Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
observer

Waste Incinerator for Warrington?

Recommended Posts

McBain.

I don't know if Bill can give an example of a "devious method" but I can! In all the council documents you will not see the word "incinerator" used. What you WILL see is "Energy from Waste with Combined Heat and Power Technology" which is council-speak for incinerator.

No doubt the council realise that many people won't be able to comprehend this - presumably because of the inadequate education they have received in the council's schools!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My definition of ?spin? is carefully choosing the words to suit your own argument without necessarily telling lies and calling a waste incinerator an energy recovery plant is a perfect example.

 

You could argue as Egbert does that that in itself devious but for me it?s more the fact that the methods used to appears to have been deliberately chosen to provide a biased set of results which are then presented as accurate facts to justify a course of action.

 

Spending public money to deliberately provide biased information IS not only devious it should in my opinion be classed as a offence and the people responsible for doing this should stand accountable. :evil:

 

Bill :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately Bill such an approach would mean that almost the entire machinery of Government would have to resign if using statistics to support your own arguments were made an offence, as you suggest :wink:

 

Still, once you speaka-da-planning-lingo then you can make your case in a similar manner. Instead of talking about possible bad smells and harmful smoke, you could refer to "atmospheric particulates and odours that will have unpredictable and possibly unquantifiable but nevertheless negative impact on residents' physical and mental well being".

 

You could even go the whole hog and start a campaign group called:

 

Cancel

Recycling

Atmospheric

Polluters!

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if that?s what it takes to impart honesty and integrity into the cogs that drive our society then maybe we should sack the whole bloody lot of them and start afresh. Spin I can live with but deliberately choosing to try and deceive me? Nah I don?t accept for one moment.

 

Bill :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that comment just about sums things up here.

 

Have we really become so complacent that we don?t even bother to question decisions that fly in the face of public opinion? Or do we just lie down and accept this sort of crap, because as Mcbain say?s that?s the way the system works?

 

Bill :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well that comment just about sums things up here.

 

Have we really become so complacent that we don?t even bother to question decisions that fly in the face of public opinion? Or do we just lie down and accept this sort of crap, because as Mcbain say?s that?s the way the system works?

 

Bill :)

 

Before the "waste management strategy" consultation I had the opportunity of a press briefing at which I pointed out that the information regarding "energy from waste with combined heat and technology" was a complex way of describing a waste incinerator.

I suggested it would be much better to use the term incinerator to gauge public opinion.

I actually pointed out that once the public realised how it had been dressed up it would not go down very well.

The rest is history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Gary that?s not quite the point I was making.

 

Dressing up words as said earlier is just spin, it?s the fact that methods were used to gather information knowing full well they would not produce a result that reflected public opinion.

 

These are then presented as facts gathered from a consultation process and quoted to two decimal places to imply accuracy. In short it stinks and makes a mockery of the terms public consultation, transparency and democracy.

 

If the planners believe that incineration is the best way forward then they should put forward their proposals in an open and honest manner rather than trying to trick the public into believing that it?s what we asked for.

 

Bill :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately there isn't a group in the world that opts for such honesty when trying to gauge public opinion - the design of questionnaires etc. is always carefully designed to ensure that only those issues the interest group wants answers on are addressed; other and potentially embarassing matters are either marginalised or ignored entirely.

 

This is the way Government operates, the way Warrington Council operates and the way almost every other organisation I can think of operates.

 

You'll never see an "honest" question like:

 

Q. Do you agree that Warrington Council is little more than a loose conglomeration of self-obsessed egotistical and narcissistic no-marks, the only demonstrable talent of which is to further its own interests?

 

What you are far more likely to see is:

 

Q. On a scale of 1-5 (1=stayed the same, 5=stellar improvement) please indicate how much you think Warrington Council has improved in terms of its general governance and administrative performance over the last 12 months

 

The old adage "If you don't want the answer, then don't ask the question" is always applicable in politics :?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill, Apathy rules.

Until people get off their backsides and out of their personal bubble, the council and Government will do what they want.

Perhaps this present situation, money and job losses, might wake a few people up and then they might get more vocal and question what goes on.

Same with local cllrs. Unless people take them to task and question what they do, they will do very little apart from check their bank accounts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Observer - you obviously feel very strongly about this, having started a separate topic on the same issue!

But Church Lane, Culcheth, does not strike me as being the sort of road likely to be occupied by snobs.

Is it not possible they just want a bit of peace and quiet? Or does that make them snobs anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll never see an "honest" question like:

 

Q. Do you agree that Warrington Council is little more than a loose conglomeration of self-obsessed egotistical and narcissistic no-marks, the only demonstrable talent of which is to further its own interests?

 

 

But that of course is not an honest question, because you have started it with the words, "do you agree" then it goes on to make an opinionated statement. :wink::)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By any chance, would the people who object to an incinerator be the same people who put bins full of waste out to be collected each week. :wink:

 

Well since the bottom fell out of the recylcing market it is all being stock piled by local authorities now and most of it going into landfill - so much for all the recycling!!! :cry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether asking a question that?s really an opinionated statement or as in Paul?s case one with a built in implication of guilt only serves to demonstrate ones ability at political point scoring. Do they actually teach this sort of thing or is it just a refection of the persons character? Either way, it?s exactly this kind of wordplay practised and excelled at by those responsible for running our town that ultimately leads to wrong decisions.

 

If you truthfully want to know the answer, then you need to ask the question in a very straight forward way however in this instance the outcome was already known and asking the question served no other purpose other than to demonstrate that the planners had ?consulted?

 

Bill :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul - since you are a politico you'll have to excuse yourself from the debate since you have a vested interest in "bigging up" the Council :!:

 

Got to agree with Bill in that many "consultation exercises" are undertaken purely to tick a box on the validation list that planners hold so dear. Rarely is consultation undertaken early on in the process when things haven't been decided - it's just too expensive to do things that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul - since you are a politico you'll have to excuse yourself from the debate since you have a vested interest in "bigging up" the Council :!:

 

quote]

 

Do I. :?:

 

But interestingly since you chose not to identify yourself and we therefore don't know who you are, it could be said that you might well have a vested interest in "downing" the Council. :wink::)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whether asking a question that?s really an opinionated statement or as in Paul?s case one with a built in implication of guilt only serves to demonstrate ones ability at political point scoring. Do they actually teach this sort of thing or is it just a refection of the persons character? Either way, it?s exactly this kind of wordplay practised and excelled at by those responsible for running our town that ultimately leads to wrong decisions.

 

Bill :)

 

From time to time Bill, there are elections. You can stand, and if elected ensure that wrong decisions are never made. New blood in the Council is never a bad thing....and the gene pool does need expanding. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul

 

The gene pool doesn?t need expanding it needs eradicating and that extends to the unelected, overpaid numpties who call themselves planning officers. And by the way Paul, I wasn?t actually having a pop at you there, I thought you were just using that question as another example of how not to ask. :roll:

 

If that wasn?t the case, well as the saying goes ?if the cap fits.? :wink:

 

When it comes to making wrong decisions, we all do that from time to time and I?ve made some crackers in my time. But I?m not criticising the decision to go for incineration; just the way in which the council is trying to fool people into believing it?s what the public actually wanted when all previous indications say otherwise.

 

As for me getting involved in politics who knows? Maybe when I?m old and grey, :wink::lol: but at the moment, I prefer to remain the captain of my own star-ship with no affiliations to the Klingons, Romulan or even the Ferengis. :lol:

 

Bill :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this issue identifies a problem at the heart of democracy - with new technology, it would appear perfectly possible to make "political" decisions on the basis of continual IT referenda, thus cutting out the middle men, IE the politicians! :shock: The problem of course with that idea is, that people tend to vote solely on the basis of self interest, which is arguably the essence of democracy; but worse: not everyone would necessarilly participate thus making it the dictatorship of "the interested"; or worse still: we would have "uninformed" decision making. :shock: In theory, we elect politicians to take away the load and responsibility of such "decision making", in a similar way to all the other specialisations in our society - problem is; the political class has become a career choice rather than representative function. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...