Recommended Posts

  • Replies 211
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I only wish you had posted them individually. 

I suspect a lot of the money will have gone to consultants and advisers - people who are not actually connected to the real world. They will be the people who suggested what should be done - and how much the punters should be charged for the privilege of seeing the results of those decisions.

 

I doubt if anyone on the council made had much say about what was done, apart from the decision to pay consultation fees to others.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I always wonder how schemes like this start. Someone must at some point say "I know lets knock down the market square and create a modern,  minimalist replacement. It will be totally out of keeping in an area surrounded by Victorian buildings but it's a bargain at £17 million."

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The lady in charge worked for the Natural Trust and while she may be very nice I doubt she has an "enterpreneurial" bone in her body. And when you combine that with Ted Cantle (one of the high priests of wokedom in the UK) you have the recipe for the current omnishambles.

 

And anyway, whatever happened to Bob White and the Sheriff's Commission all those years ago? Was it crushed by the wobbly N?

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Cliff Ton said:

I suspect a lot of the money will have gone to consultants and advisers - people who are not actually connected to the real world. They will be the people who suggested what should be done - and how much the punters should be charged for the privilege of seeing the results of those decisions.

 

I doubt if anyone on the council made had much say about what was done, apart from the decision to pay consultation fees to others.

 

11 hours ago, philmayfield said:

‘Piss up’ and ‘brewery’ come to mind when observing the doings of the Nottingham City Council.

Well it’s been a Labour Council for too many years, we City residents have the highest Council Tax bill in the country and that’s before the latest bombshell of the district heating company in trouble and needing £17.5m to upgrade the facilities.   Nottingham City needs to recruit proven businessmen (and women) to take the reins rather than ‘career councillors’ who don’t  know how to ‘run a brewery’

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps if they stopped dreaming up grandiose schemes and concentrated on simple routine, business people might not be necessary and the council would not be hemorrhaging money.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, LizzieM said:

 

Well it’s been a Labour Council for too many years, we City residents have the highest Council Tax bill in the country and that’s before the latest bombshell of the district heating company in trouble and needing £17.5m to upgrade the facilities.   Nottingham City needs to recruit proven businessmen (and women) to take the reins rather than ‘career councillors’ who don’t  know how to ‘run a brewery’

It's chicken and egg. In the days of the old city corporation if you were a councillor or alderman you could sit on committees that dealt with education (including higher), water supply and sewerage, police, fire, ambulance, public transport, social services, public health, council housing, highways, and. before nationalisation gas and electricity supplies. Over the years central government has removed more and more powers and either centralised them or given them to appointed quangos - councillors nowadays are just a bit of democratic window dressing and that must affect the calibre of those standing for election.

 

There were plans to expand the Eastwood Incinerator 20 years ago which would have addresseed the capacity constraints but there was opposition from those who had naive faith in recycling.  And while £17.5 million sounds a lot, a Premier League football club would drop that on a single player without thinking. And in the context of the local economy (amortised over several years) it's not big bucks - especially when you compare it with the tens of billions HMG has hosed on the COVID crisis with lots of very questionable supplier deals.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bamber said:

And while £17.5 million sounds a lot, a Premier League football club would drop that on a single player without thinking. And in the context of the local economy (amortised over several years) it's not big bucks - especially when you compare it with the tens of billions HMG has hosed on the COVID crisis with lots of very questionable supplier deals.

 

The football analogy is not really relevant, they're not dipping in the public purse.

 

In the round we're looking at lord knows how much to refurbish Eastcroft, £17 million for the square, £30 million for the castle, £560 million for the tram, another £200 million for the proposed Kimberley link plus losses of almost a £1million a WEEK.

Add to that the  proposed  battery tram at a cost of £2.3 BILLION (over £46 million per mile),  It's no wonder the county jumped ship and Broxtowe wants nothing to do with it. Amortise that lot and the final total will make your eyes water!

Are taxpayers really getting good value? How is fair to compare a national (Covid) expenditure with that of a local council? of course the numbers will be bigger and proves... well not a lot really.

 

Raising questions about dodgy suppliers brings to mind Cllr Robinson who was allowed to resign after admitting his nefarious actions when trying to force through the Derby  planning application - he should have been prosecuted and all his council dealings investigated - but that's politics for you.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Far be it from me want to defend the council but to be fair the recent castle refurbishment was funded in part by the heritage lottery fund and a local business enterprise scheme. I cannot find a breakdown of how much money was paid by all those involved but I dare say the rate payers portion was/will be substantial. 
Moving on I don’t know what the cost of having ‘clippies’ on the trams to take fares was but they have been withdrawn and it’s a matter of honesty now to pay for your journey with the occasional and very rare spot checks by inspectors to catch fare dodgers. I wonder how many actually pay for their journey especially shorter runs. I don’t use the trams a great deal but I haven’t seen an inspector for ages.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was orginally £24 million including the £600,000 for plan development. The budget ran over by 25% to £30 million. The lottery tipped up £12.9 million, an eneterprise fund £5million and £2million direct from the business rates account -  although there are different figures for the mix depending on which version you read.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2021 at 12:07 AM, Brew said:

 

The football analogy is not really relevant, they're not dipping in the public purse.

 

In the round we're looking at lord knows how much to refurbish Eastcroft, £17 million for the square, £30 million for the castle, £560 million for the tram, another £200 million for the proposed Kimberley link plus losses of almost a £1million a WEEK.

Add to that the  proposed  battery tram at a cost of £2.3 BILLION (over £46 million per mile),  It's no wonder the county jumped ship and Broxtowe wants nothing to do with it. Amortise that lot and the final total will make your eyes water!

Are taxpayers really getting good value? How is fair to compare a national (Covid) expenditure with that of a local council? of course the numbers will be bigger and proves... well not a lot really.

 

Raising questions about dodgy suppliers brings to mind Cllr Robinson who was allowed to resign after admitting his nefarious actions when trying to force through the Derby  planning application - he should have been prosecuted and all his council dealings investigated - but that's politics for you.

 

 

You seem to be confused. The tram is a concession and is not operated or financed by the city. The original go-ahead for the tram came from central government and any expansion of the network will only happen if the government approves. 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not unusual to have a bus company on board. NCT were involved as part of the team running the original franchise.

 

This sounds interesting if you want to hear the thinking behind the castle revamp...

 

https://nlha.org.uk/event/the-nottingham-castle-project-dr-richard-gaunt-nottingham-civic-society/?fbclid=IwAR3rW_p6S_WHAoRqlr-cppu9uFpA0uyu8r-50o4RmLJEtopVoe16GMKEeR8

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 10 months later...

I’ve just seen that entrance to the castle although still £13 or £12 for concessions (family tickets available) now gives free entry as many time as you want for a year. I think that’s good value. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to be the practice now to charge an outlandish admission fee but to say that the buyer can return as many times as they like within a specified period of time. The Crich Tramway Museum operate the same strategy.  That's fine and dandy when people live locally but not so good for those who don't. What was wrong with the previous system of a fair admission fee for each visit?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking of Crich, went there with the wife's cousin and her husband.

I bought the tickets and we were told the same info, re coming back.

I gave the tickets to cousin as were coming home the day after and not sure of our next visit to Nottingham. Thought no more about it until we found that said cousin and husband were going back to Crich, taking a different couple with them each time. Not only that but they swore blind that they were the original four when the tickets were bought, after being asked by the staff. So we never did get our free returns. (Newhaven Fort operate the same system).

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have had the grandchildren all week so went to the castle the other day. I shelled out my £27 for a family pass. They enjoyed it. It was lovely to go back. I didn’t get chance to look around the ‘castle’ building completely, I don’t walk too well and it was so hot and perhaps it’s not fair to say yet but initial impressions, I preferred it as it was. The grounds are little changed. They have deckchairs dotted around and I sat looking out towards Wilford Hill and had a nice snooze for an hour or so while they played in the adventure park. We’ve already been back, I WILL get my monies worth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

Castle administrators go into liquidation.

 

The makeover from a few years ago obviously hasn't paid its way. Numbers are down and it didn't turn out to be the world-beater as predicted.

 

https://westbridgfordwire.com/breaking-nottingham-castle-closes-to-public-as-trust-appoints-liquidators/

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is very disappointing news. Since my post dated 12th August I’ve been there probably a dozen times. My grandson asked me to take him only Saturday just gone and we spent several hours there. His request, he loves it there.
I don’t know how well this closure was know but I heard staff selling tickets on the premise that ‘you can come back any time for a year’.

Pretty disgusted to be honest. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...