Road Rage



Our postbox has been rammed today with two contrasting but inter-connected stories.The first concerns over-zealous Wirral Council spy-car patrols and the second is about the same Council making Lollipop people redundant .

These two stories seem to sum up everything that is wrong with Wirral Council’s priorities. Whilst we wouldn’t advocate  parking pandemonium the CCTV spy car seems to be primarily a money making scheme and not a road safety measure. We say this based on the welter of stories we receive about minor motoring indiscretions hit with a £70 fine which are no way commensurate  with the so-called offence. Appeals appear to be largely futile – although you are invited to see the footage of your heinous crime for yourself should you so desire.

Meanwhile we understand that after the Wirral Council have undertaken road safety assessments at 48 school crossing sites . These sites are described in an anonymised  “at risk” of potential redundancy letter sent to a School Crossing Patrol as having  a “light controlled engineering facility” . We think this must be  Council-speak for traffic lights ,pelican crossings etc; !.

Lollipop letter 2

As a result of these assessments 40 sites have been de-lollipopped and therefore it could be said that children’s road safety is automatically compromised – whether they’ve got the benefit of a “light controlled engineering facility” or not !.

The 8 sites that will retain a School Crossing Patrol are :

1       Old Chester Road/Rocklands Avenue, Bebington
2       Teehey Lane / Village Road / Town Lane, Bebington
3       Upton Road , Moreton
4       Woodchurch Road , Oxton
5       Woodchurch Road / Singleton Avenue , Oxton
6       Mill Lane / Ashburton Road, Liscard
7       New Chester Road / Bebington Road (Toll Bar), New Ferry
8       Oxton Road / Love Lane, Poulton

Under the circumstances and as Wirral Council advise in their letter , perhaps the School Crossing Patrol could discuss with their manager/supervisor that a suitable “alternative location for employment” would be behind the wheel of a spy-car ! – as that’s where the money -and the Council’s priorities – currently seem to be at!.



3 thoughts on “Road Rage

  1. Isn’t it sad. No matter that these good men and woman dedicate their lives to this wonderful role in not only providing road safety to both children and adults, they are stood out there in all weathers providing a tiny slither of community service that’s seen many of them doing this job for so long in their working lives the idea to them that it was just a job has long since passed many years ago because the term job doesn’t do this role, calling or vocation enough justice in adequately describing just how important they’ve become to our way of life. Many of these wonderful people have actually got to see the children grow up and become parents of their own children who, now as Moms and Dads get the chance to introduce their young family to that special person who’s been helping them for decades to safely cross a road.That’s some achievement. It’s something to be marvelled at and its something that should escape the grasping fingers of those in the Council who want to save money but don’t want themselves to meet this cost and find it easier to invest in a piece of cash generating kit rather than continue to invest in the wonderful people who proudly carry out their civic role.
    A bucket of bile and phlegm on their heads for investing in a soulless, heartless van that’ll gift you a fixed penalty notice, a fine and an endorsement rather than ring fencing a smiling and friendly face that’s played such a huge part in the lives of so many.
    Me? Whenever I see these people at crossing points I nod, I inwardly acknowledge that they’re better than me and I can only watch in awe at their dedication as they go about their lowly paid business of helping our kids to cross a road.

  2. The letter states, “Thanks for your commitment…” whilst taking the opportunity to stick the boot in.

    So we can safely assume that Mark Smith is just as callous and uncaring as his predecessor David Green, the bloke who, after being caught out in high-level impropriety / nepotism involving a £multimillion contract, swanned off with £103,000 in public money to add to his wife’s £205,000 from the local NHS. It gets very expensive for us council tax payers when Torylite abusive members put themselves in a position where they’re forced to buy people’s silence to protect themselves.

    Presumably these fine lollipop persons will be coerced and made to sign a settlement agreement (omitted from the Smith letter) with a gagging / confidentiality clause – to ensure that they don’t pass on any dangerous, council threatening information that they’ve picked up whilst out there helping our kids cross the road.

    Because that’s what real Tory Jeff Green did didn’t he? When he had a brief stab at leading the council, the one that he now criticises so long and so hard from his position as a green-eyed monster. Yes, good old Jeff issued 835 ‘compromise’ (now settlement) agreements which gagged the whole lot – everybody from lollipop person all the way down the ladder to senior officer, costing us £65,500.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s