Taken For Granted

Almost all the areas visited by Brown, Cameron & Clegg during the election campaign have been marginal constituencies. The safer seats have been left undisturbed. The rock-solid seats have been treated like embarrassing relatives; it's already been noted elsewhere that the Liverpool Walton seat, bequeathed by Peter Kilfoyle to Steve Rotheram, has seen vitually no leaflets or posters. Apathy goes both ways. The parties can be just as dismissive of the whole business as the voters.
Another seat long taken for granted is neighbouring Bootle. A solid Labour seat since anyone can remember, the local party assumes nothing will change tomorrow, as does its MP, Joe Benton. Which may explain his decision not to attend a meeting of the candidates called in the constituency on Tuesday of last week (http://icseftonandwestlancs.icnetwork.co.uk/icbootle/news/tm_headline=joe-benton-does-not-attend-sefton-tuc-hustings-meeting%26method=full%26objectid=26338475%26siteid=60252-name_page.html ).
Also absent was the Tory candidate, Sohail Quershi. However, given that the Tories' chances in Bootle are minimal, his decision not to turn up could be understood.
Benton knows that as Labour MP for the seat (Cherie Blair was approached about succeeding Benton last year, but turned it down), his position won't be seriously challenged by any other party. Such certainty morphed into arrogance long ago & it goes some way to explaining why he presumably felt a public meeting in the seat he's supposed to represent was beneath him.
Walton, Bootle & other such constituencies are the 21st century versions of rotten boroughs.

Gremlins

There must be a glitch in the system, as the Cameron video doesn't appear to be loading. Tip: go to the YouTube homepage & type "Common People-David Cameron".

An Upper Class Hero Is Something To Be

Anyone who tells you that class doesn't matter anymore should be treated with the disdain they warrant; as the comfortably-off middle class entrench their position, social mobility is consigned to the history books. In the context of this sour, yet salient fact, it's to be welcomed that some enterprising scamps on YouTube have adopted the Pulp classic Common People & used it to highlight the privileges & opportunities accorded to Tory leader David Cameron (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKFTtYx2Oc )
"What chance have you got against a tie and a crest?" Paul Weller, Eton Rifles.

A View From Across The Pond

Tory blogger Iain Dale doesn't normally feature on this blog, but he's highlighted Jon Stewart's inimitable take on "Bigotgate" (http://tv.gawker.com/5528164/jon-stewart-mocks-the-laughable-tameness-of-british-political-scandals ).
US observers are often crassly out of the loop on European politics, but Stewart's look at the moment when Gordon Brown's ignorance of live microphone syndrome confirmed Labour's hapless state is acute & well-judged. The only jarring note is the use of subtitles to accompany not just Brown's comments, but those of Gillian Duffy. Are they really so unfamiliar with regional accents in the States?

Tearing At The Bonds Of Tribal Loyalty

Around lunchtime today I Tweeted that this was the most dispiriting election campaign I could remember. It remains so, although a spark of life has been injected with what's already become known as Bigot-gate (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/28/gordon-brown-bigoted-woman ).
[It would make a great storyline for The Thick of It; just think what Malcolm Tucker would make of it.]
The uncomfortable reality in most areas of Merseyside is that immigration & the use of migrant labour has been ignored as an issue by Labour & the Lib Dems (we all know the Tories' irrelevance in the region), allowing the BNP to raise it at every opportunity. Speaking the other day to a couple of acquaintances in the white, working-class constituency of Bootle, it was clear that their hostility to Cameron's privileged upbringing & the banks' culpability over the global financial crisis was tempered by a confused & aggrieved take on the immigration issue, the result of a silence from the parties, mainly Labour, it must be said, allowing the myths peddled by the BNP to take hold.
Gary Younge penned a finely-balanced piece at the beginning of the week on the issue (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/26/we-need-an-honest-immigration-debate ). However, John Harris' take on Brown's microphone moment also makes for instructive reading (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/28/bigot-gordon-brown-gillian-duffy ):
"The incident perfectly captures a plotline that I've observed time and again, not least as we've been travelling round the country during the campaign: millions of people who are confused, unsettled, and often ragingly angry, faced with a political class that affects to feel their pain, but too often holds them in borderline contempt. What with the rise in support for the BNP -- and that great chasm that divides too much of the country from richer corners of the capital -- the metropolitan media is part of the same problem. It tends to portray them as latter-day Alf Garnetts, nostalgic for a world long gone, and fired up by the sort of prejudices that have no place in London W1 or W11."
Harris concludes with a point which helps explain the dislocation between such voters & the party to which they once pledged largely unconditional allegiance:
"This may sound tangential, but I'm rather reminded of a passage from a Tony Blair conference speech that both sets out New Labour's credo, and captured its essential pathology. ' The character of this changing world is indifferent to tradition, ' he said. ' Unforgiving of frailty. No respecter of past reputations. It has no custom and practice. It is replete with opportunities, but they only go to those swift to adapt, slow to complain, open, willing and able to change. ' That doesn't describe Gillian Duffy [the woman who confronted Brown], nor millions and millions of other people. And in this awful episode, here are the wages of that ever-festering disconnection."
There is a tendency for middle-class liberals to dismiss & disparage what are still called Labour's heartlands ( disgraced ex-Cabinet minister Geoff Hoon referred to them as "metal bashers"). Countering such lazy aspersions are the people in these areas standing up to the BNP.

Warren's War Zones

Election campaigning continues apace. Yet amidst the bombast, bluster & bullshit, there are disconcerting sounds of, well, not contrition or remorse exactly, more like an embarrassed clearing of the throat, a muffled sigh, a sotto voce aside.
Home truths are beginning to be acknowledged by those whose state of denial has been so deep as to be subterranean. Wayne has long pointed out how, inter alia, the disfigurement of the city's waterfront blocks the view of the Three Graces. The response until now has varied from an embarrassed silence to an exercise in juvenile name-calling. However, the pretence is starting to slip & Wayne expertly dissected its threadbare nature earlier today (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2010/04/mann-island-is-penny-finally-dropping.html ).
Another area where the Fib Dem council is inching dangerously close to a mea culpa concerns housing. Warren Bradley blurts out the obvious to David Bartlett in this morning's Oldham Echo (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/04/26/council-leader-warren-bradley-we-ripped-heart-out-of-liverpool-communities-100252-26317085/ ).
Bartlett is moved to observe that Bradley's comments are "frank". Well, yes & no. It certainly puts the Fib Dems' Bread & Circus approach to the city in a stark context hitherto ignored by Oldham Hall Street. However, it also seeks to deflect at least some of the blame onto Whitehall & the quangocracy: "The council, national government and (regeneration agency) English Partnerships probably bit off more than we could chew.
"We announced six renewal areas, and in hindsight we should have done it one by one. Completing one area and then moving onto the next."
Bradley's tactic is totally transparent, admit mistakes, but imply that Labour & English Partnerships are at least equally culpable. This is election time, don't forget.
The man who is to local history what Jeremy Clarkson is to cycling goes on to deliver some choice comments which act as incriminating evidence in the case against the Fib Dems' reign of misrule in the city:
"You can't rip the heart out of the community and promise them something in 15 years time.
"I just don't think it is correct, but we are where we are. We have now got the job of rebuilding communities and giving them reassurance.........
"We should have landscaped areas so that people didn't feel they were living in a war zone".
That's some self-confessed record of ruin to play at the voters, isn't it? As well as the civic vandalism of what's still mystifyingly called a World Heritage Site & inflicting Grovesnor-pool in the process, Bradley & his cohorts have neglected whole neighbourhoods not fortunate enough to live in the city centre or in Fib Dem wards. The war zones have been left to fester.

He Said What?!

"Look, you've punished us enough about Iraq, right?"
Foreign Secretary, David Miliband (http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2010/apr/23/david-miliband-interview-labour ).
No, David, we haven't. Right?

Read All About It? Already Done So

Murdoch's titles are still rightly reviled on Merseyside. However, it's possible that some, at least, will sneak a glance at the front page of tomorrow's News of the World. It has the story everyone who follows Liverpool Football Club has been talking, texting & emailing about in the last 24 hours (if you don't know the story to which I refer, you'll have to wait, as the lawyers are still involved apparently).
It'll also be interesting to see how the Oldham Echo handles the story; its coverage of the local football clubs rarely veers from the adulatory, fawning & sychophantic. This is because it gets "access" in return, ie., an anodyne, cliched quote from one of the players or the manager which can be filed under the "stating the bloody obvious" category.
At least Murdoch's rag can't claim the story as an "exclusive", even though it'll slap that tired tag across the page. The story has been all over the web like a rash since yesterday afternoon.

An Irrelevant Issue

Given the change in the Lib Dems' poll ratings since Nick Clegg's performance in the first TV debate (& the paranoid reaction of Murdoch's minions as they barged into the Independent's offices the other day), it seems strange that one of their spokesmen should revisit a tired & dated topic.
Don Foster, Lib Dem spokesman for culture, media & sport, has made some approving noises about the return of terraces to football stadia (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/poll/2010/apr/22/1 ). This is despite the fact that all-seater stadia was a key feature of the Taylor Report in the wake of Hillsborough.
This subject is of little or no relevance at a time when the bigger issue of football club ownership is one that Foster & his colleagues should consider.

On Board The Overland Odyssey

Andy Hunter's blogging about Liverpool FC's trek to Madrid (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2010/apr/20/liverpool-atletico-madrid-travel ). Seems like the media are enjoying the leisurely journey across the continent more than the manager & players. Thanks to an Icelandic volcano, highly paid (& underachieving) footballers are experiencing the novel sensation of travelling by public transport.
It seems strange that the long journey began at Runcorn; I know that Lime Street can be soulless & crowded, but Runcorn?! Rafa, Stevie G, Carra, et al could have stopped off at the Yankee Bar on Lime Street for a pint before departure. Then again, knowing the Yankee Bar, maybe it wouldn't have been a good idea.

The Dame Of Dereliction's Domain *

With the possible exception of Liverpool Wavertree, the city's constituencies are, as ever, devoid of debate & canvassers in this election campaign. It's hardly surprising, given the city's political make-up over the last 30 years or so; rock-solid Labour seats are taken for granted by both the parties & local media. After all, what's the point of speculating on the Tories' chances in Walton?
It's a trend of thought discerned earlier this month by the Electoral Reform Society in a sarcastic missive, as David Bartlett observed (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2010/04/electoral-reform-society-says.html ).
However, in the wake of Thursday's televised election debate, the Guardian's Jon Henley decided to visit the Liverpool Riverside seat, hoping for some deviation from the apathy which has now become the seat's striking feature (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/17/nick-clegg-debate-liverpool-voters ).
Despite the sub editor's headline for Henley's piece ("Britain's most apathetic voters enlivened by challenge to Labour hegemony"), there was little enthusiasm for Nick Clegg or anyone else for that matter. Moreover, while Henley clearly attempted to sketch a representative image of the seat, there were a couple of howlers:
"Riverside is a mixed constituency. To the north is the city centre, and some of Liverpool's most famous sights: the Royal Liver building, the Albert docks. Billions have been pumped into a regenerated waterfront, a fine new arena, a conference and exhibition centre, a shopping mall, even a cruise terminal.
"In the south, there are well-to-do wards like leafy Aigburth. In the middle is Toxteth, scene of the 1981 riots and now a depressed and depressing place, whole swaths of its streets slated for demolition. Unemployment in the constituency stands at 12%, with pockets far higher; a 2007 study found half the children in Liverpool Riverside living in poverty."
Leaving aside Henley's use of the euphemism "regenerated" for the waterfront, the "fine new arena" which still regards stewarding as an optional extra at the concerts it hosts, & the cruise terminal (another time, another blog post altogether), his grasp of the constituency's layout is incomplete. Certainly, the seat is "mixed", something touched upon by John Harris when he visited the constituency (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/video/2010/mar/01/labour-liverpool-harris ).
However, while Aigburth, one of the few middle class enclaves in the city, is in the south of the seat, Toxteth is not in "the middle". Nor is the city centre the northern-most point in the seat; Henley fails to mention that north of the city centre are the Vauxhall & Kirkdale areas, where the levels of deprivation match those of Toxteth. Apart from Aigburth & the city centre, the constituency stands as a sobering indictment of New Labour's inability & unwillingness to transform such areas over the last 13 years.
Perhaps the muted response that Henley encountered in relation to Nick Clegg can be explained by the record of Clegg's mates in the Town Hall; what greater disincentive to engage with local politics could there be than Warren Bradley's antics over the last few years. Prior to Bradley, Mike Storey & Trevor Jones' record similarly induced disillusion. When a locally elected representative such as Bradley can declare brazenly: "The [city] council is now seen more as a company than as a local authority, and we have conducted ourselves in a way that is appropriate to a major development" (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2010/02/putting-con-into-confidence.html ), you realise why so many are apathetic on the streets of Toxteth & Kirkdale.

* Wayne's affectionate description for Riverside's Labour MP, Louise Ellman.

Marking The Anniversary

Unlike last year the world's media weren't at Anfield in significant numbers on today's Hillsborough anniversary. This year's memorial service was more low-key, less political in nature. The attendance, too, was down on last year. However, the attendance of 30,000 twelve months ago was in many ways a one-off.
Credit to the Guardian's Sachin Nakrani for a perceptive & measured appraisal of today's service (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2010/apr/15/hillsborough-disaster-liverpool-memorial-service ).

Potholes & Promises

Long before the freezing temperatures in January worsened the state of many roads the situation in Liverpool was pretty dire; as a cyclist I've often thought of Rice Lane, Great Homer Street & a few other thoroughfares as downright dangerous, if not potentially lethal for anybody on two wheels.
The cycling organisation CTC has compiled a list of UK local authorities' records on dealing with hazards caused by potholes (http://www.fillthathole.org.uk/league-table ). It shows that Liverpool is ranked 145th out of 212 local councils, with just 24% of reported hazards dealt with.
It isn't just a matter of concern to those on two wheels, but to motorists generally & pedestrians too.
Next time Warren Bradley or any of his cohorts rhapsodise about their record, bear that statistic in mind.

Allegiance & Alienation

Recommended reading: Marina Hyde's look at the situation surrounding both Liverpool & Everton football clubs & how it has affected the Walton area (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/apr/12/football-supporters-election-votes ).

Desecration Row

So you thought it couldn't be that bad. Maybe, you mused, all the objections to the building work at Mann Island have been alarmist. Well, here's the vision which will be foisted upon us. Grotesque is the first word that comes to mind. Wayne's already delivered an appropriate verdict on the monstrosities which will help further deface the waterfront (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2010/04/mann-island-artists-impression.html ).
The bureaucrats at Unesco should discreetly check down the front of their trousers, for it seems they didn't have the balls to oppose what has happened on what is laughably described as a World Heritage Site.

When Truth Isn't The Only Casualty Of War

Anguished hand-wringing has been the predominant response of most people to the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan. However, there are moments when it should be replaced by a righteous rage & anger; Bush's war for oil in Iraq was notable for having a pliant mainstream media, eagerly lapping up the official line in return for the juvenile thrill of being "embedded". The culprits weren't just the usual suspects, but the BBC & New York Times, too.
Over the Easter weekend Wikileaks (www.wikileaks.org ) posted a video online showing a horrific incident in Baghdad in June 2007. Two Reuters journalists were spotted by a US Apache helicopter. Convinced that the cameras the two journalists wore around their shoulders were weapons, the order was given to kill. In the last few days the Pentagon has gone into full smear mode, accusing Wikileaks of being hostile to the US & implying that it's little better than a terrorist website. Such desperation is contemptible, yet understandable when you view the video; what you see in the video is a war crime, the US personnel delighting in their bloodlust & ignorance. Even when it transpires that there are two children badly injured, one US official remarks that the "terrorists" shouldn't have brought their children with them.
The video is, naturally, sickening. However, the anger it generates should be channelled at the US for sitting on it for so long while lying about its details:
http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0405/video-shows-forces-firing-killing-reporters/ .

Adios, Rafa

A litany of promises, excuses & hard luck tales since the start of the season. Too many points dropped. It won't wash anymore. If Benfica win on Thursday (& I expect them to), watch the Kop turn on Rafa; the scales will drop like rain. The manager has long since lost the dressing room. Further proof of this came yesterday when Torres was substituted (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTbN1ksDTds ).
Mid-table mediocrity beckons for Liverpool Football Club.

Four Wheels Good, Two Wheels Bad

The blogging postal worker Roy Mayall gave his own dry take on proposals by Royal Mail to end deliveries by bicycle on the Guardian's Comment is Free pages last Wednesday (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/31/postal-service-cycling-environment ).
Fossil fuels are energy's version of analogue TVs, peak oil yield is imminent & Obama made real investment in green technology a precondition for the US administration's bail-out of the auto industry. However, Royal Mail wishes to dispense with bicycles, viewing them as archaic, & replace them with more vans. Inspired thinking, wouldn't you say?
Roy Mayall's blog: http://roymayall.wordpress.com .

A Take On Two Cities

Before Murdoch erects a paywall around his titles it's worth reading a piece in The Times by Stuart Maconie which could be viewed as a compare & contrast exercise regarding Liverpool & Manchester (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/travel/news/article7075464.ece ).
The headline to Maconie's article, however, could be a case of a sub-editor at Wapping wishing to throw a lighted match into an open can of petrol: "Manchester vs Liverpool: which is best?"
That said, Maconie has no wish to act as agent provocateur, rather his take incorporates a (very) potted history of the origins of the rivalry, beginning with the Manchester Ship Canal & continuing through to the obvious subjects of footballing & musical rivalry.
Maconie sees little wrong with the new Museum of Liverpool, commenting that "the concrete wave of the building looks good to me."
When charting recent hotel developments for both cities, Maconie concludes with a wry observation:
"For years, the weary wayfarer's choice of affordable affluence was the Adelphi in Liverpool or the Britannia in Manchester; both blousy painted ladies of a certain age. Now the connoisseur of the complimentary shower cap is spoilt for choice, from Hope Street Hotel and the new Hilton in Liverpool to the City Inn, Malmaison and Lowry in Manchester.
"I once saw Wayne Rooney and Rio Ferdinand in the bar of the latter sharing burgers and Cokes. I hope the food was as delicious as the irony of multimillionare footballers eating gourmet fast food in a five-star hotel named after the visual laureate of the northern underclass."

*Thanks to Wayne for emailing me Maconie's article.

National Spotlight On Waterfront's Mutilation

As Wayne mentioned earlier today (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2010/03/museum-of-liverpool-radio-4-take.html ), the Friday edition of Radio 4's You and Yours programme featured a piece by Winifred Robinson, Liverpool-born & bred, on the squat monstrosity that will be the Museum of Liverpool (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/youandyours/listenagain/friday_previous.shtml ).
Wayne is quoted in the piece, as is NML Director David Fleming, who does his best to convince a rightly sceptical Robinson of the carbuncle's merits ("we're really very pleased with the exterior," he enthuses).
However, Fleming audibly flags when presented with some further questions. The man who thought nothing of giving Port of Liverpool building owner Downing £750,000, ten times the original estimate for the museum's construction breaking a covenant (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2010/02/calculating-cost-of-cracked-covenant.html ) is also disingenuous.
"Much opposition?" Robinson asks him.
"No, not really," Fleming breezily & brazenly replies.
It's also significant that Professor John Belchem from the University of Liverpool doesn't question or dispute Robinson's suggestion that Liverpool has fallen into the trap of becoming a theme park, something the city, as well as others, wished to avoid after the 80s recession.
For good measure, Belchem suggests a spot of "retail therapy" at Grosvenor-pool.

Peel's Press Gang Plan

When someone is losing the argument & won't take no for an answer, despite logic & law being against them, they're usually advised to grow up, or leave the pub & sober up. Unfortunately, Peel Holdings has cast itself in the role of the recalcitrant reveller, adamant it's right & that it won't back down over its plan to use public money for a commercial development (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/03/19/liverpool-s-pier-head-could-become-a-base-for-cruise-liners-100252-26065361/ ).

Needless to say Warren Bradley & his merry men (they've been drinking in the same bar as Peel) & Oldham Hall Street are back on board, just as they were during their juvenile game of name-calling with Southampton (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/09/oldham-echo-fight-arranger.html & http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/10/oldham-echo-fight-arranger-round-two.html ).

When the appeal of "port wars" began to wane, accompanied by the heavy hangover reality of business as it is normally conducted (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/11/public-money-to-pay-for-ports-plan.html ) & the threadbare nature of Peel's case was exposed, the cheerleaders realised the game was up & silently peeled --pardon the pun-- away (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/12/oldham-echo-fight-arranger-licence.html ).

That said, however, I noted at the time: "It would be nice to think that sanity's finally prevailed. Don't hold your breath, though."

Well, the sanity's gone out of the window again & it's trebles all round at the bar for Peel & its acolytes; Peter Elson lost no time in the Oldham Echo to get the party resumed (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/03/22/shipping-lines-peel-floats-idea-of-transferring-cruise-turnarounds-to-temporary-pier-head-berth-100252-26081623/ ):

"Terrific news from Mersey Docks owner Peel and Liverpool City Council about transferring the turnaround cruises from Langton Dock to the Pier Head cruise liner stage on a temporary basis.

"This is bold new thinking from Peel which, by retaining the same number of cruises as at Langton, hopes not to antagonise rival Southampton port bosses' cries of foul over breaking EU caveats on grants used to fund the new stage. Vital, too, is the tag of it being temporary, while Peel reviews building its own stage to the north."

This "bold new thinking" could well be seen by some as a third-rate sleight-of-hand manoeuvre by Peel. It's intriguing, too, that Elson uses the word "reviews" about Peel's stage north of the Pier Head. That could be read as a non-committal stance by Peel on whether such a stage would ever be built.

Elson's piece quotes Cllr Gary Millar (yes, he's popped back into the bar, too), the council's executive member for local tourism & regeneration, & he further muddies the already brown waters surrounding the exotically-named Liverpool Waters project when he burbles that "it's a wonderful advance by Peel to test the waters. Once a temporary berth is established the public will have a perception that it shouldn't be taken away and hopefully that will focus efforts on finding a long term solution."

So, Peel is testing the waters with this plan, eh? Interesting phrase. It could be taken to mean that Peel is chancing its arm with this plan & that it could present both Southampton & the Department for Transport with a de facto, as opposed to a de jure, cruise liner development which would be sold as a fait accompli, regardless of anyone else's wishes. Moreover, I'm sure Oldham Hall Street will play its part in facilitating the public perception "that it shouldn't be taken away".

Nah, maybe I'm just being too cynical & Mark Thomas is right that this really is a "nasty & vindictive blog". Incidentally, I note from Elson's article that the first cruise liner that left the Langton Dock this week was named Boudicca, a tribute to the ancient leader whose war against Roman occupation of Britain ended in heroic failure, her corpse reportedly being buried on the site of one of the platforms at London's King's Cross station. I'm sure there aren't any parallels with Peel's prospects in its renewal of hostilities.

Yet it seems that Peel does inhabit a parallel universe in believing that if it can't convince government of their case, it'll continue with a crafty nod here, a surreptitious wink there & a rabble-rousing call to base parochialism, elbowing the famous Mersey ferries in the process, as Wayne noted last Friday (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2010/03/peel-holdings-want-pier-head-stinky-ink.html ).

This is the reality which neither the Daily Ghost nor the Oldham Echo won't even allude to, as outlined by the Southampton Daily Echo (yes, yes, I'm highly aware that Southampton has its own agenda, but its points on the use of public money for a commercial operation are unarguable):

"The Department for Transport (DfT) decided against relaxing its rules on publicly funded competition to allow a full turnaround facility at Liverpool's Cruise Terminal on the grounds that it would have an 'unfair and adverse effect' on the market.

"Now officials from the Mersey Docks and Harbour Company, owned by developer Peel, are again in discussions with the city council to transfer cruises from its existing turnaround facility, a tatty dock in Bootle, to Pier Head.

"Now, however, Peel says the move would just be temporary, while it presses ahead with ambitious plans to build its own cruise terminal as part of the £5.5 billion skyscraper Liverpool Water scheme. That scheme, the largest urban regeneration project in the UK, is likely to take years, with a planning application not due to be submitted until later this year.

"In a bid to appease concerned rivals they say the number of turnaround cruises would remain the same, but ABP [owner of Southampton docks] is unimpressed arguing if they had wanted better facilities 'they should have invested in them years ago' " (http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/business/shipping/shippingnews/5077150._Port_wars__resume/ ).

Indeed. However, that won't stop Peel, Bradley's crew & those in an increasingly Mary Celeste-like Oldham Hall Street from filling up their tankards & demanding a resumption of Cruise Wars until EU rules are tossed overboard, the DfT is rammed & Peel's vessel rules the waves.

*Image courtesy of http://www.e-architect.co.uk/ .

Showing The True Picture

Liverpool's regeneration continues apace, we're assured by the Daily Ghost & Oldham Echo. One of the instances cited is the "redevelopment" of the entrance to Lime Street station, a grotesque spectacle. Just across the road from the latest monstrosity to be presented as "progress", lies the old ABC cinema.
Derelict & left to rot over the last decade or more, the cinema stands as a curt rejoinder to the eternally deluded saps who buy the argument from the council & their PR people on Oldham Hall Street that the city is changing for the better. Once a local landmark just as prominent & popular as more obvious ones in the city centre, the cinema, along with Southport's Pleasureland complex, has been in the hands of Urban Splash in recent years. Promises have been made & grandiose plans have been outlined for both sites.
However, in an admission which makes a mockery of the numerous puff-pieces in the Echo declaring the city's immunity to a global recession, Urban Splash have now acknowledged the obvious: all their best-laid plans count for nothing when the perfect storm of the credit crunch & global downturn continues to rage (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/03/22/urban-splash-committed-to-abc-cinema-and-pleasureland-schemes-100252-26081387/ ).
Urban Splash's Tom Bloxham tries to sound hopeful in the Echo apologia (no byline for the article, surprise, surprise), but sounding hopeful is no business plan. Instead, he talks of something "very special" for both sites. Very special? That should fill any potential investors with confidence, shouldn't it? As the Echo meekly admits:
"In September 2007 it was announced [Urban Splash] had been appointed as the developer for the derelict ABC cinema in Lime Street.
"At the time plans were expected to be submitted to the city in July 2008 with work completed by mid-2010.
"But Liverpool Council confirmed that Urban Splash is yet to submit a planning application for the site."
Bloxham's ambiguity on the fate of both sites indicates that the situation is unlikely to change for the forseeable future. Indeed, he sounds more like a Lottery punter hoping his numbers come up:
"On both we have got lots of ideas that we are exploring and trying to come up with the best solution.
"It's difficult to move forward at the pace we want to."
Whether things are moving forward at any sort of pace is open to question, as even the Oldham Echo anxiously admitted in its editorial (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2010/03/22/city-can-t-be-made-to-wait-for-regeneration-of-former-abc-cinema-in-lime-street-100252-26080650/ ).

Anything In The Name Of Modernity

Recommended reading: a piece by local blogger Joe Moran on the Guardian's Comment is Free pages at the beginning of this week (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/22/modernity-public-sector-paradox-management ). Moran refers to the blogging postal worker Roy Mayall & his brilliantly acerbic account of "modernisation" in his workplace. He also delivers a finely concise assesment of "modernisation" & the motives of those behind it:
"Governments are as susceptible to groupthink as professions. And it is worth questioning the argument that all public sector employees, from postal workers to academics, are equally resistant to "change". The leitmotif of the New Labour era has been the unstoppable nature of such change: doing nothing is not an option; we can't stand still or we will roll backwards. Often this is a way of shutting off argument (who on earth would want to roll backwards?) by claiming ownership over the future and insisting this is the only way things can be - in order for markets to be free, the workers must be incentivised and coralled into line."
Whereas New Labour acolytes can only be incentivised by the lure of a few grand a day.

Not Such A Byers Market

In a week which has seen the truly base & venal nature of certain New Labour politicians --& others-- exposed (excellent investigative job by the people at Channel 4's Dispatches programme), it's worth recalling an incident involving Stephen "cab for hire" Byers & a local female Labour councillor in 2002 (http://news.scotsman.com/stephenbyers/The-night-minister-dropped-his.2339704.jp ).
The incident involving Barbara Corish, then councillor for Litherland Ward in Bootle, is salient not for any prurient or sensationalist motives on my part (other blogs on the web cater for that market), but because it affords a glimpse into the mindset of an arrogant, avaricious & hubristic New Labour luminary. As the saying goes, hubris precedes nemesis, the latter of which duly arrived with his high, & Mittyesque, opinions of himself, as told to the undercover Dispatches journalist (£3,000-£5,000 a day sure beats the minimum wage). Along with Geoff Hoon, who once dismissed manufacturing workers as "metal bashers", & Patricia Hewitt, Byers' fall has been worthy of Icarus.
On a not entirely unrelated note, it's heartening to see that Heather Brooke, who campaigned tirelessly on the issue of MPs' expenses, & whose mother hails from Merseyside, is now getting the credit she merits, as Roy Greenslade obseved this week (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/mar/22/freedomofinformation-mps-expenses ).

Nick Peet Gets Facebooked

It's been a while since Nick Peet was let out to scrawl his juvenile sentiments in the Oldham Echo. This has been bad news for Paddy Shennan (hello, Paddy!), as Peet's efforts made Paddy's contributions look cerebral. Now it seems that the "writer" who thinks it's a bit of a laugh to throw bottles at concerts (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/11/oldham-echos-mood-music.html ) has attracted the attention of some less than enamoured souls who have formed themselves into a Facebook group, "Nick Peet Should Be Removed From Writing For The Echo" (http://www.facebook.com/#!/group.php?gid=365427618025&ref=nf ).
Cheer up, Nick, I'm sure someone rates your copy, I mean, Big Al must surely......um, well.....I'm sure your mum reads it from time to time.

Sabotaging Sub Judice

It was inevitable that the tabloids would salivate over the news that Jon Venables had returned to jail. True to form, they have gloried in their largely self-generated hysteria over the story.
There was, however, a welcome note of sanity & perspective in yesterday's Guardian editorial (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/06/jon-venables-james-bulger-editorial ):
"The tabloids are waving the principled banner of the public's right to know, but are trading speculative accounts of where Venables is, what he looks like -- even what he is eating -- while damning the government for 'betraying James' by 'sickening' details of Venables' latest misdoings. No matter that there is no presumption for disclosure, still less an automatic press release, at this stage with recalls, the red-tops -- backed by a Conservative Party whose 'rehabilitation revolution' now seems almost forgotten -- suggest the justice secretary [Jack Straw] is being soft by refusing to publish the details. This show of populist strength is a dangerous game which could self-defeat, even in its own terms. There are rare occasions when casual spraying about of information can frustrate justice, most obviously before a criminal trial. Even if Venables has committed a serious new crime, and even if the aim is to make him suffer as much as possible, it will not be served by prejudicing proceedings against him to the point where the courts rule themselves unable to establish guilt."
Those are points Mark Thomas would have done well to consider before writing about the case on his blog (http://www.ldpeditor.merseyblogs.co.uk/2010/03/we_have_right_to_know_why_jame.html ).
As an aside, I'm sure it wasn't intentional, but I suspect I'm not the only person to find this observation by Thomas in dubious taste:
"If I had been asked to have a wager on which of them [Thompson or Venables] might get into further trouble in their adult lives, my money would have been on Thompson".
Considering such a question in terms of "a wager" is jarringly incongruous. It is also an insult to the memory of James Bulger.

Beneath Contempt

I once bumped into Michael Foot. He was leaving the Grand Hotel in Brighton during the 1983 Labour Party Conference one late evening to take his dog for a walk. I was on my way in to join the throng at the hotel bar. Brief pleasantries were exchanged, though I never spoke to him again. I was reminded of his willingness to chat amiably to complete strangers when his death was announced last Wednesday.
Charles Moore, on the other hand, is an individual I've never met, nor would I wish to. Moore pens his "thoughts" for the Telegraph, or, as the blurb on his webpage gushes (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/charlesmoore/ ): "Charles Moore covers politics with the wisdom and insight that come from having edited The Daily Telegraph, The Sunday Telegraph and The Spectator."
Moore's take on the tributes paid to Foot reveal all you need to know about the character (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/charlesmoore/7377111/Was-Foot-a-national-treasure-or-the-KGBs-useful-idiot.html ).
Citing the discredited ex-Soviet agent Oleg Gordievsky, Moore relates the claim that officials from the KGB would visit Tribune's offices when Foot was the paper's editor, & leave £10 notes (£250 in today's terms) in Foot's jacket. Even if this claim is true, it clearly didn't affect the line Tribune took during that period, something that Moore is clearly aware of as he frantically attempts to row back from the point where he could declare Foot's Soviet allegiance:
"It is important to understand that Foot would not have known that he was considered an agent. That was an internal classification of the KGB -- a scalp for the bureaucracy. There is no evidence that he passed on state secrets. He probably considered that he was simply keeping the Soviet Union well informed in the interests of peace.
"It is not clear why Foot took the cash, but he probably did not blow it on himself. Most likely he used it to pay petty bills for Tribune, accepting the tainted money because he thought it was all in a good cause. You could not say he was a Communist traitor."
Moore goes in for the classic nudge-nudge smear tactic with this third-rate Oxbridge scrawl, making his claim all the more despicable. There is, of course, the added factor that the dead can't sue. I daresay that if Foot did indeed pocket the money, he would have thought to himself, more fool them, I'll use this for the paper; an example of putting "tainted money" into a paper which wasn't afraid to condemn Stalinism.
Moore is said to be a devout Catholic. That being the case, he'll be familiar with the Biblical phrase about being judged by the company you keep. Moore was an enthusiastic supporter of the Pinochet regime in Chile & campaigned for his release when he was arrested in Britain ten years ago. Indeed, such was the butcher's gratitude to Moore that he sent him a Christmas card every year until his death in December 2006 (http://www.remember-chile.org.uk/comment/00-01-19bv.htm ).
When it comes to journalistic integrity, Moore is merely an upmarket version of Kelvin MacKenzie.

Believe It Or Not, This Band Came From Liverpool

Among the comments that are thrown at those of us who condemn what's being done to the city of Liverpool (& I'm referring to the more repeatable ones here) is the contention that Liverpool has to move on & change with the times; Wayne gets that sort of thing quite often from commenters lacking the courage of their convictions to ditch the "anonymous" tag.

So when yet another part of what is still titled a World Heritage Site is defaced in the name of progress & modernity, it is accompanied by the claim that Liverpool can't live in the past. We need to move on, says Oldham Hall Street. Hmmm, OK, let's go back through the editorials in the Oldham Echo over the last week which reflect that attitude.

Ah yes, got one here, I think. Here it is: http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2010/02/25/why-liverpool-needs-to-do-more-to-make-the-most-of-the-beatles-100252-25909501/ .

The Oldham Echo editorial begins predictably:

"There are still those who insist that Liverpool somehow overplays the fact that it gave birth to the four lads who shook the world.

"The Beatles, as they say, moved on from the city - and it's time the city moved on from them.

"Some even suggest there is little real demand for attractions connected to John, Paul, George & Ringo.

"All of which is nonsense."

Apart from the shameless lifting of the phrase Arthur Dooley chose to accompany his sculpture in Matthew Street (no attribution, surprise, surprise), this well-worn trudge along the Merseybeat Path lives down to expectations. It's said that Paddy Shennan (hello, Paddy!) pens most Echo editorials. If so, this isn't of the same standard as his normal Pulitzer-worthy efforts.

So yes, apparently we don't commemorate The Fabs anywhere near often enough. Presumably, there should be at least half a dozen Matthew Street festivals throughout the year. Indeed, the Echo would probably relish the idea of the city council changing the city's name to something like Beatle City, or Beatleville. Warren Bradley could claim that, 400 years on, the band are as popular as ever. We could also encourage everyone to wear mop-top wigs & ill-fitting collarless suits while David Fleming stands outside the monstrosity that is the new Museum of Liverpool & sings Money (That's What I Want). Warren Bradley could sit at the top of Grosvenor-pool, crooning Fool On The Hill. Jason Harborrow could make a surprise guest appearance & perform a duet with Lee Forde on the classic Fabs song, I Should Have Known Better.

Yes, it's all starting to fall into place now. All we now need is for Phil Redmond to talk about planting tangerine trees & cellophane flowers along Water Street.

The Echo concludes:

"It's surely time for Beatle City to stage a Beatle Summit, during which the main players in the tourism and Beatles industries can get their heads together to help make the most of one of this city's greatest draws."

Absolutely. What greater sign could the city send out to demonstrate its forward-looking, twenty-first century approach?

Taking A Figure Out Of The Equation

Tucked away in this morning's Oldham Echo was a dutiful piece, penned by Neil Hodgson, about Trinity Mirror's trading figures (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/03/04/trinity-mirror-results-ahead-of-expectations-100252-25961631/ ).
It reads like the sort of thing Pravda would run about tractor production figures in the old Soviet Union. Missing from Hodgson's docile dispatch, however, is the circulation figure for the Echo. According to the latest ABC figures, as Ronnie de Ramper commented on a previous post, it's dipped alarmingly by 9.5% to 88,000.
Must have been edited out due to lack of space, eh, Neil?

Missing An Open Goal

It's laudable that the Spirit of Shankly group should organise a billboard campaign around the city, drawing even wider attention to Hicks & Gillett's ruinous reign at Anfield (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/mar/03/liverpool-spirit-of-shankly-campaign ).
However, it's counterproductive for the group to dismiss any possibility of cooperation with those Manchester United fans protesting against the Glazers continued presence at Old Trafford. We all know about the rivalry between the two sets of fans, so much so that it's long been tiresome to many. However, some measure of cooperation is not just desirable, but necessary in both campaigns; the wider issue of football club ownership cannot be addressed as long as normal rivalries supersede the realisation that there is a common concern for both sets of supporters.

Down By The Riverside

Recommended viewing: John Harris takes a trip around the Liverpool Riverside constituency, notable in UK terms for having an extremely low turn-out for recent general elections (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/video/2010/mar/01/labour-liverpool-harris ).
There isn't much in Harris' video which will be revelatory to anyone on Merseyside. However, it is interesting to see that Harris shows the side of Liverpool which is now completely ignored by the Fib Dem council & a complacent local Labour Party. Ringo's childhood home in Madryn Street (now boarded up) is featured &, in a moment of Beatlesque surrealism, the Magical Mystery Bus turns up on cue.

Calculating The Cost Of A Cracked Covenant

Liverpool in 1963: Merseybeat was at its peak, Everton won the league & across Stanley Park, Shanks was turning his recently promoted squad into a major footballing force. It was a heady time, reflected in the singing of Merseybeat hits on the terraces (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEutB0xZSIA ).
Oh & another thing, the Mersey Docks & Harbour Board sold the land on which Mann Island was situated to the then Liverpool Corporation. It wasn't a big issue then.
It is now (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/02/24/revealed-tax-payer-funded-national-museums-liverpool-paid-out-750k-for-spoiling-a-waterfront-view-100252-25901760/ ).
Yes, indeed, remember all those imbeciles who dismissed concerns at the mutilation of the waterfront? You're living in the past, we were told. Well, the past has returned to give these characters a kick where it hurts most -- the pocket.
Of course, it's all a big shock to the Oldham Echo, which splashes Ben Schofield's article on its front page this morning. To summarise Schofield's anguished piece, National Museums Liverpool (NML) has paid Downing, the owners of the Port of Liverpool building (one of the Three Graces) £750,000 because the new Museum of Liverpool (you know, the one Roger McGough insisted was ours) blocks the view of the Pilotage Office from the Port of Liverpool building. This breaks a covenant dating back to the sale of the land 47 years ago, as Schofield confirms:
"The covenant dates back to 1963 when the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board -- which then owned Mann Island and the Port of Liverpool building -- sold the land the museum now stands on to Liverpool Corporation.
"It kept hold of the imposing port headquarters but wanted to protect its view of the Pilotage Office at the entrance to Canning Half Tide Dock.
"It insisted nothing was built within 40ft of the river and any new buildings would not be taller than 40ft.
"The new Museum of Liverpool breaks both parts of the covenant."
Lifted your jaw from the floor yet? OK, let's try to ascertain the whos, whys, whens, wheres & hows of this farce, shall we? Oh sorry, forgot for a moment that when a cock-up on this scale emerges, Oldham Hall Street doesn't do finger-pointing. That said, Schofield does offer this nugget of potential culpability:
"It only came to light partway through the museum's planning stage and stunned NML's trustees because it left them vulnerable to a compensation claim by the Port of Liverpool's owners, Downing.
"At first NML lawyers said if the case went to court, the settlement would be around £70,000.
"But desperate to keep the project on track, NML director Dr David Fleming and then chair of trustees Loyd Grossman chose to pay £750,000 up front -- and up to 10 times over the odds."
Fleming's record has been less than impressive, as Wayne has consistently pointed out (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com ). As for Grossman, it beggars belief that a TV celebrity should have been in a position to sanction such a move. Grossman was on the panel which awarded Liverpool its Capital of Culture status back in 2003. Did this entitle him to occupy his position with NML?
In contrast to Catherine Jones' fawning piece earlier this month, Schfield openly admits that the project "is now months behind schedule."
He also sketches a picture of complacent/ignorant lawyers acting on NML's behalf who blithely insisted that it wouldn't be such a big deal & quotes a source who ruefully recalls:
"Everyone was steaming ahead and presumably no one did a complete job looking into the rights of the land."
I think "steaming ahead" is somehow supposed to refer back to the port's maritime past. However, it also sums up the approach & attitude of all those guilty of wrecking the character of the waterfront; the "where there's a space, let's build apace" mentality forming a poisonous pincer movement with a council whose leader seems to think the Three Graces date back eight centuries.
An NML spokesman tells Schofield that the covenant amounts to a "restriction". Interpreting the covenant in that way reveals NML's disregard for the waterfront area. He also fails pathetically in trying to put the best possible spin on the spending of £750,000 of our money to Downing.
Incidentally, the claim by NML that knowledge of the covenant "came to light part way through the museum's planning stage" doesn't quite tally with Downing's version of events:
"We were approached at the eleventh hour and did work expediently to accommodate the museum so that the project was not jeopardized."
I'm no expert on these matters, but I can't see how the planning stage would be at "the eleventh hour" of the project. Perhaps Fleming & Grossman (when the former isn't giving soundbites to pliable Trinity Mirror hacks & the latter isn't launching another bloody brand of sauce) could elucidate. What do you reckon?
The Oldham Echo feels compelled to pen an anguished, hand-wringing editorial on the whole debacle (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2010/02/24/750-000-too-high-a-price-for-national-museums-liverpool-to-have-to-pay-downing-100252-25900195/ ).
Typically, however, it keeps its consternation at NML's actions to a minimum, preferring a sense of wounded dismay to scornful attribution. Instead, it won't surprise many that the editorial then seeks to draw Downing into the fray as a villain of the piece:
"And what of Downing? Hard-nosed businessmen and women may point out they are perfectly entitled to benefit from a decades-old covenant, however perverse the outcome may seem to outsiders.
"But what of the greater good? What of the greater interests of the people of Liverpool and the city of Liverpool?
"Does this costly outcome have anything to do with the spirit of resurgence and regeneration currently coursing through the city's veins? It doesn't seem to, does it?
"Couldn't a better deal have been done? Couldn't a compromise have been reached?"
All valid points, of course. It's a pity that Oldham Hall Street didn't consider such wider concerns when putting 100 Liverpool printers out of work as a consequence of moving its printing operations 50 miles down the M62. Isn't it?

Look Who's Back

It's been a while since David Bartlett posted on his Dale Street Blues blog (perhaps Mark Thomas pleaded with him not to dabble anymore with the curse of the blogosphere; it starts out as the occasional Tweet, then the tentative postings on Facebook, & before you know it, you're hooked, blogging from Oldham Hall Street really does screw you up).
Still, it's nice to see that David has spent his time away from the keyboard constructively, as evidenced by this cerebral offering: http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2010/02/poll-gives-new-meaning-to-a-we.html .
We're grateful to David for elevating the tone of local political discourse. Keep it up, David (ahem).

Celebrating A Carbuncle

Wayne's already fired a well-aimed salvo at the PR spin surrounding of the Museum of Liverpool (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2010/02/museum-of-liverpools-opening.html ), in particular the piece Catherine Jones wrote for today's Oldham Echo.
However, it's also worth casting an eye over an article she penned for Friday's Echo, just hours after the official handover of the carbuncle from the contractors to NML (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/02/12/five-hundred-fundraisers-celebrate-the-official-handover-of-the-museum-of-liverpool-to-nml-100252-25818601/ ). The occasion was marked by "a fundraising dinner" [hasn't the monstrosity already been paid for, largely through our money?] &, judging by Jones' breathless prose, some observers might unkindly suspect that she herself had what the aristocracy still like to term "a good meal".
Thursday night's festivities were graced by the presence of Phil Redmond, whose "thoughts" in the Daily Ghost must surely warrant an entire section of Private Eye's Pseud's Corner. Redmond was in expansive mood as he declared to a clearly-rapt Jones:
"It was a great night and provided our supporters from the business and cultural community with their first opportunity to view the museum's spaces, and it previewed what will undoubtedly become one of the best vantage points in the city through a magnificent 80ft picture window."
Ah yes, that view, can't argue with Redmond's use of the word "magnificent" to describe it, can we? It'll afford an unparalleled view of Professor Chucklebutty's upturned caravan, aka, the Mersey Ferry terminal building, & the almost cancerous cluster of high-rise "developments" around the Three Graces [not bad-looking for 800 years, btw, eh, Warren?], not to mention the burger stalls which will adorn the west entrance to the Liver Building.
Jones enthuses in her apologia for journalism:
"[The Museum] will boast four main themes - port city, creative city, people's city and global city."
OK, let's break this down into manageable portions of effluvia, shall we? The port of Liverpool still exists, of course, but presenting it as a museum artefact confirms the view of many that it'll be another exercise in nostalgia, a piteous pining for a Golden Age that never was [my grandfather worked on the docks when those who got work for the day were picked out from pens containing their not-so fortunate colleagues].
As for the "creative city" theme, we all know the talent & originality that's emanated from Merseyside down the years. So what makes me suspect that it'll be dominated by four Liverpool lads who split up over 40 years' ago?
And then, of course, we have the "people's city" theme. NML must have a twisted sense of humour to call it that; a "people's city" would have been consulted, at the very least, about the Botoxification of the entire waterfront. Incidentally, it's an open secret that NML were going to include a section on Hillsborough under this theme. Crass & insensitive are two of the more printable words that come to mind.
Liverpool's development & history as a port means that calling it a "global city" is intellectual tautology. Its maritime links, moreover, hark back to an era which ended, roughly, in the early twentieth-century.
Anyway, I'm sure that such matters didn't concern the revellers on Thursday night. Among their number was Roger McGough who, as Jones, trilled, "is writing new verse to add to the museum's exhibits."
You just know something is inherently naff when a local poet agrees to scribble some doggerel about the city, don't you?
It's a shame, really. Roger's done some good things in the past... like the, erm, Scaffold [remember "Lily the Pink"?], but his ringing endorsement of the monstrosity is cringe-inducing:
"As a Liverpool lad, the museum belongs to me as much as anyone, and I'm happy to be lending my support in the ways I know best, through art and poetry.
"I encourage others who hold the city close to their hearts to get involved with their new museum with continued support and a passion for the arts, history and culture."
So the museum "belongs" to us, eh, Roger? It's our museum, is it? Now that's what I call creative writing.

It Was Twenty Years Ago Today

Nelson Mandela's release from jail on this day 20 years ago is one of those "where were you when..." moments. I recall it as a cold February Sunday afternoon on my 27th birthday. The BBC's normal current affairs programme scrapped its format for the day & transmitted live pictures from South Africa.
Of course, much has changed since then, a good deal of it inimical to those like Mandela who dedicated their lives to the struggle. That discussion can, however, wait at least a short while.
Here's a clip I saw on Channel 4's "The Tube" back in 84 of Jerry Dammers & chums, produced by Our Declan (Elvis Costello), performing one of the songs which became the soundtrack to the final push for apartheid's demise:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxENtgItiH8 .
Twenty-six years on it still works as a powerful calling-to-arms.

The History Man

I made a mistake in my previous post regarding the rental income for the city council from Grosvenor-pool, as a commenter pointed out. However, those who may be wondering, & with good reason, whether Warren Bradley really did say that the Three Graces went as far back as the Charter for the city in 1207 may be interested in watching the clip I mentioned:
http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=QOYvo7bdiOc . *

I'm out on my maths. Warren's completely out on his history.
*[Acknowledgements to Wayne.]

Putting The Con Into Confidence

Welcome to the weird & wonderful world of Warren Bradley. Cllr Bradley never tires of telling us, via his PR agents on Oldham Hall Street, what an unalloyed success story Grosvenor-pool has been for the city. He was at it again this morning in the Daily Ghost (love the "relaunch", btw, Mark, how long have you been given?) , rhapsodising about the council's handover of the land colonised by Grosvenor (http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2010/02/08/city-in-liverpool-one-deal-with-grosvenor-92534-25784604/ ).
Alan Weston was the one to draw the short straw & put the best possible gloss on a shabby stitch-up. However, his valiant efforts were pitifully transparent as he briefly described the general outline of the arrangement:
"Under the terms of the lease, Grosvenor will own the 42 acres of land occupied by Liverpool One for the next 250 years, in return for which the city council will receive 5% of the rental value -- now standing at £1.7m a year.
"But with the complex not yet fully occupied and discounted rent deals for some stores coming to an end, that figure is sure to rise in future years."
Hmm, so let me get this straight. The council's take from the arrangement will be 5% of £1.7m: £85,000. Right, I see. That's what I call good business. Another fly in the ointment is to be found in Weston's breezy assurances of sunlit uplands & eternal happiness for the retail behemoth. He undermines the faux feel-good factor later on in his piece with his admission that "More than 95% of the 1.6m sq. ft. scheme is currently let".
Not much scope there for extra revenue from the complex, eh? There's also the distinct possibility that retailers will respond to the end of the discounted rent scheme in the way they did at the Albert Dock two decades ago, ie., leave. The recession may be technically over, but retailers know as well as shoppers that its effects are still taking place.
At which point, let's consider the words of local soothsayer & saviour, Warren Bradley. Bear with him here. After all, he did once say in a TV interview that the Three Graces were as old as the city itself (btw, the Cavern started as a Cavalier hang-out for King Charles' troops in between civil war battles for Liverpool Castle). Anyway, speak up, Warren, take it away:
"Liverpool One has brought real confidence back to the city centre, and just as importantly, to those outside the city centre."
Ah yes, Warren, you can really see that "confidence" in the rising number of empty retail spaces on Church Street. What's more, the residents in Dingle, Belle Vale, Speke, Croxteth, Kirkdale, etc. really exude that "confidence" because of Grosvenor-pool. What happens in their own neighbourhoods is strictly secondary, isn't it, Warren? Any other pearls of wisdom, councillor?
"The council is now seen more as a company than as a local authority, and we have conducted ourselves in a way that is appropriate to a major development."
Absoluteley! Why think of yourselves as heading a council when you can tell yourselves & others that you're really a crack team of business people; that deal with Grosvenor confirms how business-savvy you are, right? Anything else to add before we bid adieu?
"The 42 acres now occupied by Liverpool One were previously low grade and didn't offer anything. What we have now represents a good deal for the city council, and we should be grateful to Grosvenor for having the confidence to do it in Liverpool."
Perfect, Warren, perfect. Yes, "confidence" is the word; just add the term "trick" & you have the summation of the Fib Dems' Bread & Circus approach to running a major UK city. Oh, btw, the original Chavasse Park wasn't exactly Edenesque. Nor, however, was it "low grade". I seem to remember that it formed a natural amphitheatre for one of the main stages during the Matthew Street festival. So are you slighting a festival you normally praise ad nauseam? Surely not, eh, Warren? That would affect "confidence", wouldn't it?

His Evolution Was Not Televised

Recommended reading: Sean O'Hagan's piece on the return of Gil Scott-Heron in today's Observer (http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2010/feb/07/gil-scott-heron-comeback-interview ).
Scott-Heron has brilliantly covered Robert Johnson's "Me & the Devil" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OET8SVAGELA ).

A "Fair & Balanced" Response To Fox

Despite the best efforts of some on the Right, the "culture wars" largely remain a US political phenomenon; the homogeneity of the leaderships to be found in New Labour, the Tories & the Lib Dems extends to a general consensus regarding the issues that fuel the fires of the US Right. Last week saw the Daily Show's Jon Stewart venture into the Lions' Den, aka, Rupert Murdoch's Fox News' studios in Manhattan. Stewart was the "guest" of Bill O'Reilly, a strident populist who fits the bill for a network which once tried to copyright the "fair & balanced" tag with which it flatters itself.
To be "fair", as Stewart himself noted, O'Reilly is not the network's worst offender; one of his colleagues, Glenn Beck, last year accused Obama of racism against white people.
Stewart stood up to the barbs that were thrown his way, countering with a few well-considered ripostes, including this observation (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/02/jon-stewart-bill-oreilly_n_446372.html ): "They [Fox] have taken reasonable concerns about this president and this economy and turned it into a full-fledged panic attack about the next coming of Chairman Mao."

Establishing The Truth

Justice delayed for 20 years, but it's to be hoped that it won't be denied for much longer. The eight-person panel which will oversee most, though not all, documents surrounding Hillsborough has its first meeting in Liverpool today (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/feb/03/hillsborough-disaster-liverpool-documents ).
David Conn, whose work on this as well as many other football-related investigative matters has been exemplary, quotes Home Secretary Alan Johnson: "I believe that the independent panel has an historic opportunity to bring healing to those affected by the tragedy, and that its establishment can help to begin to bring an end to the grievances strongly felt by many."
The panel can certainly begin to address the issues, but Johnson is complacent to think that "healing" can be delivered when too many individuals won't have to answer for their actions & statements.
It's a point inadvertently raised by the chief constable of South Yorkshire Police, Andy Holt: "There is a good deal of suspicion from the families that a cover-up took place, and the panel will provide transparency, an assurance that the release of our documents is above board and being done with integrity."
It seems odd to see the word integrity used in connection with South Yorkshire Police; that there was a cover-up isn't a "suspicion", it's a fact.

Treacherous Waters

Liverpool Waters. The name sounds so nice, doesn't it? Perhaps saying the name often enough produces a soothing, soporific effect. The reality is that you'd need to be in a stupor to swallow the effluent served up by Peel Holdings. Maybe that's why their pals on Oldham Hall Street are so keen to persuade us that it will transform the north end docks with a piece by Neil Hodgson which reminds us why associating Trinity Mirror with investigative journalism is just as risible as associating John Terry with fidelity (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/02/03/massive-public-backing-for-peel-s-5-5bn-liverpool-waters-scheme-100252-25748917/ ).
Yes, you've read that correctly, Hodgson does, indeed, claim that there is "massive public backing" for the latest round of mutilation a supposed World Heritage Site faces (all the journos on Oldham Hall Street write their own headlines, the sub-editors have long gone).
Hodgson's panegyric to Peel's plans begins in a manner which provokes astonishment & hilarity in equal measure:
" 'When can you start?' was the reaction of most visitors at developer Peel Holdings' Liverpool Waters public showing."
And it gets worse, much worse, as Hodgson's puff-piece for Peel plumbs hitherto unchartered depths of subterranean sychophancy. We're told that the "public showing" was a "consultation", that the plans are a "redevelopment" (such a nice, warm euphemism), that the event was "a huge hit" with people who attended (in their "hundreds", apparently), & that "early analysis of almost 300 questionnaires revealed that 99% were in favour of the 30-50 year scheme."
If, say, three of Peel's lackeys are roped in to make positive noises, but one of them hesitates before giving assent, I guess that counts as a 99% level of support. It also places Peel & the Oldham Echo in good company: North Korea's regime often claims 99% support from the people, too.
Keen to give the impression that they're a reasonable & flexible bunch, Peel's spokeswoman tells a clearly smitten Hodgson that they're interacting with the public on this plan, & that they are ready to "make amendments to the scheme as appropriate." Note the "as appropriate" bit, btw, it's their wafer-thin charm offensive fleetingly exposed.
There are more honeyed words from Lindsey Ashworth, the development's "director" for Hodgson to scribble down. This is in stark contrast to Wayne's encounter with Ashworth (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2010/02/liverpool-waters-glass-pie-in-sky-we.html ), during which he sneered: "We don't have to put this show on" & charmingly declared: "We are doing you a favour."
And what aroused such contemptous arrogance from Ashworth? Merely the wholly reasonable objection that the entire plan should be the subject of a public inquiry. Yes, they want the public's views, all right, as long as they tally with their own. Oh, & remember this, they're doing us a favour. Isn't that nice of them?

A Paper You Can Trust

Accuracy, reliability, integrity. We all know the Oldham Echo is rightly renowned for those qualities; Big Al would surely remind us of that while comparing it to the New York Times.
However, every now & again, there is an unfortunate slip-up. Isn't there, Al? What's that, Al? Sorry, didn't quite catch that, must be my hearing, seems you've gone strangely mute.
Anyway, let's allow Simon from the No Rock and Roll Fun blog to explain (http://xrrf.blogspot.com/2010/02/not-all-taylors-are-same.html ):
"The Liverpool Echo has managed to ruin plans for American singer Taylor Bright to do a small gig in the city: the paper erroneously claimed it was Taylor Swift off the Grammys who would be appearing."
The fact that the Grammys, at which Taylor Swift appeared, were held in Los Angeles 24 hours before the supposed gig in Liverpool didn't permeate the dense skulls on Oldham Hall Street.
And the upshot of this typical inattention to detail? Well, would you believe it, they're sorry, as Simon notes:
"The Echo is contrite:
'The Echo regrets the mistake in Saturday's paper and has apologised to the school governors.
'We are making a donation to school funds as a gesture of goodwill.'
" 'and, hey, maybe we should get the kids some tickets to go see Beyonce who we know for a fact is going to be playing Anfield Comp on Thursday, right?' "
Actually, that's on Friday. However, that other Echo article about McCartney joining Pete Price for the Sunday afternoon karaoke session at The Grapes is true. Isn't it, Al?

She Said What?!

People say the strangest things when they're trying to defend the indefensible (just look at Blair's offerings to The Iraq Inquiry today). Sly Bailey, chief executive of Trinity Mirror, publisher of the Daily Ghost & Oldham Echo, last week railed against the proliferation of council-run competitors to local papers. She described such competitors as "mini Pravdas" (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jan/21/sly-bailey-council-pravdas-bbc ).
Yes, the woman ultimately responsible for the "content" that goes into the Daily Ghost & Oldham Echo had the gall to dismiss council-run efforts as propaganda. Of course, there wouldn't be a need for the city council to compete with both papers, seeing that press releases are republished verbatim, statements by the Fib Dem leaders are quoted unquestioningly & dissenting voices are conspicuous by their absence in Trinity Mirror's rags.
The words, pot, kettle & black come to mind.

Hotel Reservations

Somewhere in the increasingly understaffed & dispirited offices on Oldham Hall Street the penny is finally beginning to drop among at least a couple of hitherto deluded saps about what's happened to the city's waterfront with the blessing of Trinity Mirror.
Typically late to cotton on to a story about possible corruption & fraud concerning the land value of Mann Island, a story that Wayne had previously informed them of (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2010/01/north-west-development-agency-shysters.html ), they've also only just realised that the grotesque botoxification of the waterfront featuring many hotel developments may not be the saving grace for an entire city (their usual editorial line). Instead, & brace yourselves here, a small, still note of doubt has permeated their dense skulls concerning a proposed Travelodge on the Strand, near the corner with James Street (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2010/01/20/liverpool-s-world-famous-waterfront-needs-better-than-another-budget-hotel-100252-25637804/ ).
Its editorial begins:
"It goes without saying that Liverpool is extremely proud of its world-famous waterfront."
Ah, yes, that "world-famous waterfront", whose disfigurement has been presented by the Daily Ghost & Oldham Echo as "progress".
It should be noted, however, that the editorial questions rather than openly opposes the proposed development (got to remain "pro-business", eh, guys?).
The piece continues:
"During this time of regeneration [ha!], we have welcomed many new and varied hotels to the city -- but things are looking a little less varied than they could be on the waterfront."
Message to Big Al & his minion Mark: it's nice to see you've finally woken up & smelled the coffee, but I'm afraid the damage is done, & the binge cheerleading you did for "developing" the waterfront has sadly left its mark.
Oh, well, be grateful for small mercies, I suppose; it's the nearest approximation of a mea culpa we'll get from Oldham Hall Street. That said, the editorial can't help concluding on a characteristically "where there's a space, let's build apace" note:
"There is obviously a need for more budget hotels in Liverpool, but surely there isn't a need for another one to be built slap bang in the middle of our World Heritage Site."
Absolutely, let's keep "our World Heritage Site" (when's that next UNESCO inspection, btw?) for the Hilton Hotels of this world, where nightly charges for most of the rooms exceed the average weekly wage on Merseyside.

Rules & Regulations? Irrelevant!

Carbuncle by the Mersey, notorious venue whose management encourage the punters to get legless, overrated, over-hyped barn masquerading as a 21st century conference facility. Yes, the Oldham Echo & Convention Centre has certainly made its mark during its brief existence. It now appears that its genesis was notable for a cavalier disregard of European regulations, which doesn't really surprise anyone familiar with grandiose & dubious projects in the city pre & post-08 (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/01/20/liverpool-council-faces-having-to-pay-back-around-2m-of-funding-given-to-the-echo-arena-and-convention-centre-100252-25637788/ ).
The Oldham Echo's piece (without a byline, btw) sheepishly admits:
"Officials in Europe have raised concern that the awarding of contracts for the complex was 'anti-competitive'."
There seems to be a pattern emerging of local schemes which we're informed will transform Merseyside being mooted &, indeed, embarked upon, without anyone bothering to check if it's all above board. First the cruise liner terminal debacle which fell foul of clearly defined & understood regulations on the use of European money, now this.
At the heart of the Arena & Convention Centre fiasco is the issue of "design & build" contracts. Again, let's leave it to the Oldham Echo to mumble reluctantly what that means:
"The issue arose after the EU Court began to investigate whether 'design and build' schemes could be at odds with fair competition.
"The Arena project is one where the design and construction of the project was undertaken as one contract.
"The council has put £4.1m aside in its reserves for unspecified clawback but admits the final figure is 'unknown'."
The rank incompetence & jaw-dropping ignorance of building projects shown by the council would beggar belief were it not for the dismal track record of Warren Bradley's merry men & women. It also speaks volumes for their inability to adequately manage the city's finances that they can't say with any certainty that the final figure won't exceed four million quid.
There are brave, bullish words from Flo Clucas, clearly, erm, designed to win over the gullible, saying there's enough cash in reserve to pay the money back. However, she undermines her own argument when she says:
"The situation is we did a design and build on the Arena, which was a contractual situation which local government right across the UK does, and it means you know what the thing is going to cost, can say 'that's what we want', agree your design and it goes from there.
"The European Court of Auditors has said that such a scheme is not able to be done in the EU without interference from competition.
"This has meant that the UK is having to reconsider what has happened on those types of schemes and unfortunately the Arena has got caught up in it."
As far as I'm aware (& I'm willing to be corrected on this), no other council in the UK has committed Liverpool's error. Moreover, Cllr Clucas' contention that design & build schemes allow you to keep a check on cost is odd given that she & her colleagues can't say whether a £4.1m bill will be the end of the matter. Oh, & the description of competition as "interference" sits oddly with a council which, through its mouthpieces on Oldham Hall Street, never tires of telling us that it is "pro-business".
Cllr Clucas goes on to tie herself up in even more knots, acknowledging that design & build "did not give other designers a chance", yet maintaining that the council did "shop around" for other contractors, & rounding off her muddled thinking (let's be somewhat charitable here) by declaring that, according to the Echo piece, "she thought design and build was a 'reasonable way' to progress schemes."
She "thought"? She's a councillor. Didn't she get the final word on the matter from the lawyers? Then again, this is the Fib Dem city council with its "let's try it this way & hope no one picks up on it" approach.

History Repeats Itself

Mention Istanbul to most people in Liverpool &, depending on their footballing allegiance, memories will come flooding back of either the greatest comeback seen in any European Cup final, or the biggest fluke in the history of football. I belong firmly in the former camp (nice to see the back of Tom Hicks jnr., btw, for that charming email to a fan -- no more unannounced & unwelcome visits to the Sandon, eh, Tom (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2008/02/walk-on-walk-on-right-out-of-pub-mate.html )? -- now if only his dad & Gillett would follow suit). However, I digress.
The University of Liverpool's Impacts08 site (http://impacts08.wordpress.com/2010/01/13/capitals-of-corruption/ ) picks up on an article in the UAE-based The National paper about Istanbul's status as a capital of culture for 2010 (http://www.thenational.ae/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100113/ART/701129962/1224 ).
The more you read down Claire Berlinski's piece, the more you find yourself thinking, this sounds familiar. It begins with an observation you'll never find in the Daily Ghost or Oldham Echo:
"As officials at Istanbul's European Capital of Culture Agency know all too well, once you've been named a capital of culture, it's only a matter of time before all the 'capital of corruption' jokes start."
A couple of paragraphs on, the parallels with the Lib Dems' Bread & Circus charade (aka Liverpool08) start to appear with astonishing similarity:
"A study that the international cultural advisers Palmer/Rae Associates prepared for the [European Culture] commission noted that 'almost all cities' selected thus far 'reported that there were problems with their governance structures'. The most commonly noted issues were 'domination of political interests, relationship difficulties between board members and with the operational management team, the absence of representation of cultural interests and the size of the governance structure'. Moreover, it noted, 'personality clashes, communication problems, inappropriate experience of personnel and unclear responsibilities and job descriptions' were ubiquitous."
Berlinski goes on to report that amid claims & accusations of embezzlement & incompetence is the charge "that Istanbul's culture is being destroyed by rapacious development faster than it can be promoted."
Sound familiar?
Then there's this gem with which to compare & contrast Istanbul 2010 & Liverpool08:
"Some of the projects supported by the [Istanbul] agency certainly do leave the organisation open to the charge that the selection process was made with something other than cultural significance in mind. The most notorious has been the nine-million-lira [£3.7m] contract awarded to a residential construction company to re-enact the 52-day circumcision ceremony of the son of Sultan Murad III. Contracts for the restoration of the city's historic walls, it is said, have been given to bidders so unqualified that archeologists are in convulsions; some hint that as a result, Istanbul could be thrown off Unesco's World Heritage List."
I'm not sure about circumcisions, but a growing number of people would happily administer a medical procedure, sans anaesthetic, to the same part of the male anatomy of the chancers, shirkers, propagandists & charlatans whose grandiose claims about culture year's lasting legacy for Merseyside have been shown to be bollo-, sorry, false.

Frozen Frolics

While the grown-ups have struggled & cursed their way through the elements over the last few days, the kids have taken advantage of the opportunity for some winter sports on Everton Brow, as the Augean Stabletalk blog vividly demonstrates: http://augeanstabletalk.blogspot.com/2010/01/sledging-on-everton-brow.html .

Roads To Nowhere

A couple of the local blogs have reflected the Big Freeze which reduced the flow of traffic out of the city centre yesterday to an imperceptible, sclerotic crawl. Scouse in the House pithily lays the blame where it should be apportioned, ie., the council (http://polcentre.blogspot.com/2010/01/think-politics-doesnt-affect-you.html ). Robin Brown on the Liverpool Culture Blog relates a hair-raising account of his journey from the city centre to Lark Lane, featuring some dramatic photographs, too (http://www.liverpoolcultureblog.co.uk/2010/01/snow-brings-liverpool-to-its-knees/ ). There's also a striking photographic record of conditions on the A Lack of Imagination blog (http://www.alackof.com/photoblog/snow-roads ).
On a more juvenile level, Oldham Hall Street's let Nick Peet out again so he can breathlessly tell us all how he put on weight over the festive break & hates driving to work in the snow (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/liverpool-columnists/nick-peet/2010/01/06/nick-peet-it-s-snow-way-to-start-new-year-100252-25532158/ ).
Nick, you really should have stayed at home.

Self-Congratulation: A Case Study

It may be the start of a new year but you can be sure that the Oldham Echo will continue to work hand in glove with the Fib-Dems on Dale Street in civic delusion. Take today's soft-focus piece by Catherine Jones in which she allows Claire McColgan to deploy the sort of jargon & bollockese that would've made my old English teacher explode (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/01/06/culture-director-claire-mccolgan-liverpool-has-so-much-to-offer-in-2010-100252-25532732/ ):
" 'My role is to steer for the city council but obviously to work in partnership with people,' she explains. 'I'm not the artistic director for the city, I'm facilitating and driving the cultural work which is very different.
" 'It's about making the connections both within the city but also nationally and internationally.' "
Jones serves up yet another wasn't-culture-year-great piece & is happy to let McColgan spew forth even more drivel; clearly Jones forgets the old journalistic rule that a little scepticism should be injected to counterbalance a torrent of PR bilge.
McColgan trills that she wants the city's waterfront to be "the South Bank of the north."
The South Bank may have its weaknesses, yet it hasn't allowed its most distinguished features & landmarks to be overshadowed by vulgar & crass additions.
She goes on to exhume the old cliche about culture year rescuing the city from the dark days of decline & adds:
" 'In 08 we all came together. There was just one voice that came out of Liverpool that said "look at us, we're fantastic".
" 'Nobody who lives in this city wants it to fail. You want it to be the thing that's the success story in the country.'....
" 'Our main job is to engage with that kid in Croxteth who doesn't feel the city centre is for them,' " McColgan opines.
There's so much nonsense in that passage that warrants attention. Firstly, we didn't all come together & pat ourselves on the back; long before Ringo warbled on the roof of St George's Hall some of us were sounding the alarm bells. Secondly, saying that nobody wants the city to fail is such an inane truism that it shouldn't even be uttered. Thirdly, "that kid in Croxteth" has good reason to feel that it's no longer his or her city centre -- look at the monstosity that is Grosvenor-pool. No amount of engagement will alter that.
Jones goes on to reflect in awe-struck tones:
"Capital of Culture is, amazingly, two years ago now."
Yes, Catherine, it is amazing. It may have something to do with the fact that the gap between 2008 & 2010 is, "amazingly", two years.
However, let's leave the final word in this apologia for journalism to McColgan as she says in her cosy chat with Jones:
" 'As a city council first and foremost we need to deliver for the people of the city, that's why we're here.' "
Give me strength.

Snow In January Shock

It's both amusing & pathetic to view the media treatment of weather conditions which are a regular feature of life in other northern European countries. As a few sagacious observers have noted, those who protest about a shortage of salt & grit for the conditions that have turned most of the UK into a giant ice rink over the last couple of days tend to be the same individuals who normally moan about having to pay council tax.
That said, yesterday's tales of traffic chaos all over Merseyside becauseof the snow & ice (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/01/06/snow-brings-merseyside-to-an-icy-standstill-transport-network-falls-victim-to-freezing-weather-100252-25535187/ ) did reveal an alarming level of panic & incompetence from both Merseytravel & the city council.
Merseytravel made no meaningful attempt to inform the widest possible number of commuters about the cancellation of bus services across the whole region. Informing Radio Merseyside is all very well, but thousands of would-be bus passengers were still waiting at bus stops a couple of hours after the cancellation, not so blissfully unaware of the news.
The city council's sheepish mumble that it had run out of grit was of a piece with other cock-ups by the Fib-Dem regime. As a postie based at Copperas Hill said to me today, it's typical of the Bradley administration's faith in a bread & circus approach when it comes to running one of the UK's major cities; no expense was spared for culture year (especially not with the £90,000 Ringo & his entourage got through during their stay), yet the city's thoroughfares are viewed as an afterthought in the midst of adverse weather conditions.