They should leave the island to the wildlife, nothing good will come from people walking all over the island. Why could they not erect a statue or something . Did this useless council not consider the wildlife at all?
Excellent article and why I’m so happy to subscribe to The Post. Why do ‘they’ have to change things and not for the better. Princes Park is one of the many beautiful Victorian parks we are lucky to have around Liverpool. I’m all for improvement that looks and feels right, like the Watering Can at Green Bank and the Reader in Calderstones. But to build something that looks to have a more detrimental effect is not good especially when there are doubts about the some of the people behind it. The dishonesty of our former Mayor leaves a long shadow.
Totally agree with this! Build a statue, place a plaque, but don’t give access to a piece of land that’s been a sanctuary for wildlife for over a century. Who come up with these stupid ideas!
Bearing in mind the council has been in special measures (costing the council tax payers hundreds of thousands of pounds by the way!) Anything other than essential service works should be on hold or subject to very stringent due diligence by the government appointed officials, until this council is brought under control. It’s a joke that money given to this project (nearly £200k)5 years ago has achieved absolutely nothing what was it spent on! Trips to Africa! What has Nelson Mandela got to with a park in Liverpool. Great man but make a bronze statue and put it in lime street station or somewhere. Something that won’t require maintenance like this bridge will as well the police time it will take up getting kids off the island, doing what they usually do. Yet again another Liverpool council joke!
Murky goings on at Liverpool City Council ??? There's a surprise !
Whether this is an appropriate public memorial Nelson Mandela and use of public funds is for our politicians to decide and subject to democratic political debate, rather than anonymous briefings.
I am concerned by the amount of "off the record" briefing in this article. If detractors have legitimate concerns they should be prepared to speak out publicly. Murky opposition is no better than murky government.
Before anything else congratulations Jack on another great item. I was not aware of this Bridge action at all although not been there as much this year.
I think you hit the nail on the head when you say there is distrust in anything the council or any of its associates do. They could invent a cure for cancel and I think most people in Liverpool would not trust them. You see this in the elections where less than one third of the city vote. The people are sending all the right signals to the council but the councillors are not listening. Not that we should be surprised at that.
Should there be a concern for wildlife yes but then again given how well our young people behave now I wonder how long the bridge will be open for, or even still standing. Mind, i can see H&S claims when people "Hurt" themselves "where there's blame there's a claim" comes to mind.
Is this an appropriate way of remembering Nelson Mandela. Only time will tell. Will people know what why the bridge was built? How many bridges do you cross where you stop to read anything bar toll fees at the side.
The funny in this story is the "especially the teenage nature-despising section of the public which allegedly exists." statement. Is this "allegedly" as in allegedly the tide comes in at Southport beach? It does happen you just need to be there to see it and have your eyes open and not closed.
As your article says. The deed is done the work has started and like so many other things in Liverpool only those who give the right answer to the council were aware of anything happening.
Cheers for reading Ian, distrust is huge at the moment, I think around the conflicts of interest etc there are some grey areas - such as the fact that while Wendy Simon didn't declare an interest on her register of interests, can this really be flagged as a big thing when literally no one was declaring anything under Joe Anderson. Perhaps not. But yeah, given what's happened in the last few years I also understand why people are less willing to look charitably.
With the "especially the teenage nature-despising section of the public which allegedly exists" I guess I threw in the allegedly because it seemed surprising to me that teenagers were actually attacking the animals, but having since spoken to some of the people in the park who spend a lot of their free time ferrying the animals to the vets (sometimes in Birmingham if surgery is needed!) perhaps I shouldn't have used the word. Depressing though!
Can't help but agree with the first three comments, obviously, speaking as somebody who lives in the "North End" of Liverpool, the first response to me would be "it's not your area, you don't live here so it doesn't concern you." Fair enough, can't & won't argue with that, BUT (and it was inevitable that word would appear before too long) as a Liverpool Council Tax payer, then, like everyone else, I'm concerned about how my money's spent.
A few points in the article which make me draw breath sharply, and stroke my chin, are that a fair sum has already been doled out, do we know to who, and for what? Then there's the small matter of builders, any particular reason why London? do they intend to use any left over materials for "Boris's" Garden Bridge on the Thames, or perhaps it's the same crowd behind the Millennium Bridge, that was a roaring success! Then we hear Elliot Lawless' name mentioned, if that doesn't set off any alarms anywhere within the Council, then we might as well bring Joe back!
Build a memorial by all means, I would welcome it, maybe even incorporate it into a museum, explaining about the Regime Mandella and the majority of "Sith Efrica" lived under, and why he ended up taking the action he did (he and the ANC), maybe even build it in the park, possibly that way, everyone will be happy, and the wildlife can remain where they are (reasonably) safe & unharmed
Why? Who the hell thought up this crackpot idea? Tinpot council? Mandela has absolutely ZERO connection to Liverpool, why should our money be wasted on something which is nothing but a bit of self-glorification for those involved, a big 'look at me' moment. We might as well have a tribute to Del Boy & Rodney, famous sons of Liverpool they've already got a bar, why not a memorial.
That money should have been put to improving local infrastructure to benefit all, not pandering to a few half-wits.
Want to pay tribute to Mandela? Go to his homeland instead.
An excellent item prompting some excellent comments. As a Sefton resident it's not really my place to comment on LCC or the city's parks - local residents and council tax payers should be first in that queue. One thing that struck me was that photo of the sign with the sheets of A4 paper attached containing criticism of the scheme. Whilst I sympathise a lot with the sentiment I am uncomfortable with the method. There are at least two sides to this argument. There are also two sides to the sign. Assuming it is possible to stand behind the sign, why not stick these messages on the rear, with a sheet stuck to the bottom of the front of the sign encouraging passers by to go round to hear "the other side of the story"? Covering up messages we might disagree with (however justifiably), particularly if they are not themselves offensive, looks like another indication we might be turning into a society in which everyone is shouting and no one is listening. This seems particularly ironic if one of the complaints is that the council are not listening.
Yeah that would work nicely. I think the key point for me is that if they'd have (properly) asked the people in the area about this then the opposition would've been clear and they might have landed on something more sensible. Appears most of the consultation happened after they finallised their plans, which is baffling
The title of this piece is wrong. It is not the water surrounding the island in the park which has been a safe and tranquil wildlife habitat for countless generations of water birds for 180 years that is troubled. The trouble is the building and politicising of the bridge. Pure and simple.
A little late, but a thank you from me, the wildlife rescue teams and the locals for highlighting a number of issues surrounding this project that concerns us all.
Also appreciate the humour in other pieces. Hoping the job centre doesn't have space for you after all as it's nice to read something different to the usual copy and paste.
Nice to see a well-worded, fairly reported piece of journalism.
The island only is an island because of the Mandela8 project.
As a subscriber I'm disappointed in this article. I read the Post for better journalism but here it seems the same approach that we see everywhere - more to shock and scandalise than to inform and look deeper.
The article tells me little or nothing about the Mandela8 project, its history and significance to local people, its intentions and struggles.
I too share many of the concerns expressed here for the swans and other birds and wildlife that have some sanctuary on the island.
Would readers be aware that it is through the Mandela8 project that funds were raised to reinstate the island, and solve the leaking away of the water in the lake? This has enhanced the lake for wildlife, as well as for people, restoring a place of peace and tranquility.
Could this important project help to win more regard for the natural environment of Princes Park? Give more young people experience of the tranquility and sanctuary of natural open space?
There are opportunities to get involved with taking care of Princes Park. Friends and volunteers meet every second Sunday to care for the trees and plants and pick up litter. Recent planting projects have involved the children of local schools, who return to visit 'their' tree. The reeds that have become settled since the lake was repaired are providing habitat and safety for water birds such as the little grebe, and, recently the reed warbler that is quite rare in city parks.
Of course Mandela8 consulted with the Friends of Princes Park. You can see that on the FOPP website.
So Jack, please give us more... not just the shock and scandal angle.
The island only is an island because of the Mandela8 project.
As a subscriber I'm disappointed in this article. I read the Post for better journalism but here it seems the same approach that we see everywhere - more to shock and scandalise than to inform and look deeper.
The article tells me little or nothing about the Mandela8 project, its history and significance to local people, its intentions and struggles.
I too share many of the concerns expressed here for the swans and other birds and wildlife that have some sanctuary on the island.
Would readers be aware that it is through the Mandela8 project that funds were raised to reinstate the island, and solve the leaking away of the water in the lake? This has enhanced the lake for wildlife, as well as for people, restoring a place of peace and tranquility.
Could this important project help to win more regard for the natural environment of Princes Park? Give more young people experience of the tranquility and sanctuary of natural open space?
There are opportunities to get involved with taking care of Princes Park. Friends and volunteers meet every second Sunday to care for the trees and plants and pick up litter. Recent planting projects have involved the children of local schools, who return to visit 'their' tree. The reeds that have become settled since the lake was repaired are providing habitat and safety for water birds such as the little grebe, and, recently the reed warbler that is quite rare in city parks.
Of course Mandela8 consulted with the Friends of Princes Park. You can see that on the FOPP website.
So Jack, please give us more... not just the shock and scandal angle.
Cheers Paul. A great point re. S106. In terms of "powerful cabals" I don't know, maybe that's a touch strong ahah, I do think there's a lot of frustration not just in L8 but all around Liverpool that a limited number of people who have connections with councillors etc are bumped to the top of the list in all these projects. I'm sure that's not just a Liverpool thing of course but it's easy to see why people get annoyed. And as you say, it winds up with a very small number of people claiming to speak for a very large number of people and projects that clearly have massive opposition being waved through unchallenged..
On Africa Oye (which is great), you're completely right. Being a festival it seems unlikely most people are going to be focused on bridge consultations. It also happened after the plans were submitted anyway, so not really a 'consultation' in any meaningful sense
They should leave the island to the wildlife, nothing good will come from people walking all over the island. Why could they not erect a statue or something . Did this useless council not consider the wildlife at all?
Excellent article and why I’m so happy to subscribe to The Post. Why do ‘they’ have to change things and not for the better. Princes Park is one of the many beautiful Victorian parks we are lucky to have around Liverpool. I’m all for improvement that looks and feels right, like the Watering Can at Green Bank and the Reader in Calderstones. But to build something that looks to have a more detrimental effect is not good especially when there are doubts about the some of the people behind it. The dishonesty of our former Mayor leaves a long shadow.
Totally agree with this! Build a statue, place a plaque, but don’t give access to a piece of land that’s been a sanctuary for wildlife for over a century. Who come up with these stupid ideas!
Yeah this is the thing Kev, and had they done a proper consultation this would likely have been the response (I think)
Bearing in mind the council has been in special measures (costing the council tax payers hundreds of thousands of pounds by the way!) Anything other than essential service works should be on hold or subject to very stringent due diligence by the government appointed officials, until this council is brought under control. It’s a joke that money given to this project (nearly £200k)5 years ago has achieved absolutely nothing what was it spent on! Trips to Africa! What has Nelson Mandela got to with a park in Liverpool. Great man but make a bronze statue and put it in lime street station or somewhere. Something that won’t require maintenance like this bridge will as well the police time it will take up getting kids off the island, doing what they usually do. Yet again another Liverpool council joke!
Murky goings on at Liverpool City Council ??? There's a surprise !
Whether this is an appropriate public memorial Nelson Mandela and use of public funds is for our politicians to decide and subject to democratic political debate, rather than anonymous briefings.
I am concerned by the amount of "off the record" briefing in this article. If detractors have legitimate concerns they should be prepared to speak out publicly. Murky opposition is no better than murky government.
Before anything else congratulations Jack on another great item. I was not aware of this Bridge action at all although not been there as much this year.
I think you hit the nail on the head when you say there is distrust in anything the council or any of its associates do. They could invent a cure for cancel and I think most people in Liverpool would not trust them. You see this in the elections where less than one third of the city vote. The people are sending all the right signals to the council but the councillors are not listening. Not that we should be surprised at that.
Should there be a concern for wildlife yes but then again given how well our young people behave now I wonder how long the bridge will be open for, or even still standing. Mind, i can see H&S claims when people "Hurt" themselves "where there's blame there's a claim" comes to mind.
Is this an appropriate way of remembering Nelson Mandela. Only time will tell. Will people know what why the bridge was built? How many bridges do you cross where you stop to read anything bar toll fees at the side.
The funny in this story is the "especially the teenage nature-despising section of the public which allegedly exists." statement. Is this "allegedly" as in allegedly the tide comes in at Southport beach? It does happen you just need to be there to see it and have your eyes open and not closed.
As your article says. The deed is done the work has started and like so many other things in Liverpool only those who give the right answer to the council were aware of anything happening.
Cheers for reading Ian, distrust is huge at the moment, I think around the conflicts of interest etc there are some grey areas - such as the fact that while Wendy Simon didn't declare an interest on her register of interests, can this really be flagged as a big thing when literally no one was declaring anything under Joe Anderson. Perhaps not. But yeah, given what's happened in the last few years I also understand why people are less willing to look charitably.
With the "especially the teenage nature-despising section of the public which allegedly exists" I guess I threw in the allegedly because it seemed surprising to me that teenagers were actually attacking the animals, but having since spoken to some of the people in the park who spend a lot of their free time ferrying the animals to the vets (sometimes in Birmingham if surgery is needed!) perhaps I shouldn't have used the word. Depressing though!
Can't help but agree with the first three comments, obviously, speaking as somebody who lives in the "North End" of Liverpool, the first response to me would be "it's not your area, you don't live here so it doesn't concern you." Fair enough, can't & won't argue with that, BUT (and it was inevitable that word would appear before too long) as a Liverpool Council Tax payer, then, like everyone else, I'm concerned about how my money's spent.
A few points in the article which make me draw breath sharply, and stroke my chin, are that a fair sum has already been doled out, do we know to who, and for what? Then there's the small matter of builders, any particular reason why London? do they intend to use any left over materials for "Boris's" Garden Bridge on the Thames, or perhaps it's the same crowd behind the Millennium Bridge, that was a roaring success! Then we hear Elliot Lawless' name mentioned, if that doesn't set off any alarms anywhere within the Council, then we might as well bring Joe back!
Build a memorial by all means, I would welcome it, maybe even incorporate it into a museum, explaining about the Regime Mandella and the majority of "Sith Efrica" lived under, and why he ended up taking the action he did (he and the ANC), maybe even build it in the park, possibly that way, everyone will be happy, and the wildlife can remain where they are (reasonably) safe & unharmed
Why? Who the hell thought up this crackpot idea? Tinpot council? Mandela has absolutely ZERO connection to Liverpool, why should our money be wasted on something which is nothing but a bit of self-glorification for those involved, a big 'look at me' moment. We might as well have a tribute to Del Boy & Rodney, famous sons of Liverpool they've already got a bar, why not a memorial.
That money should have been put to improving local infrastructure to benefit all, not pandering to a few half-wits.
Want to pay tribute to Mandela? Go to his homeland instead.
Leave the park and the wildlife alone.
Perhaps they should make it the Mandela Maze, given the labyrinthine nature of council politics.
Hahahaha, very good!
An excellent item prompting some excellent comments. As a Sefton resident it's not really my place to comment on LCC or the city's parks - local residents and council tax payers should be first in that queue. One thing that struck me was that photo of the sign with the sheets of A4 paper attached containing criticism of the scheme. Whilst I sympathise a lot with the sentiment I am uncomfortable with the method. There are at least two sides to this argument. There are also two sides to the sign. Assuming it is possible to stand behind the sign, why not stick these messages on the rear, with a sheet stuck to the bottom of the front of the sign encouraging passers by to go round to hear "the other side of the story"? Covering up messages we might disagree with (however justifiably), particularly if they are not themselves offensive, looks like another indication we might be turning into a society in which everyone is shouting and no one is listening. This seems particularly ironic if one of the complaints is that the council are not listening.
Stupid idea, waste of money, and ruining a little patch of nature to boot.
Crass and basic.
Agree a statue would have been much better. In fact, it could have been placed on the island for people to view from the shore.
Yeah that would work nicely. I think the key point for me is that if they'd have (properly) asked the people in the area about this then the opposition would've been clear and they might have landed on something more sensible. Appears most of the consultation happened after they finallised their plans, which is baffling
Plus ça change at Liverpool City Council. Certainly I wouldn't expect to receive an explanation from Simple Simon.
Do we know who the contractors are, the details of the bidding process, and how much the contract was worth?
That, in the past on other matters at the council, has unfortunately been illuminating.
The title of this piece is wrong. It is not the water surrounding the island in the park which has been a safe and tranquil wildlife habitat for countless generations of water birds for 180 years that is troubled. The trouble is the building and politicising of the bridge. Pure and simple.
A fair point - Perhaps "A Birdge too Far" would've been the better option...
A little late, but a thank you from me, the wildlife rescue teams and the locals for highlighting a number of issues surrounding this project that concerns us all.
Also appreciate the humour in other pieces. Hoping the job centre doesn't have space for you after all as it's nice to read something different to the usual copy and paste.
Nice to see a well-worded, fairly reported piece of journalism.
Thanks Jack.
The island only is an island because of the Mandela8 project.
As a subscriber I'm disappointed in this article. I read the Post for better journalism but here it seems the same approach that we see everywhere - more to shock and scandalise than to inform and look deeper.
The article tells me little or nothing about the Mandela8 project, its history and significance to local people, its intentions and struggles.
I too share many of the concerns expressed here for the swans and other birds and wildlife that have some sanctuary on the island.
Would readers be aware that it is through the Mandela8 project that funds were raised to reinstate the island, and solve the leaking away of the water in the lake? This has enhanced the lake for wildlife, as well as for people, restoring a place of peace and tranquility.
Could this important project help to win more regard for the natural environment of Princes Park? Give more young people experience of the tranquility and sanctuary of natural open space?
There are opportunities to get involved with taking care of Princes Park. Friends and volunteers meet every second Sunday to care for the trees and plants and pick up litter. Recent planting projects have involved the children of local schools, who return to visit 'their' tree. The reeds that have become settled since the lake was repaired are providing habitat and safety for water birds such as the little grebe, and, recently the reed warbler that is quite rare in city parks.
Of course Mandela8 consulted with the Friends of Princes Park. You can see that on the FOPP website.
So Jack, please give us more... not just the shock and scandal angle.
The island only is an island because of the Mandela8 project.
As a subscriber I'm disappointed in this article. I read the Post for better journalism but here it seems the same approach that we see everywhere - more to shock and scandalise than to inform and look deeper.
The article tells me little or nothing about the Mandela8 project, its history and significance to local people, its intentions and struggles.
I too share many of the concerns expressed here for the swans and other birds and wildlife that have some sanctuary on the island.
Would readers be aware that it is through the Mandela8 project that funds were raised to reinstate the island, and solve the leaking away of the water in the lake? This has enhanced the lake for wildlife, as well as for people, restoring a place of peace and tranquility.
Could this important project help to win more regard for the natural environment of Princes Park? Give more young people experience of the tranquility and sanctuary of natural open space?
There are opportunities to get involved with taking care of Princes Park. Friends and volunteers meet every second Sunday to care for the trees and plants and pick up litter. Recent planting projects have involved the children of local schools, who return to visit 'their' tree. The reeds that have become settled since the lake was repaired are providing habitat and safety for water birds such as the little grebe, and, recently the reed warbler that is quite rare in city parks.
Of course Mandela8 consulted with the Friends of Princes Park. You can see that on the FOPP website.
So Jack, please give us more... not just the shock and scandal angle.
Cheers Paul. A great point re. S106. In terms of "powerful cabals" I don't know, maybe that's a touch strong ahah, I do think there's a lot of frustration not just in L8 but all around Liverpool that a limited number of people who have connections with councillors etc are bumped to the top of the list in all these projects. I'm sure that's not just a Liverpool thing of course but it's easy to see why people get annoyed. And as you say, it winds up with a very small number of people claiming to speak for a very large number of people and projects that clearly have massive opposition being waved through unchallenged..
On Africa Oye (which is great), you're completely right. Being a festival it seems unlikely most people are going to be focused on bridge consultations. It also happened after the plans were submitted anyway, so not really a 'consultation' in any meaningful sense