Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose

Posted: June 6, 2010 in Cardiff, Punch Magazine
Tags: , , , ,
WalesOnline picture of March Cardiff June 2010

WalesOnline picture of March Cardiff June 2010

The Fascists were bussed into Cardiff yesterday  to object to Muslims in our community. Although apparently hosted by something called the Welsh Defence League the t-shirts in the photos I saw suggested Dudley, England rather than anywhere nearer. Unite Against Fascism got wind of the demo and arranged with the police for a counter demo: I suspect that 500 people marching from the Bay to City Hall was a truer indication – along with a 24hr strike by Muslim tax-drivers – of where Cardiff and Wales’ feelings lie.

Heartened I took to my researches for something quite different and, serendipitously, in a way the internet drags one, fell upon a Punch 1914 short story about a canary. (A bird still at that time serving as gas watch in Wales’ mines, and to subsequently serve in the trenches.) You can download the entire magazine at the amazing Gutenberg project and read on your iPad’s nice new bookstore app.  As you read be grateful of what has changed even if it appears to be so little….

PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI
Vol. 147. July 1, 1914.

ONCE UPON A TIME: The Alien.

Once upon a time a poet was sitting at his desk in his cottage near the woods, trying to write.

It was a hot summer day and great fat white clouds were sailing across the sky. He knew that he ought to be out, but still he sat on, pen in hand, trying to write.

Suddenly, among all the other sounds of busy urgent life that were filling the warm sweet air, he heard the new and unaccustomed song of a bird. At least not new and not unaccustomed, but new and unaccustomed there, in this sylvan retreat. The notes poured out, now shrill, now mellow, now bubbling like musical water, but always rich with the joy of life, the fulness of happiness. Where had he heard it before? What bird could it be?

Suddenly the poet’s housekeeper hurried in. “Oh, Sir,” she exclaimed, “isn’t it a pity? Someone’s canary has got free, and it’s singing out here something beautiful.”

“Of course,” said the poet—”a canary;” and he hastened out to see it. But before he could get there the bird had flown to a clump of elms a little way off, from which proceeded sweeter and more tumultuously exultant song than they had ever known.

The poet walked to the elms with his field-glasses, and after a while he discerned among the million leaves, the little yellow bird, with its throat trembling with rapture.

But the poet and his housekeeper were not the only creatures who had heard the strange melody.

“I say,” said one sparrow to another, “did you hear that?”

“What?” inquired the other sparrow, who was busy collecting food for a very greedy family.

“Why, listen,” said the first sparrow.

“Bless my soul,” said the second. “I never heard that before.”

“That’s a strange bird,” said the first sparrow; “I’ve seen it. It’s all yellow.”

“All yellow?” said the other. “What awful cheek!”

“Yes, isn’t it?” replied the first sparrow. “Can you understand what it says?”

“Not a note,” said the second. “Another of those foreigners, I suppose. We shan’t have a tree to call our own soon.”

“That’s so,” said the first. “There’s no end to them. Nightingales are bad enough, grumbling all night, and swallows, although there’s not so many of them this year as usual; but when it comes to yellow birds—well.”

“Hullo,” said a passing tit, “what’s the trouble now?”

“Listen,” said the sparrows.

The tit was all attention for a minute while the gay triumphant song went on.

“Well,” he said, “that’s a rum go. That’s new, that is. Novel, I call it. What is it?”

“It’s a yellow foreigner,” said the sparrows.

“What’s to be done with it?” the tit asked.

“There’s only one thing for self-respecting British birds to do,” said the first sparrow. “Stop it. Teach it a lesson.”

“Absolutely,” said the tit. “I’ll go and find some others.”

“Yes, so will we,” said the sparrows; and off they all flew, full of righteous purpose.

Meanwhile the canary sang on and on, and the poet at the foot of the tree listened with delight.

Suddenly, however, he was conscious of a new sound—a noisy chirping and harsh squeaking which seemed to fill the air, and a great cloud of small angry birds assailed the tree. For a while the uproar was immense, and the song ceased; and then, out of the heart of the tumult, pursued almost to the ground where the poet stood, fell the body of a little yellow bird, pecked to death by a thousand avenging furies.

Seeing the poet they made off in a pack, still shrilling and squawking, but conscious of the highest rectitude.

The poet picked up the poor mutilated body. It was still warm and it twitched a little, but never could its life and music return.

While he stood thoughtfully there an old woman, holding an open cage and followed by half-a-dozen children, hobbled along the path.

“My canary got away,” she said. “Have you seen it? It flew in this direction.”

“I’m afraid I have seen it,” said the poet, and he opened his hand.

“My little pet!” said the old woman. “It sang so beautifully, and it used to feed from my fingers. My little pet.”

The poet returned to his work. “‘In tooth and claw,’” he muttered to himself, “‘In tooth and claw.’”

Alice in Wonderland hole digging

Posted: March 23, 2010 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

I thought a primary rule of politics was to stop digging when you are in a hole: not Cardiff’s leadership apparently.

There’s been good advice given since Ocober 2008 that Cardiff’s Local Development Plan wasn’t any good. Amongst others, Cardiff Civic Society (disclaimer, I am it’s chair and have worked with the team who produced the society’s LDP submission) identified that the recession (and global warming) would blow a hole in any estimates made previously.

CCS executive member David Eggleton told them at a ‘stakeholders meeting’ at County Hall on the 22nd October 2008,”regrettably, it seems to me that there is an elephant in the room that we are studiously ignoring. We are entering a financial crisis, the worst for a century and an environmental situation that could require drastic action; would it not be appropriate to have a contingency plan in the event that the LDP is not found sustainable by the inspectors”. The council’s answer to this? “We carry on to produce the LDP, no contingency plans”. This objection amongst many others was re-voiced in June last year in CCS’s coruscating submission. Now the council is claiming global events have taken them unawares.

What is sad is that the press is taking the Lib Dem/Plaid party excuses, hook line and sinker. Here’s yesterday’s Wales Online:

“Cardiff council is set to admit defeat in its long-running battle to save some of the city’s last remaining unprotected areas of green open space.”

- just untrue. The council’s policy – which has widespread support, of maintaining green spaces – is only threatened because the LDP was so badly constructed that it failed to present viable, sustainable plans to support the policy. Neither the Inspectors (who have to be neutral about what is proposed as policy), nor the Assembly, are opposed to the policy: but they are saying the plan doesn’t support those policies. The failure is Cardiff Council’s alone. That’s bad enough, but to seek to blame others for that failing is shameful.

Assertion two: “In the papers, officers blame the worldwide recession for scuttling their previous hopes of catering for the expected growth of the city largely through building flats in areas like Cardiff Bay and Butetown with small-scale in-fill development throughout the city.”

- devious diversion. Again, there’s nothing wrong with flats on brownfield sites if they are part of a bigger plan to meet the needs of a holistic policy that includes family and low-cost housing. Until recently it was easy (‘cos they made money) to persuade developers to throw up jerry built apartments and boxy houses for tiny families. As above, the recession was flagged 18 months ago but the steamroller city process rolled on regardless. What was lacking was policy to encourage house building of the right kinds, in the right places. Again, blame anything, and any one, rather than the guilty party.

The final paragraph of the Wales on Line article is breathtaking: it’s not a quote, doesn’t seem to have come from the officers’ report, so one guesses it is inspired investigative journalism, the writer’s own conclusions, or – just maybe – a planted official line from the council: “Asking inspectors to withdraw the plan means the city will be spared a costly and probably futile legal battle in which the council would face widespread opposition from developers and business leaders in a hearing presided over by Assembly planning inspectors who have already indicated they agree with the business community’s concerns.”

- by legal battle, this might mean the public hearings: yes, (see previous) this would have been futile. More importantly, the paucity of the council’s approach and the shallowness of its evidence would had been forensically exposed. Embarrassing, or what?

And again, the blatantly misleading assertion that the Inspectors have ganged up with developers. Actually, if you read the Inspectors’ notes they present obstacles to the get-rich-quick developers. What they do is simply demolish the evidence the council has produced: an LDP, for all our sakes, has to be based on consensual policies, and a viable, sustainable plan to deliver them. It’s neither rocket science, nor too difficult.

But hey, what’s reality around here, this is Cardiff. Let’s keep digging, its saves thinking about how we have failed the citizens of the capital city. And, while we’re at it, let’s throw the mud at others, it might stick and we might hang on to power just a little bit longer.

BBC to give Cardiff’s planning woes a very public airing

Posted: March 19, 2010 in Cardiff Council, Planning, Wales and the Welsh, Wales Assembly Government
Tags: , , , , ,

Ok, so planning’s not sexy. But it is important and I frequently bore on about it: lately the focus has been dodgy Cardiff Council planning decisions (again) and its Deposit Local Development Plan.

The BBC has taken on a big task to make these subjects fit for human consumption with a 30 minutes long Week in Week Out on Tuesday 23th March (10.35pm BBC One Wales only). Judging from the length of time it has been in preparation, and the care involved (a view based on the endless requests for documentary proof and evidence that have come my way daily for the past two months) I suspect it’ll be a pretty robust analysis.

I’ve had no preview, of course, but I can make some pretty shrewd guesses about the areas that are likely to cause acute embarrassment to Cardiff Council.  The program’s title “Starbucks and stadiums” gives a bit of a clue: might the programme question the city’s relentless drive for more city centre shopping “experiences”, mega-sports-stadiums, and high-rise flats for the (until the recession) upwardly mobile? And does it have a robust and delivable plan for Cardiff’s housing, employment, transport etc in the future?  If it addresses these issues, it will have plenty of ammunition: from politicians who decry the destruction of local communities like Butetown, to academics who question the wisdom of a continued growth thrust in these economically constrained and ecologically threatening times. The programme blurb asks the question: ”who’s benefitted from it all?”

Our council leadership argues that international sporting events are vital to the city’s economic well-being. They are prepared to sacrifice huge sums of taxpayers money and held-in-trust resources like its heritage parks, for kudos and at best, arguable economic benefit. The most recent example concerns Cardiff City Football Club: given land to enable it to build a new stadium, it blithely flogs it off to pay overdue VAT and national insurance. What possible public gain is that – taking ratepayers money to give to HMCR to bail out poor management? It’s a very poor way of developing long-term employment except for a few rich footballers and their board members.

Employment is one area where the council has been under serious criticism from WAG’s planning inspectorate over the Deposit LDP. This document is supposed to set out the plans to support the longterm vision for the city. Cardiff Civic Society (interest declaration, I’m its Chair) warned the council more than a year ago that its approach was flawed and didn’t follow the guidelines. Last year we further contended that it was “unsound” in six areas, housing and employment among them. I know that even more expert, and you would have thought influential, voices were saying the same thing. The council chose to ignore all the warnings and deposited a complete nonsense of a plan that has been forensically dissected by WAG.

I expect on the tv that council leader, Rodney Berman, will trot out his already rehearsed defences: I’m guessing the words, of course, “the LDP idea is flawed” (how come all councils in Wales helped to develop it then?); “WAG is forcing us to build on greenfield sites” (no, it’s saying you have no evidence that you can avoid building on greenfield sites – the whole point of the plan!); “it’s an affront to democracy” (this from the council that consulted 123 citizens over the plan asking them questions no one could reasonably answer); “the Inspectorate won’t tell us what to do with the plan” (oh, they have and you’re very aware of the alternatives, all of them embarrassing and shameful in terms of the cost that has been wasted).

Two days after the tv programme the full council meets to decide what to do with the LDP. Frankly, all and any option is bad for Cardiff. To go back to the drawing board means a planning hiatus, massive embarrassment for politicians, a huge waste of money, and serious questions about council officers’ and members’ competence. To trudge through public hearings where the council attempts to shore up a totally flawed structure with ‘new evidence’ will simply expose even further its paucity of robust, creative solutions for Cardiff’s’ many problems. And it seems that at some point the inspectors’ patience might expire and they declare it unsound anyway.

Strangely, it may turn out to be good for Cardiff in the end. What the programme might demonstrate is how, for so long, the city has depended on a self-generated aura of ‘capital city-ness’ and that big, brash, often violent planning solutions will succeed. The “we’re not afraid to make difficult decisions” mindset of minor dictators.

Like many people, I think Cardiff needs to take a long, hard, painful look at itself. It needs to question the quality of its decision making, the ease with which it has accepted assertions (like long-term benefit from sporting events) as though they were inviolate facts that would survive recession and global warming. It needs to engage with its civic society (and maybe even its Civic Society!) in a meaningful way so that communities in Butetown, Whitchurch, and Ely and elsewhere might once again be connected.

A local development plan might seem boring, but it’s actually, when used with skill, imagination and vigour, potentially a way of mapping a better future for us all – not just a few.

Now if next week’s half hour on BBC Wales manages to make some of that sound interesting then it will be worth this year’s licence fee.

Judge jails the cleaner

Posted: November 21, 2009 in Justice
Tags: , ,

It took 464 days after she was first remanded, but our cleaning lady finally (yesterday 20 November 2009) got her just deserts for the attempted murder of our neighbour: an indeterminate sentence because she is a danger to the public and a tariff of 15 years.

Cardiff Recorder judge Nicholas Cooke QC had said this was a complex sentence and asked the CPS counsel to explain to us exactly what it meant.

If Linda Griffiths had been judged as just evil and not dangerous she could expect with this tariff to be out of prison in about six years (half the 15 years less the time on remand). As he judged her to be a public danger, the best she can hope for is to try to prove to the Parole Board at the time that she is no longer dangerous and ask for a time to be set for release: no automatic exit then!

As I have previously written, this is a case which has stretched credibility in the legal system in ways that no one – other than, presumably, the guilty defendant – could have been happy with. As hearing after hearing was thwarted, sentencing and closure of the case, seemed always out of grasp. But something happened late on Thursday and suddenly the judge said he would hold the sentencing hearing on Friday. Of course, the court itself was unprepared for this, but the two barristers – both CPS and defence – seemed united in trying to get the case completed.

It was only when Patrick Harrington QC for the prosecution started to describe the crime in dispassionate, articulated detail that the real horror of it all came back to us. Then the mass of detailed police leg-work, rightly commended by the judge: first the collections of photographs showing the accused’s progress across Cardiff, first to commit the crime, then to get rid of her clothes and set up her alibi. I am wholly against the intrusion of CCTV cameras, but here they gave the essential evidence to prove planning and execution.

Then a file of forensic evidence – accepted by the defence team so the detail didn’t have to be revealed – directly linking Griffith’s dna with blood splattered clothing and the crime scene. Now we knew why the police had been so confident that even if she had pleaded not guilty they would have got a conviction.

You can read the details if you want here and here. But two things the judge picked up that really need emphasising: firstly this evil woman betrayed trust, not just of this victim, but of all of us who gave her our house keys, left valuables, pets and children in her path. She was able to claim in court ‘hitherto unblemished character’; those of us who had employed – and mostly sacked her – thought this was odd. We all have stories of suspected theft unresolved: the police view was that following each of these up would not have been a good use of resources. In the event, she was sentenced to six months for theft and six counts of fraud connected with the assault.

The judge highlighted the trust issue when determining the tariff and also added: “I must have regard to the fact that the elderly are terrified by offending of this kind”. Indeed. At the time we started escorting friends home, helped fit safety chains. A real terror inhabited the streets where before there had been nothing but security.

So we have all been victims of this one crime. Of course the left-for dead 77 year old will have lasting mental scars in spite of a remarkable physical recovery. We have all lost a sense of trust: are we really going to CRB check cleaning ladies? And it wouldn’t have prevented this crime anyway.

For many our comfortable community will no longer be so much taken for granted.

Any good outcomes? Recognition of the bravery of the local councillor who discovered the battered pensioner – only now did we learn that she had been terrified the assailant was still in the house. Recognition of the relentless work of the police – much of it tedious, boring and forensic that built a cast iron case to be deployed if she changed her guilty plea.

And some vicarious pride in the judicial system that – even after 464 days – finally locked away an evil person that we had known.

The phenomena of Simonova

Posted: September 28, 2009 in Arts
Tags:

In writing about the new YouTube phenomena that is Kseniya Simonova there have been a couple of common threads: “it couldn’t have happened here”, and “but is it art?”
Of course it couldn’t happen here: eight minutes of prime time television with a young (albeit televisually attractive) woman throwing sand about to an edited sound track ranging from bombs to pop music, telling a story through moving pictures about the most harrowing times of her nations’ modern history in which one in five of the population died. Ant & Dec would be struck dumb, and the blessed Cowell would have had her off within nano-seconds.
If you haven’t seen her – do: I think the preliminary round performance is more compelling than the one for the final so that’s the link here – but they’re all on YouTube. It is easy to believe, for once, the hyperbole: that this performance brought the entire Ukrainian nation to tears. So as a first reflection on the ‘couldn’t happen here debate’: what story telling of a contemporary national event would you select to move the whole British nation? Dunkirk? Diana’s funeral? The London Bombings? No, there’s nothing that would unite us in a nationwide shudder of recognition and shared pain.
And would we allow a 24 year old artist to mediate this shared experience? I doubt it, but ten of millions have tried it on YouTube even though their understanding of the story – and its personal resonance – must in most cases be very slight.
So what of the art. Well, let’s start with Guardian writer James Donaghy’s much blogged quote:

…it’s clear that Simonova has achieved her goal as an artist. If we take it that art’s purpose is to illuminate the world in a new way, provoke a reaction, somehow alter the consciousness of the viewer then her work is a huge success.

He may not have meant to be, but that seems a little grudging – alright as far as it goes. Just consider, first the technique.
I know nothing about sand drawing except that multicoloured postcardy stuff you sometimes see at the seaside. But this is live drawing – making a line and seeing where it goes as Victor Pasmore once described his technique to me. But the material is pretty crude and control must be an immense problem.
This is not a still life sketch though – nor is it quite animation. My nearest parallel is the work of South African artist William Kentridge who has produced extraordinary animated films based on stop-frame filming of works where he draws, then erases, the pictures. This shows the action in motion (although with Kentridge you never see his hand at work, unlike Simonova where the doing is part of the performance) and the rubbed out lines leave ghostly marks as the story progresses.

Simonova takes this idea a step further because the process is the art – as well as the picture. She’ll sketch – say a flight of birds – and moments later they’ll form part of a portrait. This isn’t a single picture, but a constantly moving drama that is visualised in front of us. The ghostly image of the light box (projected on a big screen for the audience who thus have a view of her as performance artist and she even uses simple prompts to set the tone of a piece) mutates as she progresses the story in startling and shocking ways. The end is usually a hand written caption.
And, the whole is choreographed to a sound track that has been thought about in advance and edited so that Simonova’s ‘drawing’ follows the audio story. It is carefully synchronised so one must assume a great deal of rehearsal is involved in order to repeat the outcome.
So it’s art, performance and video all rolled into one. It exists first for the audience – though without the big tv screen it would be a very private experience, and then for us watching both the artist and the audience. I’m not aware that Simonova has made any ‘gallery’ versions of her work, so what we get, we get courtesy of a popular Ukrainian tv show and YouTube.
This to my mind is what is extra-ordinary. Something very discrete, almost incapable of replication and sharing, is transformed by other media into something startling that can be shared by millions.
Where does she go now? What happens to the art? I’ve no idea. But I pray she stays a long way away from Simon Cowell and his Philistine crew.

Music industry: change or die

Posted: September 25, 2009 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Contributing to a Guardian debate:
I’ve been meaning to think about and blog about the music business for a while – not least ‘cos I get a right earful from a v important music artist (and his missus!) everytime the subject is raised.
I latched on to a Guardian Comment blog and got involved and realised I was saying some of the things I meant to – so why rewrite – just say again!

You’re right about one thing: it’s complicated!
No one can morally justify ripping off an artist – but labels have a pretty poor record here too. But the record industry has never treated its consumers fairly (ripping them off with excessive pricing, inflexible attitudes to actual ownership eg what do I get when I buy a CD?) so they can hardly be surprised when some bite back in ways that hurt their licence-to-print-money profits.
And I have seen no compelling evidence that file sharing actually reduces record sales. I know it’s difficult to prove a negative, but many record labels may benefit from streaming radio for example with listeners buying music they hear.
The change from record to track buying muddies the water too. Who wants to buy a CD unless you love the lot? Wait for the reviews and buy (or ‘borrow’) the two good tracks. The whole digital approach to music has not been responded to by most labels and their artists.
Persecuting truly innovative ideas like Pandora (we’re banned from listening in the UK yet I bought more new music as a result of Pandora than by reading reviews) is not the way to build a customer relationship with listeners.
Any attempt to cut off those illegally file-sharing from the internet will fail: technically and socially. It’s a waste of time and public money just to support an ailing private business sector.
I don’t have any answers – certainly no magic cure. But the whole industry needs to stop blaming its customers for its shortcomings and get a grip and find models that work in the 21st century and benefit artists and those who love music.

This contribution certainly kept the debate going and I responded with more points:

@hollybaloneytoo You’re right some people have got used to not paying for music but iTunes et al have sold untold millions of tracks – a business that didn’t exist five years ago – millions are buying at 79p. So it’s some, not all of us .. a problem
@SteveFarr Spot on – the artists have got to take control, re-connect. And spot on, Spotify is one of the ‘answers’ but so was (is in the US) Pandora. I think the labels have got to accept that theses models may not earn great revenues in the short term – but might be the way to re-connect.
@SIChore iTunes at least has jumped your argument: I can now download non-DRM, high quality tracks for the same price as the old mp3 quality. What’s not to like? If it’s less that three tracks iTunes, more it’s a CD.
And, although a different topic, the industry’s attitude to niche internet radio stations sucks. Same regressive attitude. Protectionism never makes money in the end.

I thought that it had run its course: but no, so I ended:

What strikes me about this thread is:
a) there are lots of issues in the music business where the business simply hasn’t kept up with technology and changes in its customer base
b) approaching these issues with ‘old’ models – most people seem to agree – isn’t working, or going to work eg making ISPs spent money to cut of their own customers (Doh!)
c) many/most people seem to agree that artists need to be rewarded (handsomely sometimes) for what they give to us
d) it is possible – in spite of all the complications and unknowns for sensible people (us included) to have rationale, wide-ranging conversations about these issues without rancour/violence/whatever
e) the music moguls (a wide-ranging term intended to mean those intermediaries whose only function now seems to act as fleecers of musicians and their audiences) don’t like this conversation because – it seems likely – they may not have a future.
They (e) have the power and money to go on influencing (in their bad old ways) signed artists, unsigned artists and government (which still seems to hanker after some idea of intellectual property rights making the country rich again?). What they – all above – can’t do any longer is control the listener.
We can, and have, stopped buying CDs, expect more for our money (including rights) when we buy music performances, expect to be able to listen/sample for free (or at least just with annoying ads). We can switch ISPs with ease (and subvert their controls – it’s not rocket science to proxy you know!). And we can vote out dumb politicians.
No wonder everyone has their communal knickers in a twist!

Go on – join in here
Or comment here of course.

Justice is failing the victim

Posted: September 24, 2009 in Justice
Tags:

A bad day in court

Crown Court Cardiff

Crown Court Cardiff


When your ex-cleaning lady attempts to murder a neighbour – who is in her late seventies – it is difficult not to be at least a little bit interested. The fact that we were directly involved in the event itself makes it difficult to be disinterested. So, since March 2008, I’ve been following the case.
It was the middle of last year when hearings began in earnest, the accused spending some time in the Caswell Clinic secure unit being assessed for her mental state (a cost of £100,000 per person per year has been mentioned but I have no corroboration of that) but eventually pleading guilty to the charge of attempted murder. Most reported Court of Appeal decisions support sentences of at least 8 years imprisonment for this offence and often much longer. She had also admitted to charges relating to theft and use of the victim’s credit card.
Until yesterday the same judge had heard – at his insistence – every hearing and only agreed to them when the same team of CPS and defendant’s barristers and lawyers could be present. He has adopted – rightly one suspects in view of the possible impact of an appeal against sentencing – a rigorous approach to every aspect, most recently insisting that at the sentencing hearing – to be held yesterday – he would personally hear the expert testimony from both prosecuting and defence psychiatrists. This inevitably built in delays particularly when this summer’s break scuppered an earlier hearing date.
So yesterday was the day. Every one assembled. No absent psychiatrists. All pre-sentencing reports from probation service etc to hand. Because number one court at Cardiff is so old, the judge kindly agreed to relatives and friends of the victim sitting in the jurors’ seats so that we could see and hear clearly what was happening.
Then bombshell. The defence barrister – apparently one of the finest criminal defence lawyers in the country – stood and announced that he, his junior and the accused’s solicitors were all withdrawing from the case. He made it clear that they had not been dismissed but that there were serious problems about them continuing, most of which could not be explained in open court because of client confidentiality. As she had begun (so she said) to recover her memory there was now doubt about the way in which she should be represented. The barrister said he did not ‘think’ she was going to change her plea of guilty.
The judge was clearly in no position to do much more than tell the accused she must appoint a new lawyer (she wants a woman this time) pronto and fix a progress meeting for two weeks time.
It’s now entirely possible, that 18 months after the event, the accused can change her plea and force a full hearing. Had the court proceedings themselves not been delayed by her undoubted lack of co-operation (noted by the judge at earlier hearings) she would by now be in prison serving a lengthy sentence for something she has – at least until now – admitted doing. Instead, in the interests of justice (and I am not one to argue the case against that) she is able to expend yet more taxpayers’ money on a new team of solicitors and barristers who have to start from scratch. It’s most likely they’ll make the same recommendations as the ones who have withdrawn and we’ll be in the same place – not some time soon – probably in 2010.
But, as the judge addressed the court after the accused had been sent out, this was an unsatisfactory state of affairs that will impact all involved.
Yesterday was to have been a marker at least in the process of recovery for the victim. She was beaten repeatedly over the head by a person wielding a claw hammer and left for dead. It was a happy co-incidence that she was discovered before she bled to death, but another ten minutes and the outcome could have been fatal. She has since had eighteen months coming to terms with the horror of it all. Yesterday was no justice for her.
There can be no criticism of anyone involved in the legal process: the judge and legal teams as far I can tell as a simple observer, have been exemplary in their handling of the case, especially the police and CPS working with the victim.
But, just supposing, this was another ploy engineered by a manipulative, devious person who according to the evidence already disclosed in court, is unable to face her own weaknesses. Who, whilst formally admitting the offence, is unable to deal with the vision of her actual, violent, murderous behaviour against someone she knew and worked for, indeed callously visiting the victim whilst she was in hospital. Should such a person really be allowed the luxury of playing the legal system, whilst the victim seeks closure?
I don’t have an answer, and clearly the legal system doesn’t either.

WAG admits courts defeat over Llanishen – fight resumes

Posted: September 5, 2009 in Cardiff Council, Planning, Wales Assembly Government
Tags: , , , ,

Llanishen Reservoir Cardiff by Greg Marshall

Llanishen Reservoir Cardiff by Greg Marshall

Just as it was thought that all would be decided on 22nd September, the fight for the future of Llanishen Reservoir starts again.
In April 2009 the Welsh Environment Minister, Jane Davidson, rejected Western Power’s appeal following the Second Public Planning Inquiry which was held in June 2008. In effect, she refused permission for Western Power’s scheme to build 324 houses and flats on the site of Llanishen reservoir. Her decision was a little unusual in that the planning inspector who had presided over the appeal, recommended that the development should go ahead. However, the Minister disagreed with the Inspector’s conclusions and did not accept his recommendation.
Unhappy developer: they needed to challenge the minister on a matter of law, hence the impending court case. At the door of the court, as it were, WAG climbed down:

Having considered the grounds put forward by the company, and on the advice of Counsel, the Welsh Ministers accept the legal arguments put forward by the company that aspects of the assessment through which they reached their original decision were incorrect. Rather than continue the legal proceedings and go to a hearing which they consider they would not win, the Welsh Ministers have agreed not to contest the challenge.

Basically, WAG cocked up.
So now – and follow carefully: the court will send the decision back to the minister; she will notify those who took part in the original appeal and ask for any new information; she will decide whether or not to re-open the inquiry; a decision will be made, but not this year.
In the meanwhile: the minister has listed the reservoir as a building of historic importance and Cardiff Council in its Deposit Local Development Plan (previous blogs) has shown that the site is part of the protected Nant Fawr river corridor. That should made a rejection of the planning application a forgone conclusion.
But … the developers have loads of money. They must feel victorious in getting the court showdown. And the very status of the LDP has been questioned by the minister’s own planners.
As ever – pace Swalec Stadium, Bute Park Bridge, Sophia Gardens Car Parking, playing fields et al – it’s the objectors, the local people, who have to find the emotional, physical and financial resources to go through the whole fight again. And, in fighting to get the Deposit LDP returned to the drawing board, some of us may be unwittingly helping Western Power Distribution Investments Limited destroy Llanishen reservoir.

Cardiff’s Local Development Plan: dead in the water?

Posted: September 2, 2009 in Cardiff Council, Wales and the Welsh, Wales Assembly Government
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Report by Civic Society on Cardiff Council Deposit LDP

Report by Civic Society on Cardiff Council Deposit LDP

Cardiff is in the final stages of deciding the shape of the city for the next 15-20 years seeking approval of its “Deposit Local Development Plan”. The next stage in the process is supposed to be consideration of the LDP by a WAG appointed Inspector to judge its soundness.
Into the arena steps WAG planner Mark Newey who has apparently told the council to drastically revise it!
As one of the team that helped Cardiff Civic Society submit a coruscating response, I am overjoyed that the council’s flimsy, shallow, unstrategic apology for long-term planning should be shown up for what it is: a high sounding – and perfectly commendable – vision that lacks any real evidence based delivery mechanisms. CCS found that it was ‘unsound’ on six grounds.

The Cardiff Civic Society believes that the process of developing this LDP has been followed in accordance with the guidelines: its implementation however has been unsound leading to inadequate policy formulation. Whilst the CCS concurs with the vision section of the LDP, our mapping of policy proposals onto that vision reveals patchy coverage and this leads, inexorably, to inadequate and inappropriate proposals.
We conclude therefore that the plan is unsound and thus has to be rejected in its entirety.

Mark Newey states:

There is a fundamental issue regarding the ability of the plan’s strategy to deliver the vision which presents a significant degree of risk for the authority if not addressed prior to submission stage.
“In summary, while the vision sets out a clear position to enable Cardiff to play its role as a European capital city, the LDP strategy does not deliver the council’s own vision, nor does it adequately reflect the evidence base. The degree of concern is significant.”

In an interesting presentation (Delivering Spatial Planning) that Mark Newey prepared, he set out very clearly – it seems to me – the way the new LDP process should work. It’s littered with phrases like: community consensus; interest groups; opportunities; focus not on objections but issues; addressing cross boundary issues; adapt to change; holistic evidence base; grounded in stakeholder/community involvement. I could cite many more areas he says are needed to be addressed and where CCS found that Cardiff Council had, quite simply, failed to understand, address and reach agreement.
It makes me wonder how the Council is going to get itself out of a very large hole of its own making. Will the Deposit LDP even go before the Inspector in this state in the light of the WAG objections?
I hope not.
Now, perhaps the council could get off its arrogant high-horse, and sit down with organisations like Cardiff Civic Society and create a visionary, viable, and deliverable strategy for the nation’s capital city.

Victorian Society in Cardiff goes afloat

Posted: August 29, 2009 in Victorian Society, Wales and the Welsh
Tags: ,

Restored Brecon Canal basin

Restored Brecon Canal basin



Like lots of such organisations, The Victorian Society in Cardiff is a bit hid under a bushel. There’s a very English centric website but nothing for Wales – so news of events depends on emails and circulars. This one is particularly interesting and they seem to welcome ‘outsiders’.

A talk on Canals at Theatr Brycheiniog, lunch at Tipple’n’Tiffin and a canal boat trip on the Monmouthshire and Brecon canal
on Monday 21st. September
Graham Bailey, one of our members, has very kindly offered a talk on ‘Inland Waterways-Conserving Our Heritage’.
Graham was Conservation Architect for British Waterways for 10 years and is particularly interested in how the significance and unique character of the waterways can be conserved. We have an extensive inland waterway heritage but it is constantly under threat.
‘In spite of the competition from the new railways (of the mid nineteenth century), many canals continued in commercial use for another 100 years and indeed some canals can be considered truly Victorian’.
You may wish to gather for coffee in the Tipple’n’Tiffin, Theatr Brycheiniog, Brecon at 10.30 am. I have booked the Studio at the theatre from 11.00 am until 12.30 pm for Graham’s talk. Then we will have a pre-booked lunch in the ‘Tiffin’.
The menu choices are;
Moroccan Spiced Chicken on Mixed Pepper Cous Cous
Spanish Style Pork & Chorizo on Pilau Rice
Bangers ‘n’ Mash or vegetarian if required.
followed by Apple Crumble or Lemon Tart.
At 2.30 pm we will board the canal boat at the wharf outside, for a 2 hours + trip along this famously beautiful canal. On our return journey we will have a cream tea.

The cost for the day is £23 to include main meal and pudding, talk, hire of studio space, canal trip and tea on the canal boat plus the usual administration costs (of postage, photocopying and stationery).
Coffee/tea/etc. in the Tipple’n’Tiffin are additional.

A reminder of forthcoming events;
Radnorshire on 17th.October. Member’s contributions event in November.

Please complete the booking form below and return with your cheque to Elaine Davey, 37 Romilly Rd., Thompson’s Park, Cardiff CF5 1FJ (02920387384) by 12/09/09. If you require a receipt/map-please send an s.a.e.

Older Entries
Newer Entries