Little Donkey

Nativity

I must remember to get to places on time, as I found out on Christmas Eve. Now, I wasn’t late at Church, just on the last minute, which happened to coincide with the realisation that there was no-one to play the part of Joseph. I became a willing volunteer. I just hope people realised the situation, otherwise they will be wondering how many babies I am fathering, as I played the role of Joseph, with Gill as Mary and Frank as Jesus, last year!

I struggle with the formality and reading out of a book format of Church services, as there feels, to me, to be little sincerity about them, but Christmas Eve is far moread hoc and I enjoy it. Each year there is a real donkey and based on recent figures over half of the time it results in a pile on the church floor, this year was no exception.

Speaking of the real donkey, whilst standing ready to make my grand entrance I looked to my right and there it was. Gareth began playing; the congregation began singing, “Little Donkey, Little Donkey on the dusty road…” I went to get said Donkey and it had disappeared! A quick look around the church yard and it was nowhere to be seen. Eventually it was found, not that far off a dusty road! With help it was guided to the Church door and became reluctant to enter Church, I got the job of pushing it from behind, which considering what happened later was probably a close call.

Church on Christmas Eve is always followed by the Children’s Christmas Party at the Football Club, well attended as ever. I’m not sure that my help in the musical chairs really helped, but we muddled on through.

Bouncing

Harry Newbold Cozens is a promising Trampolinist and he lives in Charnock Richard. I had the good fortune to talk with his father, Bryan, recently and quickly began to realise the personal dedication required from parents of talented young sports people. Team events, it seems, attract more attention than individual sports making securing funding support and sponsorship difficult. I will try to point Harry in the direction of funding opportunities and have discussed with the relevant people at Chorley Council, who are going to do whatever they can.

Neighbourhood Meeting

The most recent neighbourhood meeting was interesting as it was the first to be run under the new format, involving Parish Council representatives and the County Councillor. The intent is to encourage wider participation and involvement in the various projects. The intent is there, I just hope the meetings become a little more lively and involving, which is difficult as there are only two a year.

Astley Hall Coach House Gallery

Very rarely is it that I have reason to question the way in which a decision is made. I often question decisions, but generally can appreciate that if it has been made in the correct manner then it has been made with the best intentions.

The Coach House Gallery in Astley Park was the subject of an Executive Decision which, having read the supporting report, appeared to have missed out a large proportion of the users of the gallery when making a decision to house a semi-permanent display, leaving other users with nowhere to exhibit.

Christmas Eve in the Town Hall and the call-in papers were handed in, questioning whether sufficient effective consultation had taken place. Not that long after Christmas and people began to telephone me, Chorley Photographic Society, Friends of Astley Park, The Lodge Artists Society, Chorley Paintbox, Chorley Historical Society, Chorley Historical and Archaeological Society to name but a few all contacted me wanting to know what was happening. A meeting was held, in a local hostelry, which was well attended and I advised those attending what the call-in process meant and what was going on. Those present agreed on an extremely able spokesperson, in the form of Glynn Davies of Chorley Photographic Society, to present their case and I had several discussions with him between then and the Overview and Scrutiny meeting at which the call-in would be discussed.

The Council Chamber was packed, which clearly displayed the amount of concern amongst the groups that had displayed in the Coach House Gallery. A round of applause followed mine and Glynn’s speeches (to be honest it was after Glynn’s speech, which just happened to follow mine!). The leader of the council accepted that the consultation could have been better, but maintained it was adequate. It was pointed out that telling someone that the facility is no longer available and having them accept an alternative (or have nothing) is not consultation (another round of applause).

The result was as expected and the decision was held as having been made in the correct manner – I disagree and remain dissatisfied that I was not allowed to answer a question that was put to me, whilst the leader was and that some misleading (not entirely false, but not entirely true) information was presented. The decision may well be the correct decision but the way it was made remains, in my opinion, wrong.

Overall it was a great experience and a privilege to meet people that I would otherwise probably never have met. Chorley truly is a great place with great people.

Fortunately there has been a positive outcome in that representation of users of Astley Hall and Park, on the Astley Advisory Group, is likely to involve more local groups. Additionally the various projects, to provide alternative exhibition space, are being promised to be brought forwards. Thanks to everyone who was involved.

The words of my speech:

“The way in which the executive decision is at question not the decision itself and this is not a criticism of the Chorley Remembers project. I, along with (as far as I am aware) all members of the Council, am fully supportive of the aims of the Chorley Remembers project in ensuring that all those from the town and Borough who fought and died in the service of their country will never be forgotten by current and future generations.

The objection is that the report does not address whether the proposed exclusive use of the gallery, to a sole organisation, meets the original Heritage Funding requirements or whether the gallery is for wider varied community use. Neither does the report identify, that consultation and engagement with the wider community, has taken place.

The report does not address users concerns relating to lack of disabled access in Astley Hall.

The report removes the widely accepted principle that the gallery is for all user groups and an integrated impact assessment does not appear to have taken place.

An integrated impact assessment would have ensured that this decision had considered any positive or negative impacts for Chorley residents with regards to equalities, health and sustainability. It would also have considered reputational impact of the Council. If undertaken an Integrated Impact Assessment would result in an action plan providing some transparency to the decision making process, a process which, in this instance, is opaque at best.

It is, therefore, requested that an integrated impact assessment is undertaken.

The intent of the (£2,479,000) Heritage Lottery Funding for the (Chorley Council) Renovation of the Coach House and Walled Garden was to engage more people and a wider range of people and therefore was intended for all community groups.

The Heritage Lottery Funding (£323,000) for the (Chorley PALS Memorial) Chorley Remembers project was for Conservation of the Memorial Arch, Enhancements to the PALS memorial statue and the creation of a NEW exhibition and interpretation space in Astley Hall.

It is, therefore, requested and that the existing exhibition space in the Coach House Gallery remains the accepted venue for all user groups rather than being for a fixed exhibition.

This council executive is keen to explain how emphasis is being placed on getting things done for local people. By changing the way things are done they say they can act on what local people are saying so they can make a real difference allowing people to contribute to their community. This decision regarding use of the Coach House Gallery has not been transparent and, as acknowledged by the executive member for Resources, Policy and Performance (Peter Wilson, week commencing 3 September 2012), there has been no council led consultation with all interested parties.

This council tells us how it wants to do a lot more and be a lot more ambitious for the Borough, yet the ambition to provide fully inclusive exhibition spaces for all local groups appears to be thwarted by nothing more than electrics and IT provision.

The vision of this council, or so we are led to believe, is to be “An ambitious council that achieves more by listening to the whole community and exceeding their needs” Priorities of this council rightly include: “Involving residents by improving their local area and equality of access for all” and “striving to be an ambitious council, doing more to meet the needs of the residents and local area”.

Outcomes from the vision and priorities include: “A wide range of quality recreational activities”; “a council that consults and engages with residents”; “an ambitious council that continually strives to improve”.

The only consultation on this matter appears to have been with the Astley Advisory Group, representatives of which have expressed concern over a lack of wider consultation.

Consultation did take place on the Corporate Strategy, to which I have just referred. 97% of those who responded agreed that it is important for the council to consult and engage with residents. In this instance, however, it appears that the vision and words of the corporate strategy are without meaning, there has been, at best, ineffective limited council led consultation and engagement and the opinion of that 97% is being ignored.

I ask that this council strives to improve, ensure their vision and priorities have substance and are not just rhetoric. You must do what the people of Chorley say is important to them and undertake effective consultation and genuine engagement with the residents of Chorley on this matter.”

And the words of Glyn Davies:

“Mr Chairman, I speak on behalf of three hundred members of six local voluntary organisations, and four thousand members of one regional body, who have made use of the Coach House Gallery in the recent past and would do so in the future had the opportunity to do so not been removed by the decision to hand it over to the exclusive use of a single organisation. They, together with regional artists, have now been denied the opportunity to show their work in Chorley’s only purpose built public gallery – “the perfect setting (of which) has made it a well sought after space for artists from around the North West” (Minutes of this Committee 2011):

• None of the following comments implies any criticism of "Chorley Remembers", but are directed entirely at the actions of the Council, in particular the lack of a proper, inclusive consultative process from the outset, the failure to consider alternative options, and the failure to canvass the opinions of users of the Coach House Gallery. Discussion has thus been stifled.
• The Report indicates that the only alternative option initially considered was to accommodate “Chorley Remembers” in the Townley Parker Room at Astley Hall. Why did the Council fail to consider using some of the funding on offer to upgrade existing under used accommodation on the ground floor of the Coach House? Using one of the Coach House’s general purpose rooms would provide an improved facility as an additional and lasting legacy, while retaining the Gallery in its existing form, thus adding to facilities, not detracting from them. Why is there no evidence of this suggestion, made by several individuals and organisations, having been considered?
• What is the Council’s fallback plan against inevitably waning interest in, and declining visitor numbers to, the permanent exhibition? Will it be left in a few years’ time to gather dust like the existing, shabby Memorial Room? There has been a failure to investigate alternative options.
• Consultation initiated by the Council was restricted to the Astley Advisory Group – all other contacts having been subsequently initiated by local groups who heard of the plan only via the “grapevine”. Ensuing proposals for replacement accommodation have been universally deemed inadequate by all the groups in question.
• The Coach House was refurbished with 80% Heritage Lottery funding – in the order of £2.5M. During the Lottery Funding process it was proven that there is “inadequate provision of exhibition space for public use in the Chorley Area”. Ceding the provided facility to a single organisation is not only a clear change of use but also denies its use to the majority of the town's organisations and returns Chorley to the former woeful state which was deprecated by the Heritage Lottery. I ask if the Heritage Lottery Fund has been properly consulted about this change of use? Have they been made aware of the inevitable unwelcome outcomes?
• I ask what consideration has been given to the negative impact on people with disabilities who wish to attend exhibitions. There is no alternative exhibition space in Chorley with comparable disabled access. I understand that there is a statutory duty to carry out an Equalities Impact Assessment for all council decisions to assess their impact on disabilities groups. What was the outcome of the mandatory consultation with the Equalities Forum and if no such consultation took place, why not?
• The decision to hand over the Gallery was an Executive Member Decision – not a decision taken at, or debated by, a Council Committee. Why was this conducted in what seems to have been “stealth mode”? Was it to avoid any possible challenge by Councillors?

As there has been a failure to consult all concerned parties and to consider all options, I ask this Committee to recommend that the decision making process be revisited and conducted with probity, transparency and the thoroughness and inclusivity that the people of this Borough have a right to expect from their elected representatives, and that have been woefully lacking so far.”

Summaries of planning applications and delegated decisions related to Chisnall Ward are covered in my blog Chisnall Planning www.chisnallplanning.blogspot.com