Hengistbury Head revamp incurred £135k ‘unforeseen costs’ over building’s re-thatch

Bournemouth Echo: BIG SPEND: TV presenter Chris Packham and the Mayor of Bournemouth Cllr Rodney Cooper open the new Hengistbury Head Visitor Centre BIG SPEND: TV presenter Chris Packham and the Mayor of Bournemouth Cllr Rodney Cooper open the new Hengistbury Head Visitor Centre

A PROJECT to build the new Hengistbury Head visitor centre incurred unforeseen costs of £135,600, a Freedom of Information request has revealed.

The scheme ran over budget because the council decided to completely re-thatch the building to save costs and disruption in the long-term. This cost an additional £54,000 and there was an extra £81,600 in additional contractual instructions.

These extra costs were met from service unit budgets and meant the total budget increased to £1,279,400 and the total spend was £1,282,000. The Hengistbury Head visitor centre opened earlier this year and there was a formal celebration with wildlife expert Chris Packham in April.

At around this time, Bournemouth council announced it planned to bring the privately-run land train service in-house, sparking speculation this was to compensate for an overspend on the visitor centre. Bournemouth council recently reversed this decision and gave the current operators a new three-year contract.

Michael Rowland, parks development manager, said: “Since the new visitor centre opened last December it has been a great success with more than 50,000 visitors coming to the centre to learn about the area’s rich heritage.

“In order to invest in this historic building a complete re-thatching was carried out, instead of repairing the existing thatch which was originally intended. This came at an additional cost but will ensure further costs and disruption are avoided in the long term. With the summer season upon us I would encourage the public to come and enjoy this fantastic resource at this important historic site.”

Comments (29)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:53am Wed 28 May 14

Collerby says...

Maybe if the council updated the visitor centre site which says 'due to open in late summer 2013' they would get more visitors
Maybe if the council updated the visitor centre site which says 'due to open in late summer 2013' they would get more visitors Collerby
  • Score: 13

7:46am Wed 28 May 14

PUZZLED ONE says...

Article says 'there was an extra £81,600 in additional contractual instructions'.
Amazing, it cost £81,600 to say 'Re-thatch the roof' instead of 'Repair the roof as necessary'.
I wish that I could earn at that rate!
Article says 'there was an extra £81,600 in additional contractual instructions'. Amazing, it cost £81,600 to say 'Re-thatch the roof' instead of 'Repair the roof as necessary'. I wish that I could earn at that rate! PUZZLED ONE
  • Score: 8

7:50am Wed 28 May 14

skydriver says...

What does the land train reversal decision have to do with yet another overspend by the council. Or is it so the extra cash that's been spent doesn't appear to be as bad as it is.
I think this amount of cash could have been better spent on more deserving areas .
Did I not see that some of this money had been given by the National Lottery. So it's not ALL come from the council.
What does the land train reversal decision have to do with yet another overspend by the council. Or is it so the extra cash that's been spent doesn't appear to be as bad as it is. I think this amount of cash could have been better spent on more deserving areas . Did I not see that some of this money had been given by the National Lottery. So it's not ALL come from the council. skydriver
  • Score: 5

8:50am Wed 28 May 14

G from Kinson says...

The question has to be asked as to how the Parks & Countryside are going to now fund maintaining the rest of their nature reserves bearing in mind the overspend!
The question has to be asked as to how the Parks & Countryside are going to now fund maintaining the rest of their nature reserves bearing in mind the overspend! G from Kinson
  • Score: 4

9:25am Wed 28 May 14

Hessenford says...

With austerity upon us for some years to come I don't see and justification in spending over one million pounds on a visitor centre on barren wasteland when there are many more deserving projects this amount of money could have been spent on.
With austerity upon us for some years to come I don't see and justification in spending over one million pounds on a visitor centre on barren wasteland when there are many more deserving projects this amount of money could have been spent on. Hessenford
  • Score: -2

9:54am Wed 28 May 14

nickynoodah says...

I travelled from Derbyshire to visit well worth the visit the raised wildlife pond was my favourite teeming with dozens of living creatures
also the benches carved out of logs magnificent and so comfy you know
best place I been for ages.
worth every penny spent.
I travelled from Derbyshire to visit well worth the visit the raised wildlife pond was my favourite teeming with dozens of living creatures also the benches carved out of logs magnificent and so comfy you know best place I been for ages. worth every penny spent. nickynoodah
  • Score: 8

10:00am Wed 28 May 14

askquestion says...

could someone tell us what Chris Packham was paid to open this centre ? we do have other important nature reserves in this town, that need money spent on them. how did the council intend they would get any money back from this vast ovr spend on this centre ?
could someone tell us what Chris Packham was paid to open this centre ? we do have other important nature reserves in this town, that need money spent on them. how did the council intend they would get any money back from this vast ovr spend on this centre ? askquestion
  • Score: 0

10:11am Wed 28 May 14

askquestion says...

nicky. its great that you travelled from derbyshire to visit this centre. did you get a chance to visit any of the other s.s.s i. sites at all ? from what i havesen of the shop at Hengistbury, its very expensive stuff that i would suggest can be bought at any N/T or RSPB shop.

the facts are that this council have a history of over spending on projects that cost the locals a smal fortune. this one of those !

where do get a return for this centre.? not even a tea shop !
nicky. its great that you travelled from derbyshire to visit this centre. did you get a chance to visit any of the other s.s.s i. sites at all ? from what i havesen of the shop at Hengistbury, its very expensive stuff that i would suggest can be bought at any N/T or RSPB shop. the facts are that this council have a history of over spending on projects that cost the locals a smal fortune. this one of those ! where do get a return for this centre.? not even a tea shop ! askquestion
  • Score: 2

10:26am Wed 28 May 14

High Treason says...

askquestion wrote:
could someone tell us what Chris Packham was paid to open this centre ? we do have other important nature reserves in this town, that need money spent on them. how did the council intend they would get any money back from this vast ovr spend on this centre ?
To true. Stour Valley is not accessible from the underpass at Whitelegg Way for months in the winter. You can walk along the riverbank if you wade through 18" plus of water to get there. It never used to be like this but apparently a drainage pipe is blocked and needs replacing. No money or no interest because the council only goes for prestige projects.
[quote][p][bold]askquestion[/bold] wrote: could someone tell us what Chris Packham was paid to open this centre ? we do have other important nature reserves in this town, that need money spent on them. how did the council intend they would get any money back from this vast ovr spend on this centre ?[/p][/quote]To true. Stour Valley is not accessible from the underpass at Whitelegg Way for months in the winter. You can walk along the riverbank if you wade through 18" plus of water to get there. It never used to be like this but apparently a drainage pipe is blocked and needs replacing. No money or no interest because the council only goes for prestige projects. High Treason
  • Score: 2

10:28am Wed 28 May 14

G from Kinson says...

askquestion wrote:
could someone tell us what Chris Packham was paid to open this centre ? we do have other important nature reserves in this town, that need money spent on them. how did the council intend they would get any money back from this vast ovr spend on this centre ?
Good point about the fee for Chris Packham.I have asked the Echo if the info is available under FOI
[quote][p][bold]askquestion[/bold] wrote: could someone tell us what Chris Packham was paid to open this centre ? we do have other important nature reserves in this town, that need money spent on them. how did the council intend they would get any money back from this vast ovr spend on this centre ?[/p][/quote]Good point about the fee for Chris Packham.I have asked the Echo if the info is available under FOI G from Kinson
  • Score: 2

10:33am Wed 28 May 14

MikeGB says...

I am not condoning over spends or poor financial management, but the centre is excellent and for those with a little interest in history or the natural world it is a valuable asset. Please let us remember that education continues through life for people with the desire to learn. The fact that so many would prefer money spent on cultural enrichment to be directed at those who feel society owes them support because they have squandered their own opportunities should not mean the rest of us should be denied something that has already provided so much pleasure to many locals and visitors.
I am not condoning over spends or poor financial management, but the centre is excellent and for those with a little interest in history or the natural world it is a valuable asset. Please let us remember that education continues through life for people with the desire to learn. The fact that so many would prefer money spent on cultural enrichment to be directed at those who feel society owes them support because they have squandered their own opportunities should not mean the rest of us should be denied something that has already provided so much pleasure to many locals and visitors. MikeGB
  • Score: 0

10:37am Wed 28 May 14

G from Kinson says...

High Treason wrote:
askquestion wrote:
could someone tell us what Chris Packham was paid to open this centre ? we do have other important nature reserves in this town, that need money spent on them. how did the council intend they would get any money back from this vast ovr spend on this centre ?
To true. Stour Valley is not accessible from the underpass at Whitelegg Way for months in the winter. You can walk along the riverbank if you wade through 18" plus of water to get there. It never used to be like this but apparently a drainage pipe is blocked and needs replacing. No money or no interest because the council only goes for prestige projects.
The staff also spent months digging a trench for a cattle trough at Stour Valley which should have been done by contractors thus leaving them to concentrate on the proper management!
[quote][p][bold]High Treason[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]askquestion[/bold] wrote: could someone tell us what Chris Packham was paid to open this centre ? we do have other important nature reserves in this town, that need money spent on them. how did the council intend they would get any money back from this vast ovr spend on this centre ?[/p][/quote]To true. Stour Valley is not accessible from the underpass at Whitelegg Way for months in the winter. You can walk along the riverbank if you wade through 18" plus of water to get there. It never used to be like this but apparently a drainage pipe is blocked and needs replacing. No money or no interest because the council only goes for prestige projects.[/p][/quote]The staff also spent months digging a trench for a cattle trough at Stour Valley which should have been done by contractors thus leaving them to concentrate on the proper management! G from Kinson
  • Score: 2

10:52am Wed 28 May 14

whataboutthat says...

H Head ruined by dogdodo and sheer numbers of pseudo ramblers. SSSI's should never become developed venues in their own right. If they do they die. End of.
H Head ruined by dogdodo and sheer numbers of pseudo ramblers. SSSI's should never become developed venues in their own right. If they do they die. End of. whataboutthat
  • Score: 0

10:52am Wed 28 May 14

eyesropen says...

The point you are missing is that the massive overspend has been paid for out of council funds. We all know this poorly costed project was funded by the lottery and other sources. I hope this is being investigated and any mismanagement not being swept under the carpet.
The point you are missing is that the massive overspend has been paid for out of council funds. We all know this poorly costed project was funded by the lottery and other sources. I hope this is being investigated and any mismanagement not being swept under the carpet. eyesropen
  • Score: 2

11:23am Wed 28 May 14

BmthNewshound says...

Whats another £135k when you consider the £millions Beesley has squandered on his many vanity projects ?
.
Because there is no effective opposition on Bournemouth Council Beesley and his chums can pretty much do what they want and spend as much as they want secure in the knowledge that they won't be challenged.
Whats another £135k when you consider the £millions Beesley has squandered on his many vanity projects ? . Because there is no effective opposition on Bournemouth Council Beesley and his chums can pretty much do what they want and spend as much as they want secure in the knowledge that they won't be challenged. BmthNewshound
  • Score: 3

11:50am Wed 28 May 14

Redgolfer says...

BmthNewshound wrote:
Whats another £135k when you consider the £millions Beesley has squandered on his many vanity projects ?
.
Because there is no effective opposition on Bournemouth Council Beesley and his chums can pretty much do what they want and spend as much as they want secure in the knowledge that they won't be challenged.
After last weeks election, I am not so sure on Beasley position, if everybody votes UKIP as last week, then all those noses in troughs could be out on their ear and about time as anybody WILL not be as bad as this lot ???
[quote][p][bold]BmthNewshound[/bold] wrote: Whats another £135k when you consider the £millions Beesley has squandered on his many vanity projects ? . Because there is no effective opposition on Bournemouth Council Beesley and his chums can pretty much do what they want and spend as much as they want secure in the knowledge that they won't be challenged.[/p][/quote]After last weeks election, I am not so sure on Beasley position, if everybody votes UKIP as last week, then all those noses in troughs could be out on their ear and about time as anybody WILL not be as bad as this lot ??? Redgolfer
  • Score: 1

12:28pm Wed 28 May 14

eyesropen says...

Redgolfer wrote:
BmthNewshound wrote:
Whats another £135k when you consider the £millions Beesley has squandered on his many vanity projects ?
.
Because there is no effective opposition on Bournemouth Council Beesley and his chums can pretty much do what they want and spend as much as they want secure in the knowledge that they won't be challenged.
After last weeks election, I am not so sure on Beasley position, if everybody votes UKIP as last week, then all those noses in troughs could be out on their ear and about time as anybody WILL not be as bad as this lot ???
Hell will freeze over before I vote UKIP, and yes they would be even worse difficult as it is to believe. Only independent or green councillors are likely to not have snouts in troughs. Anyway this cork up is down to incompetence much lower down the pecking order than Beesley.
[quote][p][bold]Redgolfer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BmthNewshound[/bold] wrote: Whats another £135k when you consider the £millions Beesley has squandered on his many vanity projects ? . Because there is no effective opposition on Bournemouth Council Beesley and his chums can pretty much do what they want and spend as much as they want secure in the knowledge that they won't be challenged.[/p][/quote]After last weeks election, I am not so sure on Beasley position, if everybody votes UKIP as last week, then all those noses in troughs could be out on their ear and about time as anybody WILL not be as bad as this lot ???[/p][/quote]Hell will freeze over before I vote UKIP, and yes they would be even worse difficult as it is to believe. Only independent or green councillors are likely to not have snouts in troughs. Anyway this cork up is down to incompetence much lower down the pecking order than Beesley. eyesropen
  • Score: 0

1:42pm Wed 28 May 14

muscliffman says...

eyesropen wrote:
Redgolfer wrote:
BmthNewshound wrote:
Whats another £135k when you consider the £millions Beesley has squandered on his many vanity projects ?
.
Because there is no effective opposition on Bournemouth Council Beesley and his chums can pretty much do what they want and spend as much as they want secure in the knowledge that they won't be challenged.
After last weeks election, I am not so sure on Beasley position, if everybody votes UKIP as last week, then all those noses in troughs could be out on their ear and about time as anybody WILL not be as bad as this lot ???
Hell will freeze over before I vote UKIP, and yes they would be even worse difficult as it is to believe. Only independent or green councillors are likely to not have snouts in troughs. Anyway this cork up is down to incompetence much lower down the pecking order than Beesley.
You say "Only independent or green councillors are likely to not have snouts in troughs."

A fascinating deduction, based upon what evidence?
[quote][p][bold]eyesropen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Redgolfer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BmthNewshound[/bold] wrote: Whats another £135k when you consider the £millions Beesley has squandered on his many vanity projects ? . Because there is no effective opposition on Bournemouth Council Beesley and his chums can pretty much do what they want and spend as much as they want secure in the knowledge that they won't be challenged.[/p][/quote]After last weeks election, I am not so sure on Beasley position, if everybody votes UKIP as last week, then all those noses in troughs could be out on their ear and about time as anybody WILL not be as bad as this lot ???[/p][/quote]Hell will freeze over before I vote UKIP, and yes they would be even worse difficult as it is to believe. Only independent or green councillors are likely to not have snouts in troughs. Anyway this cork up is down to incompetence much lower down the pecking order than Beesley.[/p][/quote]You say "Only independent or green councillors are likely to not have snouts in troughs." A fascinating deduction, based upon what evidence? muscliffman
  • Score: 4

1:49pm Wed 28 May 14

itsneverblackorwhite says...

When you think how many people this virtually free open space and nature reserve all year round I think that the costs are very proportionate especially when you consider the many white elephants and money wasting projects in other areas of the Borough!
When you think how many people this virtually free open space and nature reserve all year round I think that the costs are very proportionate especially when you consider the many white elephants and money wasting projects in other areas of the Borough! itsneverblackorwhite
  • Score: 1

2:10pm Wed 28 May 14

Bob49 says...

Yes, it is not as if folk were ever visiting the area. Just as the sign along the Spur Road which has helped so many who were totally unaware that they were driving onto Bournemouth.

Sadly, the reality is that this is just another waste of money that has been driven by 'free money' grants. As with the nonsensical bike lanes randomly dumped along Christchurch Road (and elsewhere. (Now rusting) scrap iron dumped along Sea Road and camouflage netting strung out along Castle Lane.

There is virtually no co ordinated thinking behind any of this, merely ' a child with some money shoved into a sweetshop' mentality being told to spend it all in one go.
Yes, it is not as if folk were ever visiting the area. Just as the sign along the Spur Road which has helped so many who were totally unaware that they were driving onto Bournemouth. Sadly, the reality is that this is just another waste of money that has been driven by 'free money' grants. As with the nonsensical bike lanes randomly dumped along Christchurch Road (and elsewhere. (Now rusting) scrap iron dumped along Sea Road and camouflage netting strung out along Castle Lane. There is virtually no co ordinated thinking behind any of this, merely ' a child with some money shoved into a sweetshop' mentality being told to spend it all in one go. Bob49
  • Score: -2

2:45pm Wed 28 May 14

xbar48 says...

Collerby wrote:
Maybe if the council updated the visitor centre site which says 'due to open in late summer 2013' they would get more visitors
I am a volunteer at the Centre. We have many visitors, and I have yet to hear an adverse comment from any of them. The official web site for the Visitor Centre is http://www.visitheng
istburyhead.co.uk . This gives details of current events. Perhaps you have been looking at an unofficial one. I hope you will come and visit us if you haven't done so already. Even if you have, I think you would find something more worth seeing on a repeat visit.
[quote][p][bold]Collerby[/bold] wrote: Maybe if the council updated the visitor centre site which says 'due to open in late summer 2013' they would get more visitors[/p][/quote]I am a volunteer at the Centre. We have many visitors, and I have yet to hear an adverse comment from any of them. The official web site for the Visitor Centre is http://www.visitheng istburyhead.co.uk . This gives details of current events. Perhaps you have been looking at an unofficial one. I hope you will come and visit us if you haven't done so already. Even if you have, I think you would find something more worth seeing on a repeat visit. xbar48
  • Score: 3

3:14pm Wed 28 May 14

nickynoodah says...

askquestion wrote:
nicky. its great that you travelled from derbyshire to visit this centre. did you get a chance to visit any of the other s.s.s i. sites at all ? from what i havesen of the shop at Hengistbury, its very expensive stuff that i would suggest can be bought at any N/T or RSPB shop.

the facts are that this council have a history of over spending on projects that cost the locals a smal fortune. this one of those !

where do get a return for this centre.? not even a tea shop !
Yes I've visited sites all-over the world you know
I have a few caravans in Dorset and Devon that I rent out
I spend months on end down there you know
there's a place a short walk from the new centre for refreshments you know
its got an upstairs you can see for miles
I could see the puffins roosting on the I O W.
also free rides on a little wooden train
its good nice friendly staff
waving to the passengers on the train was Mr Noodah.
[quote][p][bold]askquestion[/bold] wrote: nicky. its great that you travelled from derbyshire to visit this centre. did you get a chance to visit any of the other s.s.s i. sites at all ? from what i havesen of the shop at Hengistbury, its very expensive stuff that i would suggest can be bought at any N/T or RSPB shop. the facts are that this council have a history of over spending on projects that cost the locals a smal fortune. this one of those ! where do get a return for this centre.? not even a tea shop ![/p][/quote]Yes I've visited sites all-over the world you know I have a few caravans in Dorset and Devon that I rent out I spend months on end down there you know there's a place a short walk from the new centre for refreshments you know its got an upstairs you can see for miles I could see the puffins roosting on the I O W. also free rides on a little wooden train its good nice friendly staff waving to the passengers on the train was Mr Noodah. nickynoodah
  • Score: -2

4:28pm Wed 28 May 14

G from Kinson says...

eyesropen wrote:
The point you are missing is that the massive overspend has been paid for out of council funds. We all know this poorly costed project was funded by the lottery and other sources. I hope this is being investigated and any mismanagement not being swept under the carpet.
The current management believe that this centre will be a money spinner long term.Trouble is that in the short term the other 9 nature reserves in Bournemouth will suffer! Two staff members in north Bournemouth have left recently with only one left to manage five reserves!
Madness!
Problem is that no one want's to be accountable to the taxpayers!
[quote][p][bold]eyesropen[/bold] wrote: The point you are missing is that the massive overspend has been paid for out of council funds. We all know this poorly costed project was funded by the lottery and other sources. I hope this is being investigated and any mismanagement not being swept under the carpet.[/p][/quote]The current management believe that this centre will be a money spinner long term.Trouble is that in the short term the other 9 nature reserves in Bournemouth will suffer! Two staff members in north Bournemouth have left recently with only one left to manage five reserves! Madness! Problem is that no one want's to be accountable to the taxpayers! G from Kinson
  • Score: 0

4:32pm Wed 28 May 14

Lord Spring says...

G from Kinson wrote:
askquestion wrote:
could someone tell us what Chris Packham was paid to open this centre ? we do have other important nature reserves in this town, that need money spent on them. how did the council intend they would get any money back from this vast ovr spend on this centre ?
Good point about the fee for Chris Packham.I have asked the Echo if the info is available under FOI
Ladbroke's are offering 11-10 on that it was £1000.
[quote][p][bold]G from Kinson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]askquestion[/bold] wrote: could someone tell us what Chris Packham was paid to open this centre ? we do have other important nature reserves in this town, that need money spent on them. how did the council intend they would get any money back from this vast ovr spend on this centre ?[/p][/quote]Good point about the fee for Chris Packham.I have asked the Echo if the info is available under FOI[/p][/quote]Ladbroke's are offering 11-10 on that it was £1000. Lord Spring
  • Score: 0

9:34pm Wed 28 May 14

eyesropen says...

I find it hard to believe that 50000 people have visited the centre since it opened. Even if it had been open 6 months, which it hasn't yet, that would be an average of 2083 per week, and there were a lot of extremely wet weeks when the only people out were a few hardy dog walkers. To make any sort of money they will have to charge visiting groups a fair bit and schools can't afford that. They don't have the staff to be running the number of paying events that would make any significant income. The shop will be lucky to cover running costs. Hence they wanted the train to have a guaranteed income, and of course help cover their overspend. Visitor Centres are a good thing but they are not money spinners unless they are huge concerns with associated recreational activities such as are found at country parks like Moors Valley. On nature reserves they are for educating people about the wildlife that is being protected there.
I find it hard to believe that 50000 people have visited the centre since it opened. Even if it had been open 6 months, which it hasn't yet, that would be an average of 2083 per week, and there were a lot of extremely wet weeks when the only people out were a few hardy dog walkers. To make any sort of money they will have to charge visiting groups a fair bit and schools can't afford that. They don't have the staff to be running the number of paying events that would make any significant income. The shop will be lucky to cover running costs. Hence they wanted the train to have a guaranteed income, and of course help cover their overspend. Visitor Centres are a good thing but they are not money spinners unless they are huge concerns with associated recreational activities such as are found at country parks like Moors Valley. On nature reserves they are for educating people about the wildlife that is being protected there. eyesropen
  • Score: 0

9:57pm Wed 28 May 14

eyesropen says...

I find it incredible that thatching the roof wasn't included in the original funding bid. It was obvious to anyone that it was due for re-thatching. What's the point of budgeting for expensive displays if you don't have a sound roof. I heard that the power supply to the centre had to be upgraded to run it. Surely they checked that before submitting their plans...or did they?
I find it incredible that thatching the roof wasn't included in the original funding bid. It was obvious to anyone that it was due for re-thatching. What's the point of budgeting for expensive displays if you don't have a sound roof. I heard that the power supply to the centre had to be upgraded to run it. Surely they checked that before submitting their plans...or did they? eyesropen
  • Score: 3

8:40am Thu 29 May 14

G from Kinson says...

eyesropen wrote:
I find it incredible that thatching the roof wasn't included in the original funding bid. It was obvious to anyone that it was due for re-thatching. What's the point of budgeting for expensive displays if you don't have a sound roof. I heard that the power supply to the centre had to be upgraded to run it. Surely they checked that before submitting their plans...or did they?
Just shows the poor management from all concerned!
Problem is, who will listen to our concerns?
[quote][p][bold]eyesropen[/bold] wrote: I find it incredible that thatching the roof wasn't included in the original funding bid. It was obvious to anyone that it was due for re-thatching. What's the point of budgeting for expensive displays if you don't have a sound roof. I heard that the power supply to the centre had to be upgraded to run it. Surely they checked that before submitting their plans...or did they?[/p][/quote]Just shows the poor management from all concerned! Problem is, who will listen to our concerns? G from Kinson
  • Score: 0

11:18am Thu 29 May 14

eyesropen says...

muscliffman wrote:
eyesropen wrote:
Redgolfer wrote:
BmthNewshound wrote:
Whats another £135k when you consider the £millions Beesley has squandered on his many vanity projects ?
.
Because there is no effective opposition on Bournemouth Council Beesley and his chums can pretty much do what they want and spend as much as they want secure in the knowledge that they won't be challenged.
After last weeks election, I am not so sure on Beasley position, if everybody votes UKIP as last week, then all those noses in troughs could be out on their ear and about time as anybody WILL not be as bad as this lot ???
Hell will freeze over before I vote UKIP, and yes they would be even worse difficult as it is to believe. Only independent or green councillors are likely to not have snouts in troughs. Anyway this cork up is down to incompetence much lower down the pecking order than Beesley.
You say "Only independent or green councillors are likely to not have snouts in troughs."

A fascinating deduction, based upon what evidence?
Based on such individuals that I know and based on logic. If you go into politics for personal gain you join a party with some influence surely. In my experience independents and greens tend to do it for more altruistic reasons. That's not to say that all do obviously, there are bad pennies in any group; that's just human nature.
[quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]eyesropen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Redgolfer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BmthNewshound[/bold] wrote: Whats another £135k when you consider the £millions Beesley has squandered on his many vanity projects ? . Because there is no effective opposition on Bournemouth Council Beesley and his chums can pretty much do what they want and spend as much as they want secure in the knowledge that they won't be challenged.[/p][/quote]After last weeks election, I am not so sure on Beasley position, if everybody votes UKIP as last week, then all those noses in troughs could be out on their ear and about time as anybody WILL not be as bad as this lot ???[/p][/quote]Hell will freeze over before I vote UKIP, and yes they would be even worse difficult as it is to believe. Only independent or green councillors are likely to not have snouts in troughs. Anyway this cork up is down to incompetence much lower down the pecking order than Beesley.[/p][/quote]You say "Only independent or green councillors are likely to not have snouts in troughs." A fascinating deduction, based upon what evidence?[/p][/quote]Based on such individuals that I know and based on logic. If you go into politics for personal gain you join a party with some influence surely. In my experience independents and greens tend to do it for more altruistic reasons. That's not to say that all do obviously, there are bad pennies in any group; that's just human nature. eyesropen
  • Score: 1

11:00am Tue 3 Jun 14

G from Kinson says...

G from Kinson wrote:
askquestion wrote:
could someone tell us what Chris Packham was paid to open this centre ? we do have other important nature reserves in this town, that need money spent on them. how did the council intend they would get any money back from this vast ovr spend on this centre ?
Good point about the fee for Chris Packham.I have asked the Echo if the info is available under FOI
Still no response from the Echo!
[quote][p][bold]G from Kinson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]askquestion[/bold] wrote: could someone tell us what Chris Packham was paid to open this centre ? we do have other important nature reserves in this town, that need money spent on them. how did the council intend they would get any money back from this vast ovr spend on this centre ?[/p][/quote]Good point about the fee for Chris Packham.I have asked the Echo if the info is available under FOI[/p][/quote]Still no response from the Echo! G from Kinson
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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