King’s Square petition: Michelle Wyatt

Michelle Wyatt’s petition on the King’s Square paving – which is also trying to protect other historic cart tracks and setts in the city – was debated at the full council meeting on Thursday evening. A webcast of the meeting meant we could watch it live. It’s now available on YouTube. I know many visitors to this website will find this particular item of interest.

The embedded clip above is set up to begin at the relevant point, or visit agenda item 4, on YouTube. (Michelle begins speaking at  13min 40 seconds in.)

Michelle sat in King’s Square for weeks/months, collecting signatures. She persisted when many of us would have given up. And she got enough signatures for the issue to be debated by the full council. That’s pretty impressive, as was acknowledged by several of the councillors who spoke on the subject later.

I listened carefully and took note of particular points in Michelle’s speech addressed to council. I hope they took note too.

‘There is no way I can answer a ten page document in three minutes.’

‘These people came to me because they felt they couldn’t come to you’

‘Simply provide accessibility next to the traditional stonework instead of removing it. This is our request for the future.’

‘Please make it so we can be proud of you. Thank you.’

CYC response to petition, by Guy Hanson, Regeneration Architect (PDF)

Tagged: ,

  By Lisa @YorkStories 14 December 2013 To link to this page's proper location please use the > permalink

About Lisa @YorkStories

Lisa @YorkStories is the creator, administrator, and writer of content on www.yorkstories.co.uk. She can be contacted on this link or via Twitter, @YorkStories

One comment

  1. Michelle Wyatt

    The Kings Square 3 min public comment starts at 13min 40 seconds into the video. The debate on it was 30 min later and lasted for approx 30 min.
    The outcome I experienced was that all the conservatives were in favour and all labour against. To me this showed a lack of ability to express individual opinions which could be why our wishes arent being understood and debated clearly. Towards the end it descended into a point scorring battle of wits where only extremities were being given rather than practical, middle ground, realistic and plausible, constructive (hand me a thesaurus!) discussion.
    I believe the solution to this is for at the begining of the debate 1 labour stands up giving the party position. Then one conservative gives the party position. Then the remaining 4-5 people give individual non party line discussion. In this way both the labour and conservative can get thier attack in but more than 2 positions/viewpoints can be presented. If I could I would do a 3min talk on this!!

Add a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>