War memorial poll (From This is Hampshire)

Interesting, I cannot see the poll online.....

Before anyone reading this is considering taking part in this quite blatantly rigged and biased "opinion" poll,please read the following

Evaluate Consistency. Sources that apply different standards to those who agree and disagree with them are suspect. If your source praises one politician for "changing to meet the needs of his constituency", but then criticizes an opposing politician for "changing his position with opinion polls", it is likely that the source is biased.

Investigate the financial or funding sources for sponsored research. Determine the sources of funding for the study conducted to get an idea of the potential influences on the study. Various sources of funding can sway the information presented or the way a study is conducted in order to align with their own agendas.

Also consider how Andover would stand to benefit from this when there is poor shopping,nothing for youngsters to do,more police officers are needed and the local hospital could do with better resources,just too name one i have to travel every day to Southampton for Radiotherapy,to sum up actually its not how the town would benefit but who would benefit from this.

bmcallister wrote:
Interesting, I cannot see the poll online.....

No I cannot find it either. I wonder how accurate the final poll will be? Many people will give up rather than keep looking for it.

treaclesdaddy, I'm loving your comment. I would sum it up thus...

Conspiracy theory, plagiarised nonsense (quote your references!), Andover’s rubbish, listen to me because I’m ill, more conspiracy!

Pray tell, in your paranoia, who do you think would benefit from an almost 100 year old monument to the towns’ dead being put back where it was intended to be?

For the benefit of those looking the poll is slap bang in the middle of the home page...please vote 'yes' or 'no' as you wish, because we live in a democracy and that is why people like treaclesdaddy (use your real name) get to spout their drivel, thanks to 214 men who died and are listed on the memorial.

If people would actually stop and look at what Treaclesdaddy is saying,he puts forward a reasoned and sensible arguement which is not based on conspiracy theories or paranoia in the slightest. I have just gone to vote on the poll and it only shows the figures at present and is not allowing me to vote,also i am interested as to why in the space of one week there has been such an impossibly big swing in the numbers and that the wording is so obviously designed to distort the perception of the public and that there has never been this much fuss made about any other poll that the paper has run considering how many more burning issues exist in the town.
The thing that bothers me about this issue of who would benefit form it being moved i have to ask,how would the unemploed man or woman benefit,how would the single mum struggling to feed her child benefit,how would the food bank benefit which is struggling to keep going benefit,how would the pensioner being harrased benefit,and to take up the point above how would the person who needs treatment benefit from the monument being moved when they dont have facilities available locally and so the list goes on.
Our town is in need of many changes before worrying about the war memorial,but the people at fault here are not the campaigners on either side because i do agree about democracy,the problem is the Andover Advertiser starting all this again when there are far more important things that they could be reporting on,shame on the usually good local paper for bringing about this bad piece of press.

Nigel Moore, it is well known that you and treaclesdady are one in the same, which is a bit naughty really. Perhaps if you put a space after your commas, then it would at least disguise the fact a little.

I think the poll is pretty clear, are you happy with the memorial where it is or would you like to see it back in the High Street, where it was originally. The Advertiser clarify this by adding that any move would have to be funded, like the original erection of the monument, by public subscription, so it discounts the use of council finance (taxpayers money), which might pay for some of the things you mention, which all would agree, are desperately needed in Andover.

I suspect the paper have instigated the poll because week after week for the past two and a bit years their letters pages have been filled with correspondence about the memorial, predominately, but not wholly, from residents that would like to see it put back. Through all this, TVBC have remained silent, apart from the Cabinet dismissing the idea out of hand.

You are asking an erroneous question when you say who would benefit from it being returned to the town centre. It is a war memorial. It is not meant to benefit anyone, anymore than a statue erected to a great leader, or the placing of a plaque on a building because someone famous once lived there, benefits anyone. It is a mark of respect to the men who sacrificed their lives for our democracy and our way of life. As someone said, it is an outward manifestation of the town’s pride for what those men sacrificed for future generations. Returning it won’t bring economic growth, an end to unemployment, or better medical facilities for the town. But neither would leaving it where it is. The two issues are completely separate, especially as the paper clarified that the move would be by public subscription.

But what a return would do is show we are a town who has pride for its history, and in that respect, because of its uniqueness, the memorial might attract a few more visitors to our town, or encourage those that do come to return, because they can see that Andover is a place which values its community and its heritage, and that actually, despite all the problems you highlight, Andover is actually a great place to live and work. It would help if you could be a little less negative about our lovely town? If we have pride in Andover, then others will see that and want to come to the town too, which has got to be a good thing.

If this were simply a request to move the memorial, I could see some of the stuff you say could make sense, but given that the actual ‘wrong doing’ here was perpetrated by the Borough Council when it removed the memorial in the first place (because of a few boxes and a proposal to extend the guildhall), then all the campaigners are asking is for a return to where it once was, for no other reason than 214 men died and we should remember that, not just once a year, but everyday. And because that is where the people who paid for the memorial, who lost those men, wanted it to be.

Yes, here are arguments to be had, I know, about what would happen to the WW2 plaques, but the issue is this…unless there is a discussion about the memorial, we’ll never be able to answer that and any other questions. And at the end of the day, it might be decided that it isn’t actually feasible to return the monument, because it is too delicate to move, or the underground services in the high street won’t allow it, or the money can’t be raised. But given the strength of feeling on both sides it’s got to be worth discussing, rather than ignoring the issue?

I agree the poll is flawed. Only those that read the Advertiser (or go online) AND have a computer AND can be bothered to vote (either way), will be represented by the poll, but if nothing else (and irrespective of the result), if the paper publishes the numbers that actually took part, it will be an indication of how many people care, one way or the other, about the memorial. What this poll should spark is a discussion between the council and interested parties and then perhaps some sort of proper referendum on the issue, so that the actual views of the town are known. Then we would know if there is an actual desire locally to see it back in the High Street or not. At the moment we are all guessing what the actual opinion is, but perhaps this pole, with all its flaws, will give an indication?

Whichever way you look at it, it is a hot topic of debate for Andover so no one can just dismiss out of hand the idea of a return, and I wonder in the face of all this, how long TVBC can stay silent on the issue. Their tactic of “ignore it and it will go away” doesn’t seem to be working for them, and I for one would welcome a proper resolution of the issue, one way or the other. If something isn’t done soon, then it will be the historian who looks back on all this with disbelief at the councils inactivity and how will he or she judge our current crop of councillors?

Oh, and if you can only see the figures and not join in the poll, this means that you (or someone else) has already used your computer to vote. My understanding is that it is possible to vote multiple times (which might explain the sudden swings in the figures both ways that I have seen). If this is a normal poll, then at the end, all duplicate entries will be discounted, so if anyone is tempted to vote more than once, you are wasting your time. It could mean that whatever the figures show now, the result will change significantly once the duplicates are removed. However, perhaps, just perhaps, if the vote is in favour of returning the memorial, then that is actually how the people of Andover feel (or at least the ones taking part in the newspaper poll). Not everyone thinks the same as you, Nigel, so if more people want to see it returned than want it left in the churchyard then that is democracy.

Some very good points are made above but two still elude me the first being
a)The suggestion of public subscription by the Advertiser is awkward at best because surely with the Cenotaph being council maintained,agreeing to such a venture would surely open the floodgates for anyone in town to decide where anything would go by simply throwing money at it.

and
b) When someone dies why do you need a constant daily reminder,surely thats would be like placing a loved ones headstone in your back garden and that is a terrible thought,most people are fully aware of the sacrifices given by our armed forces throughout history without needing to be prompted.

(*huge sigh)

Nigel, I feel compelled to come back to you, even though I shouldn't bather. To answer your points:

a) The war memorial, as most in this country, was originally paid for by public subscription, thereby giving people at the time the freedom of choice, so dearly won, to contribute or not (many in Andover chose to pay towards the War Memorial Hospital instead). The Advertiser’s suggestion mirrors that, I believe, because it wants to separate the issue of location from the financing of any return. We all know the country is in a terrible financial state and no one would expect the move to be paid for out of taxpayers money - although of course we are conveniently forgetting that the move to the churchyard was paid by the Borough and so was a diversion of public funding in 1956. People have a certain level of disposable income, be it a little or a lot and they choose to spend this on things such as alcohol, cigarettes, charitable donations, holidays etc. If those people are willing to chip in some of that money to help relocate the memorial then that is their choice. If no one is willing to do this, then it will surely stay where it is. As for moving anything else if you have the cash, this probably holds true in any walk of life? What else would you move though? The Guildhall? The memorial would only be put back (and that's the point) if there was the backing of the people of Andover to do so and the funds could be raised. If people don’t want to see it returned, then please leave it where it is. What I am saying is (and I think the Advertiser are trying to do) lets at least find out what people want, because the council will sadly not be moved to do so! Remembering that the memorial has already been removed from its intended location, it is covered by its own legislation, namely the War Memorials (Local Authorities’ Powers) Act (1923) as amended by the Local Authorities Act/Local Government Act (1948), which gives the provision for the maintenance and guardianship of memorials by the local authority. This is therefore a unique situation and it is disingenuous of you to suggest it would open the floodgates for other stuff, not so covered, to be moved on a whim.

b) I think what you have done here is compare the death of say someone’s elderly relative, who has had a long life, to the sacrifice made by almost one million ordinary young men (and women lets not forget) of this country, in the defence of our freedom and democracy during the First World War. This is a very crass statement, and belittles not only Andover, but all those thousands of cities, towns and villages across the United Kingdom who, following the First World War, chose like Andover, to erect a monument to their fallen at the heart of the community. The very point of these memorials was to do exactly what you pour scorn upon - to remind people everyday that whist they went about their business they were able to do so was because those listed on the memorial had not returned from defending our way of life. Not in some morbid fashion (unless that is what you are suggesting?), but with pride. What you seem to be suggesting here is that all war memorials should be hidden away so you don’t have to remember why you are able to write your musings so freely on this website? Should we move the Cenotaph in London, because it is in the middle of a busy street and people might get upset?

I have to say, Nigel, you seem rather to preoccupied with the thought that the people of Andover might exercise their democratic right and demonstrate their desire to have the memorial returned (there is that word again – returned) to the heart of the community. It would be more useful if, rather than trying to get people not to take part in the poll (which has some rather unfortuante connotations), you encouraged EVERYONE, whether yes or no voters, to get involved and lobbied the council yourself to get them to do something in the way of finding out once and for all what people actually want. At the end of the day, you may well be right in everything you say, that people don’t want the constant reminder of war in the town centre, and once a year is sufficient to remember them, and that the best thing might be to leave the memorial where it is. But unfortunately, you seem hell bent on preventing us from finding out one way or the other.

Bob R.

What a lot of words have been used here to actually not answers my points,in point a) i simply asked about the possibility of others thinking they could move stuff in a similar way and i am baffled that this case would be seen as a special circumstance,as stated before tell that too the unemployed person that even though your still unemployed alls right in the world as the cenotaphs moved even tough you're still without a job,and in point b) i'm just asking why we need constantly reminding off the troops sacrifices that everyone is fully aware off and at no point as suggested would i belittle anything concerning Andover or the forces past and present,i have always had the utmost respect for our troops past and present and will continue to do so.
Finally due to the distortion of my points in this issue and having more important things to do i am out of this debate, but remember there are two sides to every arguement as quite obviously some people are failing too see.

Nigel, don’t kid yourself. You and I (and your alter ego, treaclesdaddy) have not been debating. I have simply been trying to correct some of the nonsense you have been writing about the poll and the memorial in general. I do, however, apologise if my last correspondence was not clear, I will try to do better.

a) I was trying (poorly) to point out that unlike almost everything else in the town, the war memorial does not have an owner, simply a guardian in the local authority, and therefore unlike a building or a park etc, it IS a special case. But you are right, it could open the floodgates for people to want to move stuff, but it would be because of public opinion not money. Unless the public back a proposal then all the money in the world won’t shift something (unless those in authority are corrupt), and as I tried to point out, the poll the Advertiser are running separates the issue of financing for any move so that we can get to the heart of whether people want it back or not. And that is the point, this is not moving something on a whim, it is putting it back where it was always intended to be. That has to be a worthy cause. As I said, it won’t end unemployment, but neither will leaving it in the churchyard, so it is wrong for you to link deprivation, poverty or unemployment with the ultimate location war memorial. I fail to see how you think these two issues are linked, other than you attempting to cloud the issue. Money spent returning the memorial would not be diverted from tackling those issues, as they were when the memorial was taken to the churchyard.

b) Again, clearly a poor job on my part in trying to respond to you. We don’t NEED, as you say, to remember our war dead, we CHOOSE to do so because we want to remember their sacrifice, and that is the mark of a caring, cultured and sensitive community. We make it an open expression of our gratitude to show we care, not because we need to be told we should remember. If you think that is wrong then what you say not only applies to our and other war memorials, but also to other public displays of remembrance, such as those to Stephen Lawrence, PC Yvonne Fletcher or the 7/7 bomb victims. They are all in public places and are there because we CHOOSE to remember how life can be taken in such tragic circumstances not because someone is making us remember. Surely this is the mark of a civilised society?

Again, please EVERYONE vote, whether you are in favour of a return or are happy for it to saty in the churchyard, so we can find out what Andover thinks, not just Nigel (or me!).