1 min read

No.31 Community Bus Not Running Today/Tomorrow

Jim Morgan·

Thanks to Jim for letting us know this news. Ed

bus routeThe No 31 community Bus in Bonchurch and Ventnor will not be running today (Tues Dec 6th) and possibly not on Wednesday either.

Apologies for the late notice.

Advertisement
Related
Subscribe
Email updates?
0 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Steve Goodman
25, October 2013 10:46 am

Thanks again to everyone contributing to the improvements made. We know what’s coming will not be easy, but at least we now have more co-operation & openness.

0
0
Geoff Lumley
25, October 2013 11:21 am

Interesting that all Group Leaders were asked to submit a maximum of 400 words to OntheWight by last Thursday 17 October. Reg Barry and I both more than met this requirement. Subsequently Dave Stewart was allowed 594 words to avoid the question, Ian Stephens was allowed 982 words for his ruling group propaganda, and the Ukip Leader has submitted nothing.

Fair ?

0
0
diogenes' barrel
Reply to  Geoff Lumley
25, October 2013 11:54 am

So on average it was ‘Fair’!

All’s fair in love and politics(?)

0
0
sam salt
Reply to  Geoff Lumley
25, October 2013 12:48 pm

@ Geoff. Fair comment. However, you and Reg came over well, made your points, no political point scoring and both articles were a pleasure to read. You both gave an impression that there was a willingness to be open and fair minded and work with others for the good of the Island. That was all spoilt though with you using the word propaganda in your comment above… Read more »

0
0
woodworker
Reply to  Geoff Lumley
25, October 2013 6:02 pm

There I was thinking that Geoff was actually willing and ready to contribute in a positive way to this council. But no, he seems to have slipped back into vocal opposition mode – although if he has nothing more to oppose than how many words someone is allowed to write then it must mean this council is doing a good job. Incidentally Geoff, how do you know… Read more »

0
0
Robbo
Reply to  woodworker
25, October 2013 7:25 pm

Who are you “woodworker”? Maybe your handle should be “twit” given your failure to absorb what Mr L actually said?

0
0
woodworker
Reply to  Robbo
25, October 2013 8:23 pm

What Geoff actually said was that different people have written articles of different lengths, and goes on to make a political statement about this, calling the council leaders contribution “Propaganda”. Given that, I think its entirely reasonable to suggest that perhaps Geoff should worry less about a word limit and more about actually contributing to this council. If theres some hidden meaning in his words that passed… Read more »

0
0
Robert Jones
Reply to  woodworker
26, October 2013 7:29 pm

Oh, he’s prepared to contribute in a positive way; and he’s doing so. Geoff was born chippy, however, and he always will be – you either love the little tinker for it, or you loathe him: on the whole, it’s easier to do the former than the latter. He’ll never let you rest on morally or ideologically suspect ground – which CAN make him something of a… Read more »

0
0
woodworker
Reply to  Robert Jones
26, October 2013 8:39 pm

most of the time I would agree with you.

This time, with Geoff honking about word limits, I think he has sunk to the level of some of his political rivals.
Contribution should be positive, not petty, and worrying about a few hundred words is just petty.

0
0
cgiles
25, October 2013 11:24 am

It would be interesting if the IWCC took the lead from the City of London “Court of Common Council”, where party politics are not allowed and independent members are the norm. At least this would stop the unfair bankrolling of candidates from political parties that make it difficult for independents to break through onto the main stage due to financial constraints. Political affiliations seem at odds with… Read more »

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  cgiles
25, October 2013 1:10 pm

@sgiles “Political affiliations seem at odds with the need for true localism in council chambers” I agree wholeheartedly and would extend it to Parliament as well. IMHO, true democracy demands that: * voting should be compulsory, *formal membership of elected MPs to political parties should be outlawed, *party political Whips should be outlawed, *MPs should have their electorate as their first allegiance and not their party. *MPs… Read more »

0
0
Mark Francis
Reply to  cgiles
26, October 2013 10:15 am

If we had no parties and everyone agreeing would this be the same as a one-party state?

Works for China.

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  Mark Francis
26, October 2013 10:31 am

“No parties” does not mean “everyone agreeing”, rather the opposite.

The more debate between widely differing views, the more likely it is that a solution acceptable to the majority is likely to emerge.

Independence of thought rather than slavish adherence to the ideology of a political party is critical.

0
0
peaceful_life
Reply to  Cynic
26, October 2013 12:47 pm

Hi Cicero. With respect, the entire process is a waste of time if the debate is focused around oranges rather than the apples that it should be. Independence of thought would be a boon provided that it’s used to have the courage to think outside of regurgitated dogma and the doesn’t simply apply to political ideology, it’s an entire cultural narrative. Of course in-depth debate should be… Read more »

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  peaceful_life
26, October 2013 1:31 pm

@PL “With respect, the entire process is a waste of time if the debate is focused around oranges rather than the apples that it should be.” That indeed is true! So the first step is to reach common agreement on the nature and definition of the problems to be solved. Once that has happened accessing a wide gamut of independent views (rather than regurgitating ideological views propounded… Read more »

0
0
Robert Jones
25, October 2013 2:27 pm

The situation Cicero seems to be enthusing over reminds me of the current situation in Egypt, where political parties are, effectively, banned. Doesn’t strike me as a good model. Ask yourselves why political parties were formed in the first place, perhaps.

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  Robert Jones
25, October 2013 4:16 pm

Political parties were formed (just like trades unions) to protect and promulgate the interests of their members against those of other communities in particular and the national community at large. However, I did not express myself clearly enough. When I said that “political parties should be banned” I was referring to their presence as coordinating forces with Parliament where IMHO they corrupt democratic values. Today’s Egypt is… Read more »

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  Cynic
25, October 2013 4:20 pm

South (America)

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  Cynic
25, October 2013 5:44 pm

“with(in) Parliament!

0
0
Robert Jones
25, October 2013 9:41 pm

That’s a jaundiced view of the reasons behind the formulation of political parties, and even more of those leading to the formation of trade unions. Yes, both were formed to protect and promulgate the interests of their members, but that goes nowhere near to explaining why those interests needed protection in the first place; nor was the primary purpose to organize against other groups, even if that… Read more »

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  Robert Jones
26, October 2013 9:31 am

@RJ Good and interesting response! However: “Yes, both were formed to protect and promulgate the interests of their members, but that goes nowhere near to explaining why those interests needed protection in the first place; nor was the primary purpose to organize against other groups, even if that was the inevitable consequence of doing so.” With respect is that not a little illogical? If the parties and… Read more »

0
0
Robert Jones
Reply to  Cynic
26, October 2013 12:31 pm

Well, you can dance on the head of a pin about this sort of thing (one of my favourite things: I wonder why I have so few friends….?) but my point in the first instance was that there wasn’t anything necessarily hostile about workers banding together; it was, initially, defensive. It’s useful to remember this, because otherwise the myth grows that all we need to do is… Read more »

0
0
Mark Francis
Reply to  Robert Jones
26, October 2013 12:48 pm

In point of fact Whig and Tory parties were formed in order to keep the Roman Catholics out and to enable King Charles II to rule without parliament respectively.

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  Mark Francis
26, October 2013 2:19 pm

Why not go back to he Tolpuddle Martyrs- agriculturak workers trying o form the first trade union or even the group barons that forced the king to sign the Magna Carta (and then reneged on their promise to surrender London after the signing) protecting their rights? :-))

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  Mark Francis
26, October 2013 2:20 pm

“agriculturaL” “To”

0
0
Robert Jones
Reply to  Mark Francis
26, October 2013 7:17 pm

True enough, with caveats – but I’m not at my best and brightest just now, so don’t feel up to pursuing them. Modern Tories, though, haven’t much in common with those who made up the party in the 17th century, nor is Parliament the same beast; so, I don’t argue with your historical point at all, but the modern basis of British politics lies much more in… Read more »

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  Mark Francis
26, October 2013 8:40 pm

Russell Brand? The guy who defecates through upper and lower orifices, each as bad as the other?

You might as well ask Rooney to comment on the latest rocket science!

0
0
Thomas
25, October 2013 10:50 pm

Assisted Area Status. We must remember the input Catherine Bearder MEP put in Ian, her meeting with Vince Cable Secretary Of State BIS.

0
0
Mark Francis
Reply to  Thomas
27, October 2013 11:03 am

I agree with Robert Jones concerning the class basis of modern parties. However the whole basis of the Tory party has been to further the interests of those in power which is why they supported the Royalist faction and continue to support the rich& powerful over the rest of us whilst attempting to con the rest of us in identifying their interests with their own. In the… Read more »

0
0
peaceful_life
26, October 2013 3:59 pm

Go back?….you mean things have moved on from the Flavius dynasty?

Time they did.

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  peaceful_life
26, October 2013 4:13 pm

LOL!

0
0
Mark Francis
26, October 2013 6:55 pm

What have the Flavians ever done for us…(apart from conquer the Isle of Wight) ?

0
0
peaceful_life
Reply to  Mark Francis
27, October 2013 9:40 am

Hi Mark.

Christ knows……..

0
0
peaceful_life
26, October 2013 9:38 pm

@Cicero.

I wouldn’t say Brand has a monopoly on effluent discharge to be fair. He had a ramble in the New Statesman titled ‘we no longer have the luxury of tradition’, probably more reasonable to critique that than play an ad hominem.

0
0
tryme
Reply to  peaceful_life
26, October 2013 10:09 pm

I saw RB in a discussion on Newsnight once, and was quite impressed. And at other times too, ditto.

0
0
tryme
Reply to  tryme
26, October 2013 11:01 pm

..I’ll get my coat…

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  peaceful_life
27, October 2013 8:52 am

Yep! Sorry! My visceral dislike of his chosen persona overrode my usual avoidance of ad hominems. But then that dislike is rekindled when I read his honest confession in the second paragraph of his New Statesman article “Like when I’m conversing and the subject changes from me and moves on to another topic.” Sheesh! Consistency of argument appears weak when he states “apathy is the biggest obstacle… Read more »

0
0
tryme
Reply to  Cynic
27, October 2013 9:06 am

Well done Cicero! Btw, I’m sure it was for comic effect that he lamemted conversation moving away from him, (and Jonathon might be impressed at the indication of what is often a ‘Guilty Pleasure’ – being the centre of attention – I daresay!). And he might not think that voting indicates an engagement in the real issues; and thus not voting wouldn’t be the benchmark when judging… Read more »

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  tryme
27, October 2013 9:41 am

Which is why I believe that voting should be compulsory, compelling citizens in a democracy to face up to its problems and choose their preferred solutions. Citizenship in a democracy not only has rights and privileges it also has duties and responsibilities. One of those duties is to choose the way it is governed. Opponents of compulsory voting claim they have the “right not to vote”. True!… Read more »

0
0
peaceful_life
Reply to  Cynic
27, October 2013 12:32 pm

Hi Cicero. Good to hear you now have some clarity on that particular subject matter. I myself can’t be bothered to muster up the strength to be overly annoyed at the Brand celebrity persona, but his self deprecation and allusions to pseudo ignorance indicate that we shouldn’t be fooled by the ‘fools’ tomfoolery as he reads Tom Campbell but can only be bothered to reference Cromwell from… Read more »

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  peaceful_life
27, October 2013 1:01 pm

Presumably RB doesn’t really care. Would he no vote Green if he did?

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  Cynic
27, October 2013 1:02 pm

Sorry using a Scottish keyboard! :-))

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  Cynic
27, October 2013 1:12 pm

The sun has about 5 billion years before it burns out. Life on Earth has been about 3.6 billion years, so there is time for whole new life-forms to develop in the changing world.

Darwin lives! :-))

0
0
peaceful_life
Reply to  Cynic
27, October 2013 1:24 pm

Dunno, I aint got a Scooby. Perhaps he thinks that with the public gaze still caught in the rhetorical headlights of ‘growth’ beamed by the dominant ‘parties’ and media alike that there’d be no point in promoting them? Can the greens even deliver what needs done?….can politics on the whole?…it’s not really designed for common sense and wellbeing, it’s more suited for continual expansion and if you… Read more »

0
0
tryme
Reply to  peaceful_life
27, October 2013 2:54 pm

On the strength of that I would definitely vote for you, peaceful_life! Your oratory takes us on a fantastic leap out of the blinkered and humdrum that we normally take to constitute the parameters of our ‘world’. Very inspiring.

0
0
tryme
Reply to  tryme
27, October 2013 3:01 pm

Your 12.32 post in particular.

0
0
peaceful_life
Reply to  tryme
27, October 2013 6:32 pm

Thanks for that, Tryme, although I haven’t really said anything of substance, just highlighting the obvious.

Thanks.

0
0
peaceful_life
Reply to  tryme
27, October 2013 8:33 pm

Hi, Tryme. I thought I’d reply again with a little more depth, that ‘humdrum’ thing kinda triggered me off, so please, forgive my ramble…. I guess it must be the most bitter of sweet ironies, that as has been pointed out, after X amount of billions of years of evolution, here we sit perched on the zenith of technological modernism…and yet, we are left in the vacuum… Read more »

0
0
tryme
Reply to  tryme
27, October 2013 9:22 pm

If we reacted to this emergency with the same focus, energy and determination as ‘we’ did to the crashing of the banks and the recession, (putting aside the content of that response), how amazing could that be!

Your words conjure up vivid pictures….

0
0
Mark Francis
Reply to  Cynic
27, October 2013 12:40 pm

Rooney.Quantum physics.Easy.
You put Rooney in a big box with a radio- active source & then see if he’s dead or not. The answer depends on whether it is Mickey or Wayne.

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  Mark Francis
27, October 2013 12:59 pm

LOL!

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  Mark Francis
27, October 2013 2:57 pm

Or both… or neither… or could one tell? :-))

0
0
peaceful_life
27, October 2013 1:35 pm

@Cicero.

I missed the context of life on Earth and expectancy of the Sun burn out.

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  peaceful_life
27, October 2013 1:54 pm

Just pointing out there is time to scrap the current world and start again. :-))

0
0
Albert Street
27, October 2013 2:37 pm

Until the Independents resolve the ferry issues one way or another we will all be faced with cuts, cuts and more cuts. For some reason there is a reluctance,by this and previous administrations, to tackle the problem that impacts all of us. The ferry companies are slowly but surely killing the island off. I fully appreciate that things are difficult but fail to see why the independents… Read more »

0
0
woodworker
Reply to  Albert Street
27, October 2013 3:37 pm

the cuts have come about from central government cuts to council funding.
The ferry companies, whilst locusts who are sucking the island dry, are not responsible for government cuts. Anyone who says otherwise is wrong.

The only way to possibly stop cuts is to vote for someone other than Tories in 2015.

0
0
Albert Street
Reply to  woodworker
27, October 2013 5:48 pm

@woodworker. The point about central government cuts is absolutely is not in doubt. I make reference to the ferry companies because they stifles growth on the Island, I would go so far as to say that they are even killing off existing businesses. No new businesses will establish themselves here without huge cash incentives and when the money runs out they leave. Sustainable business is squeezed to… Read more »

0
0
woodworker
Reply to  Albert Street
27, October 2013 5:53 pm

Yet that isnt what you said – is it.

I dont disagree that the ferry companies have a serious impact on growth on the island – but then again, that impact is often positive as well as negative.

There is however no doubting the fact that the ferry companies do not have any influence over government cuts, or over the council, which is how your comment reads.

0
0
Albert Street
Reply to  woodworker
27, October 2013 6:27 pm

My point is that Central Government cuts can be off-set by attracting business and sustaining existing businesses. This brings employment, which reduces social costs and adds to the coffers of the Island.

0
0
woodworker
Reply to  woodworker
27, October 2013 8:24 pm

I see your point, but it still doesnt make the cuts the responsibility of the ferry companies, OR their responsibility to offset. It also doesnt mean the council is failing to resolve the situation. They are in talks with Wightlink last I heard, and supporting the MP, who will hopefully see results before the general election, otherwise he may lose interest like last time. Any business serious… Read more »

0
0
phil jordan
Reply to  Albert Street
28, October 2013 7:27 am

The Council have no special mechanism by which they can affect the operational policy of the ferry companies…but we engage and will continue to engage with them to try to improve the position over service levels and costs. The apparent attendance of all ferry companies at our Scrutiny committee at some point in the near future is some headway, I think. However, “things are difficult” is an… Read more »

0
0
Albert Street
28, October 2013 9:04 am

Oh dear Phil, yet again the council misses the point. You have control of a very large amount of public money and six months in you fail to grasp just what impacts those funds and how by increasing revenues or the removing obstacles (restrictive practices of the Ferry Operators) can reduce the impact of the cuts from central government. Despite your assertions policy has been set by… Read more »

0
0
woodworker
Reply to  Albert Street
28, October 2013 9:55 am

Im a bit sick of this Albert. You allege that ” policy has been set by officers and you and your colleagues will go along with it as you have on many other occasions in the past.” Prove what you say please. It has been denied by a councillor, so if he is lying, please prove it. You also assert that the council can remove obstacles, ie… Read more »

0
0
Mark Francis
Reply to  Albert Street
29, October 2013 1:44 am

I see the boo boys are out in strength today.

0
0
Albert Street
28, October 2013 10:47 am

BT Contract negotiations, Solent Energy to name but two. Who in the ranks of the Independents has the ability or skill to set budgets and exactly what budgets are they setting if up to 90% is apparently ring fenced?, They have relied on ex councillor Welsford historically with Liberal and Labour ccouncillors in the past. So Councillor Jordan’s comment that approximately 90% of the budget is to… Read more »

0
0
woodworker
Reply to  Albert Street
28, October 2013 11:51 am

But you havnt stated it as opinion. You seem to be claiming it is fact. ” policy has been set by officers” HAS does not suggest this is your opinion, it suggests that you are stating a fact. So, rather than speculating that I am a councillor, or being rude and calling me obtuse, maybe you can actually prove your allegations. Or are you claiming that you… Read more »

0
0
Bystander
Reply to  Albert Street
28, October 2013 12:11 pm

Ignore him Albert he tries this all the time. You raise interesting points and people are listening don’t be sidetracked.

0
0
Albert Street
Reply to  Bystander
28, October 2013 5:10 pm

Thank you Bystander.

0
0
Bystander
Reply to  Albert Street
28, October 2013 5:48 pm

Thats ok Albert more people should be entering the debate but must be put off seeing self appointed henchmen. I would imagine Phil will get back to you once he has been briefed by the officers as he does appear to have snookered himself by saying up to 90% of the budget is apparently ring fenced and the remainder is equal to the cuts which need to… Read more »

0
0
woodworker
Reply to  Bystander
28, October 2013 6:08 pm

Oh please. The points he has raised are incorrect. Its that simple. After having that pointed out, Albert claimed that the points he put across as fact were actually opinion.

If Albert is able to substantiate what he says, then fair enough. I doubt he can, because it is simply incorrect.

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  woodworker
28, October 2013 7:48 pm

Erm. Is this not easy to check from public documents? Looking at the Agenda and Minutes of IWC meetings, it appears that each briefing for a policy decision seems to have attached a full report from the officers linked to that policy. The officers’ report usually defines possible options with a recommendation for one of those options. Presumably if one had the time (and willpower) to check… Read more »

0
0
woodworker
Reply to  Cynic
28, October 2013 8:14 pm

Why bother checking? Its so much more sensationalist to just say it without a shred of evidence, and so much more entertaining to change what you say from purported fact to opinion when pulled up on it. Then again, we do have an elected councillors word for it: “I absolutely reject your assertion however, that we have “already written a policy” on spending and budgets for 2014… Read more »

0
0
Albert Street
28, October 2013 8:38 pm

I have the necessary information to back up my opinion, It is an issue for those who supplied me with the information which is why I flag things up, as opposed Woodworker who seems to be the self appointed solicitor for Councillor Jordan making comment on just about everything and everyone. This administration, with a very few exceptions, does not have the skill, knowledge, ability or drive… Read more »

0
0
woodworker
Reply to  Albert Street
28, October 2013 8:55 pm

then share that information. Im still not sure how what you say is your opinion when you apparently have the evidence to back it up as fact. Perhaps you should make your mind up, is it opinion or fact? If it is fact, then share your information and prove it. If you are not willing to share your information, why would anyone believe what you say, especially… Read more »

0
0
Robert Jones
Reply to  Albert Street
28, October 2013 10:11 pm

While that’s probably true, it was also true of the last administration and just about every single one before it. A small group of councillors told the officers what they wanted, and the officers translated those objectives, as best they could, into deliverable policy. That doesn’t mean that officers dictate policy – they just put incoherent ideas into coherent form. On the other hand, what councillors let… Read more »

0
0
phil jordan
Reply to  Albert Street
28, October 2013 10:55 pm

@albert street: I have just arrived home and may have missed some of the exchanges… forgive me that. I have to explain to you, again and for the last time, that this administration – of whom I am an active member and a cabinet member with certain responsibilities – have NOT decided upon ANY budget or written ANY policy in this respect. I am afraid that your… Read more »

0
0
tryme
Reply to  phil jordan
29, October 2013 12:06 am

I presume this is the same Albert Street who suddenly appeared here and in a notably anti-Indie capacity, the minute this administration won office. (Or as soon as another lot lost). This was before they had barely drawn breath. I therefore doubt that s/he is someone who is open to persuasion to think well of the Indies on any basis.

0
0
Albert Street
Reply to  tryme
29, October 2013 1:09 am

No not anti Indi just pro the Island.

I just hate people trying to pull the wool over my eyes by making election promises, oh sorry aspirations that they can not fulfill.

Mr Mew I sincerely hope you get some answers and assistance from the council (Phil Jordan is one of the good guys who will try his best to help)

0
0
woodworker
Reply to  Albert Street
29, October 2013 9:54 am

No-one has tried to pull the wool over your eyes. YOU on the other hand have made a statement which you first put across as fact, then claimed was opinion, then claimed as fact again, with the evidence to back it up which you have failed to share. YOU have been told twice by a county councillor that you are incorrect. But now all becomes clear. “Aspirations”… Read more »

0
0
tryme
Reply to  tryme
29, October 2013 5:56 am

However, Phil, for people like me it’s both interesting and reassuring to read your explanations, so you are not wasting your breath in that respect!

0
0
I.Reader
Reply to  tryme
29, October 2013 7:56 am

Coincidentally, I’m told that a former resident of Albert Street in Newport is former County Hall president & Rotten Boroughs character David Pugh!

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  I.Reader
29, October 2013 9:38 am

Bystander = David Pugh?

Obviously not as eleven days ago he claimed to be Spartacus (the name to which Nigel Farage had previously laid claim.)

:-))

0
0
Bystander
Reply to  tryme
29, October 2013 8:28 am

and I’m told that an ireader is a convenient way of reading fiction, it was suggested that I could be David Pugh as well recently

0
0
I.Reader
Reply to  Bystander
29, October 2013 8:35 am

And reading Private Eye is a convenient way to see what governments & businesses don’t like us knowing about.

0
0
Bystander
Reply to  Bystander
29, October 2013 10:35 am

perhaps Albert is Private Eye then, oh but wait now apparently I am Albert according to woodporker

0
0
Albert Street
Reply to  Bystander
29, October 2013 10:51 am

No I am not the upstart Pugh or anyone else.

Before more accusations are leveled at me for being anti Indi perhaps those who question my alleged political leaning should look at my postings on IWFIRST

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  Bystander
29, October 2013 11:21 am

Älbert Street “No I am not the upstart Pugh or ANYONE ELSE.”

To misquote “Eccles” (Spike Milligan)”Everybody got to be someone”!

0
0
woodworker
Reply to  Bystander
29, October 2013 2:35 pm

Having just looked at Albert Streets postings on IWFIRST on facebook, and read some of the paranoid bile that he touts, I am now off to do something worthwhile with my time. I really wish I hadnt wasted 10 minutes of my life reading it.

0
0
Ed Mew
28, October 2013 11:33 pm

I have spent over a year trying to get clear answers from this council, both the elected and non elected! I am a local business person trying to protect local business. Unfortunately every single correspondence I have had with the council results in “There is nothing we can do”. What a great council we have supposedly running this Island.It doesn’t matter who wins the vote, they all… Read more »

0
0
phil jordan
29, October 2013 9:29 am

@Ed Mew:

Ed, I will do whatever I am able to do and assist you. Without making promises I might not be able to keep I would very much like to hear from you directly.
Can I ask you to write initially to my Council email address: phil.jordan@iow.gov.uk and I will respond appropriately.

0
0
Ed Mew
Reply to  phil jordan
29, October 2013 12:31 pm

Ok Phil I will do that!!

0
0
hazel wyld
29, October 2013 10:28 pm

It has always amused me the pseudo names used …I always put my name to my opinions so you know who to shout at, if I believe it, I say it, maybe we should all do this to stop speculation!!!

0
0
woodworker
Reply to  hazel wyld
29, October 2013 11:29 pm

Why? Its what people say and whether they can back it up that matters.
Opinions are fine when expressed as such. Facts are fine when backed up. ‘Someone-told-me-so-it-must-be-true’ is just a waste of time.

0
0
Ed Mew
Reply to  hazel wyld
30, October 2013 12:47 am

Hazel 100%! The people that come on here spouting off use other names, if they are passionate about how they feel they should use their real names! Unfortunately there are a few that come on here just to bicker between each other and try to score points! I sometimes feel that some of them had their CB radios taken off of them and the only fox hunt… Read more »

0
0
Ed Mew
Reply to  Ed Mew
30, October 2013 1:37 am

Sorry Hazel, I don’t want to sound patronising! But “Handle” in CB world means using a name that is not your own, just to hide your real identity! Unfortunately the majority of the boring ones on this site that constantly bicker and try to out do each other by using big words and boring the rest of us do so! When they grow a set and use… Read more »

0
0
tryme
Reply to  hazel wyld
30, October 2013 6:00 am

We don’t all want to be ‘shouted at’, Hazel! And for a lot of us, our professional lives mean that we are bound not to express many of our personal views at work, so it would be a problem if people we see there could make the link. Whatever the name, an opinion is an opinion, (and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with “long words” Ed!… Read more »

0
0
Bystander
Reply to  tryme
30, October 2013 7:47 am

Another problem with using your real name is that when you have made statements like Ed has made above those are available forever to anyone to dismiss your credibility by simply googling your name.

And what would stop people choosing a user names that sound like a real name, how could you ever know that wasn’t their name?

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  tryme
30, October 2013 7:53 am

@tryme re pseudonyms- I agree. The Island is a small community and there is always a danger of embarrassing other family members. Further- how do we know that “Ed Mews” and “Hazel Wyld” are not also pseudonyms like “Albert Street”? Does OTW really need to demand proof of identity for every comment? (As to the use of “big and long words” shall we all write in words… Read more »

0
0
Mark Francis
30, October 2013 9:13 am

They are all my sock puppets.

0
0
hazel wyld
30, October 2013 10:13 am

Believe me, my real name! However I do get it, that for some people their job requires they cannot use real name…and isn`t that a sad indictment of the democracy we are supposed to live in!!! I remember the teachers and care workers being actually threatened with disciplinary action if they commented… What happened to the quote which off hand I cannot recite word for word but… Read more »

0
0
Cynic
Reply to  hazel wyld
30, October 2013 11:12 am

Attr, to Voltaire but whether he actually said it (in French) is hotly disputed.

0
0
tryme
Reply to  Cynic
30, October 2013 6:47 pm

Sounds as though he would have been a pain on here.

0
0
Ed Mew
31, October 2013 11:19 pm

Ok guys, you all spout on about transparency when it comes to political issues (I’ve read many of your posts before).I would assume that if a council member came on here you would expect them to be honest and show their names. So in order for me to understand your reasoning for not letting us know who you are, please write a comment stating any occupation that… Read more »

0
0
Bystander
Reply to  Ed Mew
31, October 2013 11:40 pm

Whether you approve of the practice or not is entirely irrelevant as it isn’t against the rules, so why allow yourself to get so wound up about it? Have you considered the possibility that Councilors also use anonymous accounts on here to praise themselves?

0
0
Mark Francis
Reply to  Bystander
31, October 2013 11:49 pm

You are all my sock puppets!

0
0
Sicnarf Kram
31, October 2013 11:50 pm

Oh no, we’re not!

0
0
Mark Francis
31, October 2013 11:51 pm

Oh yes you are!

0
0
Mark Francis
31, October 2013 11:52 pm

That’s the way to do it!

0
0
Kram L Sicnarf
31, October 2013 11:55 pm

Judeh, Judeh Judeh! oops here cpmes Mr Plod with the sausages…

0
0
tryme
Reply to  Kram L Sicnarf
1, November 2013 6:35 am

I’ve just realised there are in fact about 3 people commenting OTW, (and 2 of these are Mark).

0
0
tryme
1, November 2013 6:27 am

Ed – For example, any occupation where someone is providing a service to individual members of the public, and where the job involves working with colleagues. If colleagues and clients know your views on subjects they themselves feels very strongly about, possibly in disagreement, this would be a problem. They may not address the service provided in a positive way, they may start arguing against the views… Read more »

0
0
tryme
Reply to  tryme
1, November 2013 6:32 am

And this also applies to volunteer services.

0
0
tryme
Reply to  tryme
1, November 2013 6:44 am

..Parents Evening with woodworker, anyone?…

0
0
Albert Street
1, November 2013 9:07 am

We seemed to have gone completely off topic, which is Councillor Stephens’s Impression of the first six months in office.

0
0
Sally Perry
Admin
Reply to  Albert Street
1, November 2013 9:22 am

Agreed.

Readers, please can we stick to the topic of the article.

For those interested in the subject of the article, it’s off-putting to have to wade through comments irrelevant to the subject.

0
0
Previous
Appeal After Burglaries In Brading
Next
Wayzgoose: A Fantastic Opportunity To Buy Interesting And Unique Gifts This Week
OnTheWight logo for image watermark