Oldham's Wood - the new name for Swallow's Wood?

If you've been paying a certain amount of attention to the local press in recent weeks, you may have noticed that there have been tentative ideas mooted about naming a Tameside Nature Reserve after the late Council Leader, Roy Oldham.

A local person, Margaret Smethurst, proposed that Haughton Dale Nature Reserve, near Denton, should be renamed the Roy Oldham Haughton Dale Local Nature Reserve at a recent District Assembly Meeting. The idea seems to be receiving serious consideration, in that the local rags are talking about it. Now whilst our friend John Hall may have something to say about the contradictions of the man most responsible for environmental pollution and the destruction of Green space in Denton being memorialised in the name of the local Nature Reserve, we feel we have a compromise solution that will keep everyone happy.

How about Roy Oldham's name being attached to the Nature Reserve at Swallow's Wood? We are serious! He never got to see his bypass built, but let's remember - this is a man that supposedly was 'aware of the beautiful countryside on his doorstep' - so what better tribute to his ultimate success in keeping Swallows Wood and the surrounding countryside preserved for the future (through his failure to erect a bypass)? Who knows, in decades to come, Roy Oldham may even secure his place in future 'Legends of Longdendale' as the man who saved the wood from the clutches of the evil road-men. After all, if the wood was to bear his name, what Tameside politician would ever dare to support a plan to put a road through it!

Sod Denton - let's have Roy Oldham's Wood here in Longdendale!

Tameside Council dumps Roy Oldham - Kieran Quinn is now leader

The breaking news is that Tameside Council has dumped Roy Oldham from his leadership post and selected Kieran Quinn. Does this mean all bets on Bypass 2.0 are now off?

Oldham in desperate "I'll deliver Bypass 2.0" pledge - the Old Goat has shot his bolt

Predictably, Roy Oldham is using his secret weapon in a last ditch move to shore up any wavering voters in Longdendale. The best bit about the leaflet is that Oldham is saying that Bypass 2.0 will follow public consultation, almost like night follows day. Now we think this seems to be a case of him prejudging the issue, which could have serious consequences for him. We understand both Longdendale Siege and Longdendale Labour have chosen this moment to pounce because the Tory candidate Peter Hayes has been making it quite clear that he can't make any promises regarding Bypass 2.0

Meanwhile, the man who made all the promises for years on end and didn't deliver is making more of them. The Old Goat has shot his bolt.

Pure propaganda - Roy Oldham "aware of the beautiful countryside on his doorstep"

One of our contacts has passed us Roy Oldham's latest election leaflet for the local Council Elections, and it's a gem.

You can see the full leaflet here and here. Note that the only line about the Bypass is a solitary sentence - "In Longdendale, the Bypass is going through its procedures", which makes it sound like it's some kind of independent sentient being. We're willing to bet that behind closed doors, Roy carries on conversations with the Bypass - for all we know, he may even believe he sleeps with it, which perhaps may go some way to explaining his dogged persistent devotion to the "idea" over the years.

Equally bizarre though is the small series of vignettes which illustrate how Roy is 'working for you', and in particular the one on the left. Apparently, Roy is very aware of the "beautiful countryside on his doorstep". The problem is that Roy wants to introduce his jealous lover Bypass to the beautiful countryside -  it's one of Roy's sick, twisted fantasies - and we know how it's going to end folks don't we? Yes, the perverted Bypass will have his wicked way with 'beautiful countryside', making her tired, ugly and degraded - a shadow of her former self.

Now you would have thought that a perfect backdrop to illustrate Roy's love for the countryside would be - the countryside of Longdendale! The only problem with that is that many of the views you could pick would be spoiled forever by the Bypass. So Roy's played it safe and posed against the park at the junction of the A57 and A628 in Hollingworth.

We think this is no small accident: for politicians like Oldham, the mitigation for projects that entail environmental degradation and the destruction of open spaces in the countryside is the provision of dead, paved, ecological deserts such as the park in the photograph. We know which we prefer.

We hear that Roy's facing a showdown with Kieran Quinn on May 16th, only 9 days after the results of the Council Elections. He may have plenty of time to spend in his park after that.

Roy Oldham's Downfall - is Bypass 2.0 in freefall?

Some of our readers may have noticed the story on the Manchester Evening News website that Roy Oldham is not only facing a challenge to his leadership of Tameside MBC from fellow Councillor Kieran Quinn, but that his local constituency party in Stalybridge and Hyde is supporting Quinn.

Now this is not 'new' news, and was actually reported at the end of January by Tameside Eye (with the hilariously apposite video above added to the post). But the fact that the MEN are using the story brings it out into the open.

What can it mean for the Bypass? It's well known that the original Bypass and the new Bypass ('with Bumps') 2.0 are Oldham's babies. As we hinted in our blog last night, there's a strong chance Oldham's end will spell the end of the road.

There's more to this story than meets the eye, so stay tuned over the next few days for more.

Roy Oldham drops the bomb on Longdendale

As a taster, here's a little sneaky peak at the real substance of the report prepared by TMBC about the 'Longdendale Integrated Transport System' - RoyOldham/Colonel Kurtz has scrawled his solution for Longdendale. Our sources are telling us that there is a Tameside equivalent of Captain Willard waiting in the wings to stick the knife in at the right moment, but will he take up Oldham's priorities and methods, or are they only the property of the old goat?

We need motivation to adopt our old blogging habits, but an exposition of the whole sorry, pathetic affair will appear here at some point (yes, we know we promised it before!).

Sean Parker-Perry the rubbish rebel

Here's us thinking that Longdendale Councillor Sean Parker-Perry's career is virtually over and he sets himself firmly on the political centre stage in Tameside - at least for now. Not only that, but his 'green credentials' (such as they exist) are again at the centre of it all.

What are we talking about? Well Sean's decided to come over all rebellious regarding the recent conversion of Tameside MBC towards fortnightly bin collections. But as is usually the case with these things, you have to read between the lines. 

The Tameside Advertiser article makes it clear that Sean favours a weekly collection, but smaller bins which it says will 'force people to divide rubbish'. The current plan sees Tameside residents receiving a number of containers for different types of rubbish. Also, Sean says that recycling facilities in various parts of Tameside have disappeared.

And Sean seems to have hit a nerve - in the Reporter/Chronicle, there's a whole page devoted to the issue, with letters of support for Sean's stance. Or is there? The praise seems to have come from those who think the collections should stay weekly, rather than Sean's idea of smaller bins 'forcing' people to recycle. 

It might be easier if we get out own views on the subject out of the way first before we move onto the implications of this kerfuffle. 

Firstly, there's the issue of Public Services. The move to a less frequent collection is clearly an attack on a vital Public Service. There has been an increasing tendency over the past couple of years for Local Authorities to contract out their waste management services to private companies, with all the usual and predictable results, both for the public and employees in the public sector. Sean doesn't mention this, so presumably he's in favour of it. The idea that this is a clash of political ideologies is absurd - all the political parties agree with the continued privatisation of Public Services. 

Secondly, in this 'debate' there is a complete absence of analysis, both at the local and national level. Who is talking about the commodification of waste for example? 4 multinational corporations - whose turnover number in the billions of pounds - control three quarters of all refuse collection contracts (many of which are to last for 25 years). Rubbish is very big business. And whilst the contracts keep political responsibility for waste management with Local Authorities, they do not allow them to keep any direct operational control. That is determined by only multinational corporations in response to national regulations. 

Local Authorities simply have no power, and on a local level neither the Tories, Liberal Democrats or Labour can do anything about it. And last time I looked, none of them were arguing for returning waste management services to Local Authority control.

And this brings us on to you and I, and our 'responsibility' for recycling and waste management. We are continually told that 'we have to take more responsibility' for 'our' waste. That this is an individual problem, even a moral problem (i.e. it is we that are 'lazy' or 'wasteful'). But all of that misses the point completely and is in fact a smokescreen for what it actually happening. The fact of the matter is that 'we' have no control  - not only do we not produce the waste (excessive packaging, junk mail etc etc) but also it is actually the Local Authorities that have swallowed the government (Tory and then Labour) line on the commodification of waste and awarded lucrative and long-term contracts to private companies that can do exactly as they please.

Waste management policy wants to make rubbish into a profitable commodity. This is why the onus for sorting waste is being put onto us, and the collections are happening less frequently - so that capitalist enterprises don't have to employ as many workers to sort the rubbish and collect it on a regular basis. Which is in order for them to widen their profit margins. It has nothing to do with us becoming 'greener' or becoming more 'environmentally aware'. 

We don't see Sean Parker-Perry, or anyone else for that matter, talking about any of that.

So what is this argument really about? Roy Oldham's career is clearly in it's twilight months now. This could also be true of Sean - his credibility in the local Labour Party has nose dived in the past 12 months, what with his sacking from James Purnell's team, and the foundering of his relationship with the daughter of one of Tameside's most powerful political figures. It's do or die, and what better way to revive his fortunes - with a slanging match in the press with the leader of the Council over an issue neither of them have control over.

What a load of rubbish...

EXCLUSIVE: The bill to TMBC taxpayers for Oldham's jaunt to London

Further revelations have emerged about the costs partially incurred for Roy Oldham's trip to London to lobby Geoff Who? last month.

In a Freedom of Information release, John Hall has discovered that the trip cost Tameside MBC's taxpayers £545.60 in train and taxi fares (although any associated costs have yet to be disclosed).

As well as himself, Oldham transported 4 other Councillors/Staff members including Councillor Wareing his - get this - Aide-de-Camp! Oldham clearly thinks he has to impress the former Defence Secretary Who?/Hoon with this pseudo-military posturing. Perhaps Wareing carries Oldham's Viagra?

Anyhow, what is interesting is that although Oldham took 4 other people with him, according to the official meeting notes only Mike Thompson ('Director of Operations and Performance') was allowed in. Perhaps the Aide-de-Camp was too busy setting up Oldham's field HQ? Either way, it's a waste of money, and hopefully a waste of time. 

Hoongate part 3: what was said to Geoff Who?

And now here's the news you needed to make you chuck up your Xmas dinner. We have some answers about what took place at the 'Hoongate' meeting last month. The implications for the future of this road scheme are massive.

Keen readers of the local press may have noticed a press release from Friends of the Peak District over the past week or so. Along with the Campaign for National Parks, they have demanded to know how alternatives have been rejected (as was the line from Tom Levitt) when the Public Inquiry has not yet had chance to examine them, and they also accuse Geoff Who? of breaking the Governments Ministerial Code by 'jumping the gun'.

But now leading Objector John Hall has passed to us notes from the Hoongate meeting, which can be viewed here. They reveal the 'official' version of events, which we'll now try to elucidate.

Firstly, it's clear from the text that Tom Levitt has shot his bolt by stating all the guff about the Glossop Spur. For the DfT officials, the Spur is clearly so unimportant that it's not even appeared in the notes. As usual, Levitt makes a complete fool of himself. 

The main complaint begins in paragraph 5, where Roy Oldham makes it clear that the big problem for the pro-road lobbyists is the cost escalation. Oldham believes the estimated costs are too high when compared with other schemes, although it was pointed out to him by Highways Agency officials present that the cheaper schemes he used as an example are not really comparable, which shows how ignorant he is. 

Hoon then offered to turn the Inquiry process on it's head - paragraph 6 says that he offered to detrunk the existing road - this demonstrates that he is clearly partial and implicated now in this whole mucky, cruddy business. The current proposals for the bypass envisage that detrunking - a shifting of responsibility for the road from the Highways Agency to the Local Authorities - would take place after the bypass had been built. The fact that the A628 and A57 are a Trunk road is also one of the principle reasons thrown up by the pro-road lobby as to why a lorry ban is not possible. 

So we can only assume that Hoon's offer to detrunk the road now means that a Lorry Ban is more possible now than it has ever been. If it's that easy to remove problems, then there's no excuse not to try it. 

The implication of Hoon's offer is that if the responsibility for the road is handed to local authorities, then they can also have the responsibility for funding and constructing a bypass. Whether or not this makes a bypass more or less likely is a point we'll surely return to if Hoon's offer is serious. 

In paragraph 7, Purnell discounts alternative routes, after Hoon asked for views on them. This makes it clear that Hoon is asking the opinion of politicians before the case for alternatives have been put to the Inquiry, and before Hoon's agency - the Highways Agency - have rebutted any evidence put before them for alternative routes.

And in paragraph 8, Hoon is said to be 'awaiting formal advice from the relevant regional authorities before making a decision and when he had received that in the coming weeks he would be considering the best way forward'. 

With the release of this news, John Watson the Inquiry Inspector must wonder exactly what his role is. It's clear now for all to see that the key decisions are being made outside the Inquiry, and the politicians are completely brazen about it. Not only are the Highways Agency wasting the time and money of the public with their delaying tactics and not only is the Public Inquiry clearly a complete sham, but the politicians have no intention of even listening to the alternative point of view. 

That's fine - it confirms what we knew all along: they want a road, not alternatives.

But they need to be clear about the implications of making such aggressive moves. If Hoon wants to launch a war on the environment in Glossopdale and Longdendale in the same fashion as he launched the Iraq war - i.e without consultation, without listening to other points of view, in a pre-emptive manner - then he can expect a suitable response. 

Tameside 'needs more trees' - laugh? we nearly shat...

This one seems to have slipped under the radar (thought not others - hat tip: Tameside Eye). You really couldn't make it up, the irony is so beautiful. Anyway, rather than explain it all, here's the article in the Tameside Advertiser from 20th November:

Council branches out for Christmas

’Tis the season to be green. Residents, schools and community groups are being given an early Christmas present next Sunday (30 November) in the form of 3,500 trees.

The giveaway, run by Tameside Council, hopes to give the borough’s tree coverage a much-needed boost.

Martin Watkins, the council’s environmental co-ordinator, said: “In relation to many other areas of the country and Greater Manchester, tree coverage in Tameside is poor. “We don’t have access to great big sweeps of land where we can go and plant woodland but if everyone puts one or two trees in their garden it’s the equivalent. It helps wildlife and it helps the planet as well.”

Residents have 10 domestic varieties to choose from - maple, hornbeam, alder, silver birch, hawthorn, bird cherry, wild cherry, crab apple, rowan and whitebeam.

The feathered whips, around 1.5m tall, are bare rooted and need to be planted as soon as possible after collection. Instructions for planting and fertiliser will also be handed out so all residents need to bring is a bin bag.

Well, well. What a classic line - "In relation to many other areas of the country and Greater Manchester, tree coverage in Tameside is poor". This is the same Council that wants to trash Swallows Wood for the Bypass - an Ancient Semi Natural Woodland and an important habitat for wildlife with thousands of trees. And this is ignored and instead, individuals are urged to plant trees in penny numbers here and there.

One is immediately reminded of Roy Oldham's comments during his 2006 State of the Area Address when he announced the eventual planting of 10,000 trees to 'compensate' for the loss of Swallows Wood and also to 'offset' the CO2 emissions increase caused by the bypass. Except his sums were wrong - one of our backroom pixies worked out that 6.7 million trees would be needed to accomplish this - they would cover 1600 hectares, an area roughly the size of Glossop!

But there's a seed of a good idea in there. How about we start planting and sowing - here there and everywhere? Without permission, without warning, we should take this plea literally... 

Out with the Oldham and in with the new

Readers may have noticed that our letter to the Glossop Chronicle eventually made it into the letters page a week last Thursday. Even better was that it was juxtaposed with a letter from Roy Oldham which managed to represent all of the things we'd criticised in our letter.

In the letter, Oldham goes to great lengths to explain all of the measures Tameside MBC put in place - which somehow still resulted in a traffic nightmare. Here's a priceless quote from Oldham (the lack of punctuation is his):

"Prior to works commencing the Council as the Local Highway Authority was involved in extensive consultation with the Gas Alliance and other affected Local Authorities (High Peak and Derbyshire) together with the Emergency Services and the public in order to minimise disruption and inconvenience"

...all of which failed completely spectacularly on 27th October! It's clear he arrogantly feels the problem is everybody else's perception but the final two paragraphs spell out what he thinks people should do - call for a bypass to end traffic problems.

With his views on this and other matters, Roy Oldham increasingly represents a take on the world that is archaic, outmoded and of the past. This letter should be his epitaph. Indeed, there's a certain irony that his letter was published on the 50th anniversary of the opening of the Preston Bypass, Britain's first motorway, which eventually became the M6.

But can anyone but Oldham and the Longdendale Siege Committee really believe that it's possible and desirable to keep constructing motorways for another 50 years? Well, we've some bad news for them. Only yesterday, the International Energy Agency said that Oil production would most likely peak by 2020 - only last month, the same notoriously conservative organisation said it would be 2030. Others believe it will come about much earlier, such as 2013.

The effect of Peak Oil upon societies that are dependant upon it will be a rapid and steep decline that will have the most grievous effects where there is least preparation for it, such as ours. Many things we take for granted are dependent upon oil.

Whilst only the most vicious misanthropes would relish such a scenario, there are opportunities now to create a different kind of society that is not dependent upon oil and is radically different, and all but the misanthropic can involve themselves in bringing it about. But that society should not involve cars, the road industry or even capitalism itself. Nor should it include such people as Roy Oldham - like oil, he is peaking, his time is running out.

The flawed rhetoric and actions of these 'throwbacks' belong to a different age, not the new one that is potentially within our grasp.

Hoongate part 2 - who said what to Geoff Who?

Since our post last week about the Bypass Cartel's meeting with the Secretary of State for Transport Geoff Hoon, we now have three different sources of info about what was said. It's time to compare and contrast and form some conclusions.

Firstly, the article in the Advertiser, and a classic Oldhamism from Roy:

"Clearly he (Mr Hoon) can’t support it as he is the final arbitrator but I am hopeful that what we heard is that he understands what our problems and our needs are."

Arbiter Roy, that's the word you're after. Anyway, Levitt didn't get a look in on this article and for a change, Oldham is diplomatic, making it clear that Hoon is 'supposed' to be impartial. 

Then we have the article in the Glossop Chronicle, which also quotes Oldham at the Longdendale and Hattersley District Assembly, and Levitt's remarks on what was discussed. Leaving aside some of the more revealing and juicy quotes for future articles, the impression it gives is that the delegation 'made their case' to Hoon, but hinting that some kind of reassurance was given, Levitt is quoted thus:

"We left the meeting feeling far happier than when we went in"

Now set aside visions of a meeting along the lines of the ones Roy Oldham used to hold with his friends Tom Pendry and Owen Oyston and a bevvy of young women for one moment! This suggests Hoon gave them some kind of hope that the road will be built, come what may.

But the clincher is another source. Quoted by Virtual Glossop, it's from a newsletter sent by Levitt to Party supporters. We'll quote it in full:

Bypass Talks Win New Momentum

The new Transport Secretary, Geoff Hoon, met local MPs Tom Levitt and James Purnell with Tameside Council Leader Roy Oldham last week. The meeting was called to try to get the road plans for the A628 / A57 back on track after the public enquiry ran into technical problems.

“A number of ways forward were discussed,” said Tom, “and some were ruled out. For example, local politicians and the Highways Agency agreed that there was no credible alternative route for the road.” Tom said that Glossop’s economic development relied heavily on the bypass and the associated Glossop Spur being built together. Geoff Hoon, who was our Euro-MEP until 1994, knows the area. He said that officials would explore options to bring the plans back on course quickly.

Levitt likes to portray himself as having all kinds of access at all kinds of levels of government and no doubt this news is more than a little bit of self-aggrandisement. But then we have the mixed messages about 'ways forward' being 'ruled out'. Who is ruling what out? Is it Hoon (previously known as 'Geoff Who' by the press during the attack on Iraq)? If so, it's none of his business, as Roy Oldham was keen to make clear at the Longdendale DA. 

So is Levitt going out on a limb, out of desperation for his more than likely battering at the next General Election? Or did this very cosy meeting really agree a way forward? It should be clear that if objectors request to met him and are rebuffed, then he clearly showing favouritism and bias.

To try to get to the bottom of the matter, leading Objector John Hall sent a Freedom of Information request to Hoon on 26th November:

The press releases today 26th November 2008 indicate your meeting with a delegation of TMBC Councillors who seek your approval for the strongly contested ByPass scheme through the Peak District National Park.

To accept this lobbying by those concerned indicates your complicity in showing contempt for the Public Inquiry process and the protocols required under an appointed Public Inquiry Inspector.

Those objecting to this road scheme have had to abide by the PI proceedings in presenting their evidence under the requirements of the Inquiry, and then being subjected to any cross examinations required by any Supporters of this ByPass.

The gates have been opened through your acceptance of this "organised delegation" who have been allowed to submit their support of the scheme directly to yourself, thereby showing contempt for the present Public Inquiry, the Inspector administrating the proceedings, and all the many objectors.

Because of these lobbying methods adopted through the stated meeting, those involved have avoided being cross examined in a Public Inquiry where their rhetoric and manipulated comments were directly made to yourself, with no recourse whatsoever to the substantial and error free evidence submitted by objectors.

To discriminate in such a flagrant manner Secretary of State, indicates and confirms an existing bias against those objecting through your acceptance of this recent lobbying meeting in London.

The PI Inspector concerned has now lost all credibility in his administrations because of these recent methods adopted by TMBC Councillors and MPs, which indicates a desperation in not being capable of substantiating their rhetoric in an Public Inquiry Open Forum.

I therefore now wish for the implementation of my FOI legislated request to yourself seeking the minutes, agenda, or any matters whatsoever discussed at your recent meeting because I believe extremely serious existing Public Inquiry protocols and procedures have been breached by the DfT whose impartiality has now been totally destroyed through its substantiated complicity with those supporting the ByPass.

We'll keep you informed of any responses as soon as we hear. 

First Watsongate, now Hoongate...

Today brings reports that the local politicians backing the Bypass - Tom Levitt MP, James Purnell MP and Tameside Council Leader Roy Oldham - have met with the new Transport Secretary of State Geoff Hoon to gain assurances about the status of the Longdendale Bypass.

Although the (as yet) unofficial press release from Levitt (originally published on Virtual Glossop - a snapsot of the original article can be viewed here) does not quote Hoon, according to Tom Levitt, there was agreement that "there is no credible alternative to the road" - at least amongst the Highways Agency and local politicians. As the Secretary of State, Hoon is effectively the head of the Highways Agency, so with this proclamation, the Secretary of State is commenting on a scheme that - if it were a Court case - would be sub judice. Breaching that would mean contempt of Court. 

Through their completely unfettered incompetence, Hoon's agency - the Highways Agency - have assured that the 'alternatives' have not even yet had a hearing at the Public Inquiry. What he should be saying is that 'at the Inquiry, the Highways Agency will contend that there are no alternatives, and the Inspector will make a decision based upon the evidence presented by ourselves and Objectors that argue the contrary'. But there's fat chance of such a reasonable pronouncement from this crowd of assorted cretins.

If, as is suggested, the Highways Agency has examined the case for alternatives, why is this information not available to the public at the Inquiry Library or on the website? Why are they not allowing their evidence to be examined prior to challenge by submitting their theories about alternatives now? After all, the alternatives do not form part of their scheme, and are independent of their work/cock-ups so far. Dos this mean the work has not been completed, or is there something else going on?

Despite his past warm words for the Save the Woodhead Tunnel campaign, Tom Levitt is 'speaking with forked tongue'. Because if, as he says, there are 'no credible alternatives' to the bypass, this means he's flashing the campaign a huge V sign. That this twit wants to have his cake and eat it has always been largely undisputed by those who have a realistic appraisal of snake-like politicians. 

And if they are so concerned and passionate about the Bypass, why did James Purnell, Tom Levitt and Roy Oldham fail to schedule their appearances to speak in favour of it at the Inquiry when it was running previously? Because they know full well that their rhetoric and propaganda would be tested to the fullest extent and that they would be exposed as a Cartel in hock to the Road Industry.

Lastly, we hear of reports that at a 'Community Empowerment' event last weekend, Tom Levitt proclaimed that supporters and objectors stood at 50/50 - THIS IS A LIE. For the umpteenth time, we'd like to remind this liar that of the 4239 responses logged by the Highways Agency (available on a list at the Public Inquiry Library), 1469 expressed support, but 2770 have objected. This is 65% against - or using a ratio, 2:1 against. 

We're sure we'll feature much more about this matter very soon...

Tameside's "Traffic Calming" Deathtraps

There was a small snippet in last week's Tameside Advertiser that may have escaped widespread notice. It was about a campaign by Roseanne Kay of Stalybridge to highlight the death of her 16 year-old son, Callum, on Tameside's roads.

In December 2003, Callum was out on his moped for the first time when he hit a pothole, fell off and slid into the path of a lorry and was killed. The pothole was below the Council's own trigger point for repairs (depths greater than 50mm), and the Coroner criticised TMBC's road repair procedures heavily at the Inquest into Callum's death. 

Roseanne is now planning to present a petition to James Purnell MP calling for action on the state of the Roads in Tameside.

As we reported recently, Tameside already has a brutal approach to expressions of roadside grief. But the grim reaper himself in this morbid pantomime is played by none other than Roy Oldham. Just over a year after the inquest into Callum's death, the best he could offer by way of an explanation for potholes is that they were a "Traffic Calming Measure". You would expect a shape-shifting politician to be rather more mindful of the grief of Roseanne, but Oldham's trademark is his tendency to open his mouth and put his foot right in it. The message is clear - we don't give a shit about the safety of the public, be they pedestrian, cyclist, motorist or otherwise. Tameside MBC would rather spend hundreds of thousands of pounds on ridiculous flower arrangements, whilst banning floral tributes. It would rather spend millions of plugging a road that will increase deaths (the bypass), than  a few thousand filling in properly holes that will prevent them.

We wonder what reception Roseanne will get from the veritable smooth snake that is James Purnell? Fine words probably, but fuck all is our best guess. And if she lays flowers at the site where her son died, under their new directive the bureaucrats at Tameside will remove them in a month...

Showdown at the Showground - the end of 'Mottram' Show

The above photo shows the magnificent view of the Longdendale Valley from the Mottram Showground, home of the Mottram Show, during a show in 2002. The bypass route goes right through the Showground (photo credit: spaceless.com)

You may remember our post from a couple of weeks ago about the behind-the-scenes horse-trading going on during the Public Inquiry Recess. We mentioned that the Mottram Show Committee is split, not least because Roy Oldham has made it clear that were the Committee to object to the bypass, they could kiss goodbye to a new venue for their show. Access to the Supporter/Objector list shows that amongst the 6 Committee members listed on this page, there are 2 objectors and 1 supporter (J Swann, Supporter No. 866). The other people named have not taken a formal view. Whatever happened to people standing up with their consciences displayed? What power does Oldham have that he can buy their silence?

Well there are now rumours circulating around Longdendale that the deal has been done - and that the new home of the Mottram Show will be - Gee Cross. Or at least a patch of land alongside Stockport Road. This is clearly in Hyde, but the physical Geography of the location suggests that the Mottram Show will no longer belong to neither Mottram nor Longdendale. Along Stockport Road, it's possible to view the hills that form the valley, but not the valley itself - significantly, it also won't be possible to see the bypass. We've created a custom map, which is at the foot of this post which illustrates the Geograhical dislocation of this tradition from the whole area.

So the Mottram Show is cut off from its rightful home, and it's not even possible to view where it was from its new location. The brutal psychology at work in this deal should not be underestimated. The fact that the A560, fastest road in the area at 50 mph, runs through the land here is also highly ironic, as is the fact that the construction of the Bypass will entail a 15% increase in traffic along this road by 2015, and a 25% increase by 2030. Maybe by then, even the Gee Cross show - as it's sure to become known - will still not be safe from calls for a new road. But those on the Mottram Show Committee who have chosen to keep silent may well be pushing up daisies by then, along with the architect of the destruction of the Mottram Show and the Longdendale Valley, Roy Oldham.


View Larger Map

Since we published this post, we have learned the actual venue for the Show, as well as further interesting details. Read here for more details.

One Man and His Poodles

Not sure how you are managing with the Council Tax increases, plus paying this Winter's power bills, but some are doing fantastically at getting money out of TMBC, to the tune of £500 million plus - yes, £500 million plus! So who is this giant money-making Company, and how is it happening?

Well, nearly £200 million came from the Longdendale Bypass contract, and now another £300 million contract - placed by ONE TMBC Decision maker - for the Tameside Schools programme.

Remember Carillion, the construction Company named last week by the Office of Fair Trading for being associated with manipulating contracts, or otherwise being bent? Their appeal for mercy was obviously lodged to try to get a potentially large financial penalty reduced.

But hang on, within recent weeks Carillion were awarded another massive contract by none other than your Councillor Roy Oldham, who was described (see page 1, opens PDF) as the "Decision Maker", the contract being appropriately signed by him.

Now, to attain this important role Roy Oldham was instrumental in starting another Advisory Quango (see page 9, opens PDF) for the purpose of giving him so-called 'advice' before he took this £300 million plus decision. Now I ask you - do you really fall for this, that Roy Oldham required advice from a carefully selected TMBC quango before he flexes his Dictatorial "I'm in charge" decision-making stance? But he did, and the known contract-manipulating Mowlem/Carillion were handed your money to the tune of £500 million plus in total.

Were there any others considered for this massive contract? Well, the two considered along with the extremely dodgy Carillion were Trillium and Interserve Project Services Limited. Trillium are not exactly a Construction/Building Company, but Interserve Project Services Limited were also on the OFT's named and shamed list last week. Out of interest, their Company Chairman is Lord Blackwell, previous Head of the Prime Ministers Policy Unit, but it gets better because he is also a Board Member for - the Office of Fair Trading!

Now I and others are getting pissed off at these so called revered people who administrate our lives and these known very dodgy Companies putting their hands in my pockets, your purses and wallets to the tune of £millions and laughing at you as you try and make ends meet each week. It's all a bloody disgrace, and that's why you need to know as much as I can discover.

A Freedom of Information request to TMBC, as to who else tendered other than Carillion, did not bring results until the TMBC Solicitor was informed that the information had passed to the Office for Fair Trading - then, lo and behold, the information was given immediately.

Remember how the cost of the Bypass job rocketed skyward after the contract was awarded? - and don't forget the Highways Agency's finger in this escalating financial costs scam.

Now you may well think this is mud raking, but if you are a soft touch to the tune of £500 million with these individuals and Companies doing their thing, then you must have a trusting mind beyond most peoples imagination.

Do you deserve to be conned? - I think not - and you deserve far better than being robbed
by those laughing at you.

I definitely have a feeling some people and some Companies are sitting on an already-lit time bomb. Lets wait and see!

Better than an Agatha Christie for YOU

It's the weekend. So being cold, wet, and with a bankrupt UK, here's a good mystery for you to solve with plenty of clues to assist you.

Carillion, one of the largest Building Contractors in the UK has now pleaded to the Office of Fair Trading for mercy because its been found to be ripping you off big time for deviously obtained contracts. So who is behind Carillion the rip off merchants? Well, for a start, we have Baroness Vanda Murray: not only an important person at Carillion, but also a Director of the North West Development Agency, who are big supporters of the Bypass scheme which is being built by - Carillion.

Appointed by Lord Sainsbury, the Baroness also declares her interests in the Cheshire Building Society, a Phone Company and, sod me, the UK Audit Commission. And, if you want to see how she manipulates money have a shufty here.

Now try and keep up, because who else is very important friend to the North West Development Agency? Well it's Councillor Roy Oldham of Tameside (who also wants the Bypass) which is being built for you by Carillion.

Now Carillion have been exposed by the Office of Fair Trading, the BBC, and the Press as being crooked and they really are in the shit deep, but never fear it gets better! Who gave the Bypass contract to Carillion (a Company who overcharges according to the OFT)? Well, using Freedom of Information legislation, I asked the Highways Agency in Manchester who the members of the Panel awarding the Bypass contract are. At first, they preferred to say "we won't tell you, it's not in the public interest" - well it's in my bloody interest to know because I am contributing to the soon to be a £200 million Bypass! So then after an appeal - because it is in the Public's interest according to common sense, out came the 4 names who decided to give the contract to Carillion (the crooked company).

First out of the trap is Stephen Greenhalgh, the infamous vanishing Bypass project leader who, everyone knows, became exceedingly skilled at apologising to the Public Inquiry almost every day because his evidence was exposed as absolute crap. But why should he be concerned? It's only YOUR money from YOUR pocket to the tune of £9.5 million to Carillion/Mowlem & Associates spent on totally useless error ridden evidence which stopped the Inquiry 5 times. Not to worry, Carillion and friends will be charging again for the new evidence it's taking a year to produce, so the past lot of evidence must have really been expensive shit thrown at the Public Inquiry.

Next, is another member of the Highways Panel who awarded the contract to the crooks, and another Highways Agency associate of Stephen Greenhalgh - one John Hornagold (funny old Norfolk name but spelt the same as one of the UK's largest Building Contractors owned by an S Hornagold from Essex). He was closely involved with the Cumbrian Bypass scheme, which was handy because it's believed he resides in a very swish area called Arnside on the approach to The Lakes.

Number three on the Panel was Ziad El-Balbisi of the Highways Agency (not really an independant panel as yet!) - no known track record as yet.

The fourth member of this Panel who awarded the multi-million contracts for the Bypass was Irvin Peacock of Mott MacDonald (the Employers Agent), again one of the largest Contractors in the UK. Now Irvin is shown as being from Mott MacDonald Group Ltd Sheffield as a Project Engineer, so it's likely he knows all the major contractors such as Carillion (i.e. the bent ones) and he was also directly involved in the traffic surveys concerning the Bypass scheme via Mott MacDonald, which as we know turned out also to be crap.

So of the 4 members of the contract awarding Panel, 2 have created incorrect evidence for the Public Inquiry. Yet they are deemed able to award a £200 million contract to Carillion - is their efficiency to spend that £200 million of any merit ?

Well, it can only get more confusing regarding who knows who and in what context.

In addition to all this, the Public Inquiry Witness Brian Witten is also a Director of Matt Macdonald, so obviously it must presumed knows Irvin Peacock, the person involved in awarding HA contracts to large Construction Companies. Another Witness at the PI is Adrian Rowe from Carillion.

Then we have the assortment of Public Inquiry witnesses for the Bypass including:

John Greiller, a Director of Hyder Consulting
Stewart Lowther, another Director of Hyder Consulting
Robert Kitch of Hyder Consulting
J Hunter of Hyder Consulting
Sergio Solera of Hyder Consulting
Andrew Bean of Hyder Consulting
Adrian Rowe of Hyder Consulting

Now Hyder Consulting has connections with Carillion but let's leave that for the next time we blog.

But the following facts are also interesting:

At a Bypass Public Meeting in 2001, the Chair stated "SPITS have a remit to reduce traffic on quite a number of routes (in the Park). SPITS is responsible at the moment for the strategy on these routes. SPITS have explained how this improvement can be done. SPITS are seeking to transfer traffic onto the A628 to improve other areas of the Park." Does that mean that SPITS knows the real truth is being hidden?

The SPITS Business Plan (opens PDF) identifies the following aims:

"Traffic restraint e.g. speed reduction measures and traffic calming on all Trans-Pennine routes and class A And B roads south of the M62 and north of the A50 except the A57/A628/A616 corridor" (our emphasis).

So here comes your Trans Continental Road Route from Ireland, Liverpool, Manchester, M67, M1, Humberside Ports, Germany, Poland, Netherlands, Baltic States, your Northern Corridor NETA Plan. So please don't tell me it's for the 3 Villages, that's pure spin as they force their route through the Peak District National Park and along the Longdendale Valley.

To end with a laugh: Peter Bibby, one-time Tameside Councillor for Longdendale stated at a Public Meeting in 2001:

"The Council supports a bypass ... this has been going on for 70 years and the M62 is overloaded".

Now which of you had a Car or a HGV in 1938 which was clogging up Mottram Moor? I want photographic evidence please!

Free Speech for the Dumb or 'If you don't like bad news, don't shoot the messenger'

Our spies have reported that Longdendale's biggest mouth, Roy Oldham (after his brother-in-law Mike Flynn) has been throwing his weight around again.

At the last full Council meeting on 14th February, Roy Oldham poured scorn on the recent Manchester Evening News article about TMBC's costs for the Glossop Spur. He reportedly said that the MEN journalist Brian Lashley was 'biased' and that he should 'reconsider his job' and also said that he would be 'speaking to the editor'.

The MEN get a lot of shit from both sides for their bypass coverage - including us, for differing reasons. But just who does Oldham think he is? He's so brazen that he thinks he can call for the resignation of a journalist on a regional newspaper for merely reporting how much TMBC have spent on their pet scheme.

But we're not going to call for Oldham to resign or even shut up. Because these bully-boy tactics can only further tarnish his already shitty reputation as an intimidating gobshite ... and help us and our cause.

Much more of this crap and we'll be mounting a campaign to defend Brian Lashley.

Roy Oldham's money shot

Trench warfare continues. Roy Oldham is clearly worried that he'll be pushing up daisies by the time work starts on the bypass.

So today, he has launched an offensive in the Manchester Evening News with the publication of this article.

If you don't want to read this crap, the gist of it is that the delays in the Public Inquiry (PI) are 'holding back business' (heaven forfend!).

In a world where the most important of all considerations is economic, the mask has slipped for Oldham: he loves money, as do his cronies. Those who live in the area - and who don't easily have the wool pulled over their eyes - are experiencing the 'economic prosperity' this bypass will bring, but not in an economic way. Go to Tintwistle and look across to Hadfield - straight at those awful grey sheds - Rossington Park and Bridge Mills. Go into Glossop and take a look at all the 'same as everywhere else' chain stores. The economic prosperity they bring (and who they bring it to) is debateable - what is sure is that they bring spiritual and environmental poverty to the people who have to live there.

The message of the filthy lucre-crew is clear - tell the government to wind up the PI, or to ignore it. We need a bypass to extend the M67 and bring more lorries through, and to build more warehouses in, the area.

What the hell has this got to do with 'relieving 3 villages of traffic'?

We plan to release more and more info over the coming weeks that will fully demonstrate Roy Oldham's love of money, much of it you will not have heard of before.

A Toot and a Wave for 'not so Sir' Oldham

Apologies, apologies, apologies - sorry for my absence over the latter part of our glorious summer. There's been 'trouble at mill', & I will inform comrades on a need-to-know basis - basically it's family problems, illness and it's impending doom. Seems to have been hanging over my dad's head like the Sword of Damocles. I only have one head and it has been needed elsewhere - a thousand apologies to all those who matter. I think you know who you are. Anyway, back to business.

On a recent visit to a certain drinking establishment I bumped into a friend of mine, and as is usual when we meet, he sold me a copy of the very excellent periodical NORTHERN VOICES. For those of you who are not familiar with this little literary gem, it tends to offer the reader good, honest, journalistic attempts at some home truths, as well as issues/stories that may be of interest to local people - something our local rags fail in the most miserable fashion (unless of course you are in the market to purchase a conservatory, house, or motor car).

I noticed this little story. I quote directly from source:

GUESS WHO WANTS A KNIGHTHOOD

A regular reader of NV contacted us recently with a juicy bit of information. It seems that he had heard from a council employee that a certain councillor who leads a Greater Manchester Local Authority had gone ballistic when he had learned that the leader of Manchester City Council, Richard Lees, had been honoured with a knighthood. It seems that that the councillor - who covets a knighthood - was so incensed that he'd been overlooked in the honours list that he turned purple with rage and was seen to kick a door in at the council offices where he works. Our source told NV that he was seen 'kickin and a spitten' and shouting, "They're my knighthoods, the bastards"

I'll quote again from Northern Voices:

Next Knight Of Tameside

The voters of Tameside would do well to heed the words of American poet Walt Whitman who once said "rise at once at the never ending audacity of elected persons". That politicians are inclined to become brazen and arrogant the longer they are in office was recognised long ago by the ancient Greeks in Athens, who tended to exile those elected persons that they felt had got too big for their boots. In Tameside, the local Council has been Labour-controlled and led by its leader Roy Oldham since 1979. Mr Oldham, now aged 73, likes to boast that he holds the record for being the longest serving Council leader in the country. Indeed, he has now been in power longer than Robert Mugabe who leads the Zanu PF party in Zimbabwe and seems almost as difficult to get rid of as the ageing dictator. However, in spite of his political longevity, it seems that Councillor Oldham is becoming something of an embarrassment if the letters in the local press are anything to go by. It seems that some people feel that his ego has become almost as inflated as his council salary. This summer (August) he was accused by the leader of the Tory opposition, councillor John Bell, of being on a "massive ego trip" after it was discovered that his house on Back Moor had been etched into a bronze map showing places of historical interest in Mottram. The map, which shows the homes of L S Lowry and the old Post Office, is the first in a series of bronze maps which are intended to showcase the jewels of Tameside's cultural heritage.

Some members of the public have reacted angrily, accusing the council leader of arrogance, megalomania, and of being an embarrassment and a laughing stock. But councillor Oldham, who already has a bridge named after himself in Stalybridge, is unrepentant and insists that placing his house on the map was "just a bit of fun". He told a local newspaper "It's like when a carpenter works in a church and carves a little church mouse on the bottom of an emblem. I don't see why any one should make a problem but there are sad people in all walks of life". Some politicians on Tameside council are not impressed, believing that the leader's arrogance gives politicians a bad name and undermines local government politics. Councillor Bell said "Councillor Oldham's ego has run away with him ... a few years ago, he had CCTV installed at his home at tax payer's expense after a bomb hoax. Now he's drawing attention to himself by putting his home on a map".

THE BIG O?

How to deal WITH THE BIG O. No folks, I'm not talking about Roy Orbison, I'm talking the real BIG O. Our glorious leader, the 'not so Sir' Roy Oldham. In my humble opinion, the only rise Roy needs to hear (a rise sir Roy) is possibly in his trousers - I would not wish the alternative on man or beast, so I suppose that covers Roy in one way or another. Anyway, how can we as a group of like-minded individuals best draw attention to our glorious leader's plight? Well, one idea I've had is to contact all our friends, comrades, political alliances etc and start a campaign to get Mottram renamed Oldhamgrad (I quite fancy the bypass being called the Oldhamgrad/Tnitwistle Bypass). No, only joking - about the bypass, not the new name for Mottram though. I think we should start a campaign to help Roy obtain the accolade and the big 'thank you' he deserves. There it is, the name of our campaign - THE BIG THANK YOU. A campaign from the good and fair people of our land to pay homage and respect to a dedicated local politician who, through his selfless acts and betrayal of local communities, thinks that the needs of us green 'n common folk, are best served by the greed and backscratching of the grubby and vile speculators that follow the Highways Agency long after these middle pigs have concreted over another piece of our green 'n pleasant land.

At the very least I propose we adopt a new strategy: let's take our campaign to a new level, or different direction. Lets help the Big O. I propose at the very least a TOOT AND WAVE POLICY. Let me explain. Was it not Councillor Oldham who was BRASS faced enough to have his home address cast in the same, so that all and sundry will know where the 'not so Sir' Roy resides? Let's ask all our allies - everybody we know - let all campaigners be emailed with his home address and politely ask/invite them to take part in a campaign against this road scheme by tooting and waving as they pass by Roy's house . A cheap, effective campaign that fights on a different front. Lets hope it becomes a relentless barrage of noise and car horn blowing. He seems to like roads and the motor car so lets use them against him. In life you sometimes get what you wish for...