Bowstring Bridge and Pump and Tap.

At the bottom of this post is the opinion piece in today's Mercury, which sums up how many people feel about the city council's decision to try to push this through in private.

Now lets start from the beginning....All council agendas and related non-confidential reports always land on my desk a week before the meeting is held. So I looked through the agenda and papers. Now you will always have a good look at the confidential items, sadly councils will nearly always have them and often it can be something juicy.

For the meeting on Monday there are two confidential papers.

The first is called "LEICESTER'S NEW BUSINESS GATEWAY: NEW BUSINESS QUARTER PHASE 2". Without reading this report you can pretty much guess what this is about, it has been talked about for years. The clue is in the title and it is probably about the development of the Campbell Street Post Office to prepare for a new square outside Leicester Railway Station. I guess we'll find out later on.

Now the second is called: "SALE OF LAND AND VIADUCT AT DUNS LANE". Now I know what this is because I was given the report. Now you could also guess what this was about, maybe, but having read this report, this really is a creative use of a title. Cynical I know. But the second paragraph is the one which says that the council will agree to spend up to £472,000 to demolish the Bowstring bridge. What I am trying to say is that the sale of land is one of two main recommendations to be agreed on Monday. Why was this not included in the title? You can make up your own mind.

Anyway, so I received this report and rang Ross Willmott, because he was presenting the report. Instead Patrick Kitterick called me from Ireland. First thing he said was that the council was not being secretive. They had a press release to be sent out after the council meeting. That sticks in my throat. How is that open? No-one would have known anything until afterwards. (They then put out a press release out on Friday anyway.)

I really do not understand why this is being discussed in private. The deal is done, the costs agreed. What is different about other reports on the main agenda on Monday? For example, there is a report, being discussed in public, on the development of a science park around the National Space Centre.

The science park report says the cabinet will agree to: "Acquire the freehold of the site from Emda, likely at a peppercorn (subject to negotiation)".

So here they are openly saying they will agree to buy the freehold, in a bit, after negotiations. This is what De Montfort University and the council have done on Dun's Lane, a deal much further along the line as DMU have already agreed to pay a peppercorn rate plus other phased payments. It makes no sense.

The council will not change their mind and on Monday it sounds like some people will be at the Town Hall to vent their anger at the plan, and also the circumstances of how it is to be agreed.

The council think this deal is great news for Leicester, but they have handled it very badly indeed. They would have been happy to wax lyrical about this decision, afterwards, when no-one knew it had been happening. When thousands of people have protested against this very plan, that is wrong.

Here is the Mercury's opinion:

The future of Leicester's Bowstring Bridge has been one of the most talked about issues in this newspaper in recent times.

Furthermore, campaigners have set up websites to show their strength of feeling on the matter. Thousands of names have been added to petitions against the removal of this local landmark in the heart of Braunstone Gate.

It is somewhat strange then that a meeting which will decide the future of the bridge should be held in private.

In fact, most of the people who have battled for so long to save the bridge, and the popular pub The Pump and Tap - which will also be demolished as part of the plans - would not have found out about the deal to knock it down had they not bought yesterday's Leicester Mercury.

In turn, the Leicester Mercury would not have been able to publicise the fate of the area had someone with a conscience, or at least some sense of democracy within the city's corridors of power, not leaked to us the report which explains the deal struck between De Montfort University and the council.

Today we have learned that despite the details of the Bowstring Bridge's future now being available on every newsstand in the city, the meeting to discuss the deal between the parties will still be held in private, on Monday, as planned.

The councillors at the heart of this situation claim the information in the report could not have been publicised because it was deemed commercially sensitive.

Their point being that they did not want the amounts being paid for the land in the area around Duns Lane being revealed.

However, now the deal is in the public domain and the figures are out there. We think it is it now time for the council to rethink their plan to discuss the matter in private.

Surely the people of Leicester deserve to hear about the major things which are happening in their city.

Eco Town is not over.

It will be two weeks ago tomorrow that I was at Westminster to hear the announcement that Pennbury was not going to be included on the Government's eco-town shortlist.

Soon afterwards I was with protesters who were celebrating outside number 10 Downing Street, having completed one of the largest and most organised opposition campaigns I have ever seen, and I suspect ever seen in Leicestershire.

But their work is still not over. Having spoken to Kevin Feltham at a county council meeting this week, they, Cascet, are still desperate to undermine the Co-op and their proposals to build close to Leicester.

There's just one thing I cannot get over, and that has been the attitude of the city council in this. The tram I can understand was attractive, but the rest? After all that regeneration work they have done?

Eco-towns are a Labour policy, yes, some councillors are Co-op Labour members, but even the Labour Government did not think that much of the proposal, even from day one. The highest grade it ever got was a b/c I think. Keith Vaz and particularly Sir Peter Soulsby have been completely against it, and made that clear.

Now I was told very early on by a very senior councillor, who wouldn't make it up, that members of the city council cabinet were told by the party they had to support it. But I was always surprised at the extent they did. I remember on one occasion, Patrick Kitterick had a real go at Sir Peter Soulsby in the paper, called him something like a "maverick MP" for opposing it.

This has been the third time that the Co-op has tried to develop their farm land, and I suspect that it will not be the last time, in fact, it probably won't ever stop until they can get the result they want. Clearly they have decided that farming is not going to make enough money, or they need to raise some, or both, and housing is what they will try to do. The green plans are admirable, but in my humble opinion, almost impossible to deliver. Cynical I know, but money is the driving force and I just can't understand how they can make the money they want if they reach these standards.

I suspect that they will now try to apply for a smaller scale development, as a sustainable urban extension, using all the research and work they have done in the build up to their failed eco-town bid. No surprise there probably. And if they can sort a tram, then the city will probably back them again.

Clearly the Government's decision was a big blow to the Co-op, but it is clearly not over.

Quick thoughts on recycling.

Isn't it time that people who cannot be bothered to recycle get a fine?

Today was the start of National Recycling Week and began with an event in Town Hall Square showing people what they can recycle, where to put it, and how it is disposed of.

This is not anti-city council, it is only right that people should be given the chance to get it right, but surely those who simply do not make the effort should be punished eventually? It is them who cost us taxpayers more to dispose of their waste after all because there is much more of it in their bins.

Now, is recycling really that difficult or new? Is the thought of putting glass or plastic boxes in a different place that alien to people? It makes me angry.

In the city around 40 per cent of waste is recycled and composted, and about 50 per cent out in the county. Not the figures of an area where many people do not understand recycling or are new to it.

Yes, people looking at the stalls outside the town hall today may have found out a few more things to dispose of or recycle. The councillor I spoke to today, Sarah Russell, said that the people who recycle are those who make an effort to (or something similar to this.) and she wanted to change the mindsets of those who don't. She is right, but it is how those mindsets are changed.

People quickly change their minds if they get hit in the pocket, so why not do that? The council has a team of city wardens to hand out fines in other circumstances, if you leave your bin out for example. I for one hope they start to use it when people are failing to recycle. They would probably have to check what people are throwing away, but that doesn't worry me at all.

Ancient skeletons.

Back to work today, this morning I discovered some ancient skeletons in a field in North Leicester - well someone else did and told me about it. It is in tomorrow's paper and i'll put a link up in the morning. Great story to write.

Back on the blog after recovering from the Euro count on Sunday.

Although election nights are always exciting, I thought this one was pretty subdued in the end, not sure if it was because the Tory train was pretty relentless from result one, especially in the county. The only exception was in Leicester, where Labour cleaned up completely. They are formidable in the city despite the national climate.

Anyway, results were coming in pretty fast but then we ended up waiting for hours for just three districts - either way our photographer had to set up a picture with the winners after the results were confirmed because the actual moment on the stage was so underwhelming.

Then rushed back to Merc HQ for 2ish, and had to file 700 words by 2.40am. That was exciting, proper back against the wall journalism to ensure we got the paper out. Our night editor Mark was magnificent that night, and we produced a front and inside lead to be proud of in time for the print run to start at 3.30am. Was in bed at around 4.30am - job done and had the next day off, even better.

Today was busy, things are really happening at County Hall, lots of stories floating around, can't report it all on here yet (well, in truth, not sure of all facts yet) one emerging issue is that leader David Parsons is choosing his new cabinet this week, but the deputy leader job (Nick Rushton's) is now up for election, not just chosen by the leader as it has been before. Strange business. I wonder if it is because Coun Rushton will go and it won't be Coun Parsons' decision or he will stay and again it won't be the leader's decision. Maybe me being cynical.

Two words: Special Olympics.

Front page today is about the Special Olympics and the company it employed which has failed to raise any money from commercial sponsorship.

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/politics/MARKETING-FIRM-FAILS-RAISE-1p-GAMES/article-1035987-detail/article.html

This is actually quite a sad story, you speak to the Leicester city councillors or games officials -they sound gutted about this situation. One councillor told me that sponsors will kick themselves for missing out. Yes perhaps they will but somehow this has not been sold to those sponsors.

The recession has hit the Games, but it is clear that the company wanted to get one big sponsor, and may have put their eggs in one basket with Visa. But this fell through and they have now been left with nothing.

I tried to speak to First Rights yesterday, was promised a call back but it never happened. I would like to know what they tried, whether they changed their strategy, why they think they failed. I hope they call back next week.

The council's scrutiny committee is right to have agreed to review what has happened here, especially because the city wants to take some part in England's World Cup bid for 2018.

What is clear is that lessons must be learned. We want the city to bid for these events, we do not want this experience to put off doing it again but clearly the sponsorship or lack of it has been extremely disappointing.

Now to one of my favourite days of the year! It's cup final day. Only been to the new Wembley once, and that was only the outside. But went to the old one with my beloved Ipswich to the last competitive final there in 2000, where we won promotion to the Premier League. The place is magical, made better because I was there with my brother and Dad.

Anyway, I'll be cheering for Everton and having a drink. Bon weekend.

Noisy neighbours/thoughtless louts.

Today's front page is a story about noisy neighbours and the misery suffered by those living next to these thoughtless louts.

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/news/Noisy-neighbour-complaints-soar/article-1030441-detail/article.html

Yesterday I spoke to a Beaumont Leys woman who has lost weight, has become agoraphobic, and almost lost her marriage because of the problems caused by her neighbour who insists on having karaoke all through the night, letting her children and dogs run riot and who personally shouts, swears and throws things out of her windows.

Her case is not unique, in fact speaking to the police and council it became clear that thousands in the city and county suffer in exactly the same way.

Ok, all of us may have been guilty in the past of having the stereo on loud, doing DIY when we shouldn't or having a party that has got a bit out of hand. But the authorities have clear procedures and send letters, and I think 99 per cent of people would be mortified if they realised they had caused these problems and would pop next door to say sorry with some wine or flowers.

Yesterday I was in a lock-up near Morrisons at Freemans Common there were the piles and piles of DVD players, stereos, TVs, all seized from idiots who ignored the warnings and are too stupid/selfish to see they are making life so difficult for people. It makes people ill and drives them to the edge, making it difficult to function at work and at home. We should throw the book at them.

City council expenses.

So, as I said last week the city council failed to respond to my FOI request asking for the release of the expenses of the city council cabinet within 20 days.

My comment that "there would be trouble" made a few people giggle, but anyway I was pretty grumpy about it, especially because the county council had given me the same info already, with days to spare. I was even more grumpy because I was told there was no real reason for the delay. Actually the reason I was given was so shocking I can't put it on here because it was followed swiftly by the "that was off the record by the way."

Anyway, on to today then.

10am: The situation was discussed with newsdesk and the editor, and we decided to get a formal response from the council's FOI department explaining the late reply and run a story on it. So I called the top man there, who said it was a "failure in the council's processes." Thanks. Very. Much. That's. Why. I. Am. Ringing.

Midday: I get a phone call from the city press office, asking if I was writing a story on the delay and if they could send a full statement explaining it. Of course I say.

2pm: I receive this explanation:

A city council spokesperson said:

“Firstly, we acknowledge that responding to this request has taken longer than we had hoped and we apologise for that.

“The scale and complexity of Freedom of Information (FoIA) requests has grown over the last couple of years, putting the resources and systems we need to deal with these requests under some pressure. The consequence is that responses to some requests, like this one, extend past the agreed deadline.

“However, we are currently reviewing our FoIA management systems to ensure we are better placed to deal with these requests in the future.

“As far as members’ expenses are concerned, the council has a policy of transparency – for many years summary information has been made available to the Mercury for publication annually.

“Members of the public also have access to this information during a set period each year, as part of the access arrangements to our wider accounts. We are aiming to have all of our accounts information available for public access by mid summer and will be publishing a notice to that effect shortly.

“The Mercury’s request and the ongoing national debate around MPs expenses have raised a number of issues about how we can ensure the greatest possible levels of transparency. We are currently looking at how we can make this information even more accessible so that the council taxpayers of Leicester can see exactly where their money is being spent.”

I then pop into a meeting to discuss how we are going to cover the elections on June 4.

3.15pm: The expenses, invoices and receipts are hand delivered to Mercury towers by Leicester City Council.

It would be cynical of me to think that I would not have got those details today anyway right? Now to plough through them.

One thing I have already noticed, one senior councillor sends more texts than the average teenager each month and charges the taxpayer by the way.