Campaign launched to save York's National Railway Museum from closure

Campaign launched to save York's National Railway Museum from closure

Mallard at the National Railway Museum ahead of 75th anniversary celebrations

Crowds at the National Railway Museum when the restored Flying Scotsman was unveiled

First published in News
Last updated
by

THE PRESS today launches a campaign to safeguard the future of one of York’s biggest and most-treasured attractions.

The National Railway Museum or one of its two sister museums in the north will “almost certainly” close if feared funding cuts are confirmed, it was announced yesterday.

Our “Save The NRM” campaign will fight to secure the future of the museum, one of the most-respected in Britain and an integral part of York’s economic and cultural sectors.

Tourism, political and business leaders have already backed the campaign. York Central MP Hugh Bayley said closure of the NRM should be unthinkable.

The campaign has been launched in the wake of yesterday’s announcement by Ian Blatchford, director of the NRM’s parent organisation, the Science Museum Group.

Mr Blatchford said that as well as big cuts to the Science Museum in London, one of its attractions in York, Manchester, or Bradford would “almost certainly” have to go, due to the prospect of a further ten per cent funding cut.

The group runs the Museum of Science and Industry in Manchester and and Bradford’s National Media Museum, as well as the NRM.

Mr Blatchford said the group had endured 25 per cent cuts in real terms in the past four years and a further ten per cent cut could mean the £2 million annual deficit rising to about £6 million, he told BBC Radio 4’s World At One.

Asked if that would mean a museum closing, he said: “I have to say, with a very heavy heart, it really does.

“We have done lots of boring and sensible things, awful things like cutting staff, procurement, raising more money.

“But cuts of that level bite really deep into our flesh so it means not only big cuts in the Science Museum in London, but one of our three great northern museums almost certainly would also have to close.”

Asked which museum was most likely to shut, he said: “It is a very difficult question to answer because we are having that discussion at the moment.

“You are comparing three great cities, York, Bradford and Manchester, very different cities with different economies and different universities. We just haven’t decided yet.”

National museums do not charge for admission and currently cannot due to Government policy, but Mr Blatchford said he was in talks with the Government about the possibility of reinstating entry fees.

Mr Blatchford said in a later statement that the Science Museum Group was vital in helping to “inspire the next generation of scientists and engineers to drive the economy, showcase the best of British research for the British public and help them understand the complexities of modern research”.

He said: “If an additional ten per cent cut is made when the spending review is announced at the end of this month, there would be little choice other than to close one of our museums.”

He said he would rather have “three world class museums than four mediocre museums”.

A Department for Culture, Media and Sport spokesman said it would be inappropriate to speculate on the outcome of the Spending Review and said: “This is an operational matter for the Science Museum Group who has to address a large projected operating deficit from 2014 onwards and is assessing a range of options to address this situation.”

Petition: Join our campaign to keep York's National Railway Museum open>>

Comments (54)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:24am Thu 6 Jun 13

ouseswimmer says...

The rail museum is the richest museum in York. There are many highly paid positions within the museum and really they need to look to themselves first not the local people of York who have long supported them.
The rail museum is the richest museum in York. There are many highly paid positions within the museum and really they need to look to themselves first not the local people of York who have long supported them. ouseswimmer
  • Score: 0

9:41am Thu 6 Jun 13

Oaklands Resident says...

It is unthinkable that the Railway Museum - which is a vital party of the City's visitor economy - would close.

It is entirely thinkable that admission charges will be reintroduced.
It is unthinkable that the Railway Museum - which is a vital party of the City's visitor economy - would close. It is entirely thinkable that admission charges will be reintroduced. Oaklands Resident
  • Score: 0

9:41am Thu 6 Jun 13

rogue84 says...

probably the 100th time i've voiced this, but if the government cut probably 0.1% of their Trident budget, they could keep important things like these museums going.....the whole system is a farce.
what on earth are we actually going to be left with?!
we cannot lose the NRM, but that's not from a York-resident point of view, that's from my opinion as a citizen of the country.
would also like to ask, why is the Science Musem in London not one of the possible sites to close???? could it because it's in London? hmmmm
probably the 100th time i've voiced this, but if the government cut probably 0.1% of their Trident budget, they could keep important things like these museums going.....the whole system is a farce. what on earth are we actually going to be left with?! we cannot lose the NRM, but that's not from a York-resident point of view, that's from my opinion as a citizen of the country. would also like to ask, why is the Science Musem in London not one of the possible sites to close???? could it because it's in London? hmmmm rogue84
  • Score: 2

9:42am Thu 6 Jun 13

Mickey T says...

Quote "York Central MP Hugh Bayley said closure of the NRM should be unthinkable"

Reminds of 1995 at the Carriage Works hearing similar comments from the guy..
Quote "York Central MP Hugh Bayley said closure of the NRM should be unthinkable" Reminds of 1995 at the Carriage Works hearing similar comments from the guy.. Mickey T
  • Score: 0

9:47am Thu 6 Jun 13

terry_nyorks says...

NRM whould be classed as a World Heritage site, it is so well renowned. Unthinkable damage to Railway posterity - closure should not even be considered.
NRM whould be classed as a World Heritage site, it is so well renowned. Unthinkable damage to Railway posterity - closure should not even be considered. terry_nyorks
  • Score: 2

9:55am Thu 6 Jun 13

msmithy12 says...

I visited the NRM when i was about 8 with school, and more recently studied there with the Yorkshire Rail Academy and York College, the place should be kept open.

Although maybe with NRM gone that`s one less company to push out when the tear-drop gets redeveloped, Only Siemens, Unipart Rail and The Timber Yard to get rid of!
I visited the NRM when i was about 8 with school, and more recently studied there with the Yorkshire Rail Academy and York College, the place should be kept open. Although maybe with NRM gone that`s one less company to push out when the tear-drop gets redeveloped, Only Siemens, Unipart Rail and The Timber Yard to get rid of! msmithy12
  • Score: 0

10:08am Thu 6 Jun 13

Exlabourmember says...

Give me the £36m a year and ill do the
Job.

Sheesh talk about people protecting their own interest. If they can't deliver on £36m a year they need to take a long hard look at themselves. But then again.

Usual tack blame others rather than looking at how inefficient your own operation is

http://www.yorkpress
.co.uk/news/10388471
.Flying_Scotsman_hol
d_up_is_costing_NRM_
millions/
Give me the £36m a year and ill do the Job. Sheesh talk about people protecting their own interest. If they can't deliver on £36m a year they need to take a long hard look at themselves. But then again. Usual tack blame others rather than looking at how inefficient your own operation is http://www.yorkpress .co.uk/news/10388471 .Flying_Scotsman_hol d_up_is_costing_NRM_ millions/ Exlabourmember
  • Score: 0

10:08am Thu 6 Jun 13

Happy Chappie says...

Rogue84.. No one is telling the NRM to close, it is they that are suggesting they may have to, so in fact no one is giving any priority whatsoever to London science Museum. An entrance fee might help....Simples. If it's that important, and it is, it must be worth contributing to...Not rocket science.
Rogue84.. No one is telling the NRM to close, it is they that are suggesting they may have to, so in fact no one is giving any priority whatsoever to London science Museum. An entrance fee might help....Simples. If it's that important, and it is, it must be worth contributing to...Not rocket science. Happy Chappie
  • Score: 0

10:09am Thu 6 Jun 13

Alpha Kenny Thing says...

rogue84 wrote:
probably the 100th time i've voiced this, but if the government cut probably 0.1% of their Trident budget, they could keep important things like these museums going.....the whole system is a farce.
what on earth are we actually going to be left with?!
we cannot lose the NRM, but that's not from a York-resident point of view, that's from my opinion as a citizen of the country.
would also like to ask, why is the Science Musem in London not one of the possible sites to close???? could it because it's in London? hmmmm
Probably the 100th time I've said this; if they cut the overseas aid budget they would be able to paint every museum in the country gold and and have them moved around of wheels so that they visited you!
[quote][p][bold]rogue84[/bold] wrote: probably the 100th time i've voiced this, but if the government cut probably 0.1% of their Trident budget, they could keep important things like these museums going.....the whole system is a farce. what on earth are we actually going to be left with?! we cannot lose the NRM, but that's not from a York-resident point of view, that's from my opinion as a citizen of the country. would also like to ask, why is the Science Musem in London not one of the possible sites to close???? could it because it's in London? hmmmm[/p][/quote]Probably the 100th time I've said this; if they cut the overseas aid budget they would be able to paint every museum in the country gold and and have them moved around of wheels so that they visited you! Alpha Kenny Thing
  • Score: 0

10:11am Thu 6 Jun 13

smudge2 says...

Its all scaremongering so they can introduce a charge without the public outcry by getting the sympathy vote......Just get on with it. You know its not going to close. The Minster did the same thing a few years ago to start charging. Nothings free forever in life (unless your a councillor !)
Its all scaremongering so they can introduce a charge without the public outcry by getting the sympathy vote......Just get on with it. You know its not going to close. The Minster did the same thing a few years ago to start charging. Nothings free forever in life (unless your a councillor !) smudge2
  • Score: 0

10:22am Thu 6 Jun 13

SteveSCA says...

Surely the answer has got to be the introduction a modest admission charge - even if this means that government policy has to change.

According to the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions, the NRM had 716,000 visitors in 2012. If a deficit of £6 million is projected (as the article says), then an admission charge of £8.38 per head would cover this immediately.

Would a charge of £8.38 (call it £8.50) seriously deter that many people from visiting such a major national attraction? Possibly a bit, but then other museums in York charge entry fees, like the Castle Museum (£8.50), the Yorkshire Museum (£7.50), and the Air Museum (£8) and they seem to be doing OK. In any case, why should the NRM automatically be free (ie. subsidised by the taxpayer), when those other museums have to stand on their own two feet and generate visitor income in order to survive?

What would everyone - and the government - prefer? An NRM which charges a relatively moderate admission fee of (say) £8.50, and continues to thrive and grow? Or no NRM at all?

Seems like a bit of a no-brainer to me.
Surely the answer has got to be the introduction a modest admission charge - even if this means that government policy has to change. According to the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions, the NRM had 716,000 visitors in 2012. If a deficit of £6 million is projected (as the article says), then an admission charge of £8.38 per head would cover this immediately. Would a charge of £8.38 (call it £8.50) seriously deter that many people from visiting such a major national attraction? Possibly a bit, but then other museums in York charge entry fees, like the Castle Museum (£8.50), the Yorkshire Museum (£7.50), and the Air Museum (£8) and they seem to be doing OK. In any case, why should the NRM automatically be free (ie. subsidised by the taxpayer), when those other museums have to stand on their own two feet and generate visitor income in order to survive? What would everyone - and the government - prefer? An NRM which charges a relatively moderate admission fee of (say) £8.50, and continues to thrive and grow? Or no NRM at all? Seems like a bit of a no-brainer to me. SteveSCA
  • Score: 0

10:29am Thu 6 Jun 13

Jiffy says...

smudge2 wrote:
Its all scaremongering so they can introduce a charge without the public outcry by getting the sympathy vote......Just get on with it. You know its not going to close. The Minster did the same thing a few years ago to start charging. Nothings free forever in life (unless your a councillor !)
Spot on Smudge!
[quote][p][bold]smudge2[/bold] wrote: Its all scaremongering so they can introduce a charge without the public outcry by getting the sympathy vote......Just get on with it. You know its not going to close. The Minster did the same thing a few years ago to start charging. Nothings free forever in life (unless your a councillor !)[/p][/quote]Spot on Smudge! Jiffy
  • Score: 0

10:29am Thu 6 Jun 13

AMAJET says...

Plain and simply put, its not going to close.it is a news story thats getting out of control and running away with itself. If I remember correctly, anyone with a york card didn't pay anyway and I don't think it should be free. It should charge an entry free to tourists, I have to pay everywhere I go when on holiday.
Plain and simply put, its not going to close.it is a news story thats getting out of control and running away with itself. If I remember correctly, anyone with a york card didn't pay anyway and I don't think it should be free. It should charge an entry free to tourists, I have to pay everywhere I go when on holiday. AMAJET
  • Score: 0

10:35am Thu 6 Jun 13

rogue84 says...

Happie Chappie, thanks for putting me right on that. I agree, I am still surprised it is free entry to the NRM in all honesty.
Alpha Kenny Thing - I like that reply!
Happie Chappie, thanks for putting me right on that. I agree, I am still surprised it is free entry to the NRM in all honesty. Alpha Kenny Thing - I like that reply! rogue84
  • Score: 0

10:36am Thu 6 Jun 13

razor08 says...

Mickey T wrote:
Quote "York Central MP Hugh Bayley said closure of the NRM should be unthinkable"

Reminds of 1995 at the Carriage Works hearing similar comments from the guy..
I am frightened that every save this or that Press campaign has failed!! it is a great asset to the tourism and should not close I think there has been poor decision making as the museum by their management the total mess of the restoration of Flying Scotsman and the losses from Railfest 2012.
The restoration should have been managed by engineers not bean counters who looked for the cheaper option in the short term only to get their fingers burnt by trying to the restoration based in finances not on a full strip down and thorough survey!!!
[quote][p][bold]Mickey T[/bold] wrote: Quote "York Central MP Hugh Bayley said closure of the NRM should be unthinkable" Reminds of 1995 at the Carriage Works hearing similar comments from the guy..[/p][/quote]I am frightened that every save this or that Press campaign has failed!! it is a great asset to the tourism and should not close I think there has been poor decision making as the museum by their management the total mess of the restoration of Flying Scotsman and the losses from Railfest 2012. The restoration should have been managed by engineers not bean counters who looked for the cheaper option in the short term only to get their fingers burnt by trying to the restoration based in finances not on a full strip down and thorough survey!!! razor08
  • Score: 0

10:46am Thu 6 Jun 13

greenmonkey says...

It is a part of York's heritage as a railway town and the biggest such museum in the world. They may have made some expensive mistakes with projects like the Flying Scotman but the Museum must stay even if a charge has to be reintroduced. Before moving to York it was this museum that attracted me to visit the city, travelling by train and I'm sure that must be the case for a lot of our visitors from the region.
It is a part of York's heritage as a railway town and the biggest such museum in the world. They may have made some expensive mistakes with projects like the Flying Scotman but the Museum must stay even if a charge has to be reintroduced. Before moving to York it was this museum that attracted me to visit the city, travelling by train and I'm sure that must be the case for a lot of our visitors from the region. greenmonkey
  • Score: 0

10:46am Thu 6 Jun 13

MouseHouse says...

SteveSCA wrote:
Surely the answer has got to be the introduction a modest admission charge - even if this means that government policy has to change.

According to the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions, the NRM had 716,000 visitors in 2012. If a deficit of £6 million is projected (as the article says), then an admission charge of £8.38 per head would cover this immediately.

Would a charge of £8.38 (call it £8.50) seriously deter that many people from visiting such a major national attraction? Possibly a bit, but then other museums in York charge entry fees, like the Castle Museum (£8.50), the Yorkshire Museum (£7.50), and the Air Museum (£8) and they seem to be doing OK. In any case, why should the NRM automatically be free (ie. subsidised by the taxpayer), when those other museums have to stand on their own two feet and generate visitor income in order to survive?

What would everyone - and the government - prefer? An NRM which charges a relatively moderate admission fee of (say) £8.50, and continues to thrive and grow? Or no NRM at all?

Seems like a bit of a no-brainer to me.
£8.50 per what? Adult? Child? Concession? Assuming that's per adult a family ticket (the boring 2 adults, 2 children) is going to come in at about £25.00.

Is that going to put folk off? Add in the best part of a tenenr to park a car and we're at £35.00 of very hard earned cash. That would put people off yes.

Scrap trident and we solve so many of the financial sector caused problems we now face.
[quote][p][bold]SteveSCA[/bold] wrote: Surely the answer has got to be the introduction a modest admission charge - even if this means that government policy has to change. According to the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions, the NRM had 716,000 visitors in 2012. If a deficit of £6 million is projected (as the article says), then an admission charge of £8.38 per head would cover this immediately. Would a charge of £8.38 (call it £8.50) seriously deter that many people from visiting such a major national attraction? Possibly a bit, but then other museums in York charge entry fees, like the Castle Museum (£8.50), the Yorkshire Museum (£7.50), and the Air Museum (£8) and they seem to be doing OK. In any case, why should the NRM automatically be free (ie. subsidised by the taxpayer), when those other museums have to stand on their own two feet and generate visitor income in order to survive? What would everyone - and the government - prefer? An NRM which charges a relatively moderate admission fee of (say) £8.50, and continues to thrive and grow? Or no NRM at all? Seems like a bit of a no-brainer to me.[/p][/quote]£8.50 per what? Adult? Child? Concession? Assuming that's per adult a family ticket (the boring 2 adults, 2 children) is going to come in at about £25.00. Is that going to put folk off? Add in the best part of a tenenr to park a car and we're at £35.00 of very hard earned cash. That would put people off yes. Scrap trident and we solve so many of the financial sector caused problems we now face. MouseHouse
  • Score: 0

10:52am Thu 6 Jun 13

anti-rant says...

smudge2 wrote:
Its all scaremongering so they can introduce a charge without the public outcry by getting the sympathy vote......Just get on with it. You know its not going to close. The Minster did the same thing a few years ago to start charging. Nothings free forever in life (unless your a councillor !)
And when it turns out they are not going to close the NRM, of course the Press will take the credit with their absurd 'campaign'.
[quote][p][bold]smudge2[/bold] wrote: Its all scaremongering so they can introduce a charge without the public outcry by getting the sympathy vote......Just get on with it. You know its not going to close. The Minster did the same thing a few years ago to start charging. Nothings free forever in life (unless your a councillor !)[/p][/quote]And when it turns out they are not going to close the NRM, of course the Press will take the credit with their absurd 'campaign'. anti-rant
  • Score: 0

10:53am Thu 6 Jun 13

SteveSCA says...

MouseHouse wrote:
SteveSCA wrote:
Surely the answer has got to be the introduction a modest admission charge - even if this means that government policy has to change.

According to the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions, the NRM had 716,000 visitors in 2012. If a deficit of £6 million is projected (as the article says), then an admission charge of £8.38 per head would cover this immediately.

Would a charge of £8.38 (call it £8.50) seriously deter that many people from visiting such a major national attraction? Possibly a bit, but then other museums in York charge entry fees, like the Castle Museum (£8.50), the Yorkshire Museum (£7.50), and the Air Museum (£8) and they seem to be doing OK. In any case, why should the NRM automatically be free (ie. subsidised by the taxpayer), when those other museums have to stand on their own two feet and generate visitor income in order to survive?

What would everyone - and the government - prefer? An NRM which charges a relatively moderate admission fee of (say) £8.50, and continues to thrive and grow? Or no NRM at all?

Seems like a bit of a no-brainer to me.
£8.50 per what? Adult? Child? Concession? Assuming that's per adult a family ticket (the boring 2 adults, 2 children) is going to come in at about £25.00.

Is that going to put folk off? Add in the best part of a tenenr to park a car and we're at £35.00 of very hard earned cash. That would put people off yes.

Scrap trident and we solve so many of the financial sector caused problems we now face.
Well, as I mentioned, other museums in York and elsewhere charge entry fees at around this level, and they seem to survive quite happily.
[quote][p][bold]MouseHouse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SteveSCA[/bold] wrote: Surely the answer has got to be the introduction a modest admission charge - even if this means that government policy has to change. According to the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions, the NRM had 716,000 visitors in 2012. If a deficit of £6 million is projected (as the article says), then an admission charge of £8.38 per head would cover this immediately. Would a charge of £8.38 (call it £8.50) seriously deter that many people from visiting such a major national attraction? Possibly a bit, but then other museums in York charge entry fees, like the Castle Museum (£8.50), the Yorkshire Museum (£7.50), and the Air Museum (£8) and they seem to be doing OK. In any case, why should the NRM automatically be free (ie. subsidised by the taxpayer), when those other museums have to stand on their own two feet and generate visitor income in order to survive? What would everyone - and the government - prefer? An NRM which charges a relatively moderate admission fee of (say) £8.50, and continues to thrive and grow? Or no NRM at all? Seems like a bit of a no-brainer to me.[/p][/quote]£8.50 per what? Adult? Child? Concession? Assuming that's per adult a family ticket (the boring 2 adults, 2 children) is going to come in at about £25.00. Is that going to put folk off? Add in the best part of a tenenr to park a car and we're at £35.00 of very hard earned cash. That would put people off yes. Scrap trident and we solve so many of the financial sector caused problems we now face.[/p][/quote]Well, as I mentioned, other museums in York and elsewhere charge entry fees at around this level, and they seem to survive quite happily. SteveSCA
  • Score: 0

11:11am Thu 6 Jun 13

Ignatius Lumpopo says...

Up until a decade ago, the NRM was the business. Since then, it's become all happy-clappy and touchy-feely with silly graphics, daft events and some mind-boggling ego trips. It's pitched itself to be a museum for morons.

And how come Flying Scotsman doesn't appear in the article? Whoever thought that venerable, yet immovable, lump of scrap was worth getting into running order needs their head examining.

Make the entire museum staff spend the winter at Barrow Hill near Chesterfield (private, yet with free admission) and then they'd soon learn how to run an engaging railway museum....
Up until a decade ago, the NRM was the business. Since then, it's become all happy-clappy and touchy-feely with silly graphics, daft events and some mind-boggling ego trips. It's pitched itself to be a museum for morons. And how come Flying Scotsman doesn't appear in the article? Whoever thought that venerable, yet immovable, lump of scrap was worth getting into running order needs their head examining. Make the entire museum staff spend the winter at Barrow Hill near Chesterfield (private, yet with free admission) and then they'd soon learn how to run an engaging railway museum.... Ignatius Lumpopo
  • Score: 0

12:00pm Thu 6 Jun 13

Guy Fawkes says...

Agreed that this is scaremongering. It'll be the Bradford media museum that goes if any of them do, and for the following reasons.

1. There are no other tourist attractions of any significance in Bradford. Apart from during the Bradford Film Festival, organised school trips and the odd researcher working in their archives, the place is empty.

2. The London museum already has a major photography/cinemato
graphy collection, and with a little bit of thought, what little remains of the 'hard core' exhibits (i.e. stripping out the happy-clappy, touchy-feely cr@p) could probably be integrated there relatively easily. Pictureville is probably worth saving (one of only two three-projector Cinerama installations in the world), but it could probably survive just as a cinema on its own with a lot less subsidy than it needs with the museum attached to it.

3. York is an established visitor destination, and Manchester has a population big enough to sustain their museum without relying on out-of-town visitors. Bradford has neither.
Agreed that this is scaremongering. It'll be the Bradford media museum that goes if any of them do, and for the following reasons. 1. There are no other tourist attractions of any significance in Bradford. Apart from during the Bradford Film Festival, organised school trips and the odd researcher working in their archives, the place is empty. 2. The London museum already has a major photography/cinemato graphy collection, and with a little bit of thought, what little remains of the 'hard core' exhibits (i.e. stripping out the happy-clappy, touchy-feely cr@p) could probably be integrated there relatively easily. Pictureville is probably worth saving (one of only two three-projector Cinerama installations in the world), but it could probably survive just as a cinema on its own with a lot less subsidy than it needs with the museum attached to it. 3. York is an established visitor destination, and Manchester has a population big enough to sustain their museum without relying on out-of-town visitors. Bradford has neither. Guy Fawkes
  • Score: 0

12:06pm Thu 6 Jun 13

PinzaC55 says...

Ignatius Lumpopo wrote:
Up until a decade ago, the NRM was the business. Since then, it's become all happy-clappy and touchy-feely with silly graphics, daft events and some mind-boggling ego trips. It's pitched itself to be a museum for morons.

And how come Flying Scotsman doesn't appear in the article? Whoever thought that venerable, yet immovable, lump of scrap was worth getting into running order needs their head examining.

Make the entire museum staff spend the winter at Barrow Hill near Chesterfield (private, yet with free admission) and then they'd soon learn how to run an engaging railway museum....
I actually agree with you. I think this is something of a non-story and is designed to soften us up for admission charges or something of that sort.
I was in the queue on the opening day way back in 1975 and I have to say that in those days it was a "real" museum but today it is a cross between a theme park and a chain restaurant where you get the impression they would rather sell you tacky souvenirs rather than inform you.
I used to know a senior member of staff and he was constantly moaning about their latest "project" with a high price tag - this was long before the Flying Scotsman debacle.
[quote][p][bold]Ignatius Lumpopo[/bold] wrote: Up until a decade ago, the NRM was the business. Since then, it's become all happy-clappy and touchy-feely with silly graphics, daft events and some mind-boggling ego trips. It's pitched itself to be a museum for morons. And how come Flying Scotsman doesn't appear in the article? Whoever thought that venerable, yet immovable, lump of scrap was worth getting into running order needs their head examining. Make the entire museum staff spend the winter at Barrow Hill near Chesterfield (private, yet with free admission) and then they'd soon learn how to run an engaging railway museum....[/p][/quote]I actually agree with you. I think this is something of a non-story and is designed to soften us up for admission charges or something of that sort. I was in the queue on the opening day way back in 1975 and I have to say that in those days it was a "real" museum but today it is a cross between a theme park and a chain restaurant where you get the impression they would rather sell you tacky souvenirs rather than inform you. I used to know a senior member of staff and he was constantly moaning about their latest "project" with a high price tag - this was long before the Flying Scotsman debacle. PinzaC55
  • Score: 0

12:15pm Thu 6 Jun 13

ouseswimmer says...

I don't understand why it coast £1m a week to run? Surely the building is paid for along with the trains? A few staff are all thats needed. Is someone heavily overpaid?
I don't understand why it coast £1m a week to run? Surely the building is paid for along with the trains? A few staff are all thats needed. Is someone heavily overpaid? ouseswimmer
  • Score: 0

12:21pm Thu 6 Jun 13

meme says...

Cut the overseas aid budget and help ourselves when we are in trouble finacially and stop prtetending we are some great world power/benfactor
Regrettably charity begins at home, not helping tin pot dictators line their pockets!
Its time we accepted we need to get UK out of the mire and when we are rich again we can give some away to others.
We are living in a fantasy world if we really think we can afford to give all this money away to other countries
Cut the overseas aid budget and help ourselves when we are in trouble finacially and stop prtetending we are some great world power/benfactor Regrettably charity begins at home, not helping tin pot dictators line their pockets! Its time we accepted we need to get UK out of the mire and when we are rich again [if ever] we can give some away to others. We are living in a fantasy world if we really think we can afford to give all this money away to other countries [Including India one of the fastest growing ecomnomies and most corrupt in the world] meme
  • Score: 0

12:27pm Thu 6 Jun 13

TerryYork says...

It would be unthinkable to close the NRM. Whatever campaign is required, we should all be in on it.
It would be unthinkable to close the NRM. Whatever campaign is required, we should all be in on it. TerryYork
  • Score: 0

12:45pm Thu 6 Jun 13

nearlyman says...

It will not shut...This is just a convenient campaign for the press to jump on and say we suceeded. There is more chance of the press shutting first !
It will not shut...This is just a convenient campaign for the press to jump on and say we suceeded. There is more chance of the press shutting first ! nearlyman
  • Score: 0

1:29pm Thu 6 Jun 13

CaroleBaines says...

Over kill by Press. NRM won't be shutting and since when do Press campaigns make any difference? Rowntrees, Carriage Works, etc.
Over kill by Press. NRM won't be shutting and since when do Press campaigns make any difference? Rowntrees, Carriage Works, etc. CaroleBaines
  • Score: 0

2:59pm Thu 6 Jun 13

yorkonafork says...

It isn't going to shut down, this is all a storm in a teacup. As someone mentioned, probably a link to re-introduce admittance fees, which there's nothing wrong with doing as long as it's sensible.

If the Press are so concerned they can use some of the money they get from the ridiculous advertising graphics they now use on this site, they must be rolling in it, it's about 10 adverts for every 1 article!
It isn't going to shut down, this is all a storm in a teacup. As someone mentioned, probably a link to re-introduce admittance fees, which there's nothing wrong with doing as long as it's sensible. If the Press are so concerned they can use some of the money they get from the ridiculous advertising graphics they now use on this site, they must be rolling in it, it's about 10 adverts for every 1 article! yorkonafork
  • Score: 0

3:02pm Thu 6 Jun 13

oi oi savaloy says...

Sounds like liebour scaremongering again! And exactly what will huge bailey do about it? Well I'll tell you, he will dictate a letter , pop on his bike to the post box to send it first class and then fill in his expense form to claim it all back from the tax payer! Cos that's all he's ever done!
Sounds like liebour scaremongering again! And exactly what will huge bailey do about it? Well I'll tell you, he will dictate a letter , pop on his bike to the post box to send it first class and then fill in his expense form to claim it all back from the tax payer! Cos that's all he's ever done! oi oi savaloy
  • Score: 0

3:08pm Thu 6 Jun 13

desmond tiblets says...

What differance does it make if our mp gets involved no one listens to him anyway.simple solution start charging to get in the nrm.
What differance does it make if our mp gets involved no one listens to him anyway.simple solution start charging to get in the nrm. desmond tiblets
  • Score: 0

4:34pm Thu 6 Jun 13

JHardacre says...

MouseHouse wrote:
SteveSCA wrote:
Surely the answer has got to be the introduction a modest admission charge - even if this means that government policy has to change.

According to the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions, the NRM had 716,000 visitors in 2012. If a deficit of £6 million is projected (as the article says), then an admission charge of £8.38 per head would cover this immediately.

Would a charge of £8.38 (call it £8.50) seriously deter that many people from visiting such a major national attraction? Possibly a bit, but then other museums in York charge entry fees, like the Castle Museum (£8.50), the Yorkshire Museum (£7.50), and the Air Museum (£8) and they seem to be doing OK. In any case, why should the NRM automatically be free (ie. subsidised by the taxpayer), when those other museums have to stand on their own two feet and generate visitor income in order to survive?

What would everyone - and the government - prefer? An NRM which charges a relatively moderate admission fee of (say) £8.50, and continues to thrive and grow? Or no NRM at all?

Seems like a bit of a no-brainer to me.
£8.50 per what? Adult? Child? Concession? Assuming that's per adult a family ticket (the boring 2 adults, 2 children) is going to come in at about £25.00.

Is that going to put folk off? Add in the best part of a tenenr to park a car and we're at £35.00 of very hard earned cash. That would put people off yes.

Scrap trident and we solve so many of the financial sector caused problems we now face.
Legoland is £169.20 for a family of four. Yet it's packed out

£25 is the bargain of the century!
[quote][p][bold]MouseHouse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SteveSCA[/bold] wrote: Surely the answer has got to be the introduction a modest admission charge - even if this means that government policy has to change. According to the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions, the NRM had 716,000 visitors in 2012. If a deficit of £6 million is projected (as the article says), then an admission charge of £8.38 per head would cover this immediately. Would a charge of £8.38 (call it £8.50) seriously deter that many people from visiting such a major national attraction? Possibly a bit, but then other museums in York charge entry fees, like the Castle Museum (£8.50), the Yorkshire Museum (£7.50), and the Air Museum (£8) and they seem to be doing OK. In any case, why should the NRM automatically be free (ie. subsidised by the taxpayer), when those other museums have to stand on their own two feet and generate visitor income in order to survive? What would everyone - and the government - prefer? An NRM which charges a relatively moderate admission fee of (say) £8.50, and continues to thrive and grow? Or no NRM at all? Seems like a bit of a no-brainer to me.[/p][/quote]£8.50 per what? Adult? Child? Concession? Assuming that's per adult a family ticket (the boring 2 adults, 2 children) is going to come in at about £25.00. Is that going to put folk off? Add in the best part of a tenenr to park a car and we're at £35.00 of very hard earned cash. That would put people off yes. Scrap trident and we solve so many of the financial sector caused problems we now face.[/p][/quote]Legoland is £169.20 for a family of four. Yet it's packed out £25 is the bargain of the century! JHardacre
  • Score: 0

4:54pm Thu 6 Jun 13

roskoboskovic says...

as someone born and bred in york and still living here i often despair at the state of the place as i walk around it and wonder how,as a place dependant on tourism it can look such a mess.i have been to the railway museum several times but doubt if i shall ever go again and as it is really a place for tourists i suggest that either the enthusiasts or those businesses who benefit most from the tourists dig deep and donate to the museum.people such as mr sinclair have made their money yet only appear when they suspect that the cash cow may be compromised.it would be a shame if the museum were to close but would i mourn its loss,no.
as someone born and bred in york and still living here i often despair at the state of the place as i walk around it and wonder how,as a place dependant on tourism it can look such a mess.i have been to the railway museum several times but doubt if i shall ever go again and as it is really a place for tourists i suggest that either the enthusiasts or those businesses who benefit most from the tourists dig deep and donate to the museum.people such as mr sinclair have made their money yet only appear when they suspect that the cash cow may be compromised.it would be a shame if the museum were to close but would i mourn its loss,no. roskoboskovic
  • Score: 0

5:37pm Thu 6 Jun 13

BigJon says...

The Press is a bit slow off the mark and a bit too quiet about this. Looking online the petition to save Machester's MOSI has over 30,000 signatures and Bradford's Media Museum has over 4,000 signatures already. If it was serious it'd be advertising it all over the social network sites, train enthusiast sites and York tourist sites.....
The Press is a bit slow off the mark and a bit too quiet about this. Looking online the petition to save Machester's MOSI has over 30,000 signatures and Bradford's Media Museum has over 4,000 signatures already. If it was serious it'd be advertising it all over the social network sites, train enthusiast sites and York tourist sites..... BigJon
  • Score: 0

5:52pm Thu 6 Jun 13

chelk says...

If it closes so be it will not be the end of the world
If it closes so be it will not be the end of the world chelk
  • Score: 0

6:45pm Thu 6 Jun 13

Garrowby Turnoff says...

If the museum can't continue functioning on a free entry basis then charging is the only solution if we want to keep the attraction open. No brainer.

The threat of closure from the owners is to gain the sympathy of the public prior to charging, and The Press campaign is a handy vehicle for its deliverance.
If the museum can't continue functioning on a free entry basis then charging is the only solution if we want to keep the attraction open. No brainer. The threat of closure from the owners is to gain the sympathy of the public prior to charging, and The Press campaign is a handy vehicle for its deliverance. Garrowby Turnoff
  • Score: 0

7:43pm Thu 6 Jun 13

minijms says...

What's the panic? It wont close, just a backdoor excuse to start charging again. And of course the Press will claim another lame victory.
What's the panic? It wont close, just a backdoor excuse to start charging again. And of course the Press will claim another lame victory. minijms
  • Score: 0

8:04pm Thu 6 Jun 13

PinzaC55 says...

You know you are getting old when you remember the days when the idea of a MUSEUM charging for was unthinkable. That was before Thatcher of course.
You know you are getting old when you remember the days when the idea of a MUSEUM charging for was unthinkable. That was before Thatcher of course. PinzaC55
  • Score: 0

8:11pm Thu 6 Jun 13

minijms says...

oi oi savaloy wrote:
Sounds like liebour scaremongering again! And exactly what will huge bailey do about it? Well I'll tell you, he will dictate a letter , pop on his bike to the post box to send it first class and then fill in his expense form to claim it all back from the tax payer! Cos that's all he's ever done!
Not quite, I'm no fan of any politician, but he has his uses. Back in the day I worked at local company threatened with closure. There was a lot of banter (mostly caused by the Press). Bailey stepped in and quietened the situation down and negociations were carried out between company and council in a business like way. The result - I still work for the company 13 years later.
[quote][p][bold]oi oi savaloy[/bold] wrote: Sounds like liebour scaremongering again! And exactly what will huge bailey do about it? Well I'll tell you, he will dictate a letter , pop on his bike to the post box to send it first class and then fill in his expense form to claim it all back from the tax payer! Cos that's all he's ever done![/p][/quote]Not quite, I'm no fan of any politician, but he has his uses. Back in the day I worked at local company threatened with closure. There was a lot of banter (mostly caused by the Press). Bailey stepped in and quietened the situation down and negociations were carried out between company and council in a business like way. The result - I still work for the company 13 years later. minijms
  • Score: 0

8:21pm Thu 6 Jun 13

velvetdixie says...

Want to save The NRM?

Really?

Right then. Stop throwing good money after bad and end the Flightless Scotsman project. Finish with a proper paint job and make it a non-moving exhibit with appropriate signage confessing that there stands a monument to bureaucratic bungling.
Want to save The NRM? Really? Right then. Stop throwing good money after bad and end the Flightless Scotsman project. Finish with a proper paint job and make it a non-moving exhibit with appropriate signage confessing that there stands a monument to bureaucratic bungling. velvetdixie
  • Score: 0

8:23pm Thu 6 Jun 13

ReginaldBiscuit says...

"Tourism, political and business leaders have already backed the campaign" - A set of very well-paid morons following the very predictable herd mentality and giving their knee-jerk views when a crisis arises.

There is no crisis, the NRM won't close. It will simply have to charge an entrance fee like mostly everywhere else does. End of. Panic over. Folks would be better off obsessing over the crumbling resistance of antibiotics to infection or the spiralling levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Mankind. Worrying about the wrong things again.
"Tourism, political and business leaders have already backed the campaign" - A set of very well-paid morons following the very predictable herd mentality and giving their knee-jerk views when a crisis arises. There is no crisis, the NRM won't close. It will simply have to charge an entrance fee like mostly everywhere else does. End of. Panic over. Folks would be better off obsessing over the crumbling resistance of antibiotics to infection or the spiralling levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. Mankind. Worrying about the wrong things again. ReginaldBiscuit
  • Score: 0

8:55pm Thu 6 Jun 13

Gerry2 says...

CO2 in the atmosphere ?
WTF?
Would that be from various steam engines ? or ...
CO2 in the atmosphere ? WTF? Would that be from various steam engines ? or ... Gerry2
  • Score: 0

10:14pm Thu 6 Jun 13

henleazeyorkie says...

JHardacre wrote:
MouseHouse wrote:
SteveSCA wrote:
Surely the answer has got to be the introduction a modest admission charge - even if this means that government policy has to change.

According to the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions, the NRM had 716,000 visitors in 2012. If a deficit of £6 million is projected (as the article says), then an admission charge of £8.38 per head would cover this immediately.

Would a charge of £8.38 (call it £8.50) seriously deter that many people from visiting such a major national attraction? Possibly a bit, but then other museums in York charge entry fees, like the Castle Museum (£8.50), the Yorkshire Museum (£7.50), and the Air Museum (£8) and they seem to be doing OK. In any case, why should the NRM automatically be free (ie. subsidised by the taxpayer), when those other museums have to stand on their own two feet and generate visitor income in order to survive?

What would everyone - and the government - prefer? An NRM which charges a relatively moderate admission fee of (say) £8.50, and continues to thrive and grow? Or no NRM at all?

Seems like a bit of a no-brainer to me.
£8.50 per what? Adult? Child? Concession? Assuming that's per adult a family ticket (the boring 2 adults, 2 children) is going to come in at about £25.00.

Is that going to put folk off? Add in the best part of a tenenr to park a car and we're at £35.00 of very hard earned cash. That would put people off yes.

Scrap trident and we solve so many of the financial sector caused problems we now face.
Legoland is £169.20 for a family of four. Yet it's packed out

£25 is the bargain of the century!
Spot on. At the end of the day it's an attraction. It will still be on visitors "to do" lists whether there's a charge or not and I remember even with a charge way back when, there were just as many people milling around the place as now, which I still visit with the kids on my bi-annual pilgrimages back to York and my family.

Another point, as a Railway museum in a Railway city, it's relevant, just as the SS Great Britain Museum and Harbour Museum are here in Bristol. I'd prefer none of these "Science Museum Group" attractions to close, but I ask myself - Media in Bradford??
[quote][p][bold]JHardacre[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MouseHouse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SteveSCA[/bold] wrote: Surely the answer has got to be the introduction a modest admission charge - even if this means that government policy has to change. According to the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions, the NRM had 716,000 visitors in 2012. If a deficit of £6 million is projected (as the article says), then an admission charge of £8.38 per head would cover this immediately. Would a charge of £8.38 (call it £8.50) seriously deter that many people from visiting such a major national attraction? Possibly a bit, but then other museums in York charge entry fees, like the Castle Museum (£8.50), the Yorkshire Museum (£7.50), and the Air Museum (£8) and they seem to be doing OK. In any case, why should the NRM automatically be free (ie. subsidised by the taxpayer), when those other museums have to stand on their own two feet and generate visitor income in order to survive? What would everyone - and the government - prefer? An NRM which charges a relatively moderate admission fee of (say) £8.50, and continues to thrive and grow? Or no NRM at all? Seems like a bit of a no-brainer to me.[/p][/quote]£8.50 per what? Adult? Child? Concession? Assuming that's per adult a family ticket (the boring 2 adults, 2 children) is going to come in at about £25.00. Is that going to put folk off? Add in the best part of a tenenr to park a car and we're at £35.00 of very hard earned cash. That would put people off yes. Scrap trident and we solve so many of the financial sector caused problems we now face.[/p][/quote]Legoland is £169.20 for a family of four. Yet it's packed out £25 is the bargain of the century![/p][/quote]Spot on. At the end of the day it's an attraction. It will still be on visitors "to do" lists whether there's a charge or not and I remember even with a charge way back when, there were just as many people milling around the place as now, which I still visit with the kids on my bi-annual pilgrimages back to York and my family. Another point, as a Railway museum in a Railway city, it's relevant, just as the SS Great Britain Museum and Harbour Museum are here in Bristol. I'd prefer none of these "Science Museum Group" attractions to close, but I ask myself - Media in Bradford?? henleazeyorkie
  • Score: 0

10:19pm Thu 6 Jun 13

Fulford Filly says...

Jiffy wrote:
smudge2 wrote:
Its all scaremongering so they can introduce a charge without the public outcry by getting the sympathy vote......Just get on with it. You know its not going to close. The Minster did the same thing a few years ago to start charging. Nothings free forever in life (unless your a councillor !)
Spot on Smudge!
Completely agree with Smudge and Jiffy. Also, the NRM is a bit of a dump from the outside and the dark tunnel an embarrassment. Use the the entrance money to smarten it up, please!

BTW what happened to the Richard III campaign? That faded away even though big hitters like Alexander and Sturdy threw their substantial weight behind that campaign. Also, what happened to the Haxby rail halt....
[quote][p][bold]Jiffy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]smudge2[/bold] wrote: Its all scaremongering so they can introduce a charge without the public outcry by getting the sympathy vote......Just get on with it. You know its not going to close. The Minster did the same thing a few years ago to start charging. Nothings free forever in life (unless your a councillor !)[/p][/quote]Spot on Smudge![/p][/quote]Completely agree with Smudge and Jiffy. Also, the NRM is a bit of a dump from the outside and the dark tunnel an embarrassment. Use the the entrance money to smarten it up, please! BTW what happened to the Richard III campaign? That faded away even though big hitters like Alexander and Sturdy threw their substantial weight behind that campaign. Also, what happened to the Haxby rail halt.... Fulford Filly
  • Score: 0

3:42am Fri 7 Jun 13

Magicman! says...

Haxby rail halt was denied funding from the government... again... and so now goes to the regional fund list.... again....

------

To be honest I really don't see the NRM closing, at least not it's York site (Shildon maybe) - it's a world famous museum and a major draw in its own right. People would still come to it from around the world even if there was an admission charge.... plus visitors then have the bonus of it being in York.

Compare that with the media museum.... which is in Bradford. Enough said.
Haxby rail halt was denied funding from the government... again... and so now goes to the regional fund list.... again.... ------ To be honest I really don't see the NRM closing, at least not it's York site (Shildon maybe) - it's a world famous museum and a major draw in its own right. People would still come to it from around the world even if there was an admission charge.... plus visitors then have the bonus of it being in York. Compare that with the media museum.... which is in Bradford. Enough said. Magicman!
  • Score: 0

9:36am Fri 7 Jun 13

Hoofarted says...

Funding cuts from a Government hell bent on bailing out the incompetent banks and awarding tax cuts for the super rich.

It doesn't take an unelected City Of York tory candidate to see why this is happening.
Funding cuts from a Government hell bent on bailing out the incompetent banks and awarding tax cuts for the super rich. It doesn't take an unelected City Of York tory candidate to see why this is happening. Hoofarted
  • Score: 0

10:06am Fri 7 Jun 13

Ignatius Lumpopo says...

Instead of signing a petition to keep our York museum open, why not sign one to get the ones in Bradford and Manchester to close?
Instead of signing a petition to keep our York museum open, why not sign one to get the ones in Bradford and Manchester to close? Ignatius Lumpopo
  • Score: 0

10:18am Fri 7 Jun 13

TheMiddleWay says...

These scaremongering stories really annoy me. Every time an organisation is short of funds they offer the most drastic solution, hospitals claim they will have to cut A&E nurses and councils will have to reduce elderly care, it is rather like someone who needs to lose weight claiming that they will have to cut a limb off. The NMR just needs to think like a dieter, i.e. less “special snacks” like the vapid Hogwats and Thomas exhibits and no “occasional feasts” like the Flying Scotsman.
These scaremongering stories really annoy me. Every time an organisation is short of funds they offer the most drastic solution, hospitals claim they will have to cut A&E nurses and councils will have to reduce elderly care, it is rather like someone who needs to lose weight claiming that they will have to cut a limb off. The NMR just needs to think like a dieter, i.e. less “special snacks” like the vapid Hogwats and Thomas exhibits and no “occasional feasts” like the Flying Scotsman. TheMiddleWay
  • Score: 0

10:28am Fri 7 Jun 13

henleazeyorkie says...

TheMiddleWay wrote:
These scaremongering stories really annoy me. Every time an organisation is short of funds they offer the most drastic solution, hospitals claim they will have to cut A&E nurses and councils will have to reduce elderly care, it is rather like someone who needs to lose weight claiming that they will have to cut a limb off. The NMR just needs to think like a dieter, i.e. less “special snacks” like the vapid Hogwats and Thomas exhibits and no “occasional feasts” like the Flying Scotsman.
A good analogy. I think the NMR is probably on a diet as you put it. I actually believe the Hogwarts/Thomas events are ok in the sense that they do pull punters in.

I have to agree fully about the Flying Scotsman though. This engine has been an albatross around every neck that's owned it, including a few millionaires along the way.

Much as I admire the dedication of those involved, I can't help thinking that its restoration is a step too far and goodness knows how much of the thing will actually be original at the end of the day
[quote][p][bold]TheMiddleWay[/bold] wrote: These scaremongering stories really annoy me. Every time an organisation is short of funds they offer the most drastic solution, hospitals claim they will have to cut A&E nurses and councils will have to reduce elderly care, it is rather like someone who needs to lose weight claiming that they will have to cut a limb off. The NMR just needs to think like a dieter, i.e. less “special snacks” like the vapid Hogwats and Thomas exhibits and no “occasional feasts” like the Flying Scotsman.[/p][/quote]A good analogy. I think the NMR is probably on a diet as you put it. I actually believe the Hogwarts/Thomas events are ok in the sense that they do pull punters in. I have to agree fully about the Flying Scotsman though. This engine has been an albatross around every neck that's owned it, including a few millionaires along the way. Much as I admire the dedication of those involved, I can't help thinking that its restoration is a step too far and goodness knows how much of the thing will actually be original at the end of the day henleazeyorkie
  • Score: 0

8:06pm Fri 7 Jun 13

CaroleBaines says...

oi oi savaloy wrote:
Sounds like liebour scaremongering again! And exactly what will huge bailey do about it? Well I'll tell you, he will dictate a letter , pop on his bike to the post box to send it first class and then fill in his expense form to claim it all back from the tax payer! Cos that's all he's ever done!
How is this political, Savaloy? Give it a rest, you'd make the demise of the hedgehog all 'Liebour's' (ho-ho) fault!
[quote][p][bold]oi oi savaloy[/bold] wrote: Sounds like liebour scaremongering again! And exactly what will huge bailey do about it? Well I'll tell you, he will dictate a letter , pop on his bike to the post box to send it first class and then fill in his expense form to claim it all back from the tax payer! Cos that's all he's ever done![/p][/quote]How is this political, Savaloy? Give it a rest, you'd make the demise of the hedgehog all 'Liebour's' (ho-ho) fault! CaroleBaines
  • Score: 0

11:10am Sat 8 Jun 13

oi oi savaloy says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
oi oi savaloy wrote:
Sounds like liebour scaremongering again! And exactly what will huge bailey do about it? Well I'll tell you, he will dictate a letter , pop on his bike to the post box to send it first class and then fill in his expense form to claim it all back from the tax payer! Cos that's all he's ever done!
How is this political, Savaloy? Give it a rest, you'd make the demise of the hedgehog all 'Liebour's' (ho-ho) fault!
so if its not political what is huge bayley sticking his nose in for?

and don't tell me to give it a rest woman! last time I looked free speech was still valid! (until james alexander starts with the 'report this post' option)
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oi oi savaloy[/bold] wrote: Sounds like liebour scaremongering again! And exactly what will huge bailey do about it? Well I'll tell you, he will dictate a letter , pop on his bike to the post box to send it first class and then fill in his expense form to claim it all back from the tax payer! Cos that's all he's ever done![/p][/quote]How is this political, Savaloy? Give it a rest, you'd make the demise of the hedgehog all 'Liebour's' (ho-ho) fault![/p][/quote]so if its not political what is huge bayley sticking his nose in for? and don't tell me to give it a rest woman! last time I looked free speech was still valid! (until james alexander starts with the 'report this post' option) oi oi savaloy
  • Score: 0

7:45am Mon 10 Jun 13

CaroleBaines says...

oi oi savaloy wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
oi oi savaloy wrote:
Sounds like liebour scaremongering again! And exactly what will huge bailey do about it? Well I'll tell you, he will dictate a letter , pop on his bike to the post box to send it first class and then fill in his expense form to claim it all back from the tax payer! Cos that's all he's ever done!
How is this political, Savaloy? Give it a rest, you'd make the demise of the hedgehog all 'Liebour's' (ho-ho) fault!
so if its not political what is huge bayley sticking his nose in for?

and don't tell me to give it a rest woman! last time I looked free speech was still valid! (until james alexander starts with the 'report this post' option)
Hilarious!
[quote][p][bold]oi oi savaloy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oi oi savaloy[/bold] wrote: Sounds like liebour scaremongering again! And exactly what will huge bailey do about it? Well I'll tell you, he will dictate a letter , pop on his bike to the post box to send it first class and then fill in his expense form to claim it all back from the tax payer! Cos that's all he's ever done![/p][/quote]How is this political, Savaloy? Give it a rest, you'd make the demise of the hedgehog all 'Liebour's' (ho-ho) fault![/p][/quote]so if its not political what is huge bayley sticking his nose in for? and don't tell me to give it a rest woman! last time I looked free speech was still valid! (until james alexander starts with the 'report this post' option)[/p][/quote]Hilarious! CaroleBaines
  • Score: 0

10:16am Mon 10 Jun 13

Kelvar says...

yorkonafork says "If the Press are so concerned they can use some of the money they get from the ridiculous advertising graphics they now use on this site, they must be rolling in it, it's about 10 adverts for every 1 article!"

Do what I do - download the extension AdBlock. I use it EVERY time I visit the York Press Website! No more annoying Banner or any other Ads!
yorkonafork says "If the Press are so concerned they can use some of the money they get from the ridiculous advertising graphics they now use on this site, they must be rolling in it, it's about 10 adverts for every 1 article!" Do what I do - download the extension AdBlock. I use it EVERY time I visit the York Press Website! No more annoying Banner or any other Ads! Kelvar
  • Score: 0

1:12pm Mon 10 Jun 13

desmond tiblets says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
oi oi savaloy wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
oi oi savaloy wrote: Sounds like liebour scaremongering again! And exactly what will huge bailey do about it? Well I'll tell you, he will dictate a letter , pop on his bike to the post box to send it first class and then fill in his expense form to claim it all back from the tax payer! Cos that's all he's ever done!
How is this political, Savaloy? Give it a rest, you'd make the demise of the hedgehog all 'Liebour's' (ho-ho) fault!
so if its not political what is huge bayley sticking his nose in for? and don't tell me to give it a rest woman! last time I looked free speech was still valid! (until james alexander starts with the 'report this post' option)
Hilarious!
Actually there was a dramatic reduction in hedgehogs during labours calamitous reign this was due to them actually been a delicacy in Eastern Europe
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oi oi savaloy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oi oi savaloy[/bold] wrote: Sounds like liebour scaremongering again! And exactly what will huge bailey do about it? Well I'll tell you, he will dictate a letter , pop on his bike to the post box to send it first class and then fill in his expense form to claim it all back from the tax payer! Cos that's all he's ever done![/p][/quote]How is this political, Savaloy? Give it a rest, you'd make the demise of the hedgehog all 'Liebour's' (ho-ho) fault![/p][/quote]so if its not political what is huge bayley sticking his nose in for? and don't tell me to give it a rest woman! last time I looked free speech was still valid! (until james alexander starts with the 'report this post' option)[/p][/quote]Hilarious![/p][/quote]Actually there was a dramatic reduction in hedgehogs during labours calamitous reign this was due to them actually been a delicacy in Eastern Europe desmond tiblets
  • Score: 0

10:51pm Mon 10 Jun 13

oi oi savaloy says...

desmond tiblets wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
oi oi savaloy wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
oi oi savaloy wrote: Sounds like liebour scaremongering again! And exactly what will huge bailey do about it? Well I'll tell you, he will dictate a letter , pop on his bike to the post box to send it first class and then fill in his expense form to claim it all back from the tax payer! Cos that's all he's ever done!
How is this political, Savaloy? Give it a rest, you'd make the demise of the hedgehog all 'Liebour's' (ho-ho) fault!
so if its not political what is huge bayley sticking his nose in for? and don't tell me to give it a rest woman! last time I looked free speech was still valid! (until james alexander starts with the 'report this post' option)
Hilarious!
Actually there was a dramatic reduction in hedgehogs during labours calamitous reign this was due to them actually been a delicacy in Eastern Europe
we can always blame liebour for the rise in the slaughter of swans as well actually, eastern Europeans like to slaughter them and eat them... but hey ho suppose it was there way of creating a job for hissing dan sidley.

not so hilarious.
[quote][p][bold]desmond tiblets[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oi oi savaloy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oi oi savaloy[/bold] wrote: Sounds like liebour scaremongering again! And exactly what will huge bailey do about it? Well I'll tell you, he will dictate a letter , pop on his bike to the post box to send it first class and then fill in his expense form to claim it all back from the tax payer! Cos that's all he's ever done![/p][/quote]How is this political, Savaloy? Give it a rest, you'd make the demise of the hedgehog all 'Liebour's' (ho-ho) fault![/p][/quote]so if its not political what is huge bayley sticking his nose in for? and don't tell me to give it a rest woman! last time I looked free speech was still valid! (until james alexander starts with the 'report this post' option)[/p][/quote]Hilarious![/p][/quote]Actually there was a dramatic reduction in hedgehogs during labours calamitous reign this was due to them actually been a delicacy in Eastern Europe[/p][/quote]we can always blame liebour for the rise in the slaughter of swans as well actually, eastern Europeans like to slaughter them and eat them... but hey ho suppose it was there way of creating a job for hissing dan sidley. not so hilarious. oi oi savaloy
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree