General Discussion
@Deedoodle have you had the Autumn/Winter edition of the Town Crier delivered yet? If not, but you get a chance to read it I suggest you take a look at page 7 and the article concerning the playpark. If you have a heart condition or anything along those lines I'd suggest you make sure you've had your medication and that you are sat down.
Because........... the article starts by referencing the public consulation and then states that " The responses were overwhelmingly in favour of a playpark on the lawn".
Correct me if I am wrong but weren't ALL the questions concerned with having a playpark on the lawn, somewhere? Thought so. In which case no wonder the response turned out to be as is claimed in this article.
Does it not also say funding is being sought for the building of the play park and there is a nice map showing its position on the lawn.
And yet people still fail to understand that those respondents who selected “No” to each and every one of the options, were the ones who didn’t want a playpark anywhere on the Lawn. It was that simple!!
Here are the questions that were asked in the consultation and the responses that were given by those giving a Dawlish postcode.
DAWLISH RESIDENTS
1. Do you want a Play Park on the Top Lawn between the bandstand and the bowling green in Dawlish Town Centre?
YES 345 60%
NO 226 40%
(Total number of responses = 571)
2. Do you want a Play Park on the Top Lawn between the bandstand and the bowling green of a different size?
YES 66 12%
NO 485 88%
(Total number of responses = 551)
3. Do you want a Play Park on the Lawn in another area?
YES 95 17%
NO 466 83%
(Total number of responses = 561)
(source: minutes of Dawlish Town Council meeting held 7th September 2016) http://www.dawlish.gov.uk/edit/uploads/2106_920823159.pdf
Note that there was no explicit question along the lines of “Do you think there should be a play park on the Lawn. Yes or No?”.
Well i for one see little difference between do you think and do you want in fact if it had been do you think and it had the same outcome there still would be moans that the question was incorrectly worded a bit like the brexit vote.
I know nothing, but how was this consultation conducted, where was it taken or how was it taken? Have those figures been corroborated or have those figures ever been challenged? I know of cases where figures have been plucked out of the air and I know a lot what councils and others will do to get their way.
So isthere a true picture of what has taken place thus far. If there is no paper trail, then may I suggest the figures could be false.
@majorp - ask deedoodle. he will be able to tell all of us (again) all about it.
To summarise - the consultation took place for about three weeks in the summer of 2016. Based mostly in the Strand Centre I believe but info and ability to take part in answering questions also available online.
However, what I understand is the case with regard to the consultation papers/votes/call them what you will, is that they have now 'disappeared'. I am chasing this up but thus far have gotten nowhere.
See my post above concerning the questions and answers. Note question number 2, the numbers responding, and how they responded. When this consultation took place I believe those who participated were under the impresssion that the playground would take up the vast majority of the space behind the bandstand and the bowling green. The (overwhelming?) majority said they did not want one of a different size to that which was being proposed.
However, what is now being proposed is indeed of a different size - about half the size in fact.
So what the (overwhelming?) majority said they didn't want is precisely what is now being offered.
Well Lynne, if they cannot produce the results of the consultation then the consultation should be declared null and void and the whole process should start again with more input from the people before it starts.
More background info.
It has been pointed out to me that back in 2014 when Voices for Dawlish were in control of the town council, a consultation took place concerning the future of the lawn and how it might be developed. A playground? New bandstand? etc.
I am told that the consultation showed that 67% of those who took part expressed a preference for there to be a playpark on the lawn.
Please note I do not know the specific questions asked nor do I have specific numbers concerning those who responded and I am always wary of quoting percentages.
So if anyone has any more info on this 2014 consultation please could you let us know (or me, privately, and I will then post on here).
and no sooner do I ask for more info than as if by magic...........(from the 2014 consultation)
Depends on how you define overwhelming and how the figures are interpreted.
A total of 644 respondents in 2014 took part in the consultation concerning whether or not to have a playpark on the lawn.
Of that number, 430 were in favour of there being a playpark on the lawn - somewhere.
And of that 430 - 164 didn't want a playpark near the bandstand.
Whilst 214 were not in favour of a playpark on the lawn - anywhere.
So if you add together the 164 and the 214 (a playpark on the lawn but not near the bandstand plus no playpark on the lawn anywhere) you have a total of 378 not wanting a playpark by the bandstand. Compare that with only 266 expressing a wish for a playpark by the bandstand.
So, interpreting the results in the way that I have above puts those wishing for a playpark by the bandstand in the minority.
But does that not apply to everything we vote for these days General Elections, Brexit, The Playpark, etc,etc, and folk have to moan and groan and pick fault with results. Was the wording correct etc etc do we now have a country full of bad losers who throw there toys out of the pram everytime a result doesnt go there way.
I didn't 'vote' in the consultation and I have no strong views either way about a playpark (hence I didn't 'vote'). So I am not a bad loser.
I am just unhappy (extremely) about the wording that has been used when describing the outcome.
It was/is no more 'overwhelming' than it was the verdict of 'the majority of the people in Dawlish' (which was another, previous, misleading statement).
If Dawlish was the Titanic and the crew and captain were the Dawlish town council it would have sunk in the harbour before it even started its maiden voyage.
Although what do you expect from a bunch who seem to do what THEY want, no matter the damage to the town, traders and ratepayer's...in my opinion...e &e.o.....written without prejudice, etc,etc,etc....no insects, animals, slugs were harmed in the making of this comment.
So now that it is known there were two consultations about the play park on the lawn, why was it necessary to conduct a second consultation on the same subject, what was wrong with the first?
I wonder how many of those moaning voted for or against the playpark i know Lynne didn't how about everyone else. I was talking to someone yesterday winging about the Goverment who didnt vote in the last election and who has never voted so what right have they to moan in my mind non at all. Just for the record i cast my vote.
Who did leatash vote for?
If there was a name donkey on the voting list, it would get an X guaranteed!
So.....
if you don't cast a vote you have no right to moan
if you do cast a vote but are on the losing side you have no right to moan (mustn't be a bad loser old chap, not cricket, what ho)
if you cast a vote and are on the winning side you should have no need to moan
Is that what is being suggested?
majorp did you vote or not. And Lynne thats not what i said my thaughts are if you dont take part whatever the outcome what right have you to moan anyway sorry to dissapoint but i am of on my travels again back in 10 days isn't retirement great.
leatash is way off course as he like so many others do not understand the system.
There is a polling station and when you go inside someone makes sure you are eligable to vote. Ok so far?
You are given a slip of paper with the names of those standing for the election and you go into a booth and cast your vote by putting a mark on the slip as to who you wish to vote for. So far everyone if they are watching will know who has come in and who has gone into the booth where things are done in secret and who has put their slip into the ballot box.
WHO KNOWS WHO YOU VOTED FOR IF YOU DID VOTE. Now that is the point, nothing can make you vote but you can go through the motions and others may think you did. But nothing will show whether you did vote or not.
So how much are the 'consultants' the town council has employed with a remit to access further funding getting? Hopefully not as much as the 'town council' wasted on The Termite!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! or the Manor House fiasco!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! or, or, or, or, or!
At least you didn’t waste any money on unnecessary explanation marks...
I’m surprised though that Purrrrrfect doesn’t know what a termite looks like. I mean, he must have taken a photo or a dashcam video of one before...
Well said Deedoodle, ignore the facetious comments from others, you ask a really important question and one which many of us would like to have answered. The consultants for the ‘slug’ were paid over £20,000! How much are we wasting on consultants on the white elephant of the playpark, which most residents don’t want building on the beautiful unspoilt lawn area?
Prove it, once and for all! There are so many consultation results who can say what the people of Dawlish really want. We need another INTELLIGENT consultation with balanced questions so a full analysis of the views of residents can take place. But people like you won’t want such a democratic approach because you are so biased!
Wait a minute. You’re the one that just wrote “most residents”! Why ask me to disprove your assertion? I agree that most elderly residents might not want a playpark, but most residents??? Really?
What's the bad smell that floats over Dawlish.com that causes so many people to stop engaging with others on this site? Oh I know, does anyone else!
Can't their I.P. address(s) be blocked from the site?
The town council are funding (from the Sainsbury money) an Exeter based consultancy to look into how to get extra funding.
Nothing will happen until it is known whether or not extra funding is available and, if so, how much.
I’ve just read today’s Gazette. I find it intriguing that Ms Foden (strange how articles almost always fail to mention that she’s a pseudo-independent town councillor) states in one breath that the original consultation failed to represent the views of enough Dawlish residents, yet her petition was apparently signed by only a few more (7-ish% of the Dawlish population??). It’s a pity that respondents weren’t forced to put their real age against their real/electronic signature(s).
From the minutes of the July meeting of the town council's Finance and General Purposes Committee
b) RESOLVED – by majority that the Town Council will employ the services of The Fruit Tree to bid for additional funding for the Play Park on the Lawn.
How on God's green earth does the council justify using funds form 106/cil to construct an ineffectual playpark on The Lawn for under 8's? This money is supposed to be used for providing infrastructure to support the development of Dawlish.
As I have said several times, there is a perfectly good and safe play park near the Manor House.
The original proposal was to have a play park several times the size of the current proposal with funds required teetering around £200K+. Now the playpark is going to be about a third the size the council still employs consultants, based in Exeter, to find more money.
If it was going to cost around £200k+ for the full size park why is the £120kish amount not sufficient to complete the new proposed playpark.
The longer this fiasco goes on the more ridiculous it gets, in my opinion.
I just happened across this FOI concerning TDC playpark closures and budgets.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/playground_budgets_and_closures_275#incoming-897575