Dakota is killing the South Wales pub covers scene

The South Wales pub music scene is in a sorry state and bands need to take a good look at themselves instead of pointing the finger elsewhere.

Before I go any further, I want to make it clear that not all of the music scene is in crisis. There are some really good things happening, and undoubtedly there’s a lot I'm not aware of, but generally there is a desperately sad (and somewhat pathetic) malaise in our pubs and clubs.

A QUICK HISTORY LESSON
There was a time when Newport and the surrounding region was revered internationally for the vibrancy of its music. If you're old enough to remember the 80s you'll remember that venues, clubs, bars and pubs thundered with the sound of countless bands playing their own original music and pulling big audiences. It was very much the norm that punters would happily and enthusiastically support this scene and the bands.

Cover versions were few and far between – maybe the odd cover thrown into a set as a nod to your heroes or influencers.

But then the 90s happened.

I remember it clearly. Venues that once played host to these bands discovered the dreaded tribute act. Virtually overnight gigs dried up for originals bands and you could only get a gig if your set was entirely dedicated to one band.

The tribute scene eventually relocated to larger venues where the better exponents continue to pull decent crowds and make decent money, but what was left in its place was the pub rock covers scene that has dominated ever since.

Pub rock covers has become the norm in South Wales to such a degree that young players are picking up and learning instruments with the express aim of joining or forming a covers band so they can join this circus; as if regular gigs at the local Cock & Beaver for a couple of quid is the full extent of their ambition. It's depressing.

WHERE WE ARE TODAY
The full depressing state of this pub rock covers scene can be seen on the Facebook group ‘Champions League of South Wales Cover Bands’. With over 5,400 members this group features members from most of the cover bands in the South Wales region. It's probably the first time this sizeable community has been gathered in one place.

This community largely spends its time whining about gigs and pay. A great many of them appear to believe they have a god given right to gigs and hundreds of £s by the simple fact that they have assembled themselves into a unit and learned Stereophonics ‘Dakota’ because “the punters like Dakota”, and because they have invested money in their gear.

As social kinda guy I travel around venues a lot and encounter many of these bands. And as a booker for a Newport venue I get inundated with approaches for gigs. They all tell you they are great and better than the rest, when in reality it’s hard to tell many of them apart; they all promise they’ll bring a crowd with them or pull an extra crowd, but rarely do; and way, way too many of them turn up and play essentially the same set to the same average standard.

Of course there are some better examples in amongst the throng, but these guys tend to know they are better and understand what it takes to rise above the rest. These are the bands that also attract a crowd and they tend to play sets that are different to the same old, same old of the majority. And they clearly rehearse hard to make sure their standard is good.

As a result they are also the bands that command better rates of pay and have no trouble finding gigs. Indeed, they don’t often have the need to go looking for gigs because the venues come to them in the safe knowledge that they will get a great experience.

As for the rest, as a booker for a venue I have put in place a very simple quality control valve I call the Dakota Valve. If a band contacts me and shares their setlist and I see Dakota on there, they don’t get any further. It's my version of 'No Stairway? Denied!" from Wayne's World.

A Liverpudlian mate of mine, who has been living here for several years and who sits religiously at the bar every Saturday night sarcastically asked me if there was a Welsh bylaw that said all rock covers bands HAVE to play Dakota.

But it’s not just Dakota. There’s an alarmingly thin catalogue of songs that a lot of South Wales cover bands pull from, and Dakota, along with Sex On Fire, Mustang Sally and Teenage Kicks are just some of the unimaginative choices many of them make in the belief that that’s all audiences want to hear (presumably because they wouldn’t want to insult an audience by thinking they like anything else).

Just to reiterate, I don’t have a problem with the covers scene as such (I've done it myself), just the lazy way too many bands approach it.

It feels like the X Factor mentality underpins the thinking of many bands... “I want to play music, I want to have an audience in place when I arrive (without going to any effort to attract one), and I want to be paid well for my trouble. But I don’t want to have to work too hard at it, or think about it too hard. Hell, I don’t even want to bother sound checking if I can help it.”

The real problem here is that the covers scene and the lazy approach of many bands has become so dominant across South Wales that it strangles a lot of opportunities for anyone who wants to do anything different. Venues have come to accept same old, same old rock covers as the only flavour available, and it's incredibly hard for venues to sift through the chaff to find the wheat. This is why many venues are finding attendances dropping, because people are getting bored of the same meal of egg and chips every Friday and Saturday night.

But why should audiences be expected to turn up religiously every weekend just to see the same songs played to the same standard?

Bands have to understand that falling audience numbers inevitably means falling revenues for venues. And falling revenues puts pressure on the money available to pay for entertainment. The whole scene continues its depressing downward spiral.

SOME ADVICE - TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT
So I guess the only thing left to do is offer my recommendations of what bands should do to make sure they rise above the throng to get those gigs and move up the pay scale.

1. Ditch the idea that you have to play Dakota, Sex On Fire, Mustang Sally, Brown Eyed Girl, Jailbreak etc because ‘that’s what audiences want to hear’. You insult the audience by thinking they only know and like a narrow range of songs. They like thousands of songs. Yes, they may like the songs listed above, but not every bloody Saturday night. If you stick to the same 'safe' set as countless other bands, what is there to differentiate you? And at the same time you expect more gigs and better pay? Really?
2. Work on your set and your delivery. Don’t just learn a song to a basic standard and think it’s enough. Again, you insult your audience if you think they can’t tell the difference between a good and bad performance. Stereophonics don’t do that. They work to be as tight as they can be. You may think rehearsals are a pain in the arse, but it makes all the difference to work on nuances. Be self-critical and ask yourself can you do it better? If you don't think you can do it better you're either brilliant and earning shitloads, or you're deluded.
3. Sound Check. It’s depressing how many bands – and especially guitarists – say “I know my set up. I can just plug and play.” That attitude reveals your amateur approach to gigging. Each room has a different acoustic, so instruments need to be balanced accordingly. If you can’t tell the difference perhaps you should stick to playing in your bedroom or garage where the acoustics never change.
4. Market yourselves properly. Trust me, most of you say you’re brilliant, and most of you promise the moon on a stick. But if you’re approaching a new venue for a gig you need to prove your worth in advance because we’re not all easy to fool. Set up a decent Facebook page and post videos of yourself so we can check you out. If bands can't do this simple thing venues will assume it's because bands fear they’ll be found out for not being as good as they say they are.
5. Don't assume you are owed a living. You’ll be paid what you’re worth. Just because you’ve heard that a band can earn several hundred quid more than you currently get, don’t assume there’s a standard rate that you're being unfairly denied. They get paid more for a reason. Stop whining and go figure that reason out.
6. Don't assume the money you spent on gear deserves reward in itself. A shit guitarist can pay £2,000 for a guitar, £1,500 for a stack, and a grand on pedals and outboard. It doesn't mean they deserve riches if they can barely hold down a riff. If the next guy plays a second hand guitar through a second hand rig but plays better with more commitment and style it's obvious he deserves more reward for his efforts.
7. (Additional) Singers, ditch the lyric stand. When did it become acceptable to perform standing behind a lyric stand? All that says is you can't even be arsed to learn the words to songs the audience probably know the words to? And how are you supposed to deliver in your role as a frontman / frontwoman if you're hidden behind a music stand? Why not just go sit at the side of the stage if it's too much like hard work?

There ARE good bands out there, plenty of them. I go out looking for them and when I find them I book them (if the venue can stretch to the budget and the style is suitable). A few weeks ago our venue hosted a band doing bluegrass versions of popular hits and they went down a storm. And last weekend I saw a band in Slipping Jimmy’s (Newport) open their set with a tight and well played version of It Bites ‘Calling All the Heroes’. There wasn’t a Dakota or Sex On Fire in sight.

Did the audience rebel or walk out? No they didn’t.

I've never been convinced by Friars Walk... but now I'm worried

In November 2013 I was approached by the South Wales Argus to supply a commentary piece on why I thought taking out a £90m loan to fund Friars Walk was a bad idea. I'm a nobody, so I suspect I was the only person they could find prepared to voice their opposition to such an idea.

My reasoning was simple. Friars Walk was the wrong thing at the wrong time. In a city which is economically depressed, employment and ways to earn money is what we need, not ways to spend it. And the fact that nobody from the private sector could be found to take the financial gamble suggested it probably wasn't the safest bet anyway.

On 26th November Newport City Council voted overwhelmingly to a deal that would see the city borrowing £90m which it would them loan to Queensbury to cover the cost of construction and fit-out of the development. This loan would be paid back at a commercial rate of interest.

On Nov 12th 2015 Friars Walk opened to much celebration from local media, politicians, and indeed the city as a whole, almost all of whom viewed the development as Newport's salvation around which a city-wide regeneration would arise.

That was then, this is now.

Today (29th June 2016) just seven months after Friars Walk opened its doors, the surprise news has broken that a proposed sale to Talisker Corporation - a Canadian real estate and management company - has fallen through. This has potential serious implications for the city that the Council (and indeed local media) appear to be downplaying, and we need to return back to November 2013 to understand why.

A news report in the Telegraph & Argus at the time revealed that...

"If Queensberry couldn’t pay back the cash the council could take the scheme over and sell it on or re-finance it. The firm has until 12 months after completion to repay the money – by June 2017 at the latest. But if it can’t refinance it or sell it, the council could be faced with costs of between £4 million to £7 million to fund the borrowing."

If such a situation were to transpire this would be extremely serious for a city already trying to balance the books following government cuts to its budget (Newport City Council has had to make £11 million in cuts in 2016 alone). Even at the optimistic figure of £7 million a year (not including interest), it would be 12 years before the Friars Walk loan is paid off. At the lower rate of £4 million we would be looking at over 22 years.

The press coming out of Queensbury/Newport City Council today is predictably blase about the deal falling through, with plenty of 'speaking to others', as if it's not a problem.

But it IS a problem, and the harsh reality is that finding a buyer in the current climate will be EXTREMELY difficult. The only way Friars Walk will attract a buyer is if it is an overwhelming commercial success.

So how successful is Friars Walk, and how bright or otherwise is its future?

To answer the second question first, and without even factoring in post-Brexit uncertainty, the future for shop retail isn't looking good. Experts are predicting a significant decline in the fortunes of brick and mortar retail that will be comparable with recession. At the same time online retail is coming to dominate the landscape to such a degree that John Lewis has already revealed it expects its online sales to overtake store sales by 2018, and has invested £500 million in preparing itself.

John Lewis you will remember is a direct competitor of Debenhams, which provides the anchor store for Friars Walk. It's safe to assume they share the same future vision for their businesses.

Internet retail is hitting certain types of retailers hardest, and is changing the face of retail. Women's clothes stores in particular are suffering as women become more comfortable with the convenience of online shopping, and according to the Local Data Company (the UK's retail experts) women's clothes stores are closing faster than any other type of High Street business. Women's clothes shops make up a sizeable percentage of outlets in Friars Walk.

[As an aside, the types of businesses doing well in this brave new world are barbers, mobile phone shops, tobacconists, hair & beauty salons, nail salons, and health clubs.]

Shopping centers in generally, like high streets, aren't particularly thriving. Latest data shows footfall is 9% down on high streets in the last five years, 3% down in shopping centers, and 5% up in retail parks. Evidence of this can be seen by the ongoing success of Newport Retail Park in Spytty.

With regards to the success of Friars Walk, we only have the PR and the number of units let on which to judge.

In May 2016 Queensbury proudly announced that 'more than five million shoppers have visited Newport's Friars Walk since it opened to the public six months ago.' Impressive figures indeed, but can we believe them, or is this merely an over-egging of the PR mix intended to attract a buyer? The PR surrounding Friars Walk has been nothing if not bullish and glaringly optimistic since the start.

To put that figure of five million shoppers into context, it would mean over 27,300 shoppers visiting the centre seven days a week since Friars Walk opened. On the times when I have visited I felt it hard to believe such a consistently high number was being achieved or sustained, but of course that is just my observation and opinion.

With regards units let, according to the leasing plan on the website, Friars Walk still has 19 vacant units awaiting interest. This is a significant proportion. So clearly the centre is finding it hard to achieve anywhere near full occupancy.

And of course if we are to judge Friars Walk on its attractiveness to potential buyers, we MUST consider the wider picture within which it sits - the surrounding city centre, the purchasing power of the local population, and whether it is capable of attracting outside visitors. With regards this last point, as a classic 'Clone Town' development it is certainly not attracting people from Cardiff or further afield, for why would you travel to Newport's Debenhams when you have a bigger one in Cardiff? This is the widely understood weakness and failure of Clone Town developments.

So when you look past the spin and the protective shield of optimism surrounding Friars Walk, it doesn't look so much of a good opportunity for potential buyers. The people of Newport's fondness for Friars Walk isn't enough to warrant a buyer spending upwards of £100 million on it. It needs to be a proven success and a good investment, and unfortunately for the people of Newport, it doesn't look like it is.

I don't wish to speculate on the likely reasons talks with Talisker Corporation collapsed. But they did and there is now a very real chance that Friars Walk could cost us all dearly in the very near future. I genuinely wish and hope that it doesn't, but I am deeply worried.

Labour launches all-out war on history, heritage and culture in Newport

It would be good to understand exactly what it is about Newport’s history, heritage and culture that so offends the Labour Party that they feel the need to sweep it aside with such vigour.

Most residents of the city will recognise that culturally Newport is a shadow of its former self. You only need to look back to the 1980s and 1990s to find a city that was culturally vibrant with a hugely successful and throbbing nightlife, a global reputation for music (remember ‘Newport - The New Seattle’), and when the likes of Sir Elton John and David Bowie were performing at the Newport Centre.

The museum also used to attract major touring exhibitions. There was a time when queues formed across John Frost Square for entry to an exhibition of paintings and sculptures by Gerald Scarf (the man behind the Pink Floyd ‘The Wall’ artwork and opening credits to ‘Yes Minister’). And as you walked around the town you got the feeling of a town built on a rich heritage played out on grand murals that most of Newport’s residents took for granted. That was just the way it was.

Newport was truly buzzing. All of this culture helped to bring people into the town (as it was then) and those people would spend money in our shops, pubs, clubs and restaurants. So the local economy benefitted. There were few, if any, boarded up shops and a thriving local independent retail community that gave the place identity and character.

It’s hard to think of Newport then and Newport now without being struck by the scale of the contrast.

The Labour-led Council’s long war of attrition against Newport’s history, heritage and culture stepped up a gear last year with the underhand destruction of the Chartist Mural in John Frost Square. This disastrously handled affair drew national attention and shock at just how arrogant an elected Council could be. A somewhat reluctant attempt at an apology was eventually dragged out of the Council, and promises were made by Council Leader Bob Bright that 2014 would be ‘a year in which Chartism is celebrated in diverse and imaginative ways that give their ideas a contemporary relevance.’

At the time of writing this blog we are just a few weeks away from the end of 2014. The ‘diverse and imaginative’ celebrations promised by Cllr Bright remain locked in the imagination. If it weren’t for Newport’s schools and schoolchildren recreating the Chartist march on the day of the 175th anniversary of the Chartist Uprising, we would have had virtually nothing to mark the single most momentous event in Newport’s history.

The latest assault comes with the announcement that it’s highly likely that Newport will lose its city centre museum, art gallery and library. According to a report in the South Wales Argus, ‘Proposals could see its [museum and art gallery] closure, with the collection moved out of the building and exhibited at temporary events with 13 full time jobs being lost’. This would be almost inconceivable that a city – supposedly ‘on the rise’ – would not have a city centre museum, art gallery or library. It is difficult, if not impossible to think of any other city that can make such a shameful claim.

As well as a proposal to close the museum, art gallery and library, there is also a proposal to reduce funding to the historically important Newport Medieval Ship.

The Newport Medieval Ship has been an inconvenience for the Council since the day it was discovered during the building of the Riverfront Arts Centre. As this case study from the National Co-ordinating Centre for Public Engagement explains [click for link], its discovery was initially kept secret but was leaked. In one moment of inconvenience, Newport City Council’s simplest – and no doubt preferred option of quiet destruction of the remains was foiled and the Council was effectively lumbered with an albatross around its neck. The Council has never been a fan of the ship, but has had its hand forced to go along with the public, the Welsh Assembly Government, and the Friends of the Newport Ship in supporting the relic.

At the time of writing, news is breaking that Associated British Ports (ABP) have stepped forward as a hard-cash sponsor helping the Friends of the Newport Ship towards its target of £100,000 to rebuild the ship in a purpose built museum. ABP must be applauded for its vision and generosity.

Just a month earlier, a Newport City Council report [dated 3 October 2013] discusses disposal as a potential option. The negatives against destruction are listed as:

• Loss of opportunity to develop a visitor experience that tells a unique story
• Possible loss of museum’s accredited status
• Grants might be reclaimed

It’s hard to believe the chance to develop a visitor attraction would feature highly on the Council’s list of benefits, and with the likely loss of the central museum would this have left only the threat of reclaimed grants as a hurdle to the Council breaking out the sledgehammers? If only people like Associated British Ports would stop adding extra complication for the Council. The Labour councillors must be spitting feathers up there at the Civic Centre and scratching ABP off their Christmas card list.

At the heart of the problem is the fact that the Labour-led Council really doesn’t see any value in Newport’s history, heritage and culture. Instead we have a Council that has given its unswerving loyalty to big brand retail logos. They just want Newport to be distilled down into a city of mere consumers spending what little hard-earned cash we have in the familiar retail brands of the typical clone High Street.

History, heritage and culture doesn’t really fit with multinational retail. The two tend to live in entirely different unconnected worlds. But if and when history, heritage and culture become an obstacle or an inconvenience, Newport City Council has no qualms in brushing it aside. Chartism is not as important as Next and Nandos to this Council.

The scale of this misguided devotion can be seen in the Council’s eagerness to put the city into hock for £90 million for a new shopping centre (built as a response to the popularity of Cwmbran Shopping Centre), yet it claims poverty and budget pressure as justification for closing down the museum, art gallery and library. No developers were prepared to take a gamble on funding Friars Walk, but such is the conviction to multinational retail that the Council signed OUR collective names on the loan form. So if we have to lose our history, heritage and culture to help them realise their dream of Newport as a city of shoppers, that’s the way it has to be.

This nonsense has to stop. Whatever side of the political spectrum we individually sit, we cannot let this arrogant, self-serving, misguided Council to ransack OUR city, OUR history, OUR heritage any longer.

NOTE At the time of writing neither Paul Flynn MP (Labour) or Jessica Morden MP (Labour) have stated an opinion on the proposed closure of Newport museum, art gallery and central library. One would expect a staunch criticism of the closures considering the reason behind them is apparently the Coalition's programme of austerity and budget cuts. However, in the absence of any such criticism from the MPs, this writer will assume they agree with any forthcoming closure, and by extension the austerity programme.

Newport City Summit - We need more than blanket optimism or cynicism

A tale of two cities. Cllr Bob Bright and Simon Gibson sat next to each other during a Q&A at The Celtic Manor, but the distance between the two is greater than it looks.

Friday 7th October saw the second Newport City Summit at which Newport City Council and reNewport gave an update on Newport's regeneration plans. The message was very much about positivity and flag waving, but in reality, what we really saw here was 'the difficult second album' after the phenomenal success of February's first Summit.

Let me make one thing clear. NOBODY wants to see Newport's regeneration more than I do. I love Newport. I love the people, the culture, and the unique but hard to define 'something' that makes Newport special and different. If I didn't love Newport I would move elsewhere. But even if I won the Euromillions, my home would remain the city to which I will always belong.

There's a lot going on in Newport at the moment and there's certainly a feel that efforts are being made on a multitude of fronts. Some of these efforts I am a keen supporter of, and others I think are folly. For example, I found it difficult to play down my enthusiasm for the reNewport vision presented at the first Newport City Summit in February. I can't remember a time when Newport actually had a strategy or a vision, but reNewport at last presented a balanced and well researched vision I could really get behind.

Similarly, I'm a huge supporter of the Newport BID. This has the potential to transform the city centre and make it a more appealing environment for shoppers and business. I also am grateful that Admiral has chosen the city centre for its new office. The injection of several hundred workers at lunchtime has no doubt provided a considerable boost for local businesses. To be fair, I don't think I've heard a single word in opposition to Admiral arriving in the town, which underlines how much such a development is appreciated by all.

By contrast, I'm not a supporter of the Friars Walk development. In my opinion it's folly for the city to go into hock for £90 million to build a new shopping centre when what we really need is more industry and business to bring revenue IN to the area, instead of multinational retail chains taking yet more money OUT of the area.

Yet because I criticise things like the Friars Walk development I am considered by some an unwelcome and unhelpful cynic. I was even called 'relentlessly negative' by a contributor to the comments section on the South Wales Argus website recently (who obviously hadn't noticed those things for which I am a gushing advocate). I guess the mantra holds strong in Newport that 'you're either with us or against us' and we should all give 100% unswerving approval of everything that happens.

Newport is increasingly polarised in this way. Most people seem to sit in one of two camps. You are either unfailingly a supporter of everything that's going on (and by extension an unflinching supporter of Bob Bright's Labour led council), or you are cynically opposed to everything. Neither is helpful, but while having a balanced, pragmatic attitude where you have differing opinions on different aspects of the regeneration process makes far more sense, it clearly is a not popular approach.

So I went to the Newport City Summit in a mixed frame of mind. I could still taste the euphoria of February's Summit and the unveiling of the reNewport Report, but I suspected this time it would be more of a flag waving exercise for the council and less about reNewport. You may remember Bob Bright's comment at the time of the first Summit...

'We could all have written down those ideas.' Reaction of @NewportCouncil leader Bob Bright to @RE_NEWPORT report. But he didn't. No vision.
— Kevin Ward (@ArgusKevinWard) December 12, 2013

The second Summit agenda was issued in advance and showed that the event was indeed going to be more of an overall summary than the February event; giving an update on where Newport is with regards to all of the regeneration activity going on. It is of course vital that all regeneration efforts are viewed in relation to each other. Ideally, each should have a bearing on the direction of the others to be truly holistic. Sadly we don't appear to be at that level of organisation or strategic thinking, but it would be of huge benefit if we were. The regeneration programme still has a feel of separate projects happening at the same time with a hope that 'it all comes together'.

The Morning Session
The event kicked off with Councillor Bright giving a City Centre Regeneration Update, much of which centred on the Friar's Walk development. Mr Bright was followed by Simon Gibson, Chairman of the reNewport Task Force who gave a presentation on Driving Economic Growth for the City. These presentations were followed by a brief Q&A.

Both men can speak with authority and conviction, but Simon Gibson is particularly convincing and authoritative. Without wishing to sound like a fan boy (which I concede I might), Mr Gibson gave an impression of somebody who didn't have to be there, but who was because he is genuinely committed and believes in what he and his team are doing.

This was well illustrated when Mr Gibson addressed an earlier shouted comment from a protester about arms dealers and also a question about what the council was doing to help the under-privileged and homeless (there were only two protesters and they were half-hearted at best). Simon Gibson addressed both points with balance and care, even though they were clearly outside his remit, and he even went over to discuss the issues with the protesters during the break. I don't know what he said to them, but we heard nothing more from them throughout the rest of the day.

By contrast, Bob Bright was more guarded and defensive in nature. During the Q&A I asked for an update on the £90 million loan for the Friar's Walk development - when will the council start pulling down the loan, when will the city start paying the loan back, what kind of interest is due etc. Mr Bright said he wouldn't go into specifics, but assured the audience that no money had been drawn down yet. He also made a bullish claim that we can 'rest assured the council will be making a profit'. Let's hope that one doesn't come back to bite him on the backside.

The reNewport project continues to impress and progress. But this doesn't surprise me. There is a strong and growing movement in Newport of people who are advocates of technology as Newport's future. The movement comprises a growing number of business who meet monthly under the banner of Digital Tuesday and strongly complements the reNewport project. They are very focussed and are asking the questions that need to be answered if Newport truly is to develop as a centre of technology and reap the considerable rewards on offer.

reNewport and Digital Tuesday have a very different feel to the other regeneration efforts, which invariably are Council-led. They feel more democratic, inclusive, focussed, and crucially, they take a more critically informed approach. This is in contrast to the other 'suck it and see' regeneration activities.

I don't get the feeling there is any ongoing assessment of regeneration plans from the Council, or any feeling that evidence has informed the tactics adopted. Even asking questions or volunteering comments is not welcome. But what successful venture has ever been completed with only unflinching optimism at its heart?

You can't open a shop and stand behind the counter with a welcoming a smile and expect success as a given. You need to constantly assess what you're doing - whether you have the right stock, whether you're getting the best price from suppliers, whether you're charging the right price to your customers, whether the shop layout works etc. It has to be an ongoing process. Similar analogies can be made for building a successful football team, putting a man on the moon, or indeed regenerating a city. But I don't see that with Newport's regeneration programme. I don't see much by way of open dialogue, I don't see any KPIs being set, I just see 'build it and hope' and an expectation that we must all go along with this approach. They decide, and we accept (and of course foot the bill for their gut instincts).

However, fortunately for the Council, events such as the Newport City Summit largely attract the faithful. It was noticeable that during the Q&A sessions at the Newport City Summit, instead of a forest of curious hands raised from audience members, we had just a few solitary questions. Most people had come to listen and learn, not to question. One must assume they are all happy, supportive and convinced that everything that is going on will lead to success. I truly hope they're right.

The Afternoon Session
After lunch the stage was given over to presentations by Ian Edwards, Chief Executive of Celtic Manor Resort who looked at The NATO Summit and its Legacy, and Ceri Doyle, Chief Executive of Newport City Homes who gave a presentation on Newport - Building the Story. These were also followed by a Q&A session.

I won't dwell on Mr Edwards' presentation. I've made my views known on the myth of a legacy for Newport from the NATO Summit. I don't believe there is one. Yes, it's been fabulous for the Celtic Manor and it's wonderful that the resort has now established itself firmly in the top division of global venues for major events.

But, as a good friend pointed out recently, the reality is given away in the name - Celtic Manor RESORT. The events it holds are largely self contained within the confined of the resort and claims of major trickle down benefits to the city are hugely overplayed. I like the idea of the new Conference Centre, but Mr Edwards' claim that it will generate 100,000 room nights for other local hotels in reality means it will generate room nights for multinational hotel chains, not locally owned businesses. So more Champagne for Paris Hilton, more zero hour minimum wage jobs for Newportonians. I don't call that regeneration sorry.

Neither can I share Mr Edwards obvious joy at seeing the world 'Newport' in tiny letters at the bottom of CNN coverage of the NATO Summit. The word on the screens of the world's TVs only name checked us, it did nothing to show who we are or what we have to offer beyond the confines of the Celtic Manor. In my role as PR consultant I would feel cheeky presenting that to a client as 'coverage gained'.

There are more major events coming to the Manor, including the International Investment Conference taking place 20 - 21 November which, for some bizarre reason, seems to be of interest to nobody in the city, even though this is EXACTLY the kind of event we should be looking to take advantage of. The Celtic Manor will also host the InterAction Council next year, which presumably people WILL get excited about because it includes a few famous names.

Ceri Doyle's final presentation was somewhat left field. A new arrival to the city, Ms Doyle was particularly interesting and open during the Q&A session when the host Roger Hiscott, himself a key figure in the Digital Tuesday movement, asked about her views of Newport before she came here. 'Somewhat lacking in ambition' may not be what we would want to hear, but I got the feeling that the room could sympathise.

But as Ms Doyle has obviously learned, as a city we DO have ambition, the big question is; are we going about it the right way to turn ambition into success?

Nobody appreciates the value of positive thinking more than me. But I wish more people saw the value of also viewing things critically and of ongoing reassessment of our course. I left the second Newport City Summit with a feeling that we are progressing down an expensive and unfamiliar road with our combined fingers crossed that it leads to verdant fields around the corner. It may do, it may not. But I'd rather be walking down that road putting my trust in a Ordinance Survey map instead of simply a cheery smile and an optimistic song.‏

International Investment Conference - a genuine opportunity we must not miss!

It's now less than six week until the Celtic Manor Resort plays host to an international investment conference that was announced just over six weeks ago by Business Secretary Vince Cable and Welsh Government Minister for Economy, Science and Transport Edwina Hart. So we are halfway between the announcement of the conference and the actual conference taking place.

Apart from the initial excitement from local politicians following the announcement, have we heard anything since about how this event presents an opportunity for Newport, or about how Newport will be taking advantage? Of course we haven't. Or at least I haven't noticed.

This event presents an infinitely bigger opportunity for Newport and indeed Wales than the NATO Summit ever did. The world leaders and media who descended on Newport for the NATO Summit came to discuss global security issues, and they had a very tight schedule in which to conduct their business. Their remit was never to come here with a view to checking out Newport as a destination for business or tourism. And even if they wanted to, they certainly didn't have time.

Yet here we are with the world packing its overnight bag ready to come here and actually discuss international investment, and nobody in local government seems that bothered. I don't see endless tweets about 'opportunity' or 'putting Newport on the map' from the usual suspects as I did during NATO. Perhaps the investment conference is missing the celeb factor of Mr Obama, because frankly, that's all our local politicians cared about when NATO was in town.

Furthermore, the forthcoming conference will be focussing on what I and many others consider to be the REAL future for Newport and the surrounding area - ‘Embracing new technology for competitive advantage'.

With the demise of traditional industries such as steel and coal, Newport and South Wales lost the main source of income that had paid for the growth of our towns and cities throughout the 20th Century. We've tried to attract other industries to varying degrees of success, but what we really need is one overpowering industry that can take root here and which can come to represent us in the same way as steel and coal once did.

Technology offers that potential.

I'm not alone in thinking this and there is a growing local movement that, galvanised by the excellent reNewport report of February 2014, has taken upon itself to drive momentum for Newport as a centre of technology. For instance, launched by Sir Terry Matthews, the regular Digital Tuesday events held at Celtic Manor are gaining popularity as a forum for technology discussion and networking. I attended one recently and the optimism and enthusiasm of attendees and organisers was noticeable.

Many people in the Newport area will not be aware that Newport is excellently equipped to become a 'Silicon Valley' type centre of techology industries. We certainly have the infrastructure, the skills, and indeed a track record of hosting emerging and successful technology business. And in reNewport we have a vision laid out that can serve as a roadmap.

Newport itself was selected as one of the first ten Cities in the UK to become ‘super connected' as part of the UK Government’s £150million Urban Broadband Fund. Equipped with superfast and ultrafast broadband, funding is available for small and medium businesses, charities and social enterprises through Newport City Council.

We even have Europe's biggest data centre which is similar in size to Heathrow Terminal 5 and which is truly state-of-the-art.

This is all excellence stuff, and it just scratches the service of what we have to offer. This is what we need to be promoting to the outside world if we have any serious ambitions to attract inward investment and to grow Newport.

Technology should certainly be the focus of our ambition because technology industries are global, rich, growing rapidly, and offer an opportunity to deliver seriously rewarding careers and generate vast amounts of revenue for the area.

But this is where it hits a speed bump because our politicians seem totally disinterested and incapable of understanding the potential on offer. Instead we get a mindless infatuation with a new shopping centre that will deliver mostly part-time, zero-hour, minimum wage employment, and local councillors fighting over each other to have their photo taken next to President Obama.

Promotional activity should have started the moment the inward investment conference was announced. We should already be reaching out to delegates and global press well in advance to offer them invitations to tour and check out Newport as a technology business destination. The press in attendance will be business press and technology press, most of whom would certainly be interested in taking a look at what we have to offer; the tech businesses we already have here; our tech heritage and our infrastructure. This is in contrast to the military and political press that accompanied the NATO Summit who had no interest in such stuff.

As well as shouting about the benefits for technology businesses should they come here, we should also be shouting about the benefits for their employees. These benefits include cheaper house prices, so tech employees earning fat salaries will know they can afford beautiful houses in a beautiful part of the world.

I sincerely hope all this is in hand and we aren't just going to 'do a NATO' and stand on the sidelines with cap in hand when the international investment conference rolls into town. If it is all in hand, fine, but it might help to shut people like me up if we were kept informed of what the city is doing.

The trouble is, I don't believe it is in hand. Part of the problem will be that our councillors and politicians don't 'get' technology and consequently choose to put their faith, and our money, elsewhere on projects that won't deliver any lasting benefit.

They build shops when, as a city, we don't have money to spend. They build houses when there are not enough well paying jobs that people can afford mortgages. It's putting the cart before the horse time and time again.

We should be doing what we can to attract genuinely valuable business (not coffee chains and clothes shops) and developing an industrial base that generates inward revenue while creating good, well paid jobs. When people are in good jobs and earning good money THEN they will be able to afford houses and have money to spend in shops.

So let's see what happens with the forthcoming international investment conference. Will Newport take this opportunity by the scruff of the neck? It needs to get its skates on if it hasn't already started.

NATO Wales (Newport) - Where is the legacy?

Legacy. It's an important word. But where is the legacy of the NATO Wales Summit? And why has there been no mention of it?

The London Olympics was all about legacy. It was used as the justification for the huge spend on the games and remained a topic of contention before, during and after the event. However, with the London Olympics at least the city had something to show when the games ended, even it if was just a few sports venues and a park in a previously under-developed area in the East of the capital.

The NATO Summit Wales (Newport) will not cost anywhere near as much as the London Olympics as it doesn't require the building of stadia and infrastructure, but for a city the size of Newport the cost will (arguably) be proportionately more. We are a small city - actually the smallest city ever to host the NATO Summit - and the cost in policing and disruption will be considerable at a critical time when we are embarking on much needed regeneration. Can we really afford the disruption and expense at this moment?



The NATO Summit enthusiasts - clearly star struck and drunk on the idea of famous people coming to our city - have been spouting off about 'opportunity' since the day the event was announced. But it is a hollow promise of opportunity that hangs on a vague and desperate hope that Newport will somehow benefit from heightened global profile and will enjoy a noticeable upturn in inward investment and tourism triggered by the Summit. This is clearly pie-in-the-sky nonsense. There has yet to be any sort of return-on-investment analysis, but so far, all we know for certain is the event will cost the city dearly on many levels, and we have yet to hear of any tangible rewards for our involuntary investment. Quite simply, nobody appears to have any concrete suggestions about how Newport can actually take advantage of this mythical 'opportunity' beyond repeating the 'opportunity' mantra time and time again in the hope that it will become a self-fulfilling prophesy.

 

The public mood has noticeably turned against the Summit. The disruption is clearly unwelcome. There are some token PR events planned to try and love-up the people of Newport, including a 'NATO Festival' that sees a riverside food festival, marching band, parachute display and historic aircraft flypast, and a few local food businesses will get the chance to exhibit at the Summit venue. But against the huge economic and social cost of the NATO Summit, these tactics are bordering on insulting,

So what could/should NATO have realistically done to offset the inconvenience and expense to our beleaguered city - the smallest city ever to have the Summit forced upon it?

Collectively, NATO is immensely rich. Comprising the majority of European countries, Canada and the United States of America. It would have been a small matter for each member state to have donated to a fund to provide a genuine legacy for Newport - perhaps a new hospital or a couple of new schools. In the face of such a donation - small to the participants, but huge to our city - the resistance to the Summit would have greatly diminished. A new hospital is something Newport desperately needs and the people of the city would have genuinely appreciated such a gesture, regardless of whether they are for or against NATO as an organisation.

By doing this small thing NATO would have ensured a positive legacy in Newport. From a PR point alone this would have been invaluable to the organisation. Most major events and projects have a requirement to consider legacy before they are given permission to take place, so why not the NATO Summit?

Unfortunately, as far as Newport is concerned the only legacy we are facing is a long drawn-out task of trying to put a final cost on the event; inevitable disappointment that 'opportunity' failed to deliver; and a rather bitter taste left in the mouth.

NATO Summit 2014 yet to show any signs of delivering on 'opportunity' promise

The closer the NATO Summit gets, the further away the much hailed 'opportunities' retreat. With the revelation that the vast majority of journalists will be accommodated in Cardiff, it becomes clear that the promise of a huge media presence in the city and a chance to showcase ourselves is evaporating. One of the biggest carrots has gone rotten... 

Media accreditation is now open for the NATO Summit Wales 2014. Up to 1,500 journalists and other media representatives now need to register and go through security scrutiny before they can receive their passes to attend. Pretty standard stuff for such an event.

The Summit has been hailed as a 'great opportunity' for Newport, and although public feeling has done a 180 degree U-turn against the event, there are still die-hards insisting that it's going to be great for the city. But while we learn daily of more ways in which the Summit is going to be one big, expensive inconvenience, we have yet to see any actual sign of a benefit beyond 'it will raise the profile of the city'. Excuse me while I yawn.

The arrival in Newport of the massed ranks of the media has been one of the main carrots dangled from the start. The expectation was that thousands of journos would be descending on the city with their expense account credit cards, buying 'I Love Newport' t-shirts, eating in our restaurants, drinking in our pubs, and writing glowing reports of what a fabulous city this is and how people and businesses around the planet should think seriously about coming here.

That carrot has now passed its 'use by' date.

As well as opening registration for media passes, the Government has also appointed HRG as the nominated agency to book hotel accommodation for journalists and media crews who wish to attend the NATO Summit Wales 2014. It's a convenient service for international media flying in from all corners of the globe - a one-stop-shop where they can book their accommodation securely through a Government appointed representative.

However, there are only six hotels listed on the HRG webpage, and guess what? Four of the six are in Cardiff. But the picture for Newport is even bleaker because combined the two Newport hotels have only 346 rooms between them. The other 1154 rooms needed will be in the capital. So while a third of the hotels are in Newport, less than a quarter of the rooms needed are.

Obviously this is great news for Cardiff, its restaurants and businesses. And we can confidently predict there will be vastly more international promotion for Cardiff than Newport in any coverage surrounding the Summit. In fact, it will be pretty damned hard to find much positive pro-Newport coverage at all following the event.

But we have to be realistic here, because Newport is not overly well endowed with hotel accommodation away from the cluster around the Coldra roundabout. Once you take the Celtic Manor Resort out of the picture, the city simply doesn't have the capacity to comfortably accommodate 1,500 international journalists who will (rightly) be expecting something a bit better than the Travelodge in the city centre. So if you are the Government organising the Summit, it makes sense to work with Cardiff hotels. That's not where the issue lies here.

The issue is once again with the nonsense STILL being regurgitated by the die-hards and political optimists about 'a great opportunity' and how this is a chance to 'showcase Newport'. There are plenty of examples, for instance Conservative MP David Jones who recently tweeted...

.@NATOWales will be a huge opportunity to showcase Newport, one of the great commercial cities of Wales.
— David Jones (@DavidJonesMP) June 28, 2014

That's a big bold and oft repeated statement. But we need to see a bit of meat on the bones about how this is going to work. Because frankly, it's looking less obvious by the day.

Just having famous world leaders descending on Celtic Manor Resort simply doesn't cut it as an answer to the question, because it doesn't think through the reality.

Mr Obama and the rest will have very tight schedules and will be tied up with the business of the Summit. It is highly unlikely they will have the time or inclination to go out sightseeing in Newport, and indeed with tens of thousands of protesters in the city they will be deterred from doing so by their security. So we can count out the political delegations who won't dare to venture anywhere near Newport, and we can also count out the majority of journalists who, if they do venture into the city, will do so only to cover the protests.

So who does that leave? Who are we counting on to witness and report to the world on our showcase opportunity? And what actual form is the 'showcase' taking? Perhaps if somebody could convincingly answer these questions we will at least know who we are targeting and how the city is going to do it.

UPDATE
A meeting of the HOC Welsh Affairs Committee entitled 'International Representation and Promotion of Wales by UK bodies' is scheduled to take place 2.30pm Wednesday 9th July. It can be followed live at http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=15752

Where does cycling fit within £250m plans for Newport?

In towns and cities across the UK cycling is being encouraged and enabled by everything from cycle paths to urban cycle hire. But where, if at all, does cycling fit within Newport's vision of the future?

Regardless of what you think about cycling, it's getting ever more popular and will continue to do so. Animosity will no doubt continue to rage between cyclists and car drivers, but that's not what this blog is concerned with. In this blog I will look at the importance of cycling to the future of Newport and ask whether Newport City Council has fully considered two wheeled transport, or are we once again missing the boat and lining up problems for ourselves?

Newport is on the up. Apparently. That means growth, and growth means more people and more business (hopefully). New housing developments in and around the city are being announced periodically, for example the old Alcan site in Rogerstone. Back in July 2012 the South Wales Argus was reporting how Newport City Council’s Local Development Plan allocates 700 houses for the site. There have since been several announcements of new housing developments. And if the reNewport ambitions to transform the city into a high tech hub become reality, we will even see a 'software university' as well as an influx of new businesses. Of course it goes without saying that one of the central aims of Friars Walk is to attract more people to Newport.

So if there are going to be more people living, working and doing business in Newport, the issue now looming over the horizon is; how are all these people going to get around the city?

The Southern Distributor Road certainly helped to address some of the congestion that had worsened during the 80s, 90s and early 2000s, but it's no secret that Newport faces continuing challenges, particularly on the M4. The city centre is a pretty difficult place to get around as it is, and the layout of the streets and roads mean there's not a lot that can be done to the major infrastructure to address this. We are pretty much stuck with what we have. Yes, we could perhaps look to painfully and expensively develop roads and bypasses on the outskirts, but that's a 'sledgehammer-to-crack-a-nut' way of thinking that will do little to affect the traffic problems in the heart of Newport when that heart is growing.

Even on the outskirts there are concerns about the future. Take the aforementioned development at the old Alcan site in Rogerstone. 700 houses presumably means at least 700 people looking to commute to and from the estate. Forge Lane isn't a bundle of laughs as it is. Stick another couple of hundred cars into the equation and you can already see the letters to the Argus writing themselves.

So a sustainable transport plan - one that allows for continued and unforeseen expansion - should already be at the centre of Newport's 'on the up' vision. If it's not, the question needs to be asked 'why is it not?' They can't surely be ploughing ahead with these new developments with little or no care for how increasing numbers of people are going to get around the bright shiny Newport of tomorrow? Or is that a bridge they will try and cross when they get there?

Cycling is a big part of the solution and it needs to be included as an influencer on any and all planning decisions. Whatever developments are being considered there should be a box to progress that is only ticked when cycling has been included in the thinking and addressed. This has worked extremely well for Bristol.

Back in 2008 Bristol was named England's first Cycling City after the government gave the city £11.4m to create dedicated cycle lanes, better facilities and more training for children. The same year Bristol was ranked as Britain's most sustainable city, topping the Future's Sustainable Cities Index 2008. Of course this wasn't entirely down to cycling, and also considered the city's environmental and economic performance, quality of life, future-proofing [take note Newport City Council], how well it addressed climate change, recycling and biodiversity. But as the increasing number of visitors to Bristol know, it's a city that is certainly 'on the up' in many respects and has been improved immeasurably as a result of a concerted effort and joined-up thinking.

As Newport grows people WILL look to cycle more, certainly as a way of commuting. And ironically the growth of the city and the subsequent inevitable traffic problems will be a driver for growth in itself. But without a cycling strategy those people taking to two wheels will find it difficult to integrate. Without a cycling strategy and the infrastructure in place what we will undoubtedly see are growing issues with accidents, animosity between cars drivers and cyclists, and problems with cyclists riding on pavements and through the city centre. Again, the letters to editor continue to form well in advance.

Now, I may have missed it amongst all the noise, but I don't recall much in the way of strong statements about cycling or sustainable transport anywhere in news stories or statements about Newport's development. A glance at the Newport City Council's website does little to fill me with confidence. The dedicated Cycling page serves as little more than an intermediate page that links to the Velodrome. Compare this to the wealth of information on cycling on the Bristol City Council website. As far as the Newport City Council is concerned, cycling appears to be something the rest of the world does, but not us.

So in a week when the local news has been filled with cycling and the visit of the British Cycling National Championships and Sir Bradley Wiggins at the British Time Trial Championships at Celtic Manor, let's keep our fingers crossed that the attending media didn't think to investigate or ask how accommodating Newport is for cyclists. The answer would have embarrassed.

I should make it clear now that I am not a cyclist. When I was a lad I spent my life on my bike and cycle-toured around the country during summer holidays, but until last week I hadn't sat on a pushbike for at least 30 years and only bought a bike last week so I could go out with my lad at weekends. I work from home so have no need to commute.

Newport BID a crucial element of city regeneration

Thursday 19th June saw around 40 business leaders, councillors and others attend the opening of the Newport BID Office. The event included presentations by Martin Tressider of Queensberry who is managing the Friars Walk development, and Julie Vellucci, Head of Regeneration at Newport Council. A planned presentation by Inspector Mike Richards on the impact of the NATO Summit was postponed.

The presentations by Martin Tressider and Julie Vellucci were impressive. Martin's presentation included a CGI flythrough of the Friars Walk development. While I remain cynical that such a development is needed in Newport at this moment in time, I have made clear my belief that if it must happen, Queensberry are the best choice to deliver. But while it all looks very nice in CGI where the sky is always blue, I still fail to see how the me-too retailers and food outlets will transform Newport into a destination that can attract people away from Cardiff, Cwmbran and Bristol, and I worry that Friars Walk will only serve to further suck the life out of Commercial Street.

Julie Vellicci's presentation impressed me more. For the first time I got a sense that there was some strategy behind the council's thinking. This is what has always been missing in Newport. The tradition has been for scatter-gun tactics whereby good money has been thrown at various bad redevelopment schemes with no concept of integration or any 'bigger picture' thinking. 'If you build it, they will come' is a seductive line for a movie about a guy building a baseball field for ghosts, but it doesn't always work in real life.

However, Newport City Council has clearly done some good work in standing back and looking long and hard to analyse just what the centre of Newport is, and what can be done to inject some life and vibrancy into it. They have even managed to divide it up into logical zones that include a retail zone, creative & education zone, entertainment zone, and gateway - and at long last the council is looking at how it can work with landlords to make best use of the stunning buildings we have to create accommodation and get more people living in the city centre.

A lot of physical work has been done to improve the city centre, for example outside Newport Market and at the top of Commercial Street, and a lot more physical work is planned. It's all good positive stuff and it complements the bigger picture ambition for Newport as defined by reNEWPORT that sees Newport's future as a technology hub.

So where does the BID fit into this, and why is it so important?

In case you don't know, BID stands for 'Business Improvement District'. Many towns and cities across the UK have BIDs in place and in the most basic terms; a BID delivers services - street cleaning, security, events, marketing - paid for by businesses within the BID area, that are additional to those delivered by the council.

I have a great interest in a Newport BID as I've done a lot of work helping to promote the Bath Business Improvement District - an impressive BID that has achieved much, including high levels of street cleaning, security, and a full programme of events that attract major footfall, such as getting the likes of Nicholas Cage to switch on the Christmas Lights. So I understand fully what a BID can deliver. However, it could be argued that a BID in an already successful and thriving city such as Bath is more of a nice-to-have than a need-to-have.

For Newport, a BID is an absolutely-must-have.

It's widely agreed that Newport city centre has pretty much hit rock bottom. Both the daytime and night-time economies have declined dramatically and public perception is at an all-time low. The reasons given for why people stay away are also universal and generally centre on 'there's nothing there', 'it's scruffy and dirty', 'I feel intimidated', and 'there's nowhere to park'. While the arrival of Friars Walk may begin to address the first and (to a degree) the last of these common criticisms, the wider scruffiness and poor state of the city around it will certainly impact negatively on the success of Friars Walk. People will either have to walk through a decomposing and scruffy city centre to reach the shiny new development, or park within Friars Walk and not venture out. Again, this will impact on the rest of the city. The ideal scenario would be one where footfall happily passes in and out of Friars Walk.

A BID has the potential to dramatically improve the rest of the city centre and address both the scruffiness and its intimidating nature. These two negatives have done an immense amount to speed the latter stages of decline and especially to deter older people from visiting. So the sooner these problems are addressed the better. My yardstick for success is my mother-in-law. The day she feels inclined to visit Newport over Cwmbran and doesn't complain about the state of the streets or the beggers and winos that scare her, I'll know that Newport is, finally, on the rise.

Businesses in Newport have been surveyed as part of a Scoping Study for the BID (certainly worth downloading and reading) and their opinions echo those of the public at large. The perception of crime is the third highest concern for businesses (after vacant premises and parking) and tackling anti-social behaviour their second highest priority (after parking).

There is a process before Newport can have a BID (you can read all about it at http://newportbid.com/about/) and it involves a vote from businesses in the proposed BID area. But such is the pressing need for a BID that any business voting against it will be voting against their own survival. In my opinion, it's that important.

In fact, I would go as far as to say a BID would do more for Newport than the Friars Walk development. It would help support local businesses and increase footfall to the businesses that have hung in there, and which stand to have what little footfall there is tempted away to the multinationals in Friars Walk.

I've been impressed by the team working hard to set up a Newport BID. They have enthusiasm, drive and commitment that hopefully will help to convince businesses that it's the right thing to do. It's certainly in the interests of both Queensberry and Newport City Council that a bid is set up.

The NATO Summit - A 'great opportunity' for Newport?

When Prime Minister David Cameron announced on October 31st 2013 that the NATO Summit would be held at the Celtic Manor Resort, several people were injured in the stampede as local political figures rushed to gush about what a fantastic opportunity this was for the city.

Like the Ryder Cup, the NATO summit would not only 'put Newport (Wales) on the map', but would present a wonderful opportunity for the city to show off its potential to a world that presumably is desperately searching for another small port city. And with thousands of journalists and delegates following the world leaders, this would also supposedly be a boom time for local businesses.

If only life were that easy.

So here we are, eight months later and within the final 100 day countdown to the Summit. How are we shaping up to take advantage of this wonderful and much hailed 'opportunity'? Pretty poorly it would seem. The rose tinted glasses have been removed and the reality of the event is starting to sink in. This isn't going to be an easy event. The NATO Summit is a logistical challenge of immense proportions that will not only cause significant inconvenience, but will come with a significant bill.

The first initial bill for the 2012 Summit in Chicago put the cost of just policing and fire services at $16m. Add to this the largely unmeasured costs associated with cleaning up after the army of protesters and the disruption to business. In May, Assistant Chief Constable Chris Armitt warned the security operation will be a bigger challenge than the London 2012 Olympics. You remember the fuss about security for the Olympics? Anti-aircraft missiles on tower blocks and navy ships harboured in the Thames?

Today the South Wales Argus reports that 'more than 50 schools across Newport could close when the Nato summit begins at the Celtic Manor Resort', the issue being the amount of travel disruption caused by the Summit. Presumably this will mean several thousand working parents needing to use up holiday entitlement so they can stay at home with their children - if they can get it.

Other disruption is becoming apparent, including a new announcement from Newport County AFC warning that fixtures will be moved and the club office, shop and ticket office likely affected as well.

We've already started to hear rumours about police snipers on bridges, random spot checks of vehicles, closed roads and other disruption, and of course the anti-Summit protesters have been very open about their intentions.

So we're getting plenty in about the cost, inconvenience and disruption, but still not one solid idea about how the 'opportunity' will be taken advantage of. Indeed, this has emerged as a point of argument, with local politicians both in Newport and Cardiff bickering and playing the blame game about how no game plan or strategy has emerged. It would seem to our political class, that identifying the Summit as 'an opportunity' is enough in itself.

Ironically, it's the Celtic Manor Resort that has been the most outspoken about this. During May, Celtic Manor bosses voiced their concerns about how 'NATO benefits could be missed.' They were of course spot on, but it's easy to suspect that the statement was ultimately about reputational self-preservation. The Celtic Manor Resort was (rightly or wrongly) criticised following the Ryder Cup when that particular 'opportunity' failed to deliver any obvious benefits to Newport. By voicing their concerns in advance of NATO, they can legitimately holds their hands up after the event and say 'Not our fault. You were warned.'

First Minister Carwyn Jones immediately responded to the Celtic Manor by saying 'Welsh and UK ministers are constantly discussing events they want to hold around the Nato summit in Newport.' With less than 100 days, I don't think we can expect too much from these discussions.

And what about Newport Council? Remember, it was our councillors who were first to rush en masse to announce what a great opportunity NATO presented. Surely they haven't been sitting on their hands?

Unfortunately, it would appear they have (quelle surprise). Council Leader Bob Bright was quoted in The South Wales Argus as late as 9th June as saying, “Officers have been tasked with researching the economic benefits/promotional opportunities of other Nato summits held in major cities elsewhere and with producing an associated PR and marketing strategy that will guide the authority’s promotional activities between now and the summit in September." With less than three months to go, this is far too late in the day to be doing research. Actual plans should already be well developed. Remember, the basic premise has always been about promoting Newport TO THE WORLD. You can't do that in the last week or even the last month before the Summit. It should be happening NOW! In the second great irony, it has been the protesters who have pounced quickest to spread the news of the NATO Summit in Newport.

The third great irony is; that it will be the protesters themselves that offer the greatest opportunity, certainly for local businesses. The world leaders and their assembled entourage won't be spending their hard earned pennies in shops, pubs and restaurants, and most of the attendant media cloud will no doubt camp in Cardiff. The only people guaranteed to descend on Newport itself will be the protesters. They won't be allowed anywhere near the Celtic Manor, so Newport city centre will be where they do their thing, and they will all need to be fed, watered and accommodated. There have already been protest events in the city, so they've started to drip money into the local economy. Of course any money brought in needs to be offset against the cost of policing the protesters, but still, some local business will certainly benefit.

So what is this blog really about? Quite simply, it's about the speed and tedious predictability with which local politicians rush to issue knee-jerk sound bytes without thinking first or without doing basic research to back up their statements. And it's not just politicians. Several local businesses also rushed to gush about how wonderful the NATO Summit would be for Newport. It remains to be seen what actually happens between now and the day NATO rolls out of Newport, but it's my bet that the Summit will deliver little in the way of actual benefit and instead carries a sizable financial and social cost for the city.

Once it's all over and the dust has settled, it will be worth revisiting some of the people who rushed to gush about 'opportunity' and ask where they think they got it wrong. If the Summit goes well and delivers great benefit for Newport, I will, as a cynic from the start, hold my hands up and say I got it wrong. But at least I will have based my prediction on basic research of previous events. Can the politicians say the same?

What a load of bollards!

If, after watching the Winter Olympics, you were tempted to experience the thrills of the downhill slalom, you can get a pretty good feel for the sport by talking a brisk walk through Newport's Commercial Street.

Newport city centre is inherently a very pretty city, architecturally at least. The buildings that line Commercial Street are particularly beautiful and both visitors and locals appreciate them. Of course, there are the occasional ugly cuckoos, such as the Littlewoods building, but while these scar the line of the street, the general feeling as you look up is of a city with character and beauty.

When you lower your gaze, it all falls apart.

It's not so much the shop fronts themselves, these are generally OK. Most retailers understand that an attractive façade makes all the difference in tempting shoppers. Where Commercial Street falls apart is in the mess created by the various necessary and unnecessary street furniture. By 'street furniture' we're not just talking about seats and benches, but all the other stuff - signs, phone boxes, telecoms boxes, bins and, most menacing or all, bollards.

What is it with Newport's addiction to bollards where they're not needed? Commercial Street has been pedestrianised since 1986, and with statues guarding either end, there's no way traffic could access it. So why all the bollards?

Even in areas where traffic does have some access, such as Bridge Street through Cambrian Road, and at the bottom of Stow Hill through Skinner Street, the number of bollards is overwhelming. Seriously, what are we protecting against here? Is there really that much risk of cars drifting too close to shop fronts or mounting pavements?

The infestation of bollards serves to make the whole city centre one big mess. Furthermore, they are inconvenient and you have to keep your wits about you, especially if pushing a pram.

Of course there are some areas where, it could be argued (at a push) that some bollards are necessary, for instance opposite the Queens Hotel and outside the old Pizza Hut. Traffic is banned throughout the day, so retractable bollards are raised to close the street off. But just look at the way this has been presented, with dramatic orange lines painted on the road, yellow-topped bollards, striped raised bollards, warning lights... A touch overkill perhaps? All that's missing is a machine-gun post to make sure we get the message.



More warnings than you'll find on the access road to the Pentagon?

The combined impression created by the street furniture along with the artistic stuff such as statues, is one of complete disarray. Harsh yellow-topped bollards hover around the base of statues like so may hoodies. It's unnecessary and messy.

If you move a few yards down the street pictured above you reach the full-on pedestrianised area. Here we have plinths with statues and ornamental street lights. There is no way a (sane and sober) driver would ever think they could drive down here, but still, just to make sure we have yet more unnecessary bollards.



The chap on the phone needs to pay attention if he's to avoid that bollard he's walking towards...

As you turn into Cambrian Road (the heart of Newport's night life) you are presented by an avenue of bollards. Remember, this is a road where traffic is largely restricted through the day and where the majority of traffic will consist of taxis on a Friday and Saturday night. Most revellers pay no attention to the difference between road and pavement at these times, so the bollards are ineffectual anyway.

How much better, neater and fresher would Cambrian Road be without all these bollards?

There is an alternative solution to the somewhat dated idea of separate roads and pavements - one that many countries across Europe are successfully engaging with. 'Shared Space' sees traffic and pedestrians allowed to integrate without the need for raised pavement or even signs. By the use of different coloured and textured paving materials, drivers and pedestrians are subtly guided. Sharing the same space each takes more care, with demonstrable reduction in accidents.

For more information on Shared Space see this article I wrote a few years' back on behalf of Brett Landscaping.

Shared Space delivers neater, more effective and more pleasant urban environments. Newport needs all three of those. It certainly doesn't need hundreds of pointless, ugly and inconvenient bollards.

Here's an idea for Newport City Council... pull up all the bollards, and melt them down to make a tribute to the Chartist Movement. Just please, less with the bollards eh?

Brand Loyalty AKA Unrequited love

Big brands are experts at encouraging brand loyalty from consumers and they spend vast amounts of money to do it. But don't be fooled, because loyalty is all too often a one-way relationship, as M&S proved when it announced its final betrayal of the people of Newport.

Marks & Spencer spent £££millions on its Christmas advert. It does every Year. It's now a traditional annual battle between the major retailers to produce the biggest and glossiest adverts to warm the cockles of our collective hearts every Christmas, and the budgets are frankly obscene for something as fickle as a temporary festive peak in brand recognition.

The idea is to make us consumers love and trust the companies just a little bit more, and consequently spend more of our money with them. It's both an art and a science to build brand loyalty and the marketing departments of the major national retailers will be phenomenally well resourced, with access to all sorts of market research and expertise in advertising, PR, and social media. But don't make the mistake of thinking it's a genuine emotional activity on their part; it's the cold, hard science of 21st Century consumerism and market share, hidden behind a friendly smiling mask.

All of these brands will have well-worked-out CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) strategies covering everything from how they treat their staff, to how sustainable and energy efficient they are, how they treat suppliers, and how they interact with the communities in which they operate. But in reality, CSR will often be a 'need to do' rather than a 'want to do' for the big players. In today's business world you need to at least be SEEN to do the right thing, even if you would secretly rather expend the effort on increasing revenue and profit.

However, there ARE businesses that approach CSR more willingly and are genuinely driven by conscience and a desire to do the right thing, but do we really believe the big banks and multiple retailers are doing it out of the goodness of their hearts? After all, these are the same 'caring, sharing' companies that screw farmers on margin to such a degree that they can barely survive. But hey! Every little helps.

Newport was shocked and disappointed when M&S pulled out of Commercial Street early in 2013. It was a significant and defining moment in the downturn of the city's retail heart. It showed us just how serious things had got when the city's most reliable and loved retailer gave up the ghost. There are plenty of unconfirmed rumours about why they pulled out - from unsatisfactory maintenance by the building's landlord, to a hard commercial decision that the business was not getting the footfall to warrant hanging in there, none of which comforted.

M&S still has a presence in Newport, but it's now out in the cold, clinical environment of Spytty Retail Park. For Marks & Spencer's traditional (older) clientele, it's simply not the same. And with M&S increasingly evolving from a friendly presence on the High Street to the type of company that sells sarnies to stressed drivers in motorway service stations, perhaps we should have accepted that M&S no longer puts the same value on 'emotional old school retail' as its customers.

This week we learned the depressing news that M&S is pulling out of a 75 year long relationship with Rogerstone's Avana Bakeries, with 650 jobs now hanging in the balance. 75 years! Three quarters of a century! That arrangement began a year BEFORE Dunkirk, and a long, long time before the people making the decision were even born.

It's been pointed out that having 85% of your business with one customer is a precarious position to be in for a business like Avana Bakeries. That's true to an extent, but many thousands of businesses large and small are founded on, and thrive on, a single main contract or customer - from engineering companies that service a single airline, to sign writers who supply only the Highways Department.

In the Avana case, this isn't (wasn't) a typical business arrangement. The very length of the relationship would suggest that there would be (should be) deep rooted transparency, openness, trust and loyalty between both parties. Apparently not so. But you would certainly expect that the customer - M&S - would have the decency after such a long time to discuss the situation with its old partner the moment it started to get itchy feet or saw a need for change; to see if the relationship could be adapted or improved to suit both parties.

Marks & Spencer has issued a statement explaining its reasons for transferring the Avana business to an alternative supplier (Park Cakes).

As part of our work to further improve the quality of our food supply chain, we are consolidating some of our fresh desserts and cakes business and moving from two suppliers to one.

'Improving the quality of our supply chain'? In other words 'streamlining our supply chain'. Basically, putting all the business with a single supplier to reduce costs.

To make this depressing story even more unpalatable, the new supplier - Park Cakes - has previously been at the centre of claims of 'slave labour' practices. Since winning this contract the Bakers, Food & Allied Workers Union are claiming that Park Cakes is preparing to maximise this opportunity by introducing cheap agency labour.

So neither M&S or Park Cakes are covering themselves in glory here. Every business has a right - indeed an imperative - to make itself as efficient as possible. But like free speech, the process of making yourself more cost efficient comes with responsibility. It mustn't be cost-at-any-cost, certainly not if it means the likely loss of hundreds of jobs, the decimation of a community that has for two or three generations come to rely on you, and the replacement of proper jobs with low-pay temp work.

But perhaps I am being harsh. In fairness to Marks & Spencer, it does have extra costs it needs to consider. Those A-listers don't come cheap. If sacrificing 650 jobs in South Wales helps to pay for Helena Bonham Carter in next year's Christmas advert, who can blame them? And if this story does have the inevitable unhappy ending we are all expecting it to have, let's try and resist the temptation to put our boots through the TV when the inevitable mega-budget ad appears next December.

Brand Loyalty? You don't deserve it Marks & Spencer.