After a long period without ANY parking enforcement, the council looks set to clampdown on illegally parked cars with the appointment of 11 new traffic wardens. The council state that the reason for doing this is to make our roads safer and to reduce congestion however many suspect that it may well be more about raising revenue from the already over taxed motorist.

We invite visitors to this site to help the council by nominating locations they believe dangerous parking occurs rather than a safely parked car overstaying it's limit.

You can do this by clicking the link below.

The proposed medical waste disposal plant planned to be located in the residential area of Longford looks set to be given a green light despite strong objections from residents and local politicians.This really does beg the question of just who controls our town, the people with money or the people that we ellect to represent or views.

A public meeting has been called to discuss this issue at the Parr Hall on Tuesday 26th July

In an emotional council meeting attended by hundreds of concerned residents, the council unanimously rejected proposals to site a controversial medical waste treatment facility in our town. Residents leaving the meeting hailed the decision as great success, a good day for the town and common sense.

The council took the unusual step of having a recorded vote where each councillor put his or her name to the decision. Did this affect the way they voted? Did the council feel intimidated by the huge public turnout?  

Either way the battle is not over yet as planning chief and lawyers for the council pointed out that the company will almost certainly appeal against this decision and costs may well be considerable.

A customer of a Spar store in Callands area claims to have become the subject of a banning order following a public appeal for the safe return of sentimental items from a purse that was lost in the store. The store has refused to speak with the customer concerned or to give any explanation as to why the banning order was made.

Small community stores such as Spare have been in the news recently as retail giants tighten their grip on the market. These stores provide vital services for those people who can't easily travel and are often the only remaining focal point for the local community.

Sadly in this instance, The Spar store and it's manager seem to have possibly forgotten about community spirit, the very thing that they owe their existence to.

The man at the door seems honest enough and carries an official looking card with the Warrington Borough Council coat of arms and the Trading Standards Logo. The old lady says  “Yes I've heard in the press about the campaign against rough traders and your attempts to only allow approved traders to carry out work.”

This of course is totally made up but it could all so easily be true. An official looking plastic card hung around your neck can be so convincing as I discovered today when I completely fooled friends and relatives into believing that I now worked for Trading Standards.

This sort of thing is easy enough to do but the jobs is made so much simpler when Trading Standards themselves issue professionally printed plastic cards as part of their info pack intended to warn the public about just this sort of thing.

Trading Standards would no doubt claim that their identity badges look nothing like this but none the less, the need for and the wisdom of issuing such cards is seriously questionable.

     Last year the council issued a press release headed
     "COUNCIL TO GET TOUGH ON FLY-POSTERS"
                                          Then
Later that year, the same council flyposted their own signs promoting a cultural event on traffic lights across the town.
                                          ............
Following complaints to both council and Guardian where it was pointed out that the signs were not only illegal but also distaracting to drivers; the council duely removed their signs. They said health and safety issues were their prime concern.
                                            But
If this were true, why haven't the council taken the safe option of simply removing the rash of signs erected by Countryside Properties?????? By adding their own flyposted fluorescent stickers declaring the poster itself is "CANCELED" but the event is not,  the council have surly made these signs even more of a distraction to the motorist.

Could it be that the council don't want to upset Countryside Properties? Either way this isn't exactly getting tough and two wrongs certainly don't make things right!

A recent survey in the Paddington area regarding the introduction of speed bumps brought a disappointing result for the council with only thirty-five out of 725 families responding.

The results were 40% for and 60% against the introduction of bumps but this was soon changed 90% in favour by the inclusion of a "for only" petition from a local councilor.

In the interest of fairness and to remove any political bias, an independent survey was carried out by forum users offering residents a choice between bumps and a 20mph limit. The results were.
                                                          (Second survey results)
                                           For the Bumps + 30mph limit =48  (17.5%)

                                          No bumps but a 20 mph limit = 226  (82.5%)
                              Read the full story in the Guardian or on our discussion forum.

The long battle to prevent two labour councillors from forcing through an unpopular plan to install 19 speed bumps in the Paddington area has finally ended. It was announced today that due to an overwhelming majority of objections, the plan was to be axed.
http://p212.ezboard.com/fwarringtonsspeakfreelyfrm7.showMessage?topicID=298.topic
People were originally asked if they would like something done to prevent the road being used as a shortcut or to avoid speed humps on a nearby road. The council's solution of just more bumps did not go down well though and a group of residents set out to challenge the council's claim that the majority of people in the area wanted bumps.

The 11th hour change occurred after it was admitted that the council had failed to consult properly. Planners were asked to again write to all concerned informing people that they did have a choice and their views wouldn't, as was the case in the two previous attempts, simply be ignored.

The axing of this plan now allows time to investigate ways in which problems can be solved for the community as a whole without pitting neighbour against neighbour.