A discussion on the All About Goole group re the latest announcements about the Victoria Pleasure Ground element of the Town Deal schemes has offered some interesting and potentially valuable insights.
Firstly, somebody who seems to be a member of Goole AFC said they would like to see the evidence if anybody can provide it that Goole AFC (I presume but do not know for certain they meant the members) has been consulted to any great extent about the plans for VPG. The other comment was from the mayor that Goole Town Council were given a choice by the Town Deal Board between two plans for the VPG, and they had to make a choice between them in a very short space of time. If they didn’t chose one of the two plans the Town Deal money would be lost and VPG would probably have to close. Neither of the plans included the 400m running track which the Athletics people have made clear they need to keep their club going, despite assurances to the Athletics community from the Town Deal/East Riding Council side that the 400m track was still an option during the public planning consultation, and in the wake of a petition to retain the track signed by around 2,300 people.
The members of Goole Town Council are the elected representatives of the citizens of Goole. Does anyone know who selected the Goole Town Deal Board members? Your writer has not seen any explanation, but presumably it was somebody within East Riding Council. Was the person, or were the persons, who selected the Goole Town Deal Board members elected by the people of Goole does anyone know?
An interesting discussion has taken place on the All About Goole post with that Goole AFC member who has reached out. It has been a discussion, not an adversarial exchange and it has been beneficial. They are offended and horrified at the perception of Goole AFC/football fans as being boorish, bullying and determined to impose their will on others. That Goole AFC member extolled the good side of being a member of the Goole AFC and football communities – kindness, support, decency being among them. Those people who are not part of the Goole AFC and football communities do not experience those good sides. If what we experience is feeling threatened and intimidated, drunken and antisocial behaviour and the interests of the football community being put ahead of the interests of other members of the community, that will negatively shape our image of the football community. People on the streets leading to the ground talk about “fans” racing past their houses banging on doors and windows and thinking this hugely funny. Banging on doors and windows can be disturbing at any time, the more so if they are unexpected. Those on their own may feel vulnerable and frightened. Those caring for children and other vulnerable people have the demands on them significantly increased, again that will negatively shape their perception of the football community (or of any community where that is their experience).
Anybody who questions East Riding Council, the Town Council and the Town Deal Board is sidelined, and often publicly maligned. Shortly before the General Election, the town’s former MP was given space in the letter’s page of the Goole Times to describe people who have raised questions about the Town Deal, and the money he personally obtained for Goole as he sees it, as “moaners”, “negative” and “haters”. This is very inflammatory language. A town’s MP has considerably more power and influence than a town’s citizen and when an individual uses their power and position to attack and demean those less powerful then that passes into bullying and abusive conduct. The former MP has done a lot of good, but this is not responsible behaviour in a democracy. Some of the Town Councillors have also engaged in this kind of activity, describing anybody expressing doubts and questions as “always running Goole down”. It has an antagonising effect, and its is very corrosive. That has negatively impacted perceptions of the Town Deal and those groups of society that will benefit from it at the expense of others.
Speaking of expense, the mayor said that VPG costs £30,000 a year, that this is a loss, and it is unsustainable (hence the drive for the increased use and “hospitality venue” that will negatively impact residents around the ground). Do the residents see this as a cost, or an investment in the wellbeing, development and quality of life of residents and therefore value for money?
The Mayor clearly puts a lot of effort into community work. It may be that the Mayor is between a rock and a hard place. It is quite possible the mayor and others are being used in a Machiavellian, manipulative way, to put across messaging and take the blame for decisions while one or more people who actually are taking the decisions and wielding all the power are either under the radar or escape taking the flack.
In a family, when one family member sets out to “win” and therefore another family member “lose” while enjoying their “victory” they may find this does so much damage to the relationship that it breaks down. That is magnified in a community context when one group sets out to “win” over another rather than seeks to achieve consensus and generate goodwill.
The above is offered out of conversations with Goole people. The Goole AFC member reaching out has been constructive and positive.