the job. I of course will miss seeing the little green trains tootling up and down - and it is a shame in a way that Bournemouth Council can't keep the current trains (or at least ones of similar style) in service. That however does not address the need for larger carry capacity, disabled facilities and a train that is adequate to undertake the extended route. Progress has a habit of creating a sense of nostalgia - which can then be voiced as a form of opposition. In this case unfounded opposition ..... sadly. The 'Noddy Train' is dead......... Long Live The 'Noddy Train'![/p][/quote]If Mrs. Faris decides that she would no longer wish to run her trains, let that be her decision not Bournemouth Council's. Pay the lady the great respect that she deserves, maybe she would like to sell her business? There are many individuals who would love the opportunity to invest in such a business, and carry on this wonderful tradition. What's happened to contracts going out to tender anyway? ollie47
  • Score: 4

7:49pm Wed 19 Mar 14

kalebmoledirt says...

How many column inches can an ancient attraction which as similar appeal as candy floss,live animals in circuses.And clowns,the new act in town is the Beasley pantomime.supplying all that the globe trotting traveller needs.I'm off to a place with vision and democratic approach.The Crimea
How many column inches can an ancient attraction which as similar appeal as candy floss,live animals in circuses.And clowns,the new act in town is the Beasley pantomime.supplying all that the globe trotting traveller needs.I'm off to a place with vision and democratic approach.The Crimea kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 3

8:41pm Wed 19 Mar 14

eyesropen says...

"A council spokesman said there were around 400 licences involving the parks or seafront and so they were constantly coming up for renewal."

Are they seriously suggesting that this long standing and much loved service is the same as a seasonal ice-cream kiosk or crazy golf course? Yet another insult to Mrs. Faris!

Taking Mrs. Faris, her staff and the history of the train out of the equation, this decision taken behind closed doors affects a great many people because the schedule will be completely different and the landrover service to take belongings down to the beach huts will be lost. They have not told us whether the permit system allowing beach hut owners to drive down to sort out their huts in march and october will be continued and if it is who will be operating the gate. They have not told us how contractors and delivery vehicles will gain access. Certainly there will not be the flexible system currently operating with the gate manned from 9 to 5. People walking and cycling down to the sandspit will also find themselves more inconvenienced by these larger trains. Likewise people using southbourne promenade will find themselves having to jump out of the way of trains. The Bistro on the Beach will have to lose it's outdoor seating as the promenade is very narrow there, as it is all the way along to the end after you pass the Fisherman's Walk slope. People driving down to the Hengistbury Car Park will find themselves stuck in queues behind the trains. Will the roadside parking on the Broadway be lost to create a train lane I wonder? I walked down to the sandspit today and the noddy train came along as I was at the narrow stretch near the start of the beach huts. There is little room for error with the existing train and if I owned one of those huts I'd be seriously worried about my balcony. We still haven't heard what will be done at the turning circle to accomodate these trains. Have they even considered these practicalities? I think a FOI request might be needed if we are to get any answers. This is far more than a routine contract renewal issue!
"A council spokesman said there were around 400 licences involving the parks or seafront and so they were constantly coming up for renewal." Are they seriously suggesting that this long standing and much loved service is the same as a seasonal ice-cream kiosk or crazy golf course? Yet another insult to Mrs. Faris! Taking Mrs. Faris, her staff and the history of the train out of the equation, this decision taken behind closed doors affects a great many people because the schedule will be completely different and the landrover service to take belongings down to the beach huts will be lost. They have not told us whether the permit system allowing beach hut owners to drive down to sort out their huts in march and october will be continued and if it is who will be operating the gate. They have not told us how contractors and delivery vehicles will gain access. Certainly there will not be the flexible system currently operating with the gate manned from 9 to 5. People walking and cycling down to the sandspit will also find themselves more inconvenienced by these larger trains. Likewise people using southbourne promenade will find themselves having to jump out of the way of trains. The Bistro on the Beach will have to lose it's outdoor seating as the promenade is very narrow there, as it is all the way along to the end after you pass the Fisherman's Walk slope. People driving down to the Hengistbury Car Park will find themselves stuck in queues behind the trains. Will the roadside parking on the Broadway be lost to create a train lane I wonder? I walked down to the sandspit today and the noddy train came along as I was at the narrow stretch near the start of the beach huts. There is little room for error with the existing train and if I owned one of those huts I'd be seriously worried about my balcony. We still haven't heard what will be done at the turning circle to accomodate these trains. Have they even considered these practicalities? I think a FOI request might be needed if we are to get any answers. This is far more than a routine contract renewal issue! eyesropen
  • Score: 5

8:54pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Rich521 says...

Just a question to start with, have their been any complaints about any aspects of the present service (note that word) provided for visitors to this area?
What a way to run a council, remember they outsourced the BH Live ticketing, the "non profit makers" who charge you to print tickets at home on your own printer.
Who did make the decision, can we now be told?
Obviously not, I was not aware that Putin's influence carried this far.
Just a question to start with, have their been any complaints about any aspects of the present service (note that word) provided for visitors to this area? What a way to run a council, remember they outsourced the BH Live ticketing, the "non profit makers" who charge you to print tickets at home on your own printer. Who did make the decision, can we now be told? Obviously not, I was not aware that Putin's influence carried this far. Rich521
  • Score: 2

9:33pm Wed 19 Mar 14

eyesropen says...

"Trains will be operated by fully-trained staff with Public Service Vehicle licences and will be accessible to disabled people.

The council said its trains would also use less fuel and result in lower emissions."

How many times! The current train does have a wheelchair-accessibl
e carriage.

PSV training, as confirmed somewhere in the comments on a previous article by a PSV trained driver, is of no advantage whatsoever. Driving a land train is in no way like driving a bus. The noddy train drivers are well trained and not allowed out alone before they prove themselves to be competent and able to respond to all the specific hazards on that road.

Can the council please publish evidence of their lower emissions because the figures I have seen suggest otherwise. If they have nothing to hide there is no problem with that surely? I did ask them in my email but of course just got the standard response that everyone else got which answered none of my questions.
"Trains will be operated by fully-trained staff with Public Service Vehicle licences and will be accessible to disabled people. The council said its trains would also use less fuel and result in lower emissions." How many times! The current train does have a wheelchair-accessibl e carriage. PSV training, as confirmed somewhere in the comments on a previous article by a PSV trained driver, is of no advantage whatsoever. Driving a land train is in no way like driving a bus. The noddy train drivers are well trained and not allowed out alone before they prove themselves to be competent and able to respond to all the specific hazards on that road. Can the council please publish evidence of their lower emissions because the figures I have seen suggest otherwise. If they have nothing to hide there is no problem with that surely? I did ask them in my email but of course just got the standard response that everyone else got which answered none of my questions. eyesropen
  • Score: 6

9:34pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Madrae says...

Isosceles wrote:
Geldon
I see your point but why council run - shouldn't it have been put out to tender?
Geldon. Mrs Faris was NOT accepting of the news. She was told it immediately after learning that her grandson had died! The meeting shouldn't have proceeded under such sad circumstances, she was in a state of total shock at the time. Mrs Faris is being forced to retire against her wishes and offered no compensation for recent expenses in refurbishing trains. There are already disabled facilities available on the existing trains. The proposal offers appalling service. April - October instead of 364 days a year and NO Land Rover facility to the beach? What are BBC thinking of? Offering a lesser, inevitably costlier service, removing the current owner against her wishes and all undertaken with an air of secrecy. Even fellow council members knew nothing of these plans.
[quote][p][bold]Isosceles[/bold] wrote: Geldon I see your point but why council run - shouldn't it have been put out to tender?[/p][/quote]Geldon. Mrs Faris was NOT accepting of the news. She was told it immediately after learning that her grandson had died! The meeting shouldn't have proceeded under such sad circumstances, she was in a state of total shock at the time. Mrs Faris is being forced to retire against her wishes and offered no compensation for recent expenses in refurbishing trains. There are already disabled facilities available on the existing trains. The proposal offers appalling service. April - October instead of 364 days a year and NO Land Rover facility to the beach? What are BBC thinking of? Offering a lesser, inevitably costlier service, removing the current owner against her wishes and all undertaken with an air of secrecy. Even fellow council members knew nothing of these plans. Madrae
  • Score: 9

9:40pm Wed 19 Mar 14

BIGTONE says...

Nice little loophole the Council have got going there on decisions.
Democratic processes?
Straight into the pan and flush......
Nice little loophole the Council have got going there on decisions. Democratic processes? Straight into the pan and flush...... BIGTONE
  • Score: 6

9:43pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Telscombe Cliffy says...

kalebmoledirt wrote:
Tim Baber wrote:
I drove the train in the 70's .Today it is the mature veteran I should be were I not individually too lazy to improve. The Noddy train has evolved and improved over 45 years from employing today better drivers than I ever was. To make up for an equally lazy career I used to seek intellectual chit chat for years going as a member of the public gallery to Bournemouth Council. It paid off just about in knowing stuff and seeing people with integrity like Cllr West or Cllr Anne Rey lock horns with groups who sought to rule following secretive or bullying gang culture way too often as far as I could see.
I heard some dreadful examples of bullying from the 80's and 90's, and could sympathise with those so bullied. Let me tell you something a Councillor agreed was true. If the ruling group have something in mind even if it is a brilliant idea the opposition will try to sink it, irrespective of merit.
This they do wrongly believing it is the function of opposition to oppose. Or
Christchurch Council suffered from pragmatic politeness that papered over issues, because there were only ever a handful to oppose and so voting with the ruling group even if it was divisive budget decisions was normal
politeness. Abstentions were a nice touch to show dissent, A contrary vote was, well, contrary and not bothered with as most were of the same ilk.
Now, I lost interest in my 50's when I stopped my local (dot)co(dot)uk website msbnews, but Councillors I knew and respected..Rey, Ratcliffe, or West, say, spoke out though they were overrun...and saw things as they were before the ruling group became riven with disaffection thanks to some humanity showing itself! Councillors are always going to range a bit...they are human and are voted in by humans. But the Council should prevail, for example offering greater wider consideration than a ward councillor when something less welcome is happening. Ward councillors are supposed to know things and then act accordingly....for the good of the whole town or their ward or for the world all open to some margin making.
When ward councillors do not know "stuff" democracy is moving away from "us:.
And today they are saying a decision was made at a sort of "low level"
without therefore any great shall I call it "conspiracy". The arrogance beggars belief. I spent years seeing a different world.
Well. In 2002 and thereabouts I was so worried by manoeuvres to get the Prom Puffer down to Mudeford Beach I challenged the Chairman of the relevant committee. My information came from scrutinising the minutes and agendas and knowing an employee had been measuring the width of the road...a sign supporting the tricky width issue which is and was then very relevant. My msbnews website can still be read with all of this roved by the best source ever..not a politician, not a journalist..but ME.
And now these people have the arrogance to say the "time is right".
You can browbeat a widow under contractual duress but do not say to my ears or eyes a decision "cannot be challenged". In my day a Councillor aggrieved or motivated to help the aggrieved could seek a six person or similar "Menbers Motion". A safety valve in any institution. Now once decided a subject under standing orders can be safe for 6 months without recall...but Standing Orders can be revoked with a simple vote. I have seen these two mechanisms used when convenient many many times. The arrogance to have either acted contrary or spoken contrary to the rules, or
changed the rules by stealth..which Bournemouth seems the first to do.

So if that is the case why all the stealth in 2002 and the same thing now. I was taught the three a priori principles of transparency, accountability and openness. I have seen these lost before and know Governments will do whatever it takes if threatened
by losing control, as monarch programming(dot)com ably testifies
over a really testing decision for any politician to fight for survival.
But the principle is the same, The difference is Monarch programming will be the death of us all. The Council irrevocable and secret decision to do what THEY want to do without dialogue or any trace in the democratic process is proof of being a slave to a new world order. We will see who gets to control Hengistbury Head's former transport concession. This is after the irrevocable virtually secret decision has been made. By the same token politicians are unable to stop the Monarch programming system of
brainwashing because they have failed to democratise the decision even though thousands of people {like me) know it exists and is out of control which if we had openness transparency and accountability we would not be where we are.
I will retract whatever is not right in this view from the Public gallery. But my point is that were I still to go to the Public gallery I would not have learned of this because the normal democratic conventions are running away and hiding behind each other. They will want to build a bridge over the Run next.
I agree I think.
Too long
[quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tim Baber[/bold] wrote: I drove the train in the 70's .Today it is the mature veteran I should be were I not individually too lazy to improve. The Noddy train has evolved and improved over 45 years from employing today better drivers than I ever was. To make up for an equally lazy career I used to seek intellectual chit chat for years going as a member of the public gallery to Bournemouth Council. It paid off just about in knowing stuff and seeing people with integrity like Cllr West or Cllr Anne Rey lock horns with groups who sought to rule following secretive or bullying gang culture way too often as far as I could see. I heard some dreadful examples of bullying from the 80's and 90's, and could sympathise with those so bullied. Let me tell you something a Councillor agreed was true. If the ruling group have something in mind even if it is a brilliant idea the opposition will try to sink it, irrespective of merit. This they do wrongly believing it is the function of opposition to oppose. Or Christchurch Council suffered from pragmatic politeness that papered over issues, because there were only ever a handful to oppose and so voting with the ruling group even if it was divisive budget decisions was normal politeness. Abstentions were a nice touch to show dissent, A contrary vote was, well, contrary and not bothered with as most were of the same ilk. Now, I lost interest in my 50's when I stopped my local (dot)co(dot)uk website msbnews, but Councillors I knew and respected..Rey, Ratcliffe, or West, say, spoke out though they were overrun...and saw things as they were before the ruling group became riven with disaffection thanks to some humanity showing itself! Councillors are always going to range a bit...they are human and are voted in by humans. But the Council should prevail, for example offering greater wider consideration than a ward councillor when something less welcome is happening. Ward councillors are supposed to know things and then act accordingly....for the good of the whole town or their ward or for the world all open to some margin making. When ward councillors do not know "stuff" democracy is moving away from "us:. And today they are saying a decision was made at a sort of "low level" without therefore any great shall I call it "conspiracy". The arrogance beggars belief. I spent years seeing a different world. Well. In 2002 and thereabouts I was so worried by manoeuvres to get the Prom Puffer down to Mudeford Beach I challenged the Chairman of the relevant committee. My information came from scrutinising the minutes and agendas and knowing an employee had been measuring the width of the road...a sign supporting the tricky width issue which is and was then very relevant. My msbnews website can still be read with all of this roved by the best source ever..not a politician, not a journalist..but ME. And now these people have the arrogance to say the "time is right". You can browbeat a widow under contractual duress but do not say to my ears or eyes a decision "cannot be challenged". In my day a Councillor aggrieved or motivated to help the aggrieved could seek a six person or similar "Menbers Motion". A safety valve in any institution. Now once decided a subject under standing orders can be safe for 6 months without recall...but Standing Orders can be revoked with a simple vote. I have seen these two mechanisms used when convenient many many times. The arrogance to have either acted contrary or spoken contrary to the rules, or changed the rules by stealth..which Bournemouth seems the first to do. So if that is the case why all the stealth in 2002 and the same thing now. I was taught the three a priori principles of transparency, accountability and openness. I have seen these lost before and know Governments will do whatever it takes if threatened by losing control, as monarch programming(dot)com ably testifies over a really testing decision for any politician to fight for survival. But the principle is the same, The difference is Monarch programming will be the death of us all. The Council irrevocable and secret decision to do what THEY want to do without dialogue or any trace in the democratic process is proof of being a slave to a new world order. We will see who gets to control Hengistbury Head's former transport concession. This is after the irrevocable virtually secret decision has been made. By the same token politicians are unable to stop the Monarch programming system of brainwashing because they have failed to democratise the decision even though thousands of people {like me) know it exists and is out of control which if we had openness transparency and accountability we would not be where we are. I will retract whatever is not right in this view from the Public gallery. But my point is that were I still to go to the Public gallery I would not have learned of this because the normal democratic conventions are running away and hiding behind each other. They will want to build a bridge over the Run next.[/p][/quote]I agree I think.[/p][/quote]Too long Telscombe Cliffy
  • Score: 1

10:25pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Joy Dean says...

Ferkster wrote:
18640 signed the petition! 18640 people being ignored and pushed aside by Bournemouth Council!

18640 people wont be voting Conservative in the next election....
19,190
[quote][p][bold]Ferkster[/bold] wrote: 18640 signed the petition! 18640 people being ignored and pushed aside by Bournemouth Council! 18640 people wont be voting Conservative in the next election....[/p][/quote]19,190 Joy Dean
  • Score: 5

11:12pm Wed 19 Mar 14

Bob49 says...

To paraphrase Pastor Neimuller

When they threw £3n into Boscombe sea, we did nothing

When they wasted £10m knocking down the Imax we did nothing

And each time another car park was handed over to favoured developers we did nothing

And when they came up for re-election ......... we voted them in

....... again and again and again
To paraphrase Pastor Neimuller When they threw £3n into Boscombe sea, we did nothing When they wasted £10m knocking down the Imax we did nothing And each time another car park was handed over to favoured developers we did nothing And when they came up for re-election ......... we voted them in ....... again and again and again Bob49
  • Score: 10

1:37am Thu 20 Mar 14

HRH of Boscombe says...

It's a dictatorship then!
.
There's no democracy just elected dictators.
.
Already made your backhanding deals then Bmth Council?
.
You really aren't going to get away with this one. It can and will be challenged now and in the future .

"Gormless southern council defy their voters after chucking £3 million worth of their money into the sea."
.
Trust me everyone has more faith in fairy tale characters running it than Bmth Council :) !
It's a dictatorship then! . There's no democracy just elected dictators. . Already made your backhanding deals then Bmth Council? . You really aren't going to get away with this one. It can and will be challenged now and in the future . "Gormless southern council defy their voters after chucking £3 million worth of their money into the sea." . Trust me everyone has more faith in fairy tale characters running it than Bmth Council :) ! HRH of Boscombe
  • Score: 4

1:38am Thu 20 Mar 14

Son of Bad Rabbit says...

rusty james wrote:
Man oh man. Love the area, love the people, but the council? Who voted for these arrogant cretins?
Who voted for them?
Most of the commentators on this forum.
Bournemouthians may be many things, but a common thread that unites is the urge to vote blue unless they really don't want to think in which case they vote UKIP.
[quote][p][bold]rusty james[/bold] wrote: Man oh man. Love the area, love the people, but the council? Who voted for these arrogant cretins?[/p][/quote]Who voted for them? Most of the commentators on this forum. Bournemouthians may be many things, but a common thread that unites is the urge to vote blue unless they really don't want to think in which case they vote UKIP. Son of Bad Rabbit
  • Score: 5

6:15am Thu 20 Mar 14

rusty james says...

Son of Bad Rabbit wrote:
rusty james wrote:
Man oh man. Love the area, love the people, but the council? Who voted for these arrogant cretins?
Who voted for them?
Most of the commentators on this forum.
Bournemouthians may be many things, but a common thread that unites is the urge to vote blue unless they really don't want to think in which case they vote UKIP.
That's just depressing.
[quote][p][bold]Son of Bad Rabbit[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rusty james[/bold] wrote: Man oh man. Love the area, love the people, but the council? Who voted for these arrogant cretins?[/p][/quote]Who voted for them? Most of the commentators on this forum. Bournemouthians may be many things, but a common thread that unites is the urge to vote blue unless they really don't want to think in which case they vote UKIP.[/p][/quote]That's just depressing. rusty james
  • Score: 3

7:44am Thu 20 Mar 14

Lord Spring says...

15mins is the time the Noddy Train takes on its Headland journey

Has anyone worked out how many vehicles it will be required to run the proposed service from Alum to the Spit with the same frequency as the existing Noddy Train.


Say 7 miles at 10mph = 45mins minimum one way allowing for loading and unloading.
It will need at least 3 to run at half hour frequencies.
15mins is the time the Noddy Train takes on its Headland journey Has anyone worked out how many vehicles it will be required to run the proposed service from Alum to the Spit with the same frequency as the existing Noddy Train. Say 7 miles at 10mph = 45mins minimum one way allowing for loading and unloading. It will need at least 3 to run at half hour frequencies. Lord Spring
  • Score: 4

8:30am Thu 20 Mar 14

Joy Dean says...

Joy Dean wrote:
Ferkster wrote:
18640 signed the petition! 18640 people being ignored and pushed aside by Bournemouth Council!

18640 people wont be voting Conservative in the next election....
19,190
19,343
[quote][p][bold]Joy Dean[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ferkster[/bold] wrote: 18640 signed the petition! 18640 people being ignored and pushed aside by Bournemouth Council! 18640 people wont be voting Conservative in the next election....[/p][/quote]19,190[/p][/quote]19,343 Joy Dean
  • Score: 3

8:33am Thu 20 Mar 14

Tim Baber says...

Another thing. When i sat for hour upon hour in the Bournemouth Council public gallery..(I recommend it to people with a strong sense of right and wrong) I heard one exasperated councillor say ...So we are not voting through what is on the white pages....(minor procedural rubbish containing few items of any controversial nature) but the YELLOW pages. Minor embarrassment as Councillors (53 of them) consider this if it is a revelation or not, and some always correct and measured official...(probably the legal independent officer at the top table using considered judgement) falls into step with whatever advice is appropriate from a range of Sir Humphrey type
rainbow spectra. I seem to remember that the minor stuff was not therefore
really approved only the Yellow Pages, and I suggest a crash telephone poll of each Councillor on this subject if it is relevant to the Noddy decision. Did it go through Main Full Council on a yellow page...someone would have known if so...the ward Councillors would have been aware? Or was it snuck through on a minor white page and not actually "seen" by Full Council to ratify the leisure or transport committee or whatever was and I mean was the appropriate committee.. Oh I forgot, Bournemouth Council moved to a leaner fitter Council with cabinet decisions. Cabinet decisions basically override dissent, dissent is often unaware of the issues unless the public know, and the public do not know it it is being snuck through. Dissent does not exist in Cabinet as you know, for Cabinet insists "all men or women within it can agree and can't weaken their resolve to mix metaphors from a masonic origin! Seriously, to be told a decision is irrevocable needs an Anne Rey or the Humanist Roger West who by knee jerk object to any such
graphene slimyness. Or even the mischief making of a labour old timer, or blundering colleague roughly aware democracy has fallen again.
I leave the stupidity of the concept to others, for I used to give slide lectures on the sensibility of the train in the 80's ( I have the videos) and remember enthusing for effect about interconnected termini like the train connecting with the ferry better or the train going along the Prom to Poole. What stopped me from such stupidity was also said, though, that I did not want then 200,000 potential Pron Puffer users disgorging outside my beach hut (156 by the terminus) . You will note that fact from THEN...back in the 80's from a finical annual report was supplanted by merely the profit figure in pounds. As a librarian, not politico, I hate officials whose jobs depend on supplicancy and the prostitution of factual accuracy. I am an amateur and in the push and shove of trains can be forgiven. People paid to harm "information", or "person", deserve no place on any train less it be the monarch programming" freedom train" I so hate those svelte neck-tied or
fancy-lizard handbagged minor politicians. If we are lucky they will trip up on their own actions and it is they who suffer from what they do with Council assets. Councillor McLoughlin? If they succeed in the only culture that will keep them afloat..gang culture...What do I propose...the old tried and tested openness, transparency and accountability. So who is going to retract this is "impossible to be challenged". One weapon this person needs like a medical application is a "Vote of No Confidence"..rarely used in a gang culture.. I remember what they did to a County Counmcillor who did not fit in called Handley. I heard the gossip from people I admired. Or used to.
I heard her speak in public and in private. I hate the system and it is always
open to challenge, it is always open to debate. it is always open to revision. If it were not these gangs would not be needed to have recourse a spectrum of dirty tricks as wide and dirty as a Human resources manager
calling a warning about showing some visiting Chinese students a book on Tiannemman Square a consultation. Sometimes gang culture does grasp a nettle to solve a problem and that can be wise, but the good news is the system should make it an expensive if necessary route to take. Bournemouth Council, I care not what your party complexion is, for that can be a distraction. But when the numbers of passengers exceeds the horsepower of your traction, or you are too wide for the road, you are looking at a life cycle of the next Council possibilities slip from your grasp.
The new word next election will be new. The Old guard (less those with the integrity that has sustained them), will wither on this vine. Start using the full width of the road to try and reverse out of this one. The father forward you have gone. the harder will be your escape...I only tried reversing a Noddy train a few times, I have the pictures to show where YOUR imagined public will end up. You offend the dignity of Hengistbury head. msbnews
Another thing. When i sat for hour upon hour in the Bournemouth Council public gallery..(I recommend it to people with a strong sense of right and wrong) I heard one exasperated councillor say ...So we are not voting through what is on the white pages....(minor procedural rubbish containing few items of any controversial nature) but the YELLOW pages. Minor embarrassment as Councillors (53 of them) consider this if it is a revelation or not, and some always correct and measured official...(probably the legal independent officer at the top table using considered judgement) falls into step with whatever advice is appropriate from a range of Sir Humphrey type rainbow spectra. I seem to remember that the minor stuff was not therefore really approved only the Yellow Pages, and I suggest a crash telephone poll of each Councillor on this subject if it is relevant to the Noddy decision. Did it go through Main Full Council on a yellow page...someone would have known if so...the ward Councillors would have been aware? Or was it snuck through on a minor white page and not actually "seen" by Full Council to ratify the leisure or transport committee or whatever was and I mean was the appropriate committee.. Oh I forgot, Bournemouth Council moved to a leaner fitter Council with cabinet decisions. Cabinet decisions basically override dissent, dissent is often unaware of the issues unless the public know, and the public do not know it it is being snuck through. Dissent does not exist in Cabinet as you know, for Cabinet insists "all men or women within it can agree and can't weaken their resolve to mix metaphors from a masonic origin! Seriously, to be told a decision is irrevocable needs an Anne Rey or the Humanist Roger West who by knee jerk object to any such graphene slimyness. Or even the mischief making of a labour old timer, or blundering colleague roughly aware democracy has fallen again. I leave the stupidity of the concept to others, for I used to give slide lectures on the sensibility of the train in the 80's ( I have the videos) and remember enthusing for effect about interconnected termini like the train connecting with the ferry better or the train going along the Prom to Poole. What stopped me from such stupidity was also said, though, that I did not want then 200,000 potential Pron Puffer users disgorging outside my beach hut (156 by the terminus) . You will note that fact from THEN...back in the 80's from a finical annual report was supplanted by merely the profit figure in pounds. As a librarian, not politico, I hate officials whose jobs depend on supplicancy and the prostitution of factual accuracy. I am an amateur and in the push and shove of trains can be forgiven. People paid to harm "information", or "person", deserve no place on any train less it be the monarch programming" freedom train" I so hate those svelte neck-tied or fancy-lizard handbagged minor politicians. If we are lucky they will trip up on their own actions and it is they who suffer from what they do with Council assets. Councillor McLoughlin? If they succeed in the only culture that will keep them afloat..gang culture...What do I propose...the old tried and tested openness, transparency and accountability. So who is going to retract this is "impossible to be challenged". One weapon this person needs like a medical application is a "Vote of No Confidence"..rarely used in a gang culture.. I remember what they did to a County Counmcillor who did not fit in called Handley. I heard the gossip from people I admired. Or used to. I heard her speak in public and in private. I hate the system and it is always open to challenge, it is always open to debate. it is always open to revision. If it were not these gangs would not be needed to have recourse a spectrum of dirty tricks as wide and dirty as a Human resources manager calling a warning about showing some visiting Chinese students a book on Tiannemman Square a consultation. Sometimes gang culture does grasp a nettle to solve a problem and that can be wise, but the good news is the system should make it an expensive if necessary route to take. Bournemouth Council, I care not what your party complexion is, for that can be a distraction. But when the numbers of passengers exceeds the horsepower of your traction, or you are too wide for the road, you are looking at a life cycle of the next Council possibilities slip from your grasp. The new word next election will be new. The Old guard (less those with the integrity that has sustained them), will wither on this vine. Start using the full width of the road to try and reverse out of this one. The father forward you have gone. the harder will be your escape...I only tried reversing a Noddy train a few times, I have the pictures to show where YOUR imagined public will end up. You offend the dignity of Hengistbury head. msbnews Tim Baber
  • Score: 2

8:53am Thu 20 Mar 14

Tim Baber says...

Yeah, that above was good. it needs a better person to put one of the three motions into action. You can have a (several , but I forget the number" ... member's motion... to revisit a topic. You can suspend standing orders...usually done when no careers are at stake though) You can visit was it a white page or yellow page decision..that might be a revelation, or you can ask for a "Vote of No Confidence" a sort of last resort but test of resolve from which then there can be no escape with a baying crowd of voters for whom this will be like the music hall farce that cost the ruling group their foot-plate. If they fear the wrath of local voters then that is an opportunity for THEM to change their mind (without Monarch Programming)
to save their skins. Or do they think they are "right" about this decision and they are that rare beast...the conviction politician". Such are usually strangled on the vine. Here is a tip, my beach newspaper ( the UK msbnews on the web) used to sell 30% to the huts, 30% to locals and 30% to visitors from outside the borough. Roughly. This council is looking in a rear view mirror at their claimed decision and all they can see is a wide , too wide Dotto german made train that would rip our the beating heart of the Noddy train, its staff and British engines, and never mind what you can't see yet. Can you hear the squelching sounds as your grasping hands of greed for more meet the foul ups everyone gets now and then but multiplied several fold. And can you feel the ire for generations as children grow into parents
and walk past your floundering railroad grab, using this act to teach their children there are good trains, and there are bad trains. And Councillors who will not meet their equals (I laugh) in the middle. Tim Baber (ex driver)
Yeah, that above was good. it needs a better person to put one of the three motions into action. You can have a (several , but I forget the number" ... member's motion... to revisit a topic. You can suspend standing orders...usually done when no careers are at stake though) You can visit was it a white page or yellow page decision..that might be a revelation, or you can ask for a "Vote of No Confidence" a sort of last resort but test of resolve from which then there can be no escape with a baying crowd of voters for whom this will be like the music hall farce that cost the ruling group their foot-plate. If they fear the wrath of local voters then that is an opportunity for THEM to change their mind (without Monarch Programming) to save their skins. Or do they think they are "right" about this decision and they are that rare beast...the conviction politician". Such are usually strangled on the vine. Here is a tip, my beach newspaper ( the UK msbnews on the web) used to sell 30% to the huts, 30% to locals and 30% to visitors from outside the borough. Roughly. This council is looking in a rear view mirror at their claimed decision and all they can see is a wide , too wide Dotto german made train that would rip our the beating heart of the Noddy train, its staff and British engines, and never mind what you can't see yet. Can you hear the squelching sounds as your grasping hands of greed for more meet the foul ups everyone gets now and then but multiplied several fold. And can you feel the ire for generations as children grow into parents and walk past your floundering railroad grab, using this act to teach their children there are good trains, and there are bad trains. And Councillors who will not meet their equals (I laugh) in the middle. Tim Baber (ex driver) Tim Baber
  • Score: 1

9:22am Thu 20 Mar 14

Leftpeg says...

This is a classic example of the council totally missing the point. You'll never sell it to anyone on the basis of "new, modern trains" and "trained staff" I like the fact that the drivers remind me of my family, they interact with kids and answer questions however stupid the questions may be. I love the fact that it rocks a bit when it's windy, and that during the winter it's cold, particularly if you're in the uncovered carriages.

We're not interested in having a soulless modern train run by the council, we want it as it is,
This is a classic example of the council totally missing the point. You'll never sell it to anyone on the basis of "new, modern trains" and "trained staff" I like the fact that the drivers remind me of my family, they interact with kids and answer questions however stupid the questions may be. I love the fact that it rocks a bit when it's windy, and that during the winter it's cold, particularly if you're in the uncovered carriages. We're not interested in having a soulless modern train run by the council, we want it as it is, Leftpeg
  • Score: 6

10:05am Thu 20 Mar 14

Bloss45 says...

There seems to be quite a lot of miss-information out there on this matter. Below are the FAQs direct from Bournemouth Council. I would prefer to see the old traditional arrangements to stay in place, then I am getting on a bit and resistant to change. Not wishing to let the facts get in the way of a good argument. For what it is worth here it is from the horses mouth.

"Land Train at Hengistbury Head

Councillor Lawrence Williams, portfolio holder for Leisure, Tourism & Culture, said:

“The Council already has a well run land train service along the seafront and with the opening of the new Hengistbury Head visitor centre we see this is an ideal opportunity for us to provide a joint service. The long term aim is to link the whole of the coast up from Hengistbury Head to Alum Chine on one single land train service. There are absolutely no plans to consider Disney branding.

“The existing land train service at Hengistbury Head has served the area well for a number of years and I would like to thank Mrs Faris for her dedicated work during this time. With the current licence set to expire and after much consideration we feel that the time is right for the Council to take ownership of the service and provide the investment required for the longer term.”

What are the proposed improvements to the service?
• New traditionally-styled upgraded trains
• Increased capacity and shorter waiting times
• Fully trained staff with PSV (Public Service Vehicle) licenses
• Access for disabled people
• Lower fuel and emissions
• Longer-term integration with the current Seafront service, allowing people to travel between Hengistbury in the East and Alum Chine in the west.

Why change something that has worked for years?
Hengistbury Head has recently benefited from a major investment with the new visitor centre. Upgrading the land train service is the next step in improving services in the area. The current operator has on several occasions over the past few years been asked for proposals to invest in the service but nothing has come forward in response.
What will the new trains look like?
The trains will not be ‘Disney style’ as has been suggested. The Council is extremely sensitive to the special environment of Hengistbury Head so the trains will be upgraded in a traditional style. In order to meet current demand, the seating capacity of each train will be increased to 65 which is an improvement of at least 50 per cent on the current trains.
Are you planning to increase prices?
No, the fares for the 2015 season will be frozen. We would like to introduce some new ticketing options and incentives. These might include family tickets, short trip options and multiple tickets for beach hut users.


How will the trains be run?
The increased capacity will mean shorter waiting times during the busy period, which will mean a reduction in the number of journeys needed across the Head and therefore a reduction in the impact on this special environment.
How will the trains be staffed?
As with the seafront trains, each train will have a qualified Passenger Service Vehicle (PSV) driver and they will also have a guard, who will assist people using the service. The guard will collect the fares from passengers once they have boarded the train. The current operation only has a driver and they are not PSV qualified. We are talking to the current operator about the transfer of staff and the Council’s TUPE obligations.
What will happen to Disabled users?
The new trains will be wheelchair accessible.
Will the trains run to a timetable?
During the quieter months of the year it is proposed that the train will run to a set timetable to make it easier for passengers to plan their journeys. During busy times the trains will run on demand.
There are reports that the seafront trains are wider and so will cause more congestion on the path. Is this true?
The new trains are slightly wider than the current trains, however we are confident this can be operated without impacting negative on the environment.
What will happen to the Land Rover service for the beach hut tenants?
The Council will not run the separate 4x4 (Land Rover) service which was introduced to service the private beach huts and businesses on the Sandspit. However there has been an indication that another party may be interested in running this service in the future and we shall be encouraging them to bring their proposals forward.
There are reports the new trains will use more fuel than the existing service
This is incorrect. In fact with the reduction in the number of journeys across the Head the fuel and emissions will be lower than the current service. As part of the proposals two new trains will be purchased for the seafront, which will have Euro 4 or 5 rated engines with extremely low emissions.
What’s your response to the current contractor’s surprise to this change?
We met with Mrs Faris on the 6 February 2014 to discuss the future operation of the land train. We explained a straightforward renewal of her license would no longer be possible as we were keen to make significant improvements to the service. Our legal options were to either tender the whole operation or bring it in-house to ensure it was fit for purpose. Mrs Faris’s initial reaction was she had anticipated this news as she had been advised of this position previously. Mrs Faris has on several occasions over the past few years been asked for proposals to invest in the service but we have not received anything from her. She explained she felt it might be a good time to wind up her operation after this season. Based on that, we are planning to let the current service run for this summer season and it will be brought in-house after the October half-term."

How much of this we take on board as fact and reliable is a matter for the individual. We all know the present system on the sea front does not always run on time. It is staffed and not run by the proprietor quite a significant difference.
There seems to be quite a lot of miss-information out there on this matter. Below are the FAQs direct from Bournemouth Council. I would prefer to see the old traditional arrangements to stay in place, then I am getting on a bit and resistant to change. Not wishing to let the facts get in the way of a good argument. For what it is worth here it is from the horses mouth. "Land Train at Hengistbury Head Councillor Lawrence Williams, portfolio holder for Leisure, Tourism & Culture, said: “The Council already has a well run land train service along the seafront and with the opening of the new Hengistbury Head visitor centre we see this is an ideal opportunity for us to provide a joint service. The long term aim is to link the whole of the coast up from Hengistbury Head to Alum Chine on one single land train service. There are absolutely no plans to consider Disney branding. “The existing land train service at Hengistbury Head has served the area well for a number of years and I would like to thank Mrs Faris for her dedicated work during this time. With the current licence set to expire and after much consideration we feel that the time is right for the Council to take ownership of the service and provide the investment required for the longer term.” What are the proposed improvements to the service? • New traditionally-styled upgraded trains • Increased capacity and shorter waiting times • Fully trained staff with PSV (Public Service Vehicle) licenses • Access for disabled people • Lower fuel and emissions • Longer-term integration with the current Seafront service, allowing people to travel between Hengistbury in the East and Alum Chine in the west. Why change something that has worked for years? Hengistbury Head has recently benefited from a major investment with the new visitor centre. Upgrading the land train service is the next step in improving services in the area. The current operator has on several occasions over the past few years been asked for proposals to invest in the service but nothing has come forward in response. What will the new trains look like? The trains will not be ‘Disney style’ as has been suggested. The Council is extremely sensitive to the special environment of Hengistbury Head so the trains will be upgraded in a traditional style. In order to meet current demand, the seating capacity of each train will be increased to 65 which is an improvement of at least 50 per cent on the current trains. Are you planning to increase prices? No, the fares for the 2015 season will be frozen. We would like to introduce some new ticketing options and incentives. These might include family tickets, short trip options and multiple tickets for beach hut users. How will the trains be run? The increased capacity will mean shorter waiting times during the busy period, which will mean a reduction in the number of journeys needed across the Head and therefore a reduction in the impact on this special environment. How will the trains be staffed? As with the seafront trains, each train will have a qualified Passenger Service Vehicle (PSV) driver and they will also have a guard, who will assist people using the service. The guard will collect the fares from passengers once they have boarded the train. The current operation only has a driver and they are not PSV qualified. We are talking to the current operator about the transfer of staff and the Council’s TUPE obligations. What will happen to Disabled users? The new trains will be wheelchair accessible. Will the trains run to a timetable? During the quieter months of the year it is proposed that the train will run to a set timetable to make it easier for passengers to plan their journeys. During busy times the trains will run on demand. There are reports that the seafront trains are wider and so will cause more congestion on the path. Is this true? The new trains are slightly wider than the current trains, however we are confident this can be operated without impacting negative on the environment. What will happen to the Land Rover service for the beach hut tenants? The Council will not run the separate 4x4 (Land Rover) service which was introduced to service the private beach huts and businesses on the Sandspit. However there has been an indication that another party may be interested in running this service in the future and we shall be encouraging them to bring their proposals forward. There are reports the new trains will use more fuel than the existing service This is incorrect. In fact with the reduction in the number of journeys across the Head the fuel and emissions will be lower than the current service. As part of the proposals two new trains will be purchased for the seafront, which will have Euro 4 or 5 rated engines with extremely low emissions. What’s your response to the current contractor’s surprise to this change? We met with Mrs Faris on the 6 February 2014 to discuss the future operation of the land train. We explained a straightforward renewal of her license would no longer be possible as we were keen to make significant improvements to the service. Our legal options were to either tender the whole operation or bring it in-house to ensure it was fit for purpose. Mrs Faris’s initial reaction was she had anticipated this news as she had been advised of this position previously. Mrs Faris has on several occasions over the past few years been asked for proposals to invest in the service but we have not received anything from her. She explained she felt it might be a good time to wind up her operation after this season. Based on that, we are planning to let the current service run for this summer season and it will be brought in-house after the October half-term." How much of this we take on board as fact and reliable is a matter for the individual. We all know the present system on the sea front does not always run on time. It is staffed and not run by the proprietor quite a significant difference. Bloss45
  • Score: -4

10:56am Thu 20 Mar 14

Deltiologist says...

The current service only runs with the polite agreement of other users, (e.g. pedestrians, cyclists) of the road from the Hungry Hiker to the spit. We politely stand by the verge to allow the train to pass by, and often give a cheery wave to the passengers. During the busy summer months, some pedestrians take a little time to move to the side of the road, which slows down the train in several places, most especially where the road is at its narrowest. But why should we move out of the way at all? If all the signatories to the petition took turns in walking in the middle of the road, and the prom, refusing to stand to the side to allow the train to pass, this service would be impossible to operate. We may not be able to challenge the decision, but we can challenge the operation of the service.
The current service only runs with the polite agreement of other users, (e.g. pedestrians, cyclists) of the road from the Hungry Hiker to the spit. We politely stand by the verge to allow the train to pass by, and often give a cheery wave to the passengers. During the busy summer months, some pedestrians take a little time to move to the side of the road, which slows down the train in several places, most especially where the road is at its narrowest. But why should we move out of the way at all? If all the signatories to the petition took turns in walking in the middle of the road, and the prom, refusing to stand to the side to allow the train to pass, this service would be impossible to operate. We may not be able to challenge the decision, but we can challenge the operation of the service. Deltiologist
  • Score: 6

11:03am Thu 20 Mar 14

JackJohnson says...

Deltiologist wrote:
The current service only runs with the polite agreement of other users, (e.g. pedestrians, cyclists) of the road from the Hungry Hiker to the spit. We politely stand by the verge to allow the train to pass by, and often give a cheery wave to the passengers. During the busy summer months, some pedestrians take a little time to move to the side of the road, which slows down the train in several places, most especially where the road is at its narrowest. But why should we move out of the way at all? If all the signatories to the petition took turns in walking in the middle of the road, and the prom, refusing to stand to the side to allow the train to pass, this service would be impossible to operate. We may not be able to challenge the decision, but we can challenge the operation of the service.
How about a mass picnic, in the middle of the path, the day the new service starts? Be good if we could get 15,000 to take part.
[quote][p][bold]Deltiologist[/bold] wrote: The current service only runs with the polite agreement of other users, (e.g. pedestrians, cyclists) of the road from the Hungry Hiker to the spit. We politely stand by the verge to allow the train to pass by, and often give a cheery wave to the passengers. During the busy summer months, some pedestrians take a little time to move to the side of the road, which slows down the train in several places, most especially where the road is at its narrowest. But why should we move out of the way at all? If all the signatories to the petition took turns in walking in the middle of the road, and the prom, refusing to stand to the side to allow the train to pass, this service would be impossible to operate. We may not be able to challenge the decision, but we can challenge the operation of the service.[/p][/quote]How about a mass picnic, in the middle of the path, the day the new service starts? Be good if we could get 15,000 to take part. JackJohnson
  • Score: 2

11:19am Thu 20 Mar 14

ashleycross says...

The current service consists of drivers with no respect for pedestrians using the path.
The current service consists of drivers with no respect for pedestrians using the path. ashleycross
  • Score: -6

11:23am Thu 20 Mar 14

JackJohnson says...

ashleycross wrote:
The current service consists of drivers with no respect for pedestrians using the path.
Evidence? Even if only anecdotal.
[quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: The current service consists of drivers with no respect for pedestrians using the path.[/p][/quote]Evidence? Even if only anecdotal. JackJohnson
  • Score: 2

11:44am Thu 20 Mar 14

Tim Baber says...

Just read above about the fate of the trains if they have to "go".
First suggestion...1. Stonehenge. They studied the Noddy Train and recommended a similar one for Stonehenge in preference to a disabled bus.
Second. 2. Does the Road research laboratory still exist? they studied the train in the 70's (They did the maths all wrong apparently said Mr fairs the designer) and would have a wide view of possible sites Countryside parks and so on. Trains started to appear all over after then.
3. The Council Prom Puffer a a concept is looking a bit tired even for a leased machine. Alan Barnard, gird your loins and test your much loved train against the grain by offering Noddy to replace the leased Dotto's.
That is right, a reverse take-over! That would be a study worth the arguing? Imagine if it worked out miles cheaper for the Council..our servants we pay to be so often sensible/appropriate
/ use best practice would be able to show if their official role had been distorted by an ambitious Council.
I remember the to and fro to get a Hengistbury head Visitor Centre built.
That was an exercise in Council officers questionnaires being seen as exemplars in contorted reasoning for that purpose, which I actually endorsed at the time and said so, but was deeply embarrassed by the professionalism of deceit to achieve an desired goal.
4. Employ me to give my old Noddy train talk, or I have a VHS of it to show a disinterested ex driver (me) arguing for the ascendancy of Noddy Train over Stonehenge. Amazingly my suggestion was adopted as policy but not put into action because ironically the public used their right to question, challenge and veto a pro active Council! Sigh, Two cheers for democracy..at least it provides examples to follow.
I say Cherchez la femme. The "spirit of the headland"...see issue one of the Mudeford Sandbank News, at the UK website msbnews. The piece is called " Invisible Beauty" on Page 4 of the 1998 edition , the picture is still there to enjoy, as is the Noddy train from a century later. These Councillors
need to free their officers to let slip the Dotto's in this war. and see if the Noddy Train should do the whole route their way. I have met the Dotto German designer (with the Noddy Train mechanic) as was and it would seem that the Noddy train could have been encouraged from long ago to
preserve the genius of this place. I would have come out of retirement under the right leadership...for leadership is still needed, not a corporate brochure. Tim Baber (ex Noddy driver)
Just read above about the fate of the trains if they have to "go". First suggestion...1. Stonehenge. They studied the Noddy Train and recommended a similar one for Stonehenge in preference to a disabled bus. Second. 2. Does the Road research laboratory still exist? they studied the train in the 70's (They did the maths all wrong apparently said Mr fairs the designer) and would have a wide view of possible sites Countryside parks and so on. Trains started to appear all over after then. 3. The Council Prom Puffer a a concept is looking a bit tired even for a leased machine. Alan Barnard, gird your loins and test your much loved train against the grain by offering Noddy to replace the leased Dotto's. That is right, a reverse take-over! That would be a study worth the arguing? Imagine if it worked out miles cheaper for the Council..our servants we pay to be so often sensible/appropriate / use best practice would be able to show if their official role had been distorted by an ambitious Council. I remember the to and fro to get a Hengistbury head Visitor Centre built. That was an exercise in Council officers questionnaires being seen as exemplars in contorted reasoning for that purpose, which I actually endorsed at the time and said so, but was deeply embarrassed by the professionalism of deceit to achieve an desired goal. 4. Employ me to give my old Noddy train talk, or I have a VHS of it to show a disinterested ex driver (me) arguing for the ascendancy of Noddy Train over Stonehenge. Amazingly my suggestion was adopted as policy but not put into action because ironically the public used their right to question, challenge and veto a pro active Council! Sigh, Two cheers for democracy..at least it provides examples to follow. I say Cherchez la femme. The "spirit of the headland"...see issue one of the Mudeford Sandbank News, at the UK website msbnews. The piece is called " Invisible Beauty" on Page 4 of the 1998 edition , the picture is still there to enjoy, as is the Noddy train from a century later. These Councillors need to free their officers to let slip the Dotto's in this war. and see if the Noddy Train should do the whole route their way. I have met the Dotto German designer (with the Noddy Train mechanic) as was and it would seem that the Noddy train could have been encouraged from long ago to preserve the genius of this place. I would have come out of retirement under the right leadership...for leadership is still needed, not a corporate brochure. Tim Baber (ex Noddy driver) Tim Baber
  • Score: -1

12:14pm Thu 20 Mar 14

Blobbb says...

Hengistbury Head is one of my favourite spots in this area to take my dog for a good walk.The atmosphere seems very relaxed and far away from the hustle and bustle of day to day life.A sort of haven in this this mad world we live in.
The mere fact it is serviced by the Noddy train adds to its charm. My dog and I came back on the train to the car park last week after a long walk.What a pleasure to sit in the old open carriage with like minded dog lovers and others.
This area does not need larger trains or timetables.That is the beauty of a visit here.Time does not matter.You just wait patiently at the stop for the next train !! No clock watching as we do the rest of our lives.please save the Noddy train !!!
Hengistbury Head is one of my favourite spots in this area to take my dog for a good walk.The atmosphere seems very relaxed and far away from the hustle and bustle of day to day life.A sort of haven in this this mad world we live in. The mere fact it is serviced by the Noddy train adds to its charm. My dog and I came back on the train to the car park last week after a long walk.What a pleasure to sit in the old open carriage with like minded dog lovers and others. This area does not need larger trains or timetables.That is the beauty of a visit here.Time does not matter.You just wait patiently at the stop for the next train !! No clock watching as we do the rest of our lives.please save the Noddy train !!! Blobbb
  • Score: 10

12:37pm Thu 20 Mar 14

hobosolero says...

Firstly increased width of train equals increased danger to children, pedestrians and cyclists. Secondly joining up the service from Alum Chine means increased pressure on the heathland detrimental to the ecological reasons for having this ecological asset in the first place. Thirdly and finally for the Council to state the decision cannot be reversed means that not only are the Council being intransigent it means that they are not a "Can Do" Council. - Yet another in a long list of travesties to highlight the need for a change in Councillors
Firstly increased width of train equals increased danger to children, pedestrians and cyclists. Secondly joining up the service from Alum Chine means increased pressure on the heathland detrimental to the ecological reasons for having this ecological asset in the first place. Thirdly and finally for the Council to state the decision cannot be reversed means that not only are the Council being intransigent it means that they are not a "Can Do" Council. - Yet another in a long list of travesties to highlight the need for a change in Councillors hobosolero
  • Score: 3

1:11pm Thu 20 Mar 14

lonelysurf says...

And to bring in even more revenue the council could ban cycling on the same path forcing all to use the service.
Due to 'Health and Safety 'the pathway is not wide enough for the train service and walkers to use it safely.
We regret to inform you that WALKING is now banned on the 'trainway'
PLEASE USE THE FACILITIES PROVIDED
GET YOUR TOKENS FROM THE PAYBOX !
And to bring in even more revenue the council could ban cycling on the same path forcing all to use the service. Due to 'Health and Safety 'the pathway is not wide enough for the train service and walkers to use it safely. We regret to inform you that WALKING is now banned on the 'trainway' PLEASE USE THE FACILITIES PROVIDED GET YOUR TOKENS FROM THE PAYBOX ! lonelysurf
  • Score: 3

5:26pm Thu 20 Mar 14

skydriver says...

ashleycross wrote:
The current service consists of drivers with no respect for pedestrians using the path.
What a load of rubbish, you write if that's all you can comment on don't bother.
[quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: The current service consists of drivers with no respect for pedestrians using the path.[/p][/quote]What a load of rubbish, you write if that's all you can comment on don't bother. skydriver
  • Score: 2

6:58pm Thu 20 Mar 14

poolebabe says...

This is just unbelievable. How dare the council, elected by and to serve the public, think that they do not need to consult or even consider the public opinion on this? Beyond belief. Something needs to be done. A protest or something. I'm actually angry!
This is just unbelievable. How dare the council, elected by and to serve the public, think that they do not need to consult or even consider the public opinion on this? Beyond belief. Something needs to be done. A protest or something. I'm actually angry! poolebabe
  • Score: 5

7:18pm Thu 20 Mar 14

Understated says...

if this plan goes ahead i hope everyone who signed this petition will boycott it, because it will show what happens when you let money run your mind. good luck getting your moneys worth out of that decision, you will be far worse off for going against the citizens
if this plan goes ahead i hope everyone who signed this petition will boycott it, because it will show what happens when you let money run your mind. good luck getting your moneys worth out of that decision, you will be far worse off for going against the citizens Understated
  • Score: 2

7:31pm Thu 20 Mar 14

Joy Dean says...

Joy Dean wrote:
Joy Dean wrote:
Ferkster wrote:
18640 signed the petition! 18640 people being ignored and pushed aside by Bournemouth Council!

18640 people wont be voting Conservative in the next election....
19,190
19,343
19,649
https://you.38degree
s.org.uk/petitions/s
ave-the-current-heng
istbury-head-land-tr
ain-service
[quote][p][bold]Joy Dean[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Joy Dean[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ferkster[/bold] wrote: 18640 signed the petition! 18640 people being ignored and pushed aside by Bournemouth Council! 18640 people wont be voting Conservative in the next election....[/p][/quote]19,190[/p][/quote]19,343[/p][/quote]19,649 https://you.38degree s.org.uk/petitions/s ave-the-current-heng istbury-head-land-tr ain-service Joy Dean
  • Score: 0

8:11pm Thu 20 Mar 14

Tim Baber says...

JackJohnson wrote:
Deltiologist wrote:
The current service only runs with the polite agreement of other users, (e.g. pedestrians, cyclists) of the road from the Hungry Hiker to the spit. We politely stand by the verge to allow the train to pass by, and often give a cheery wave to the passengers. During the busy summer months, some pedestrians take a little time to move to the side of the road, which slows down the train in several places, most especially where the road is at its narrowest. But why should we move out of the way at all? If all the signatories to the petition took turns in walking in the middle of the road, and the prom, refusing to stand to the side to allow the train to pass, this service would be impossible to operate. We may not be able to challenge the decision, but we can challenge the operation of the service.
How about a mass picnic, in the middle of the path, the day the new service starts? Be good if we could get 15,000 to take part.
On April the 1st 1968 local Chairman of the Hengistbury residents Assoiciation was expected to lie in the path (his words) of the present train. 2 police cars were there and sundry press but nothing happened. Decades later at meetings of the HRA officers and their reporting ward Councillors (BasilRatcliffe of ages old, ..what a gentleman) the train was always a non issue, something loved and welcomed as the average age of members increased inline with their wish to a solution for their transport that matched grandchildren smile for mile.
Sigh I must have a cry now, The staff of today are Everyman heroes, and that includes Sue who was also a police special. We were a happy crew...Tennyson....w
e even had a trade union only the councillors of the time knew of...The Order of the Celestial railroad. Yet I remember Shelly Hunt of Coast to Coast on ITV TVS television and Fern Britton both saying lovely things about then and she knew! She knew! Someone talked.
I never got to the bottom of the OCR, nor the top. I think it stopped the Council in 2002 when they eyed the route then, but thought they might get what they wanted later, as the drivers were so articulate and so well connected. Now they have the moral high ground, and it is the Council who will have tender behinds. The OCR always hiding as guardian angels of the train, has since then learnt monarchprogramming.c
om tricks of "throwing people off the freedom train" *metaphorically (Google it) because when people grasp further than they should reach, today, there are consequences further down the line. ..Tim Baber
Let arguments like this rise or fall through debate before voting. Yeah?
[quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Deltiologist[/bold] wrote: The current service only runs with the polite agreement of other users, (e.g. pedestrians, cyclists) of the road from the Hungry Hiker to the spit. We politely stand by the verge to allow the train to pass by, and often give a cheery wave to the passengers. During the busy summer months, some pedestrians take a little time to move to the side of the road, which slows down the train in several places, most especially where the road is at its narrowest. But why should we move out of the way at all? If all the signatories to the petition took turns in walking in the middle of the road, and the prom, refusing to stand to the side to allow the train to pass, this service would be impossible to operate. We may not be able to challenge the decision, but we can challenge the operation of the service.[/p][/quote]How about a mass picnic, in the middle of the path, the day the new service starts? Be good if we could get 15,000 to take part.[/p][/quote]On April the 1st 1968 local Chairman of the Hengistbury residents Assoiciation was expected to lie in the path (his words) of the present train. 2 police cars were there and sundry press but nothing happened. Decades later at meetings of the HRA officers and their reporting ward Councillors (BasilRatcliffe of ages old, ..what a gentleman) the train was always a non issue, something loved and welcomed as the average age of members increased inline with their wish to a solution for their transport that matched grandchildren smile for mile. Sigh I must have a cry now, The staff of today are Everyman heroes, and that includes Sue who was also a police special. We were a happy crew...Tennyson....w e even had a trade union only the councillors of the time knew of...The Order of the Celestial railroad. Yet I remember Shelly Hunt of Coast to Coast on ITV TVS television and Fern Britton both saying lovely things about then and she knew! She knew! Someone talked. I never got to the bottom of the OCR, nor the top. I think it stopped the Council in 2002 when they eyed the route then, but thought they might get what they wanted later, as the drivers were so articulate and so well connected. Now they have the moral high ground, and it is the Council who will have tender behinds. The OCR always hiding as guardian angels of the train, has since then learnt monarchprogramming.c om tricks of "throwing people off the freedom train" *metaphorically (Google it) because when people grasp further than they should reach, today, there are consequences further down the line. [ * it is a metaphor, a script, not real]..Tim Baber Let arguments like this rise or fall through debate before voting. Yeah? Tim Baber
  • Score: 1

8:34pm Thu 20 Mar 14

rusty james says...

Blobbb wrote:
Hengistbury Head is one of my favourite spots in this area to take my dog for a good walk.The atmosphere seems very relaxed and far away from the hustle and bustle of day to day life.A sort of haven in this this mad world we live in.
The mere fact it is serviced by the Noddy train adds to its charm. My dog and I came back on the train to the car park last week after a long walk.What a pleasure to sit in the old open carriage with like minded dog lovers and others.
This area does not need larger trains or timetables.That is the beauty of a visit here.Time does not matter.You just wait patiently at the stop for the next train !! No clock watching as we do the rest of our lives.please save the Noddy train !!!
Sums it up for me, (though I don't have a dog). It's all about the charm and character of the place. It's old fashioned and slightly eccentric, which is why the Noddy train fits so well. The councils version belongs in a theme park. Might as well open a Harry Ramsdens out on the spit to add to the great vision. Bell ends.
[quote][p][bold]Blobbb[/bold] wrote: Hengistbury Head is one of my favourite spots in this area to take my dog for a good walk.The atmosphere seems very relaxed and far away from the hustle and bustle of day to day life.A sort of haven in this this mad world we live in. The mere fact it is serviced by the Noddy train adds to its charm. My dog and I came back on the train to the car park last week after a long walk.What a pleasure to sit in the old open carriage with like minded dog lovers and others. This area does not need larger trains or timetables.That is the beauty of a visit here.Time does not matter.You just wait patiently at the stop for the next train !! No clock watching as we do the rest of our lives.please save the Noddy train !!![/p][/quote]Sums it up for me, (though I don't have a dog). It's all about the charm and character of the place. It's old fashioned and slightly eccentric, which is why the Noddy train fits so well. The councils version belongs in a theme park. Might as well open a Harry Ramsdens out on the spit to add to the great vision. Bell ends. rusty james
  • Score: 3

8:36pm Thu 20 Mar 14

Tim Baber says...

Beatnik fly wrote:
lympete wrote:
Embedded in the Bournemouth Borough Council website is a section on Community Right to Challenge. This right enables communities to bid to take over local services they think they can run differently and better.

A Community Group is primarily concerned with the facilities of their own community. The current Hengistbury Head Land Train experience and surrounding environment to me is a "community" which the Council is attempting to change but not, in the opinion of the petitioners, to better for the benefit of the existing users who wish to retain the current arrangements. Bournemouth Borough is not the community in this sense, it is the local Land Train Community which sits within the overall area.

A bid would have to come from an eligible body so the obvious scenario to me would be for the petitioners, beach hut owners, conservation protectors, boat users, cafe, Black House B&B etc, etc. to form a Community Interest Group as an umbrella to employ the existing operators on a not for profit basis, an operation clearly proven to work by the last 45 years results, perhaps even supported by a Friends of the Hengistbury Head Land Train organisation.

The lack of a business plan could be easily rectified with a 45 year history of financial performance which as a reminder has been carried out to provide a SERVICE, a seemingly dying concept, rather than boost the council coffers by inevitable increased charges and presumably less than 364 day per year service.

Continuity would be ensured after the inevitable demise of the otherwise (in folk lore) immortal Mrs Faris and indeed, a Friends support organisation would facilitate additional injection of funds to maintain the equipment as necessary for the foreseeable future.

There must be a process to challenge decisions of the Council when they are not deemed by the electorate to fulfil the local need decided as being required by the Community and I cannot see how the decision of one Councillor can take priority over an open Cabinet debate with invited public consultation on such an emotive subject and now seemingly nationally important matter as the Land Train.

The publication of the statistics and figures which have been relied upon by Cllr. Williams, seemingly alone, to reach HIS final decision should surely also be put in the public domain for scrutiny. If a business plan was required from Mrs Faris, it must surely be required by the Council.
People have looked into a Community Enterprise / interest Group for a number of council run sites around Christchurch. There are a huge number of local people behind this campaign for the land train so the council will not be rid of this uprising any time soon, I believe they have a different agenda with regards to this area, and this is just the beginning. The income figures for this service do not add up so their belligerent stance is obviously to hide another agenda.
YES YES YES
These things can work, with a light supervisory touch. And I should be on the hiring panel. Just saying. I would hire myself then as a relief driver.
I have files, photos, videos, know most of the players, am retired, live in Ringwood, have done the retrired diy thing, drove the train in the 70's
and more, but am no leader or businessman, I knew people who would hold the reins lightly, maybe even run trains to Poole if it was really the thing to do....Roger Slater but he died sadly...he was employed by a development agency to revive companies, and even offered me all my start up costs for msbnews as an incentive. He would carry the torch for Joyce and stand by her. He would understand the attraction of the past..one he shared with my and my father;s generation. Mind you I met someone ...no that is sailing Club gossip...I do know he was a Metal Box executive and they paid for him to travel Concorde as his time and skills were so valued, yet he was happiest watching the train pass his Hut 216 window, and wondering if Pete the driver waving from below. would come good for one of his beautiful daughters. It is better run now. The drivers concentrate more on the job.
There are many people suited to helping the train along.
I worked for 30 years in the local college library and everyone can know me from then, since and all the writing i do now,. This feeds off a lifetime of Noddying in my mind which I would like to revisit under proper supervision of course, yes, use what I have. I just need a car again. And a 360 degree permit to work, from the real drivers now who have raised the standard since my idea of making every journey a "perfect one".
see http://www.msbnews.c
o.uk/archives/hht2p1
.html
It was a long time ago and matters are now run by a woman.
I understand she has now made every journey a perfect one. Capiche?
I always used to get all excited after the train and needed the pacification the train gave me. And it would stop me getting into trouble as i have see www.about.me/timoxyl
ene.barbabutanoll
Actually that is more important but I would like to add my name to the hundreds Joyce has in three books of wannabe drivers .
[quote][p][bold]Beatnik fly[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lympete[/bold] wrote: Embedded in the Bournemouth Borough Council website is a section on Community Right to Challenge. This right enables communities to bid to take over local services they think they can run differently and better. A Community Group is primarily concerned with the facilities of their own community. The current Hengistbury Head Land Train experience and surrounding environment to me is a "community" which the Council is attempting to change but not, in the opinion of the petitioners, to better for the benefit of the existing users who wish to retain the current arrangements. Bournemouth Borough is not the community in this sense, it is the local Land Train Community which sits within the overall area. A bid would have to come from an eligible body so the obvious scenario to me would be for the petitioners, beach hut owners, conservation protectors, boat users, cafe, Black House B&B etc, etc. to form a Community Interest Group as an umbrella to employ the existing operators on a not for profit basis, an operation clearly proven to work by the last 45 years results, perhaps even supported by a Friends of the Hengistbury Head Land Train organisation. The lack of a business plan could be easily rectified with a 45 year history of financial performance which as a reminder has been carried out to provide a SERVICE, a seemingly dying concept, rather than boost the council coffers by inevitable increased charges and presumably less than 364 day per year service. Continuity would be ensured after the inevitable demise of the otherwise (in folk lore) immortal Mrs Faris and indeed, a Friends support organisation would facilitate additional injection of funds to maintain the equipment as necessary for the foreseeable future. There must be a process to challenge decisions of the Council when they are not deemed by the electorate to fulfil the local need decided as being required by the Community and I cannot see how the decision of one Councillor can take priority over an open Cabinet debate with invited public consultation on such an emotive subject and now seemingly nationally important matter as the Land Train. The publication of the statistics and figures which have been relied upon by Cllr. Williams, seemingly alone, to reach HIS final decision should surely also be put in the public domain for scrutiny. If a business plan was required from Mrs Faris, it must surely be required by the Council.[/p][/quote]People have looked into a Community Enterprise / interest Group for a number of council run sites around Christchurch. There are a huge number of local people behind this campaign for the land train so the council will not be rid of this uprising any time soon, I believe they have a different agenda with regards to this area, and this is just the beginning. The income figures for this service do not add up so their belligerent stance is obviously to hide another agenda.[/p][/quote]YES YES YES These things can work, with a light supervisory touch. And I should be on the hiring panel. Just saying. I would hire myself then as a relief driver. I have files, photos, videos, know most of the players, am retired, live in Ringwood, have done the retrired diy thing, drove the train in the 70's and more, but am no leader or businessman, I knew people who would hold the reins lightly, maybe even run trains to Poole if it was really the thing to do....Roger Slater but he died sadly...he was employed by a development agency to revive companies, and even offered me all my start up costs for msbnews as an incentive. He would carry the torch for Joyce and stand by her. He would understand the attraction of the past..one he shared with my and my father;s generation. Mind you I met someone ...no that is sailing Club gossip...I do know he was a Metal Box executive and they paid for him to travel Concorde as his time and skills were so valued, yet he was happiest watching the train pass his Hut 216 window, and wondering if Pete the driver waving from below. would come good for one of his beautiful daughters. It is better run now. The drivers concentrate more on the job. There are many people suited to helping the train along. I worked for 30 years in the local college library and everyone can know me from then, since and all the writing i do now,. This feeds off a lifetime of Noddying in my mind which I would like to revisit under proper supervision of course, yes, use what I have. I just need a car again. And a 360 degree permit to work, from the real drivers now who have raised the standard since my idea of making every journey a "perfect one". see http://www.msbnews.c o.uk/archives/hht2p1 .html It was a long time ago and matters are now run by a woman. I understand she has now made every journey a perfect one. Capiche? I always used to get all excited after the train and needed the pacification the train gave me. And it would stop me getting into trouble as i have see www.about.me/timoxyl ene.barbabutanoll Actually that is more important but I would like to add my name to the hundreds Joyce has in three books of wannabe drivers . Tim Baber
  • Score: -1

10:47pm Thu 20 Mar 14

shoppingnoodles says...

I have received another email from the Council giving the £45k figure again. No explanation if this is net or gross profit.

I quite agree with the person who felt that the figures simply do not add up. I did a very quick Google search for some facts (apologies if hence they are approximate) and around a million people visit the head each year. An adult single journey cost £1.20, child 60p. Lets assume that all of the journeys are made by adults; £45k divided by £1.20 is 37500 journeys. The average UK PSV driver earns approx £19k and they probably need to employ at least 2. Another 31667 journeys. Almost 70000 journeys before we get onto the other costs. The drivers will require pensions, benefits and employers NI contributions. There will be insurance, maintenance, H&S checks, fuel, ticketing, signage, the cost of the trains/depreciation etc etc.

So are the council suggesting that every single visitor to the Head will ride the train? Or can they just not add up......a bit like when they built the surf reef?
I have received another email from the Council giving the £45k figure again. No explanation if this is net or gross profit. I quite agree with the person who felt that the figures simply do not add up. I did a very quick Google search for some facts (apologies if hence they are approximate) and around a million people visit the head each year. An adult single journey cost £1.20, child 60p. Lets assume that all of the journeys are made by adults; £45k divided by £1.20 is 37500 journeys. The average UK PSV driver earns approx £19k and they probably need to employ at least 2. Another 31667 journeys. Almost 70000 journeys before we get onto the other costs. The drivers will require pensions, benefits and employers NI contributions. There will be insurance, maintenance, H&S checks, fuel, ticketing, signage, the cost of the trains/depreciation etc etc. So are the council suggesting that every single visitor to the Head will ride the train? Or can they just not add up......a bit like when they built the surf reef? shoppingnoodles
  • Score: 2

12:36am Fri 21 Mar 14

Archiebean says...

Blobbb wrote:
Hengistbury Head is one of my favourite spots in this area to take my dog for a good walk.The atmosphere seems very relaxed and far away from the hustle and bustle of day to day life.A sort of haven in this this mad world we live in.
The mere fact it is serviced by the Noddy train adds to its charm. My dog and I came back on the train to the car park last week after a long walk.What a pleasure to sit in the old open carriage with like minded dog lovers and others.
This area does not need larger trains or timetables.That is the beauty of a visit here.Time does not matter.You just wait patiently at the stop for the next train !! No clock watching as we do the rest of our lives.please save the Noddy train !!!
I couldn't agree more. I'm not fighting this because I'm politically motivated. I'm fighting it, as I suspect most people are because I love the low key nature of the service that is wonderfully quirky and just blend in so beautifully with the area. No I'm not naturally a political activist but the best reason for getting involved in politics in the truest sense of the word is because you believe passionately and I passionately believe that a bad decision has been made here, a decision that I am prepared to stand up against and carry on protesting against. So what do we do next? Post your ideas, arrange dates etc to show that the opinion of nearly 20,000 people can not be just swept under the wheels of a glamour train! Please post ideas and let's arrange the next step.
[quote][p][bold]Blobbb[/bold] wrote: Hengistbury Head is one of my favourite spots in this area to take my dog for a good walk.The atmosphere seems very relaxed and far away from the hustle and bustle of day to day life.A sort of haven in this this mad world we live in. The mere fact it is serviced by the Noddy train adds to its charm. My dog and I came back on the train to the car park last week after a long walk.What a pleasure to sit in the old open carriage with like minded dog lovers and others. This area does not need larger trains or timetables.That is the beauty of a visit here.Time does not matter.You just wait patiently at the stop for the next train !! No clock watching as we do the rest of our lives.please save the Noddy train !!![/p][/quote]I couldn't agree more. I'm not fighting this because I'm politically motivated. I'm fighting it, as I suspect most people are because I love the low key nature of the service that is wonderfully quirky and just blend in so beautifully with the area. No I'm not naturally a political activist but the best reason for getting involved in politics in the truest sense of the word is because you believe passionately and I passionately believe that a bad decision has been made here, a decision that I am prepared to stand up against and carry on protesting against. So what do we do next? Post your ideas, arrange dates etc to show that the opinion of nearly 20,000 people can not be just swept under the wheels of a glamour train! Please post ideas and let's arrange the next step. Archiebean
  • Score: 1

10:46am Fri 21 Mar 14

B'mth West says...

The councillors seem united in adopting a " not me guv" approach to this decision .. So may we be told who actually did make it.
The councillors seem united in adopting a " not me guv" approach to this decision .. So may we be told who actually did make it. B'mth West
  • Score: 1

3:50pm Mon 24 Mar 14

Molecatcher says...

I am not a lawyer, but isn''t this the sort of heavy handed decision making that a Judicial Review is for? The council have not put out an invitation to tender (no pun intended) and have 'just decided' because they felt like it, thereby denying someone their living.. It's outrageous.
I am not a lawyer, but isn''t this the sort of heavy handed decision making that a Judicial Review is for? The council have not put out an invitation to tender (no pun intended) and have 'just decided' because they felt like it, thereby denying someone their living.. It's outrageous. Molecatcher
  • Score: 1

4:57pm Mon 24 Mar 14

Molecatcher says...

Apparently, a fee of £60.00 is payable when you lodge your application for permission to apply for Judicial Review. A further £215.00 is payable if you wish to pursue the claim if permission is granted (Civil Proceedings Fees (Amendment) Order 2011). Then the fun starts...
Apparently, a fee of £60.00 is payable when you lodge your application for permission to apply for Judicial Review. A further £215.00 is payable if you wish to pursue the claim if permission is granted (Civil Proceedings Fees (Amendment) Order 2011). Then the fun starts... Molecatcher
  • Score: 1

7:22pm Thu 27 Mar 14

DuncanH says...

JackJohnson wrote:
Deltiologist wrote:
The current service only runs with the polite agreement of other users, (e.g. pedestrians, cyclists) of the road from the Hungry Hiker to the spit. We politely stand by the verge to allow the train to pass by, and often give a cheery wave to the passengers. During the busy summer months, some pedestrians take a little time to move to the side of the road, which slows down the train in several places, most especially where the road is at its narrowest. But why should we move out of the way at all? If all the signatories to the petition took turns in walking in the middle of the road, and the prom, refusing to stand to the side to allow the train to pass, this service would be impossible to operate. We may not be able to challenge the decision, but we can challenge the operation of the service.
How about a mass picnic, in the middle of the path, the day the new service starts? Be good if we could get 15,000 to take part.
Excellent idea, count me in. If the council won't listen to public opinion they will have to take notice of a public demonstration. Tiananmen Square comes to Dorset.
[quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Deltiologist[/bold] wrote: The current service only runs with the polite agreement of other users, (e.g. pedestrians, cyclists) of the road from the Hungry Hiker to the spit. We politely stand by the verge to allow the train to pass by, and often give a cheery wave to the passengers. During the busy summer months, some pedestrians take a little time to move to the side of the road, which slows down the train in several places, most especially where the road is at its narrowest. But why should we move out of the way at all? If all the signatories to the petition took turns in walking in the middle of the road, and the prom, refusing to stand to the side to allow the train to pass, this service would be impossible to operate. We may not be able to challenge the decision, but we can challenge the operation of the service.[/p][/quote]How about a mass picnic, in the middle of the path, the day the new service starts? Be good if we could get 15,000 to take part.[/p][/quote]Excellent idea, count me in. If the council won't listen to public opinion they will have to take notice of a public demonstration. Tiananmen Square comes to Dorset. DuncanH
  • Score: -1

9:06pm Thu 27 Mar 14

JackJohnson says...

DuncanH wrote:
JackJohnson wrote:
Deltiologist wrote:
The current service only runs with the polite agreement of other users, (e.g. pedestrians, cyclists) of the road from the Hungry Hiker to the spit. We politely stand by the verge to allow the train to pass by, and often give a cheery wave to the passengers. During the busy summer months, some pedestrians take a little time to move to the side of the road, which slows down the train in several places, most especially where the road is at its narrowest. But why should we move out of the way at all? If all the signatories to the petition took turns in walking in the middle of the road, and the prom, refusing to stand to the side to allow the train to pass, this service would be impossible to operate. We may not be able to challenge the decision, but we can challenge the operation of the service.
How about a mass picnic, in the middle of the path, the day the new service starts? Be good if we could get 15,000 to take part.
Excellent idea, count me in. If the council won't listen to public opinion they will have to take notice of a public demonstration. Tiananmen Square comes to Dorset.
Perhaps everyone should turn up in fancy dress.

Noddy.
[quote][p][bold]DuncanH[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Deltiologist[/bold] wrote: The current service only runs with the polite agreement of other users, (e.g. pedestrians, cyclists) of the road from the Hungry Hiker to the spit. We politely stand by the verge to allow the train to pass by, and often give a cheery wave to the passengers. During the busy summer months, some pedestrians take a little time to move to the side of the road, which slows down the train in several places, most especially where the road is at its narrowest. But why should we move out of the way at all? If all the signatories to the petition took turns in walking in the middle of the road, and the prom, refusing to stand to the side to allow the train to pass, this service would be impossible to operate. We may not be able to challenge the decision, but we can challenge the operation of the service.[/p][/quote]How about a mass picnic, in the middle of the path, the day the new service starts? Be good if we could get 15,000 to take part.[/p][/quote]Excellent idea, count me in. If the council won't listen to public opinion they will have to take notice of a public demonstration. Tiananmen Square comes to Dorset.[/p][/quote]Perhaps everyone should turn up in fancy dress. Noddy. JackJohnson
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree