Say Hello (To Taxpayer Money), Wave(s) Goodbye (To Pretending You Know What You’re Doing)

Enjoying the weather?

Chances are, probably not, as Storm Kathleen is having a whale of a time bashing up our western coastline today.

It’s been the first test for Wirral’s great impenetrable sea defence at West Kirby that came in not for a snip – this is Wirral Council we’re talking about – but massively over budget at £19 million of taxpayers’ money.

Now, obfuscating about the source of finances for this project or that project is a tedious game all political entities indulge in, presumably thinking the little people don’t understand all this high-brow stuff.

In this case the council will say the £19m didn’t come out of their budget, which is true. But the money definitely came out of our taxpayer pockets, which is also true.

But other people’s money either way, right?

The Great Wall found its way to construction via the usual labyrinthine route only a local council can fashion:

1. Cook up a mad idea to spend other people’s money that you know voters will hate.
2. Hold consultation. Discover voters do indeed hate it. Decide to do it anyway.
3. Find oddities on the fringe of general society to be the local fall guys when it all goes belly up and throw them a stick.
4. Seek out a quango to hide behind when the results typically aren’t what you had hoped for – despite ignoring deafening advice from others.
5. Apply for public cash.
6. Receive public cash.
7. Waste public cash.

Any heathens who dared to question the veracity of this scheme were given a block response from the council which looked (and looks – until about 9am tomorrow, when no doubt it’ll disappear) like this:

So there you have it. All safe. All smashing.

Right up until this morning when the wall got its first actual stress test….

Which is when we got this instead (if you don’t use Facebook, ask someone who can in order to see the video).

Which itself resulted in this complete and utter idiocy:

Then:

1. Scoff at those pointing out the wall is a £19 million chocolate teapot.
2. Furiously stamp up and down insisting the wall has done its job while literally everyone else takes on the little boy role to point out the emperor is wearing no clothes.
3. Thunderously declare that black is white:

Yes, that’s Green Party councillor Pat Cleary claiming, with what seems to be a straight face, that the wall isn’t really there to stop water, just to make the waves a bit less, erm, tidally. King Canute need not worry just yet.

Although Cllr Pat seemed not to notice that the ferocity of the water – you know, the force of it, Cllr Pat – meant staff working at Tanskey’s on WK promenade had to be rescued by lifeboat crew (brilliant as ever).

Meanwhile, Storm Kathleen will cause havoc for the next couple of days before eventually blowing itself out.

As is now tradition, the next named storm will have as usual a female name beginning with L, the next letter in the alphabet.

Odds on Storm Liz, anyone?

PS. Someone else not enjoying the weather will be the Echo, and the idiots quoted in this at only 11.39am this morning…..

You really couldn’t make it up.

Fawkes It

The bad news is that, despite all the evident increases in technology and online research capabilities, despite Attenborough researchers finding a way of filming inch-long translucent jellyfish miles below the sea surface, and despite even Elon Musk (possibly) waking up for the traditional 5am middle-aged gentleman’s visit to the bathroom in between sending rockets into space, there still doesn’t seem to be an available image of a real bulldog licking the proverbial wee off a nettle.

The good news, though, is that we don’t need one, thank goodness.

Instead, we can satisfy ourselves with the thought of the self-styled Hoylake saviour that nobody ever asked for, wandering around Melrose Hall today quietly snarling at people supporting the return of the beach from the absolute stinking and visually appalling swamp he’s helped and encouraged to create.

The sign above, on the advertising hoarding board on Melrose Avenue opposite The Ship, has proved troublesome for Our Jools.

He doesn’t think people should be encouraged to disagree with him, you see.

But this notice was probably a bit too high to destroy, so it stayed up.

Not that it needed it, but the attendance today proved what Julian Priest and his equally fantastically unpopular “sorry if we missed you” mob (it was on every leaflet they swiftly shoved through letterboxes before the local elections earlier this year where they nevertheless drastically failed) simply cannot seem to fathom, a bit like those kids at school, the ones who smelled of malted milk biscuits, when asked to contemplate the idea of shoelaces:

We. Want. Our. Beach. Back.

Not your sand-yachting beach, Our Jools.

All of it.

Today’s lesson for you, OJ Simpleton, was staring reality in the face.

Real people who really disagree with you – and, also, wonder, quite fairly, when did you get put in charge? Who voted for you? Who on earth are you?

Another lesson, also, should be whenever you gaze at that monostrity you helped (with Our Mark Howard) to create at the top (or now bottom, thanks to you guys) of Market Street that now taints the vista of the entire village.

All of these people are now running as fast as they can in their too-small T-shirts and hideous Hawaiian shorts seemingly somehow pretending that the swamp and the Lubyanka are nothing whatsoever to do with them.

But there’s still a swamp.

And there’s still no cinema, no fine arts village, no five star restaurant.

So, thank you to Hoylake Sailing Club and all involved on both creation and clear-up for a magnificent bonfire display on Friday evening (criticised, as ever, by the usual suspects, for “endangering sand” or whatever, and thankfully ignored).

And thank you to the Hoylake Beach Community for today’s undoubtedly successful event.

But the real fireworks should start now with simple answers to simple questions.

When we attended the original launch of the utterly ludicrous beach plan, ironically at the disused building site once known as the town hall before this lot got their hands on it, we were told – instructed – that the event was a “safe space” where dissent was not allowed.

Well, Our Jools, that was many years ago. And the gloves are now off.

So:

Where’s the cinema, Julian?

Where’s the high-dining restaurant, Julian?

Where’s the arts’ village, Julian?

And why did hardly anyone vote for you, Julian?

And, most importantly, after wrecking things most people actually from Wirral hold dear, why on earth are you still even here?

PS. Can’t wait for their, um, PR “wordsmith” to come back at this.

Back benchers

The blank-brained, sourpuss killjoys of the swamp are never more enraged than when their hypocrisy and utter intransigence are laid bare for all to see.

Last week it was yet again the turn of Liz “Honoured to meet Extinction Rebellion” Grey and some of her political colleagues confirming how much they really don’t care what happens to Hoylake beach, as long as they win.

It’s not about the beach. They clearly don’t give a toss about that.

Because if they did, we’d be enjoying a clean beach again and we’d also all happily put this entire saga behind us and move on.

But no, forget about the golden sands and glittering sunset vistas, because this is all about power.

That is: Their power over you.

It’s taken right out of their political playbook and it’s not exactly new.

There used to be a time when whoever or whatever you voted for was a personal issue, kept between you and the polling booth. Not anymore.

Now, unless you publicly declare absolute adherence to The Rules of the Righteous, then you are, to all intents and purposes, “wrong”.

Can’t define a woman? Come on in.

Can define a woman? Racist!

Vast, overwhelming majority of local people wanting their beach back? DEMONS.

Weeny little group into weeds? ANGELS.

This is just how they work.

It’s not quite bullies in the playground stuff, because bullies can be reported to the headteacher.

But when the bullies actually are the people in charge, simply because someone in Birkenhead voted for them because their dad did, they make their own rules.

Then, later last week, it was a further pile-on from a minority party that is basically a local Labour party offshoot in different coloured gilets, firing off intimidating missives as if imbued by the magnificently malign malevolence of Ming the Merciless himself.

Let’s be in no doubt – while the local Labour outfit continues its decades-long, scandal after scandal-enfused stranglehold of Wirral Council, which shows no sign of letting up, Hoylake beach, as once was just three years ago, ain’t coming back anytime soon.

As Our Liz admitted publicly last week, it doesn’t even matter what you say.

If you don’t agree with her – and she is, after all, a teacher, so even though you left school tens of years ago, you’re still bizarrely expected to kowtow to her boundless knowledge of everything that is correct – you’re dismissed.

It is depressingly evident.

They asked for written questions in advance of last week’s meeting.

That normally gives them a chance to formulate a reply, probably with a team of advisors and council lawyers checking every word before they semi-politely tell you to bugger off.

Now they don’t even bother with such niceties.

Pre-sent written questions were replied to with “I’ll write to you” back. Then why call a public meeting in the first place?

Oh, no, sorry. It wasn’t a “public meeting”.

It was, as Our XR Liz withered, “a meeting in public”.

Jeepers!

They will argue that black is white, oranges are lemons, dogs are cats, knights are dames, and if you dare to challenge their outright, childish nonsense, then you are every slur they can muster from their well-thumbed, dog-eared copy of Our Righteous Complaints R Us/Them/They.

More worryingly still, they actually seem to believe it.

So thank heavens, then, for a little brevity provided by some excellent wags in Hoylake who have hit the nail on the head. And on a bench, too.

It’s on the prom.

Find it for a selfie before The Usual Suspects spark up their typically tiresome organic fire and environmentally friendly brimstone.

The swampies keep trying to tell the rest of us that it’s not a swamp. So what do they call this mess, then? A beach?

Photography by a local resident, captured on Wednesday, May 5, 2021.

For the vast majority of people in Hoylake and Meols, this is heartbreaking and depressing.

Meanwhile, today, polling day (!), the council has miraculously found time and resources to send contractors to clear sand from the pavements around the polling station at the community centre on the prom.

And the quad-bike weedkiller sprayers have been out and about tackling Hoylake and Meols pavements, too.

What a coincidence that it should happen today when people are casting their votes…

Being Frank: A doctor writes again…

By Dr Frank McArdle

Just an update on the email stream I previously described…. that there is no update.

It would appear that the good councillor concerned is either far too busy to reply to the electorate, is finding it difficult to produce answers to the points raised, has no answers to the points raised, or is just ignoring things, hoping they will go away.

Well, if no answers are forthcoming, the only conclusion that can reasonably be drawn, is that all of the points raised in the previous emails are plausible, can not be answered, and exposes an intrinsic naivety, and huge flaws in the validity of the process that has been embarked upon regarding the immediate past, present and long term future of Hoylake beach.

However, prejudgement of Councillor Grey and her response (or lack of it) would be unfair, so I will prompt her again for a speedy reply.

The whole saga regarding Hoylake beach does however raise a number of more general (political but not party political) points that should be thought about by the people of Wirral, if not addressed by the council:

Question: Is the council leaving football pitches, rugby pitches, cricket pitches, bowling greens and golf courses to naturally develop and re-green into flower filled meadows?

Answer: No.

Reason: These are amenity spaces, used by large numbers of the public, and have proven mental and physical health benefits.

Question: Is the council going to plaster Wallasey and Birkenhead town halls and other historic Wirral buildings with solar panels?

Answer: No.

Reason: That would ruin the look and intrinsic beauty of these historic monuments.

Also, what is more perplexing, is that most if not all of the independent organisations involved with the council on this matter accept the relevance and importance of an amenity beach at Hoylake, and suggest that this should be included in any future management agreement, whilst the council, under Councillor Grey’s advice, seems to be totally opposed to any such proposal.

So why is this council hell bent on the destruction of Hoylake amenity beach, with it’s obvious benefits to many people’s physical and mental health, and all of its intrinsic and historic beauty?

Perhaps this might have something to do with the ruling group in the council only re-greening spaces, and pursuing their green vision, if their actions do not offend the voting base in their presumed solid and marginal seats, whilst ploughing on in wards that would never fall to their political persuasion.

It is also entirely plausible that any long-standing council ruling group might lose sight of their primary responsibility to the people they represent, irrespective of political persuasion, and be more concerned with the continuation of their hold on power for its own sake, with all that entails.

It has also been stated that these council decisions are the result of a democratic process.

This has to be brought into question when voting patterns in the council seem to demonstrate the use of a permanent, if not always official, three line whip, with members being told how to vote, without reference to their own conscience.

This kind of partisan self-serving politics should have no place in local government, where elected representatives should act in the interests of the whole electorate, and this sort of archaic political entrenchment has no place in the twenty first century.

Finally, the more that is seen of the council’s behaviour in the whole Hoylake beach issue, the more it appears to be little more than a punitive cost cutting exercise, hidden under a thin veil of green environmental concern.

Mother of God! When council leader Our Jan pressed “send” and then wished she hadn’t (again!)

For the benefit of the DIR, present in this interview room are myself, DI Steve Can’tnot, along with my colleague, DS Our Painkillers, and subjects Our Jesus, Our Mary, and Our Joseph, and what appears to be some kind of ass.

So, let’s get down to it, then, shall we, Braying Beast of Burden?

“No comment.”

Well, I haven’t asked you anything yet…

“No comment.”

But…

“No comment.”

It’s about the beach…

“No comment.”

And, y’know, the swamp and suchlike…

“No comment.”

Well, the thing is, no one likes it…

“No comment.”

And almost everyone agrees it looks dreadful…

“No comment.”

And only about ten people seem to agree with you…

“No comment.”

Some of the same people inextricably linked with considerable sums of public funds that…

“No comment.”

I can see you’re uncomfortable speaking like this, face to face…

“No comment.”

Would it be easier if I just emailed instead…

“No comment.”

For the benefit of the DIR, WD40, EE, and ROFL, we’re moving this interview online…

(Pause)

For the benefit of the internet, we’re showing your reply to an email that you sent at precisely 13.19 on Saturday, May 1, 2021.

Do you agree it says what it says, for the love of Gawd? Viz:

 “No comment.”

What did yer mean by “deal with her”, missy?

“No comment.”

Did you accidentally send this to entirely the wrong person and now fervently wish you hadn’t?

“No comment.”

Did you get a bit of a back and neck sweat when you realised what you’d done and desperately hoped no one would notice?

“No comment.”

Did you fear this would be made public and you might look a bit daft again?

“No comment.”

At least try to explain this sort-of reply you sent, for the benefit of Our Jesus, Our Mary, Our Joseph, and Our Internet….

“The email to [Our] Liz which you were cc’d into was simply pointing out there are no new issues and that our officers can deal with this and any subsequent enquiries from this point.

“You have been given an explanation of events by Cllr Grey and nothing has changed. I am asking her to keep her responses to a minimum as I believe the correspondence is becoming circular and time consuming. This does not show disdain for anyone.

“I acceot (sic) you are disappointed with the decision around Hoylake beach but it has been made and scrutinised with no change. Democracy is not always about things going our way, it is about a process. To remind people of this is not disrespectful and I am sorry that you see it that way.

“I have expressed my views on this now and will not engage in any further email exchanges.

“Kind regards

“[Our] Janette.”

“No comment.”

Have you ever sent anything via the miracle of the internet that you have ever regretted?

“No comment.”

Is there indeed any point at all in anyone trying to engage with you about matters that concern them?

“No comment.”

Any more comments to add?

“No comment.”

Should we vote for you?

“Yes. Up the shirkers.”

A research scientist of many years writes to Our Liz:

Dear Councillor Grey,

As a long standing resident of Hoylake I feel compelled to raise my concerns with regard to your council’s future Hoylake beach management plan (or lack of one).

I feel that you, as the council representative and apparent spokesperson, are employing a whole series of “smoke and mirrors” to hoodwink the electorate into believing that the mismanagement of Hoylake beach may not be permanent and will be reviewed in 2023.

I put it to you that you have no intention of reversing the policy of none management, and are trying to confuse the public by talk of surveys and consultations.

To clear up this matter l request that you answer the following questions: Who will collate and analyse all of data (both beach surveys, population surveys, and socioeconomic surveys) generated in the proposed studies and make the final decisions on the future of Hoylake beach in 2023?

Also what weight will be given to each type of survey in the final decision, for example, if a beach flora study and a socioeconomic study generate the same “points”, which study would be given more weight etc?

What are the trigger results in each or all of the surveys that will result in the final decision on Hoylake beach?

That is to say, what results will mean continued mismanagement, and what results would indicate a return to beach management (including raking and sand levelling)?

Not having any of these endpoints already set out would expose the naivety of those responsible, leaving them open to the accusation of manipulating their endpoints to fit the survey results in order to get what they want.

The council, in the spirit of transparency, should make those endpoints clear now, and stick to them in the future.

I am afraid that the more I see of the conduct of the council in this matter, the more I am forced to believe that this is the imposition of somebody’s personal rose tinted green vision on a reluctant electorate, with no thought or regard for impact in the real local world, and any collateral damage caused.

One might also be inclined to think that this is a cynical manipulation of well meaning green thinkers in the community, in order for the council to try to massage their theoretical carbon capture figures in order to reach future carbon neutrality.

On a personal note (being a research scientist of many years), this is clearly an experiment and not just a set of surveys.

You are making the hypothesis that the beach would be better unraked, so taking the managed beach, making an intervention (cessation of beach management), and observing the temporal effect of this intervention, generating results, and coming to conclusions.

As the old adage says “If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck”.

However this is where your scientific prowess falls short. In any scientific experiment (which this clearly is) a series of controls are necessary in order to make sense of any data generated.

For example your observations may well be influenced not by management cessation, but by unseasonal weather patterns, tidal flow changes, pollution, or by an array of other unforeseen human or natural factors.

These are important and urgent points, and I look forward to your speedy response to the general matters raised, and a full and transparent response to all of the specific questions asked, and not a regurgitation of ‘these questions have been answered already’ kind of response.

Yours Sincerely,

Dr. Frank McArdle

After finally receiving a reply of sorts (see below), Dr Frank then sent this follow-up email…

Dear councillor Grey,

Thank you for your recent response to my queries regarding the mismanagement of Hoylake beach.

Unfortunately, I feel that the upcoming public engagement and consultations (dates, places, and formats as yet unspecified) you suggest may not be the correct forums to gain meaningful and timely answers to the questions raised in my previous email (sent 14/4/21).

These are simple questions which should not take up much of your time.

With this in mind l request that you supply me (a member of the electorate, to which I believe you are answerable to) with answers to these questions as soon as is possible.

Also, could you please explain to me the functions of the engagement and consultation processes.

Are they just for dissemination and explanation of council policy, or will they be used to take public wishes on board, and allow the public to shape future council policy with regard to Hoylake beach management?

It would also be helpful to all concerned if you could make public the dates of the upcoming public engagement and consultations you refer to, with locations and formats.

I hope you realise that continued ducking and weaving of legitimate questions posed by the electorate will only serve to alienate your Labour group, even more, from the people you are elected to serve.

I keenly await your prompt reply,

Dr. Frank McArdle

And Our Liz’s reply?

Oh, well, then. That’s cleared that up…

Love Hoylake supporter writes to Natural England

This is a copy of an email one of the Love Hoylake – Save Hoylake Beach supporters has written to Natural England, the body that the Swampies worship like Thor.

Dear Sir / Madam,

I am writing to complain about the approach being taken at Hoylake Beach, Wirral and in particular;

• The lack of ‘local community’ involvement and non-conformance to the process outlined within your own values and customer promise
• The existing changes you have already authorised to the beach, due to be in place until at least 2023, without any appropriate ‘planning’ or prior dialogue with residents living adjacent to the ‘beach’ boundary
• The footprint strategy and rationale you have used to select this specific coastal location selected for your collaborative project with Liz Grey

Your ‘values’ and ‘customer promise’ clearly outline the need to involve the ‘local community’ prior to any change project or development is implemented. The original beach management agreement has already ceased and your only noted engagement has been with Liz Grey and her Labour colleagues. The ‘local community’ as defined by the Hoylake and Meols ward boundary is represented by Conservative Councillors. The Conservative Councillors and local residents have not been properly directly engaged.

This is exacerbated, as it’s my understanding people living adjacent to a development or change boundary have the right to be involved in any ‘planning’ discussions before change is implemented. This is not the case at Hoylake Beach as the beach ‘project’ has already been initiated. This is a similar well-established process used for any local change plan or development, for example when the council allow a new Lidl store or a new residential development.    

Whilst I’m absolutely sure most local people are not averse to sound environmental, biodiverse and sustainable projects in general. The coastline boundary surrounding the Wirral is vast with most areas already overtaken by nature, left inaccessible or completely unkempt including, Parkgate, Heswall, Birkenhead and Bromborough amongst others. However, the one area of beach set aside for ‘communal use’ and directly parallel to an adjacent residential strip has been selected for this project, again without prior consultation. Not only that but the full length of this residential strip has been taken over. There is already an existing grassy area set aside directly adjacent to the RNLI station. Whilst other, Labour-ward, coastal areas appear to be earmarked for commercial development by the council. Hypocrisy at best.

The unintended consequences of these actions are already being felt locally with thousands of petition signatures already mobilised.

I look forward to your reply on these points and your next steps.

Hoylake mum of three blocked on Twitter by Our Liz for pointing out how awful the beach has become

A local, beachfront mum writes:

Six days ago, I was reading up on the beach situation and became annoyed after reading some of Liz Grey’s tweets about how it was a win for nature that the beach was to be left alone.

She’d tagged in various celebrities who stand up for the environment and quite frankly, I was cross.

As a resident who lives very close to the beach (yes, I’m one of those who can afford to live by the beach, don’t get me started on that) I see the beach in all its glory, and all its mess on a daily basis.

I decided to respond to Liz’s tweets with a photograph of my son, playing next to a stream of revolting gloop that runs directly into Liz’s beloved grass.

I posted the picture from my son’s account (managed by me before anyone says kids aren’t allowed on Twitter) stating:

“Here’s a picture of me, local child, trying to play safely on the beach you’re ‘rewilding’. This isn’t rewilding, this is neglect.”

I then tagged in Natural England, as well as the celebs she’d tagged. My kids and me liked the post.

Didn’t think any more of it, didn’t get a response.

A week later I thought I’d check up on the tweet only to find that Liz had blocked my son’s account, as well as mine and my 2 daughters’ accounts… just to make really certain I wouldn’t be able to express my opinion any further.

I believe anyone who commented was also blocked. 

Our True Democratic Liz in action!

Remember that letter from Sir David Attenborough “seemingly” backing Our Liz over the beach? No one should be surprised to learn there’s quite a bit more to it…

Compare and contrast these two separate letters from the pen of the institution and national treasure that is Sir David Attenborough.

The first (please click here to take you to our earlier blogpost) – which Our Liz “seemingly” (copyright – the thing that used to be a newspaper, once, the Liverpool Echo) saw as complete validation of her plan for wrecked sands – doesn’t, when you read all dozen or so words of it, say very much at all.

Then we have this, second letter, received in response to a letter from Love Hoylake member Keith Randles, which arrived a couple of days ago, after he wrote to Sir David for further advice.

EDIT: The most interesting line in this missive from the great man, is: “I cannot offer any useful comment on the problem you describe since I have never visited the area.”

Has Our Liz used Sir David’s reputation to spectacularly over-egg her own swamp pudding?

You decide.