'Don't cut Christmas' - Newport councillors

South Wales Argus: 'Don't cut Christmas' - Newport councillors 'Don't cut Christmas' - Newport councillors

A NEWPORT councillor said he wouldn’t sanction cancelling Christmas amid concern over proposals to cut funding to city-centre events.

A scrutiny meeting of Newport council yesterday heard concerns from members over proposals to end funding for the Christmas countdown and light switch-on, along with the Newport Food Festival and Big Splash, by 2016.

Other sources of funding, such as sponsorship, would be sought.

One senior council officer suggested traders can make a contribution to help with event costs.

The proposals to save £82,000 have come about through the current city council budget process, with the authority having to save £25 million over four years as a result of cuts to public spending by the UK government.

Labour Rogerstone councillor Chris Evans said the economic benefits of the Big Splash, the Christmas light switch-on and the food festival were obvious.

He said the food festival has taken three years to build up and was “incredible” in 2013, adding: “It will be very difficult for me to put my hand up at full council and say I am sanctioning cancelling Christmas”.

He cited an Arts Council report stating that only £55,000 was raised across Wales for arts sponsorship in one year and claimed £49,000 was raised in Newport alone – and suggested that would be difficult to multiply that by seven fold.

Labour councillor Miqdad Al-Nuaimi, Labour backbench councillor for Stow Hill, said he was fully in agreement over the food festival and Christmas lights, and also expressed concerns over plans to seek sponsorship and reduce funding for floral displays.

Scrutiny committee chairman Cllr Roger Jeavons said: “We can’t turn around and be the authority that cancels Christmas.”

Tory Allt-yr-Yn councillor David Fouweather said: “We are fishing from a small pool. We are not going to get the level of sponsorship we require”.

Cllr Matthew Evans, leader of the Tory group, said that the Big Splash and the Newport Food Festival are in their infancy.

He added: “We can’t afford to jeopardise these initiatives”.

Sheila Davies, strategic director of place, said: “I totally understand all the comments being made.

“The issue is, if we carry on supporting those where else do we save the money then to pay for them?”

Ms Davies, speaking after the meeting, suggested it would be good if traders would “club together to contribute”, adding: “Some things we can’t pay for”.

Comments (17)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:06am Wed 29 Jan 14

Woodgnome says...

Interesting, considering that only yesterday the SWA reported that the Wales Audit Office advised that Council's are not planning for the future and taking the cuts needed seriously. I'm beginning to wonder if some of these Councillors get it yet? These events should be self funded by those that profit from them and not on public funds and therefore those that need essential services.
Interesting, considering that only yesterday the SWA reported that the Wales Audit Office advised that Council's are not planning for the future and taking the cuts needed seriously. I'm beginning to wonder if some of these Councillors get it yet? These events should be self funded by those that profit from them and not on public funds and therefore those that need essential services. Woodgnome

10:13am Wed 29 Jan 14

DavidMclean says...

So we could actually become perhaps the only UK city that doesn't collectively and publicly celebrate Christmas.
So we could actually become perhaps the only UK city that doesn't collectively and publicly celebrate Christmas. DavidMclean

10:15am Wed 29 Jan 14

Woodgnome says...

DavidMclean wrote:
So we could actually become perhaps the only UK city that doesn't collectively and publicly celebrate Christmas.
That does not follow at all DMC - it's just a question of who pays. I wonder if the non Christians in Newport want to celebrate it anyway?
[quote][p][bold]DavidMclean[/bold] wrote: So we could actually become perhaps the only UK city that doesn't collectively and publicly celebrate Christmas.[/p][/quote]That does not follow at all DMC - it's just a question of who pays. I wonder if the non Christians in Newport want to celebrate it anyway? Woodgnome

12:50pm Wed 29 Jan 14

newportonian69 says...

never christmas , the are on the verge of closing every bowling green in Newport and letting the old folk pay to run them all themselves yet I have not heard of any councillors or heads of the parks and greens losing there jobs to save thousands of pounds.
never christmas , the are on the verge of closing every bowling green in Newport and letting the old folk pay to run them all themselves yet I have not heard of any councillors or heads of the parks and greens losing there jobs to save thousands of pounds. newportonian69

1:08pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Ian MacKinlay says...

Third paragraph from the end:


"Sheila Davies, strategic director of place, said: “I totally understand all the comments being made."


I do not know what function "strategic director of place" has but I cannot help feeling the expression constitutes a proper noun phrase and therefore warrants the use of capital letters.
Third paragraph from the end: "Sheila Davies, strategic director of place, said: “I totally understand all the comments being made." I do not know what function "strategic director of place" has but I cannot help feeling the expression constitutes a proper noun phrase and therefore warrants the use of capital letters. Ian MacKinlay

1:16pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Ian MacKinlay says...

What does a "strategic director of space" (sic) do actually?

Perhaps the Argus could tell us.

If we knew what Sheila Davies does, operating under this rather grand title, then, who knows, perhaps some of us might think that her role could be scrapped and thereby contribute to some of cuts which must be made.
What does a "strategic director of space" (sic) do actually? Perhaps the Argus could tell us. If we knew what Sheila Davies does, operating under this rather grand title, then, who knows, perhaps some of us might think that her role could be scrapped and thereby contribute to some of cuts which must be made. Ian MacKinlay

2:44pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Mr Bump. says...

Woodgnome wrote:
DavidMclean wrote:
So we could actually become perhaps the only UK city that doesn't collectively and publicly celebrate Christmas.
That does not follow at all DMC - it's just a question of who pays. I wonder if the non Christians in Newport want to celebrate it anyway?
I'd be a lot happier and financially better off if they banned xmas altogether.
[quote][p][bold]Woodgnome[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DavidMclean[/bold] wrote: So we could actually become perhaps the only UK city that doesn't collectively and publicly celebrate Christmas.[/p][/quote]That does not follow at all DMC - it's just a question of who pays. I wonder if the non Christians in Newport want to celebrate it anyway?[/p][/quote]I'd be a lot happier and financially better off if they banned xmas altogether. Mr Bump.

3:59pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Ian MacKinlay says...

.


Sixth paragraph:


"Labour Rogerstone councillor Chris Evans said the economic benefits of the Big Splash, the Christmas light switch-on and the food festival were obvious."


Oh, really.


That's interesting.


Then why would the recipients of these economic benefits not wish to pay for them?


The Council does have a role in such matters, including taking or supporting the initiative to get schemes, such as these, up and running, but if the schemes are successful, then financially they should run themselves.


It would seem reasonable to me for the Council to agree to chip in, with say, 10% of the costs.


However, the suggestion here appears to be that the Council is paying the lion's share. This is surely non-sensical.


I suspect that quite a lot of the voters in Newport would agree that the Council's funding should be only contributory, and that it should not be expected to come up with meeting the major share of the bill.


People might say, in such circumstances, "Well you know what you can do; vote for a different party or councillor at the next local election."


Here we have the classic Newport situation where you cannot get a Rizla paper between the two main parties; the conjoined twins, Chris Evans and Matthew Evans both supporting the initiatives, as described above, in an entirely cross-party fashion.


That's what these two lots do.


All the time.


One lot does one thing, when in office, largely supported by the other in opposition, and then when things go wrong, each blames the other side for having done whatever it is, when the roles of office and opposition have been reversed.


We had this with the mural.


Both main parties fully shared the blame for that.


Both parties showed utter contempt for what were clearly the wishes of the electorate, that the mural somehow should be saved.


Any persons who took the trouble to look further than the comments from the Voice of God et al, on the Argus comment pages, readily would have realized that most of the nearly four thousand so-called signatures on a major petition were, in reality, a lot more.


Most were articulate expressions, giving reasons why the matter should be dealt with differently from the course being taken by the de facto single-party Council.


The views of such people were dismissed, because few took the trouble to acquaint themselves even of their existence. Those that knew otherwise chose not to acknowledge the validity of such views and proceeded to ride rough-shod over them.


Paul Flynn, the Member of Parliament for Newport West, dismissed the campaign and “names on the petition” as “not serious” and a bit “dodgy” respectively, as early as May 2014, when already the petition had 1300 signatures.


If Paul Flynn had looked later in October, at the comments that came in from far and wide, condemning the position taken by the Council, and applied Occam’s Razor, I think he would have to concede that the Argus comments reflected those on the petition, and that they were indeed serious, and that the people sending them in would be offended, to be dismissed by one of their parliamentary representatives, as being “dodgy”.


*(Google: “Petition calls to save Newport’s mural, Argus”.


Now, another matter.


The opposition among the electorate to the Council agreeing to the borrowing of ninety million pounds, to loan to the Friars Walk developers, Queensberry Real Estate, was clearly not reflected in the council chamber.


Forty-five councillors were present to vote.


Forty-four voted in favour.


Mr Miqdad Al-Nuaimi was not there.


Cllr David Williams voted against.


The thickness of a Rizla paper separating the two main parties is thereby calibrated.


One, just one, councillor.


That's Newport democracy for you.


The electorate really does get what it votes for, so that means the Council can now go away and spend whatever it likes on a big splashes, Christmas, food fairs and anything else it would like to squander the council tax payers’ money on.



Newport City Council.


Go ahead.


Do what you like.


You have a free rein.


*
“Petition calls to save Newport's Chartist mural” by David Deans. Wednesday 29th May 2013 (Twenty-second paragraph) .


Oh.


And by the way.


Newport City Council, Queensberry Real Estate and the Argus all spell “Friars Walk” without an apostrophe.


Is this because they are all ignorant, downright lazy, can’t be bothered or have now chosen to follow the “national guidelines” on dumbing down standards to the lowest common denominator?


Maybe, nobody knows whether it should be Friar’s Walk or Friars’ Walk.


Maybe nobody has taken the trouble to find out.


Who or what came up with this name?


Argus.


Please ask him, her or it.


Maybe Newport’s “Strategic Director of Space” could help.


.
. Sixth paragraph: "Labour Rogerstone councillor Chris Evans said the economic benefits of the Big Splash, the Christmas light switch-on and the food festival were obvious." Oh, really. That's interesting. Then why would the recipients of these economic benefits not wish to pay for them? The Council does have a role in such matters, including taking or supporting the initiative to get schemes, such as these, up and running, but if the schemes are successful, then financially they should run themselves. It would seem reasonable to me for the Council to agree to chip in, with say, 10% of the costs. However, the suggestion here appears to be that the Council is paying the lion's share. This is surely non-sensical. I suspect that quite a lot of the voters in Newport would agree that the Council's funding should be only contributory, and that it should not be expected to come up with meeting the major share of the bill. People might say, in such circumstances, "Well you know what you can do; vote for a different party or councillor at the next local election." Here we have the classic Newport situation where you cannot get a Rizla paper between the two main parties; the conjoined twins, Chris Evans and Matthew Evans both supporting the initiatives, as described above, in an entirely cross-party fashion. That's what these two lots do. All the time. One lot does one thing, when in office, largely supported by the other in opposition, and then when things go wrong, each blames the other side for having done whatever it is, when the roles of office and opposition have been reversed. We had this with the mural. Both main parties fully shared the blame for that. Both parties showed utter contempt for what were clearly the wishes of the electorate, that the mural somehow should be saved. Any persons who took the trouble to look further than the comments from the Voice of God et al, on the Argus comment pages, readily would have realized that most of the nearly four thousand so-called signatures on a major petition were, in reality, a lot more. Most were articulate expressions, giving reasons why the matter should be dealt with differently from the course being taken by the de facto single-party Council. The views of such people were dismissed, because few took the trouble to acquaint themselves even of their existence. Those that knew otherwise chose not to acknowledge the validity of such views and proceeded to ride rough-shod over them. Paul Flynn, the Member of Parliament for Newport West, dismissed the campaign and “names on the petition” as “not serious” and a bit “dodgy” respectively, as early as May 2014, when already the petition had 1300 signatures. If Paul Flynn had looked later in October, at the comments that came in from far and wide, condemning the position taken by the Council, and applied Occam’s Razor, I think he would have to concede that the Argus comments reflected those on the petition, and that they were indeed serious, and that the people sending them in would be offended, to be dismissed by one of their parliamentary representatives, as being “dodgy”. *(Google: “Petition calls to save Newport’s mural, Argus”. Now, another matter. The opposition among the electorate to the Council agreeing to the borrowing of ninety million pounds, to loan to the Friars Walk developers, Queensberry Real Estate, was clearly not reflected in the council chamber. Forty-five councillors were present to vote. Forty-four voted in favour. Mr Miqdad Al-Nuaimi was not there. Cllr David Williams voted against. The thickness of a Rizla paper separating the two main parties is thereby calibrated. One, just one, councillor. That's Newport democracy for you. The electorate really does get what it votes for, so that means the Council can now go away and spend whatever it likes on a big splashes, Christmas, food fairs and anything else it would like to squander the council tax payers’ money on. Newport City Council. Go ahead. Do what you like. You have a free rein. * “Petition calls to save Newport's Chartist mural” by David Deans. Wednesday 29th May 2013 (Twenty-second paragraph) . Oh. And by the way. Newport City Council, Queensberry Real Estate and the Argus all spell “Friars Walk” without an apostrophe. Is this because they are all ignorant, downright lazy, can’t be bothered or have now chosen to follow the “national guidelines” on dumbing down standards to the lowest common denominator? Maybe, nobody knows whether it should be Friar’s Walk or Friars’ Walk. Maybe nobody has taken the trouble to find out. Who or what came up with this name? Argus. Please ask him, her or it. Maybe Newport’s “Strategic Director of Space” could help. . Ian MacKinlay

4:07pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Ian MacKinlay says...

Ian MacKinlay wrote:
What does a "strategic director of space" (sic) do actually?

Perhaps the Argus could tell us.

If we knew what Sheila Davies does, operating under this rather grand title, then, who knows, perhaps some of us might think that her role could be scrapped and thereby contribute to some of cuts which must be made.
Sorry, should read "What does a "strategic director of place" (sic) do actually?
[quote][p][bold]Ian MacKinlay[/bold] wrote: What does a "strategic director of space" (sic) do actually? Perhaps the Argus could tell us. If we knew what Sheila Davies does, operating under this rather grand title, then, who knows, perhaps some of us might think that her role could be scrapped and thereby contribute to some of cuts which must be made.[/p][/quote]Sorry, should read "What does a "strategic director of place" (sic) do actually? Ian MacKinlay

4:08pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Ian MacKinlay says...

Ian MacKinlay wrote:
.


Sixth paragraph:


"Labour Rogerstone councillor Chris Evans said the economic benefits of the Big Splash, the Christmas light switch-on and the food festival were obvious."


Oh, really.


That's interesting.


Then why would the recipients of these economic benefits not wish to pay for them?


The Council does have a role in such matters, including taking or supporting the initiative to get schemes, such as these, up and running, but if the schemes are successful, then financially they should run themselves.


It would seem reasonable to me for the Council to agree to chip in, with say, 10% of the costs.


However, the suggestion here appears to be that the Council is paying the lion's share. This is surely non-sensical.


I suspect that quite a lot of the voters in Newport would agree that the Council's funding should be only contributory, and that it should not be expected to come up with meeting the major share of the bill.


People might say, in such circumstances, "Well you know what you can do; vote for a different party or councillor at the next local election."


Here we have the classic Newport situation where you cannot get a Rizla paper between the two main parties; the conjoined twins, Chris Evans and Matthew Evans both supporting the initiatives, as described above, in an entirely cross-party fashion.


That's what these two lots do.


All the time.


One lot does one thing, when in office, largely supported by the other in opposition, and then when things go wrong, each blames the other side for having done whatever it is, when the roles of office and opposition have been reversed.


We had this with the mural.


Both main parties fully shared the blame for that.


Both parties showed utter contempt for what were clearly the wishes of the electorate, that the mural somehow should be saved.


Any persons who took the trouble to look further than the comments from the Voice of God et al, on the Argus comment pages, readily would have realized that most of the nearly four thousand so-called signatures on a major petition were, in reality, a lot more.


Most were articulate expressions, giving reasons why the matter should be dealt with differently from the course being taken by the de facto single-party Council.


The views of such people were dismissed, because few took the trouble to acquaint themselves even of their existence. Those that knew otherwise chose not to acknowledge the validity of such views and proceeded to ride rough-shod over them.


Paul Flynn, the Member of Parliament for Newport West, dismissed the campaign and “names on the petition” as “not serious” and a bit “dodgy” respectively, as early as May 2014, when already the petition had 1300 signatures.


If Paul Flynn had looked later in October, at the comments that came in from far and wide, condemning the position taken by the Council, and applied Occam’s Razor, I think he would have to concede that the Argus comments reflected those on the petition, and that they were indeed serious, and that the people sending them in would be offended, to be dismissed by one of their parliamentary representatives, as being “dodgy”.


*(Google: “Petition calls to save Newport’s mural, Argus”.


Now, another matter.


The opposition among the electorate to the Council agreeing to the borrowing of ninety million pounds, to loan to the Friars Walk developers, Queensberry Real Estate, was clearly not reflected in the council chamber.


Forty-five councillors were present to vote.


Forty-four voted in favour.


Mr Miqdad Al-Nuaimi was not there.


Cllr David Williams voted against.


The thickness of a Rizla paper separating the two main parties is thereby calibrated.


One, just one, councillor.


That's Newport democracy for you.


The electorate really does get what it votes for, so that means the Council can now go away and spend whatever it likes on a big splashes, Christmas, food fairs and anything else it would like to squander the council tax payers’ money on.



Newport City Council.


Go ahead.


Do what you like.


You have a free rein.


*
“Petition calls to save Newport's Chartist mural” by David Deans. Wednesday 29th May 2013 (Twenty-second paragraph) .


Oh.


And by the way.


Newport City Council, Queensberry Real Estate and the Argus all spell “Friars Walk” without an apostrophe.


Is this because they are all ignorant, downright lazy, can’t be bothered or have now chosen to follow the “national guidelines” on dumbing down standards to the lowest common denominator?


Maybe, nobody knows whether it should be Friar’s Walk or Friars’ Walk.


Maybe nobody has taken the trouble to find out.


Who or what came up with this name?


Argus.


Please ask him, her or it.


Maybe Newport’s “Strategic Director of Space” could help.


.
Sorry. Should read "Maybe Newport’s “Strategic Director of Place” could help."
[quote][p][bold]Ian MacKinlay[/bold] wrote: . Sixth paragraph: "Labour Rogerstone councillor Chris Evans said the economic benefits of the Big Splash, the Christmas light switch-on and the food festival were obvious." Oh, really. That's interesting. Then why would the recipients of these economic benefits not wish to pay for them? The Council does have a role in such matters, including taking or supporting the initiative to get schemes, such as these, up and running, but if the schemes are successful, then financially they should run themselves. It would seem reasonable to me for the Council to agree to chip in, with say, 10% of the costs. However, the suggestion here appears to be that the Council is paying the lion's share. This is surely non-sensical. I suspect that quite a lot of the voters in Newport would agree that the Council's funding should be only contributory, and that it should not be expected to come up with meeting the major share of the bill. People might say, in such circumstances, "Well you know what you can do; vote for a different party or councillor at the next local election." Here we have the classic Newport situation where you cannot get a Rizla paper between the two main parties; the conjoined twins, Chris Evans and Matthew Evans both supporting the initiatives, as described above, in an entirely cross-party fashion. That's what these two lots do. All the time. One lot does one thing, when in office, largely supported by the other in opposition, and then when things go wrong, each blames the other side for having done whatever it is, when the roles of office and opposition have been reversed. We had this with the mural. Both main parties fully shared the blame for that. Both parties showed utter contempt for what were clearly the wishes of the electorate, that the mural somehow should be saved. Any persons who took the trouble to look further than the comments from the Voice of God et al, on the Argus comment pages, readily would have realized that most of the nearly four thousand so-called signatures on a major petition were, in reality, a lot more. Most were articulate expressions, giving reasons why the matter should be dealt with differently from the course being taken by the de facto single-party Council. The views of such people were dismissed, because few took the trouble to acquaint themselves even of their existence. Those that knew otherwise chose not to acknowledge the validity of such views and proceeded to ride rough-shod over them. Paul Flynn, the Member of Parliament for Newport West, dismissed the campaign and “names on the petition” as “not serious” and a bit “dodgy” respectively, as early as May 2014, when already the petition had 1300 signatures. If Paul Flynn had looked later in October, at the comments that came in from far and wide, condemning the position taken by the Council, and applied Occam’s Razor, I think he would have to concede that the Argus comments reflected those on the petition, and that they were indeed serious, and that the people sending them in would be offended, to be dismissed by one of their parliamentary representatives, as being “dodgy”. *(Google: “Petition calls to save Newport’s mural, Argus”. Now, another matter. The opposition among the electorate to the Council agreeing to the borrowing of ninety million pounds, to loan to the Friars Walk developers, Queensberry Real Estate, was clearly not reflected in the council chamber. Forty-five councillors were present to vote. Forty-four voted in favour. Mr Miqdad Al-Nuaimi was not there. Cllr David Williams voted against. The thickness of a Rizla paper separating the two main parties is thereby calibrated. One, just one, councillor. That's Newport democracy for you. The electorate really does get what it votes for, so that means the Council can now go away and spend whatever it likes on a big splashes, Christmas, food fairs and anything else it would like to squander the council tax payers’ money on. Newport City Council. Go ahead. Do what you like. You have a free rein. * “Petition calls to save Newport's Chartist mural” by David Deans. Wednesday 29th May 2013 (Twenty-second paragraph) . Oh. And by the way. Newport City Council, Queensberry Real Estate and the Argus all spell “Friars Walk” without an apostrophe. Is this because they are all ignorant, downright lazy, can’t be bothered or have now chosen to follow the “national guidelines” on dumbing down standards to the lowest common denominator? Maybe, nobody knows whether it should be Friar’s Walk or Friars’ Walk. Maybe nobody has taken the trouble to find out. Who or what came up with this name? Argus. Please ask him, her or it. Maybe Newport’s “Strategic Director of Space” could help. .[/p][/quote]Sorry. Should read "Maybe Newport’s “Strategic Director of Place” could help." Ian MacKinlay

4:17pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Ian MacKinlay says...

Is it not about time that the Argus got its web page designer to get him or her to engineer matters such that the site recognized an opening quote, " " ", and reproduced it as " " " instead of """ ?

While he or she is at it, how about making it possible for readers to type in URLs or links to interesting things, without the URL being split up after a very few letters or words?

Is this beyond the wit of Argus person?
Is it not about time that the Argus got its web page designer to get him or her to engineer matters such that the site recognized an opening quote, " " ", and reproduced it as " " " instead of """ ? While he or she is at it, how about making it possible for readers to type in URLs or links to interesting things, without the URL being split up after a very few letters or words? Is this beyond the wit of Argus person? Ian MacKinlay

4:20pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Ian MacKinlay says...

Fifth paragraph:

"The proposals to save £82,000 have come about through the current city council budget process, with the authority having to save £25 million over four years as a result of cuts to public spending by the UK government. "

How much is the salary and benefits package of a "Strategic Director of Place" I wonder.

Just asking.
Fifth paragraph: "The proposals to save £82,000 have come about through the current city council budget process, with the authority having to save £25 million over four years as a result of cuts to public spending by the UK government. " How much is the salary and benefits package of a "Strategic Director of Place" I wonder. Just asking. Ian MacKinlay

9:11am Thu 30 Jan 14

no cheese says...

The only free thing the people get in newport and you want to scrap it already. Mind you I thought you would have scrapped the big splash before now as it encourages people to Newport and it feels like that's not actually what you want. Scrap car park fees and start encouraging people here. Lower business rates for the empty shops and encourage more people to the City of Newport.
One more point get your departments within the council to talk to each other. I know of a case that a person was continuing to claim benefits even though another department knew they shouldn't be. In this case it resulted in £12,000 pound given out. How was it repaid you may ask!! by taking £5.00 out of their current benefits per week. Absolute joke!!! that money could have been in your bank accruing interest. Instead you are in effect paying yourselves back. I am sure that this wasn't a one off and a simple solution to it, talk to each other.
The only free thing the people get in newport and you want to scrap it already. Mind you I thought you would have scrapped the big splash before now as it encourages people to Newport and it feels like that's not actually what you want. Scrap car park fees and start encouraging people here. Lower business rates for the empty shops and encourage more people to the City of Newport. One more point get your departments within the council to talk to each other. I know of a case that a person was continuing to claim benefits even though another department knew they shouldn't be. In this case it resulted in £12,000 pound given out. How was it repaid you may ask!! by taking £5.00 out of their current benefits per week. Absolute joke!!! that money could have been in your bank accruing interest. Instead you are in effect paying yourselves back. I am sure that this wasn't a one off and a simple solution to it, talk to each other. no cheese

3:32pm Thu 30 Jan 14

ThisisNewport says...

This is a terrible idea.

Without these events the city will be like a ghost town.
The events attract people from all over Gwent and beyond, all spending their money in shops, cafes and restaurants. This should be a service that the council provides for it's residents.
The highly popular superdragons has already been dropped, let's not get rid of the rest.
This is a terrible idea. Without these events the city will be like a ghost town. The events attract people from all over Gwent and beyond, all spending their money in shops, cafes and restaurants. This should be a service that the council provides for it's residents. The highly popular superdragons has already been dropped, let's not get rid of the rest. ThisisNewport

6:02pm Thu 30 Jan 14

russ angel says...

It's over let's flatten the lot put it all out of it's misery.
It's over let's flatten the lot put it all out of it's misery. russ angel

8:20pm Thu 30 Jan 14

bugsy93 says...

What cuts will they dream up next? When they start cutting back on the overpaid non-productive executives, directors and heads of departments that is so top heavy in the public services then they may start gaining some support of the public.
What cuts will they dream up next? When they start cutting back on the overpaid non-productive executives, directors and heads of departments that is so top heavy in the public services then they may start gaining some support of the public. bugsy93

11:08pm Thu 30 Jan 14

JanJenkins says...

For the next Council elections, We need to eject these wantabe's and stop this stupid council, patting each other on the back, and actually get Newport Central back up and living, because its become a hole. The High Street has become a haven of pawn shops/money lenders, charity shops and mobile phone shops. The Kingsway centre has never been fully occupied and is likely never to be.. Yet the council gives a builder millions to build another shopping mall . The only people who are making money out of Newport. is Newport Councilors
For the next Council elections, We need to eject these wantabe's and stop this stupid council, patting each other on the back, and actually get Newport Central back up and living, because its become a hole. The High Street has become a haven of pawn shops/money lenders, charity shops and mobile phone shops. The Kingsway centre has never been fully occupied and is likely never to be.. Yet the council gives a builder millions to build another shopping mall . The only people who are making money out of Newport. is Newport Councilors JanJenkins

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree