Welsh Millennium dome

[Sion]

Hi everyone!

Anyone care to comment on the commercial failure of the S.Wales based
Llanarthne Botanical garden?

For example, we could consider the accountability of the initiators of this
doomed project. In the private sector, accountability would equate to losing
your home. I suggest that the relevant people within the public sector that
can sanction such ventures endeavour to meet the same criteria and become as
accountable as those within the private sector counterpart. (The WDA springs
to mind!) Should they still maintain a post that's subsidised by the
taxpayer or should they be dismissed? Should they ever be put in a similar
position in the future?. Is anyone accountable ? Within the second rate
public sector? Clearly not! Probably part and parcel of the ever increasing
political apathy.

This project had a business plan presented, along with an ambitious cashflow
forecasts presented to it's guarantors, to which they sanctioned and
supported on the basis of available and allocated public funds.

Rhodri Morgan has indicated that the Assembly can not continue to subsidise
an ailing project which has already received subsidy from the public for the
sake of merely keeping it afloat. Well said Rhodri! (although you are one
dumb scruffy puppet) If it does not maintain adequate public interest, it
fails to meet it's key objectives and if it fails to sustain that initial
promise, it has literally failed. Anything beyond that, requires that a
whole Nation adopts some sympathy to what the same Nation clearly does not
have sufficient "natural" interest to sustain. Otherwise we would not
witness such a financial crisis that relates to this Botanic" in the middle
of nowhere" Fantasy. No doubt some Cardiffians will suggest that if the
Welsh Millennium dome was situated in the so-called capital, there would be
no such crisis.

Anyway, I thought that this was a current topic in an almost dead if not
already dead newsgroup

[PeterThomas]

Post by Sion
Hi everyone!
Anyone care to comment on the commercial failure of the S.Wales based
Llanarthne Botanical garden?
For example, we could consider the accountability of the initiators of this
doomed project. In the private sector, accountability would equate to losing
your home. I suggest that the relevant people within the public sector that
can sanction such ventures endeavour to meet the same criteria and become as
accountable as those within the private sector counterpart. (The WDA springs
to mind!) Should they still maintain a post that's subsidised by the
taxpayer or should they be dismissed? Should they ever be put in a similar
position in the future?. Is anyone accountable ? Within the second rate
public sector? Clearly not! Probably part and parcel of the ever increasing
political apathy.
This project had a business plan presented, along with an ambitious cashflow
forecasts presented to it's guarantors, to which they sanctioned and
supported on the basis of available and allocated public funds.
Rhodri Morgan has indicated that the Assembly can not continue to subsidise
an ailing project which has already received subsidy from the public for the
sake of merely keeping it afloat. Well said Rhodri! (although you are one
dumb scruffy puppet) If it does not maintain adequate public interest, it
fails to meet it's key objectives and if it fails to sustain that initial
promise, it has literally failed. Anything beyond that, requires that a
whole Nation adopts some sympathy to what the same Nation clearly does not
have sufficient "natural" interest to sustain. Otherwise we would not
witness such a financial crisis that relates to this Botanic" in the middle
of nowhere" Fantasy. No doubt some Cardiffians will suggest that if the
Welsh Millennium dome was situated in the so-called capital, there would be
no such crisis.
Anyway, I thought that this was a current topic in an almost dead if not
already dead newsgroup

It was interesting to see the reports about the botanic gardens on TV
and in the press recently. A colleague of mine visited it a few months
ago and commented how much he enjoyed it - but couldn't see himself
visiting it again - what would have changed?

I wonder how (or if) the projected visitor figures were checked for
sanity? It is quite a way off the beaten track ( a track I remember
when I used to travel to Llanddawddog daily!), and isn't somewhere
visitors to west Wales would be likely to visit on the spur of the
moment.

Much has been made of the fact that Richard Rogers designed the
glasshouse, and therefore by inference it should not be allowed to
close. Was it granted lottery funding because of the Richard Rogers
involvement I wonder? How likely would it have been to get a large
wedge of lottery cash if the Mrs Miggins Partnership from Cwmavon had
designed it?

I think that it should get no more public money, and that it will
indeed fail to get any such money. My reasons for thinking this are:

1. It is unlikely ever to attract enough people to make it viable as a
tourist attraction, therefore the cash demands would be made on a
regular basis - probably every time the last handout ran out.

2. Rhodri Morgan is coming under quite a bit of pressure at this
moment in time. The costs of the Welsh "embassies" have been made
public to howls of derision and disbelief, and people have started to
notice how his trips to far flung parts of the world coincide with
sporting fixtures - he cannot afford to be seen to be throwing more
money after bad.

3. Its failure MAY stop other such half baked projects seeing the
light of day, and the money saved spent on smaller and cheaper
community projects - sports pavilions, community halls etc. I admit
this is unlikely to happen as there are too many egos involved who
like their day opening the big project and the attendant publicity,
but we can dream.

[Lyn David Thomas]

Post by PeterThomas
2. Rhodri Morgan is coming under quite a bit of pressure at this
moment in time. The costs of the Welsh "embassies" have been made
public to howls of derision and disbelief, and people have started to
notice how his trips to far flung parts of the world coincide with
sporting fixtures - he cannot afford to be seen to be throwing more
money after bad.

The Welsh "Embassies" cost next to nothing in the scale of things, and
make a huge diffence to the ability of Wales to sell its self to the
world. For the most part their functions were carried out by other bodies
and would continue if they were abolished, but in a half hearted or even
more expensive way.

Post by PeterThomas
3. Its failure MAY stop other such half baked projects seeing the
light of day, and the money saved spent on smaller and cheaper
community projects - sports pavilions, community halls etc. I admit
this is unlikely to happen as there are too many egos involved who
like their day opening the big project and the attendant publicity,
but we can dream.

It should never have been sold as primaraly a tourit attraction. It is a
scientific institution that should have the same status as an university
college or the National Library. The money from visitors is and should be
the icing on the cake. That it has been missmanaged is no surprise, the
decision to rename it was stupid. This is another case of people not
seeing the value of something just the cost.

What next, a demand that libraries pay their way?

[PeterThomas]

On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 17:21:33 +0100, "Lyn David Thomas"

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas
2. Rhodri Morgan is coming under quite a bit of pressure at this
moment in time. The costs of the Welsh "embassies" have been made
public to howls of derision and disbelief, and people have started to
notice how his trips to far flung parts of the world coincide with
sporting fixtures - he cannot afford to be seen to be throwing more
money after bad.

The Welsh "Embassies" cost next to nothing in the scale of things, and
make a huge diffence to the ability of Wales to sell its self to the
world. For the most part their functions were carried out by other bodies
and would continue if they were abolished, but in a half hearted or even
more expensive way.

But we don't actually know how these Embassies perform do we? Are they
subject to any sort of cost benefit analysis?

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas
3. Its failure MAY stop other such half baked projects seeing the
light of day, and the money saved spent on smaller and cheaper
community projects - sports pavilions, community halls etc. I admit
this is unlikely to happen as there are too many egos involved who
like their day opening the big project and the attendant publicity,
but we can dream.

It should never have been sold as primaraly a tourit attraction. It is a
scientific institution that should have the same status as an university
college or the National Library. The money from visitors is and should be
the icing on the cake. That it has been missmanaged is no surprise, the
decision to rename it was stupid. This is another case of people not
seeing the value of something just the cost.

How could it be budgeted for now? I assume that if it were to be
"adopted" by the assembly then all lottery grants would have to be
repaid - any idea if this is the case?

Post by Lyn David Thomas
What next, a demand that libraries pay their way?

I hope not!

The gardens appear to me to be a poorly thought out exercise in
finding something that could get a large grant - the Richard Rogers
connection obviously helped. Perhaps a lesson may be learned.....

[Lyn David Thomas]

Post by PeterThomas
But we don't actually know how these Embassies perform do we? Are they
subject to any sort of cost benefit analysis?

Perhaps you would like to do so to the UK embassies?

[PeterThomas]

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 23:49:22 +0100, "Lyn David Thomas"

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas
But we don't actually know how these Embassies perform do we? Are they
subject to any sort of cost benefit analysis?

Perhaps you would like to do so to the UK embassies?

Might be a good idea.....

[Lyn David Thomas]

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas
It should never have been sold as primaraly a tourit attraction. It is a
scientific institution that should have the same status as an university
college or the National Library. The money from visitors is and should be
the icing on the cake. That it has been missmanaged is no surprise, the
decision to rename it was stupid. This is another case of people not
seeing the value of something just the cost.

How could it be budgeted for now? I assume that if it were to be
"adopted" by the assembly then all lottery grants would have to be
repaid - any idea if this is the case?

I don't think so, plenty of lottery grants have gone to mixed
organisations.

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas
What next, a demand that libraries pay their way?

I hope not!
The gardens appear to me to be a poorly thought out exercise in
finding something that could get a large grant - the Richard Rogers
connection obviously helped. Perhaps a lesson may be learned.....

I would disagree, it has been missmarketed by people who seem to have
misunderstood the importance of a national botanical garden (which always
has more than just native flora) - it is a university rank organisation
and perhaps the best thing for it would be to incorporate it into the
University of Wales - the visitor generated income will be a bonus.

[Sion]

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas
It should never have been sold as primaraly a tourit attraction. It is a
scientific institution that should have the same status as an university
college or the National Library. The money from visitors is and should be
the icing on the cake. That it has been missmanaged is no surprise, the
decision to rename it was stupid. This is another case of people not
seeing the value of something just the cost.

How could it be budgeted for now? I assume that if it were to be
"adopted" by the assembly then all lottery grants would have to be
repaid - any idea if this is the case?

I don't think so, plenty of lottery grants have gone to mixed
organisations.

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas
What next, a demand that libraries pay their way?

I hope not!
The gardens appear to me to be a poorly thought out exercise in
finding something that could get a large grant - the Richard Rogers
connection obviously helped. Perhaps a lesson may be learned.....

I would disagree, it has been missmarketed by people who seem to have
misunderstood the importance of a national botanical garden (which always
has more than just native flora) - it is a university rank organisation
and perhaps the best thing for it would be to incorporate it into the
University of Wales - the visitor generated income will be a bonus.

I would suspect that such a move would be interpreted by anyone beyond
Cardiff to be yet another bias towards this S.Wales capital.

[Lyn David Thomas]

Post by Sion

Post by Lyn David Thomas
I would disagree, it has been missmarketed by people who seem to have
misunderstood the importance of a national botanical garden (which always
has more than just native flora) - it is a university rank organisation
and perhaps the best thing for it would be to incorporate it into the
University of Wales - the visitor generated income will be a bonus.

I would suspect that such a move would be interpreted by anyone beyond
Cardiff to be yet another bias towards this S.Wales capital.

Why? The University of Wales is a federal institution with two of its
constituent colleges in West Wales, if it needs to be subsumed into one of
those I'd suggest Aberystwyth would be the sensible one...

Why do you think people would come up with your bizare interpretation?

[Sion]

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by Sion

Post by Lyn David Thomas
I would disagree, it has been missmarketed by people who seem to have
misunderstood the importance of a national botanical garden (which always
has more than just native flora) - it is a university rank organisation
and perhaps the best thing for it would be to incorporate it into the
University of Wales - the visitor generated income will be a bonus.

I would suspect that such a move would be interpreted by anyone beyond
Cardiff to be yet another bias towards this S.Wales capital.

Why? The University of Wales is a federal institution with two of its
constituent colleges in West Wales, if it needs to be subsumed into one of
those I'd suggest Aberystwyth would be the sensible one...

That would be refreshing

Post by Lyn David Thomas
Why do you think people would come up with your bizare interpretation?

Because I believe they do feel let down by the blatant ignorance displayed
to venues beyond Cardiff.

[Lyn David Thomas]

Post by Sion

Post by Lyn David Thomas
Why? The University of Wales is a federal institution with two of its
constituent colleges in West Wales, if it needs to be subsumed into one of
those I'd suggest Aberystwyth would be the sensible one...

That would be refreshing

Post by Lyn David Thomas
Why do you think people would come up with your bizare interpretation?

Because I believe they do feel let down by the blatant ignorance displayed
to venues beyond Cardiff.

I still don't see how you come to your conclusion? Your comment was
prompted by my suggestion that it should be taken over by the University
of Wales, as this isn't a Cardiff institution why would you say what you
did?

[Sion]

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by Sion

Post by Lyn David Thomas
Why? The University of Wales is a federal institution with two of its
constituent colleges in West Wales, if it needs to be subsumed into one of
those I'd suggest Aberystwyth would be the sensible one...

That would be refreshing

Post by Lyn David Thomas
Why do you think people would come up with your bizare interpretation?

Because I believe they do feel let down by the blatant ignorance displayed
to venues beyond Cardiff.

I still don't see how you come to your conclusion? Your comment was
prompted by my suggestion that it should be taken over by the University
of Wales, as this isn't a Cardiff institution why would you say what you
did?

I think you need to visit areas beyond Cardiff. Besides, this University is
just off the A470 and a stonesthrow from Cardiff.

[Lyn David Thomas]

Post by Sion

Post by Lyn David Thomas
I still don't see how you come to your conclusion? Your comment was
prompted by my suggestion that it should be taken over by the University
of Wales, as this isn't a Cardiff institution why would you say what you
did?

I think you need to visit areas beyond Cardiff. Besides, this University is
just off the A470 and a stonesthrow from Cardiff.

The Universty of Wales has colleges in Newport, Aberystwyth, Bangor,
Lampeter, Swansea and Cardiff, so what makes you think that it is a
Cardiff institution? I think you need to justify your remark.

[Sion]

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by Sion

Post by Lyn David Thomas
I still don't see how you come to your conclusion? Your comment was
prompted by my suggestion that it should be taken over by the University
of Wales, as this isn't a Cardiff institution why would you say what you
did?

I think you need to visit areas beyond Cardiff. Besides, this University is
just off the A470 and a stonesthrow from Cardiff.

The Universty of Wales has colleges in Newport, Aberystwyth, Bangor,
Lampeter, Swansea and Cardiff, so what makes you think that it is a
Cardiff institution? I think you need to justify your remark.

I see, so you include them all. There's me thinking that the affiliation was
directed at somewhere closer to the S.Wales capital. I didn't realise you
meant the entire quango. Anyway I can't see any justification in the
failings of one organisation being absorbed by another. The failings need to
be identified. A public enquire might be a good idea and once the reasons
for such failures are discovered, perhaps then we can identify the
individuals, instead of allowing them to be re-absorbed to blunder more
taxpayers money in the future.

If this was entirely in the private sector, the Directors of such an
organisation would bee soon identified and be accountable. Same rules should
apply to those that fail in the public sector, i.e. that they are not put in
a position whereby public finances are at their disposal for ill-thought out
projects. I would remind you that this project had a business plan presented
to all it's sponsors. The attendance figures were a concoction of fantasy
and poor foresight in the geographical location choice. When you put such a
structure up, least you can do is not assume that all that visit do so by
knowing it's location. No consideration was given, not to the possibility
but the probability that it's sheer presence to large volumes of passing
traffic would certainly have induced higher attendances. Oh no! what do we
have? A National Garden that's out of sight and unfortunately proven to be
also out of mind.

[Lyn David Thomas]

Post by Sion
If this was entirely in the private sector, the Directors of such an
organisation would bee soon identified and be accountable. Same rules should
apply to those that fail in the public sector, i.e. that they are not put in
a position whereby public finances are at their disposal for ill-thought out
projects. I would remind you that this project had a business plan presented
to all it's sponsors. The attendance figures were a concoction of fantasy
and poor foresight in the geographical location choice. When you put such a
structure up, least you can do is not assume that all that visit do so by
knowing it's location. No consideration was given, not to the possibility
but the probability that it's sheer presence to large volumes of passing
traffic would certainly have induced higher attendances. Oh no! what do we
have? A National Garden that's out of sight and unfortunately proven to be
also out of mind.

So on one hand you attack the south east and then you make a statement
tantamount to calling for all projects dependent on numbers to be situated
there.....

[Sion]

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by Sion
If this was entirely in the private sector, the Directors of such an
organisation would bee soon identified and be accountable. Same rules should
apply to those that fail in the public sector, i.e. that they are not put in
a position whereby public finances are at their disposal for ill-thought out
projects. I would remind you that this project had a business plan presented
to all it's sponsors. The attendance figures were a concoction of fantasy
and poor foresight in the geographical location choice. When you put such a
structure up, least you can do is not assume that all that visit do so by
knowing it's location. No consideration was given, not to the possibility
but the probability that it's sheer presence to large volumes of passing
traffic would certainly have induced higher attendances. Oh no! what do we
have? A National Garden that's out of sight and unfortunately proven to be
also out of mind.

So on one hand you attack the south east and then you make a statement
tantamount to calling for all projects dependent on numbers to be situated
there.....

No that's your spin on what was stated above. When did I "attack" the
S.East?

I note that you've evaded the crux of the matter, i.e. accountability?

[Lyn David Thomas]

Post by Sion

Post by Lyn David Thomas
So on one hand you attack the south east and then you make a statement
tantamount to calling for all projects dependent on numbers to be situated
there.....

No that's your spin on what was stated above. When did I "attack" the
S.East?

That is the impression you gave.

Post by Sion
I note that you've evaded the crux of the matter, i.e. accountability?

I agree with accountability, to the voters!

[Sion]

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by Sion

Post by Lyn David Thomas
So on one hand you attack the south east and then you make a statement
tantamount to calling for all projects dependent on numbers to be situated
there.....

No that's your spin on what was stated above. When did I "attack" the
S.East?

That is the impression you gave.

Interpretation is one thing. An agenda is quite another, regardless of how
smart we consider the disguise.

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by Sion
I note that you've evaded the crux of the matter, i.e. accountability?

I agree with accountability, to the voters!

Accountability to the voter is accountability to the "mainstream voter" So,
should such failings within the public sector equate to the same penalties
as though hey were practicing within the private sector?

If not, please explain why?

[Celtic King]

Post by Sion
Hi everyone!
Anyone care to comment on the commercial failure of the S.Wales based
Llanarthne Botanical garden?
For example, we could consider the accountability of the initiators of this
doomed project. In the private sector, accountability would equate to losing
your home. I suggest that the relevant people within the public sector that
can sanction such ventures endeavour to meet the same criteria and become as
accountable as those within the private sector counterpart. (The WDA springs
to mind!) Should they still maintain a post that's subsidised by the
taxpayer or should they be dismissed? Should they ever be put in a similar
position in the future?. Is anyone accountable ? Within the second rate
public sector? Clearly not! Probably part and parcel of the ever increasing
political apathy.
This project had a business plan presented, along with an ambitious cashflow
forecasts presented to it's guarantors, to which they sanctioned and
supported on the basis of available and allocated public funds.
Rhodri Morgan has indicated that the Assembly can not continue to subsidise
an ailing project which has already received subsidy from the public for the
sake of merely keeping it afloat. Well said Rhodri! (although you are one
dumb scruffy puppet) If it does not maintain adequate public interest, it
fails to meet it's key objectives and if it fails to sustain that initial
promise, it has literally failed. Anything beyond that, requires that a
whole Nation adopts some sympathy to what the same Nation clearly does not
have sufficient "natural" interest to sustain. Otherwise we would not
witness such a financial crisis that relates to this Botanic" in the middle
of nowhere" Fantasy. No doubt some Cardiffians will suggest that if the
Welsh Millennium dome was situated in the so-called capital, there would be
no such crisis.
Anyway, I thought that this was a current topic in an almost dead if not
already dead newsgroup

Doomed project?
What a weird and negative view,I can only assume you have a chip on
your shoulder regarding botanical gardens.
Or are Llion posting under yet another of his transparent alter-names.
The garden is largely in the public sector.It is required to support
itself ,in a very short timescale for such a project.You are obviously
unaware that ALL the other National botanic gardens are supported on a
massive scale directly from Westminster(i.e. the taxpayer),especially
Edinburgh.
These sums are made available on a yearly basis in grant form.
Llanarthne can come closer to supporting itself ,but not in such a
short period of time,and needs some radical alterations to make it
more attractive to the public.
Also ,I feel the publicity could have been more dynamic.
The big mistake was to approach this with the idea that it would be
self supporting. If no other national botanic garden(including Kew
gardens which is heavily subsidised by you and I,yet not condemned as
a "lame duck") has ever been funded other than from the taxpayer what
made them think that Llanarthne would?

[PeterThomas]

Post by Celtic King
The big mistake was to approach this with the idea that it would be
self supporting. If no other national botanic garden(including Kew
gardens which is heavily subsidised by you and I,yet not condemned as
a "lame duck") has ever been funded other than from the taxpayer what
made them think that Llanarthne would?

But it was sold initially as being self sufficient - it wouldn't have
been granted any lottery funding if it was to have any funding from
the taxpayer. Are you saying that it was known from the start that it
couldn't exist without money from the public purse and therefore its
application for lottery cash was fraudulent?

[Celtic King]

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Celtic King
The big mistake was to approach this with the idea that it would be
self supporting. If no other national botanic garden(including Kew
gardens which is heavily subsidised by you and I,yet not condemned as
a "lame duck") has ever been funded other than from the taxpayer what
made them think that Llanarthne would?

But it was sold initially as being self sufficient - it wouldn't have
been granted any lottery funding if it was to have any funding from
the taxpayer. Are you saying that it was known from the start that it
couldn't exist without money from the public purse and therefore its
application for lottery cash was fraudulent?

Of course not...don't be obtuse.
I would have guessed that,however they obviously didn't.
I'm merely stating that given the huge subsidies propping up Kew and
other places then it would not be too outrageuos that Wales's botanic
garden get similar support.
The reason that these places are propped up is that it is an accepted
fact that National b.gardens are a very good thing from a cultural and
educational and dare I say it a Botanical point of view and that each
country needs one of it's own.Of course Welsh folk wishing to
learn/study/enjoy themselves will not easily be able to get to Kew or
Edinburgh.
If Westminster decline support then perhaps the Welsh taxpayer should
be able to with hold that money within our taxes that is sent to prop
up Kew and Edinborough,and instead use it for our OWN National B.
garden.

[PeterThomas]

Post by Celtic King
Of course not...don't be obtuse.
I would have guessed that,however they obviously didn't.
I'm merely stating that given the huge subsidies propping up Kew and
other places then it would not be too outrageuos that Wales's botanic
garden get similar support.
The reason that these places are propped up is that it is an accepted
fact that National b.gardens are a very good thing from a cultural and
educational and dare I say it a Botanical point of view and that each
country needs one of it's own.Of course Welsh folk wishing to
learn/study/enjoy themselves will not easily be able to get to Kew or
Edinburgh.
If Westminster decline support then perhaps the Welsh taxpayer should
be able to with hold that money within our taxes that is sent to prop
up Kew and Edinborough,and instead use it for our OWN National B.
garden.

I'm not being obtuse. It was a valid question.

I input "Middleton" into a search engine today - none of the results
made any reference to the National Botanic Gardens of Wales - so much
for the re-branding of the facility. It suggests to me that the
management there really isn't up to the job.

We (Britain) has, aiui, a national botanic garden - it's Kew. To
suggest that the climate of Wales is so different from that of Britain
as a whole and threfore needs its own doesn't stand up to rational
scrutiny. The native flora of Wales doesn't need a greenhouse to
thrive (there being no naturaly occuring greenhouses) so it is safe to
assume that the National Botanic Gardens must have been set up as a
tourist attraction due to one of its selling points on the web being
the non native flora of Australia, Chile, Canary Islands, South Africa
and California - perhaps these places don't have their own botanic
gardens and would be more than happy to contribute to the cost of
running ours?

Perhaps the renowned illustrator (Welsh?) Laura Stoddard has made a
contribution to the running costs? Although I note that Laura Stoddard
doesn't appear to be that famous as anything - no sign of her in
Google.

Middleton does appear to be an excellent place to visit - you can even
get married there, but I don't see it as being worthy of support, via
the Assembly government, by the Welsh electorate. Quite how
Carmarthen CC will able to justify their support announced today will
be interesting to read.

It is a commercial facility, it has little if any relevance to Wales
and should support itself.

[Celtic King]

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Celtic King
Of course not...don't be obtuse.
I would have guessed that,however they obviously didn't.
I'm merely stating that given the huge subsidies propping up Kew and
other places then it would not be too outrageuos that Wales's botanic
garden get similar support.
The reason that these places are propped up is that it is an accepted
fact that National b.gardens are a very good thing from a cultural and
educational and dare I say it a Botanical point of view and that each
country needs one of it's own.Of course Welsh folk wishing to
learn/study/enjoy themselves will not easily be able to get to Kew or
Edinburgh.
If Westminster decline support then perhaps the Welsh taxpayer should
be able to with hold that money within our taxes that is sent to prop
up Kew and Edinborough,and instead use it for our OWN National B.
garden.

I'm not being obtuse. It was a valid question.
I input "Middleton" into a search engine today - none of the results
made any reference to the National Botanic Gardens of Wales - so much
for the re-branding of the facility. It suggests to me that the
management there really isn't up to the job.

No it doesn't, it suggests that you aren't up to the job of using
search engines properly.
Perhaps you used the American google.
A search on Google.co.uk threw up Laura Stoddard name in first and
third place.
Now the name Middleton is very common in both names and business and
not really likely to throw up useful results.
However,a more sensible search using Middleton and either the word
Botanic or Garden throws up more results relating to middleton Botanic
garden than you can shake a stick at.

Post by PeterThomas
We (Britain) has, aiui, a national botanic garden - it's Kew.

One which only a tiny proportion of the population of Wales has ever
visited.
Likewise whilst Schools from London and the southeast make masses of
educational visits there, visits by kids from any of the celtic
nations are rare indeed,due to the unrealistic siting from they and
their schools point of view. Yet strangely,we and other parents in
Wales are expected to pay taxes towards it's support.It is a well
known fact that without it's DEFRA funding kew would collapse.
The same crazy logic you use in your reply would also suggest that
because there are lots of museums in London, Wales doesn't need one.


To

Post by PeterThomas
suggest that the climate of Wales is so different from that of Britain
as a whole and threfore needs its own doesn't stand up to rational
scrutiny. The native flora of Wales doesn't need a greenhouse to
thrive

Neither does that of England .

(there being no naturaly occuring greenhouses) so it is safe to

Post by PeterThomas
assume that the National Botanic Gardens must have been set up as a
tourist attraction due to one of its selling points on the web being
the non native flora of Australia, Chile, Canary Islands, South Africa
and California - perhaps these places don't have their own botanic
gardens and would be more than happy to contribute to the cost of
running ours?
Perhaps the renowned illustrator (Welsh?)

Why would her nationality matter.
Laura Stoddard has made a

Post by PeterThomas
contribution to the running costs? Although I note that Laura Stoddard
doesn't appear to be that famous as anything - no sign of her in
Google.

Wrong again!! see above.

Post by PeterThomas
Middleton does appear to be an excellent place to visit - you can even
get married there, but I don't see it as being worthy of support, via
the Assembly government, by the Welsh electorate. Quite how
Carmarthen CC will able to justify their support announced today will
be interesting to read.
It is a commercial facility, it has little if any relevance to Wales
and should support itself.

It has all the relevance to Wales that Kew has to England.

[PeterThomas]

Post by Celtic King

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Celtic King
Of course not...don't be obtuse.
I would have guessed that,however they obviously didn't.
I'm merely stating that given the huge subsidies propping up Kew and
other places then it would not be too outrageuos that Wales's botanic
garden get similar support.
The reason that these places are propped up is that it is an accepted
fact that National b.gardens are a very good thing from a cultural and
educational and dare I say it a Botanical point of view and that each
country needs one of it's own.Of course Welsh folk wishing to
learn/study/enjoy themselves will not easily be able to get to Kew or
Edinburgh.
If Westminster decline support then perhaps the Welsh taxpayer should
be able to with hold that money within our taxes that is sent to prop
up Kew and Edinborough,and instead use it for our OWN National B.
garden.

I'm not being obtuse. It was a valid question.
I input "Middleton" into a search engine today - none of the results
made any reference to the National Botanic Gardens of Wales - so much
for the re-branding of the facility. It suggests to me that the
management there really isn't up to the job.

No it doesn't, it suggests that you aren't up to the job of using
search engines properly.
Perhaps you used the American google.
A search on Google.co.uk threw up Laura Stoddard name in first and
third place.
Now the name Middleton is very common in both names and business and
not really likely to throw up useful results.
However,a more sensible search using Middleton and either the word
Botanic or Garden throws up more results relating to middleton Botanic
garden than you can shake a stick at.

No, I used the UK google. I tried again this AM and it came back with
one hit for the botanical garden. My point is that having spent so
much money on re-branding the site the apparent lack of publicity, of
all sorts, not just search engines, doesn't instill confidence in the
management team.

Post by Celtic King

Post by PeterThomas
We (Britain) has, aiui, a national botanic garden - it's Kew.

One which only a tiny proportion of the population of Wales has ever
visited.

The same can be said of Middleton - only a tiny proportion of the
population of Wales has ever visited.

Post by Celtic King
Likewise whilst Schools from London and the southeast make masses of
educational visits there, visits by kids from any of the celtic
nations are rare indeed,due to the unrealistic siting from they and
their schools point of view. Yet strangely,we and other parents in
Wales are expected to pay taxes towards it's support.It is a well
known fact that without it's DEFRA funding kew would collapse.
The same crazy logic you use in your reply would also suggest that
because there are lots of museums in London, Wales doesn't need one.

How many schools are there within say a 50 mile radius of Kew? How
many schools are there within a 50 mile readius of Middleton?

Kew is supported by all of the UK's taxpayers - do you think it fair
that Welsh taxpayers should be asked to stump up additional money to
support a failing commercial venture?

Post by Celtic King
To

Post by PeterThomas
suggest that the climate of Wales is so different from that of Britain
as a whole and threfore needs its own doesn't stand up to rational
scrutiny. The native flora of Wales doesn't need a greenhouse to
thrive

Neither does that of England .

You're correct, it doesn't. But why did we have to build one that is
used apparently to house flora not native to Wales? Surely common
sense would have dictated that if the Welsh BG had been of a simpler,
cheaper design then it would have been cheaper to run. It is obvious
that the prospective number of visitors would be smaller than that od,
say Kew due to the smaller poplulation in the prime catchment area.

Post by Celtic King
(there being no naturaly occuring greenhouses) so it is safe to

Post by PeterThomas
assume that the National Botanic Gardens must have been set up as a
tourist attraction due to one of its selling points on the web being
the non native flora of Australia, Chile, Canary Islands, South Africa
and California - perhaps these places don't have their own botanic
gardens and would be more than happy to contribute to the cost of
running ours?
Perhaps the renowned illustrator (Welsh?)

Why would her nationality matter.

It doesn't matter as far as I'm concerned, although other people seem
to attach a degree of importance to the "Welshness" or the BG.

The question has to be asked about how much expense has been incurred
in running the exhibition of her art at the BG - how much money did
they expect to raise from what I would imagine to have a limited
appeal from the likely visitor poplulation?

Surely the management must have noticed how singularly unsuccesful
arts centres appear to be. The obvious place (as far as I'm concerned)
for an exhibition on "Traditional and Contemporary Art, Innovative and
challenging photography" would be an art gallery, not a BG

Post by Celtic King
Laura Stoddard has made a

Post by PeterThomas
contribution to the running costs? Although I note that Laura Stoddard
doesn't appear to be that famous as anything - no sign of her in
Google.

Wrong again!! see above.

Yes, I was wrong. Must remember not to use Google in work again.

Post by Celtic King

Post by PeterThomas
Middleton does appear to be an excellent place to visit - you can even
get married there, but I don't see it as being worthy of support, via
the Assembly government, by the Welsh electorate. Quite how
Carmarthen CC will able to justify their support announced today will
be interesting to read.
It is a commercial facility, it has little if any relevance to Wales
and should support itself.

It has all the relevance to Wales that Kew has to England.

It may well have, but that doesn't mean that because it is failing the
Welsh taxpayer should pick up what could prove to be an open ended
bill for it.

That is always a danger - the macho "England has a BG, Wales must have
a BG" - common sense flies out of the window, along with all the
money.

If it had been concieved as a facility that was to be funded by the
taxpayer and then run by the taxpayer then fine. But it was concieved
as a facility to be financed by the NMF and then self supporting. The
rules really shouldn't be changed to suit the changing fortune of the
BG.

[Celtic King]

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Celtic King

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Celtic King
Of course not...don't be obtuse.
I would have guessed that,however they obviously didn't.
I'm merely stating that given the huge subsidies propping up Kew and
other places then it would not be too outrageuos that Wales's botanic
garden get similar support.
The reason that these places are propped up is that it is an accepted
fact that National b.gardens are a very good thing from a cultural and
educational and dare I say it a Botanical point of view and that each
country needs one of it's own.Of course Welsh folk wishing to
learn/study/enjoy themselves will not easily be able to get to Kew or
Edinburgh.
If Westminster decline support then perhaps the Welsh taxpayer should
be able to with hold that money within our taxes that is sent to prop
up Kew and Edinborough,and instead use it for our OWN National B.
garden.

I'm not being obtuse. It was a valid question.
I input "Middleton" into a search engine today - none of the results
made any reference to the National Botanic Gardens of Wales - so much
for the re-branding of the facility. It suggests to me that the
management there really isn't up to the job.

No it doesn't, it suggests that you aren't up to the job of using
search engines properly.
Perhaps you used the American google.
A search on Google.co.uk threw up Laura Stoddard name in first and
third place.
Now the name Middleton is very common in both names and business and
not really likely to throw up useful results.
However,a more sensible search using Middleton and either the word
Botanic or Garden throws up more results relating to middleton Botanic
garden than you can shake a stick at.

No, I used the UK google. I tried again this AM and it came back with
one hit for the botanical garden. My point is that having spent so
much money on re-branding the site the apparent lack of publicity, of
all sorts, not just search engines, doesn't instill confidence in the
management team.

Post by Celtic King

Post by PeterThomas
We (Britain) has, aiui, a national botanic garden - it's Kew.

One which only a tiny proportion of the population of Wales has ever
visited.

The same can be said of Middleton - only a tiny proportion of the
population of Wales has ever visited.

Post by Celtic King
Likewise whilst Schools from London and the southeast make masses of
educational visits there, visits by kids from any of the celtic
nations are rare indeed,due to the unrealistic siting from they and
their schools point of view. Yet strangely,we and other parents in
Wales are expected to pay taxes towards it's support.It is a well
known fact that without it's DEFRA funding kew would collapse.
The same crazy logic you use in your reply would also suggest that
because there are lots of museums in London, Wales doesn't need one.

How many schools are there within say a 50 mile radius of Kew? How
many schools are there within a 50 mile readius of Middleton?
Kew is supported by all of the UK's taxpayers - do you think it fair
that Welsh taxpayers should be asked to stump up additional money to
support a failing commercial venture?

Post by Celtic King
To

Post by PeterThomas
suggest that the climate of Wales is so different from that of Britain
as a whole and threfore needs its own doesn't stand up to rational
scrutiny. The native flora of Wales doesn't need a greenhouse to
thrive

Neither does that of England .

You're correct, it doesn't. But why did we have to build one that is
used apparently to house flora not native to Wales? Surely common
sense would have dictated that if the Welsh BG had been of a simpler,
cheaper design then it would have been cheaper to run. It is obvious
that the prospective number of visitors would be smaller than that od,
say Kew due to the smaller poplulation in the prime catchment area.

Post by Celtic King
(there being no naturaly occuring greenhouses) so it is safe to

Post by PeterThomas
assume that the National Botanic Gardens must have been set up as a
tourist attraction due to one of its selling points on the web being
the non native flora of Australia, Chile, Canary Islands, South Africa
and California - perhaps these places don't have their own botanic
gardens and would be more than happy to contribute to the cost of
running ours?
Perhaps the renowned illustrator (Welsh?)

Why would her nationality matter.

It doesn't matter as far as I'm concerned, although other people seem
to attach a degree of importance to the "Welshness" or the BG.
The question has to be asked about how much expense has been incurred
in running the exhibition of her art at the BG - how much money did
they expect to raise from what I would imagine to have a limited
appeal from the likely visitor poplulation?
Surely the management must have noticed how singularly unsuccesful
arts centres appear to be. The obvious place (as far as I'm concerned)
for an exhibition on "Traditional and Contemporary Art, Innovative and
challenging photography" would be an art gallery, not a BG

Post by Celtic King
Laura Stoddard has made a

Post by PeterThomas
contribution to the running costs? Although I note that Laura Stoddard
doesn't appear to be that famous as anything - no sign of her in
Google.

Wrong again!! see above.

Yes, I was wrong. Must remember not to use Google in work again.

Post by Celtic King

Post by PeterThomas
Middleton does appear to be an excellent place to visit - you can even
get married there, but I don't see it as being worthy of support, via
the Assembly government, by the Welsh electorate. Quite how
Carmarthen CC will able to justify their support announced today will
be interesting to read.
It is a commercial facility, it has little if any relevance to Wales
and should support itself.

It has all the relevance to Wales that Kew has to England.

It may well have, but that doesn't mean that because it is failing the
Welsh taxpayer should pick up what could prove to be an open ended
bill for it.
That is always a danger - the macho "England has a BG, Wales must have
a BG" - common sense flies out of the window, along with all the
money.
If it had been concieved as a facility that was to be funded by the
taxpayer and then run by the taxpayer then fine. But it was concieved
as a facility to be financed by the NMF and then self supporting. The
rules really shouldn't be changed to suit the changing fortune of the
BG.

Why not? Kew wasn't always supported by Defra..the rules were changed
to save it from collapse.
Your argument was and remains extremely weak and disjointed.
Are you attacking this project because it's Welsh?
There is absolutely nothing macho about demanding decent facilities
for the people of Wales.
My children and most of their friends HAVE visited
Middleton.Practically none of them have visited Kew,let alone
Edinburough.
The size of the catchment area relative to London has no bearing on
the argument.
The fact is that Middleton does have a big enough catchment to be very
succesful with a little tinkering.You describe it as a failing
commercial venture,then that would make Kew a failing public venture
of course.
I believe a large proportion of the Welsh public have visited
Middleton.
A damn site more than have been to Kew which we fund and has NO
relevance to Wales.
As usual the English government are happy to fling taxpayers money at
cockeyed projects in their own homeland, the new British Library
springs to mind which overran by a record breaking 332 million on
estimated costs and took 20 years to complete? Many users are already
warning about the high running costs of the new building. The library
says its Government grant is too small and it may have to introduce
charges for readers, or buy fewer books. This is only one example of
dozens of wasteful projects in the southeast,all on money extracted
from the Welsh taxpayer (as well as others of course).
However should they be required to contribute relatively tiny amounts
to much needed projects in Wales,the newsgroups are infested with
whingers.
Llanarthne may need a change of management, but Wales certainly needs
Llanarthne,and if their is any sense justice in Westminster ,they will
realise they should help fund it,rather than pissing money away by
throwing missiles which cost three quarter of a million dollars a go
at muslims.

[PeterThomas]

Post by Celtic King

Post by PeterThomas
If it had been concieved as a facility that was to be funded by the
taxpayer and then run by the taxpayer then fine. But it was concieved
as a facility to be financed by the NMF and then self supporting. The
rules really shouldn't be changed to suit the changing fortune of the
BG.

Why not? Kew wasn't always supported by Defra..the rules were changed
to save it from collapse.

Why should what is done in England have any relevance to what we do in
Wales?

Post by Celtic King
Your argument was and remains extremely weak and disjointed.
Are you attacking this project because it's Welsh?

I'm not attacking the project. I'm attacking the apparent incompetence
of its management and the way they run to the taxpayer for what will
likely be an open ended comittment for funding.

Post by Celtic King
There is absolutely nothing macho about demanding decent facilities
for the people of Wales.

Agreed

Post by Celtic King
My children and most of their friends HAVE visited
Middleton.Practically none of them have visited Kew,let alone
Edinburough.

Have you visited Middleton? (I haven't)

Post by Celtic King
The size of the catchment area relative to London has no bearing on
the argument.
The fact is that Middleton does have a big enough catchment to be very
succesful with a little tinkering.You describe it as a failing
commercial venture,then that would make Kew a failing public venture
of course.
I believe a large proportion of the Welsh public have visited
Middleton.

I would suggest that if a large proportion of the Welsh public have
visited Middleton ( you will be able to refer to published figures to
support this?) and it cannot succeed then the business plan was
defective initially.
More important than how many people have visited the facility is how
many people have made repeat visits - what is there to attract people
back?

Post by Celtic King
A damn site more than have been to Kew which we fund and has NO
relevance to Wales.

Really? No relevance at all - please explain your justification for
that statement.

Post by Celtic King
As usual the English government are happy to fling taxpayers money at
cockeyed projects in their own homeland, the new British Library
springs to mind which overran by a record breaking 332 million on
estimated costs and took 20 years to complete? Many users are already
warning about the high running costs of the new building. The library
says its Government grant is too small and it may have to introduce
charges for readers, or buy fewer books. This is only one example of
dozens of wasteful projects in the southeast,all on money extracted
from the Welsh taxpayer (as well as others of course).
However should they be required to contribute relatively tiny amounts
to much needed projects in Wales,the newsgroups are infested with
whingers.

Aah, so England pumps money into a cockeyed project, so to prove our
machismo Wales should also do so.

Post by Celtic King
Llanarthne may need a change of management, but Wales certainly needs
Llanarthne,and if their is any sense justice in Westminster ,they will
realise they should help fund it,rather than pissing money away by
throwing missiles which cost three quarter of a million dollars a go
at muslims.

Too deep for me I'm afraid - we need Middleton because Britain has
fired missiles at Muslims. This suggests to me that your argument is
about to go the same way as Middleton, and for the same weak reasons.

[Lyn David Thomas]

Post by PeterThomas
No, I used the UK google. I tried again this AM and it came back with
one hit for the botanical garden. My point is that having spent so
much money on re-branding the site the apparent lack of publicity, of
all sorts, not just search engines, doesn't instill confidence in the
management team.

There I would agree with you Peter.

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Celtic King

Post by PeterThomas
We (Britain) has, aiui, a national botanic garden - it's Kew.

Actually there are several, including the Scottish National Botanical
Garden.

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Celtic King
One which only a tiny proportion of the population of Wales has ever
visited.

The same can be said of Middleton - only a tiny proportion of the
population of Wales has ever visited.

Agreed, but that also goes for the National Library, and the Botanical
Garden should be in the same catagory.

Post by PeterThomas
Kew is supported by all of the UK's taxpayers - do you think it fair
that Welsh taxpayers should be asked to stump up additional money to
support a failing commercial venture?

It shouldn't be a commercial venture, any more than the national museums
or the national library should be.

Post by PeterThomas
You're correct, it doesn't. But why did we have to build one that is
used apparently to house flora not native to Wales? Surely common
sense would have dictated that if the Welsh BG had been of a simpler,
cheaper design then it would have been cheaper to run. It is obvious
that the prospective number of visitors would be smaller than that od,
say Kew due to the smaller poplulation in the prime catchment area.

Because it is not a national floral collection, it is a national botanical
garden, complete with a scientific obective, which includes displaying and
cultivating a wide variety of plants from around the world. That is part
of its research basis.

Post by PeterThomas
It doesn't matter as far as I'm concerned, although other people seem
to attach a degree of importance to the "Welshness" or the BG.

It is one of the national institutions that nations tend to have. Why do
we have a national museum or a national library?

Post by PeterThomas
It may well have, but that doesn't mean that because it is failing the
Welsh taxpayer should pick up what could prove to be an open ended
bill for it.

Not open ended, but as a scientific establishment it needs our support.
As a visitor attraction it doesn't. That money is the icing on the cake
and should be secondary to its scientific work.

Post by PeterThomas
That is always a danger - the macho "England has a BG, Wales must have
a BG" - common sense flies out of the window, along with all the
money.

The National Botanical Garden is quite a modest place, with a small staff.
Its operating lost is small on the scale of things. Initially visitor
numbers where high, they have fallen, as the gardens grow and mature the
numbers will grow, with suitable marketing. The change to Middleton was
stupid, it played into the hands of those that see it just as a fancy
visitor attraction, and not as what it really is a quality scientific
research establishment of university standard.

Post by PeterThomas
If it had been concieved as a facility that was to be funded by the
taxpayer and then run by the taxpayer then fine. But it was concieved
as a facility to be financed by the NMF and then self supporting. The
rules really shouldn't be changed to suit the changing fortune of the
BG.

I rather thank it should be, it would be a national disgrace to lose such
a facility - an example of the lack of vision of a nation that has lost
sight of its values.

[PeterThomas]

On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 08:37:55 +0100, "Lyn David Thomas"

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas
No, I used the UK google. I tried again this AM and it came back with
one hit for the botanical garden. My point is that having spent so
much money on re-branding the site the apparent lack of publicity, of
all sorts, not just search engines, doesn't instill confidence in the
management team.

There I would agree with you Peter.

Thank you.

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Celtic King

Post by PeterThomas
We (Britain) has, aiui, a national botanic garden - it's Kew.

Actually there are several, including the Scottish National Botanical
Garden.

Is not Kew "the" national BG? How many national gardens can you have?

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Celtic King
One which only a tiny proportion of the population of Wales has ever
visited.

The same can be said of Middleton - only a tiny proportion of the
population of Wales has ever visited.

Agreed, but that also goes for the National Library, and the Botanical
Garden should be in the same catagory.

Sorry Lyn, I disagree. What is contained in the National library is,
mainly, unique. What is displayed/grown in Middleton may be grown
elsewhere - Australia for example.

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas
Kew is supported by all of the UK's taxpayers - do you think it fair
that Welsh taxpayers should be asked to stump up additional money to
support a failing commercial venture?

It shouldn't be a commercial venture, any more than the national museums
or the national library should be.

But that was the basis on which it was set up and on which funding was
organised. What would the place have looked like if it had been set up
by the Assembly? No dome, equally poor visitor numbers, poor
management, similiar losses?

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas
You're correct, it doesn't. But why did we have to build one that is
used apparently to house flora not native to Wales? Surely common
sense would have dictated that if the Welsh BG had been of a simpler,
cheaper design then it would have been cheaper to run. It is obvious
that the prospective number of visitors would be smaller than that od,
say Kew due to the smaller poplulation in the prime catchment area.

Because it is not a national floral collection, it is a national botanical
garden, complete with a scientific obective, which includes displaying and
cultivating a wide variety of plants from around the world. That is part
of its research basis.

Is it not just duplicating research done elsewhere? Is it reasonable
to expect a research facility to attract lots of paying visitors? If
not how is it to generate revenue?

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas
It doesn't matter as far as I'm concerned, although other people seem
to attach a degree of importance to the "Welshness" or the BG.

It is one of the national institutions that nations tend to have. Why do
we have a national museum or a national library?

See above.

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas
It may well have, but that doesn't mean that because it is failing the
Welsh taxpayer should pick up what could prove to be an open ended
bill for it.

Not open ended, but as a scientific establishment it needs our support.
As a visitor attraction it doesn't. That money is the icing on the cake
and should be secondary to its scientific work.

See above.

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas
That is always a danger - the macho "England has a BG, Wales must have
a BG" - common sense flies out of the window, along with all the
money.

The National Botanical Garden is quite a modest place, with a small staff.
Its operating lost is small on the scale of things. Initially visitor
numbers where high, they have fallen, as the gardens grow and mature the
numbers will grow, with suitable marketing. The change to Middleton was
stupid, it played into the hands of those that see it just as a fancy
visitor attraction, and not as what it really is a quality scientific
research establishment of university standard.

But all these small, insignificant costs add up don't they. (You are
well aware of my thoughts on the small extra costs incurred by the new
assembly building) We can't go on funding loss making projects because
people think it is important that we have such poorly thought out
facilties.

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas
If it had been concieved as a facility that was to be funded by the
taxpayer and then run by the taxpayer then fine. But it was concieved
as a facility to be financed by the NMF and then self supporting. The
rules really shouldn't be changed to suit the changing fortune of the
BG.

I rather thank it should be, it would be a national disgrace to lose such
a facility - an example of the lack of vision of a nation that has lost
sight of its values.

No, it wouldn't be a national disgrace if Middleton was allowed to
fail - what would be a national disgrace would be throwing what little
taxpayers money Wales has at such a failing project for all the wrong
reasons.

[Lyn David Thomas]

Post by PeterThomas
Is not Kew "the" national BG? How many national gardens can you have?

No it isn't, and incase you hadn't noticed we have several nations in the
UK and not just one. Hence more than one National Library, National

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Celtic King
One which only a tiny proportion of the population of Wales has ever
visited.

The same can be said of Middleton - only a tiny proportion of the
population of Wales has ever visited.

Agreed, but that also goes for the National Library, and the Botanical
Garden should be in the same catagory.

Sorry Lyn, I disagree. What is contained in the National library is,
mainly, unique. What is displayed/grown in Middleton may be grown
elsewhere - Australia for example.

On that basis we would have one university in the UK. And what is in the
national library isn't unique, much (but not all) of which it contains are
duplicated in the other copyright libraries (of which England has 3) The
fact remains that it is a scientific institution, and it is irrelevant
that some of its plants are found elsewhere.

I don't think you see the value of it as a scientific institution.

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas
Kew is supported by all of the UK's taxpayers - do you think it fair
that Welsh taxpayers should be asked to stump up additional money to
support a failing commercial venture?

It shouldn't be a commercial venture, any more than the national museums
or the national library should be.

But that was the basis on which it was set up and on which funding was
organised. What would the place have looked like if it had been set up
by the Assembly? No dome, equally poor visitor numbers, poor management,
similiar losses?

Why do you say that, do you think the Welsh are congentially incompetent?

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas
Because it is not a national floral collection, it is a national
botanical garden, complete with a scientific obective, which includes
displaying and cultivating a wide variety of plants from around the
world. That is part of its research basis.

Is it not just duplicating research done elsewhere? Is it reasonable to
expect a research facility to attract lots of paying visitors? If not
how is it to generate revenue?

It does generate a lot of visitors, just less than it did at first. And
yes you duplicate research, that is the way things work. Research is a
cooperative venture spread over many institutions and many countries.
That is a good thing.

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas
The National Botanical Garden is quite a modest place, with a small staff.
Its operating lost is small on the scale of things. Initially visitor
numbers where high, they have fallen, as the gardens grow and mature the
numbers will grow, with suitable marketing. The change to Middleton was
stupid, it played into the hands of those that see it just as a fancy
visitor attraction, and not as what it really is a quality scientific
research establishment of university standard.

But all these small, insignificant costs add up don't they. (You are
well aware of my thoughts on the small extra costs incurred by the new
assembly building) We can't go on funding loss making projects because
people think it is important that we have such poorly thought out
facilties.

Ah well I think you can see the cost of everything and the value of
nothing, the costs of this project are a fly speck compaired to that of
the waste of money by our military recently.

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas
If it had been concieved as a facility that was to be funded by the
taxpayer and then run by the taxpayer then fine. But it was concieved
as a facility to be financed by the NMF and then self supporting. The
rules really shouldn't be changed to suit the changing fortune of the
BG.

I rather thank it should be, it would be a national disgrace to lose
such a facility - an example of the lack of vision of a nation that has
lost sight of its values.

No, it wouldn't be a national disgrace if Middleton was allowed to fail
- what would be a national disgrace would be throwing what little
taxpayers money Wales has at such a failing project for all the wrong
reasons.

You have no vision and no ambition. Your view of the world is a bleak one.

[PeterThomas]

On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 19:55:39 +0100, "Lyn David Thomas"

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas
Is not Kew "the" national BG? How many national gardens can you have?

No it isn't, and incase you hadn't noticed we have several nations in the
UK and not just one. Hence more than one National Library, National

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Celtic King
One which only a tiny proportion of the population of Wales has ever
visited.

The same can be said of Middleton - only a tiny proportion of the
population of Wales has ever visited.

Agreed, but that also goes for the National Library, and the Botanical
Garden should be in the same catagory.

Sorry Lyn, I disagree. What is contained in the National library is,
mainly, unique. What is displayed/grown in Middleton may be grown
elsewhere - Australia for example.

On that basis we would have one university in the UK. And what is in the
national library isn't unique, much (but not all) of which it contains are
duplicated in the other copyright libraries (of which England has 3) The
fact remains that it is a scientific institution, and it is irrelevant
that some of its plants are found elsewhere.
I don't think you see the value of it as a scientific institution.

Perhaps because it wasn't set up as a scientific institution. This is
a status it appears to have achieved only recently. It comes over in
its advetising as a place to have a nice day out and somewhere that
holds art exhibitions.

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas
Kew is supported by all of the UK's taxpayers - do you think it fair
that Welsh taxpayers should be asked to stump up additional money to
support a failing commercial venture?

It shouldn't be a commercial venture, any more than the national museums
or the national library should be.

But that was the basis on which it was set up and on which funding was
organised. What would the place have looked like if it had been set up
by the Assembly? No dome, equally poor visitor numbers, poor management,
similiar losses?

Why do you say that, do you think the Welsh are congentially incompetent?

The Welsh congenitally incompetent? Definitely not. However I do have
my doubts about the ability of politicians to run commercial
enterprises.

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas
Because it is not a national floral collection, it is a national
botanical garden, complete with a scientific obective, which includes
displaying and cultivating a wide variety of plants from around the
world. That is part of its research basis.

Is it not just duplicating research done elsewhere? Is it reasonable to
expect a research facility to attract lots of paying visitors? If not
how is it to generate revenue?

It does generate a lot of visitors, just less than it did at first. And
yes you duplicate research, that is the way things work. Research is a
cooperative venture spread over many institutions and many countries.
That is a good thing.

And obviously a lot less than the business plan put forward to the
organisations that supplied the funding forecast. I have never seen it
described by Middleton how they expect to attract visitors for the
second and third time.

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas
The National Botanical Garden is quite a modest place, with a small staff.
Its operating lost is small on the scale of things. Initially visitor
numbers where high, they have fallen, as the gardens grow and mature the
numbers will grow, with suitable marketing. The change to Middleton was
stupid, it played into the hands of those that see it just as a fancy
visitor attraction, and not as what it really is a quality scientific
research establishment of university standard.

But all these small, insignificant costs add up don't they. (You are
well aware of my thoughts on the small extra costs incurred by the new
assembly building) We can't go on funding loss making projects because
people think it is important that we have such poorly thought out
facilties.

Ah well I think you can see the cost of everything and the value of
nothing, the costs of this project are a fly speck compaired to that of
the waste of money by our military recently.

Sorry Lyn, you can't really come up with the military excuse. The
British armed forces weren't set up as a tourist attraction - they are
there to serve the British people in whatever manner the government of
the day see fit (not very reassuring I know). There is no comaprison
to Middleton, or the Assembly, or the "Welsh" embassies, or Rhodris
travels around the world to watch sport.

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas
If it had been concieved as a facility that was to be funded by the
taxpayer and then run by the taxpayer then fine. But it was concieved
as a facility to be financed by the NMF and then self supporting. The
rules really shouldn't be changed to suit the changing fortune of the
BG.

I rather thank it should be, it would be a national disgrace to lose
such a facility - an example of the lack of vision of a nation that has
lost sight of its values.

No, it wouldn't be a national disgrace if Middleton was allowed to fail
- what would be a national disgrace would be throwing what little
taxpayers money Wales has at such a failing project for all the wrong
reasons.

You have no vision and no ambition. Your view of the world is a bleak one.

Yours appears to be a vision of "Lets support anything that we can
hang the word Welsh to, never mind the cost"

Good houskeeping should never be cast aside because of a whim.

[Lyn David Thomas]

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas
I don't think you see the value of it as a scientific institution.

Perhaps because it wasn't set up as a scientific institution. This is
a status it appears to have achieved only recently. It comes over in
its advetising as a place to have a nice day out and somewhere that
holds art exhibitions.

No it existed as a scientific institution from day one. And using some of
its space for visiting exhibitions is a great idea, many other places have
done just the same.

[Sion]

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Lyn David Thomas
I don't think you see the value of it as a scientific institution.

Perhaps because it wasn't set up as a scientific institution. This is
a status it appears to have achieved only recently. It comes over in
its advetising as a place to have a nice day out and somewhere that
holds art exhibitions.

No it existed as a scientific institution from day one. And using some of
its space for visiting exhibitions is a great idea, many other places have
done just the same.

Do you consider any commercial value when you make judgement? I ask because
it played a major part when it's concept was being presented for
consideration.

[Lyn David Thomas]

Post by Sion

Post by Lyn David Thomas
No it existed as a scientific institution from day one. And using some of
its space for visiting exhibitions is a great idea, many other places have
done just the same.

Do you consider any commercial value when you make judgement? I ask because
it played a major part when it's concept was being presented for
consideration.

For a national botanical garden - as far as I am concerned any money
generated from the public is a bonus, the rest should come from the state.
The same as a museum or a library. Its the same principle.

[Sion]

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by Sion

Post by Lyn David Thomas
No it existed as a scientific institution from day one. And using some of
its space for visiting exhibitions is a great idea, many other places have
done just the same.

Do you consider any commercial value when you make judgement? I ask because
it played a major part when it's concept was being presented for
consideration.

For a national botanical garden - as far as I am concerned any money
generated from the public is a bonus, the rest should come from the state.
The same as a museum or a library. Its the same principle.

That's your principle. The principle for this project before it got off the
ground would have meant that it remained self sufficient bar the initial
capital outlay given from various sponsors including the taxpayers. We can
dream all we like about a rescue from the state. I don't hear sufficient
cries from the public for that to come to any effect.

[Lyn David Thomas]

Post by Sion

Post by Lyn David Thomas
For a national botanical garden - as far as I am concerned any money
generated from the public is a bonus, the rest should come from the state.
The same as a museum or a library. Its the same principle.

That's your principle. The principle for this project before it got off the
ground would have meant that it remained self sufficient bar the initial
capital outlay given from various sponsors including the taxpayers. We can
dream all we like about a rescue from the state. I don't hear sufficient
cries from the public for that to come to any effect.

Thats strange, that is exactly what I am hearing, and the sums of money
are miniscule - in the order of £2 million a year....

[Sion]

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by Sion

Post by Lyn David Thomas
For a national botanical garden - as far as I am concerned any money
generated from the public is a bonus, the rest should come from the state.
The same as a museum or a library. Its the same principle.

That's your principle. The principle for this project before it got off the
ground would have meant that it remained self sufficient bar the initial
capital outlay given from various sponsors including the taxpayers. We can
dream all we like about a rescue from the state. I don't hear sufficient
cries from the public for that to come to any effect.

Thats strange, that is exactly what I am hearing, and the sums of money
are miniscule - in the order of £2 million a year....

That's miniscule according to which "individual"? An AM? A Cardiffian who's
seen millions ploughed into Cardiff? Or "elsewhere" and beyond? Or the
slightest consideration to Company directors who have experienced the brunt
of the administrators for "less"?

Care to share your secret?

[Sion]

Post by Celtic King

Post by PeterThomas

Post by Celtic King
Of course not...don't be obtuse.
I would have guessed that,however they obviously didn't.
I'm merely stating that given the huge subsidies propping up Kew and
other places then it would not be too outrageuos that Wales's botanic
garden get similar support.
The reason that these places are propped up is that it is an accepted
fact that National b.gardens are a very good thing from a cultural and
educational and dare I say it a Botanical point of view and that each
country needs one of it's own.Of course Welsh folk wishing to
learn/study/enjoy themselves will not easily be able to get to Kew or
Edinburgh.
If Westminster decline support then perhaps the Welsh taxpayer should
be able to with hold that money within our taxes that is sent to prop
up Kew and Edinborough,and instead use it for our OWN National B.
garden.

I'm not being obtuse. It was a valid question.
I input "Middleton" into a search engine today - none of the results
made any reference to the National Botanic Gardens of Wales - so much
for the re-branding of the facility. It suggests to me that the
management there really isn't up to the job.

No it doesn't, it suggests that you aren't up to the job of using
search engines properly.
Perhaps you used the American google.
A search on Google.co.uk threw up Laura Stoddard name in first and
third place.
Now the name Middleton is very common in both names and business and
not really likely to throw up useful results.
However,a more sensible search using Middleton and either the word
Botanic or Garden throws up more results relating to middleton Botanic
garden than you can shake a stick at.

Post by PeterThomas
We (Britain) has, aiui, a national botanic garden - it's Kew.

One which only a tiny proportion of the population of Wales has ever
visited.
Likewise whilst Schools from London and the southeast make masses of
educational visits there, visits by kids from any of the celtic
nations are rare indeed,due to the unrealistic siting from they and
their schools point of view. Yet strangely,we and other parents in
Wales are expected to pay taxes towards it's support.It is a well
known fact that without it's DEFRA funding kew would collapse.
The same crazy logic you use in your reply would also suggest that
because there are lots of museums in London, Wales doesn't need one.
To

Post by PeterThomas
suggest that the climate of Wales is so different from that of Britain
as a whole and threfore needs its own doesn't stand up to rational
scrutiny. The native flora of Wales doesn't need a greenhouse to
thrive

Neither does that of England .
(there being no naturaly occuring greenhouses) so it is safe to

Post by PeterThomas
assume that the National Botanic Gardens must have been set up as a
tourist attraction due to one of its selling points on the web being
the non native flora of Australia, Chile, Canary Islands, South Africa
and California - perhaps these places don't have their own botanic
gardens and would be more than happy to contribute to the cost of
running ours?
Perhaps the renowned illustrator (Welsh?)

Why would her nationality matter.
Laura Stoddard has made a

Post by PeterThomas
contribution to the running costs? Although I note that Laura Stoddard
doesn't appear to be that famous as anything - no sign of her in
Google.

Wrong again!! see above.

Post by PeterThomas
Middleton does appear to be an excellent place to visit - you can even
get married there, but I don't see it as being worthy of support, via
the Assembly government, by the Welsh electorate. Quite how
Carmarthen CC will able to justify their support announced today will
be interesting to read.
It is a commercial facility, it has little if any relevance to Wales
and should support itself.

It has all the relevance to Wales that Kew has to England.

Correction:- It has the same significance to S.Wales as Kew has to
S.England.

I've yet to see a Gog who has any concern about it's imminent closure.

[Sion]

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion
Hi everyone!
Anyone care to comment on the commercial failure of the S.Wales based
Llanarthne Botanical garden?
For example, we could consider the accountability of the initiators of this
doomed project. In the private sector, accountability would equate to losing
your home. I suggest that the relevant people within the public sector that
can sanction such ventures endeavour to meet the same criteria and become as
accountable as those within the private sector counterpart. (The WDA springs
to mind!) Should they still maintain a post that's subsidised by the
taxpayer or should they be dismissed? Should they ever be put in a similar
position in the future?. Is anyone accountable ? Within the second rate
public sector? Clearly not! Probably part and parcel of the ever increasing
political apathy.
This project had a business plan presented, along with an ambitious cashflow
forecasts presented to it's guarantors, to which they sanctioned and
supported on the basis of available and allocated public funds.
Rhodri Morgan has indicated that the Assembly can not continue to subsidise
an ailing project which has already received subsidy from the public for the
sake of merely keeping it afloat. Well said Rhodri! (although you are one
dumb scruffy puppet) If it does not maintain adequate public interest, it
fails to meet it's key objectives and if it fails to sustain that initial
promise, it has literally failed. Anything beyond that, requires that a
whole Nation adopts some sympathy to what the same Nation clearly does not
have sufficient "natural" interest to sustain. Otherwise we would not
witness such a financial crisis that relates to this Botanic" in the middle
of nowhere" Fantasy. No doubt some Cardiffians will suggest that if the
Welsh Millennium dome was situated in the so-called capital, there would be
no such crisis.
Anyway, I thought that this was a current topic in an almost dead if not
already dead newsgroup

Doomed project?
What a weird and negative view,I can only assume you have a chip on
your shoulder regarding botanical gardens.

Not really. £1.9M in the red on a £2M overdraft is a display of incompetence
in it's worst form and most certainly an indication of doom for this
ill-thought out project. Chips on shoulders don't enter the debate. Perhaps
you can present your positive and "ultimate" commercial soulution to this
situation.

Post by Celtic King
Or are Llion posting under yet another of his transparent alter-names.

That's funny. I don't recall that guy using a pseudonym and I certainly have
no reason to. If I was to choose on however, I wouldn't be pompous enough to
refer to myself as King of the Celts.

Post by Celtic King
The garden is largely in the public sector.It is required to support
itself ,in a very short timescale for such a project.

It is failing. Numbers are dwindling and the overdraft is increasing. Hardly
any point waffling, being solely qualified with sentiment if it's hosting
Nation don't even give enough of a toss to support it.

Post by Celtic King
You are obviously
unaware that ALL the other National botanic gardens are supported on a
massive scale directly from Westminster(i.e. the taxpayer),especially
Edinburgh.

Eden is sustaining it's own. Please tell me which of the other UK gardens
are in such financial crisis. Or if you like which other UK garden is
bleeding the taxpayers dry?

Post by Celtic King
These sums are made available on a yearly basis in grant form.

Untrue. Eden is a good example.

Post by Celtic King
Llanarthne can come closer to supporting itself ,but not in such a
short period of time,and needs some radical alterations to make it
more attractive to the public.

Na, close it. They've had ample time

Post by Celtic King
Also ,I feel the publicity could have been more dynamic.
The big mistake was to approach this with the idea that it would be
self supporting.

Agreed. Incompetence in it's purest form.

Post by Celtic King
If no other national botanic garden(including Kew
gardens which is heavily subsidised by you and I,yet not condemned as
a "lame duck") has ever been funded other than from the taxpayer what
made them think that Llanarthne would?

Subsequent posts have answered this for you by other posters. This botanic
garden is failing. Kew isn't and Geography plays a major part.

Time for heads to roll and time for an end to the "Don't blame me culture"

Same applies to futile excuses.

[Lyn David Thomas]

Post by Sion

Post by Celtic King
You are obviously
unaware that ALL the other National botanic gardens are supported on a
massive scale directly from Westminster(i.e. the taxpayer),especially
Edinburgh.

Eden is sustaining it's own. Please tell me which of the other UK gardens
are in such financial crisis. Or if you like which other UK garden is
bleeding the taxpayers dry?

Eden isn't really a scientific establishment, it is a floral disney land,
not the same at all.

[Sion]

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by Sion

Post by Celtic King
You are obviously
unaware that ALL the other National botanic gardens are supported on a
massive scale directly from Westminster(i.e. the taxpayer),especially
Edinburgh.

Eden is sustaining it's own. Please tell me which of the other UK gardens
are in such financial crisis. Or if you like which other UK garden is
bleeding the taxpayers dry?

Eden isn't really a scientific establishment, it is a floral disney land,
not the same at all.

That's a matter of interpretation. However, should the success of Eden be
based on being a "floral Disney land", shouldn't the Llanarthne Welsh
millennium dome directors have taken the initiative to convert this
scientific venture into something similar? Afterall, they've already
considered conversion in their desperation into a National Museum of all
things

[Lyn David Thomas]

Post by Sion

Post by Lyn David Thomas
Eden isn't really a scientific establishment, it is a floral disney land,
not the same at all.

That's a matter of interpretation. However, should the success of Eden be
based on being a "floral Disney land", shouldn't the Llanarthne Welsh
millennium dome directors have taken the initiative to convert this
scientific venture into something similar? Afterall, they've already
considered conversion in their desperation into a National Museum of all
things

No they shouldn't. The national museum is a comparable institution. Eden
has a limited scentific role, the national botanical gardens has as its
primary aim scientific research.

[Sion]

Post by Lyn David Thomas

Post by Sion

Post by Lyn David Thomas
Eden isn't really a scientific establishment, it is a floral disney land,
not the same at all.

That's a matter of interpretation. However, should the success of Eden be
based on being a "floral Disney land", shouldn't the Llanarthne Welsh
millennium dome directors have taken the initiative to convert this
scientific venture into something similar? Afterall, they've already
considered conversion in their desperation into a National Museum of all
things

No they shouldn't. The national museum is a comparable institution. Eden
has a limited scentific role, the national botanical gardens has as its
primary aim scientific research.

You have missed the point entirely. I would have thought that since you
highlighted Eden to be a "floral Disney land" you were presenting a bizarre
suggestion that this was the reason behind it's success.

[Celtic King]

Post by Sion

Post by Celtic King

Post by Celtic King
Or are Llion posting under yet another of his transparent

alter-names.

Post by Sion
That's funny. I don't recall that guy using a pseudonym and I certainly have
no reason to. If I was to choose on however, I wouldn't be pompous enough to
refer to myself as King of the Celts.

Are you serious?
Llion hardly knows who he is himself most of the time...he generally
posts under at least two names,his own and one other(so that he can
agree with his borderline rantings on the NG.)
He also like yourself has a deep and abiding hatred of anything that
might be positive for the nation of Wales.
Sounds familiar eh?
i notice that since you've been posting here his posts have dried up?
Mmmm...weird eh?

Post by Sion
It is failing. Numbers are dwindling and the overdraft is increasing. Hardly
any point waffling, being solely qualified with sentiment if it's hosting
Nation don't even give enough of a toss to support it.

Post by Celtic King
You are obviously
unaware that ALL the other National botanic gardens are supported on a
massive scale directly from Westminster(i.e. the taxpayer),especially
Edinburgh.

Eden is sustaining it's own. Please tell me which of the other UK gardens
are in such financial crisis. Or if you like which other UK garden is
bleeding the taxpayers dry?

Post by Celtic King
These sums are made available on a yearly basis in grant form.

Untrue. Eden is a good example.

Eden is NOT a National botanic garden....you were unable to find one
that is selfsupporting.

Post by Sion

Post by Celtic King
Llanarthne can come closer to supporting itself ,but not in such a
short period of time,and needs some radical alterations to make it
more attractive to the public.

Na, close it. They've had ample time

Close all the others then,in a spirit of fairness.

Post by Sion

Post by Celtic King
Also ,I feel the publicity could have been more dynamic.
The big mistake was to approach this with the idea that it would be
self supporting.

Agreed. Incompetence in it's purest form.

Post by Celtic King
If no other national botanic garden(including Kew
gardens which is heavily subsidised by you and I,yet not condemned as
a "lame duck") has ever been funded other than from the taxpayer what
made them think that Llanarthne would?

Subsequent posts have answered this for you by other posters. This botanic
garden is failing. Kew isn't and Geography plays a major part.
Time for heads to roll and time for an end to the "Don't blame me culture"
Same applies to futile excuses.

Don't blather on...come up with some real reasoning.

[Sion]

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion

Post by Celtic King

Post by Celtic King
Or are Llion posting under yet another of his transparent

alter-names.

Post by Sion
That's funny. I don't recall that guy using a pseudonym and I certainly have
no reason to. If I was to choose on however, I wouldn't be pompous enough to
refer to myself as King of the Celts.

Are you serious?
Llion hardly knows who he is himself most of the time...he generally
posts under at least two names,his own and one other(so that he can
agree with his borderline rantings on the NG.)
He also like yourself has a deep and abiding hatred of anything that
might be positive for the nation of Wales.
Sounds familiar eh?
i notice that since you've been posting here his posts have dried up?
Mmmm...weird eh?

I won't bother replying to this. Since you haven't the bottle to reveal your
identity, I can't see how you can expect any credibility with your stupid
accusations. Being possitive is one thing. Pig ignorance on the basis of
sentimentality is quite another.

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion
Untrue. Eden is a good example.

Eden is NOT a National botanic garden....you were unable to find one
that is selfsupporting.

Eden has plenty in common with the Llanarthne botanical garden. They both
have varied plantlife. The difference is merely one of titl and the
Llanarthne dome is an utter failure.

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion

Post by Celtic King
Llanarthne can come closer to supporting itself ,but not in such a
short period of time,and needs some radical alterations to make it
more attractive to the public.

Na, close it. They've had ample time

Close all the others then,in a spirit of fairness.

I doubt whether the English counterpart reflects Welsh interests

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion

Post by Celtic King
Also ,I feel the publicity could have been more dynamic.
The big mistake was to approach this with the idea that it would be
self supporting.

Agreed. Incompetence in it's purest form.

Post by Celtic King
If no other national botanic garden(including Kew
gardens which is heavily subsidised by you and I,yet not condemned as
a "lame duck") has ever been funded other than from the taxpayer what
made them think that Llanarthne would?

Subsequent posts have answered this for you by other posters. This botanic
garden is failing. Kew isn't and Geography plays a major part.
Time for heads to roll and time for an end to the "Don't blame me culture"
Same applies to futile excuses.

Don't blather on...come up with some real reasoning.

The onus is on you. You are faced with failure of the Llanarthne dome and
yet you present no solutions beyond sentimentality.

[Celtic King]

Post by Sion
I won't bother replying to this. Since you haven't the bottle to reveal your
identity, I can't see how you can expect any credibility with your stupid
accusations. Being possitive is one thing. Pig ignorance on the basis of
sentimentality is quite another.

Sentimentallity?
I don't think i've made a sentimental in this entire exchange.
If I have,let me know what it is.

Post by Sion

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion
Untrue. Eden is a good example.

Eden is NOT a National botanic garden....you were unable to find one
that is selfsupporting.

You never seem able to answer any points in the opposing argument.

Post by Sion
Eden has plenty in common with the Llanarthne botanical garden. They both
have varied plantlife. The difference is merely one of titl and the
Llanarthne dome is an utter failure.

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion

Post by Celtic King
Llanarthne can come closer to supporting itself ,but not in such a
short period of time,and needs some radical alterations to make it
more attractive to the public.

Na, close it. They've had ample time

Close all the others then,in a spirit of fairness.

I doubt whether the English counterpart reflects Welsh interests

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion

Post by Celtic King
Also ,I feel the publicity could have been more dynamic.
The big mistake was to approach this with the idea that it would be
self supporting.

Agreed. Incompetence in it's purest form.

Post by Celtic King
If no other national botanic garden(including Kew
gardens which is heavily subsidised by you and I,yet not condemned as
a "lame duck") has ever been funded other than from the taxpayer what
made them think that Llanarthne would?

By your standards,Kew is the greatest lame duck of all...it's subsidies are massive.

Post by Sion

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion
Subsequent posts have answered this for you by other posters. This

botanic

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion
garden is failing. Kew isn't and Geography plays a major part.
Time for heads to roll and time for an end to the "Don't blame me

culture"

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion
Same applies to futile excuses.

Don't blather on...come up with some real reasoning.

The onus is on you. You are faced with failure of the Llanarthne dome and
yet you present no solutions beyond sentimentality.

Here we go again.

[Sion]

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion
I won't bother replying to this. Since you haven't the bottle to reveal your
identity, I can't see how you can expect any credibility with your stupid
accusations. Being possitive is one thing. Pig ignorance on the basis of
sentimentality is quite another.

Sentimentallity?
I don't think i've made a sentimental in this entire exchange.
If I have,let me know what it is.

Sentiment is the entire basis of your argument. You opt to ignore the merits
at which this ill-thought out Llanarthne dome had the initial go ahead. You
also choose to ignore that it's operators have shown utter incompetence in
digging itself out of a massive £2,000,000 overdraft, so what except
sentiment do you have to offer? Oh, interesting what you chosse to reply to
in the above para. Until you have exchanged your rubber spine for a real one
I would refrain if I was you, from pointing the pseudonym finger at other
posters. Glass Houses spring to mind!

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion
Untrue. Eden is a good example.

Eden is NOT a National botanic garden....you were unable to find one
that is selfsupporting.

You never seem able to answer any points in the opposing argument.

Err? sorry. Not able to answer any of the points. I believe that I have
highlighted the contradictions between the initial business plan and the
lack of competence to honour such. All you can come up with when faced with
some realities of life where the Principality is in question, is refer to
the other poster as being anti-Welsh. A cop out that just doesn't have the
desired and intended effect

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion
Agreed. Incompetence in it's purest form.

Post by Celtic King
If no other national botanic garden(including Kew
gardens which is heavily subsidised by you and I,yet not condemned as
a "lame duck") has ever been funded other than from the taxpayer what
made them think that Llanarthne would?

By your standards,Kew is the greatest lame duck of all...it's subsidies are massive.

Kew gardens didn't set up under the pretence that it would only require
initial Capital support. The Llanarthne counterpart did just that or naively
believed that this incredible location would attract sufficient numbers. I
mean look at the figures. Only yesterday, the Assembly concluded that the
attendance figures would require a massive annual increase of 60%! Both
scenarios are different

Post by Celtic King

Post by Sion
The onus is on you. You are faced with failure of the Llanarthne dome and
yet you present no solutions beyond sentimentality.

Here we go again.

And long it will last. If the trustees of this garden have failed to come up
trumps then perhaps the self appointed King of the Celts may well be the
right man?

Again the onus is on the protagonists of it's continued survival. Clearly,
insufficient numbers of people care.