People call for resignation of Dorset District Council's leader over Charles Street project (From Dorset Echo)

Robert 'teflon' Gould need i say any more!

Clr Gould will no doubt deny Adolf Hitler lived or money DOES NOT grow on trees.
So 600 new jobs come into the town in say 18/24 months from now. It is doubtful if they will come anywhere near the jobs that have been lost since June 2011.
Most of the contractors working on the Titanic project come from outside Dorchester.
Simons are looking very dodgy financially and I understand that part of Titanic, either stern or aft are already under water and will need remedial work, who pays for this?
If council offices add value to the site then thank God Mr Gould does not look after my finances.

My Goodness me. I expect Mr Gould was overwhelmed by the fury of public anger when all 5 of those protestors pitched up with their placards and banners.

Well, actually there was 4 protestotrs and an old lady waiting for a bus who was caught up in the protest.

The new council office block looks fabulous and is something this town will be very proud of. The architects
and the council should be congratulated on a marvellous project.

max planck wrote:
My Goodness me. I expect Mr Gould was overwhelmed by the fury of public anger when all 5 of those protestors pitched up with their placards and banners. Well, actually there was 4 protestotrs and an old lady waiting for a bus who was caught up in the protest. The new council office block looks fabulous and is something this town will be very proud of. The architects and the council should be congratulated on a marvellous project.

Most people in Dorchester do not agree with the choice of site or the waste of money associated. The right thing to do would have been to halt the development until economic conditions improve. You might enjoy sitting in your new council offices but while you do so, try and remember that what WDDC have done is ensure that there can never be a decent sized retail development in central Dorchester. All that potential for revenue generation (paye, vat, corporation tax, business rates) has been lost forever. And the next stage of the project - in which the last few car parking spaces wil be lost and a church will be moved to occupy the last spaces in Trinity Street - will complete the job, putting people off visiting the town.

max planck wrote:
My Goodness me. I expect Mr Gould was overwhelmed by the fury of public anger when all 5 of those protestors pitched up with their placards and banners.

Well, actually there was 4 protestotrs and an old lady waiting for a bus who was caught up in the protest.

The new council office block looks fabulous and is something this town will be very proud of. The architects
and the council should be congratulated on a marvellous project.

A council worker smitten with their new office no doubt?? Looking forward to council taxes going up next year no doubt too?
BTW your sense of good architecture and project delivery leaves alot to be desired especially considering the building probably isn't even practically complete yet but don't let that dampen your basised opinion.

I was at the meeting and can confirm that Gould maintained a smug-looking grin throughout which for the sake of the future of Dorchester, someone needs to wipe off ASAP.

Let's face it, while Mr Gould is the mandarin of WDDC this town will never have a decent shopping centre, plus WDDC are frightened of a certain chain of family run stores in the town.

max planck wrote:
My Goodness me. I expect Mr Gould was overwhelmed by the fury of public anger when all 5 of those protestors pitched up with their placards and banners.

Well, actually there was 4 protestotrs and an old lady waiting for a bus who was caught up in the protest.

The new council office block looks fabulous and is something this town will be very proud of. The architects
and the council should be congratulated on a marvellous project.

Your timing was obviously adrift. If you'd taken the trouble to actually attend the meeting you would have witnessed the fact that there wasn't a spare seat in the chamber, which is unheard of for an executive committee meeting I believe and I can promise you the majority of the members of public in attendance were NOT there to offer Gould any encouragement or support.

The only riposte to Max Planck's rather silly and totally out of touch with local opinion is to remind him his views are rather like his name sounds like.
I leave it to the readers of these comments to make a judgement.

Abysmal architecture and looks like something from 1980's and way too large for the surroundings. If this is Goulds legacy project I think he missed the boat. How the hell do we get this jerk out of office?

dontbuyit wrote:
Abysmal architecture and looks like something from 1980's and way too large for the surroundings. If this is Goulds legacy project I think he missed the boat. How the hell do we get this jerk out of office?

I cannot remember seeing many buildings that looked better when they were surrounded by scaffolding but the new WDDC offices managed that.

I don't know how we can get Gould out of office. That is part, maybe a major part, of the problem. The Tories, including Gould and cronies, know that they cannot do any worse at elections in Dorchester than they already do. Consequently, their attitude seems to be that they can do whatever they like to the town and that there is nothing the residents of Dorchester can do about it.

dontbuyit wrote:
Abysmal architecture and looks like something from 1980's and way too large for the surroundings. If this is Goulds legacy project I think he missed the boat. How the hell do we get this jerk out of office?

Knowing the way most of the rotten 'sort your self out first' mandarins operates the only way this rotten unaccountable excuse for a civil servant will exit is with a giant golden carrot and a jolly good kick up the backside for the terrible legacy hes resided over. This development was a brilliant opportunity gone begging and nothing will ever change if we dont do something about it.

max planck wrote:
My Goodness me. I expect Mr Gould was overwhelmed by the fury of public anger when all 5 of those protestors pitched up with their placards and banners.

Well, actually there was 4 protestotrs and an old lady waiting for a bus who was caught up in the protest.

The new council office block looks fabulous and is something this town will be very proud of. The architects
and the council should be congratulated on a marvellous project.

What you have to remember max planck is that you are dealing with a load of "protesting is wrong until it affects me" self righteous nimbys who adopt an "I am alright Jack pull up the ladder" approach to all issue of the day, who take great pleasure in castigating others who stand up for themselves. Always ready to put the boot into those in society that work for a better society like public sector workers. Well, what goes around comes around, suck it up and shut up no one is listening!

cj07589 wrote:

dontbuyit wrote:
Abysmal architecture and looks like something from 1980's and way too large for the surroundings. If this is Goulds legacy project I think he missed the boat. How the hell do we get this jerk out of office?

Knowing the way most of the rotten 'sort your self out first' mandarins operates the only way this rotten unaccountable excuse for a civil servant will exit is with a giant golden carrot and a jolly good kick up the backside for the terrible legacy hes resided over. This development was a brilliant opportunity gone begging and nothing will ever change if we dont do something about it.

I still believe that these clowns can be held accountable and i think Simons are the key to this. Their last accounts painted a picture of a company whose fortunes were rapidly changing. Their next accounts are due to be filed 21-Dec. If their position has worsened, then the Council MUST avoid further exposure and halt the project.

woodsedge wrote:

max planck wrote:
My Goodness me. I expect Mr Gould was overwhelmed by the fury of public anger when all 5 of those protestors pitched up with their placards and banners.

Well, actually there was 4 protestotrs and an old lady waiting for a bus who was caught up in the protest.

The new council office block looks fabulous and is something this town will be very proud of. The architects
and the council should be congratulated on a marvellous project.

What you have to remember max planck is that you are dealing with a load of "protesting is wrong until it affects me" self righteous nimbys who adopt an "I am alright Jack pull up the ladder" approach to all issue of the day, who take great pleasure in castigating others who stand up for themselves. Always ready to put the boot into those in society that work for a better society like public sector workers. Well, what goes around comes around, suck it up and shut up no one is listening!

Here we go, more nonsense about the public sector working for a better society. You are paid for it, and paid well in this area. If you are so concerned about the good of society, why is maintaining your world leading pension scheme important to you? If you agreed to the cuts, which, after all, would still give you a better pension than those of us who pay yours, more services for the vulnerable could be maintained. And you would be able to validly claim you were working for the good of society.

JamesYoung wrote:

woodsedge wrote:

max planck wrote:
My Goodness me. I expect Mr Gould was overwhelmed by the fury of public anger when all 5 of those protestors pitched up with their placards and banners.

Well, actually there was 4 protestotrs and an old lady waiting for a bus who was caught up in the protest.

The new council office block looks fabulous and is something this town will be very proud of. The architects
and the council should be congratulated on a marvellous project.

What you have to remember max planck is that you are dealing with a load of "protesting is wrong until it affects me" self righteous nimbys who adopt an "I am alright Jack pull up the ladder" approach to all issue of the day, who take great pleasure in castigating others who stand up for themselves. Always ready to put the boot into those in society that work for a better society like public sector workers. Well, what goes around comes around, suck it up and shut up no one is listening!

Here we go, more nonsense about the public sector working for a better society. You are paid for it, and paid well in this area. If you are so concerned about the good of society, why is maintaining your world leading pension scheme important to you? If you agreed to the cuts, which, after all, would still give you a better pension than those of us who pay yours, more services for the vulnerable could be maintained. And you would be able to validly claim you were working for the good of society.

Now, now James Young, shouldn't go around making assumptions, "you are paid for it" and "give you a better pension" and "give you a better pension". I DON'T WORK IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR!! I work in the private sector but I appreciate and will always be thankful for public sector workers and their contribution to society. Well at least you don't deny the Nimby tag and on 20th October there will be hundreds of thousands of workers protesting against the cuts, unlike the 4 plus 1 waiting for bus in Dorchester.

woodsedge wrote:

JamesYoung wrote:

woodsedge wrote:

max planck wrote:
My Goodness me. I expect Mr Gould was overwhelmed by the fury of public anger when all 5 of those protestors pitched up with their placards and banners.

Well, actually there was 4 protestotrs and an old lady waiting for a bus who was caught up in the protest.

The new council office block looks fabulous and is something this town will be very proud of. The architects
and the council should be congratulated on a marvellous project.

What you have to remember max planck is that you are dealing with a load of "protesting is wrong until it affects me" self righteous nimbys who adopt an "I am alright Jack pull up the ladder" approach to all issue of the day, who take great pleasure in castigating others who stand up for themselves. Always ready to put the boot into those in society that work for a better society like public sector workers. Well, what goes around comes around, suck it up and shut up no one is listening!

Here we go, more nonsense about the public sector working for a better society. You are paid for it, and paid well in this area. If you are so concerned about the good of society, why is maintaining your world leading pension scheme important to you? If you agreed to the cuts, which, after all, would still give you a better pension than those of us who pay yours, more services for the vulnerable could be maintained. And you would be able to validly claim you were working for the good of society.

Now, now James Young, shouldn't go around making assumptions, "you are paid for it" and "give you a better pension" and "give you a better pension". I DON'T WORK IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR!! I work in the private sector but I appreciate and will always be thankful for public sector workers and their contribution to society. Well at least you don't deny the Nimby tag and on 20th October there will be hundreds of thousands of workers protesting against the cuts, unlike the 4 plus 1 waiting for bus in Dorchester.

I think dismissing real concerns about wasted taxpayer dollars as nimbyism is a lazy argument. And those hundreds of thousands of workers would earn my respect were they not to keep claiming that they are somehow saints and guardians of public services. They are paid to be so, and for the most part they are motivated by greed, as are the rest of us. If you are protesting against cuts to your personal wealth, be honest about it. Fairer pensions for all is not an honest strap line, since, with a finite amount of cash available to pay both pensions and services for the vulnerable, one or another must lose out, or additional taxes must be raised. It does not strike me as particularly public spirited to demand that Mrs Smith should be left to rot because the council cannot fund home help, or that Mr Jones should pay less into his private pension, so that public sector employees should be insulated against an economic situation that is horrifying to anybody who can read.

And just to be clear, I admire public sector workers too. It doesn't mean I think that there contribution to society is any greater than yours or mine, because the measure of both is a financial one whether we choose to acknowledge it or not.

Robert Gould is safely tucked away in Sherborne, so will not kicked out in the next election.

If you would like to contact Cllr Gould at his blog- http://robertgould.w
ordpress.com/

Is it me or is everything rubbish? wrote:
Robert Gould is safely tucked away in Sherborne, so will not kicked out in the next election.

If you would like to contact Cllr Gould at his blog- http://robertgould.w

ordpress.com/

This is the problem. WDDC councillors are voted for across the west of the county whereas the council offices are only a problem in the context of Dorchester's economic welfare.

As a lifelong Conservative I am absolutely ashamed by Cllr Gould's arrogance and attitude. He doesn't properly explain himself and refuses to defend his project on local TV.

This is not the actions of a member of the party I have supported for so long. One has to ask does he really care about Dorchester from his ivory tower in Sherborne?

JamesYoung is absolutely correct in his comments.

Thank you banknote.
Maybe the problem here goes further and we may never know but it all smacks of brown envelopes.
The Conservatives always talk about being the party of enterprise, how is it then that WDDC stuffed full of their ilk cannot see the stupidity and bad business in developing Charles Street on the back of a needless council office.
Nobody says it but who is getting the brown envelopes, possibly owns or has someone in their family who holds a stake in Simons. Even if the serious fraud office looked into this how difficult it would be to pin anything on the Council, for they are all in it together and we the taxpayers have no chance of being listened to.
This whole sorry saga is a huge nail in Democracy.

mr commonsense wrote:
Thank you banknote.
Maybe the problem here goes further and we may never know but it all smacks of brown envelopes.
The Conservatives always talk about being the party of enterprise, how is it then that WDDC stuffed full of their ilk cannot see the stupidity and bad business in developing Charles Street on the back of a needless council office.
Nobody says it but who is getting the brown envelopes, possibly owns or has someone in their family who holds a stake in Simons. Even if the serious fraud office looked into this how difficult it would be to pin anything on the Council, for they are all in it together and we the taxpayers have no chance of being listened to.
This whole sorry saga is a huge nail in Democracy.

If somebody holds a stake in Simons it shouldn't be hard to figure out - its a private limited company so shareholders and officers are submitted in an annual return each year. Personally i doubt that brown envelopes are circulating but rather there is some contractual commitment that Simons demanded - after all, if you are a developer, the three failed attempts would weigh heavy on your mind. And now it's gone wrong the council is over a barrel through its own stupidity.

James, you're absolutely right. This whole project is a monument to WDDC's total stupidity.

Over three decades too!

It really is time for a public enquiry.

Oh yes, the Gould family. Really, one store in town, owned by whoom? A council member by the name of...........! Now a hotel is to be apartments, small retail etc, less parking an 'NO" department store competiton. Some how, I think that if there is one shred of evidence, that the serious fraud squad could probably find it without turning the lights on. Get a pulic enquiry going,, get the resignations, plural!

water witch wrote:
Oh yes, the Gould family. Really, one store in town, owned by whoom? A council member by the name of...........! Now a hotel is to be apartments, small retail etc, less parking an 'NO" department store competiton. Some how, I think that if there is one shred of evidence, that the serious fraud squad could probably find it without turning the lights on. Get a pulic enquiry going,, get the resignations, plural!

Not the same family, actually.

I do find the aggravation thrown at Goulds department store a little bit puzzling.
This business has been in the town for 108 years and provides employment, a good range of products and excellent service, so why the nonsense? Linking it to Mr Gould of WDDC is quite wrong as he has no connection with the store, he merely has the same name.

Quite right mr commonsense. Real business people like Goulds Sores would NEVER, EVER have embarked upon such a suicidal deal as WDDC have done. Leave commercial deals to commercial people who stand or fall by thier decisions and not be protected by committees, unaccountable beaurocrats and the like.

I believe the true cost of this exercise so far, far exceeds that which is in the public domain - forensic accountants need to to delve deep into the councils financial weeds and tell Joe public the real costs. They will be staggering and almost unbelievable.