Hype and humbug

'Work has begun to restore College Green to its pre-Occupy Bristol glory...' says the Post. Now I like my green spaces and have a history of being more than prepared to argue for the benefits they bring, but glory? The glory of the grass on College Green? Massive exaggeration. Over the top bull.

Using the word glory would indicate a highly praiseworthy asset, worthy of adoration because of its majestic beauty and splendour. This is College Green, a formerly pleasant grassy area with a few trees and views of interesting buildings - not the Amazon Rainforest, the Serengeti National Park or the Himalayan mountain system!!

Overpaid Ormondroyd

Occupy Bristol protesters question leaders over pay rates.Why have so many comments on this story simply attacked those asking the questions? Its the issue that counts and tactical rather than fair argument is a distraction from the very important matter of who is paid what and why - and whether its fair and deserved. The current Chief Executive Jan Ormondroyd (pictured) is paid £107,000 per year more now than in 1998 - 122 per cent more than her predecessor 14 years ago. This £7600 a year rise every year for ten years, way above inflation and bearing no relation to the performance of Bristol City Council, cannot be right. Less than 10% a year says one person - but this sort of level of sustained increase has only been given to those already well paid and wealthy. Where's the justice in that?

People's paradigm

The idea to get lots of people involved in saying what they want Bristol to be like in the medium and long term is a really good one. See 'Occupy Bristol protesters draw up their vision for Bristol 2050'. There's no meaningful, democratic and effective medium and long term planning in the UK and this clearly needs to change. The intentions of Occupy Bristol are a bit different from the Post headline though - since Occupy advocate wide participation it wont be 'their' vision as such, it will be the visions of the people that come forward to make contributions. So, its over to Bristol's people...send your ideas to occupybristol@riseup.net  I very strongly agree that wider public participation means better decisions, not least because its more likely that local knowledge and good sense is included and people will have ownership of actions that result (as any exercise needs to go beyond ideas) and back them up in their own lives. Here's the story in the Post: 
PLANS to create a vision for the type of place people would like Bristol to be in 2050 will be discussed by protestors on College Green.


The Occupy Bristol camp is planning a series of open meetings to plan a future for the city.

A protester, who gave his name as Luther Blissett, said: "Neither the electoral cycle nor the product planning horizon are far enough away to allow us to be utopian, to hope for better futures. There is very little thinking about the medium and long term.



"The people's 2050 will try to inhabit this vacuum.


"It will not be a top-down document or plan that anyone tries to rigidly enforce, it will not be in that sense 'The Plan'. It will simply be a conversation that develops, spawning hundreds of little plans, counter plans and, crucially, actions.


"We hope that by looking forward 40 years we can provide a platform for the people of Bristol to come up with some interesting ideas about how we want our city and society to be organised."


This project has been inspired by the existing Bristol 2050 project but protesters say that only references the city's business leaders and should include the public.


Mr Blissett added: "There's plenty of evidence that wider public participation in decision-making means better decisions – because it means more knowledge and ideas go into the mix. The people's 2050 is an alternate vision, and we want your input."


The group asked people to send "utopian hopes and desires for Bristol 2050" in word or picture form to occupybristol@riseup.net.

Equality - not

I assume that those vehement critics of Occupy Bristol (see here) are happy with huge and unfair inequality that exists - perhaps they are even advocates of it. The 2010 report, An Anatomy of Economic Inequality in the UK showed that the richest 10% of the population are more than 100 times as wealthy as the poorest 10% of society - and comparison between the richest here and the poorest in the world is of course even worse.

Large scale income inequality cuts quality of life and eats away at the fabric of society. Look at the evidence here http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/why . We should adopt income inequality as one of the key indicators of progress in our society and urgently enact measures to cut inequality (see http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/why/remedies ).