Be interesting to see whether members choose to …

Comment posted Waitrose has £325k on table for Tuesday planning hearing – and opposition rolls in by Integrity? Not in the ConDemAll.

Be interesting to see whether members choose to reject the advice given to them by the planning department and the justification for that rejection (should it happen)

Recent comments by Integrity? Not in the ConDemAll

  • 2007 racist sectarian jibe comes back to haunt Argyll & Bute SNP candidate
    You honestly don’t think that every party does this? The hypocrisy by political parties and supporters of them when it comes to social media is ridiculous. an Aberdeen Labour councillor made a very offensive tweet in December and the SNP demanded he be disciplined. labour didn’t do it. Neil Hay makes one and Labour demand he should be disciplined, the SNP don’t do it.

    That is just two examples highlighting the hypocrisy of it but we all know there are stacks of examples out there with every party not just Labour and SNP. Parties should practice what they preach or just shut up. It’s insulting to those people who actually are interested in proper politics, and the differing views, and just flames the fire for those political supporters who are blinkered to their own parties wrong doing whilst desperate to jump on the wrong doing of opposition parties. It’s school play ground behaviour.

  • 2007 racist sectarian jibe comes back to haunt Argyll & Bute SNP candidate
    Iain

    As I sort of said above I do tend to agree – a couple of ill judged comments on a football forum (and I doubt there is anywhere on the internet more full of derogatory remarks than a football forum!) doesn’t really make you a bigot. I am a member of a football forum and I dread to think what I may have said in the past about some rival fans – never with any real malice.

    OK the sectarian element to this is not ideal, especially given the history of trouble it ahs caused in the West of Scotland over the years.

    What I would say is that at least you have directly addressed the issue in your comment. The amount of deflection in some of the other posts is ridiculous, almost as if O’Hara never said it and the whole thing ahs been made up. Until your post not one of the posts from SNP supporters has in anyway addressed the fact he did post these things.

    Machmaolain tries to dilute it by saying that there is nobody in the world who hasn’t posted something they regret but, in the same post has a go at ‘The Stig’s’ post for displaying the same sort of sectarianism that O’Hara has. Either decide it isn’t that big a deal or deal with both sides equally. I

    I do wonder what the reaction would be if a post from eight years ago by say Dugdale making offensive remarks about, for example, Polish people (totally made up before anyone starts googling!). My guess is those trying desperately to deflect from O’Hara’s comments would be all over it like a rash.

  • 2007 racist sectarian jibe comes back to haunt Argyll & Bute SNP candidate
    How has Newsroom brought sectarianism to Scotland? By reporting on another newspapers story about an SNP candidate using derogatory sectarian language?

    Isn’t it the candidate in question who has ‘brought sectarianism’ in?

    What a preposterous position to take.

    If an MSP committed expenses scandal and a paper reported it would the paper be responsible for bringing financial fraud to Scotland?

  • 2007 racist sectarian jibe comes back to haunt Argyll & Bute SNP candidate
    I do have some sympathy for the argument about something said in the past. He made what are pretty stupid comments about 7 years ago. I remember having a discussion on here with…err might have been jnrtick but I could be mistaken, about football chants, especially at England Scotland games.

    Now I was largely of the opinion that most of the chants are mainly banter and people should take them less seriously but I think Jnrtick was of a different opinion (apologies if I am remember this wrong jnrtick – I couldn’t find the thread).

    However the problem O’Hara has is that when you stand for election just about everything you have ever said can be brought up and used against you. there is no point playing the ‘who dug this up’ card as if that person is more guilty than o’Hara is. Every party does it, I recall stuff jim Murphy said when he was in the Scottish Student Labour group being churned out by SNP supporters not that long ago.

    The problem the SNP have here is that they are the party who made this sort of ‘stuff’ illegal. Whilst it wasn’t law when o’Hara made the comments it still doesn’t look particularly good, especially when the SNP have made a lot of noise about being the party of equality and fairness for all.

    Labour rightly withdrew their support of a candidate who is being charged with drink driving. Whilst O’Hara and also Neil Hay have not broken a law in the recent ‘revelations’ I am not sure they can claim to be representing the SNP’s claimed views on equality.

    It is a bit pathetic to see people claiming this is a smear campaign. Smear campaigns are largely based around slander, there is no slander here, none of this is made up. (although I exclude Stig’s post from that as he makes claims which are not substantiated by any evidence)

  • 2007 racist sectarian jibe comes back to haunt Argyll & Bute SNP candidate
    Given that O’Hara has admitted it and apologised for it I am curious as to how you can claim it is baseless!

powered by SEO Super Comments

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • LinkedIn
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Ma.gnolia
  • NewsVine
  • StumbleUpon
  • SphereIt
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • Print

37 Responses to Be interesting to see whether members choose to …

  1. Helensburgh has rejected a supermarket on the pier three times in the past decade. How many more times do you need to hear it?

    That being the case, the rest of your argument falls. I am beginning to think we need a For Helensburgh website, leaving you to concentrate on the old Argyll area where you are clearly better informed.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • It is about For Argyll itself, which in many respects I admire but which does not seem to have much of a clue about Helensburgh.

      This morning at the hearing it was made clear, through various surveys, that thousands were in favour of Waitrose at Colgrain, and that there was a roughly 55-45 split against a pier supermarket.

      Yet For Argyll has consistently claimed the opposite in both cases.

      Today there is a huge attendance of Waitrose supporters and, so far, six objectors have put their heads above the parapet.

      Interestingly, the only person booed this morning was the representative of Helensburgh Retailers Association.

      If I was the editor of For Argyll, at this point I would be questioning the quality of the reporting.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. For Argyll don’t seem to understand my area either. Folk here are still waiting to learn the membership make up of the Easdale Island charity, Eilean Eisdeal, and how the money was spent from the Scottish Gas Green Streets award. For Argyll claimed that this information should be in the public domain – so where is it? We seem to have been forgotten or FA aren’t interested in persuing this further. Perhaps they’re not bothered about the rights of folk here, or is it too political?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Lowry – as you must know, we are a very small team with a huge amount of work to do and we cannot keep absolutely on top of everything.

      We haven’t forgotten about this matter and we will be pursuing it.

      You gave us a smile at the suggestion that this – or anything – might be ‘too political’ for us. Hardly our MO.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Copied from URTV’s Facebook page:

    Final count is 693 letters of support to the council for Waitrose and 137 letters against, including a petition. There were also 7 miscellaneous letters.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Same source again – URTV:

    The Council Planning Department and Waitrose have both spoken. The Planning Department say that the effects on the town centre could have been grossly underestimated by Waitrose’s retail impact survey and that they are maintaining that they recommend refusal of the application.

    Waitrose still believe that the effects on the town centre will be negligible and they can mitigate them. Waitrose spokesperson, Martin Gorman, received a big round of applause for saying Helensburgh is crying out for a good quality food store.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. I could be wrong. But I think they made an exception for Henry Bros at Colgrain, which was greenbelt outwith the local development plan. That seemed strange at the time. Probably a large brown envelope involved there.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. From URTV again:

    ‎30 pro Waitrose representatives have spoken, including Councillor Vivien Dance and Community Councilman Nigel Harman. Now it’s over to the objectors.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. We cope with bin collections once a week (or even fortnightly) so how about fancy supermarket visits once a week? – a Waitrose on a seagoing barge, serving the west coast – say from Helensburgh to Fort William, stopping off at Dunoon, Rothesay, Campbeltown, Oban, Fort William – and maybe Tobermory and Port Ellen alternate weeks. Just dreaming. At Helensburgh it would tie up at the pier, of course. The supermarket aisles would be cushioned with giant airbags to keep everything shipshape on passage, and maybe even giant gimbals would be effective.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. Bruce Marshall has stated that he will support the application if a competent amendment can be brought forward. David Kinniburgh has stated that he will be doing the same. Robin Currie has stated that he hopes the application will be approved but the mitigation is insufficient. He is looking for an additional £420k in mitigation for various items. Neil McKay also looking to support it if an amendment can be put together but needs more mitigation.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. Alex McNaughton has also confirmed his support along with Gordon Chalmers. It is now clear that it will be approved if a competent motion / amendment can be put together.
    Cllr McAlister has also indicated support along with Cllr Devon, Cllr McMillan and Cllr McQueen.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. Pingback: Argyll News: RIP Helensburgh town centre: Waitrose out of town location approved | For Argyll

  11. A long hot day, but full marks to the Helensburgh area public for their active participation.

    The right result too, so long as Waitrose are not put off by the vastly increased ‘mitigation payment’.

    On a wider stage, Government should be looking at how such payments, which are pure and simple bribery, could be regulated.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • I thought ‘mitigation’ in the context of a supermarket proposal meant meeting the cost of any extra roadworks, pedestrian crossings etc made necessary by the extra traffic generated by the development. I’d like to know if some councillors took a more elastic view of the meaning of the word.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. I’m sure they won’t be put off by the mitigation payment. In all probability there will be negotiations over the purchase price between drum & waitrose. The application was made under two names – Waitrose & Wandering Wild (aka drum). It is highly likely that there is an agreement between drum and waitrose, where waitrose purchase the land subject to planning approval. This allows them to attach caveats re planning gain / mitigation payments. It will probably be drum who take a hit on the price. They’ll be aware that without planning approval their land is worthless. I actually think planning gain is a good thing. Just as long as it reaches the intended parties and not the council coffers, which sadly often happens.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. I’d like to see the money used to directly improve the retailers units / frontages. I’ve attached a link to the merchant city initiative below, which completely transformed that area.
    http://glasgowmerchantcity.net/regeneration.html
    I’m pleased Waitrose got their approval. Had Waitrose been rejected, then all that would have happened is a continuation of the current decline of the town centre. That decline is due to the apathy of a lot of shop keepers. Either the shopkeepers take this opportunity to get their fair share of mitigation money to improve the service that they provide. Or they sell up and allow the next generation of shopkeepers to take over. I’m sure like me, the majority of Helensburgh shoppers do not want to soley shop in Waitrose. To me the Waitrose development has always been about a high end outlet recognising the potential and wanting to invest in our town, which will hopefully be a catalyst for further investment in the town centre.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


All the latest comments (including yours) straight to your mailbox, everyday! Click here to subscribe.