Author: admin

Great News

The School Adjudicator has ruled that the school closures should not go ahead. Clearly there’s going to be some rushing around at Trafford Council to enable the cricket ground to get its hands on the receipt from the land sale. As it stands, Stretford High will keep the land and there’s suggestion in the ruling that they’d like to get their own hands on the £21m, although there’s also hints within the adjudication that compromise could be reached.

Essentially, the School Adjudicator has said the prospect of new funds from the Government as part of the Building Schools for the Future programme doesn’t in itself provide grounds for closing the schools, both of which have received recent positive Ofsteds.

Those positive Ofsteds and the fact that parents have really got behind the two schools as separate and valued establishments in their own right give a real cause for optimism. Lostock’s numbers have been hit by the uncertainty over its future. But some of its facilities are 2nd to none, especially in performing arts, and with its best ever academic performance, there’s no reason for it not to flourish. It’s going to have to get its marketing right, but it has a lot going for it.

This is a very positive decision.

Image by Iqbal Nuril Anwar from Pixabay

The news that the Govt has given the go-ahead for plannning consent to be granted after a short impasse is intriguing. The original intervention from the government suggested that issues raised by Derwent Holdings and their legal team were being taken seriously. Derwent are the owners of the White City retail park. They have had their own proposals for a supermarket at White City turned down by Trafford’s planners using arguments that from a lay perspective would seem to apply equally to the Tescos.

This latest news that the Govt is happy for the Tesco to go ahead suggests that either the Govt is confident that the Tesco consent is robust; or Derwent have backed down. Derwent are yet to comment and it will be interesting to hear their view.

In the meantime planning consent has now been rubber stamped and the dominoes are beginning to rock. We are just a short few weeks away from the promised announcement on the Stretford Academy. Given that the land required to build the Tesco is currently in possession of the soon to be closed (according to plan) Stretford High School, are we moving to resolution on that issue? If the Academy is cancelled, how does the council get its hands are the necessary school field? The School Adjudicator is looking at this issue next week. Could the school adjudicator yet scupper the whole plan? If they reversed the decision to close the school, it would certainly complicate things but is this likely? The Council gives the impression in the article that its confident this is close to being resolved. I hope we’re not going to have a sham consultation on the school closure.

Mike Cordingley

(emailed update from Insp Sutcliffe from Stretford’s Neighbourhood Team – passed on for information)

Dear All

We are working with you to identify and tackle the issues that matter to you the most.

You told us drug dealing was an issue in and around the Lostock area of Stretford.

We responded by increasing our patrols in the area and by gathering information from local people.

This morning, officers from your local Neighbourhood Policing Team, supported by Divisional Officers have executed a drugs warrant at an address on Ripon Road, Stretford. During the search, a quantity of what we believe is Class A & B Controlled Drugs, a substantial amount of cash and CS Spray were recovered. There are presently 3 people in custody at Stretford Police Station helping us with our enquiries.

Everyone has the right to have a say in how their area is policed and we would like to hear from you in one of our community meetings.

The next community meeting is taking place on 29th November 2010 between 6pm-8pm at St Matthews Church, Stretford.

If you are unable to attend our community meetings you can visit our website www.gmp.police.uk, and fill out a short questionnaire online to let us know about the matters that concern you the most.

If you have a policing issue in your area or wish to speak to an officer please contact the Stretford Neighbourhood Policing Team on 0161 856 7655 or email stretford.area@gmp.police.uk.

For non-emergency calls or to report a crime call 0161 872 5050 or for more information visit gmp.police.uk. Only call 999 in an emergency where there is a threat to life or crime in progress. You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.

We are committed to providing you with the best possible service and making your area a safer place to live.

Inspector Andy Sutcliffe

Stretford NPT

 

Email Sent from Greater Manchester Police

Our Policing Pledge

Our Policing Pledge is a commitment from GMP to the public to provide the best
possible service and make Greater Manchester a safer place to live. It has 10
key themes and sets out the standards of service GMP aspires to deliver.

See our Policing Pledge in full on gmp.police.uk/pledge

Please note – you have received this email as you have requested updates

from your neighbourhood team in Greater Manchester Police. If you no longer

wish to receive these updates, please reply to this email with Unsubscribe

in the subject bar.

Image: “Insignia of the Greater Manchester Police” by The Laird of Oldham, CC BY 2.0

The 2010 Labour Leadership race was from the start a two-horse race. Not because of any great difference in quality between the 5 contenders, but constrained by the media narrative; which Milliband would win? Personally, I would have liked the contest to have been broadened to include the Alan Johnsons, John Denhams, Harriet Harmans or even Jon Crudas’s of the party, but for whatever reason we were presented with the 5 choices.

Given that the race was so clearly between the two brothers but the voting system was AV, really all that mattered was how you listed one brother against the other. My choice was Ed rather than David but I wasn’t bowled over by either and I certainly didn’t want to give either the sort of endorsement we gave to Blair those years ago that allowed him to be contemptuous of cabinet government, party democracy and ultimately international law. That latter point was the sole reason for placing Diane Abbott as no1 on the ballot paper. She’d scare me to death as leader and had there been any danger of her winning, I wouldn’t have given her the vote, but she did actively oppose the war in Iraq and that mattered. I’m glad I gave her my no1 choice.

My second choice went to Ed Balls. Ed had ran by miles the best campaign in the contest, the only candidate to argue coherently for a winning argument on the deficit. The shame is that he is condemned for the bullying and ruthless behaviour of those in the Gordon Brown camp. He deserved his position as highest non-Miliband in the ultimate result. A strong vote in this election shows to him that he has a place at the top of our party; and if he can lose his reputation for the dark arts, this might not be his last chance at leadership.

My third choice went to Andy Burnham.

My fourth went to Ed Miliband – There is a great deal of potential in Ed and it is my view that at this stage he is the only one who could win the next election for Labour. (I just don’t think David could project the emotions and character as well as Ed can). I don’t buy the idea that there’s much between them politically.  David Miliband has handled himself incredibly well since the result.

Had it been first past the post, I would have voted for Ed Milliband.

I’m pleased with the overall winner, but not happy with the manner of the win. Elections should be fair and free from interference. There’s no point in pretending the behaviour of a single union hasn’t left a bad taste. We don’t know how much that influence made a difference; and we can’t rerun the whole thing, but GMB haven’t left themselves smelling of roses.

Mike Cordingley

image: “Labour Leadership Hustings 2010 – 18” by Young Fabians, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

I’ve received the following reply from Trafford regarding the state of the road surface. Whilst acknowledging the unsatisfactory appearance of the road, the road has not yet risen to the top of the schedule.

Dear Cllr Cordingley
I refer to your recent inquiry concerning the surface condition of the Raglan Road, and apologise for the delay in replying.

It is obvious that the carriageway has a number of areas that require substantial actions and I understand that some of these patches have now been repaired. It would appear that Raglan Road has not previously been identified as requiring inclusion in the current year’s Structural Maintenance Programme because the majority of the concrete surface is structurally sound, whilst there are very poor isolated areas of re-instatements in bituminous materials that have failed and therefore do not look particularly attractive. It is this general condition that has meant that Raglan has not previously been prioritised whilst other adjacent streets have.
We will however continue to monitor the situation, and I will speak to my colleagues in the Operation Services division and ask that, in the short-term, they undertake more extensive patching of the poor areas of re-instatements.
I will also arrange to have the road inspected with a view to see if it would warrant inclusion as a priority in next year’s programme. We will take into account the point you make regarding the cul de sac being use as a cut through for cyclists to Kellogg’s and Trafford park

I trust that this is satisfactory to you at the present time, but should you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact me again.

Regards
Peter Townsend

I have written to my neighbours on Raglan Road with the letter linked here.

Editor’s note: the featured photograph shown is “Typical Torontorian Pothole(s)” by Michael, CC BY 2.0 . As you see, it has nothing to do with the original photographs which were stored on picasaweb, a long discontinued web service. I don’t think I have the original photographs, but if I find, I’ll replace.

My postbag is increasingly dominated by the proposal to build a biomass powerstation at Barton near to the M60. This is a major scheme and we have to be careful that we’re not allowing dioxins and black carbons to be pumped into the air. Gorse Hill is very much downwind of the plant and we need to get it right. We value your views and by all means use the comments facility below to post a comment.

I’ve added a page to our website here and posted resources from both sides of the argument. I’ll add to the page as the debate develops.

Mike Cordingley

image source from scheme proposers