Lord Street Protest Work is due begin, Monday 18th September, on the controversial resurfacing of Lord Street.

Currently Lord Street is red.

Sefton Council plans to use a money-saving cheaper option to resurface the road in black. This decision coming after Sefton Council announced £32 million is to be spent purchasing Bootle Strand Shopping Center. Once again Southport is pushed aside as favour is paid to the Labour heartlands of Sefton.

Clearly decisions have been made to prioritise anywhere else but Southport. If Southport Lord Street is resurfaced in black, this risks the loss of its heritage status and the right to apply for any restoration grants from the lottery heritage fund.

Hence, a cheaper option now risks not only the status of Lord Street but the possibility of future funding for other projects such as the restoration and upkeep of its boulevards, walkways and veranda’s.


This short-term cost-saving is going to cost us more in the long run. The Council may complain about lack of funds but it is about making the right choices, spend £32 million on a venture which is deemed unprofitable by developers and investors, or maintain conservation areas and heritage sites.


This outrageous decision which compromises the identity of Lord Street and Southport. Due to the neglect from Sefton Council Southport has already lost out on its place as a top 40 UK seaside destination. Please join us in our fight against this decision. We will be present on Lord Street on Saturday 16th from 10am until 12pm.

Please come down and show your support or sign our petition here at https://www.change.org/p/jfairclough...eet-tarmac-red

If Southport Lord Street is resurfaced in black, this risks the loss of its heritage status and the right to apply for any restoration grants from the lottery heritage fund.

Is this true? Any evidence to support this statement?

a cheaper option now risks not only the status of Lord Street but the possibility of future funding for other projects such as the restoration and upkeep of its boulevards, walkways and veranda’s

Is this true? Any evidence to support this statement?

spend £32 million on a venture which is deemed unprofitable by developers and investors

Any statements from developers or investors to support this?

Schools are losing millions in funding, the streets are filled with increasing numbers o homeless people, NHS being brought to its knees, how about protesting about things like that?

Originally Posted by Mr. Brightside

Is this true? Any evidence to support this statement?

Is this true? Any evidence to support this statement?
Any statements from developers or investors to support this?

Schools are losing millions in funding, the streets are filled with increasing numbers o homeless people, NHS being brought to its knees, how about protesting about things like that?

Seconded.

Priorities people...

"If Southport Lord Street is resurfaced in black, this risks the loss of its heritage status"...really?

I doubt it given the road wasn't red until the 1950's and there has been no official confirmation of this claim it will lose its heritage status as far as I'm aware.

Just astounding hypocrisy that those who voted for the devastating cuts across the country and to Sefton's budget are now jumping up and down over this, you wanted cuts... this is part of what it looks like.... in this case, horror of horrors, a black tarmac road!

What a shame these blowhards don't get quite so worked up about the devastating effects on services, or the NHS, or the disabled etc. etc.

Bank Holiday Somewhere In The North West...

"Where should we go today"

"How about a street full of chain pubs and charity shops?"

"Sounds great - but hang on - what colour is the tarmac?"

"Er...black I think"

"Nah. Let's go to Chatsworth House instead"

Southport is getting sucked dry by Sefton. Fight back .

The loan for the purchase of the Strand will pay for itself.

Whereas the 12 million towards the Atkinson, the 4 million towards the market and £900,000 has come straight out of council coffers.

The 2 can't be compared.

Originally Posted by thebrothergrime

Southport is getting sucked dry by Sefton. Fight back .

Get it right, most councils in the country are being sucked dry by the Tories, possibly all the Lib-Dems excitedly playing the blame game may just reflect on their support for the Tories and austerity, hypocrites of the highest order.

Originally Posted by mike1979

The loan for the purchase of the Strand will pay for itself.

Whereas the 12 million towards the Atkinson, the 4 million towards the market and £900,000 has come straight out of council coffers.

The 2 can't be compared.

Sure! There are millions of tourists who travel to the Bootle Strand each year! That white elephant has never created huge profits from the time it was first built - and that was about fifty years ago, with several modernisations continuously since. The whole shopping area is dark and miserable - most people travel the additional ten minutes into Liverpool Centre to shop. Ellandi purchased The Strand in 2014 to update it yet again and then resold it to Sefton just 2.5 years later.

There are far more tourists who come to Southport! The same loan invested in Southport would have been repaid in far less time than it will take in The Strand, providing the resort is maintained with its original Victorian image it is a natural attraction.

Originally Posted by silver fox

possibly all the Lib-Dems excitedly playing the blame game may just reflect on their support for the Tories and austerity, hypocrites of the highest order.

Yes, we do seem to have now got Sir Danny Alexander (Shadow Treasury Minister in the coalition) who said:

"It was something I didn't expect but it is a real honour to have the recognition for the work I did in the coalition government - turning the economy around and getting the country on the right track."

And far more lib dem peers in the lords than the commons although the libs want to abolish the HoL....go figure that one.

Originally Posted by Username2016

And far more lib dem peers in the lords than the commons although the libs want to abolish the HoL....go figure that one.

But the House of Lords is a lot larger than the House of Commons, and the House of Commons has always over-represented the Conservative and Labour Parties at the expense of Greens, Lib Dems, UKIP etc. So when you "can't figure that" maybe the problem lies with you.

Anyway, strictly the Lib Dems don't want to abolish the House of Lords, they want (and wanted when in Coalition) to reform it by making it democratically elected and smaller. That was actually blocked by a minority of Conservatives and one of the reasons they gave was that they thought it was all a cunning plan to give the Lib Dems more Peers than they "deserved".

The irony is that if the Lib Dem reform had gone through there would (following the last two general elections) have been a smaller proportion of Lib Dem peers than there actually are at present. And that may be why they call the Tories "the stupid party"!

Originally Posted by prasnee

But the House of Lords is a lot larger than the House of Commons, and the House of Commons has always over-represented the Conservative and Labour Parties at the expense of Greens, Lib Dems, UKIP etc. So when you "can't figure that" maybe the problem lies with you.

Anyway, strictly the Lib Dems don't want to abolish the House of Lords, they want (and wanted when in Coalition) to reform it by making it democratically elected and smaller. That was actually blocked by a minority of Conservatives and one of the reasons they gave was that they thought it was all a cunning plan to give the Lib Dems more Peers than they "deserved".

The irony is that if the Lib Dem reform had gone through there would (following the last two general elections) have been a smaller proportion of Lib Dem peers than there actually are at present. And that may be why they call the Tories "the stupid party"!

I thought you'd scurried off councillor?

You don't have to be an accountant to see the ratios look wrong from elected MPs to unelected peers (ten times!) for your Libs.

http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-a...-of-the-lords/

And this one:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...s-Tory-MP.html

Ultimately little point voting lib as it's always someone else's fault they can't get their ideas through.

Originally Posted by said

Sure! There are millions of tourists who travel to the Bootle Strand each year! That white elephant has never created huge profits from the time it was first built - and that was about fifty years ago, with several modernisations continuously since. The whole shopping area is dark and miserable - most people travel the additional ten minutes into Liverpool Centre to shop. Ellandi purchased The Strand in 2014 to update it yet again and then resold it to Sefton just 2.5 years later.

There are far more tourists who come to Southport! The same loan invested in Southport would have been repaid in far less time than it will take in The Strand, providing the resort is maintained with its original Victorian image it is a natural attraction.

So you have looked at the profit/loss figures for the Strand going back the last 50 years ?

How much profit has the Atkinson made since it re-opened ? The Atkinson wouldn't have a proper museum and art gallery if it weren't for those Bootle shipping Merchants.

Originally Posted by Username2016

You don't have to be an accountant to see the ratios look wrong from elected MPs to unelected peers (ten times!) for your Libs.

Are you being deliberately simple?

Of course they "look wrong". The House of Lords is unelected. Do you not understand what that means?

The Lib Dems in Coalition Government worked hard (with Cameron's full agreement) to make it smaller and directly elected. That was undermined by a small group of backwoodsmen Tories who thought that, in doing so, they were "doing the dirty" on the Lib Dems.

The irony is that the Lib Dems currently have a greater proportion of peers than would have been the case is the Lib Dem reforms had gone through. Effectively those backwoodsmen Tories "shot themselves in the foot".

Originally Posted by Username2016

Ultimately little point voting lib as it's always someone else's fault they can't get their ideas through.

You mean apart from all their ideas they got through during the Coalition Government of 2010-2015.

Originally Posted by prasnee

Are you being deliberately simple?

You mean apart from all their ideas they got through during the Coalition Government of 2010-2015.

Are you an accountant though?

Enlighten me on what the Libs have done for southport then, you've never managed that before?

You are starting to sound angry, I'll have to see if I can find a picture of an angry councillor to see how that compares