Rangers staff risk stoking sectarianism hints Glasgow council boss Susan Aitken

[Walterbear 557]

14 minutes ago, Darthter said:

That last part was more of a general observation.....many folk are quick to criticise how things are run, but are reluctant to offer a practical solution themselves.

 

Ont his particular subject that actually aren't enough people questioning the Community council - after all , it was them who raised the initial objection and apparently refused to with draw it.  All to easy for many on here to simply go down the "SNP bad" route...

Here are the 20th June minutes. Note Stephen Dornan is in attendance and vote was a show of residents hands. Much discussion and objection so not beyond the realms of possibility that the local council have been heavily influenced by arguments from Rangers hating Dornan and the ‘residents show of hands’ included folk who might not normally attend, knowing what was to be discussed and how the vote would be constituted. Speculation I know but a good chance this was a decision influenced by a few Rangers haters as the other argument in respect of facility usage does not stand up to scrutiny. 

 

Local Rangers fans should get along to these meetings as they can change things directly. The community council is supposed to be apolitical btw. 

 

http://ibroxcessnockcc.weebly.com/minutes

Edited September 3, 2018 by Walterbear

[BlackSocksRedTops 3,806]

14 minutes ago, Walterbear said:

Here are the 20th June minutes. Note Stephen Dornan is in attendance and vote was a show of residents hands. Much discussion and objection so not beyond the realms of possibility that the local council have been heavily influenced by arguments from Rangers hating Dornan and the ‘residents show of hands’ included folk who might not normally attend, knowing what was to be discussed and how the vote would be constituted. Speculation I know but a good chance this was a decision influenced by a few Rangers haters as the other argument in respect of facility usage does not stand up to scrutiny. 

 

Local Rangers fans should get along to these meetings as they can change things directly. The community council is supposed to be apolitical btw. 

 

http://ibroxcessnockcc.weebly.com/minutes

Maybe...just maybe, some residents didn't want a football fanzone beside their house. I know I wouldn't want one near my house. 

[stewarty 2,060]

1 minute ago, BlackSocksRedTops said:

Maybe...just maybe, some residents didn't want a football fanzone beside their house. I know I wouldn't want one near my house. 

They live near Ibrox stadium.  For the sake of argument you could just call the stadium footprint an extended fan zone for every home game.  To object to having a specific family friendly entertainment zone would suggest to me that they have another agenda at play.

 

 

[JohnMc 2,801]

1 hour ago, Bluedell said:

It doesn't seem unreasonable to describe those who are attempting to split up the UK and cause irreversible damage to the country as the enemy. It's not just a decision that can be reversed in 4 or 5 years.

 

No, I'm not a member of my local community council because

a) don't have the time

b) don't care enough about the issues.

c) the council will just decide to do what they want anyway.

I'm not debating a political viewpoint, simply explaining why calling someone 'the enemy' then feigning surprise that people are sensitive to that seemed a little disingenuous.  

 

My wife is on our local community council and it can be time consuming but it's not constantly so, it ramps up as 'issues' arise, calms down as they are solved/ignored/go away. I guess they are all different though. 

Local issues can be trivial, but sometimes they're not. We'd a big issue with a planned incinerator which created a lot of local interest and concern, likewise with proposed telephone masts. I also live near a sport's stadium and resident parking is always an issue as is crime and policing. What I would say is you're dead wrong on point 'c'. Local council take a real interest in what's going on at that level. Two local councillors attend most meetings, and can become quite involved in what happens. I've actually been impressed by how much a city councillor can achieve and influence. 

 

My last observation on this. Most people take no notice of their community council or residents association unless there's a single issue that rouses them. Because of this it is very easy for one or two people to exert significant power and sway in these type of organisations. If we all took more interest in politics/issues on this level we'd see a difference in decisions made at council level. In my opinion.  

 

 

[JohnMc 2,801]

3 minutes ago, stewarty said:

They live near Ibrox stadium.  For the sake of argument you could just call the stadium footprint an extended fan zone for every home game.  To object to having a specific family friendly entertainment zone would suggest to me that they have another agenda at play.

 

 

I'd a friend who lived in a flat on Copland Road. She'd no interest in football but very quickly developed an intolerance for football supporters. As far as she was concerned Rangers supporters were responsible for urinating on her close door, littering her street and stairwell and preventing her from parking outside her own home on match days. She was right too. However, Rangers were there before she moved in and are still there after she moved elsewhere (she didn't move because of Rangers), it's not like the stadium appeared overnight. Anyone living locally needs to accept the stadium and the people who visit it are part of their community whether they like that or not. Rangers do a lot too in terms of paying for cleansing after matches, policing and generally trying to be good neighbours. As the fanzone isn't going to increase the number of people visiting during matches and it will house them very close to the stadium away from residents you can only conclude something else was influencing the objection. 

 

[BlackSocksRedTops 3,806]

8 minutes ago, stewarty said:

They live near Ibrox stadium.  For the sake of argument you could just call the stadium footprint an extended fan zone for every home game.  To object to having a specific family friendly entertainment zone would suggest to me that they have another agenda at play.

 

 

You don't know and I don't why residents objected therefore until we know all the facts can we move away from the knee jerk "Rangers haters" reaction. I'm not naive. I'm fully aware we have our detractors but if we start seeing so called "enemies" in every knook and crannie of society, that's troubling.

[Walterbear 557]

1 minute ago, stewarty said:

They live near Ibrox stadium.  For the sake of argument you could just call the stadium footprint an extended fan zone for every home game.  To object to having a specific family friendly entertainment zone would suggest to me that they have another agenda at play.

 

 

It would be the same 50,000 folk who were attending anyway on a Saturday and this fan zone was initially for a trial period. 

 

If you read the previous minutes from May and before there was no inkling there would be a problem so something has happened in a relatively short period to influence the community council. 

 

I fully understand why residents may not want this and that is fine but in the much publicised Susan Aitken letters said she had acted on information from the community council AND Stephen Dornan. She may of course consult with Dorman but the role of Stephen Dornan in what is supposed to be a residents decision is worthy of challenge given he is a relatively high profile Celtic supporter. 

 

It all seems a shambolic way to do it imo. If a few Rangers bars had emptied that night and popped along to the meeting the vote would have gone through. 

[stewarty 2,060]

6 minutes ago, BlackSocksRedTops said:

You don't know and I don't why residents objected therefore until we know all the facts can we move away from the knee jerk "Rangers haters" reaction. I'm not naive. I'm fully aware we have our detractors but if we start seeing so called "enemies" in every knook and crannie of society, that's troubling.

True.  But I'm not arguing against you on that point.   I'm merely stating that my sense is that something is wrong here and there are agendas at play beyond valid community objections.

 

The process ultimately is flawed here.  If there are objections then its right that they are discussed in a transparent manner before any decision is made.   And none of the bluster-filled retorts from the politicians under scrutiny have properly addressed the questions raised about their involvement.

[Darthter 542]

1 hour ago, Walterbear said:

Here are the 20th June minutes. Note Stephen Dornan is in attendance and vote was a show of residents hands. Much discussion and objection so not beyond the realms of possibility that the local council have been heavily influenced by arguments from Rangers hating Dornan and the ‘residents show of hands’ included folk who might not normally attend, knowing what was to be discussed and how the vote would be constituted. Speculation I know but a good chance this was a decision influenced by a few Rangers haters as the other argument in respect of facility usage does not stand up to scrutiny. 

 

Local Rangers fans should get along to these meetings as they can change things directly. The community council is supposed to be apolitical btw. 

 

http://ibroxcessnockcc.weebly.com/minutes

Are you suggesting that the folk who attended were unable to form their own opinions???

7.2     Application for temporary public licence - Ibrox 
Fanzone 11th August - area where this is proposed was originally part of a local  trust and is now owned by Glasgow life. These facilities were given to the Glasgow life by the trust and the council on the condition that they be used for the local community. There was much discussion and objection to this proposed use.  
It was noted that unlike most licensing there was no option for individuals to comment and/or object. Community Council Can object until 9th July, as such a vote was taken by show of hands from residents. Objection was favoured by a very clear majority therefore Kirsty will send objection letter prior to deadline. 

 

Based on the facts in front of us....it is clear that the local residents didn't like what was being proposed & therefore objected.  The council have then followed their standard procedures with regard to public event licencing.

Also worthy of note, that this is a different Dornan (this is Stephen(councillor), and not James(MSP)), from the one that everyone on here hates - they are no relation.

 

So, what did the Club do in order to try & get the local residents on side???  From Ms Aitken's letter, it would appear...not a lot.  But lets still blame the Bad SNP & their anti-Rangers minions....

[Darthter 542]

48 minutes ago, Walterbear said:

It would be the same 50,000 folk who were attending anyway on a Saturday and this fan zone was initially for a trial period. 

 

If you read the previous minutes from May and before there was no inkling there would be a problem so something has happened in a relatively short period to influence the community council. 

 

I fully understand why residents may not want this and that is fine but in the much publicised Susan Aitken letters said she had acted on information from the community council AND Stephen Dornan. She may of course consult with Dorman but the role of Stephen Dornan in what is supposed to be a residents decision is worthy of challenge given he is a relatively high profile Celtic supporter. 

 

It all seems a shambolic way to do it imo. If a few Rangers bars had emptied that night and popped along to the meeting the vote would have gone through. 

I think you are getting confused with James Dornan MSP....this is to do with Councillor Stephen Dornan (no relation).

Since Cllr Dornan works along side Ms Aitken, it makes sense that she would consult with him on the issue.