Stings and strings
Everything in the garden is, pretty clearly, not rosy - the National Botanic Garden of Wales, that is.
It's already been given a handout by the Minister for Heritage, Alun Ffred Jones, to guard against projected cash-flow difficulties during 2010. Deputy First Minister Ieuan Wyn Jones has also agreed to postpone the repayment of rent income due to be paid by the National Garden to the Assembly Government until March next year.
First came the Millennium Centre. Then the National Garden.
First came the money. Then come the strings: an independent review, we understand, that will look into the Garden's current finances and future financial prospects and its governance arrangements.
Is it me, or do you get the feeling that with an independent review of the Assembly Government's activities involved in the field of the creative industries being published on Thursday, 'governance arrangements' might just turn out to be the buzzwords of the week?
I'm Betsan Powys, BBC Wales' political editor. I'll be blogging the inside track on 
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~58~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Love them or loath them, flowers that is, it is time to put up the shutters and hang out a "For Sale" sign; the cupboard is bare, our pockets have been picked, let the markets decide on the future of our very expensive greenhouse.
It is not Betsan's "governance arrangements" that the public need, it smacks of dishonest politics, it is a prudent paymaster, do we have one at the "Bay of Empty" I wonder.
Complain about this comment
An almost non-political blog...not about devolution...but I'm sure someone will a route into it.
I don't think anyone will blame the people who initiated the Gardens,for not having vision. They are to be congratulated for having the aspiration. There was a lot wrong in the planning, execution and management. But even if all this had been right the Gardens are not in a suitable location to sustain a high visitor foot-fall. If the same money (or even a part of it had been spent on Dyffryn Garden the financial crisis' that have dogged the Garden woul not have occurred.
Unfortunately the Garden cannot be relocated to St Nicholas and within an easy drive for the surrounding urban population. The National is where it is, in Carmarthenshire, and will continue to struggle to cover even subsidised costs. The fact is, regardless of who occupies the WAG, the garden is going to either be closed, reduced in size or be fully subsidised.
The reality is, its a cost that unwillingly we have to bear! Closing it would be a complete and absolute waste of the money already spent, reducing it in size wpuldn't make any practical difference to the need for a subsidy...so let's bite the bullet...open ot to free admission, increase the foot-fall...give people the pleasure of visiting it more often and use the closure of IeuanAir to pay some of the cost.
Complain about this comment
Get a grip Len, the poor taxpayer is poor enough without another white elephant to carry around on very curved backs.
It's a dose of reality that's needed, not a nostalgic journey along an imagined rural idyll, I prefer not to travel that particular tranquil road to bankruptcy.
Complain about this comment
Plough some of it up and plant a cider apple orchard then re-invest the excise duty into the Gardens. After today it will be a real goldmine!
Complain about this comment
Stonemason #1
Put it in the diary we disagree about something!
The problem is that the Nat Bot Gar wasn’t an Assembly inspired something. They were lumbered with it…and to be fair to them they did hum and ah about keeping the place going the last time. There are complications about closing it down. In particular there is the Lottery Grant…the landlord is Carmarthenshire CC and if the place goes bust…the county picks up the tab.
I don’t think that selling it off is a practical idea because the cost of doing so is probably greater than keeping it as it is.
Ukchristiancitizen #4 has probably got the key to the solution. Make use of the asset to bring in revenue. Back at the last crisis they asked for volunteers and I offered three days free marketing consultancy per month to help. At the time there were no commercially experienced marketing people in the management team. I was told it would be ‘difficult’ to fit in a volunteer to the team.
Perhaps it would be sensible to bite the bullet and close it but there’s a bigger fish to fry and money to save elsewhere…near the black lagoon.
Complain about this comment
Definitely a diary entry Len ...
I noticed you didn't attach an "anti-" to me, refreshing to disagree without receiving insults.
You might be right commending "ukchristiancitizen" for his excellent suggestion.
Complain about this comment
The National Botanical Garden is a wonderful place - I recommend that you all visit it if you haven't already. Like all part of the National Estate it costs money, pennies in the greater scheme of things, but pennies none the less.
Where it has suffered is in not quite knowing what it is. Ideally it should be like Kew - a scientific centre for the study of plant life and secondly a home for a representative collection of native and foreign flora. Thirdly it should be a visitor attraction. It was never sufficiently funded as a scientific centre, its growing slowly as a representative collection and excels in its educational role. It forms part of a cluster of interesting gardens in the Carmarthen area and collectively they should be a major tourist attraction. Ideally I would have liked to have seen produced some joint marketing for them collectively. I disagree Len that they are in the wrong place, the location is stunning - and its a mistake to cluster everything around Cardiff. Many lottery funded events suffer from unrealistic projections of their potential income generation. I think this is a fault of the process rather than the recipients of the money. Certainly some of the leadership at the gardens has been less than inspiring. But it does need better marketing. The great glass house is inspired, and its choice of a Mediterranean biota refreshing. Please everyone go and have a look, its a great day out. (and no I don't work there or have any connection with the place other than that of a visitor).
Complain about this comment
Re 1
Stonemsaon, the neo-con, once again proving that he really only believes in public spending for bombs and judges in strange wigs. Why don't we close down Buckingham Palace at the same time? - because there we really are talking about spongers.
Complain about this comment
Lyn David Thomas #7
I didn't say the location isn't stunning. It is. The view of the valley from the glasshouse is fantastic. The problem is that if you are reliant on visitor generated income then you have to have the population to supply the numbers. I like Aberglasny but my wife prefers the Nat Bot Gar while my preference is Dyffryn. They are all about a gallon of petrol each way. Aberglasny has a good restaurant and a nice out door eating place, Dyffryn has good places to eat nearby in the Vale, as does the Nat Bot Gar. But the food at Nat Bot Gar is poor and the area too hilly to carry a picnic about all morning. So it's off to the (no advertising allowed). Which one do we go to? The one with the best available restaurant!
The glasshouse is amazing but the flora is arid rather than Med and at the best of times it looks as if a drought has hit it. Kew has a similar set-up (same Director developed it) Kistenbosch, Cape Town has something similar (same Director). He left a trail of look alike gardens. I like Kirstenbosch and had Sunday lunches in the open, I don't like the Kew one any more than I like the Nat Bot example. The glasshouse needs a make-over.
At least we can say of the Nat Bot Gar that it has survived longer than some the Millenium projects around the UK. The amount of money involved could largely be resolved by closing IeuanAir but then the people in North Wales will accuse us of disregarding them.
I know a big project whose closure could save us a lot of money. How much is open office space on the shore of the black lagoon going for now?
Complain about this comment
If "Coney Beach Amusement Park", Porthcawl, found itself in commercial difficulties would the WAG come to its rescue ? ......... lets take that as a resounding "No".
The same principle should apply to the gardens, its only a genteel tourist attraction, if they are not working let them go.
As I wrote at #1 ...
It is not Betsan's "governance arrangements" that the public need,... it is a prudent paymaster, ...
A reminder ... look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves, whether in the greater scheme of things or not.
Complain about this comment
It's a pity that no one in the Assembly seems to have heard of opportunity cost. Money spent on prestige projects such as the gardens and the WMC can't be spent elsewhere. In the next few years a number of much loved facilities throughout Wales will be forced to close as the effects of the cuts in the public sector begin to bite. Of course first in line criticising the local Council forced to close the local community centre or local swimming pool will be the local AM who is quite prepared to pour money into a National Botanic Garden which wasn't needed, which was built in the wrong location and with a business plan that never made any sense. Welcome to the real Wales where the elite still rule behind the scenes.
Complain about this comment
10. Stonemason
Coney Beach Amusment park, Ha ha ha ha ha!
Oh! I can't stop myself.
Now that was amusing.
Have you acctualy been to the filthy smelly place. It is the only thing that degrades Porthcawl.
The only thing that would rescue that place is to close it.
Mind you I am surprised the Environment people haven't closed it down as a health hazard.
Complain about this comment
Many,many years ago when the money was "flowing",and BBC Wales/Cymru had found "iconic",buildings/structures to cement the new wales,some of expressed concerns as to the revenue implications for taxpayers when the money eventually run out. The capital funding for many of schemes(including welsh rugby stadium) was from poor people through the national lottery,however the real problem always was and will be the long term management/maintenance costs. The "real" reason for the greenhouse in the west was the England had the EDEN project in Cornwall and ipso facto we needed something in the west to show our independent status,regardless of cost. When people who are currently working in private sector,and without pension entitlements in public sector become fully aware of where their money is being wasted,then all the "pet" projects in wales can look out and about time. The first thing to go should be S4C which costs about £120 Million in tax payers money(mainly english) and direct subsidies from BBC budget. If the welsh speakers want an independent channel,they can have it but let them pay for it by direct subscription,as I pay for tennis/footbal on the wonderful and honest SKY service.
Complain about this comment
alf, one mans' smelly is a teenage paradise.
You sidestep the real issue, Betsan's "governance arrangements", an unwillingness by our "Bay of Plenty" politicians to address fiscal problems brought about by poor commercial decision making, when has a politician ever created a commercial success.
I am probably being unkind to our ancestors, King Edward (a politician of sorts) built castles that seem to be so popular today, of course he was a strong leader.
Complain about this comment
The National Botanic Gardens are not just a tourist attraction, I'd put that as No 3 in its sense of priorities. Marketing of it has been atrocious - and that is down to its management. I would defend the Great Glass House - the Mediterranean environment (which is arid at times) isn't as showy as a tropical house, they have one of those, if smaller scale, but it is representative of a very interesting zone not often seen. I don't think anything like it exists on the same scale in the UK. I think what offends some people is the tag National - Stonemason thinks that we should withdraw all state funding from the National Museum and the two National Theatres as well - so at least he is consistent. In the real world we know that expenditure on scientific institutions is minuscule and adds to the knowledge economy that Wales needs if its to thrive.
As for subsidising Coney Beach - well as part of an upgrading of Porthcawl I could see a case being made for a development grant - but its a commercial venture, not a scientific/educational facility that has an element of being a tourist attraction. There is some difference.
Complain about this comment
If "The National Botanic Gardens" is a scientific institution, then give it to a university or other research body; as it is we have a failure, that will continue to pick the pockets of taxpayers, waiting for a politician at the "Black Lagoon" in Cardiff finds sufficient courage to call time.
There is always the option of asking the electorate whether they might like to keep it or have a new hospital built in Wales, or school, or fix a few miles of roads .....
Complain about this comment
The Eden Project seems to have overcome a more remote location issue. Llanarthne is actually quite close to industrial South Wales. I think it's great but the chosen climate should vary year on year. Quite liked the food actually - almost as good as Faggots and Peas at St Fagans....
Complain about this comment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Botanic_Garden_of_Wales
THeir Wiki could be a little more informative.
Complain about this comment
#13 TellingmewhatIknowalready wrote:
'The first thing to go should be S4C which costs about £120 Million in tax payers money(mainly english) and direct subsidies from BBC budget'
The Welsh-bashers are alive and well.
My feeling is that the nation which did its utmost to destroy a Language, and very nearly succeeded, should have a part to play in compensating for and redressing the damage done. There are, of course, other reasons, as well, I'm simply addressing your simplistic and selfish opinion.
The BBC's budget is raised from licence payers, from all parts of the UK, monoglot English-speakers (like yourself) and bilingual Welsh-speakers alike. The BBC has a responsibility to use some of those funds to provide Welsh Language services, which it fulfils via S4C. When S4C was created, the BBC (and ITV) stopped broadcasting Welsh Language programmes on its channels, and they were transferred to S4C.
Are we to be surprised that your criticisms always focus on money apparently wasted on projects in Wales? These (although no-one condones waste anywhere) pale into insignificance with the profligacy and waste of the UK government.
- Renewal of Trident £100bn
- MoD cost overrun £35bn
- Two gigantic aircraft carriers £5bn
- Illegal and immoral wars £XXbn and continuing
- NHS(England)'s computer system £12bn
- Identity cards and National Identity Register £12bn-£18b
- Bailing out the banks £100s+ bn (through lack of regulation)
- House of Lords £100m
- London Olympics £10bn (plus overruns)
- There are many other examples - the list is almost endless.
Waste in Wales pales into insignificance. The Assembly's entire annual budget is £19bn.
Btw, I'm not at all happy with the Assembly's performance to date. It is a sad, weak, institution. I'd abolish it today, if it could be replaced with a proper legislature empowered to deal with the really serious problems faced by Wales and its people and which Westminster has consistently failed to address.
Your bigoted prejudice is self-evident.
Complain about this comment
Lyn David Thomas #15
“exists on the same scale in the UK”
Pop along to Kew…
“scientific institution”
The original plan was just for that and it was to be funded out of the entrance fees from 500,000 visitors to the Nat Bot. I am sure you are either rolling around the room with laughter of have stomach grips at the stupidity of the idea.
Closing it isn’t going to remove it from the taxation burden as Carmarthen CC will have to pick up any liability. It was an ill-conceived plan and didn’t factor in failure. Carmarthenshire and the Assembly bailed it out last time because the burden to Carm CC was massive. Closing it will be moving the subsidy from the Nat Bot to helping Carm CC meet its liabilities.
Perhaps we should have a tribunal of all the people involved in the original decision to go ahead without adequate funding or a realistic business plan. Directors of business that fail have to attend a creditors meeting. Why not people who use their authority to spend and lose public money?
Whay will happen to the Great Glass House...it was designed to last for 400 years!
Complain about this comment
Actually Stonemason I would have no problem to it becoming part of a university in Wales. No problem with that at all, though of course it would still require state funding. Len I don't dispute with you that its business plan was flawed and closing it would just shift the burden elsewhere. I think it should be supported and better promoted, as I suggested with the other great gardens in the area. It is still a scientific institution, and as much as Stonemason may sneer at that, it remains one of its prime objectives. Len I don't think you and I disagree too much on this, you think it could be sighted better, I think its location is fine. It has lacked proper marketing from the beginning and doesn't have the profile it should. That is down to poor management. And yes Len I think some form of inquest (a tribunal is a bit much) into the original application would be instructive.
Dewi H I agree on the food, last time there is was not bad at all.
Bryn you are right the projects you list are a waste of money, however the National Botanic Gardens does not come into that category, its money well spent.
Complain about this comment
Built at an initial cost of £43m the assembly's audit committee criticised the public bodies involved for not making adequate checks before funding the "risky project." [BBC report]
Former heritage minister Rhodri Glyn Thomas thought Carmarthenshire council should consider providing more financial support. In his wisdom he also said "The government has to accept that it's more difficult for an institution of this kind to succeed in a rural area such as Carmarthenshire". A politician who likes grand gestures as long as the taxpayer will foot the bill.
I wonder if "Center Parcs" could make it work, pop a few hundred chalets in the grounds, put a pool under the glass complete with water slide, it might get a few more visitors, or is it just in the wrong place, would it have fared better in North Wales near Manchester and Liverpool.
Complain about this comment
Stonemason #22
"complete with water slide"
You've cheered me up. Practical sensible suggestions. I can just see the slide now. A whirly curly one that swings around the space and ends up in the sunken pool that now looks likes a cement factory drainage site.
I'll cut this short...I'm off to find my swimming trunks.
Complain about this comment
Stonemason you are a philistine, no doubt a great deal of money could be made from selling the collection at the National Museum and Galleries of Wales - but we would be considerably poorer as a result.
Complain about this comment
I'm not sure how to respond to the accusation of Philistinism, we have "The National Botanic Gardens" that has been built probably 2 or 3 hundred years too late, and without a large population who might support the venture, what more can be done.
Converting the site into a different venue that supports modern cultural values is not being a philistine it is taking the pragmatic path towards salvaging something from the wreck to mitigate some of the taxpayers losses, as it currently stands we have a white elephant that very few people are interested in visiting.
Complain about this comment
How much is the bunch of flowers?
The garden was officially opened on 24 May 2000 and in the ten years of existence it has had to be bailed out in 2004 and, now, it is also receiving a hand out to cover cash-flow difficulties during 2010 and the postponement of the repayment of rent income to the Assembly Government until March 2011. In addition it also receives £550,000 revenue support per annum from the Welsh Assembly Government. It is commercial failure as a visitor attraction.
It is not the direct fault of the Assembly. The decision in 2004 was probably the right one because the garden needed time to mature. The garden has matured but the public haven’t found their way in sufficient numbers to justify further subsidy. It will be the direct fault of the Assembly if it increases the size of the subsidy to support an attraction that has failed to cover its subsided costs in ten years. Throwing good money after bad is not prudent fiscal management.
People will look forward to the report of the independent review into the garden’s current finances, future financial prospects and governance arrangements. It might be more appropriate to appoint an Administrator.
Complain about this comment
It looks like "West is Best" is not the best place to invest public money in expensive capital projects that need high revenue income to survive,without further public money being stuffed into them. The new home for MIGHTY Scarlets,i.e Parc y Scarlets looks like one of the most sound "investments",since the ground nut scheme in 1947,and is another white elephant,to go with its near neighbour the greenhouse in the west. Lets be absolutely frank if the publically elected economic wizards, known as AM's had to invest their own cash,rather than taxpayers there would be less of the disasters we see around us,and with lot more to come in next 5 years. The "legacy" of King Rhodri is shortly going to unravel with scores of buildings,only erected like the "greenhouse in west",having to close because of lack of public funds,and lack of support from general population who could'nt give a "stuff" about "iconioc" buildings so beloved by the NATS and fellow travellers in media.
Complain about this comment
A miserable lot - what next closing the National Museum because it doesn't pay its way? Why not?
Complain about this comment
28. Who is being miserable??. If the National Museum cannot fund itself,as compared to working class people in wales like myself getting the health/education services need then so be it!!. Its the job of our elected politicians to spend public money to the best of their ability,not shovel it around to the "constituencies" in the remote west to garner votes,PERISH THE THOUGHT.The sheer economic facts of life are that this country (UK) has been virtually bankrupted since 1997 by the Scottish MAFIA in Downing Street,and the welsh branch have also spent money (not welsh) as though its going out of fashion. We need a root and branch culling of useless "investment",starting with BBC CYMRU/S4C and get back to basics. As St Paul once said " Without work there is no Bread",however he missed the welfare state by 2000 0dd years and deficit spending,and relying on our enemies to fund us until we are all in the grave. We lived without these "middle class2" obsessions and will do so once again.Come on UKIP!! as welsh conservatives have supped with the devil in trying to get into bed with the NATS.
Complain about this comment
So we have two people here, tellmewhatiknowalready (who has a writing style suspiciously like another person here) and Stonemason who think that the National Museum should be self financing and not get any public money. Interesting idea that money should not be spent in the constituencies - if not in the constituencies where? Not in the West clearly - yet the same people accuse the National Assembly and the Welsh Government as being unable to see out of Cardiff. A contradiction maybe? Tell you what abolish all spending on the arts, abolish all spending on everything other than health and education - and guess what you will still have issues with those services. I'll give you a better example abolish Trident and put its billion (rather than a few tens of millions) into health and education.
Complain about this comment
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2010/01/08/viewing-figures-of-s4c-do-not-justify-its-continued-existence-says-former-minister-91466-25551582/
Rod Richards is right as usual, S4C is hugely expensive sop to the Cymraeg, they've already got control of BBC Wales 1 & 2?
Thanks to the digital age, BBC Wales could make as much Welsh stuff as they desire, English speaking Brits can simply switch to the land of our first language, and view BBC England, lovely England. Did you know that Monmouthshire, used to be English?
Complain about this comment
Well Mr Thomas, you are once again typing on my keyboard without permission.
Though I tend to agree with your preference for the abolition of Trident, I would replace it with cruise missiles (nuclear), potentially more bangs for your pounds, and have change to start paying off the new national debt.
As for not being able to see out of Cardiff, it is indeed a contradiction, I cannot believe that you couldn't have spent the 50 million plus to provide horticultural experiences (parks) in 25 to 50 towns and villages, think back to the Victorians who created our parks ... but nowadays we have a problem, little vision and no money ...
Complain about this comment
Re 32
"I would replace it with cruise missiles (nuclear), potentially more bangs for your pounds"
Oh dear, more chilling neo-con nonsense and hyperbole from Stonemason.
Complain about this comment
Stonemason you are on record of saying that the National Museum should be financed through admission fees and not through public money. You mistake the National Botanic Garden for a park, its not, its a scientific institution and second a visitor attraction. Actually I would support the expenditure of 50 million to build and maintain new parks - though I don't think 50 million will go that far. Plus that 50 million you quote included lottery money.
Nuclear missiles are immoral and a complete waste of money as they could never be used. I am one with Enoch Powell on this one, abolish nuclear weapons, a non usable system that deters no one, so a waste of time and money.
Complain about this comment
Who am I to disagree with the late,but truly great Enoch,and even an alive and kicking Lyn David Thomas. The defence of the Realm (whilst we still have one!!)is the first priority of any proper government and Trident will play a role in safeguarding our freedoms as nuclear weapons have done for 60 years. Who can forsee world events in coming 10 years,let alone 30/40 which is life of proposed systems. We do not know if USA will become very isolationist and europe without French/British nuclear systems would be at threat from "nutters" like people running Iran at present time. We probably need to double our defence/internal police forces to protect our freedoms and this expenditure is easily found by cutting back on useless expenditure at all levels of government. According to Andrew Davies there are 146 organizations receing funding in wales for relief of economic inactivity,and all need CEO's,etc etc,and then the "oversight",by civil servants and all the time the growth of permanently unemployed mendicants rises and rises in this little part of the world.
Complain about this comment
I have not mistaken National Botanic Garden for a park, parks would have been a better use of the money.
You are mistaken, nuclear weapons were used in Japan, they ended the second world war very quickly after their use.
Complain about this comment
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
36. Stonemason
You are mistaken, nuclear weapons were used in Japan, they ended the second world war very quickly after their use.
At a very great cost in human life and suffering.
You can't blame the civilians that were killed for what their Government and forces did.
Complain about this comment
alf, you are right about the cost in human life and suffering, you could be right about not blaming the civilians, but I'm not sure, their army (civilians before training) were pretty cruel, by our standards, to POW's and captured civilians, with a few isolated exceptions I like to think the British Army in the Far East were humane, or as humane as is possible during a war.
Complain about this comment
39. Stonemason
Different cultures different outlooks on treating other cultures.
I don't suppose we are any different today or then.
In the Army you are trained to be cruel and kill that is their purpose.
Let us not forget it was the Great British Army were the ones who started the first concentration camps in South Africa with the Boers
Let us not forget the history books are always written by the victors so officially we will never know if our armed services were ever as humane as history tells us.
Some how, human nature being what it is and if society today is anything to go by, I don't think it was so .
Complain about this comment
Re 39
Stonemason,
Do you really believe these things that you blog, or are they just incendiary posts with the intention of igniting responses of sheer incredulity? I'm beginning to wonder.
I believe you say that you have an interest in philosophy. Some logical thought would be nice. Your:
"...you are right about the cost in human life and suffering, you COULD be right about not blaming the civilians, but I'm not sure, their army (civilians before training) were pretty cruel, by our standards"
(my capitals)
is extraordinary!
Complain about this comment
You are probably right alf.
Sad ...
Complain about this comment
Haven't you got the message #41, "I don't do Fo", not interested, what you write is as interesting to me as a discussion with fillets of fish.
Complain about this comment
Stonemason have you ever been to the National Botanic Garden of Wales? If no then how can you say its of no use, and again you ignore its scientific purpose. Its a lovely place - worth a visit. Go on try it.
Complain about this comment
The Gardens have a mission statement, which is:
'Develop a viable world-class national botanic garden dedicated to the research and conservation of biodiversity and its sustainable utilisation, to lifelong learning and to the enjoyment of the visitor.'
That all seems like a very worthwhile ambition for a small nation like ours. Sadly, there are always those who will oppose any Welsh project that includes the word 'national'. It's a pathological state, and there's nothing we can do about it.
Lyn is right, it's a lovely place, and I wish it well. That doesn't mean, like the Brit nats always like to imply, that those of us who support places like this excuse poor financial management. But others are always very happy to link any financial problems with what they believe is the inability of the Welsh to do anything properly. That is a racist argument.
Complain about this comment
LDT, you are being emotional, look at the business case, or better still look at The Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, with more than twice the population of Wales within a 30 mile radius. A 300 year history with a scientific basis as its beginnings.
Our venture was created in the wake of the Eden Project, as were many other disastrous ventures throughout the UK, it was conceived as an attraction to bring visitors to the West, if it is a serious scientific project then it would deserve support, much like Kew has support for its science, give it to a University.
No-one doubts it is a lovely place to visit, there are thousands of locations throughout Wales, I doubt its viability because of its failure to attract the numbers of people its original business case projected.
Let me remind you ... ... the assembly's audit committee criticised the public bodies involved for not making adequate checks before funding the "risky project."
Complain about this comment
It is with us, it is a scientific body - that is undeniable. It has an educational role. Its worth saving. Simple as. Your record is one of opposition to any public funding for the culture, arts and institutions such as the National Museum - so at least you are consistent. And yes I am emotional about it, we have needed such a place for a long time, its good that it exists and I am happy that the public purse pays for it, far rather that than useless weapons that no civilised society could ever use today.
Complain about this comment
Lyn David Thomas #44
No one can dispute the loveliness of the setting or of the developed maturity. If the place were able to pay for itself we wouldn’t be having this discussion. The original business plan was defective. There was no provision for supporting operating funds in the first few years. The belief was that the NBG would attract sufficient visitors and produce a surplus to pay for he scientific work carried out. The first year saw a large number of visitors. The second year the numbers fell and they have never recovered. This led to the crisis of March 2004.
The problem was that the immature garden didn’t provide enough of interest to draw people back. I took a membership out for two years but having been, and given a gift to help buy daffodil bulbs, there wasn’t enough there to make us to want keep on going there. When the 2004 crisis happened I took out another membership to help support the NBG. We didn’t go often enough to justify what is a fairly expensive annual cost. I have asked friends when they last went to the NBG. There is often an embarrassed silence! Once when it was opened and ‘last year’ and so on. Reasons, car park too far away from the glasshouse, the hill up to the glasshouse, the flora inside the glasshouse, the poor and expensive food.
As a nearby alternative Aberglasney has a carpark yards from the main house, a short hill that may be avoided, an interesting house and expensive but good food with a delightful south facing area to eat outside. The costs are NBG £8 per adult, £6 for me, £19 for a family. Aberglasney £7 per adult (no concesion) and £18 for a family. Dyffryn Garden £6 for an adult and £4 for me, £15 for a family. This is consumer choice and there are insufficient consumers making the choice for NBG to pay its way.
Aberglasney is smaller than NBG and hasn’t had the same crisis. Cutting the costs, perhaps by reducing the maintained size, reconfiguring the access to the glasshouse, improving the value for money aspect of the food (better quality) and revamping the flora inside the glasshouse might make more people visit it and make it affordable to remain open. Subsidies aren’t the only solution. The area of reduced size could be used as a holiday park.
Complain about this comment
I can't see any value in reducing it in size, it needs the space to expand - the costs really are small. I can't complain about the food, what I had there last time was very pleasant. I don't understand the argument about the great glass house being inaccessible, there is transport within the Botanic Garden if needed. I don't see it as competition between any of the gardens - they are all valuable. No disagreement on the poor business plan. Now to take it forward, we need to get people there - better public transport from Carmarthen would help, better marketing also. But I think we are going over the same ground. You want it to work but reduce public subsidy - Stonemason wants it to close out of principle (no public money on such projects) Noah wants it gone because it has National in its title. We are not going to agree. I just wish this national treasure the best and hope that it flourishes.
Complain about this comment
Lyn David Thomas #49
"I just wish this national treasure the best and hope that it flourishes"
I've tried subsiding it from my pension but there is a limit to the amount I can afford. I hope it flourishes but it must do so within an affordable business plan. That may involve redesign. Continually increasing its subsidy is not a longterm solution. Stonemason's waterslide and log cabins may be mind boggling but it is an idea that would help provide viability and continuity for other aspects of the NBG. The unthinkable sometimes becomes the desireable. I'm for the waterslide.
Complain about this comment
Lyn David Thomas, when you write ...
Stonemason wants it to close out of principle (no public money on such projects)
... the only principle I would ask to be applied is that good ideas should be realistic in assumptions followed by good management. In the case of "National Botanic Garden of Wales", if it were to be funded by the taxpayers, Kew is in part as an example, then the funding should have been part of the proposal at day 1.
If I have a beef it relates to ... the assembly's audit committee criticised the public bodies involved for not making adequate checks before funding the "risky project." ... why was the business model not scrutinised by the stakeholders in a professional manner ?
Complain about this comment
It was, final funding came from the Lotteries Board, who provided a great deal of the finance. Now after the fact it can be said that the original business plan was flawed. Stonemason don't be coy, you have said in this blog that the National Museum should be funded by admission fees and public money shouldn't go to it. Your whole attitude is one against public expenditure - you can't really get away from that. Kew is mostly funded by the tax payer and also in part from money it raises from admissions etc. Just like the National Botanical Gardens.
Complain about this comment
Re 52
Ah, but Kew is in England of course, so that's just fine - after all, it's us the Welsh who are incompetent and unworthy of such a place, especially if it includes the word 'National'.
Neo-cons don't want to spend public money on little more than the killing machine that is the military; be they the American or Welsh variety.
Complain about this comment
LDT, the business plan was flawed at the time of its creation, the only "after the fact" event was a competent unbiased report by the the assembly's audit committee, WAG and chums got it wrong, accept it, creating visitor attractions is better left to showmen and women, science to scientists, and the undemocratic Labour-Plaid coalition, ...
... what are they good at ?
... that would be spending the taxpayers hard earned cash.
Complain about this comment
It is with us now, to close it down would be a waste of money, to change its objectives to being just a visitor attraction would be voiding its purpose and intent. I think its something that public money should support. You don't. Fair enough, we differ on that. I think nuclear weapons are immoral and a huge waste of money, you would rather we spent money on them. I think I prefer my priorities.
Complain about this comment
If the business model is flawed, stop wasting my taxes.
Nuclear weapons are not immoral, the people who have them might be, so we can keep the option to balance the insanity of the rogue states with our sanity.
Complain about this comment
Move on, accept it is here, its not going to close and it needs some support. Your taxes will be spent on it, like on the universities and the museum. Mass murder is always immoral, and that is what nuclear weapons are about.
Complain about this comment
"the business model is flawed", stop wasting my taxes, government auditors confirm it to us; and stop the lies, the project was designed to bring tourists to the West, it failed, let it go. Jones & Jones might just be asked to justify spending money supporting this white elephant, money that would be better used looking after the elderly of Anglesey, just in time for the next election, an example of shoddy government.
Defence of the realm is always moral, and our nuclear weapons are just part of the strategy, and it has worked, no country has used them, not even the pariah states.
Complain about this comment
Re 59
Stonemason,
As a reader of philosophy, I'm surprised that you can seriously claim that morality is so easily defined.
Oh, I forgot. You've sulked and aren't talking to me...
Complain about this comment
Sorry Fo, whilst you continue to insult people, not just myself, I'm not interested.
Complain about this comment
Bringing tourists to the West was one of its objectives, but I would support it if not a single tourist visited it, its worth it for what it adds to the scientific community in Wales. As I have said I would be quite comfortable with it being taken under the wing of one of our publicly funded universities. I don't see it as a failure - other than within a narrow set of financial criteria.
Complain about this comment
Perhaps Stonemason, or any one of the others who live on the oxygen of negativity, might like to read this:
"Kew Gardens has been given an emergency £2million bail-out from the Government and taxpayer following warnings some of its exhibits are in 'a state of decay'.
The renowned botanical gardens went cap in hand to ministers following a sharp fall in visitor numbers thought to have been caused by the recession and poor weather last summer.
The existence of the black hole in the coffers of Kew appears odd given the fact it spent £3million on a tree-top walkway which opened last year.
A report from Kew's director Steve Hopper describes the organisation's finances as being of 'considerable concern'."
That was just last May!! So, perhaps it isn't just west Wales, it's London and the south east of England as well. So, if they are being consistent, Stonemason, Len, Noa and all the others who will never have any faith in any Welsh project, will now insist that Kew should close as well, as it is an even greater drain on public finances and their blessed taxes than our fine gardens in Llanarthne.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1188288/Now-Kew-Gardens-receives-Government-bailout-visitor-numbers-wither-away.html#ixzz0jbuMIQg6
Complain about this comment
Re 62
An interesting and not unexpected silence!!!!!!
Complain about this comment
Kew receives almost 27 million from government, annual and growing, mostly via DEFRA, its auditors the National Audit Office have not issued statements about Kew as did the Wales government auditors.
You can read all about Kew at its web site, everything is above board, secrecy is the WAG way, if it could get away with it.
Complain about this comment
FoDafydd #62
"faith in any Welsh project"
Now have a heart boyo. I've put my pension on the line for NBG. I don't want it to fail. I want it to proceed on a sound basis. Part of that has to be subsidy but we cannot provide an unlimited amount. Reviewing and revising it should be done. The subsidy to Kew can be 7 times as large as NBG because the population in SE England is 7 times larger. Also they get more than 7 times the visitors.
Complain about this comment
Re 65
But even they, Len, even they, in the over-populated, wealthy south east of England, had to say "Please, sir, can I have some more"!!!
Re 64
I'm afraid this is just another example of the old paranoia. It's south Wales's answer to Montana man. The idea that Westminster is more transparent than WAG is ridiculous.
So I take it from both your answers that you are not calling for Kew to be closed down.
Complain about this comment
FoDafydd #66
"for Kew to be closed"
I'm not calling for NBG to be closed...only to be configured in a way that it can operate within its funding. And that applies equally to Kew.
Complain about this comment
Len, Kew is not subsidised, it is funded for its research by DEFRA ...
Royal Botanic Gardens ... aim is to produce basic and applied information about plant-and fungal-related topics and to manage and communicate this to all our stakeholders ... is interpreted to the public through the Gardens at Kew and Wakehurst Place. These provide an amenity for the public, offering the opportunity to learn about plants and our wider work. The public gardens are a small though important part of the organisation, 60% of the 800 staff are specialist plant and fungal scientists and botanical horticulturists, this puts its science firmly at the front of its objectives.
... so you see, it really is comparing the Kew apples with our tourist attraction.
Complain about this comment
Re 67
Glad to hear it!
Re 68
I'm afraid it's the same old Kew is in England, big and good but our gardens are in Wales (the biggest problem with them apparently!), small and irrelevant.
How can you still claim that they don't have a subsidy when they were bailed out with a £2m handout just last year? Incredible! Absolutely incredible!
So, do either of you think that Kew should have one of those ever so classy water slides then?
Complain about this comment
Stonemason #68
"Kew is not subsidised"
You missed the subtleness of the comment...I said, "operate within its funding. And that applies equally to Kew" meaning...Kew does, so should NBG!
I think we've won this one. The comments of the pro-spend-spend-spend brigade are ridiculous. The place was set-up without proper due diligence. It received a lot of goodwill from the public. Even when it was rescued there was a sense of wanting it to succeed. Now it is in trouble again it is wanton to spend money on it without regard to visitor numbers and benefits received. I'm for the waterslide and if it kept kids happy at Kew on wet days, I'd put one in there as well.
See you in Dyffryn Gardens...cost less to enter and more to see.
Complain about this comment
Re 70
There's a certain amount of delusion here. The No to Wales group completely fail to accept a fact - the fact that Kew had an enormous handout to help it out of a financial hole last year - and by failing to accept that fact, they now think they've won the argument!!!
Complain about this comment
Len, I think our politicians of the Black Lagoon should be challenged to justify keeping the War Widows of Anglesey short of home help, whilst subsidising the covered park that failed to deliver.
Complain about this comment
Re 70 & 72
Look at how they talk amongst themselves, unable or unwilling to interact with those of a different view, pretending that they've won the argument!
They remain utterly incapable of accepting the fact that Kew Gardens could possibly need a £2m handout, and refuse to accept the fact that it ACTUALLY happened. But what are governments in civilized countries for if not to help out on these occasions? But if it's good enough for England it's good enough for Wales. We wouldn't want an injustice now, would we?
Delusional!!
Complain about this comment
FoDafydd #73
Facts boyo, facts. Stick with the facts. Kew gets more overseas visitors earning the UK hard currency than NBG gets as a total of visitors and needs more and more subsidy. Facts. Stay with the facts.
By the way...Kew has got a train running around the place. A waterslide would be great for the kids.
Complain about this comment
Re 74
Yes, facts - Kew needed a £2m handout last year!! Why won't you acknowledge this? What's the problem?
And, yes, I know they're big! But your logic would mean that small countries like Wales should open nothing, be they gardens, museums, art galleries...
As usual with the No to Wales gang, they claim that all facts are equally valid, but some facts seem to be more valid than others!
Complain about this comment
Len, it comes down to ...
... the assembly's audit committee criticised the public bodies involved for not making adequate checks before funding the "risky project." ...
... , the ability of our local politicians and pals not being able to manage even the smallest inconsequential projects, and the proof rests with its own audit.
Complain about this comment
Re: 76
And of course our London betters really do have the ability to manage a budget:
http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/media/2009/11/zdnet-uk-campaigners-criticise-10bn-nhs-it-overspend.html
'True Wales' - the people who like to say 'No' to anything Welsh..
Complain about this comment
Re 77
The No to Wales cabal seem to be pathologically incapable of supporting any national Welsh project, and just as incapable of doing anything but doffing their caps to the superior English establishment - especially the millionaire toffocracy of the Tory party.
And in No.76 we still see them rather childishly, stubbornly and, ultimately, cowardly just talk amongst themselves. I think that is the real sign of those who have not only lost the argument, but have also lost the plot.
Complain about this comment
And they also seem incapable as seeing the National Botanic Gardens as anything other than a visitor attraction, when, like Kew, its a scientific institution doing research and providing an educational experience.
Complain about this comment
As a keen gardener I welcome any institution, regardless of the source of its funding, that promotes a scientific understanding of the world. I’ve never visited the place, too far for me to go, but for what it’s worth, I think the subsidy given is money well spent. Any addition to the nation’s (British) scientific/gardening knowledge can only be for the good.
Complain about this comment
Stonemason
The spend/spend/spend other people's money brigade have probably never employed anyone, had to write out a cheque to pay someone their wages and never had to face the risk of running a business that employs people. They think that money is made at the Royal Mint and when you want more you manufacture more. Gordon Brown did and look what happened. If Wales had its own unicameral Parliament able to raise taxation the first to moan would be the spend/spend/spend brigade...and probably move to England because it would be cheaper to live there!
Complain about this comment
Re 81
This really is rather pathetic. Still, children, eh...?
However, as to your latest post. It can only lead to one possible conclusion - you want to close down Kew Gardens. That is scandalous. But I'm glad to say that even your toff friends in the Tory party would disagree with you.
Complain about this comment
... well Len, we seem to agree, your #81, the question "can we afford culture" or "we cannot justify subsidies for culture" was raised in today's Times, p25 written by Antonia Senior ...
... and her conclusion ...
... there is some £700 million spent by the four arts councils (enough to cover the Welsh budget deficit each year), luxury spendthrifts each and every one, it is time to slash public spending, and starting with arts let the various institutions find sponsors as did Leonardo the Medici. Let them sink or swim every one on the ability to attract sufficient revenue, if they cannot let them go.
Complain about this comment
Well that sort of cultural vandalism has always been your answer. The arts bring in a fortune, estimated for every pound of public money spent it generates 5 in income. A fair bit of that comes back in tax - so its an investment, it employs people and it enriches our lives. Short sighted people - like your self Stonemason - fail to see the value in anything that doesn't make themselves richer. If you want nuclear weapons let the military seek public subscriptions or get McDonalds pay for it, I'd rather my taxes go to improving the quality of life than fund genocidal weapons.
Complain about this comment
A politicians response at #84 to pragmatic housekeeping at #83, times are changing LDT, the cupboard is bare, you and yours now have to balance the books and supply essential services.
A point of interest, McDonalds and its UK employees have been and still are contributors to your basket of largess, or should that be a basket case of largess, where politicians take our taxes and borrow against the taxes to be paid by our great, great grandchildren. Culture for your minority paid for by the majority including the unemployed of Anglesey, the poor of Great Britain cannot afford your generosity towards the elite, time to retire to Betsan's Mountains for Labour and Plaid, time for a blue future.
Complain about this comment
Even the Tories don't back your proposals for the abolition of state funding for the arts. So when we have closed the arts centres, the galleries and all the theatres, what next - the sports centres? After all you opposed any public expenditure on "hobbies". And what about robbing the unemployed and the pensioners to pay for your weapons of mass destruction? Ignoring that point as ever.
Complain about this comment
I wouldn't have used the word "robbing" but you raise an interesting question ...
... what form, and extent, of defence should the unemployed, pensioners, and remainder of the United Kingdom population, expect from the government of the day, no-matter what party.
Complain about this comment
Most countries manage without nuclear weapons, if they were essential to defence then all would have them. Get rid of them and then think what we want in terms of armed forces. Enough for protection and our commitments to the UN but not so many that we get sucked into illegal wars on behalf of our bellicose allies.
Meanwhile it would be progress if you could acknowledge that culture and the arts expenditure employs many people, enriches our lives and makes a huge contribution to our economy. And that includes tax revenues, equal to or greater than the money provided from the state.
Complain about this comment
"Enough for protection and our commitments to the UN ..."
It has been calculated that our current balance of forces, with all its components are required, so no change there until the next defence review.
The "legality of wars" and "bellicose allies", sounds like "One man's meat is another man's poison", so no common ground there.
My position is "we cannot afford your culture unless we commit our great, great grandchildren to a never ending repayment plan." So no common ground there.
And today in the Times, page 20, Christopher Salmon the Conservative parliamentary candidate for Llanelli described the government of "South Wales" as ...
... government by stitch-up, where continuous variations of Labour and Plaid government have saddled the region with stubborn unemployment, social breakdown and wasteful councils.
There will be no common ground there either, the dose of reality sticks in the craw of the politics of Wales, as I have said many times before, second division.
Complain about this comment
Again no recognition of the tremendous input into the economy that culture and the arts make, the money it generates for the economy or the value in improving people's lives. You are a neo con that hates public expenditure on things of value other than weapons of mass destruction.
Complain about this comment
An interesting statement ...
... the tremendous input into the economy that culture and the arts make ... etc.
... , you will find little surplus to invest in the cultural future after deducting the support given by the taxpayers; no, I'm sorry LDT your balance sheet is extremely unbalanced, far more taxpayers give a subsidy than the minority who enjoy this bloated cultural experience, with much of it at the expense of the yet to be born underprivileged of the future.
As for your insult, it was meant to be an insult, it is as pathetic as Plaids (and SNP) attempt to impose its will upon parliament.
When you use the expression "public expenditure", you actually mean "large government spending money it does not have", spending the futures money, obscene in my book.
Complain about this comment
I'm not with you on this one Stonemason, what lives on after we are gone is the Arts. Life would be very dull indeed without the Arts in all its forms, and unboundedly without subsidy several of them - opera especially - would not exist.
On a personal note some of the most memorable evenings I have ever spent have been in the opera houses of London, Cardiff and Newcastle and on one occasion in Paris.
And while accepting that private enterprise is an important player in the creation of wealth, I think a nation without a lively and controversial Arts input is a pale imitation of a civilised society.
Complain about this comment
... yesterdays culture can be allowed to wither and die, it is part of the "survival of the fittest" in a world of culture, the music of the Tudors has become little more than a curiosity for academic study, it is dead and there is no cry in the wilderness.
The private enterprise you wrote of, these would be the garage bands of yesterday that become music icons for our children then vanish into obscurity, if it were more than a subsidy then cultural investment would include poetry, the subsidy of our poet laureate is ...
The post of Poet Laureate is traditionally rewarded with "a butt of sack", which in the modern day is approximately equivalent to 477 litres (105 gallons) of sherry.[2] The Poet Laureate also receives an annual honorarium, currently set at GB£5,750. wiki.
... that is a cultural subsidy I can live with ... is there a taker for a Welsh poet laureate that will write for our Black Lagoon politicians for a similar subsidy, we have a tradition for poetry ...
When LDT and others call me a cultural vandal, they often fail to explain that it is those aspects of life dear to themselves that they wish subsidised ... so Fitz, one man's culture is another line on the balance sheet.
Complain about this comment
Oh it's much more than that Stoney. Fundamentally, I feel that the Arts provide an essential, brilliant veneer to cover our brutish natures. It enriches the life of the individual, the society in which we live and in its musical form particularly, it provides solace in a world that seems to be getting madder and more irrational with each passing day.
So I don't begrudge the subsidy to the Arts but would agree that there should be a greater scrutiny of the way the subsidies are awarded.
But here's a few lines of doggeral that your detractors might like to ponder:
There's so much dishonesty in the best of us
And so much honesty in the worst of us
That it hardly becomes any of us
To talk about the rest of us.
But as far as the nationalists are concerned, keep up the good work.
Complain about this comment
And of course Stonemason refuses to believe or accept that there is a financial benefit to the economy in the arts and culture. As I have said for every pound invested 5 is generated, much of that coming back in taxation. It also adds to the viability of many towns, without culture where would Hay be? Or London as a visitor attraction without its art galleries and museums? Culture and the arts is part of the social infrastructure of any country - its not elitist its universal. If, like Stonemason, you don't believe in society then you will not be able to see the value of the arts. But even someone like him should be able to see the economic benefits.
Complain about this comment
Unfortunately we have run out of people to pay for LDT and his friends to enjoy life to their fill, the poor of Anglesey have more pressing uses for their hard earned cash, our self-righteous guardian of all things cultural needs to get a life in the real world and postpone spending more of my great grandchildren's as yet unearned taxes.
Complain about this comment
Yet more refusal to see that the arts more than pay for themselves. Again you prove that you know the value of nothing and the price of everything. The poor aren't robbed, they benefit equally and it pays for its self. So shortsighted, and leaves us all the poorer.
Complain about this comment
#97, tell that to tomorrows taxpayers.
A very small point, art only pays for itself at the turnstile, take out your wallet and pay the going rate, not sponge on the poor of West Wales, and Huddersfield, and Cardiff .............
Complain about this comment
Re: 98
So naive, so blinkered - Stonemason's blimpish ignorance is only matched by his arrogance in making such an idiotic claim.
Art, great & not so great, has always been supported by the public purse. It has never only paid for itself at the turnstiles.
The Medicis paid for da Vinci's works, Thomas Tallis & William Byrd were rewarded by the Tudors for their music, and the Welsh Princes were generous patrons of Welsh poetry.
The only difference now is that an element of democracy thankfully plays a part in the subsidy of art. Today's government is at least answerable to the electorate for is arts policies, unlike the absolute rulers of the past.
Complain about this comment
In today's Times ...
... it asks the questions :
.. Why does the Royal Opera House receive more than £20 million a year when tickets can still cost £200 a pop?
.. Why does £40 million go on free admissions to museums, when most of the public that they draw could afford to pay anyway ?
Such observations underpins the philosophy that great art should be funded by those who wish to consume it.
Simple, and not requiring the poor of Anglesey to dip into their already impoverished pockets.
Complain about this comment
Re: 100
"Such observations underpins the philosophy that great art should be funded by those who wish to consume it."
Yes, quite. What else would you expect from Murdoch's mouthpiece? Whatever, it's only an observation, an opinion. Just because The Times publishes an opinion doesn't make it a truth. You should try harder to control your forelock tugging tendencies Stonemason when it comes to matters of democratic debate.
Many of the Welsh & British public access culture via the great network of free public libraries. Would you have these people charged the next time they borrowed a novel? Would they have to pay to see an art exhibition hosted by their library? What about using library computers to access the information superhighway - would you make it available only to those who could pay their way?
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS