Scc. We Need Your Help. We're Clueless!

[HeHasRisen]

1 minute ago, Irene Swaine said:

There is no need to be rude.

Thank you for your opinion "LovePotion"...erm, I mean "Irene", I will take it under advisement.

[Planner1]

3 hours ago, sheffbag said:

Sheffield city council have been found guilty of lying / misleading a court and the public over the tree felling saga. You really think they wouldn’t lie on a radio station interview where they know they wouldn’t be challenged

I just don’t understand the motivation for telling a lie about the CAZ on air.

 

They know that people scrutinise everything they say, so why would they lie about asking the government to defer or not impose the CAZ?

 

If they hadn’t asked and were doing it because they thought it was the right thing, I’d expect they’d say so.

[Baron99]

1 hour ago, Planner1 said:

I just don’t understand the motivation for telling a lie about the CAZ on air.

 

They know that people scrutinise everything they say, so why would they lie about asking the government to defer or not impose the CAZ?

 

If they hadn’t asked and were doing it because they thought it was the right thing, I’d expect they’d say so.

Of course the way round all this is just keep refusing to be interviewed which seems to be coming the norm with certain councillors from SCC. 

Edited May 11, 2023 by Baron99

[sheffbag]

21 hours ago, sheffbag said:

Then how come you can come to a fully informed view backing the council.

You wanted evidence, i gave you the timeline evidenced by both Manchesters scheme and the DEFRA report removing it.

 

You cannot provide any evidence whatsoever to back up any of the committee chairs claim on Radio Sheffield yet preach it as gospel and deny facts.

 

So, for clarity

You believe that SCC appiied to the govt for the scheme to be cancelled - No evidence

You believe that the govt woudl step in to run the scheme if SCC refused - No evidence

You believe that SCC was further on in a scheme that was stopped 3 months before go-live and had all the infrastructure in place when it applied to the govt - No evidence except the recorded and evidenced govt report from DEFRA  postponing the scheme for Manchester date 04 Feb 2022

You believe that the govt imposed the ring road into the scheme not SCC - No evidence except the link showing that local authorities impose the CAZ not the govt.

 

An FOI has gone in asking if SCC appealed the mandate and what reasoning it gave

 

Becuase, if don't believe any of those then you cannot say you believe what the SCC committee chair said and support.

Dont go hiding behind "there's lots that goes on behind the scenes". You dont work for the council anymore and had no role in the planning of the CAZ so how can you speak on what they did do or didnt do .

 

your entire point is built on "i believe them" or "you dont know the workings" which is completely without any evidence to support it, but when presented with govt literature you dismiss it.

 

In a different question, whats your opinion of the fact the air within the CAZ is at less than 33 overall (which is the mandated way of measuring air within a clean air zone) according to the latest figures from SCC for 2021  or dont you believe their own records now 

 

1 hour ago, Planner1 said:

I just don’t understand the motivation for telling a lie about the CAZ on air.

 

They know that people scrutinise everything they say, so why would they lie about asking the government to defer or not impose the CAZ?

 

If they hadn’t asked and were doing it because they thought it was the right thing, I’d expect they’d say so.

care to answer my questions instead? 

 

[sheffbag]

19 hours ago, Planner1 said:

I just don’t understand the motivation for telling a lie about the CAZ on air.

 

They know that people scrutinise everything they say, so why would they lie about asking the government to defer or not impose the CAZ?

 

If they hadn’t asked and were doing it because they thought it was the right thing, I’d expect they’d say so.

Because there is no evidence to say that they did except for that woman on the interview who made 4 claims which cannot be evidenced anywhere.

 

There are enough examples out there of SCC  representatives lying or spreading misinformation about projects (tree felling as the classic example) to remove any public faith in what they say.

 

She also claimed that the govt would come in and run the scheme if sheffield didnt. Thats wrong. there is nothing at all in any literature stating that the govt will step in. the actual words are that local authorities are responsible for setting up schemes.

 

if they didnt then, yes there is a risk that any fines that the courts impose on the UK govt could have been passed to SCC.  Not that the govt would step in and run the scheme themselves.

 

So if she was wrong on that and proclaimed a false as a truth then why believe on anything else.

 

I'll be honest. if the FOI request comes back and confirms that SCC did appeal the mandate then i would happily admit i was wrong and retract that opinion. But that would be based on facts, of which there are none out there to support her statement, not belief.

 

I would then question as to what grounds they appealed on, because if it was quality of air (which is the only grounds on which the CAZ is based),  they didnt do a good job. 

Edited May 12, 2023 by sheffbag

[Michael_N]

A good pointer for SCC officials. Get in the car/train and travel 30 miles north up the M1 to Leeds, then report back on the findings.  

[Planner1]

1 hour ago, Michael_N said:

A good pointer for SCC officials. Get in the car/train and travel 30 miles north up the M1 to Leeds, then report back on the findings.  

They’d certainly be able to note with satisfaction that Leeds are following our example and stopping through traffic from using the city centre and providing better infrastructure for cycling and walking.

[Michael_N]

45 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

They’d certainly be able to note with satisfaction that Leeds are following our example and stopping through traffic from using the city centre and providing better infrastructure for cycling and walking.

Yet The Headrow and Eastgate keeps its buses so people can use public transport direct to the shops, not having to walk a fair old distance from Arundel Gate through to Pinstone Street.

[HeHasRisen]

Aye, all that way. A trek so arduous you need crampons and Kendal mint cake. 

[ECCOnoob]

1 hour ago, Michael_N said:

Yet The Headrow and Eastgate keeps its buses so people can use public transport direct to the shops, not having to walk a fair old distance from Arundel Gate through to Pinstone Street.

Oh yes, because absolutely no buses whatsoever go anywhere near the Moorhead or Charter Row or Eyre Street or High Street or Church Street......

 

Look, I too completely disagreed with the Pinstone Street closure, but let's not stray from reality here.

 

There are still numerous bus routes that stop nano seconds walk away from the shops in Sheffield.  It really isn't a big issue.