Welcome to Liverpool Confidential
Reset Password
The Confidential websites will be undergoing routine updates. This may cause the sites to go offline. We apologise in advance for any inconvenience.

You are here: Liverpool ConfidentialNews & Comment.

Ex-Brookie actor Simon O'Brien blasts new St Julie's plan

Mayor eyes Woolton green space for redevelopment after scrapping 'dangerous' school move

Written by . Published on June 13th 2014.


Ex-Brookie actor Simon O'Brien blasts new St Julie's plan
 

FORMER Brookside star Simon O’Brien has attacked an idea by Mayor Joe Anderson to rebuild St Julie’s school on a green space in the heart of Woolton village. 

It follows a surprise announcement by the Mayor last night that he has shelved a proposal to relocate the former Notre Dame convent school across the village to a site next to Roman Catholic St Francis Xavier's in Beaconsfield Road. 

There was jubilation at a crowded public meeting in the village last night when neighbours waging the Battle of Woolton Hill were told of the Mayor’s change of heart. 

But while the Woolton Hill residents are in a celebratory mood,  across the award-winning village things are far from rosy. 

One of the favoured sites mentioned by Mayor Anderson is a stretch of open space facing Woolton High Street. It adjoins St Julie’s, but provides a massive green buffer between the school and the High Street. 

The prospect of the school going there, instead of Beaconsfield Road, saw the first salvo in what could be a new Woolton war, being fired by O’Brien. 

Attacking the Keep Woolton Safe Campaigners, the actor blasted: “Having just attended the meeting with Mayor Anderson I am disgusted at your organisation. I have seen NIMBYism many times before but you take the biscuit. To stand and thank the Mayor ‘for making the right decision’ at the end of a meeting when he had just announced building on a piece of green space which is as old as the village itself beggars belief.

“I was not directly affected by the plans to relocate to SFX but went along to show support for other residents, only to leave appalled by the smug room full of narrow minded fools.” 

Simon O'brienSimon O'BrienCampaigner Pauline Roy said: “I think this attack from Simon is most unfair. From the very start we have taken the view a large school on the Beaconsfield site would be a disaster from a safety point of view. The roads around the Beaconsfield site could not cope with thousands of students and staff. 

“When I spoke to Mayor Anderson he told me he had been on a site visit and had concluded the site would not be the right one for St Julie’s. In fact he said he had sleepless nights over the site because he was so worried about the potential dangers. 

“The site in the High Street was mentioned at the meeting, but not by me or any of our committee. We were all taken aback when the Mayor announced at the start of the meeting that the plans had been shelved. We were just stunned. We had spent three days prepared for the meeting, expecting there to be a hard fought battle.

To call us NIMBYs is most unfair. It would seem there will be a new campaign over this alternative site.” 

In a statement today Liverpool City Council said: “Alternative plans are to be drawn up to relocate St Julie’s Catholic High School in Liverpool. 

“As part of the £169 million Liverpool Schools Investment Programme, it had been proposed that the school move from its existing site on Speke Road to the former Lower Lee Special School on Beaconsfield Road in Woolton – next to SFX Catholic College. 

Alternatives

“Mayor Joe Anderson met with local residents and told them that, after taking a detailed look at the proposals, he has listened to their concerns over traffic and decided that the planning application should not be submitted. 

"Mayor Anderson said: 'We are committed to holding genuine and meaningful consultation, and after a close look at this proposal following concerns raised by residents, I have decided it would be best to look at alternatives. 

'This was only ever a proposal, and having now studied it, I have concluded that it is not the right location for the school. 

'I would like to reassure parents and pupils at St Julie’s that this does not affect my Mayoral pledge, and I am committed to finding a new site for the school, which we will announce and consult on in due course. 

'I won’t play politics with the future education of pupils in this city and am committed to working with the school and local residents to come up with a workable solution.'” 

Lib Dem Councillor Richard Kemp said: "It is only four weeks since we were told that there were no other options available for the school's redevelopment. Local residents came up with at least two and the Mayor has put another option on the table.

"This is no way to run a planning service and it is no way to run an education service and I will be asking for a full report to go to the Mayoral Select Committee about how the council has spent a year backing a horse that was fit only for the knackers yard."

Like what you see? Enter your email to sign up for our newsletters which are chock-a-block with more great reviews, news, deals and savings.

62 comments so far, continue the conversation, write a comment.

Ford PrefectJune 13th 2014.

Now Mayor Joe can make dangerous Woolton 'village' safe by pedestrianising it because this perilous accident blackspot obviously needs it. This course of action will please the so-called 'Keep Woolton Safe' campaigners because they are aparently all in imminent danger of death on the roads. Indeed it would please everyone all round, unless of course they just a bunch of car-addicted NIMBYs...

John BradleyJune 13th 2014.

Lets build a large wall around Parklands, then link the now isolated site to Woolton with an underground metro link. The wall can be patrolled by highly trained, killer albino nuns armed with AK-47, bottles of holy water and sharpened crucifixes to protect against infection from the locals. Outside the walls a mine field of bouncing Betties and self deploying Mary statues can be installed. A battalion of Trappists monks can form the outer cordon, to face down the protestant hordes that will besiege the place, while hordes of seraphim rain fire down on them at the behest of the arch angel Gabriel. As Robert Rankin foretold the battle at the end of times will not take place in the Middle East but on Merseyside Woolton is Golgotha to Spekes Armageddon.

2 Responses: Reply To This...
AnonymousJune 13th 2014.

Now that is the John Bradley we love.

AnonymousJune 14th 2014.

HAHA!!!

far from smugJune 13th 2014.

Dear Simon I attended the meeting last night. I have supported keep Woolton Safe - and continue to do so. The site was unsafe and it cant cope with whats already there in regard to the number of boys who are like lost sheep in the mornings or Lemmings trying to cross the road at the mini roundabout at the top of Beaconsfield and dodge the parents who think its ok to park on the kerb as their kids are more important than the ones walking! I feel far from smug at the overall ending of last night! I dont undertstand why if at the outset Mayor Anderson only needed to sell St Julie's to create the cash for the new build on Lower Lea - he now needs to sell Lower Lea and St Julie's? This is a very clever and considered move by the Mayor! Instead the tension built in the room and arguments and commments erupted and he divided and conquered - we should have asked this question and still should re the capital receipt! If they don't build on the green space (if as Joe Anderson cleverly caveated at the end that IF the new site proposed could not work he would have to revert to the Beaconsfield site) Many people had left by this stage! Instead of one side of the village arguing with the other we should be trying to work as one - I do care about the whole of Woolton, asking why the St Julies site needs to be sold now as if now planned they will get the capital receipt from Lower Lea AND PALMERSTON, Palmerston which was never in the original equation/calculations - what has changed that more money is needed? Whats he doing with Parklands which will cost council tax payers £3m a year for the next 14 years has he found another suitable use for it? Im not saying put St Julie's in there just do something to make the most of the money being expended! Has he carried out due diligence in regard to the values he is getting for the site(s). Why cant the St Julie's site be made into a green space to replace the area the new school will take - to compliment the woods? I would like to see Keep Woolton Safe carry on and ask these questions and work together. This would be far more acceptable. Thanks

7 Responses: Reply To This...
AnonymousJune 13th 2014.

so you understood the bit about the school not going to Beaconsfield Road but the bit that the Mayor explained very clearly about why the school not going to Parklands is a muddle to you. Well, you are having a few problems aren't you?? should we spell it out in very simple words for you. The children don't live there. The parents can choose where to send their children. Parklands has closed because locally parents have chosen to send their children elsewhere. Lots of schools have been asked to go there and they all said no. Not because of Speke, but because of the distance. Pauline Roy has stated that she sent her children to St Julies. She would not have sent her children to Parklands. Why don't you understand. Pauline can explain it to you next time she has her tea party with you all...

AnonymousJune 13th 2014.

Dear Far from smug. Well done on your creative writing entry to the How to appear informed writing competition. I am sorry to inform you that your entry did not convince the judges that you understood the question. I am sure that with a little bit of research and gathering of factual information, you will be able to answer some of your own questions and present a coherent argument. Until then, please keep up the effort...Ah, bless......

AnonymousJune 14th 2014.

Sorry but think you need to read my post again as in regard to Parklands I said I'm not suggesting st Julie's go there, just use the building! As were paying for it in council tax! Lease it to industry someone anyone just get some money in! And yes I understand from one of the residents that a lot of children go to Halewood to school. As for tea parties I would like to come to yours for one x

JhJune 14th 2014.

Dear anonymous, not sure what you mean re the creative writing.perhaps if you say which bits I can have a look, what no one seems to have thought about is Joe Anderson probably had his eye on the new proposed site for st Julie's to parcel up with the original land sale of st Julie's all along. This wasn't a bold decision on the night or made in last few weeks. And the fact he said he had walked around Beaconsfield and realised it was too dangerous to add a further 1200 girls coming to the location begs the questions a) if his son went to the school why didn't he know this and b) if he had chosen the site as recommended by his officers in a report why hadn't he been out sooner?

Simon not BrianJune 14th 2014.

Dear Anonymous I too have been doing some creative writing. It's about a village which isn't really a village and their campaign to stop 1200 girls being moved onto a site where there were already 1200 pubescent boys already crammed into one site a dangerous road, some nuns and may steal a few ideas from John Bradley's idea. John need to meet up re this. Not sure if I will cast Simon O Brein as himself as a crusader or what need to speak to him when he's out on his bike! I'm flexible re this.There's lots of tense moments and stand off in local pubs like to add to the drama. Oh and of course the sweet shop few scenes in there. And Joe in his helicopter flying about rubbing his hands together while the locals kill each other. Can we have a tea party round yours and get some ideas you could write the factual bits?

Simon not BrianJune 14th 2014.

Been thinking we could put a romance in between rival groups may need 15 rating. Let me know.

AnonymousJune 14th 2014.

In response to the first two posts from Anonymous on this point (are you the same person or two different people one wonders?) - why such nastiness? Fair enough you are entitled to your opinion and you may not agree with what Far From Smug says but why make your points in such a spiteful way? Do you talk to people who you disagree with face to face like this? I'm guessing probably not if you want to retain any friends. It's easy to say nasty things under the cover of anonymity isn't, layer it with heavy irony to give the illusion that you are making a clever point. Surely you can make your points of disagreement without being so downright rude?!

far from smugJune 13th 2014.

Very naughty but highly amusing Mr Bradley. Did make me laugh amongst all this!

AnonymousJune 13th 2014.

Dear Simon….i am not smug or narrow minded. My concern is for the pupils that already access sfx, my son being one of them. Any plans that increases traffic and pedestrians to an already congested area are not safe in my book!!!!

1 Response: Reply To This...
Matthew PetersJune 13th 2014.

Oh dear. we now find ourselves in a position of arguing against the very people who supported us because we are now faced with the dilemma of protecting our homes versus protecting green space which is, thankfully, quite a bit of a way away from MY house....

AnonymousJune 13th 2014.

Have a word with the English teacher next time you're in will ya mate?

1 Response: Reply To This...
DeniseJune 14th 2014.

Who Matthew we need to say who we're getting at here as it all gets lost in ether? Whose grammar is poor?

AnonymousJune 13th 2014.

I am surprised at the apparent passing by the moderator on this site to what is clearly religious hatred. Satirical or not, comments by John Bradley are inappropriate and will cause offence. You would not accept comments like this of a minority religion (in the UK) such as Islam. so why do we have to put up with his damaging comments to Catholics?

2 Responses: Reply To This...
John BradleyJune 13th 2014.

It is fairly clear you have no idea what constitutes hatred.

DeniseJune 14th 2014.

Probably because Catholics and Protestants etc are used to poking fun at each other and this has gone on for years! Made me giggle x

AnonymousJune 13th 2014.

Why does some 'so called celebrity' warrant press space on this issue. As a resident within the affected area I was opposed to the plan for many reasons, not least the future of many independent shops in our village to whom I have supported with my trade for many years. Keeping a school in the village centre has been instrumental to their continued success. Keep your opinions to yourself in the future

G PrinceJune 13th 2014.

The people of Woolton need to stand together. We need Keep Woolton Safe. I have never met such hard working,focused and dedicated people. They are so passionate about protecting Woolton FOR EVERYONE. They have made a difference. There is no time for squabbling. We need to unite and work together and protect our beautiful village

3 Responses: Reply To This...
CommonJune 15th 2014.

Not QUITE for everyone, only for the small number of people they don't want to keep out!

AnonymousJune 16th 2014.

Dear common that doesn't make sense. Do you mean the small number they do want to keep out? And if so who are they?

commonJune 19th 2014.

The schoolchildren and their teachers of course! Your "people of Woolton" appear to be under the misapprehension that the roads are their personal property when in fact they are PUBLIC amenities paid for by taxpayers everywhere.

Dave MurphyJune 13th 2014.

'Far from Smug' - You really have to ask why Mayor Bradley can't turn the old St Julie's site into green space after the development? The man is Hell Bent on selling everything off in the City to developers - I wouldn't dream to speculate why - Sefton Park Meadows for example! Everyone on here, don't let this Mayor do this to Woolton village

4 Responses: Reply To This...
AnonymousJune 13th 2014.

David, please do read your comments before you post them. Who is Mayor Bradley? If you want to post here, please do have a plan to explain how you would balance the budget. In case you don't know what that means, apparently some people don't have enough money to pay for everything they need. In this case it is the city council where you live. As a result of cuts to budgets given to our city council, the man called the Mayor has to make some decisions about how to get more money to invest in our children's education. He wants to sell stuff to get money to invest in our children's future. Sometimes, we don't like what he does but it has a positive outcome for more people than just us so a lot of people say "Oh, OK, that seems like a reasonable thing to do because our children deserve the best education, as they will then contribute to the future of Liverpool when we get old." It is what we sometimes call common sense...

BarryJune 14th 2014.

Dear Anonymous, The council wastes money! Parklands closed! Esla far from full. Joe has a £650 day consultant (which is what we know about) he would be better off spending some dosh on some good forensic accountants to see why and where he is haemorrhaging money! Woolton high is massive (at top of Beaconsfield) with residential accommodation for the pupils parents. 48 kids max go there! It's empty! So I would like some degree of comfort as a council tax payer with no kids who is paying for all this what checks have been done to show we need these schools? A lot of money was spent fitting out millennium house! Now it's being ripped out for the shankly hotel and council off to Cunard building. Yes May have got a money for the building but how does this look against cost of fit out of millennium house which will now go to waste and to fit out Cunard building to accommodate the council. Do we see all this?

SJ77June 14th 2014.

Well said David, it would seem the people of WV care more about getting their own way than protecting precious habitat.

Dave MurphyJune 17th 2014.

Apologies for theMayor 'Bradley' faux pas - obviously Anderson! Oh and it was nice of you to reply anonymously Joe!

Matthew PetersJune 13th 2014.

I am absolutely dumb founded by this irrelevant argument that the children of a school should be REQUIRED to be a customer of businesses of Woolton Village. We have heard that a sweet shop MUST be supported by children, despite the fact that we all know obesity is a major issue in this country, and now children are NEEDED to support business in Woolton Village. If the resident adults are not willing to support the business of the village, do NOT blame the children. This is shameful! And to say that opinions should be kept to yourself is simply stupid if that is the whole point of this website. Get off this website if you don't want to read peoples' opinion!!!

3 Responses: Reply To This...
AnonymousJune 14th 2014.

OH SHUT UP YOU NARROW MINDED FOOL!!!! YES THIS SITE IS FOR PEOPLE WITH OPINIONS BUT PEOPLE WITH NO BRAIN LIKE YOUR SELF SHOULD BE BANNED!!!!!!

BarryJune 14th 2014.

Sorry Matthew don't agree with this. The poor guy in the shop employs 5 or 6people he would have had to shed staff. The girls don't jus buy sweets he does sell cards magazines etc. it's not just the pupils obviously the staff and nuns shop too and parents. It brings them to the area otherwise it would be out on a limb. Got to go off to buy some kola kubes in Browns.

AnonymousJune 17th 2014.

Think you left your caps lock on! It is the button on the left of the keyboard. You replied to say I was a narrow minded fool and I had no brain, but I missed your OPINION ABOUT CHILDREN BEING REQUIRED TO SUPPORT SWEET SHOPS IN WOOLTON VILLAGE. DO YOU BUY YOUR SWEETS THERE??????? Or are you someone who id scared of children like these NIMBYs too. Oh, and can you stop shouting please (polite notice).

PaulineJune 14th 2014.

I am a committee member of Keep Woolton Safe. Since January myself and other committee members have given up all semblance of normal life, spending time opposing an inherently unsafe, inappropriate planning proposal, ie relocation of St Julie's to Beaconsfield Rd. We have walked the streets posting flyers thru doors, we have written a million letters, lobbied our MP, Mayor, Cabinet members, local councillors, been interviewed on local radio, made a banner, gone to the public Cabinet meeting, demanded meaningful consultation. At last The Mayor agreed to a meeting. We spent hours and hours preparing.When he announced that he was ditching the proposal we were amazed but obviously delighted ! We had achieved what we had set out to do.We knew nothing about this new proposal before the meeting and are as shocked as everyone else. G Prince is right. There is a great community spirit in Woolton, let's make sure that it grows and flourishes ! I am proud of the people of Woolton. Simon's comments are unhelpful. Our committee is resting before meeting next week to decide how we should proceed. We are all frankly exhausted. Perhaps it is time for someone else to take up the baton if they feel very strongly re this latest proposal ? How about it Simon ?

AnonymousJune 14th 2014.

Obviously Simon Obrien is a sad uneducated idiot who is trying to get some attention from the situation. What part of the FACT that Beaconsfield Road is UNSAFE can he not comprehend?!?! This FACT has been confirmed by several professional bodies. Do your self a favour and pipe down. Your making your self look stupid. How about concentrating on your failed acting career?

5 Responses: Reply To This...
DeniseJune 14th 2014.

He has a few shows and writes.

AnonymousJune 14th 2014.

Great

OnlookerJune 15th 2014.

Anonymous wrote "What part of the FACT that Beaconsfield Road is UNSAFE can he not comprehend?!?!" (a) What is this "fact that Beaconsfielf Road id "unsafe"? (b) Are the natives violent? (c) If it really is unsafe perhaps it needs to be demolished.

BarryJune 16th 2014.

Dear Onlooker if you dont know its unsafe - get out there at 8.30am to 9.30am when the SFX boys are trying to get to school. Trying to cross the road, dodge parents parked on kerbs - hell bent on dropping thier darling off who looks like a grown man. Lots of these 'boys' must be droppped at the gate as they are unable to walk or cross this road. Its ok if the other ones who somehow seem much smaller are knocked out by a car door or have to walk in the road to pass the yummy mummy's cars. On a very narrow road with footpath on one side and a mini roundabout at the top which is extremely busy where they all cross! Try it again from 3pm onwards. Try it in the rush hour, try it at 5-6pm when most offices close and in the winter when its pitch black. Thats mildly touching on the traffic element.

onlookerJune 19th 2014.

Oh what a calamity! This happens around schools everywhere, not just on your doorstep. I live near a couple of schools and the pupils are no bother apart from a bit of litter in term-time. Of course the parents are the selfish and stupid drivers who clog the roads, park across driveways and stick their fingers up at blameless locals trying to get into their own drives, but that is the way things are in post-Thatcher, middle-class, Daily Mail-reading Britain these days. The so-called 'school run' was unheard of twenty-five or thirty years ago. These people are narrow-minded, short-sighted, inconsiderate, self-obsessed and ignorant; no doubt they also oppose schools being built by their homes because they don't want a lot of other people using 'their' roads. They are takers not givers.

BarryJune 14th 2014.

It's all getting a bit vicious now. At end of day it was ridiculous idea to put school on Beaconsfield ill thought out! Yeah they said they would close the Beaconsfield entrance and make it for service goods only! Until after a few months a few kids had been knocked down running the gauntlet across Menlove and the people in Woolton hill rd and Druidsville rd had gone into meltdown and then it would have reopened again on safety and congestion easing reasons! St Julie's site wld still have been sold, the proposed site would prob have gone with it. And St Julie's prob would have ended up having more empty places than it has now around 89 not filled last sept either because of traffic danger and mums and dads not wanting their kids to go there, not mixing with boys etc. it's appreciated that a lot of siblings go to both schools but at the end of the day it is a catholic all girls voluntary aided school. And a lot of parents pick st Julie's for this reason. And were anxious re a shared entrance on menlove and shared sports fields.

1 Response: Reply To This...
AnonymousJune 14th 2014.

Very well said Barry. There is a lot of unnecessary nastiness on this page.

Simon O'brienJune 14th 2014.

Let's be clear why I made my comment. When Mayor Anderson suggested the alternative site - building on a park I expected howls or derision but apart from some members of Woolton Society, myself and a few others the response was muted to say the least and the meeting ended by the Keepeooltonsafe committee warmly thanking Mayor Anderson for and I quote 'making the right decision'. Yours most definitely not cowardly anonymous - Simon O'Brien

3 Responses: Reply To This...
AnonymousJune 14th 2014.

They warmly thanked Joe Anderson as he AGREED the site was UNSAFE for St Julies! St Julies' land was to be sold for development anyway. Nobody was bothered about the field then! You obviously havent got a clue by the drivel you are chatting. Keep Woolton SAFE is concerned for the safety of its residents. That is blatantly not a priority for you SIMON O'BRIEN. The residence of woolton could do without an attention seeking once Z lister trying to form a rift between the two sides of woolton!

AnonymousJune 15th 2014.

Well then Simon is this just a great opportunity for you to put yourself in the public eye in an attempt to boost a flagging career or are you genuinely concerned about these new proposals of the Mayors. If it is the later(which I hope it is) then rather than dividing Woolton with your malicious, scathing and extremely damaging remarks, it would be far more desirable to use your new founded stage in a more positive and constructive way. Get behind the KWS lot They have successfully got rid of the UNSAFE Beaconsfield proposal. We need them and the rest of the village and you now to to get together. Fight this new proposal. ARE YOU UP TO IT!

DisgustedJune 15th 2014.

Goodness! What unpleasant and offensive chumps! Small-minded, curtain-twitching NIMBYs indeed, who prefer concrete and stagnation to a living community. Mr. O'Brien is defending a public amenity and he puts his name on the line at the bottom, unlike these misanthropic and self-centred Daily Mail readers who are too cowardly put their names to their offensive and quite likely defamatory statements.

AnonymousJune 14th 2014.

And another thing. Did you or did you not vandalise Paul collin's lavatory pan three decades ago? We demand an answer!

scouse690June 14th 2014.

Simon O'Brien....you've only just jumped into this debate! Pathetic.....Just use "Parklands School" in Speke....it's the teachers that "make a school"....and the behaviour of those attending! Speke is not a scary place....far from it! It's just bloody ignorance from parents, who do not want to move their children, into a school there. I was brought up and educated by my teachers...not the building, or the area. "Mayor Joe" needs to stop trying to sell off prime sites....and wanting to decimate "green land", when there are perfectly good alternatives, out there!

AnonymousJune 15th 2014.

I feel that Simon is confused. Mayor Anderson definitely made the right decision, ie not to build on Beaconsfield. For most of its length, Beaconsfield is without even a pavement as you well know, Simon. Imagine allowing more than 2.000 pupils to use it daily ! Sheer stupidity ! Re the new proposal, we too were stunned but it wasn't the time or place to discuss what we didn't understand. Plans ? Consultation ? It has all yet to take place. Do as we did Simon, engage with Mayor Anderson, help him to find a credible alternative for St J's and remember he has a budget to meet. Walk the talk Simon !

PaulineJune 15th 2014.

The rant urging Simon to ' Walk the talk ' is from me, Pauline. ( sorry, I pressed the wrong button !) I don't want to be anonymous because we need to talk openly and without rancour and come together to protect our much loved Woolton.

2 Responses: Reply To This...
AnonymousJune 15th 2014.

So now we know your first name, things are so much more transparent than if you had remained anonymous?

AnonymousJune 15th 2014.

Oh for goodness sake it's quite obvious who she is and who he is they just need to meet up and move forward. If you don't know who they both are where have you been? She's certainly not been anonymous in all this and not many people would have stuck their neck out like she has! Whether you think she is right or wrong! We are all quick to be keyboard warriors aren't we? If you don't like the plans do something! Join in. Get the list of all the MPs and councillor a join the group or form a group. Without her we would not have even got this level of info. Got a meeting with Big Joe. Probably would have been a done deal that all the land was being parcelled up win St Julie's for sale. So many people didn't know St Julie's site was moving and being sold. The council didn't even leaflet people properly. This has all been spread by word of mouth and email by the people of Woolton!

JhJune 15th 2014.

And another thing! Both Simon and Pauline have stuck their necks out and above the parapet! We don't have a right to anonymously vilify them! It was ok for Simon to try and save the baths sat outside the town hall in a dingy with his little girl! Not many people put themselves out oh I'm too busy oh I'm going out I can't come to a meeting etc, so you can't moan if you sit back! Do something! Like these people!

1 Response: Reply To This...
AnonymousJune 15th 2014.

Dingy or dinghy? Speak up man, your public need clarity!!! And fewer exclamation marks!!

JhJune 15th 2014.

Dinghy!! And I'm transgender thanks!!

AnonymousJune 17th 2014.

Can we not just grant "Woolton Village" independence from the rest of us in Liverpool. Most "village" residents have a self-righteous superior & smug attitude towards the rest of the city & its residents anyway. Please let Liverpool be free of this smug daily-mail infested backwater which appears to be stuck in the Terry & June era of the 1970's. Get lost Woolton Village...The rest of Liverpool don't want you!

2 Responses: Reply To This...
AnonymousJune 17th 2014.

Well said anonymous. Woolton village residents don't seem to comprehend what is going on in the rest of Liverpool and England. It would be nice to stay in 1970 0r 1980 but actually we are in a desperate state here in 2014. Longest recession in living memory, largest cuts city has seen. yet WV residents want to put a wall around themselves, close their eyes and say "it isn't my problem." They invoked the support of the Lib Dems to support their cause, but only to support their cause - didn't actually vote for Richard Kemp and his crew. No, they voted Labour. The Labour administration that proposed the school is built on Beaconsfield in the first place, then changed their minds. How many people have benefitted from this last decision? How many have lost out out? If you do not know the answer to this question, you are NOT informed you are blinkered, misled, self-centred, arrogant and corrupt. Let's get back to British values, where we are all in support of the democratic voice, not the loudest voice of the militant few. I am sure Kim Jong-un would be proud of your self protecting attitudes, but that is not something to be proud of. Shame on you all, your families too.

DacreJune 19th 2014.

Hear hear! These Woolton types are the ones who bring 'danger' to other areas when they too selfishly drive their lazy children to school without consideration for the people who happen to live nearby. It would serve them right if the Council allowed an open prison to be built on the site.

Sarah MurphyJune 18th 2014.

I take it the plan is to sell of the Beaconsfield land for houses & the St Julie's land too and build on the parkland next door. Where will all the youth groups go for their outdoor activities? Where will people play football ? What outside exercise area will the school use as this is where the girls do sport now? This is such a shame as this is a haven for wildlife and has never been built on it will destroy a historic conservation area too. Less green space for Liverpool - not great for everyones health and well-being. Once built on it can never be reversed. So sad everyone on this web-link is just bickering rather than being productive to get the best outcome for residents tax payers and the children.

2 Responses: Reply To This...
John BradleyJune 18th 2014.

"Once built on it can never be reversed" yes it can.

To post this comment, you need to login.Please complete your login information.
OR CREATE AN ACCOUNT HERE..
Or you can login using Facebook.

Latest Rants

Anonymous

I agree with the Councillor. His examples really don't go far enough, because of the complexities…

 Read more
Anonymous

Perhaps a "dolmus" system could be used in the city centre, they work quite well for tourists and…

 Read more
Fairminded

Not price related but sad to see that they are doing away with the Citylink bus. This runs around…

 Read more
Anonymous

Thank you Woo

 Read more

Explore The Site

© Mark Garner t/a Confidential Direct 2017

Privacy | Careers | Website by: Planet Code