Saving The Working Boys Home *UPDATE*

[Biomech]

So one guy makes the decision? In some countries, that's called a dictatorship

[Denise Lloyd]

Where does this person who made this decision live?  Not too near Hereford I can bet my bottom dollar on that. 

[Ubique]

Try Ross on Wye !

[Denise Lloyd]

Says it all then doesn't it

[twowheelsgood]

Rudhall Manor just east of Ross. Search for housing development in the grounds of Caradoc Court at Sellack to get a flavour of his modus operandi.

 

How did we get here? One person, not local, doesn’t live locally, has the final say, without debate, without the input of the ward councillor, to sweep away our heritage, given by the City's greatest benefactor for the benefit of local people. This isn't democracy by any stretch. This cabinet system is without doubt the worst thing ever to happen to this county - we'd have been better off staying with Worcestershire. At least there are checks and balances in the two tier county system. Now we just have the crony system.

 

I note the HT report doesn't say what is to happen to the fire station and who is to pay for its demise.

[Cambo]

Yes Rudhall manor I went there this morning to see mr bramer & I found him to be a very unsavoury character indeed but he didn't faze me!!

[dippyhippy]

Glad to hear that Cambo!

 

Two Wheels, I heartily agree with your last post - they have to go. They are eroding our city's heritage, history and character. They don't give two hoots for the folk who do actually live here, and for far too long they have got away with it.

No more.

Even if it takes until next Mays election, I know the tide will finally turn. There has been expensive mistakes following catastrophic failure, following gross incompetence.

They have most definitely had their day.

[Cambo]

It was quite eventful dippy mr bramer had been out all night by the look of it? & he was none to pleased to see me I can tell you!!

[Ubique]

Dippy , you are so right , they must loose power , my worry is that they all , except one live and represent villages and towns outside of Hereford and if in their residents eyes they appear to be doing a good job we have a problem , this can be overcome by the other Parties putting up excellent local People to stand against them.

Hells bells , I know nothing about the setup so all the above may well be rubbish - however I know that they must be booted out of power May 2015.

[dippyhippy]

Oooh! Cambo! Should I PM you for the gory details....or can you share with the group???

[Cambo]

Pm me & I'll share it with you & if you think I should post it then I might well do?

Also had mr Johnson ring me tonite?

[dippyhippy]

Evening Ubique!

I know what you mean, but even looking at the Pontrilas by election, a lot of folk thought the conservative candidate would get back in.....but no! Wizard Wonky won the race!

I honestly think now, after all that has happened - they will be out!

What we need to be doing is constantly refreshing people's memory, so that they don't forget the amount of costly mistakes they have made.

[Aylestone Voice]

But reading between the lines and previous posts would not the ward member have supported, or at least not objected!, to this ultimately.

As to getting rid of the tories well we will have to wait and see in 2015 but I would not see IOC, the indies or the Libs as saviours. History tells us that what politicians do in opposition is very different to what they do when in power!!

[dippyhippy]

Well.

 

Having just had a detailed update from Cambo, I am almost lost for words.

 

I will just say this - I am in no doubt that Cllr Bramer reads these pages. This message is for you.

 

You should be feeling extremely ashamed of yourself.

 

You know why.

[Ubique]

Hey Dippy , it's not fair that you are holding a secret from us ! But we understand why - I think !

 

Note that HCC have a press release on their website say how much we need a new Fire Station and the Bath St location suits everybody! It also adds that the old Fire Station and the land can be used to the benefit of the residents of Hereford ,for example Social Housing. Time will tell

[dippyhippy]

Afternoon Ubique!

There is also a piece on HT from Harry B.

Here, he says what a jolly good deal it is....absolutely the best thing for everybody. Cue, pats on the back all round.

So successful, does Harry view this deal, where he gives away a valuable and irreplaceable piece of our history, for a plot of land half the size, that he intends to do it again!

If anybody can put up a link......I will be very grateful!

[twowheelsgood]

'Cabinet councillor defends fire station land swap deal' - link here - http://tinyurl.com/oegsztr

 

'Defending the deal, Cllr Bramer said that as the council continued to consolidate its locations to cut costs it was “likely†that further buildings would be sold or transferred.' Presumably ignoring public opinion in the process.

[Cambo]

Evening all anybody heard of the marches transport body? Here's the minutes notice how few representative there are from HC

 

The Marches Local Transport Body (LTB) A Minutes of a meeting of The Marches Local Transport Body held on Tuesday,

28 May 2013 at 2.00pm in Meeting Room 3, Darby House, Lawn Central, Telford

Present:-

Councillors W A M McClements (Telford & Wrekin Council); M T Price (Shropshire Council); P D Price (Herefordshire Council); H Rhodes (Telford & Wrekin Council); C Wild (Shropshire Council); and Mr G Wynn OBE (Local Enterprise Partnership).

Officers:- Steve Burgess, Head of Transportation and Access (Herefordshire Council); Jacqui Casey, Local Enterprise Partnership Co-ordinator (Local Enterprise Partnership); Jan Cook, Team Leader Transport Planning (Shropshire Council); Keith Harris, Interim Service Delivery Manager – Highways (Telford & Wrekin Council); Geoff Kitching, LTB Technical Officer Group Secretary (Telford & Wrekin Council); and Deborah Moseley, Democratic Services Support Officer (Telford & Wrekin Council).

Also Present:-

Councillor P Adams (Shropshire Council).

1. Welcome, Introductions and Apologies

The Interim Service Delivery Manager – Highways (Telford & Wrekin Council) welcomed Members and Technical Officers to the first meeting of the Marches Local Transport Body (LTB) and individuals introduced themselves.

Apologies were received from Councillor R B Hamilton (Herefordshire Council), Elizabeth Charlton (Department for Transport) and Katie McCann (Department for Transport).

2. Appointment of Chair for the Meeting

RESOLVED – that Councillor W A M McClements be elected as Chair for the

meeting.

3. Scene Setting

The Secretary of the LTB Technical Officers Group (Telford & Wrekin Council) explained the major scheme funding process which had previously been in place for many years and provided funding direct to local authorities for transport schemes over £5m. The programme had been managed by Central Government which had established a detailed process for appraisal. The process of securing funds was extremely resource intensive and lengthy. However, following a consultation period, the Department for Transport (DfT) had devolved its major scheme funding programme for the next spending review period (2015-2019) to „Local Transport Bodies‟ (LTB) which were based on the existing Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) geographies and would be responsible for allocating and managing the devolved major scheme funds. For the Marches area it was agreed that the three Transport Authorities (Herefordshire, Telford & Wrekin and Shropshire) would form an informal partnership with the Marches LEP to form the basis of the LTB. It was anticipated that for the Marches area, the budget share allocation could be in the region of £16m although a degree of over-programming would be need to be allowed for as major scheme programmes were notorious for slippage due to complexities in construction and delivery. It was, therefore, anticipated that, at the next meeting of the LTB, the Technical Officers Group (TOG) would present

1

[Cambo]

an outline programme of up to £25m to cover the full four year period of the spending review (2015-19).

In response to questions, Members were advised that the figures quoted were indicative pending the spending review and funding would be allocated through a formula based on population size. It would then be for the LTB to allocate the funds over the four year period. Traditionally, the major scheme threshold was £5m but it was felt there was a strong local case to reduce this threshold to £1m and it was hoped that DfT would agree to the reduction to better align with local priorities. DfT were entitled to attend and observe meetings of the LTB and had formally asked to be invited, but unfortunately were unable to make this meeting.

4. Terms of Reference

The Interim Service Delivery Manager – Highways (Telford & Wrekin Council) presented a report which set out the proposed Terms of Reference and governance arrangements for the Marches LTB. He formally thanked the four member organisations for their agreement in creating this informal partnership. He referred Members to the report which outlined the role of the board, governance issues and also the key objectives set out in Appendix 1 to the report. Underpinning the LTB was the TOG which constituted officers from the member organisations, alongside whom there would be an Independent Technical Evaluator (ITE). There was also the Scheme Evaluation Sub-Group, Transport for the Marches LEP Growth Agenda Sub-Group, and The Marches Rail Sub- Group. The Terms of Reference was set out in Appendix 2 to the report.

In response to questioning, Members were advised that the Sub-Groups were administered and facilitated by the TOG and that the LTB would consider all forms of transport scheme – road, rail (passenger and freight), bus and sustainable transport (eg cycling, walking) – seeking capital funding rather than revenue, as not all schemes would fall under the guise of the LTB. It was noted that government was moving towards decentralisation of certain franchising systems for rail and that a unified voice for the region would be essential. A body of expertise with regard to rail existed in the West Midlands Regional Rail Forum and Marches Rail Group and it may be necessary to invite those groups to join the Marches LTB as Associate Members in future.

The mechanism for the release of funds to the accountable body was not yet known. Discussion took place around how funding could be gained for schemes above the funding allocation and it was stressed that the Board needed to remain mindful of its budget and priorities, although there may be other opportunities outside this partnership for LTAs to seek additional funds elsewhere.

Members agreed that it was important to encourage deputies to attend all meetings of the LTB as a contingency measure to ensure that a quorum was always available.

RESOLVED – that:-

(a) the Marches Local Transport Body governance arrangements as set out in part B of the report be approved; and

(b) the Terms of Reference for The Marches Local Transport Body outlined at Appendix 2 of the report be approved.

[Cambo]

5. Draft Assurance Framework

The Interim Service Delivery Manager – Highways (Telford & Wrekin Council) advised that the Draft Assurance Framework (AF) had been written in conjunction with Officers from all Member bodies following the DfT‟s Guidance on Assurance Frameworks which was published late in 2012. The draft had been submitted to DfT in accordance with DfT deadlines; the DfT had partly responded on Part 1 (purpose, structure, and operating principles) and appropriate amendments had been incorporated within the document. A further response from DfT was awaited on Parts 2 and 3 (dealing with technical matters and processes). The AF proposed that Telford & Wrekin Council would act as the legally constituted “Accountable Body†with all necessary financial, legal, audit and administrative services and resources being provided free of charge. The Accountable Body would also hold the devolved major scheme funding and make payments to the delivery bodies. Independent financial auditors would be appointed to verify that the LTB was operating effectively within the terms of its agreed AF. The Members were advised that the Chair designate would be required to sign off the finalised AF before the next meeting of the Marches LTB.

Members sought clarification on the voting mechanism and were advised that in accordance with paragraphs 11.4 and 11.5 of the draft AF, each of the four Full Member organisations would have one vote each and the three LTA Members would have second and casting votes in the event of an equal number of votes being cast in favour of/against decisions. This meant there was no mathematical requirement for the Chair to have a casting vote. The quorum for the meeting was three Members, consisting of one representative or deputy of each of the LTAs. Conflicts of interest were required to be disclosed at meetings.

RESOLVED – that the Assurance Framework attached to the report at Appendix 1 be approved for re-submission to the Department for Transport.

6. Technical Support and Processes

The Secretary of the LTB Technical Officers Group (Telford & Wrekin Council) informed Members that a significant level of technical resource was required to support the LTB and, in this regard, it was explained that a Technical Officer Group (TOG) had been set up to facilitate ongoing discussion with the DfT. Formal endorsement of the TOG was now being sought. The TOG would help the Marches LTB to oversee and manage development of the major scheme programme including ongoing review, delivery and post opening scheme monitoring and evaluation. This would include consideration and assessment of a wide variety of highly technical and complex supporting scheme information, as well as management of the overall Transport Business Case and associated scheme approval procedures. Each LTA and LEP Officer sitting on the TOG would act independently of their host scheme promoting authority.

An Independent Technical Evaluator (ITE) would also need to be appointed to provide appropriate advice and guidance for the group and to sign off the prioritised list of schemes to be forwarded to the DfT together with all associated technical reports. The Chair Designate would be asked to make an appointment to the post of ITE due to the short time available to assess and prioritise schemes.

In response to questioning, Members were advised that the DfT had provided a one off grant of £131,579 to support the work of The Marches LTB (with equal grants being made to other LTBs) and it was proposed that this be used to fund the work of the ITE over the period June 2013-April 2019. There was no additional funding for the TOG and each scheme promoter would be expected to bear the costs associated with its own

3

[Cambo]

major scheme submissions to the LTB including all Business Case development and post opening monitoring and evaluation costs. All three LTAs were members of the West Midlands Highways Alliance (WMHA) and it was intended to use the WMHA Framework to appoint the ITE due to the tight timescales involved. Members were advised that consultants in this framework were split into two tiers, depending on the level of work packages required. The sole Tier 1 consultant was Atkins, with Tier 2 being Jacobs and WSP Group. It was not considered that the appointment of an ITE from a particular company would preclude that company from future procurement processes although further advice could be obtained in this regard and also with regard to contracting the services of the ITE.

Members were referred to the report which detailed the four stages of the Scheme Approval Process: essentially prior to July, scheme promoters would submit Strategic Outline Cases to the TOG for assessment. TOG and the ITE would consider these alongside the LEP Growth Strategy and each Authority‟s Local Transport Plans and Local Development Frameworks, possibly including some cross-boundary work. If approval was given at this stage, the scheme promoter would then have confidence to go on to provide further detail in an Outline Business Case, for further consideration by the TOG and, if approved at that stage it would receive Programme Entry status and formally enter the LTB programme. Each Approval Stage and Business Case would build upon the last, it was a very fluid system and, although a scheme may receive initial approval, it may become clear as progress was made that a scheme was not suitable for Full Approval. Funding from the LTB would be fixed, so if the scheme costs increased, the scheme promoter would have to bear the cost of the shortfall. However, there may be some programme slippage over the four year period for a wide variety of reasons (eg problems with ground conditions, poor winter conditions, etc) and some flexibility would be required. The DfT would probably wish to monitor the LTB to ensure that timely delivery of suitable schemes was made, and if the LTB failed in this regard, future allocations may possibly be affected.

Members were advised that the Funding Allocation would not necessarily be split equally between the three Authorities or distributed on a “turn†basis, but rather that each scheme put forward would be independently evaluated and decisions made on the basis of a whole range of factors including value for money, impact on businesses and job creation etc. Whilst some concern was expressed that problems could be encountered if the funding allocation was not shared roughly evenly, it was noted that similar experience of cross-boundary prioritisation on the English Severn & Wye Regional Flood & Coastal Committee was positive. It was suggested that each Authority needed to decide on projects deliverable within the timeframe given and then also have a “wishlist†of projects. In this way the likelihood of each Authority receiving a portion of the funding allocation was increased.

Further discussion took place between Members on alternative sources of funding and it was considered that the LEP Board may need to take the lead in this respect as part of it‟s Growth Plan to ensure job creation in the immediate future and in the longer term to ensure that the Marches would be a place where businesses could continue to grow.

Concern was expressed at the tight timescale that would be in operation prior to the next meeting of the Board, particularly with regard to the work of the ITE. Whilst it was acknowledged that the timetable was tight, it would be the Officers of the TOG undertaking the majority of the evaluation work, with the ITE evaluating and moderating the scoring over the course of, say, a single day. It was essential that a Chair designate be appointed to ensure that both the formal invitation to scheme promoters and the appointment of the ITE could be made early in the process.

[Cambo]

 

 

RESOLVED – that:-

(a) the setting up of the supporting Marches Local Transport Body Technical Officer group (TOG) be approved;

(b) the appointment of an Independent Technical Evaluator (ITE) consultant be approved;

© the timetable for the completion of the Local Transport Body Major Scheme Programme for the 4 year period 2015/16-2018/19 as set out in Part B of the report; and

(d) the Chair Designate of the Marches Local Transport Body, as resolved at minute number 7 below, following consultation with the Secretary of the Technical Officers Group, be authorised to complete all necessary discussions with the Department for Transport to facilitate final ratification of the devolved major scheme programme at the July meeting of the Marches Local Transport Body.

7. Elect Chair Designate

Discussion took place on an annual appointment to the position of Chair, with the Chair rotating between Members of the LTAs. It was further considered that a Vice Chair should be appointed, but that the Vice-Chair should not be a Deputy Member.

RESOLVED – that:-

(a) Councillor W A M McClements be elected as Chair for a 12 month period;

(b) Councillor C Wild be elected as Vice-Chair for the same 12 month period as

in (a) above; and

© the Chair for future years to be rotated between the Local Transport

Authorities.

8. Any Other Business

None.

9. Date of Next Meeting

Members were reminded that at least one representative from each Authority would be required to attend and it was hoped to give Members a week to consider the paperwork.

RESOLVED – that the next meeting of The Marches Local Transport Body take place at 12 noon on Monday, 15 July 2013 in Telford.

The meeting ended at 3.54pm

Chairman: ......................................................................

[dippyhippy]

Thanks for providing the link, Two Wheels. Much appreciated as always!

 

Evening Cambo!

There's a lot there to read through!

I shall have to read it at least three times, to make any kind of sense of it..........!

 

Be patient, and I shall respond!

[megilleland]

I read this diatribe and it felt like I was sitting in a traffic jam getting nowhere. I am really concerned that we are being run by people who haven't a clue on communicating with the public and cannot tell us in plain English what they plan to do. No doubt this smoke screen is what they are directed to do by those above ie central government and these LTBs themselves haven't a clue what their role is in this pantomine of jargon.

 

Not long now before our local councils are wound up, with all assets sold and responsibilities transferred elsewhere. 

 

I'll be down at the polling station on 22nd May and voting to get out of the EU, where all this nonsense is generated, and the we know what is best for you approach.

 

I can here them saying:  "Just pay your council tax, national taxes and EU subscription (£55 million a day) and shut up.

[dippyhippy]

Heavens above!

I have read this several times now Cambo, and I still don't think I'm any the wiser!!

 

Most worrying, is that I have always held the belief that "Tog" was a warmth rating for my snuggly duvet - now, horror of horrors, I discover this is not the case! A "Tog" is a technical officers group......well, who knew???

 

I'm afraid I will need someone more fluent in gobbledegook to translate!

Even an extra glass of wine hasn't helped....and that in itself is unusual!!

[megilleland]

Council approves land and building transfer

 

15 April 2014 Herefordshire Council Newsroom

 

 

Herefordshire Council has approved the transfer of land and buildings to Hereford & Worcester Fire and Rescue Service (HWFRS), subject to planning permission, to allow the development of a new fire station in Hereford.

 

The Bath Street offices in Hereford, which are surplus to requirement following the relocation of staff to other locations, will be transferred to HWFRS via a land swap.  This not only ensures that the council receives the market value equivalent for the site and isn’t left with a costly vacant property, but also provides land at the former fire station site for the delivery of other council priorities, such as affordable housing.

 

The transfer will also allow HWFRS to develop a modern, centrally located facility within Hereford, which is essential for the protection of the city’s residents, historic core and local businesses.

 

Councillor Harry Bramer, cabinet member for contracts and assets, said: “As the council continues to consolidate its locations in order to reduce internal operating costs, it is likely that further buildings will be sold or transferred.

 

“The transfer deal with HWFRS is the best option for the Bath Street site, as it will not only provide the city with a modern fire and rescue facility, but will also provide land for the delivery of other council priorities on the site of the current fire station on St Owen Street.

 

“We are aware that HWFRS has available government funding for a new facility and urgently needs to relocate, as its current site is well beyond its useful life.  From a fire and rescue point of view, Bath Street is considered to be the most viable location in which to effectively protect the city’s residents, businesses and historic core, an option validated through response modelling and sequential testing.â€

 

Councillor Derek Prodger MBE, chairman of Hereford & Worcester Fire Authority, said: “We have investigated and had to rule out a number of potential sites in the Hereford city area, but are delighted that Herefordshire Council has now approved the transfer of this land so we are able to redevelop the site and create a new fire station fit for purpose.  The location of the site meets all of our criteria including the need to be located near to where our retained firefighters live and being centrally located to ensure our fire crews are able to respond to emergencies across the city and beyond into nearby towns and villages.

 

“Officers from Hereford & Worcester Fire and Rescue Service will be holding a public meeting in the near future so that local residents can view the proposed designs.  I feel this investment in Hereford is a big step forward and will ensure Hereford & Worcester Fire and Rescue Service can continue to serve its communities in the best way possible, whilst providing great accommodation and modern training facilities for our crews.â€

 

The new Bath Street fire and rescue facility will be subject to consultation taking place through the statutory planning process.

 

I can see a public inquiry on the horizon. 

 

[Cambo]

I know where coming from megilleland but the thing is this HC say there's no money to move bus station?…but surely they can get funding for moving it through marches transport body? It seems that's why they were set up to fund schemes like creating a transport hub?

[dippyhippy]

Council approves land and building transfer

 

15 April 2014 Herefordshire Council Newsroom

 

 

 

 

I can see a public inquiry on the horizon.

 

I can see a riot!

[dippyhippy]

The thing is, it actually wouldn't cost much to re-site the buses.

A few painted lines, a couple of perspex bus shelters, and laminated timetables!

Crikey, even with my limited DIY skills, I'd be happy to give it a go for free!

[Cambo]

Unbelievable dippy & to think the marches transport body are giving away money for such schemes why isn't HC applying for a slice of it to fund a new transport hub??