Video: Farm Terrace Allotment owners offered £1,000 to give up pitch

Farm Terrace Allotments: Offer of £1,000 to give up pitch is 'totally out of order' say holders

Farm Terrace Allotments: Offer of £1,000 to give up pitch is 'totally out of order' say holders

First published in News
Last updated
Watford Observer: Photograph of the Author by , Senior Reporter

Farm Terrace Allotment holders say it’s "totally out of order" the council has offered up to £1,000 for them give up their pitches before the result of the judicial review.

Watford Borough Council sent out letters outlining the compensation packages this week.

Currently the future of the controversial site is being considered by judges in the High Court, after the allotment holders challenged the legality of the council taking over the land for the Health Campus.

Richard Hunt said the compensation offer was limited to the end of the month and might expire before the court verdict has been reached.

Mr Hunt said: "They are offering compensation before we have the result of the judicial review.
"I think that’s out of order. I don’t want compensation.

"It feels like they are trying to get us to take it before the judicial review as the time limit is the end of the month.

"If the judicial review goes in our favour it won’t be an issue, I’ll get to keep my allotment."

Mr Hunt, who has held his allotment for 33 years, continued: "It’s totally out of order, the whole thing."

The council compensation offer was touted to the allotment holders in June and exceeds the minimum requirement under law.

Fellow allotment holder Bob Wallace, 72, said the compensation offers were expected.

Mr Wallace, of the Cassiobury estate, said: "We were promised some compensation, but I’m amazed it is £1,000 just for leaving - and not making a fuss I guess.

"There was a condition not to have another allotment for three years. I’ve been at Farm Terrace for 10 years, I don’t think I would want another allotment.

"I would probably take the compensation, but I will wait for the outcome of the judicial review."
Mark Jeffery, spokesman for Watford Borough Council, said: "We advised our Farm Terrace allotment tenants in June 2013, that we would provide a compensation package.

"Under law, an allotment holder whose tenancy is terminated is entitled to compensation.

"The package we have offered our tenants exceeds the minimum requirement under law. 

"We have received a number of requests to either relocate or end tenancies over the last year, which we have been able to accommodate.

"Setting a compensation package allows us to plan and arrange these more cost effectively, as we now have a better idea of people’s preferences."

Mr Jeffery continued: "The Health Campus scheme is vital for Watford. It means new homes, the opportunity to develop the hospital’s facilities, open spaces and jobs for the residents of our borough.

"Our Farm Terrace allotment site is essential in ensuring that the scheme is viable."

Comments (67)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:29pm Thu 4 Sep 14

phil mitchel says...

Offering compensation just prior to the result of the judicial review is wrong on at least two counts. Firstly you could take from it that Watford Council knows it's about to loose the review or if they are set to win why are the council offering to give my money (as a rate payer) away unnecessarily. Secondly the Council could be seen to applying undue and bullying pressure on the allotment holders which is of course something that WBC are all to good at. Lib Dem's need to fight an honest battle, Watford residents deserve much better than the twist way you deal with every issue that it looks like you may loose.
Offering compensation just prior to the result of the judicial review is wrong on at least two counts. Firstly you could take from it that Watford Council knows it's about to loose the review or if they are set to win why are the council offering to give my money (as a rate payer) away unnecessarily. Secondly the Council could be seen to applying undue and bullying pressure on the allotment holders which is of course something that WBC are all to good at. Lib Dem's need to fight an honest battle, Watford residents deserve much better than the twist way you deal with every issue that it looks like you may loose. phil mitchel
  • Score: 11

6:30pm Thu 4 Sep 14

MJ1 says...

If it's got a time limit on it then its not compensatiion; it's an attempted bribe. If allotment holders are entitled to compensation by law, in the even of the Council concreting over the land then there should be not time limit - particularly one that expires before the outcome of the judicial review is known. Dorothy must be getting desparate!
If it's got a time limit on it then its not compensatiion; it's an attempted bribe. If allotment holders are entitled to compensation by law, in the even of the Council concreting over the land then there should be not time limit - particularly one that expires before the outcome of the judicial review is known. Dorothy must be getting desparate! MJ1
  • Score: 21

6:37pm Thu 4 Sep 14

The Rover says...

Hey, that's not their money to give away. That money belongs to us taxpayers! Very poor decision by the Council, almost amounting to admitting they are in the wrong. I hope the plot holders are not tempted to accept and they wait until the outcome of the judicial review.
Hey, that's not their money to give away. That money belongs to us taxpayers! Very poor decision by the Council, almost amounting to admitting they are in the wrong. I hope the plot holders are not tempted to accept and they wait until the outcome of the judicial review. The Rover
  • Score: 23

6:47pm Thu 4 Sep 14

Retlas says...

Make the mayor sweat - she know's the writing is on the wall and likely to lose the judicial review.
Trying to calm the waters before standing for parliament is my guess!
Make the mayor sweat - she know's the writing is on the wall and likely to lose the judicial review. Trying to calm the waters before standing for parliament is my guess! Retlas
  • Score: 17

7:01pm Thu 4 Sep 14

Holywell Voter says...

Bribing people with our money - just how low can the Lib-Dems sin?
Bribing people with our money - just how low can the Lib-Dems sin? Holywell Voter
  • Score: 16

7:13pm Thu 4 Sep 14

Cuetip says...

An inducement, typically in the form of money is a sweetner and by any other name is still a sweetner.

All part of a wearing down process.
An inducement, typically in the form of money is a sweetner and by any other name is still a sweetner. All part of a wearing down process. Cuetip
  • Score: 15

11:01pm Thu 4 Sep 14

HertsPeter says...

What fun to see the Lib Dems running scared. Good luck to the allotment holders. They have refused to be beaten and I really admire them for it.
What fun to see the Lib Dems running scared. Good luck to the allotment holders. They have refused to be beaten and I really admire them for it. HertsPeter
  • Score: 15

11:10pm Thu 4 Sep 14

Andrew1963 says...

Mr Jeffrey says the allotment site is vital to make the scheme viable. This is at odds with what Lib Dem Cllrs have said in public recently. They have said the scheme can and will proceed without the allotments. So who is telling the truth?
Mr Jeffrey says the allotment site is vital to make the scheme viable. This is at odds with what Lib Dem Cllrs have said in public recently. They have said the scheme can and will proceed without the allotments. So who is telling the truth? Andrew1963
  • Score: 12

8:55am Fri 5 Sep 14

BlairWych says...

They should give then the compensation whatever the outcome.
In fact, 5x what they are offering.
They should give then the compensation whatever the outcome. In fact, 5x what they are offering. BlairWych
  • Score: -6

9:33am Fri 5 Sep 14

garston tony says...

It certainly sounds like a bribe to me, plus more wasted money to add to the millions already spent on this mess.

Is there anyway that the council can be investigated over this plan? I mean its not that many years since they built and then shortly after knocked down a leisure centre wasting tens of millions, now they appear to have wasted millions on this project with untold expenditure still to come. Surely these wastes need a thorough examination?
It certainly sounds like a bribe to me, plus more wasted money to add to the millions already spent on this mess. Is there anyway that the council can be investigated over this plan? I mean its not that many years since they built and then shortly after knocked down a leisure centre wasting tens of millions, now they appear to have wasted millions on this project with untold expenditure still to come. Surely these wastes need a thorough examination? garston tony
  • Score: 9

9:52am Fri 5 Sep 14

Phil Cox (UKIP) says...

There are no depths to which the LibDems are not prepared to sink in their quest for power.

What a shame the victims are the people of Watford and our town itself.

I wonder how many of the councillors, from all parties, are property speculators and/or developers. WO, how about investigating this? Our town is under threat.
There are no depths to which the LibDems are not prepared to sink in their quest for power. What a shame the victims are the people of Watford and our town itself. I wonder how many of the councillors, from all parties, are property speculators and/or developers. WO, how about investigating this? Our town is under threat. Phil Cox (UKIP)
  • Score: 1

10:30am Fri 5 Sep 14

garston tony says...

Phil Cox (UKIP) wrote:
There are no depths to which the LibDems are not prepared to sink in their quest for power. What a shame the victims are the people of Watford and our town itself. I wonder how many of the councillors, from all parties, are property speculators and/or developers. WO, how about investigating this? Our town is under threat.
This might be overly mean, but the WO seem more interested in whats happening on TV or just copying and pasting from some twitter feed or other than doing proper investigations
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox (UKIP)[/bold] wrote: There are no depths to which the LibDems are not prepared to sink in their quest for power. What a shame the victims are the people of Watford and our town itself. I wonder how many of the councillors, from all parties, are property speculators and/or developers. WO, how about investigating this? Our town is under threat.[/p][/quote]This might be overly mean, but the WO seem more interested in whats happening on TV or just copying and pasting from some twitter feed or other than doing proper investigations garston tony
  • Score: 4

10:34am Fri 5 Sep 14

Wacko Jacko says...

Two paragraphs the knee jerks above seem to have overlooked:
'Under law, an allotment holder whose tenancy is terminated is entitled to compensation'
and
'The package we have offered our tenants exceeds the minimum requirement under law'
So there's no question of not giving compensation, it is required by law. The only question is how much? It is perfectly reasonable for the Council to offer a more attractive deal to encourage plot holders to leave more quickly. If they wait for the legal decision then it sounds from this article like compensation will be the minimum required under the law.
Yes this is our money, but don't forget the land is ours too, not the plot holders who only rent it, so it is perfectly in order for the democratically elected council to decide what happens to it, as they represent the people of Watford.
Two paragraphs the knee jerks above seem to have overlooked: 'Under law, an allotment holder whose tenancy is terminated is entitled to compensation' and 'The package we have offered our tenants exceeds the minimum requirement under law' So there's no question of not giving compensation, it is required by law. The only question is how much? It is perfectly reasonable for the Council to offer a more attractive deal to encourage plot holders to leave more quickly. If they wait for the legal decision then it sounds from this article like compensation will be the minimum required under the law. Yes this is our money, but don't forget the land is ours too, not the plot holders who only rent it, so it is perfectly in order for the democratically elected council to decide what happens to it, as they represent the people of Watford. Wacko Jacko
  • Score: -5

10:39am Fri 5 Sep 14

Veritas says...

Dotty and that muppet Lewis have lost the Plot!!

What is the reaction from the Terrace Farm legal team ?

Lets get this back on the One show,

can someone confirm that the offer of this disgusting bribe, stipulates
that the recipient cannot take up an allotment for 3 years?

What a mess, The Council are also holding lots of vacant plots for Terrace farm, denying others the use.
We were also told that the dodgy Council claim that all sites are full?

in the mean time they are also spending considerable amounts of money maintaining this vacant plots!!! whilst not getting any rent!!

As the UKIP person mentioned, we need a public enquiry into all these
allegations
Dotty and that muppet Lewis have lost the Plot!! What is the reaction from the Terrace Farm legal team ? Lets get this back on the One show, can someone confirm that the offer of this disgusting bribe, stipulates that the recipient cannot take up an allotment for 3 years? What a mess, The Council are also holding lots of vacant plots for Terrace farm, denying others the use. We were also told that the dodgy Council claim that all sites are full? in the mean time they are also spending considerable amounts of money maintaining this vacant plots!!! whilst not getting any rent!! As the UKIP person mentioned, we need a public enquiry into all these allegations Veritas
  • Score: -4

10:53am Fri 5 Sep 14

Wacko Jacko says...

Veritas and several others have lost the plot. Watford has an over supply of allotment spaces across the borough. There is no waiting list for allotments, in fact there are many lying unused simply because people have lost interest. On the other hand there is a long waiting list for people needing houses in the borough and a shortage of land for development. It doesn't take much imagination to work out that releasing allotment land for housing makes sense.
Veritas and several others have lost the plot. Watford has an over supply of allotment spaces across the borough. There is no waiting list for allotments, in fact there are many lying unused simply because people have lost interest. On the other hand there is a long waiting list for people needing houses in the borough and a shortage of land for development. It doesn't take much imagination to work out that releasing allotment land for housing makes sense. Wacko Jacko
  • Score: -5

11:04am Fri 5 Sep 14

Veritas says...

we wonder if you really believe the crap that you spout!!

new name for you Walter Mitty, you even look like him
we wonder if you really believe the crap that you spout!! new name for you Walter Mitty, you even look like him Veritas
  • Score: 0

11:04am Fri 5 Sep 14

Mike Watford says...

...also it does say that the compensation package was agreed in June 2013 not 2014. And it is something that is a legal requirement.

Also the court case, is about whether the Sectretary of State's decision making process was correct - not whether he made the right decision or whether the council 'is wrong'.
...also it does say that the compensation package was agreed in June 2013 not 2014. And it is something that is a legal requirement. Also the court case, is about whether the Sectretary of State's decision making process was correct - not whether he made the right decision or whether the council 'is wrong'. Mike Watford
  • Score: 6

11:14am Fri 5 Sep 14

Wacko Jacko says...

Mike Watford wrote:
...also it does say that the compensation package was agreed in June 2013 not 2014. And it is something that is a legal requirement.

Also the court case, is about whether the Sectretary of State's decision making process was correct - not whether he made the right decision or whether the council 'is wrong'.
That's a good point, the campaigners seem to assume that the legal decision will overturn the decision, if so they are mistaken. All that is likely to happen is legal opinion telling Pickles whether or not he took the his decision correctly according to his own rules, end of story. The plot holders would be well advised to take the compensation money while it is on offer, if they wait they'll get less and have to leave anyway.
[quote][p][bold]Mike Watford[/bold] wrote: ...also it does say that the compensation package was agreed in June 2013 not 2014. And it is something that is a legal requirement. Also the court case, is about whether the Sectretary of State's decision making process was correct - not whether he made the right decision or whether the council 'is wrong'.[/p][/quote]That's a good point, the campaigners seem to assume that the legal decision will overturn the decision, if so they are mistaken. All that is likely to happen is legal opinion telling Pickles whether or not he took the his decision correctly according to his own rules, end of story. The plot holders would be well advised to take the compensation money while it is on offer, if they wait they'll get less and have to leave anyway. Wacko Jacko
  • Score: 1

11:49am Fri 5 Sep 14

Veritas says...

lets hope the Farm Terrace legal team, take into account all
comments and follow up.

The bald rotund one, don't think you represent the people of Watford,

more like the Dodgy developers, with all your lies and spin.

So what happened to your Health Campus?

Oh, Walter the land is not "your"
lets hope the Farm Terrace legal team, take into account all comments and follow up. The bald rotund one, don't think you represent the people of Watford, more like the Dodgy developers, with all your lies and spin. So what happened to your Health Campus? Oh, Walter the land is not "your" Veritas
  • Score: 0

12:45pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Jimmy The Kid says...

Veritas wrote:
lets hope the Farm Terrace legal team, take into account all
comments and follow up.

The bald rotund one, don't think you represent the people of Watford,

more like the Dodgy developers, with all your lies and spin.

So what happened to your Health Campus?

Oh, Walter the land is not "your"
Ad hominem attacks are the trademark of a person who knows their argument cannot attain victory on its own merit; resorting to petulant and irrelevant personal comments does not help your cause.
[quote][p][bold]Veritas[/bold] wrote: lets hope the Farm Terrace legal team, take into account all comments and follow up. The bald rotund one, don't think you represent the people of Watford, more like the Dodgy developers, with all your lies and spin. So what happened to your Health Campus? Oh, Walter the land is not "your"[/p][/quote]Ad hominem attacks are the trademark of a person who knows their argument cannot attain victory on its own merit; resorting to petulant and irrelevant personal comments does not help your cause. Jimmy The Kid
  • Score: 9

12:56pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Cuetip says...

Veritas wrote:
"the package WE have offered"

"yes, this is our money"

what an arrogant idiot!!

my goodness, is this the Walter Mitty councillor who denies he is a short, rotund, redeeding prat!!!
Surely you haven't conveniently forgotten R Harrington the MP hands are deep in this wealth campus mess after all the election pledges and the pretend nonsense with Mike Penning MP over his favouring of keeping Hemel Hempstead open during the build up to the 2010 election.

Hemel hospital withers on the vine, there is no new Watford hospital in sight and only those who are developers can see the rich pickings.

Look at the Coalition Gov't proposed health change impacts on the A&E at Northwick Pk Hospital and see the increased mileages that ambulance crews will have to do whilst the wealth campus grows.
[quote][p][bold]Veritas[/bold] wrote: "the package WE have offered" "yes, this is our money" what an arrogant idiot!! my goodness, is this the Walter Mitty councillor who denies he is a short, rotund, redeeding prat!!![/p][/quote]Surely you haven't conveniently forgotten R Harrington the MP hands are deep in this wealth campus mess after all the election pledges and the pretend nonsense with Mike Penning MP over his favouring of keeping Hemel Hempstead open during the build up to the 2010 election. Hemel hospital withers on the vine, there is no new Watford hospital in sight and only those who are developers can see the rich pickings. Look at the Coalition Gov't proposed health change impacts on the A&E at Northwick Pk Hospital and see the increased mileages that ambulance crews will have to do whilst the wealth campus grows. Cuetip
  • Score: -2

1:13pm Fri 5 Sep 14

John Dowdle says...

There are a number of points that need clarification here:-
Over-payment of compensation is an act of fiduciary irresponsibility, for which any councillor voting in support of it can be personally surcharged and potentially barred from future public office.
Can anyone say which councillors voted to support the over-payment?
FTAG's legal advisers were clearly remiss in not getting them to make the judicial review application earlier. If they had done so they would not have found themselves in a situation where the council is attempting to short-circuit the judicial process by offering bribes.
The council "compensation" offer is a clear contempt of court and the administrative decision-making process, for which Mr Pickles should be upbraiding (even fining) them - not collabarating with them.
Whacko Sharpe is incorrect in stating that the eventual process of the judicial review application will only provide a commentary on the Secretary of State (SoS) decision-making process.
If it is found that Watford Council failed to provide material information to the SoS then it can be argued that the SoS must reconsider the original decision in the light of the newly available information and - if appropriate - come to a different decision, i.e. refuse planning permission for the proposed development on the site.
The land in the area looks a mess but this is because the council has allowed it to take on the appearance of a mess so they can subsequently claim that they are introducing illogical and foolhardy construction on a flood plain "to make it look better".
In actuality, many of the former industrial units have been vacated at council request and been left to decay by the former tenants and the council so that it now has a dog-eared appearance for the area.
It is a deliberate policy by the council to force through their plan to concrete over the entire area and increase local flooding risk levels.
For anyone who has actually walked around the whole site - as I have - it is obvious that the land available could be used to provide a truly lovely local park for the people of West Watford.
The small wood and the large picnic meadow at the end of Cardiff Road - just before the railway bridge - are already in place and provide a good starting point for greening the whole area.
It seems the council perceive West Watford as an area which they and their developer friends can exploit financially without regard to the cares and needs of existing local residents. Can anyone imagine for one moment the council doing the same thing to Cassiobury Park?
If anyone wants to know what hypocrisy and double standards really look like, look no further than Watford Council.
There are a number of points that need clarification here:- Over-payment of compensation is an act of fiduciary irresponsibility, for which any councillor voting in support of it can be personally surcharged and potentially barred from future public office. Can anyone say which councillors voted to support the over-payment? FTAG's legal advisers were clearly remiss in not getting them to make the judicial review application earlier. If they had done so they would not have found themselves in a situation where the council is attempting to short-circuit the judicial process by offering bribes. The council "compensation" offer is a clear contempt of court and the administrative decision-making process, for which Mr Pickles should be upbraiding (even fining) them - not collabarating with them. Whacko Sharpe is incorrect in stating that the eventual process of the judicial review application will only provide a commentary on the Secretary of State (SoS) decision-making process. If it is found that Watford Council failed to provide material information to the SoS then it can be argued that the SoS must reconsider the original decision in the light of the newly available information and - if appropriate - come to a different decision, i.e. refuse planning permission for the proposed development on the site. The land in the area looks a mess but this is because the council has allowed it to take on the appearance of a mess so they can subsequently claim that they are introducing illogical and foolhardy construction on a flood plain "to make it look better". In actuality, many of the former industrial units have been vacated at council request and been left to decay by the former tenants and the council so that it now has a dog-eared appearance for the area. It is a deliberate policy by the council to force through their plan to concrete over the entire area and increase local flooding risk levels. For anyone who has actually walked around the whole site - as I have - it is obvious that the land available could be used to provide a truly lovely local park for the people of West Watford. The small wood and the large picnic meadow at the end of Cardiff Road - just before the railway bridge - are already in place and provide a good starting point for greening the whole area. It seems the council perceive West Watford as an area which they and their developer friends can exploit financially without regard to the cares and needs of existing local residents. Can anyone imagine for one moment the council doing the same thing to Cassiobury Park? If anyone wants to know what hypocrisy and double standards really look like, look no further than Watford Council. John Dowdle
  • Score: 8

1:31pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Veritas says...

kiddy winkas, oh but they relevant, that rotund little bully is hated
in the council chambers.

Every time an opposing councillor looks at the culprits, they are bound
not too say too much, this is a much better forum!!!

As to Richie Rich, he is not the mouthpiece for this dodgy development.

We totally agree with you regarding the Wealth Campus, having been to
Hemel and seen how Millions was spent on it, only to be mothballed.

Yet Hemel will be needed in the future with its growing population.

As you eloquently point out Mr Cupits, Greedy short sighted Politicians.

What we need is an inquiry into Dotty and the Councils False Wealth Campus proposals.

Whilst you are there, also look into Wackos claim of under used and
derelict Allotments, all lies.

Otherwise how can they justify claiming to spend £800,000.
kiddy winkas, oh but they relevant, that rotund little bully is hated in the council chambers. Every time an opposing councillor looks at the culprits, they are bound not too say too much, this is a much better forum!!! As to Richie Rich, he is not the mouthpiece for this dodgy development. We totally agree with you regarding the Wealth Campus, having been to Hemel and seen how Millions was spent on it, only to be mothballed. Yet Hemel will be needed in the future with its growing population. As you eloquently point out Mr Cupits, Greedy short sighted Politicians. What we need is an inquiry into Dotty and the Councils False Wealth Campus proposals. Whilst you are there, also look into Wackos claim of under used and derelict Allotments, all lies. Otherwise how can they justify claiming to spend £800,000. Veritas
  • Score: 2

1:31pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Andrew1963 says...

Wacko Jacko wrote:
Mike Watford wrote:
...also it does say that the compensation package was agreed in June 2013 not 2014. And it is something that is a legal requirement.

Also the court case, is about whether the Sectretary of State's decision making process was correct - not whether he made the right decision or whether the council 'is wrong'.
That's a good point, the campaigners seem to assume that the legal decision will overturn the decision, if so they are mistaken. All that is likely to happen is legal opinion telling Pickles whether or not he took the his decision correctly according to his own rules, end of story. The plot holders would be well advised to take the compensation money while it is on offer, if they wait they'll get less and have to leave anyway.
That's not correct - The Judicial review is on the decision, did the Secretary of State agree to the loss of allotment land at Farm Terrace correctly. If the council loses, they cannot close the allotments at Farm Terrace. They need the secretary of states permission to close the site. If the council lose, then they will have to reopen the site to new tenants. For the last few years they have refused to let plots. Quite reasonably as the sites future was in doubt, and especially as a 150 tenants would cost £150,000 to evict, where as 60 only costs £60,000.
[quote][p][bold]Wacko Jacko[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mike Watford[/bold] wrote: ...also it does say that the compensation package was agreed in June 2013 not 2014. And it is something that is a legal requirement. Also the court case, is about whether the Sectretary of State's decision making process was correct - not whether he made the right decision or whether the council 'is wrong'.[/p][/quote]That's a good point, the campaigners seem to assume that the legal decision will overturn the decision, if so they are mistaken. All that is likely to happen is legal opinion telling Pickles whether or not he took the his decision correctly according to his own rules, end of story. The plot holders would be well advised to take the compensation money while it is on offer, if they wait they'll get less and have to leave anyway.[/p][/quote]That's not correct - The Judicial review is on the decision, did the Secretary of State agree to the loss of allotment land at Farm Terrace correctly. If the council loses, they cannot close the allotments at Farm Terrace. They need the secretary of states permission to close the site. If the council lose, then they will have to reopen the site to new tenants. For the last few years they have refused to let plots. Quite reasonably as the sites future was in doubt, and especially as a 150 tenants would cost £150,000 to evict, where as 60 only costs £60,000. Andrew1963
  • Score: 2

2:11pm Fri 5 Sep 14

watford gal says...

Wacko Jacko wrote:
Veritas and several others have lost the plot. Watford has an over supply of allotment spaces across the borough. There is no waiting list for allotments, in fact there are many lying unused simply because people have lost interest. On the other hand there is a long waiting list for people needing houses in the borough and a shortage of land for development. It doesn't take much imagination to work out that releasing allotment land for housing makes sense.
This is incorrect. The waiting list for Briar Road is closed and I have it on good authority that at least 12 people are waiting for plots, so there is a need across the borough.
[quote][p][bold]Wacko Jacko[/bold] wrote: Veritas and several others have lost the plot. Watford has an over supply of allotment spaces across the borough. There is no waiting list for allotments, in fact there are many lying unused simply because people have lost interest. On the other hand there is a long waiting list for people needing houses in the borough and a shortage of land for development. It doesn't take much imagination to work out that releasing allotment land for housing makes sense.[/p][/quote]This is incorrect. The waiting list for Briar Road is closed and I have it on good authority that at least 12 people are waiting for plots, so there is a need across the borough. watford gal
  • Score: 5

2:14pm Fri 5 Sep 14

rew001 says...

The council has done the right thing in informing the current tenants of the compensation available to them and sharing the savings. If it's a problem to some of them they don't have to take it. It's as simple as that.
The council has done the right thing in informing the current tenants of the compensation available to them and sharing the savings. If it's a problem to some of them they don't have to take it. It's as simple as that. rew001
  • Score: -4

2:17pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Veritas says...

What worries us, is:-
who does the delusional Wacko and Wife think they are fooling?
This idiots are making long term decisions for Watford, all of
which seem to be leading to long term disaster, of-

Eyesore- £4million pond
Social tension- school places, over crowding on Watford roads, no GP
appointments,
Overdevelopment- lack of Parking places

Where is the opposition to all this?
Oh, we had a real Rackett going, as Chairman kept his mouth shut!!

What next?
What worries us, is:- who does the delusional Wacko and Wife think they are fooling? This idiots are making long term decisions for Watford, all of which seem to be leading to long term disaster, of- Eyesore- £4million pond Social tension- school places, over crowding on Watford roads, no GP appointments, Overdevelopment- lack of Parking places Where is the opposition to all this? Oh, we had a real Rackett going, as Chairman kept his mouth shut!! What next? Veritas
  • Score: 7

3:07pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Jimmy The Kid says...

For allotments that have repeatedly been described as beautiful, irreplaceable and magnificent, they look like a right dump in that video.
For allotments that have repeatedly been described as beautiful, irreplaceable and magnificent, they look like a right dump in that video. Jimmy The Kid
  • Score: -5

3:22pm Fri 5 Sep 14

John Dowdle says...

Jimmy The Kid wrote:
For allotments that have repeatedly been described as beautiful, irreplaceable and magnificent, they look like a right dump in that video.
Do you think it is accidental - or deliberate ?
Have you never heard of PR - or "spin" ?
Dr Goebbels would praise Watford Council !
[quote][p][bold]Jimmy The Kid[/bold] wrote: For allotments that have repeatedly been described as beautiful, irreplaceable and magnificent, they look like a right dump in that video.[/p][/quote]Do you think it is accidental - or deliberate ? Have you never heard of PR - or "spin" ? Dr Goebbels would praise Watford Council ! John Dowdle
  • Score: 6

3:49pm Fri 5 Sep 14

TRT says...

Mr Jeffery continued: " the opportunity to develop the hospital’s facilities ".

How Pythonesque!

"We all know Stan can't have babies, not having a womb, but how about we defend his RIGHT to have babies?"

If it was, say, a satirical TV comedy show, it might be funny, but it's not; it's reality.

It's tax payer's money. It's decades of hard work by allotmenteers. It's about setting a precedent for future "land grabs". It's about greedy developers and ambitious politicians lining their pockets. It's about making Vicarage the most densely populated ward in the whole of Hertfordshire. It's about public services being overloaded to breaking point. It's about a hospital that's being forced to expand or die as a result of our NHS suffering death by a thousand cuts. It's about ambulances needing roads built over flood plains and playing fields just so they have a chance of meeting response time targets as a result of covering an area far larger than was ever envisaged - and let's never forget that if they say 15 minutes to get a casualty to A&E is OK because it meets the target, we say "5 minutes is even better - it's not about targets, it's about lives".

So, before Wacko or someone says it, yes, we need a new hospital, yes, we need to replace the crumbling concrete tower and we need to resurface the access roads and replace the Oxygen and CO2 and NO2 and hot water and steam pipes that are rotting away. Yes, we need all those things. We need jobs and income and manufacturing and research and housing and nurses. But we must ask ourselves this. Do we need them so badly that we must roll over and beg and compromise to the point where we are prostituting ourselves to developers only to still get kicked in the nether regions when it turns out there's not going to be much in the way of new health facilities, or jobs, or roads? Is it not worth the fight to get something better for Watford? Are we so tired and submissive that we just let fat cat councillors and developers take our land and do what they will with the only expectation being an opportunity for something better? Do you promise to love, honour and obey or do you promise the opportunity for love, honour and obeyance?

I, for one, am sick to death of Watford disease. 6 figure budgets for pointless public works, eye-watering salaries for public officials, inflation, rent, house prices soaring to put decent living beyond the reach of even the modest middle income families.

Disgusting behaviour from the town hall. They should hang their heads in shame.
Mr Jeffery continued: "[...] the opportunity to develop the hospital’s facilities [...]". How Pythonesque! "We all know Stan can't have babies, not having a womb, but how about we defend his RIGHT to have babies?" If it was, say, a satirical TV comedy show, it might be funny, but it's not; it's reality. It's tax payer's money. It's decades of hard work by allotmenteers. It's about setting a precedent for future "land grabs". It's about greedy developers and ambitious politicians lining their pockets. It's about making Vicarage the most densely populated ward in the whole of Hertfordshire. It's about public services being overloaded to breaking point. It's about a hospital that's being forced to expand or die as a result of our NHS suffering death by a thousand cuts. It's about ambulances needing roads built over flood plains and playing fields just so they have a chance of meeting response time targets as a result of covering an area far larger than was ever envisaged - and let's never forget that if they say 15 minutes to get a casualty to A&E is OK because it meets the target, we say "5 minutes is even better - it's not about targets, it's about lives". So, before Wacko or someone says it, yes, we need a new hospital, yes, we need to replace the crumbling concrete tower and we need to resurface the access roads and replace the Oxygen and CO2 and NO2 and hot water and steam pipes that are rotting away. Yes, we need all those things. We need jobs and income and manufacturing and research and housing and nurses. But we must ask ourselves this. Do we need them so badly that we must roll over and beg and compromise to the point where we are prostituting ourselves to developers only to still get kicked in the nether regions when it turns out there's not going to be much in the way of new health facilities, or jobs, or roads? Is it not worth the fight to get something better for Watford? Are we so tired and submissive that we just let fat cat councillors and developers take our land and do what they will with the only expectation being an opportunity for something better? Do you promise to love, honour and obey or do you promise the opportunity for love, honour and obeyance? I, for one, am sick to death of Watford disease. 6 figure budgets for pointless public works, eye-watering salaries for public officials, inflation, rent, house prices soaring to put decent living beyond the reach of even the modest middle income families. Disgusting behaviour from the town hall. They should hang their heads in shame. TRT
  • Score: 12

3:58pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Veritas says...

Nice comments, but the reality is the Council don't care, otherwise they
would not be wasting so much public money, and telling so
much lies.

problem with a weak opposition and local Paper, lots of money
spent by the Fibs on propaganda, people believe what they spin!!

Unless we have a real concerted effort to topple Daft Dotty,
how about online petition?
Nice comments, but the reality is the Council don't care, otherwise they would not be wasting so much public money, and telling so much lies. problem with a weak opposition and local Paper, lots of money spent by the Fibs on propaganda, people believe what they spin!! Unless we have a real concerted effort to topple Daft Dotty, how about online petition? Veritas
  • Score: 3

7:02pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Wacko Jacko says...

Delusional Dowdle as usual gives us an essay when a couple of sentences would suffice. John, fiduciary irresponsibility is what we experienced under your old Labour chums who left us with a failing council with it's finances in meltdown. Thank goodness the LibDems have turned things around and we now have a well managed council leading a thriving town.
Delusional Dowdle as usual gives us an essay when a couple of sentences would suffice. John, fiduciary irresponsibility is what we experienced under your old Labour chums who left us with a failing council with it's finances in meltdown. Thank goodness the LibDems have turned things around and we now have a well managed council leading a thriving town. Wacko Jacko
  • Score: -8

7:08pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Wacko Jacko says...

Veritas, what an inappropriate name you have! Why not get out from behind your computer and take a look at what's happening in the Town? It's nothing like the negative picture you paint. But then there's none so blind as those who will not see.
Veritas, what an inappropriate name you have! Why not get out from behind your computer and take a look at what's happening in the Town? It's nothing like the negative picture you paint. But then there's none so blind as those who will not see. Wacko Jacko
  • Score: -7

7:13pm Fri 5 Sep 14

rew001 says...

Nothing I have read here suggests that the council have not done the right thing. Speaking as a long term resident of Watford I have been very impressed with the performance of this council, and I note that most of the people complaining about the compensation package seem to have a beef about the Mayor and the allotments are just a hook to hang their problems on.
I would suggest to some of these people that they think back to 2002 when Labour were in power and the huge improvements since then. They might also want to fast forward to May 2014 when the Mayor was re-elected with a percentage of the vote similar to 2002. It would seem that most of the residents of the town are of a similar mind to me.
Nothing I have read here suggests that the council have not done the right thing. Speaking as a long term resident of Watford I have been very impressed with the performance of this council, and I note that most of the people complaining about the compensation package seem to have a beef about the Mayor and the allotments are just a hook to hang their problems on. I would suggest to some of these people that they think back to 2002 when Labour were in power and the huge improvements since then. They might also want to fast forward to May 2014 when the Mayor was re-elected with a percentage of the vote similar to 2002. It would seem that most of the residents of the town are of a similar mind to me. rew001
  • Score: -9

7:23pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Veritas says...

lets add Watford Junction to the mess!!!!!! My goodness just had a hell of a journey just to get there 10mins ago and drop off!!!

passed the eyesore of the New Market, £1million for that?

Mmmmm, talking about stuff from over 10years ago? laughable

Just goes to show, how in cahoots with a dodgy Editor from then onwards dodgy Fib dems can hold on to power.

Issue is allotments and £1000 payoff, can someone plse confirm
the stipulation of no allotments for 3 years, if they take the money.

mind you its easy, get someone else to put their name down for new one. lol and take the £1000
lets add Watford Junction to the mess!!!!!! My goodness just had a hell of a journey just to get there 10mins ago and drop off!!! passed the eyesore of the New Market, £1million for that? Mmmmm, talking about stuff from over 10years ago? laughable Just goes to show, how in cahoots with a dodgy Editor from then onwards dodgy Fib dems can hold on to power. Issue is allotments and £1000 payoff, can someone plse confirm the stipulation of no allotments for 3 years, if they take the money. mind you its easy, get someone else to put their name down for new one. lol and take the £1000 Veritas
  • Score: 4

7:31pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Wacko Jacko says...

That's right Veritas, show us your true colours, try and fiddle the Council out of £1000 of resident's money - immoral, irresponsible, disgraceful. Your opinions are worthless
That's right Veritas, show us your true colours, try and fiddle the Council out of £1000 of resident's money - immoral, irresponsible, disgraceful. Your opinions are worthless Wacko Jacko
  • Score: -6

7:52pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Veritas says...

fiddling!!! that's a word your and your dodgy councillors allegedly
know so well. so easy to bait you. lol

Sheila Smilee, has she paid back her expenses from America? that
bloke who did his studying full time, whilst a useless councillor, then went to Ireland to a school?
Bertie's wife soon stopped claiming allowances when questions asked
as they were living in the same household.

Is there a law against another family member owning a plot,
you Wacko have clearly lost the plot, in more ways than one

We are told you don't seem to be very happy these days, in fact you seem to be a bit nervous at Council meetings, stuttering all over the place!!!!
fiddling!!! that's a word your and your dodgy councillors allegedly know so well. so easy to bait you. lol Sheila Smilee, has she paid back her expenses from America? that bloke who did his studying full time, whilst a useless councillor, then went to Ireland to a school? Bertie's wife soon stopped claiming allowances when questions asked as they were living in the same household. Is there a law against another family member owning a plot, you Wacko have clearly lost the plot, in more ways than one We are told you don't seem to be very happy these days, in fact you seem to be a bit nervous at Council meetings, stuttering all over the place!!!! Veritas
  • Score: 0

8:22pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Maceo & Fred says...

All the information can be found on the Councils website at item 9. Shame Cllr wacko Sharpe point readers in the right direction instead on spinning in circles all night

http://watford.moder
ngov.co.uk/ieListDoc
uments.aspx?CId=121&
MId=1358
All the information can be found on the Councils website at item 9. Shame Cllr wacko Sharpe point readers in the right direction instead on spinning in circles all night http://watford.moder ngov.co.uk/ieListDoc uments.aspx?CId=121& MId=1358 Maceo & Fred
  • Score: 3

8:37pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Wacko Jacko says...

That's right Veritas, tackle the man, not the ball. Criticising people for their handicaps is a disreputable tactic even for a low life like yourself. the plain fact is Watford needs housing more than it needs allotments. The resounding success Mayor Thornhill had in the recent elections demonstrates that the majority agree with her policies, and your lot will stay in the wilderness for the foreseeable future.
That's right Veritas, tackle the man, not the ball. Criticising people for their handicaps is a disreputable tactic even for a low life like yourself. the plain fact is Watford needs housing more than it needs allotments. The resounding success Mayor Thornhill had in the recent elections demonstrates that the majority agree with her policies, and your lot will stay in the wilderness for the foreseeable future. Wacko Jacko
  • Score: -5

8:43pm Fri 5 Sep 14

John Dowdle says...

Wacko Jacko wrote:
Delusional Dowdle as usual gives us an essay when a couple of sentences would suffice. John, fiduciary irresponsibility is what we experienced under your old Labour chums who left us with a failing council with it's finances in meltdown. Thank goodness the LibDems have turned things around and we now have a well managed council leading a thriving town.
I was a Member oif the Labour Group on Watford Council between 1995 and 1999. One of my last activities was to support, argue for and vote within the group to make Watford Council a debt-free council.
The group subsequently took the proposal before Full Council and got it voted through in the face of utter apathy from the Libs and Cons.
So, the actual legacy that the Labour Group bestowed upon Watford Council was a debt-free status, one of extremely few in the country.
I don't consider that situation to be 'finances in meltdown'.
Please stop continually misleading Watford residents on this points.
In addition - rew001 - you may recall that when Dorothy Thornhill first stood for election as Mayor she promised that she would reduce Watford's council tax to an average level for Hertfordshire.
Ever since, not only has she consistently failed to achieve this relatively simple target but Watford's council tax rates are currently higher than those which apply in our nearest authorities Hertsmere and Three Rivers. Check it out - you will see that I am right.
Maceo & Fred: I see: 'In response to questions from Councillor Bell about the Council’s actions following the Judicial Review, the Mayor answered that the Council would wait to see the outcome first.'
This current news article suggests that she has failed to keep her word to Councillor Bell by offering this current bribe or have I got that wrong?
[quote][p][bold]Wacko Jacko[/bold] wrote: Delusional Dowdle as usual gives us an essay when a couple of sentences would suffice. John, fiduciary irresponsibility is what we experienced under your old Labour chums who left us with a failing council with it's finances in meltdown. Thank goodness the LibDems have turned things around and we now have a well managed council leading a thriving town.[/p][/quote]I was a Member oif the Labour Group on Watford Council between 1995 and 1999. One of my last activities was to support, argue for and vote within the group to make Watford Council a debt-free council. The group subsequently took the proposal before Full Council and got it voted through in the face of utter apathy from the Libs and Cons. So, the actual legacy that the Labour Group bestowed upon Watford Council was a debt-free status, one of extremely few in the country. I don't consider that situation to be 'finances in meltdown'. Please stop continually misleading Watford residents on this points. In addition - rew001 - you may recall that when Dorothy Thornhill first stood for election as Mayor she promised that she would reduce Watford's council tax to an average level for Hertfordshire. Ever since, not only has she consistently failed to achieve this relatively simple target but Watford's council tax rates are currently higher than those which apply in our nearest authorities Hertsmere and Three Rivers. Check it out - you will see that I am right. Maceo & Fred: I see: 'In response to questions from Councillor Bell about the Council’s actions following the Judicial Review, the Mayor answered that the Council would wait to see the outcome first.' This current news article suggests that she has failed to keep her word to Councillor Bell by offering this current bribe or have I got that wrong? John Dowdle
  • Score: 2

8:54pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Maceo & Fred says...

Also, the Councils application to the government can be found below.

As readers will see the Council stated that there was an appendix 8 from Watford Hospital. This document was never written by the hospital nor was it sent to the Council to send with the application to the government.

Did the council mislead the government? The matter was raised at the Judicial Review.

https://www.whatdoth
eyknow.com/request/f
arm_terrace_allotmen
ts_2nd_subm#incoming
-540528
Also, the Councils application to the government can be found below. As readers will see the Council stated that there was an appendix 8 from Watford Hospital. This document was never written by the hospital nor was it sent to the Council to send with the application to the government. Did the council mislead the government? The matter was raised at the Judicial Review. https://www.whatdoth eyknow.com/request/f arm_terrace_allotmen ts_2nd_subm#incoming -540528 Maceo & Fred
  • Score: 5

9:08pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Wacko Jacko says...

Once again John Dowdle suffers from false memory syndrome;. When the audit Commission reported on Watford in 2002 they said 'The report concludes that the council must move quickly to to address serious failings. People in Watford are not receiving the quality of public service they deserve and the council has been one of the worst performing district councils in the country. Public satisfaction is low and the cost of services is high.' That doesn't sound much like the picture you paint , John. However under the LibDems they reported in 2005 'Watford is progressing well in priority areas and is taking effective action to deliver future improvement.' and we've gone from strength to strength since. Face it, you can't trust Labour locally or nationally on the economy, unless you want it crashed that is
Once again John Dowdle suffers from false memory syndrome;. When the audit Commission reported on Watford in 2002 they said 'The report concludes that the council must move quickly to to address serious failings. People in Watford are not receiving the quality of public service they deserve and the council has been one of the worst performing district councils in the country. Public satisfaction is low and the cost of services is high.' That doesn't sound much like the picture you paint , John. However under the LibDems they reported in 2005 'Watford is progressing well in priority areas and is taking effective action to deliver future improvement.' and we've gone from strength to strength since. Face it, you can't trust Labour locally or nationally on the economy, unless you want it crashed that is Wacko Jacko
  • Score: -3

9:16pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Maceo & Fred says...

Once again Cllr Sharpe has a memory lapse. Didn't he once say that a new road through Oxhey Park would be built over his dead body. Funny he didn't oppose this when it was voted through Council last year!
Once again Cllr Sharpe has a memory lapse. Didn't he once say that a new road through Oxhey Park would be built over his dead body. Funny he didn't oppose this when it was voted through Council last year! Maceo & Fred
  • Score: 7

9:19pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Veritas says...

wacko, its 2014 not 2002

you bumbling fool lol

seems you tell a lot of lies
wacko, its 2014 not 2002 you bumbling fool lol seems you tell a lot of lies Veritas
  • Score: 3

10:45pm Fri 5 Sep 14

John Dowdle says...

Wacko Jacko wrote:
Once again John Dowdle suffers from false memory syndrome;. When the audit Commission reported on Watford in 2002 they said 'The report concludes that the council must move quickly to to address serious failings. People in Watford are not receiving the quality of public service they deserve and the council has been one of the worst performing district councils in the country. Public satisfaction is low and the cost of services is high.' That doesn't sound much like the picture you paint , John. However under the LibDems they reported in 2005 'Watford is progressing well in priority areas and is taking effective action to deliver future improvement.' and we've gone from strength to strength since. Face it, you can't trust Labour locally or nationally on the economy, unless you want it crashed that is
Watford Council has removed all results for borough council election results before 2004 so it is difficult to comment on what you are saying.
However, the web site does reveal that Dorothy Thornhill was elected as Mayor on 2nd May 2002 which, therefore, means that the Audit Commission report was actually talking about the period when Dorothy was effectively in control of the council when they said 'council must move quickly to to address serious failings. People in Watford are not receiving the quality of public service they deserve and the council has been one of the worst performing district councils in the country. Public satisfaction is low and the cost of services is high.'
Note also: 'MORE than half a million pounds written off in Watford Council's accounts has been replaced, according to claims by its leader Vince Muspratt.' Watford Observer 17 April 2002.
Source: http://www.watfordob
server.co.uk/archive
/2002/04/17/5752121.
_Half_a_million_poun
ds_has_been_replaced
__claims_Council_lea
der/.
I stood down as a Councillor in 1999 to spend more time with my late wife Sandy who unfortunately died in February 2001.
As a result, I cannot really comment on what happened in any depth from 2001 onwards as my attention was not on local council matters.
I became aware much later that there was some sort of dispute between the council internal audit staff and district council staff, with them being on different floors in the Town Hall and neither group speaking with one another.
One relevant item was the replacement of the council's main frame computer system in response to concerns over Y2K, i.e. alleged problems with computers resulting from the end of the millenium.
The replacement system proposed I objected to within the Labour Group but was over-ruled. When the replacement computer system was reported to Full Council no one in the opposition Liberal and Conservative groups said anything in opposition to the proposals.
To be fair to them, they may well not have had the expertise to understand the technical aspects of the proposed replacement system and the implications as to problems in incorporating the new system.
Ultimately, I was not there to be able to assist with the introduction of the new system and no one else at the council - officers or members - apparently was able to assist with the implementation of the new system, which is why it took the new administration several years to get the new system working properly.
This means that all those involved from whatever political party were equally culpably responsible even though it may have been more acts of omission rather than commission which were involved.
[quote][p][bold]Wacko Jacko[/bold] wrote: Once again John Dowdle suffers from false memory syndrome;. When the audit Commission reported on Watford in 2002 they said 'The report concludes that the council must move quickly to to address serious failings. People in Watford are not receiving the quality of public service they deserve and the council has been one of the worst performing district councils in the country. Public satisfaction is low and the cost of services is high.' That doesn't sound much like the picture you paint , John. However under the LibDems they reported in 2005 'Watford is progressing well in priority areas and is taking effective action to deliver future improvement.' and we've gone from strength to strength since. Face it, you can't trust Labour locally or nationally on the economy, unless you want it crashed that is[/p][/quote]Watford Council has removed all results for borough council election results before 2004 so it is difficult to comment on what you are saying. However, the web site does reveal that Dorothy Thornhill was elected as Mayor on 2nd May 2002 which, therefore, means that the Audit Commission report was actually talking about the period when Dorothy was effectively in control of the council when they said 'council must move quickly to to address serious failings. People in Watford are not receiving the quality of public service they deserve and the council has been one of the worst performing district councils in the country. Public satisfaction is low and the cost of services is high.' Note also: 'MORE than half a million pounds written off in Watford Council's accounts has been replaced, according to claims by its leader Vince Muspratt.' Watford Observer 17 April 2002. Source: http://www.watfordob server.co.uk/archive /2002/04/17/5752121. _Half_a_million_poun ds_has_been_replaced __claims_Council_lea der/. I stood down as a Councillor in 1999 to spend more time with my late wife Sandy who unfortunately died in February 2001. As a result, I cannot really comment on what happened in any depth from 2001 onwards as my attention was not on local council matters. I became aware much later that there was some sort of dispute between the council internal audit staff and district council staff, with them being on different floors in the Town Hall and neither group speaking with one another. One relevant item was the replacement of the council's main frame computer system in response to concerns over Y2K, i.e. alleged problems with computers resulting from the end of the millenium. The replacement system proposed I objected to within the Labour Group but was over-ruled. When the replacement computer system was reported to Full Council no one in the opposition Liberal and Conservative groups said anything in opposition to the proposals. To be fair to them, they may well not have had the expertise to understand the technical aspects of the proposed replacement system and the implications as to problems in incorporating the new system. Ultimately, I was not there to be able to assist with the introduction of the new system and no one else at the council - officers or members - apparently was able to assist with the implementation of the new system, which is why it took the new administration several years to get the new system working properly. This means that all those involved from whatever political party were equally culpably responsible even though it may have been more acts of omission rather than commission which were involved. John Dowdle
  • Score: 0

8:28am Sat 6 Sep 14

rew001 says...

I think John you will find that the finances of the council were in an unholy mess when the Mayor was elected in 2002 and that her administration sorted things out.
Boasting that you were part of the party that created the mess seems an odd thing to do.
I think John you will find that the finances of the council were in an unholy mess when the Mayor was elected in 2002 and that her administration sorted things out. Boasting that you were part of the party that created the mess seems an odd thing to do. rew001
  • Score: -3

5:07pm Sat 6 Sep 14

John Dowdle says...

The fact of the matter is that when I stepped down as a councillor with the Labour Group in 1999, Watford Council was debt-free.
I repeat debt-free, a status that few other councils in England enjoyed.
The Libs inherited an absolutely golden legacy. I imagine they could not believe their luck when they inherited a debt-free council.
However, they claimed the situation was different for political reasons and they have continued misleading the public ever since.
Let me put it this way: I use my name when ever I post my comments, whereas you and all the other Libs invariably hide your identities.
Who should people believe: me - using my real name - or someone who lacks the integrity to post comments using their real name?
The only "mess" involved was connected with the changeover in the computer sytem in 2000, which was caused by certain officers at the council, something which no councillor - including Liberal councillors - either knew, understood or was able to do anything about.
Who ever was in control of the Council would have had to sort out the officers' mess. It happened to be the Liberals by then but I believe that the Labour Group would also have sorted it out in due course.
Having inherited a debt-free council, the Liberals have still failed to achieve their goal of setting the council tax at the average level for the county of Hertfordshire and they are charging a higher level of council tax than the adjoining counils of Hertsmere and Three Rivers.
Why is it that they are able to charge lower levels of council tax and that Watford - under Liberal control - have clearly failed to do so?
The answer to that question is that those other councils do not have an expensive and unnecessary top management tier which is completely unjustified and that they spend nothing like the amount spent by Watford Council on unending self-promotion and vanity projects.
The expensive "mess" presently affecting Watford Council and Watford council tax payers is solely down to the present Lib-Dem administration.
The fact of the matter is that when I stepped down as a councillor with the Labour Group in 1999, Watford Council was debt-free. I repeat debt-free, a status that few other councils in England enjoyed. The Libs inherited an absolutely golden legacy. I imagine they could not believe their luck when they inherited a debt-free council. However, they claimed the situation was different for political reasons and they have continued misleading the public ever since. Let me put it this way: I use my name when ever I post my comments, whereas you and all the other Libs invariably hide your identities. Who should people believe: me - using my real name - or someone who lacks the integrity to post comments using their real name? The only "mess" involved was connected with the changeover in the computer sytem in 2000, which was caused by certain officers at the council, something which no councillor - including Liberal councillors - either knew, understood or was able to do anything about. Who ever was in control of the Council would have had to sort out the officers' mess. It happened to be the Liberals by then but I believe that the Labour Group would also have sorted it out in due course. Having inherited a debt-free council, the Liberals have still failed to achieve their goal of setting the council tax at the average level for the county of Hertfordshire and they are charging a higher level of council tax than the adjoining counils of Hertsmere and Three Rivers. Why is it that they are able to charge lower levels of council tax and that Watford - under Liberal control - have clearly failed to do so? The answer to that question is that those other councils do not have an expensive and unnecessary top management tier which is completely unjustified and that they spend nothing like the amount spent by Watford Council on unending self-promotion and vanity projects. The expensive "mess" presently affecting Watford Council and Watford council tax payers is solely down to the present Lib-Dem administration. John Dowdle
  • Score: 2

5:56pm Sat 6 Sep 14

rew001 says...

Ah so it was the officers fault that the books wouldn't balance. Pull the other one. Golden legacy, come off it, It was widely reported that the council was a shambles and the accounts were a work of fiction.
Rewriting history obviously comes easily to you.
Oh yes and I repeat I am a resident of Watford who, over the years, has seen the fine job the Mayor has made of righting the mess she inherited. That is why she has been relected several times.
Ah so it was the officers fault that the books wouldn't balance. Pull the other one. Golden legacy, come off it, It was widely reported that the council was a shambles and the accounts were a work of fiction. Rewriting history obviously comes easily to you. Oh yes and I repeat I am a resident of Watford who, over the years, has seen the fine job the Mayor has made of righting the mess she inherited. That is why she has been relected several times. rew001
  • Score: -1

8:31pm Sat 6 Sep 14

John Dowdle says...

The reason the Libs have controlled Watford since 2001 is largely down to the fact that they want to control Watford more than anyone else.
If Labour and the Conservatives ever truly get their acts together and start actually doing some work to attract electoral support the days of the Libs controlling Watford Town Hall will come to an end.
To give them credit, the Libs are prepared to put the work into making up leaflets and newsletters for delivery to local people. The other parties - by and large - seem not to be bothered about putting in any work except at election times.
It is the apathy and supineness of the other parties which allows the Libs to retain control over Watford Town Hall.
This also explains why their ranks are stuffed with members drawn from other political parties, ex-Tories and ex-Labour too.
That and the fact that they are more ruthless than the other parties when it comes to getting and keeping power. They never let small things like the truth get in the way of getting power, after all.
This also explains why they spend so much of local council tax payers money on vanity projects and a huge amount on pushing out propaganda from the Town Hall, designed to create a false sense of competence and economy. Neither is actually true.
This current exercise in offering bribes to allotmenteers is a case in point of them using council tax payers money for their own interests.
At the end of the day, all we in Watford have - maybe - is the least worst alternative in control of the Town Hall.
A properly motivated and efficient alternative local political party could roll them up within less than 5 years but it seems none of the other local parties want to do this.
In essence, all the local political parties are crap, whatever political colour or ideology they sustain. No wonder people lose faith in them.
The reason the Libs have controlled Watford since 2001 is largely down to the fact that they want to control Watford more than anyone else. If Labour and the Conservatives ever truly get their acts together and start actually doing some work to attract electoral support the days of the Libs controlling Watford Town Hall will come to an end. To give them credit, the Libs are prepared to put the work into making up leaflets and newsletters for delivery to local people. The other parties - by and large - seem not to be bothered about putting in any work except at election times. It is the apathy and supineness of the other parties which allows the Libs to retain control over Watford Town Hall. This also explains why their ranks are stuffed with members drawn from other political parties, ex-Tories and ex-Labour too. That and the fact that they are more ruthless than the other parties when it comes to getting and keeping power. They never let small things like the truth get in the way of getting power, after all. This also explains why they spend so much of local council tax payers money on vanity projects and a huge amount on pushing out propaganda from the Town Hall, designed to create a false sense of competence and economy. Neither is actually true. This current exercise in offering bribes to allotmenteers is a case in point of them using council tax payers money for their own interests. At the end of the day, all we in Watford have - maybe - is the least worst alternative in control of the Town Hall. A properly motivated and efficient alternative local political party could roll them up within less than 5 years but it seems none of the other local parties want to do this. In essence, all the local political parties are crap, whatever political colour or ideology they sustain. No wonder people lose faith in them. John Dowdle
  • Score: 2

9:26pm Sat 6 Sep 14

POVIEW says...

An inept Mayor controlling a crumbling council. What a town. A market moved to the wrong place and one shudders what amenities for the elderly or the infirm. Allotments moved miles from your homes
Time to call it a day Dot.
An inept Mayor controlling a crumbling council. What a town. A market moved to the wrong place and one shudders what amenities for the elderly or the infirm. Allotments moved miles from your homes Time to call it a day Dot. POVIEW
  • Score: 6

9:55am Sun 7 Sep 14

rew001 says...

I'm still trying to get over the John's nerve of blaming the officers for labour's incompetence. A masive abdication of responsibilty. Nothing else he says can be taken with any degree of seriousness after that.
I'm still trying to get over the John's nerve of blaming the officers for labour's incompetence. A masive abdication of responsibilty. Nothing else he says can be taken with any degree of seriousness after that. rew001
  • Score: -2

11:51am Sun 7 Sep 14

John Dowdle says...

rew001 wrote:
I'm still trying to get over the John's nerve of blaming the officers for labour's incompetence. A masive abdication of responsibilty. Nothing else he says can be taken with any degree of seriousness after that.
I am sure you will get over it - eventually. Just lie down in a dark room.
The difference between us - apart from the fact that you lack the honesty to use your own name when commenting - is that I tell the truth.
Officers do get things wrong from time to time.
And here's the rub: opposition councillors never had a clue.
They are all just as imperfect as you are.
But then, there is no way to know just how fully imperfect you are because no one knows who you are - not even you in all probability.
Maybe you are just an automated trolling piece of software?
Nothing else.
Who knows?
Not even you, I expect.
And let's not forget why this column exists: because - presumably - people like you are involved in offering other people bribes using other peoples' money.
Is that serious enough for you?
[quote][p][bold]rew001[/bold] wrote: I'm still trying to get over the John's nerve of blaming the officers for labour's incompetence. A masive abdication of responsibilty. Nothing else he says can be taken with any degree of seriousness after that.[/p][/quote]I am sure you will get over it - eventually. Just lie down in a dark room. The difference between us - apart from the fact that you lack the honesty to use your own name when commenting - is that I tell the truth. Officers do get things wrong from time to time. And here's the rub: opposition councillors never had a clue. They are all just as imperfect as you are. But then, there is no way to know just how fully imperfect you are because no one knows who you are - not even you in all probability. Maybe you are just an automated trolling piece of software? Nothing else. Who knows? Not even you, I expect. And let's not forget why this column exists: because - presumably - people like you are involved in offering other people bribes using other peoples' money. Is that serious enough for you? John Dowdle
  • Score: 1

11:59am Sun 7 Sep 14

TRT says...

Ridiculous that you lot are droning on about ancient history and who said what to whom and when. Can we please come back to the present and acknowledge that we're facing a real-life here-and-now situation - a decision which is in the process of being taken which will affect the future shape of Watford for the next two or three hundred years. Yes... hundreds of years. that's the kind of impact that hospitals, roads and allotments have on a community. Pinch a penny today and future generations will pay the price.
No compromise over a hospital. If you can't do it right, don't do it.
Vicarage is the wrong place for a mega-hospital serving Hemel, Watford and St. Albans, and accepting the negative effects of this current plan, acknowledged by all sides, for not even the promise of a new hospital but the possibility of some new hospital facilities... Oh, and a shed load of money for some developers, well, that in my mind is a compromise too far for the sake of our children and our grandchildren. And I refuse to accept the argument that the hospital provision for those future generations will ever appear as a result of this plan.
Ridiculous that you lot are droning on about ancient history and who said what to whom and when. Can we please come back to the present and acknowledge that we're facing a real-life here-and-now situation - a decision which is in the process of being taken which will affect the future shape of Watford for the next two or three hundred years. Yes... hundreds of years. that's the kind of impact that hospitals, roads and allotments have on a community. Pinch a penny today and future generations will pay the price. No compromise over a hospital. If you can't do it right, don't do it. Vicarage is the wrong place for a mega-hospital serving Hemel, Watford and St. Albans, and accepting the negative effects of this current plan, acknowledged by all sides, for not even the promise of a new hospital but the possibility of some new hospital facilities... Oh, and a shed load of money for some developers, well, that in my mind is a compromise too far for the sake of our children and our grandchildren. And I refuse to accept the argument that the hospital provision for those future generations will ever appear as a result of this plan. TRT
  • Score: 7

12:55pm Sun 7 Sep 14

rew001 says...

I remember at the time there were talks of cover-ups about the dire state of the finances. Good of you to confirm it.
I remember at the time there were talks of cover-ups about the dire state of the finances. Good of you to confirm it. rew001
  • Score: -2

4:06pm Sun 7 Sep 14

John Dowdle says...

To take up TRT's point, you might like to know that Vince Muspratt and I worked hard to stop the West Herts Health Authority from closing Watford General District Hospital. I used my appointed position as a Council representative on the South West Herts Community Health Council to persuade them to lodge a statutory objection to the HA's proposal to close Watford General and was part of a delegation who visited the Minister of Health in Whitehall to put the case against closure. Ultimately, we were successful in stopping the closure.
I was also heavily involved in the Watford Against Threats to Close Hospitals (WATCH) and was effectively the last person to chair the campaign group at the time the closure proposals were shelved.
It may be ancient history but some of us did ensure that Watford would have a better future and I have to say it was principally members of the Labour Group on Watford Council who led the campaign to save the hosptital from start to finish.
The Liberals and Tories did almost nothing to save the hospital.
As for REW, I have to conclude he is congenitally stupid, in which case it is not his fault. The fact that he chooses to describe a debt-free council as having 'dire' finances just shows what little grasp he and his vacant friends have where real public finances are concerned.
It is people like them who squander millions on vanity projects such as the pond on the parade which most people I meet are hugely underwhelmed by what has been done there.
It is people like them who - year on year - set the highest level of local council tax because of a costly and unnecessary mayoral administration layer at Watford Council.
It is people like them who are building roads and blocks of flats on flood plain in West Watford and compeletly ignoring the necessary infrastructure development to support it.
It is people like them who only see pound signs and completely ignore the natural environment of West Watford. What a shower!!
I hope the judicial review stops them in their tracks and that the land is given back to the people who have cared for it over many years.
Where their gross incompetence is concerned, it has to be concluded "You ain't seen nothing yet".
We won't have long to wait for their next disaster!
To take up TRT's point, you might like to know that Vince Muspratt and I worked hard to stop the West Herts Health Authority from closing Watford General District Hospital. I used my appointed position as a Council representative on the South West Herts Community Health Council to persuade them to lodge a statutory objection to the HA's proposal to close Watford General and was part of a delegation who visited the Minister of Health in Whitehall to put the case against closure. Ultimately, we were successful in stopping the closure. I was also heavily involved in the Watford Against Threats to Close Hospitals (WATCH) and was effectively the last person to chair the campaign group at the time the closure proposals were shelved. It may be ancient history but some of us did ensure that Watford would have a better future and I have to say it was principally members of the Labour Group on Watford Council who led the campaign to save the hosptital from start to finish. The Liberals and Tories did almost nothing to save the hospital. As for REW, I have to conclude he is congenitally stupid, in which case it is not his fault. The fact that he chooses to describe a debt-free council as having 'dire' finances just shows what little grasp he and his vacant friends have where real public finances are concerned. It is people like them who squander millions on vanity projects such as the pond on the parade which most people I meet are hugely underwhelmed by what has been done there. It is people like them who - year on year - set the highest level of local council tax because of a costly and unnecessary mayoral administration layer at Watford Council. It is people like them who are building roads and blocks of flats on flood plain in West Watford and compeletly ignoring the necessary infrastructure development to support it. It is people like them who only see pound signs and completely ignore the natural environment of West Watford. What a shower!! I hope the judicial review stops them in their tracks and that the land is given back to the people who have cared for it over many years. Where their gross incompetence is concerned, it has to be concluded "You ain't seen nothing yet". We won't have long to wait for their next disaster! John Dowdle
  • Score: 6

7:05pm Sun 7 Sep 14

Wacko Jacko says...

TRT must be living under a stone. The location of the hospital will be excellent, being served by a new London transport station which links directly to Watford Junction and the rest of the metropolitan line destinations, plus of course a new rapid access road linking to the ring road and the M1, so what's the problem with the location? Added to the transport links it is a short walk from a large proportion of the residential areas of Watford so well placed to serve local residents. We have all worked hard to keep the hospital in Watford, let's not risk losing it through a very small and rapidly dwindling number of selfish plot holders who refuse to do what's best for the town and relocate.
TRT must be living under a stone. The location of the hospital will be excellent, being served by a new London transport station which links directly to Watford Junction and the rest of the metropolitan line destinations, plus of course a new rapid access road linking to the ring road and the M1, so what's the problem with the location? Added to the transport links it is a short walk from a large proportion of the residential areas of Watford so well placed to serve local residents. We have all worked hard to keep the hospital in Watford, let's not risk losing it through a very small and rapidly dwindling number of selfish plot holders who refuse to do what's best for the town and relocate. Wacko Jacko
  • Score: -6

7:25pm Sun 7 Sep 14

TRT says...

Hm. Well let's see... If you draw a straight line between the centres of Hemel, St Albans and Watford, the hospital is actually outside that triangle. And Hemel and St. Albans aren't on the metropolitan line. So that leaves the road... A new road costing £6m across a flood plain and a playing field and somewhere that's scores pretty high on the newt habitat checklist. Joining a road that is chockablock for a quarter of the day... And the other roads in the area that are closed for an hour during match days and might as well be closed most of the rest if the day as they approach gridlock.

If you had a clear map, you wouldn't put it there. And the location is as nothing compared to the fact the trust is still broke and won't see any new facilities anyway. So your shiny new road is really for the housing estate.
Hm. Well let's see... If you draw a straight line between the centres of Hemel, St Albans and Watford, the hospital is actually outside that triangle. And Hemel and St. Albans aren't on the metropolitan line. So that leaves the road... A new road costing £6m across a flood plain and a playing field and somewhere that's scores pretty high on the newt habitat checklist. Joining a road that is chockablock for a quarter of the day... And the other roads in the area that are closed for an hour during match days and might as well be closed most of the rest if the day as they approach gridlock. If you had a clear map, you wouldn't put it there. And the location is as nothing compared to the fact the trust is still broke and won't see any new facilities anyway. So your shiny new road is really for the housing estate. TRT
  • Score: 6

7:36pm Sun 7 Sep 14

TRT says...

Strange idea what constitutes excellent. But not a surprise. It makes sense now why the mare is excellent for Watford. Most people would describe it as barely acceptable.
However I did overlook one positive thing about the hospital being where it is... It IS in the most densely populated ward in Hertfordshire. And possibly the one with the greatest poverty related health issues.
Strange idea what constitutes excellent. But not a surprise. It makes sense now why the mare is excellent for Watford. Most people would describe it as barely acceptable. However I did overlook one positive thing about the hospital being where it is... It IS in the most densely populated ward in Hertfordshire. And possibly the one with the greatest poverty related health issues. TRT
  • Score: 9

7:41am Mon 8 Sep 14

rew001 says...

I repeat what I have said before - the Mayor has done a fine job since her election in 2002 and most people agree, that's why she keeps getting re-elected.

Amusing that John mentions Vince Muspratt, most Labour supporters are too embarrassed to talk about him. As a resident who has taken an interest in the town for many years I find it surprising that John criticises the mayoral system as it was a Labour idea championed by Mr Muspratt.
I repeat what I have said before - the Mayor has done a fine job since her election in 2002 and most people agree, that's why she keeps getting re-elected. Amusing that John mentions Vince Muspratt, most Labour supporters are too embarrassed to talk about him. As a resident who has taken an interest in the town for many years I find it surprising that John criticises the mayoral system as it was a Labour idea championed by Mr Muspratt. rew001
  • Score: -3

8:19am Mon 8 Sep 14

John Dowdle says...

As someone who claims to have taken an interest in the town for many years you will therefore remember that when Vince Muspratt was Leader of Watford Council, they had a housing department which administered and maintained all the council housing stock - all gone now since the Mayor flogged it off and used the sale proceeds to fund vanity projects.
You will also remember that the council had full control over all leisure centres, allotments, parks, open spaces and community centres - all gone now.
You will remember the council employed staff to maintain and clean all the roads and verges in the Watford area - all gone now.
You will remember the council employed staff to run the waste depot and collect all household and commercial waste - all gone now.
Indeed, if local people want to take large items of rubbish for disposal to the local depot, they can't - it is gone since the Libs took control.
Bearing in mind all the work that the former Leader of the Council did before the introduction of a full-time mayor, it made sense then to have a full-time mayor.
Not any more. This is why the current Mayor seems to spend most of her time just swanning around from one photo opportunity to another.
It is a very open question "What does she do all day"?
She is doing not even half the work the elected mayor was supposed to be doing while being paid twice as much as the former Leader.
This represents the economics of the mad house!
Why does she keep getting re-elected? Not because of the job she herself does but because the local Liberals put a lot of effort into producing and distributing far more political propaganda than the other local parties.
The mayor has political assistants and a propaganda department at the Town Hall - all paid for by council tax payers.
The Liberals' combined income from mayoral and councillors' allowances permits them to buy-out most local elections, including the mayoral election - though not parliamentary elections.
There is also the fact that most people locally can't be bothered to change the mayor as her powers and the range of the work she now does is not particularly important to most local residents.
I suspect it is more apathy that keeps getting her re-elected than any ideas of competency or efficiency.
It certainly is not on the grounds of financial efficiency as Watford's council tax is the most expensive in south west Hertfordshire.
Not that anyone would know that fact from your comments or any of the Liberal propaganda sheets paid for by local council tax payers.
As someone who claims to have taken an interest in the town for many years you will therefore remember that when Vince Muspratt was Leader of Watford Council, they had a housing department which administered and maintained all the council housing stock - all gone now since the Mayor flogged it off and used the sale proceeds to fund vanity projects. You will also remember that the council had full control over all leisure centres, allotments, parks, open spaces and community centres - all gone now. You will remember the council employed staff to maintain and clean all the roads and verges in the Watford area - all gone now. You will remember the council employed staff to run the waste depot and collect all household and commercial waste - all gone now. Indeed, if local people want to take large items of rubbish for disposal to the local depot, they can't - it is gone since the Libs took control. Bearing in mind all the work that the former Leader of the Council did before the introduction of a full-time mayor, it made sense then to have a full-time mayor. Not any more. This is why the current Mayor seems to spend most of her time just swanning around from one photo opportunity to another. It is a very open question "What does she do all day"? She is doing not even half the work the elected mayor was supposed to be doing while being paid twice as much as the former Leader. This represents the economics of the mad house! Why does she keep getting re-elected? Not because of the job she herself does but because the local Liberals put a lot of effort into producing and distributing far more political propaganda than the other local parties. The mayor has political assistants and a propaganda department at the Town Hall - all paid for by council tax payers. The Liberals' combined income from mayoral and councillors' allowances permits them to buy-out most local elections, including the mayoral election - though not parliamentary elections. There is also the fact that most people locally can't be bothered to change the mayor as her powers and the range of the work she now does is not particularly important to most local residents. I suspect it is more apathy that keeps getting her re-elected than any ideas of competency or efficiency. It certainly is not on the grounds of financial efficiency as Watford's council tax is the most expensive in south west Hertfordshire. Not that anyone would know that fact from your comments or any of the Liberal propaganda sheets paid for by local council tax payers. John Dowdle
  • Score: 3

2:59pm Mon 8 Sep 14

Veritas says...

Wacko Jacko wrote:
That's right Veritas, tackle the man, not the ball. Criticising people for their handicaps is a disreputable tactic even for a low life like yourself. the plain fact is Watford needs housing more than it needs allotments. The resounding success Mayor Thornhill had in the recent elections demonstrates that the majority agree with her policies, and your lot will stay in the wilderness for the foreseeable future.
who are you talking about wacko? We don't know who you are?
You always deny you are that half wit Councillor Sharpe, and we don't
blame you.

Offering bribes to leave the Allotments whilst the Judicial Review
is going on is very strange?

We hear that the Dodgy mayor does not look very happy these days.
must be a few people in that Town Hall, worried about the Outcome
of the Court case.
Lets hope they have to pay back all the mis spent money
[quote][p][bold]Wacko Jacko[/bold] wrote: That's right Veritas, tackle the man, not the ball. Criticising people for their handicaps is a disreputable tactic even for a low life like yourself. the plain fact is Watford needs housing more than it needs allotments. The resounding success Mayor Thornhill had in the recent elections demonstrates that the majority agree with her policies, and your lot will stay in the wilderness for the foreseeable future.[/p][/quote]who are you talking about wacko? We don't know who you are? You always deny you are that half wit Councillor Sharpe, and we don't blame you. Offering bribes to leave the Allotments whilst the Judicial Review is going on is very strange? We hear that the Dodgy mayor does not look very happy these days. must be a few people in that Town Hall, worried about the Outcome of the Court case. Lets hope they have to pay back all the mis spent money Veritas
  • Score: 6

6:53pm Mon 8 Sep 14

#UKMum says...

"Wacko"

Watford doesn't necessarily need more housing. The roads in the town suffer from gridlock a good percentage of the working day as it is but if you are sitting in the Town Hall all day, perhaps you haven't noticed. There is an excellent train service to living places a few stops up the line. The whole of SE England doesn't necessarily HAVE to live in Watford per se. It's time to consider other methods of funding Council coffers other than just increasing the rate paying population ad infinitum.
Incidentally I was in conversation with someone who has knowledge of dealing with WC on a business level recently and unfortunately what was said was not complimentary.
"Wacko" Watford doesn't necessarily need more housing. The roads in the town suffer from gridlock a good percentage of the working day as it is but if you are sitting in the Town Hall all day, perhaps you haven't noticed. There is an excellent train service to living places a few stops up the line. The whole of SE England doesn't necessarily HAVE to live in Watford per se. It's time to consider other methods of funding Council coffers other than just increasing the rate paying population ad infinitum. Incidentally I was in conversation with someone who has knowledge of dealing with WC on a business level recently and unfortunately what was said was not complimentary. #UKMum
  • Score: 3

8:39pm Mon 8 Sep 14

Veritas says...

Back to the allotments!!!!!!!
Wacko and co claim that the Allotments are underused and no waiting
list. Which we know is not true.

Why are no opposition parties, even the faded Greens not questioning
these lies? Surly that is a way to gain credibility in Watford Politics
by discrediting The lying Libs(got a ring to it).

This has got to be the best time in years to uncover the rubbish that
the Libs are doing to Watford.
Back to the allotments!!!!!!! Wacko and co claim that the Allotments are underused and no waiting list. Which we know is not true. Why are no opposition parties, even the faded Greens not questioning these lies? Surly that is a way to gain credibility in Watford Politics by discrediting The lying Libs(got a ring to it). This has got to be the best time in years to uncover the rubbish that the Libs are doing to Watford. Veritas
  • Score: 4

9:24am Tue 9 Sep 14

rew001 says...

John 's recollections of how Watford was differs greatly from reality. It was a second rate council run overseen by secon rate politicians, who by John's own admission either did not know what was going on or, if they did, washed their hands of responsibilty. Pretty shameful.
John 's recollections of how Watford was differs greatly from reality. It was a second rate council run overseen by secon rate politicians, who by John's own admission either did not know what was going on or, if they did, washed their hands of responsibilty. Pretty shameful. rew001
  • Score: -1

10:11am Tue 9 Sep 14

John Dowdle says...

One of my recollections is when the Deputy Leader of the Conservative Group on Watford Council came out with a statement "Watford is a tinpot town".
If he was around to see it now, I can barely guess at what what kind of statement he would make now to see a full-time over-paid mayor and chief executive costing Watford a huge amount more and delivering a whole lot less than at that time. Between them, they must be costing Watford council tax payers at least £250,000 a year. A very high price!
People in Watford will eventually wake up to the fact that they are being ripped-off big-time under the current hugely expensive administration, which constitutes appalling value for money.
That is why Watford's council tax level is the highest in the county and not the average as was promised by our incompetent mayor and ineffectual Liberal Democrat Group on Watford Council.
Just look at the facade of the new market and the pond. What an utter waste of money and what a flagrant disregard for Watford's history.
All I know is that while I was a Councillor I held the best attendance record of any councillor over the 4 years I served, including all the Liberal Democrat councillors. As one of the opposition groups on the Council, the Liberals were absolutely useless and never did anything.
I also believe that the implementation of the shared services between Watford and Three Rivers has been delayed due to incompetence by the current administration group. Do you deny or confirm that fact?
One of my recollections is when the Deputy Leader of the Conservative Group on Watford Council came out with a statement "Watford is a tinpot town". If he was around to see it now, I can barely guess at what what kind of statement he would make now to see a full-time over-paid mayor and chief executive costing Watford a huge amount more and delivering a whole lot less than at that time. Between them, they must be costing Watford council tax payers at least £250,000 a year. A very high price! People in Watford will eventually wake up to the fact that they are being ripped-off big-time under the current hugely expensive administration, which constitutes appalling value for money. That is why Watford's council tax level is the highest in the county and not the average as was promised by our incompetent mayor and ineffectual Liberal Democrat Group on Watford Council. Just look at the facade of the new market and the pond. What an utter waste of money and what a flagrant disregard for Watford's history. All I know is that while I was a Councillor I held the best attendance record of any councillor over the 4 years I served, including all the Liberal Democrat councillors. As one of the opposition groups on the Council, the Liberals were absolutely useless and never did anything. I also believe that the implementation of the shared services between Watford and Three Rivers has been delayed due to incompetence by the current administration group. Do you deny or confirm that fact? John Dowdle
  • Score: 0

2:23pm Tue 9 Sep 14

Harry's Bar says...

John Dowdle wrote:
Jimmy The Kid wrote:
For allotments that have repeatedly been described as beautiful, irreplaceable and magnificent, they look like a right dump in that video.
Do you think it is accidental - or deliberate ?
Have you never heard of PR - or "spin" ?
Dr Goebbels would praise Watford Council !
You've gone way too far.
[quote][p][bold]John Dowdle[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jimmy The Kid[/bold] wrote: For allotments that have repeatedly been described as beautiful, irreplaceable and magnificent, they look like a right dump in that video.[/p][/quote]Do you think it is accidental - or deliberate ? Have you never heard of PR - or "spin" ? Dr Goebbels would praise Watford Council ![/p][/quote]You've gone way too far. Harry's Bar
  • Score: -1

2:33pm Tue 9 Sep 14

John Dowdle says...

Harry's Bar wrote:
John Dowdle wrote:
Jimmy The Kid wrote:
For allotments that have repeatedly been described as beautiful, irreplaceable and magnificent, they look like a right dump in that video.
Do you think it is accidental - or deliberate ?
Have you never heard of PR - or "spin" ?
Dr Goebbels would praise Watford Council !
You've gone way too far.
Do you mean that I have gone too far?
So you think I produced the video of the site?
I am not the one using the dark arts of propaganda techniques.
That is being done by people at Watford Council.
Is it not they who are offering bribes to allotment holders?
Do you not think they are the ones who have gone too far?
[quote][p][bold]Harry's Bar[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John Dowdle[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jimmy The Kid[/bold] wrote: For allotments that have repeatedly been described as beautiful, irreplaceable and magnificent, they look like a right dump in that video.[/p][/quote]Do you think it is accidental - or deliberate ? Have you never heard of PR - or "spin" ? Dr Goebbels would praise Watford Council ![/p][/quote]You've gone way too far.[/p][/quote]Do you mean that I have gone too far? So you think I produced the video of the site? I am not the one using the dark arts of propaganda techniques. That is being done by people at Watford Council. Is it not they who are offering bribes to allotment holders? Do you not think they are the ones who have gone too far? John Dowdle
  • Score: 3
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

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