In recent posts, I have chosen to focus on the current status of the high street where I live. I may be deluding myself, but the responses to the existing discussion strongly suggest that a core nucleus of people care passionately about our town. That is as good a starting point as any.
I received a really well worded response from someone this morning citing the strengths and weaknesses of the existing high street. The respondent made the point that high streets such as the one in Denbigh will ultimately become venues for local services such as cafes, hairdressers, nail salons, bookies etc. It was also pointed out how valuable it can be to have a local butcher. Instead of having to buy your meat pre-packed in the weight dictated by the large supermarket, the local butcher can supply your exact need. If you are part of a couple or living alone, this can be a massive difference. So, instead of buying 500g of minced beef in a plastic container, your local butcher can supply you with a lesser amount with far less packaging. In most of the arguments I've heard so far bemoaning the future of our high street, many people seem to overlook the mind boggling amount of plastic packaging foisted upon us by the large supermarkets. I detest it and also worry about it's impact on our environment. It takes up to a thousand years to degrade in some instances so sustaining such an approach is actually irresponsible.
Today, I intend to focus on two towns of comparable size to illustrate that the high street in Denbigh is faced with an opportunity rather than a threat. I will describe the first town to you. In 2001, it had a population of 9,458. This is very similar to that of Denbigh. It has a famous castle just like Denbigh. It has a well known supermarket on the periphery of the town centre just like Denbigh. It has limited car parking in the centre of the town just like Denbigh. It has a healthy quota of pubs just like Denbigh. It has a fair smattering of charity shops being run by a willing army of volunteers just like Denbigh. It has a small theatre just like Denbigh. It also has a predominance of independent shops which are extremely well supported by the local community. Like Denbigh it also has an area which has not had the rub of the green when it comes to jobs and opportunity. The town I refer to here is Ludlow.
On a recent placement which lasted for 15 weeks, I had the opportunity to observe Ludlow at close quarters. A number of aspects were immediately noteworthy. The first thing to note was the absence of empty shop premises on the main high street. The second was the large number of local shoppers on foot. They were enabled by large pedestrian areas in the town centre. It was very pleasing to see such a high ration of independent shops to multi national chains. There was no doubt that the former were in the ascendency in Ludlow. Aside form their impressive variety, their service to the public was wonderful to see. They did have a moderate sized Tesco but you always got the feeling that the Tesco remained secondary to the town centre. That was because planning for the Tesco was only granted with the town centre in mind. The local planners did not make life easy for the Tesco and have restricted the extent to which it can impact on their high street. They got the important bit right - they recognised the absolute importance of a vibrant high street with respect to the local economy which they serve. Their castle is of a similar age to the one in Denbigh but is utilised far more. It is the centre piece of most of their festivals and is situated right next to their highly prized daily street market which they have fought so hard to maintain. It is to their credit that they have done so because they now boast a thriving high street as a result. In other words, they have resisted too much change for the sake of change and sought to retain the character and strength of their high street.
Moving a little closer to home, the second town which I would like to highlight is also notable for it's thriving street market. At the time of writing, it too boasts a healthy high street with very few empty retail premises. Until recently, it has only allowed a moderate sized Tesco on the periphery in such a way as to maintain the integral strength of it's high street. Mold is down the road in Flintshire and the local council charged with the responsibility of sustaining the vibrant high street look as though they are now going to grant planning to a large Sainsburys as well. That aside, the town has held it's own even with the added threat of Tesco. The market is held twice weekly and is well supported and attended. As with Ludlow, the variety and quality of the independent shops is excellent even if the ratio of multi national chains is slightly higher.
It should not be too difficult for Denbigh to observe the towns I have highlighted and seek to emulate some of their more sensible strategies. Just because our high street has sported empty shops recently doesn't mean they can't be filled provided the will exists to support them and the shops themselves seek to offer all that is good about the independent sector; great quality and service. The re-introduction of a street market shouldn't even be open to debate in Denbigh and I would strongly advocate more pedestrian zones in the town centre. I would finally play the trump card all day long - Mold doesn't have a castle like Denbigh. Ludlow does and uses it for all it's worth. Denbigh should be doing likewise because many other towns would give anything to have such an obvious asset.
The forthcoming St. David's Day festival will be great for Denbigh and I'm really looking forward to going along to support the town. But the town needs this sort of event to be the norm - not the exception.
Thursday, 27 February 2014
Tuesday, 25 February 2014
Lies, damn lies and statistics
The recent decision by my local Council to cease funding for Rhyl Sun Centre has provoked a great deal of criticism. How much of that is fair remains to be seen.
Seeking to defend their decision, the local Council cited the inability of the appointed (not for profit) management organisation to contend with a 2.8% reduction in it's subsidy. That amounted to £50,000 annually. It is open to conjecture how their proposed £10 million project for an Aquatic Centre now looks given the importance attached to £50,000.
Of course, the real reason for closure of the three sites in Rhyl and Prestatyn is perhaps as barn door obvious as it seems. The smoke screen speaks of ineffective management and infrastructure in need of repair and upgrade. Much has also been made of the "shelf life" of the sites in question. The latter tickles me because even a tent will last for decades if constructed and looked after properly. The former North Wales Hospital was built in 1848. Had it not been for a series of outrageous decisions since it's doors finally closed in 1995, I have no doubt it would be still be standing and ready for another century of public service. I was under the impression that building had progressed since the Victorian era but I stand corrected if that is not the case. Perhaps it is the decision making which has deteriorated since Victorian times rather than the actual construction?
Returning to the closures though, it is obvious that the real motive has been cost saving. For all the rubbish spun out regarding mismanagement and deterioration, closure of the three sites will immediately save the Council millions of pounds per annum when they are being asked to make savings - in common with just about every other council in the UK. To debate whether such cuts is right or wrong is fast becoming academic because they are clearly here to stay. What is not academic is to discuss the most appropriate areas for these cuts to take place. The management structure at my Local Council is mind boggling. When I worked in the Private Sector for the largest wholesale food supplier in the UK, the machine was meaner and infinitely leaner. Every penny spent had to be justified and accounted for and if cuts were made, they were invariably based on past performance. We had nowhere near the number of managers which the local Council employs. The same local Council has this week announced a £250,000 project aimed at attracting tourists to the town of Ruthin.
The same local Council also gave the thumbs up to Tesco a few years back and it's fair to say the effect on the local high street has been significant. So rather than pursuing the attentions of tourists who might only visit sporadically, would it not be more instructive to try and pursue the local residents who appear to have deserted their high street in droves? Or is this not the priority of the council? I can only comment on what I see in front of my eyes and the evidence to suggest that the local Council is serious about high street regeneration is currently a little thin on the ground.
In a mirror image of the situation unfolding in my County, the locals of Ruabon and Plas Madoc are fighting to try and overturn the decision to close Plas Madoc Leisure Centre. As in my home county, the story is depressingly familiar. Two perfectly adequate leisure facilities are being dropped in favour of a new centre. The rationale is doubtless the same - perceived cost savings. A good friend of mine has recently ascertained that the Council making that decision had been paying a staggering £40,000 per annum for the lease of a photocopying machine. That leisure site was being run by the Council - not an outside body. I'm no expert on photocopy machines, but I would suggest that I could buy a reasonably good one for a fraction of that amount!
When any of us seek to justify the money we are spending in our own lives, we usually have to think about the impact of those decisions on our families and loved ones. I would have thought the same principle would hold for the local council?
Seeking to defend their decision, the local Council cited the inability of the appointed (not for profit) management organisation to contend with a 2.8% reduction in it's subsidy. That amounted to £50,000 annually. It is open to conjecture how their proposed £10 million project for an Aquatic Centre now looks given the importance attached to £50,000.
Of course, the real reason for closure of the three sites in Rhyl and Prestatyn is perhaps as barn door obvious as it seems. The smoke screen speaks of ineffective management and infrastructure in need of repair and upgrade. Much has also been made of the "shelf life" of the sites in question. The latter tickles me because even a tent will last for decades if constructed and looked after properly. The former North Wales Hospital was built in 1848. Had it not been for a series of outrageous decisions since it's doors finally closed in 1995, I have no doubt it would be still be standing and ready for another century of public service. I was under the impression that building had progressed since the Victorian era but I stand corrected if that is not the case. Perhaps it is the decision making which has deteriorated since Victorian times rather than the actual construction?
Returning to the closures though, it is obvious that the real motive has been cost saving. For all the rubbish spun out regarding mismanagement and deterioration, closure of the three sites will immediately save the Council millions of pounds per annum when they are being asked to make savings - in common with just about every other council in the UK. To debate whether such cuts is right or wrong is fast becoming academic because they are clearly here to stay. What is not academic is to discuss the most appropriate areas for these cuts to take place. The management structure at my Local Council is mind boggling. When I worked in the Private Sector for the largest wholesale food supplier in the UK, the machine was meaner and infinitely leaner. Every penny spent had to be justified and accounted for and if cuts were made, they were invariably based on past performance. We had nowhere near the number of managers which the local Council employs. The same local Council has this week announced a £250,000 project aimed at attracting tourists to the town of Ruthin.
The same local Council also gave the thumbs up to Tesco a few years back and it's fair to say the effect on the local high street has been significant. So rather than pursuing the attentions of tourists who might only visit sporadically, would it not be more instructive to try and pursue the local residents who appear to have deserted their high street in droves? Or is this not the priority of the council? I can only comment on what I see in front of my eyes and the evidence to suggest that the local Council is serious about high street regeneration is currently a little thin on the ground.
In a mirror image of the situation unfolding in my County, the locals of Ruabon and Plas Madoc are fighting to try and overturn the decision to close Plas Madoc Leisure Centre. As in my home county, the story is depressingly familiar. Two perfectly adequate leisure facilities are being dropped in favour of a new centre. The rationale is doubtless the same - perceived cost savings. A good friend of mine has recently ascertained that the Council making that decision had been paying a staggering £40,000 per annum for the lease of a photocopying machine. That leisure site was being run by the Council - not an outside body. I'm no expert on photocopy machines, but I would suggest that I could buy a reasonably good one for a fraction of that amount!
When any of us seek to justify the money we are spending in our own lives, we usually have to think about the impact of those decisions on our families and loved ones. I would have thought the same principle would hold for the local council?
Time for new blood?
As the local council elections draw closer, I have taken time to reflect on where we are and where we might be five years hence. A cursory glance at the incumbent local councillors reveals one stark reminder as to how far we have to go. The most obvious feature of the current councillors where I live is their age.
While they all undoubtedly have experience of sorts from all walks of life, it is their age which is likely to be least attractive to the one sub section of voters most disenfranchised as I write. When local council elections were last held in Denbigh, just 591 of the 1,583 eligible to vote did so. Much criticism (justified in my opinion) was expressed when the new Police Commissioners were recently elected throughout the UK. The counter argument always follows that democracy is being played out irrespective of the turn out. I counter that it is not healthy to content ourselves with voter turn outs of one in three. Even with a half full glass and brimming with optimism, I know that this falls well short of our democratic aspirations. But why does it?
It does so because the current incumbents of public office have failed to engage with a significant proportion of the total electorate. Maybe people really have given up on the democratic process but maybe they haven't. Maybe it's time for younger candidates to come forward with a voice more sympathetic to the aspirations of their peer group. I would happily vote for a younger candidate if only to inject some balance for the existing cohort of councillors. Experience is a wonderful quality but it also comes with baggage. Experience warns us against risk. Experience urges us to play safe. Experience convinces us we have all the answers.
Youth comes with a different set of qualities. Failure is often something yet to be experienced. That is a massive advantage. Youth can see how something can work. Experience can see the pitfalls. Youth has the imagination to see beyond the obstacles. Experience can become too focused on the obstacles. I could go on but I hope my point is made.
If the forthcoming elections were to yield an influx of younger members, I'm sure the town would be the winner. In a recent group I set up exploring what it was that people would like to see on our high street to make it more attractive and vibrant, I was overwhelmed with the number of responses. Sadly, those responses featured too few of the views and insights of our younger age groups. There is nothing I would love more than to see some of the under 30s become actively involved with THEIR town.
If the next elections are decided by the votes of three quarters of the electorate, we will have a better chance of being represented by a more age diverse subset of councillors. It is not that I have any misgivings about any of the current incumbents - I don't. I know how hard they all work often behind the scenes for little reward. I would just like to see a better spread of our community and witness the youth getting more involved. Those I've spoken to are brimming with fantastic ideas so let's try and engage them to take the next step. The energy of youth is a vital resource which I feel we are currently missing out on.
If we really want to see a vibrant high street in our local town, I feel passionately that we can only do so with the involvement of all age groups and we are currently missing out. In their seminal song "Teach your Children", Crosby, Stills and Nash recognised fully the symbiotic relationship between the old and the young. While the first part of the song urges parents to teach their children well, the second part provides the balance by urging the young to teach their parents well. It cuts both ways.
While they all undoubtedly have experience of sorts from all walks of life, it is their age which is likely to be least attractive to the one sub section of voters most disenfranchised as I write. When local council elections were last held in Denbigh, just 591 of the 1,583 eligible to vote did so. Much criticism (justified in my opinion) was expressed when the new Police Commissioners were recently elected throughout the UK. The counter argument always follows that democracy is being played out irrespective of the turn out. I counter that it is not healthy to content ourselves with voter turn outs of one in three. Even with a half full glass and brimming with optimism, I know that this falls well short of our democratic aspirations. But why does it?
It does so because the current incumbents of public office have failed to engage with a significant proportion of the total electorate. Maybe people really have given up on the democratic process but maybe they haven't. Maybe it's time for younger candidates to come forward with a voice more sympathetic to the aspirations of their peer group. I would happily vote for a younger candidate if only to inject some balance for the existing cohort of councillors. Experience is a wonderful quality but it also comes with baggage. Experience warns us against risk. Experience urges us to play safe. Experience convinces us we have all the answers.
Youth comes with a different set of qualities. Failure is often something yet to be experienced. That is a massive advantage. Youth can see how something can work. Experience can see the pitfalls. Youth has the imagination to see beyond the obstacles. Experience can become too focused on the obstacles. I could go on but I hope my point is made.
If the forthcoming elections were to yield an influx of younger members, I'm sure the town would be the winner. In a recent group I set up exploring what it was that people would like to see on our high street to make it more attractive and vibrant, I was overwhelmed with the number of responses. Sadly, those responses featured too few of the views and insights of our younger age groups. There is nothing I would love more than to see some of the under 30s become actively involved with THEIR town.
If the next elections are decided by the votes of three quarters of the electorate, we will have a better chance of being represented by a more age diverse subset of councillors. It is not that I have any misgivings about any of the current incumbents - I don't. I know how hard they all work often behind the scenes for little reward. I would just like to see a better spread of our community and witness the youth getting more involved. Those I've spoken to are brimming with fantastic ideas so let's try and engage them to take the next step. The energy of youth is a vital resource which I feel we are currently missing out on.
If we really want to see a vibrant high street in our local town, I feel passionately that we can only do so with the involvement of all age groups and we are currently missing out. In their seminal song "Teach your Children", Crosby, Stills and Nash recognised fully the symbiotic relationship between the old and the young. While the first part of the song urges parents to teach their children well, the second part provides the balance by urging the young to teach their parents well. It cuts both ways.
Thursday, 20 February 2014
Hunger in a Civilised World
The decision by our most prominent Church leaders to write an open letter protesting at the growing numbers of people needing food is a long overdue debate. The growth of food banks has been well documented in recent times as many of us have continued to feel the after effects of the recession.
All recessions result in misery and it is sadly the poorest in society who inevitably fare the worst as jobs become more scarce. The debate this morning on the Today programme concentrated on how to solve this problem. While I applaud that approach, I would also urge people to engage in seeking the cause. If the cause is removed, the problem will be addressed more effectively.
As I write, we live in a purportedly civilised society. Food waste has never been so high. In equal measure, the general public and the all conquering supermarkets must both shoulder their share of the blame. I would struggle to think of a more immoral scenario than this one. On the one hand, we have increasing numbers of people going hungry (this is 2014) and increasing levels of food being thrown away. Yes, we have food banks and for some they have literally become a lifeline. As the welfare budget has been cut, those dependent upon it have become ever more squeezed.
Did the new Government in 2010 have the choice to maintain the welfare budget? Sadly, I don't think they did. They have introduced a new system which encourages people to work if they are able to do so but this is not a new system. This is the very system upon which Beveridge built the Welfare State after the war. One of the problems has been the way in which successive Governments have allowed the budget to rise. In so doing, they have perpetuated a culture of dependency upon it. The Welfare State was never designed for such an outcome. I have genuine sympathy for the disabled, carers and those genuinely unable to work. These are the very people for whom the Welfare State was designed. I was a carer for my first wife for over two years and received the princely sum of £11 per week for the privilege. It's not that I wasn't grateful for that money because I most certainly was. It's just that it was patently insufficient and in no way recognised the true worth of the millions of carers who continue to work for their loved ones every day. The money they save the NHS is incalculable.
When a new Government comes to power, it is faced with assessing the state of the nation's finances before it can start making promises about spending money and this Coalition was no different. We can argue about the speed of the cuts but we can't argue about the need to make them. Our country was in a financial mess and they have had the thankless task of addressing that. I do not profess political allegiance to the Coalition but I do recognise that they had to take the decision they took. Whether the deficit was caused by the outgoing Labour party or the Global recession or a combination of the two is frankly irrelevant now.
But the real question remains; why are people going hungry? In truth there are many reasons for this. I find it interesting that religious leaders have entered the fray at a time when religion has seldom seemed less relevant. They deserve great credit for initiating the debate. In the days when our churches were well attended, a man would not stand by and witness his fellow man suffer the indignity of hunger. I certainly wouldn't. The demise of our community spirit has contributed largely to this and has been brought about by a succession of ill advised policies.
I listened to the CEO of British Gas (Centrica ) this morning defending the prices being charged by his company. It is reported that 3% have left in the last year with many more expected to follow. That is one glimmer of good news in that the competition within the energy market is beginning to warm up. If we still had our coal industry, this problem need not be as bad as it is. Still, we are where we are so we must look forwards and not back. Looking forwards, we need to invest in strategies which will reduce the cruel levels of fuel poverty. Having to choose between heating or eating is a tough choice. It is all the more so when you are an elderly person living alone. Again, if our community was functioning as it once did (and as it still should), we would not stand by and tolerate such an outcome.
I have recently highlighted the need to support our local high streets. The main reason why I support this so passionately is that this constitutes the community hub. The church, the pub, the cafe, the grocer, the butcher, the cobbler. The list goes on but these services should be at the centre of our lives - not on the periphery. The supermarkets should be on the periphery but a succession of Governments both national and local have welcomed them with open arms. Had they stopped for one minute to consider the consequences, they might not have been so quick to do so. The effect on local jobs has been catastrophic but the effects on local community has been devastating. A vibrant high street correlates with a vibrant community spirit and if you don't believe me go to towns like Barnsley (overtly Labour), Ludlow (overtly Tory) and others. They demonstrate that you can have a healthy high street in spite of one of the supermarkets. Politics has little to do with it. This is all about people making community choices when they spend their money - if they want to live within a strong community. It is the role of our independent high street shops to be community orientated and distance themselves from the cynical marketing ploys of the share holder driven supermarkets. We pay our money and we take our choice...
I listened yesterday to an interesting programme exploring the recent trend which has seen the big four supermarkets see their takings stagnate while the discounters such as LIDL and Aldi have prospered. An expert was charged with buying the same basket of shopping fro LIDL and Tesco. They were not buying foie gras - just basic food such as bread, milk, eggs, vegetables, fruit, cereal etc. The basket from LIDL costed £17. The equivalent basket from Tesco costed £27. Even with a clubcard, that is an almighty difference for the many millions living on or near the bread line.
But how far have we sunk when supermarkets are throwing food in to skips at the rear of their premises and seeking to prosecute those trying to rescue some of that food for their consumption. How much food are we all throwing away and why are we doing that? What do food banks represent to us? Do we see them as solutions for the needy or do we see them as an indictment of our civilised society?
All recessions result in misery and it is sadly the poorest in society who inevitably fare the worst as jobs become more scarce. The debate this morning on the Today programme concentrated on how to solve this problem. While I applaud that approach, I would also urge people to engage in seeking the cause. If the cause is removed, the problem will be addressed more effectively.
As I write, we live in a purportedly civilised society. Food waste has never been so high. In equal measure, the general public and the all conquering supermarkets must both shoulder their share of the blame. I would struggle to think of a more immoral scenario than this one. On the one hand, we have increasing numbers of people going hungry (this is 2014) and increasing levels of food being thrown away. Yes, we have food banks and for some they have literally become a lifeline. As the welfare budget has been cut, those dependent upon it have become ever more squeezed.
Did the new Government in 2010 have the choice to maintain the welfare budget? Sadly, I don't think they did. They have introduced a new system which encourages people to work if they are able to do so but this is not a new system. This is the very system upon which Beveridge built the Welfare State after the war. One of the problems has been the way in which successive Governments have allowed the budget to rise. In so doing, they have perpetuated a culture of dependency upon it. The Welfare State was never designed for such an outcome. I have genuine sympathy for the disabled, carers and those genuinely unable to work. These are the very people for whom the Welfare State was designed. I was a carer for my first wife for over two years and received the princely sum of £11 per week for the privilege. It's not that I wasn't grateful for that money because I most certainly was. It's just that it was patently insufficient and in no way recognised the true worth of the millions of carers who continue to work for their loved ones every day. The money they save the NHS is incalculable.
When a new Government comes to power, it is faced with assessing the state of the nation's finances before it can start making promises about spending money and this Coalition was no different. We can argue about the speed of the cuts but we can't argue about the need to make them. Our country was in a financial mess and they have had the thankless task of addressing that. I do not profess political allegiance to the Coalition but I do recognise that they had to take the decision they took. Whether the deficit was caused by the outgoing Labour party or the Global recession or a combination of the two is frankly irrelevant now.
But the real question remains; why are people going hungry? In truth there are many reasons for this. I find it interesting that religious leaders have entered the fray at a time when religion has seldom seemed less relevant. They deserve great credit for initiating the debate. In the days when our churches were well attended, a man would not stand by and witness his fellow man suffer the indignity of hunger. I certainly wouldn't. The demise of our community spirit has contributed largely to this and has been brought about by a succession of ill advised policies.
I listened to the CEO of British Gas (Centrica ) this morning defending the prices being charged by his company. It is reported that 3% have left in the last year with many more expected to follow. That is one glimmer of good news in that the competition within the energy market is beginning to warm up. If we still had our coal industry, this problem need not be as bad as it is. Still, we are where we are so we must look forwards and not back. Looking forwards, we need to invest in strategies which will reduce the cruel levels of fuel poverty. Having to choose between heating or eating is a tough choice. It is all the more so when you are an elderly person living alone. Again, if our community was functioning as it once did (and as it still should), we would not stand by and tolerate such an outcome.
I have recently highlighted the need to support our local high streets. The main reason why I support this so passionately is that this constitutes the community hub. The church, the pub, the cafe, the grocer, the butcher, the cobbler. The list goes on but these services should be at the centre of our lives - not on the periphery. The supermarkets should be on the periphery but a succession of Governments both national and local have welcomed them with open arms. Had they stopped for one minute to consider the consequences, they might not have been so quick to do so. The effect on local jobs has been catastrophic but the effects on local community has been devastating. A vibrant high street correlates with a vibrant community spirit and if you don't believe me go to towns like Barnsley (overtly Labour), Ludlow (overtly Tory) and others. They demonstrate that you can have a healthy high street in spite of one of the supermarkets. Politics has little to do with it. This is all about people making community choices when they spend their money - if they want to live within a strong community. It is the role of our independent high street shops to be community orientated and distance themselves from the cynical marketing ploys of the share holder driven supermarkets. We pay our money and we take our choice...
I listened yesterday to an interesting programme exploring the recent trend which has seen the big four supermarkets see their takings stagnate while the discounters such as LIDL and Aldi have prospered. An expert was charged with buying the same basket of shopping fro LIDL and Tesco. They were not buying foie gras - just basic food such as bread, milk, eggs, vegetables, fruit, cereal etc. The basket from LIDL costed £17. The equivalent basket from Tesco costed £27. Even with a clubcard, that is an almighty difference for the many millions living on or near the bread line.
But how far have we sunk when supermarkets are throwing food in to skips at the rear of their premises and seeking to prosecute those trying to rescue some of that food for their consumption. How much food are we all throwing away and why are we doing that? What do food banks represent to us? Do we see them as solutions for the needy or do we see them as an indictment of our civilised society?
Wednesday, 19 February 2014
Mold: A great market town under siege?
In several recent posts I have highlighted some of the challenges facing Denbigh. It is the town where I live so understandably occupies my thoughts more than other towns. I have highlighted the need for the town to reconnect with it's roots and return to the high street. Unlike many similar sized towns, Denbigh has thus far only had to deal with the effect of one of the big four supermarkets. That has been quite enough as evidenced by the depressing numbers of empty shop units currently available. Still, this piece is intended to provide optimism and I still believe passionately that the local community can once more make their high street a vibrant place should they choose to support it in the way their forebears did.
Across the border in Flintshire lies the historic market town of Mold. Despite the presence of a very large Tesco store on the outskirts of their town centre, Mold has arguably maintained it's high street better than Denbigh. Most would agree that the presence of their twice weekly street market has been a vital factor in this. The current street market in Denbigh is a mere shadow of it's predecessors of yesteryear. The market in Mold though continues to punch above it's weight and provides an important focal point for visitors to the town. The way Mold has prospered is an example of what similar sized market towns can achieve if they get the fundamental basics right.
As I write though, Mold is on the verge of another battle. Not content with one large supermarket, the local council is weighing up the prospect of sanctioning another - directly over the road from the existing one! While I admire greatly the way in which Mold has weathered the retail storm up to now, I genuinely fear for the future of their high street should Sainsbury's be granted planning permission. It's hard to see how the decision makers can possibly justify the absurdity of such a move. I could be forgiven for thinking they don't even want a high street in their town centre. Should they choose to look at the high street of just about any town in the UK which has been subjected to this retail onslaught, they will see exactly what I mean. What chance the green grocer, the butcher, the florist, the newsagent, the electrical shop, the cafes? The list just goes on and on because the supermarkets are sustained by corporate greed. They don't want a slice of the cake. They want all of the cake. Their unrivalled buying power means they often get the whole cake while town centre businesses fall over like dominos.
I hope the local council doesn't give the green light to this latest move but if they do, I can predict with near certainty the future for the high street in Mold. At present, local people who frequent the street market catch up with old friends and have a chat. The market is a social hub which sustains community. The supermarket does not do this. People park up, fill their trolley and go home. If that were not true, there would not be a vacant retail unit on the high street in Denbigh. As I write, there are seventeen at the last count. I wonder how much evidence the local council would need to acknowledge the perils of their retail strategy?
Across the border in Flintshire lies the historic market town of Mold. Despite the presence of a very large Tesco store on the outskirts of their town centre, Mold has arguably maintained it's high street better than Denbigh. Most would agree that the presence of their twice weekly street market has been a vital factor in this. The current street market in Denbigh is a mere shadow of it's predecessors of yesteryear. The market in Mold though continues to punch above it's weight and provides an important focal point for visitors to the town. The way Mold has prospered is an example of what similar sized market towns can achieve if they get the fundamental basics right.
As I write though, Mold is on the verge of another battle. Not content with one large supermarket, the local council is weighing up the prospect of sanctioning another - directly over the road from the existing one! While I admire greatly the way in which Mold has weathered the retail storm up to now, I genuinely fear for the future of their high street should Sainsbury's be granted planning permission. It's hard to see how the decision makers can possibly justify the absurdity of such a move. I could be forgiven for thinking they don't even want a high street in their town centre. Should they choose to look at the high street of just about any town in the UK which has been subjected to this retail onslaught, they will see exactly what I mean. What chance the green grocer, the butcher, the florist, the newsagent, the electrical shop, the cafes? The list just goes on and on because the supermarkets are sustained by corporate greed. They don't want a slice of the cake. They want all of the cake. Their unrivalled buying power means they often get the whole cake while town centre businesses fall over like dominos.
I hope the local council doesn't give the green light to this latest move but if they do, I can predict with near certainty the future for the high street in Mold. At present, local people who frequent the street market catch up with old friends and have a chat. The market is a social hub which sustains community. The supermarket does not do this. People park up, fill their trolley and go home. If that were not true, there would not be a vacant retail unit on the high street in Denbigh. As I write, there are seventeen at the last count. I wonder how much evidence the local council would need to acknowledge the perils of their retail strategy?
Monday, 17 February 2014
A toxic partner
My local council has today stumbled on to their latest "strategy" for Rhyl. The once popular seaside town on our coast which entertained the Beatles 50 years ago has recently been subjected to a swathe of council cuts to key services principally in the leisure sector. As the location of choice for thousands of holiday makers for many years, the promenade at Rhyl now stands as evidence for what happens when local government get involved. All the evidence today paints a picture of a local council with no understanding of the sea front at Rhyl. They certainly show no signs of understanding what made Rhyl THE place to be for so many years for so many people.
Having erected the Children's Village in the late 1980s amid a fanfare of optimism, the then council (since renamed) assured everyone that it was money well spent. Even it's location beggared belief. Originally intended to augment the now rotting SkyTower, the new Children's Village was built nearby. It achieved several notable feats. It blocked the view of the sea (which had for decades been what people came to see!). It blocked an important access point to the sea. It has toilets for which visitors have to pay and it must rank as one of the biggest wastes of money in the history of local government in this part of North Wales. It still stands as a somewhat grotesque relic of a previous administration. Defiant to the last, they continue to resist calls for it's demolition. To do so would be to admit failure and so the impasse continues as Rhyl continues to receive a fraction of the visitors it used to enjoy.
Just recently, the now renamed council has just announced the closure of the nearby Sun Centre, Nova Centre and Bowling Centre. They have today hinted strongly that the future of the Pavilion Theatre is now also under threat. The former fun fair was demolished a number of years ago and has stood vacant ever since. It has the appearance of a town which has just been abandoned. In truth, it has.
The council today assures us that the best way forward will be a new Aquatic Centre being run by a combination of private sector and the local council. In all honesty, what kind of company in the private sector would seriously contemplate entering in to a business arrangement with our local council. Their CV in business in Rhyl reads like a car crash. Let's hope they won't be needed to organise any celebrations in the local brewery..
In truth, if the existing monstrosities along the sea front were just demolished, it would be a vast improvement on the current "vista". No matter how curious and forgiving the tourist, there's a limit to how many rusting, rotting dysfunctional buildings you can view. It would also have the added bonus of having even less need for local council involvement. Based on their track record over the last quarter of a century, that might not be such a bad idea.
I know it's radical but I wonder whether they've ever considered seeking the views and opinions of the people who actually live there or the people who visit. Maybe it's time for the people to reclaim their town from the ravages of local government before they build something else. I can but hope.
In the private sector businesses are judged on their performance. Enough said.
Having erected the Children's Village in the late 1980s amid a fanfare of optimism, the then council (since renamed) assured everyone that it was money well spent. Even it's location beggared belief. Originally intended to augment the now rotting SkyTower, the new Children's Village was built nearby. It achieved several notable feats. It blocked the view of the sea (which had for decades been what people came to see!). It blocked an important access point to the sea. It has toilets for which visitors have to pay and it must rank as one of the biggest wastes of money in the history of local government in this part of North Wales. It still stands as a somewhat grotesque relic of a previous administration. Defiant to the last, they continue to resist calls for it's demolition. To do so would be to admit failure and so the impasse continues as Rhyl continues to receive a fraction of the visitors it used to enjoy.
Just recently, the now renamed council has just announced the closure of the nearby Sun Centre, Nova Centre and Bowling Centre. They have today hinted strongly that the future of the Pavilion Theatre is now also under threat. The former fun fair was demolished a number of years ago and has stood vacant ever since. It has the appearance of a town which has just been abandoned. In truth, it has.
The council today assures us that the best way forward will be a new Aquatic Centre being run by a combination of private sector and the local council. In all honesty, what kind of company in the private sector would seriously contemplate entering in to a business arrangement with our local council. Their CV in business in Rhyl reads like a car crash. Let's hope they won't be needed to organise any celebrations in the local brewery..
In truth, if the existing monstrosities along the sea front were just demolished, it would be a vast improvement on the current "vista". No matter how curious and forgiving the tourist, there's a limit to how many rusting, rotting dysfunctional buildings you can view. It would also have the added bonus of having even less need for local council involvement. Based on their track record over the last quarter of a century, that might not be such a bad idea.
I know it's radical but I wonder whether they've ever considered seeking the views and opinions of the people who actually live there or the people who visit. Maybe it's time for the people to reclaim their town from the ravages of local government before they build something else. I can but hope.
In the private sector businesses are judged on their performance. Enough said.
Friday, 14 February 2014
NHS Superstores?
The decision to recruit the former Chief Executive of Marks and Spencer to advise our NHS managers is the latest evidence of the consumerist healthcare model coming of age. I don't doubt that Stuart Rose will have plenty of suggestions for the current managers but what is he being asked to achieve? Is it just saving money or is it improving services? Or is it the political ideal which remains a combination of the two?
Either way, I'm not sure I see the merit in this latest step. Granted, our NHS is facing huge logistical challenges which are being worsened by the day. Advances in medical science and our existing obsession with evidence based medicine mean that national guidelines now exist for virtually every symptom faced by your local GP on a daily basis. The litigation culture foisted upon us from across the pond has ensured that medicine is now operating in a more defensive manner than ever before. It has no choice. A doctor not adhering rigidly to national guidelines now faces the litigious consequences if he/she doesn't. That only speaks of the current national guidelines from the medical side of the fence though.
What is being ignored by just about everybody is the numbers of patients presenting to emergency departments and GP practices for spurious reasons. Recent estimates suggest that as many as 40% of A and E presentations are inappropriate. The knock on effect on the hospital is considerable with precious man power being needlessly swallowed up. Many of those presenting to A and E complain that they have been unable to get an appointment at their local GP. They might just be right! As far as I know though, nothing is being done to follow up these people.
We can only improve our current NHS when we are aware of it's major shortcomings. If GP opening hours are not insufficient, I suggest we need to look at that. Likewise, we also need to address whether we have enough GPs on the ground. For fear of sounding overly simplistic, an effective Primary Care will exert huge relief on the currently stressed Secondary Care sector.
Stuart Rose may know a lot about the logistics of running a business but I wonder if he has an understanding of the biggest stressors currently impacting on the NHS? Far too little is being done in the way of patient education. If more people were made more aware of the simple decisions they can make to promote healthy living, much of the current overload would be reduced. For some, it may well be too late as the damage may already have been done. That is why, we desperately need to be targeting our children - and their parents.
The decision to legislate against smoking in cars with children on board sounds like the nanny state. But there is a perfectly good reason for this legislation. Stuart Rose has been brought in because he is a businessman and, to all intents and purposes, the NHS has to be run as an accountable business. With one small difference. The NHS is the only business I know of which remains free at the point of access to every man, woman and child. If we're going to continue with this promise, we need to start attaching certain conditions. Joe Public needs to understand his/her obligations in that deal - and it is a deal. While autonomy remains a key ethical principle, there has to come a point when somebody draws a line in the sand at the "free at the point of access" bit.
Recent figures highlighted the cost of treating alcohol related illness in the North East of England. That just speaks of alcohol - not tobacco, not sugar and not any of the army of drugs now on offer. That also just speaks of the North East of England which is after all just a small part of the whole. Addiction though remains a part of human culture and behaviour and the current spending on mental health and medical education is woeful.
If we all picture the NHS as a long piece of pipe, it's time to avert our gaze from the A and E department at the one end and instead focus on the people entering the pipe at the other.
Either way, I'm not sure I see the merit in this latest step. Granted, our NHS is facing huge logistical challenges which are being worsened by the day. Advances in medical science and our existing obsession with evidence based medicine mean that national guidelines now exist for virtually every symptom faced by your local GP on a daily basis. The litigation culture foisted upon us from across the pond has ensured that medicine is now operating in a more defensive manner than ever before. It has no choice. A doctor not adhering rigidly to national guidelines now faces the litigious consequences if he/she doesn't. That only speaks of the current national guidelines from the medical side of the fence though.
What is being ignored by just about everybody is the numbers of patients presenting to emergency departments and GP practices for spurious reasons. Recent estimates suggest that as many as 40% of A and E presentations are inappropriate. The knock on effect on the hospital is considerable with precious man power being needlessly swallowed up. Many of those presenting to A and E complain that they have been unable to get an appointment at their local GP. They might just be right! As far as I know though, nothing is being done to follow up these people.
We can only improve our current NHS when we are aware of it's major shortcomings. If GP opening hours are not insufficient, I suggest we need to look at that. Likewise, we also need to address whether we have enough GPs on the ground. For fear of sounding overly simplistic, an effective Primary Care will exert huge relief on the currently stressed Secondary Care sector.
Stuart Rose may know a lot about the logistics of running a business but I wonder if he has an understanding of the biggest stressors currently impacting on the NHS? Far too little is being done in the way of patient education. If more people were made more aware of the simple decisions they can make to promote healthy living, much of the current overload would be reduced. For some, it may well be too late as the damage may already have been done. That is why, we desperately need to be targeting our children - and their parents.
The decision to legislate against smoking in cars with children on board sounds like the nanny state. But there is a perfectly good reason for this legislation. Stuart Rose has been brought in because he is a businessman and, to all intents and purposes, the NHS has to be run as an accountable business. With one small difference. The NHS is the only business I know of which remains free at the point of access to every man, woman and child. If we're going to continue with this promise, we need to start attaching certain conditions. Joe Public needs to understand his/her obligations in that deal - and it is a deal. While autonomy remains a key ethical principle, there has to come a point when somebody draws a line in the sand at the "free at the point of access" bit.
Recent figures highlighted the cost of treating alcohol related illness in the North East of England. That just speaks of alcohol - not tobacco, not sugar and not any of the army of drugs now on offer. That also just speaks of the North East of England which is after all just a small part of the whole. Addiction though remains a part of human culture and behaviour and the current spending on mental health and medical education is woeful.
If we all picture the NHS as a long piece of pipe, it's time to avert our gaze from the A and E department at the one end and instead focus on the people entering the pipe at the other.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)