Facebook battle to save former Infirmary

Campaign supporters, from left, Michael Duckworth, William Gilpin, four, Angela Gilpin, Rebecca Gilpin, seven, Ste Smith, Evie-Joy Smith, and front, Stella Smith, nine

Campaign supporters, from left, Michael Duckworth, William Gilpin, four, Angela Gilpin, Rebecca Gilpin, seven, Ste Smith, Evie-Joy Smith, and front, Stella Smith, nine

First published in News This Is Lancashire: Photograph of the Author by , Local government reporter

MORE than 200 people are set to join a protest against demolishing the decaying War Memorial wing of the former Blackburn Royal Infirmary.

They are urging the borough council to refurbish the 86-year-old building as a home for the elderly rather than demolish it so a new £4.8million dementia care home can be built.

Shadsworth photographer Michael Duckworth has organised the demonstration via Facebook outside the wing at 10 am on August 30.

So far 163 people have said they will attend the ‘Save The Old Infirmary - A Peaceful Protest’ event with another 56 hoping to join.

Earlier this month Blackburn with Darwen planning committee approved the development for 64 frail elderly people by specialist charity Community Integrated Care (CIC).

The wing, the borough’s ‘biggest eyesore’, has slowly decayed.

Council and CIC bosses said the building is too damaged to be salvaged and its heritage was being preserved in the new scheme.

Mr Duckworth, aged 27 from Ailsa Road, said: “This is a historic building which should be saved for future generations.

“The £4.8 million for the new development could have paid for the memorial wing to be restored and used for the care of dementia sufferers.

“We want the council and CIC to look at this again.”

Councillors have ordered a replica of the original mosaic floor along with its foundation stones to be sited in a special memorial garden.

Blackburn, Darwen and Rural Civic Voice secretary Simon Hugill said: “Sadly this protest is too late. If it had happened four years ago, the wing might have been saved.”

Council regeneration boss Maureen Bateson, said: “I am as sad as anyone the wing cannot be saved but it is too decayed and vandalised. The new care home will fulfil its original purpose.”

CIC deputy chief executive Catherine Murray-Howard said: “We have been working closely with the council. We appreciate this is a historic building, which many people care about. Every assessment has shown that sadly, it is now damaged beyond repair.

“We have sought to celebrate the heritage of the Royal Infirmary by salvaging many of the historic artefacts and using them in a public garden.”

Comments (23)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:56pm Fri 1 Aug 14

bow1974 says...

This lovely old building should be saved too much of blackburns history has been demolished count me in guys if i'm not working. SAVE THE INFIRMARY.
This lovely old building should be saved too much of blackburns history has been demolished count me in guys if i'm not working. SAVE THE INFIRMARY. bow1974
  • Score: 22

2:56pm Fri 1 Aug 14

tntoast says...

as this been done purposely so they can demolish this historic building which was paid for by the people of Blackburn instead of refurbing it .
I think that the people of Blackburn should be given a say in the matter keep up the good work I for one will be signing the petition
Michael Duckworth, William Gilpin, four, Angela Gilpin, Rebecca Gilpin, seven, Ste Smith, Evie-Joy Smith, and front, Stella Smith, nine
as this been done purposely so they can demolish this historic building which was paid for by the people of Blackburn instead of refurbing it . I think that the people of Blackburn should be given a say in the matter keep up the good work I for one will be signing the petition Michael Duckworth, William Gilpin, four, Angela Gilpin, Rebecca Gilpin, seven, Ste Smith, Evie-Joy Smith, and front, Stella Smith, nine tntoast
  • Score: 24

3:25pm Fri 1 Aug 14

bow1974 says...

tntoast wrote:
as this been done purposely so they can demolish this historic building which was paid for by the people of Blackburn instead of refurbing it .
I think that the people of Blackburn should be given a say in the matter keep up the good work I for one will be signing the petition
Michael Duckworth, William Gilpin, four, Angela Gilpin, Rebecca Gilpin, seven, Ste Smith, Evie-Joy Smith, and front, Stella Smith, nine
As with most old buildings cwd council cant be arsed with let the go to wrack and ruin let them get vandalized till they are nearly unrepaireable then knock them down to save the building company a few quid.This building could be brought back to life for the same cost as a new build im sure. SAVE THE INFIRMARY
[quote][p][bold]tntoast[/bold] wrote: as this been done purposely so they can demolish this historic building which was paid for by the people of Blackburn instead of refurbing it . I think that the people of Blackburn should be given a say in the matter keep up the good work I for one will be signing the petition Michael Duckworth, William Gilpin, four, Angela Gilpin, Rebecca Gilpin, seven, Ste Smith, Evie-Joy Smith, and front, Stella Smith, nine[/p][/quote]As with most old buildings cwd council cant be arsed with let the go to wrack and ruin let them get vandalized till they are nearly unrepaireable then knock them down to save the building company a few quid.This building could be brought back to life for the same cost as a new build im sure. SAVE THE INFIRMARY bow1974
  • Score: 20

3:30pm Fri 1 Aug 14

bow1974 says...

bow1974 wrote:
tntoast wrote:
as this been done purposely so they can demolish this historic building which was paid for by the people of Blackburn instead of refurbing it .
I think that the people of Blackburn should be given a say in the matter keep up the good work I for one will be signing the petition
Michael Duckworth, William Gilpin, four, Angela Gilpin, Rebecca Gilpin, seven, Ste Smith, Evie-Joy Smith, and front, Stella Smith, nine
As with most old buildings cwd council cant be arsed with let the go to wrack and ruin let them get vandalized till they are nearly unrepaireable then knock them down to save the building company a few quid.This building could be brought back to life for the same cost as a new build im sure. SAVE THE INFIRMARY
sorry should be bwd council and also should read let them go to wrack and ruin typo error SAVE THE INFIRMARY
[quote][p][bold]bow1974[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tntoast[/bold] wrote: as this been done purposely so they can demolish this historic building which was paid for by the people of Blackburn instead of refurbing it . I think that the people of Blackburn should be given a say in the matter keep up the good work I for one will be signing the petition Michael Duckworth, William Gilpin, four, Angela Gilpin, Rebecca Gilpin, seven, Ste Smith, Evie-Joy Smith, and front, Stella Smith, nine[/p][/quote]As with most old buildings cwd council cant be arsed with let the go to wrack and ruin let them get vandalized till they are nearly unrepaireable then knock them down to save the building company a few quid.This building could be brought back to life for the same cost as a new build im sure. SAVE THE INFIRMARY[/p][/quote]sorry should be bwd council and also should read let them go to wrack and ruin typo error SAVE THE INFIRMARY bow1974
  • Score: 16

3:39pm Fri 1 Aug 14

woolywords says...

It is a complete wonder that Mo Bateson doesn't have a matching set of cauliflower ears with the amount of ear bashing that I've given her in regards to this building.
As far back as 2006, I've been trying to get the Council to preserve as much as possible, the fabric of this building, being aware of it's historical significance to the town. Unfortunately, it was sold into private hands, as a speculative venture that never came to fruition. And so, like many other places, it has been never been properly secured against theft and vandalism. Even it's decrepit state, it still attracts the ne'er-do-wells, to the point where the Police don't bother attending if one reports anything.
How ironic that, in the year that we commemorate the Great War, that this buildings fate has finally been sealed. Only now do people come forwards with vain attempts at rescue, after the fact. Which is a shame really, because if more pressure were applied some time ago, we might have had a better outcome than demolition.
I take small comfort in knowing that some parts of it are saved in the new hospital, as I think that they rightly belong in the new building and doubt that the BRH will surrender them, if asked for their return.
By that I mean, the eight panels that used to be in the top of the octagon tower of the old building, that are now in the BRH, (on the left, just past WH Smith's shop).
And that, some of the fabric of the old building is to be saved for a memorial garden, for the pleasure of those with fading memories..
Have yet to hear if my suggestion of using the balustrade, that sits on top of the tower, can be used as a fence around a Willow tree. As I think that this would be a fitting tribute to those that this wing was built to honour.
You might think that I have some personal connection with this building, given my concerns for it's future but I don't. Am not even a son of this town but have a passion for history and know of what caused it to be built. Whilst many recall the slaughter of the Accrington Pals, where so many died; few recall the broken and shattered bodies of those whom survived. This hospital, built through public subscription was supposed to commemorate that and being built in engineering brick, to last forever. It just goes to show how fickle that some are, when it comes to the past.
Were it within my remit to do so, I'd have any vandals caught within this area, sentenced to clean up bricks; sufficient to build the garden wall.
It is a complete wonder that Mo Bateson doesn't have a matching set of cauliflower ears with the amount of ear bashing that I've given her in regards to this building. As far back as 2006, I've been trying to get the Council to preserve as much as possible, the fabric of this building, being aware of it's historical significance to the town. Unfortunately, it was sold into private hands, as a speculative venture that never came to fruition. And so, like many other places, it has been never been properly secured against theft and vandalism. Even it's decrepit state, it still attracts the ne'er-do-wells, to the point where the Police don't bother attending if one reports anything. How ironic that, in the year that we commemorate the Great War, that this buildings fate has finally been sealed. Only now do people come forwards with vain attempts at rescue, after the fact. Which is a shame really, because if more pressure were applied some time ago, we might have had a better outcome than demolition. I take small comfort in knowing that some parts of it are saved in the new hospital, as I think that they rightly belong in the new building and doubt that the BRH will surrender them, if asked for their return. By that I mean, the eight panels that used to be in the top of the octagon tower of the old building, that are now in the BRH, (on the left, just past WH Smith's shop). And that, some of the fabric of the old building is to be saved for a memorial garden, for the pleasure of those with fading memories.. Have yet to hear if my suggestion of using the balustrade, that sits on top of the tower, can be used as a fence around a Willow tree. As I think that this would be a fitting tribute to those that this wing was built to honour. You might think that I have some personal connection with this building, given my concerns for it's future but I don't. Am not even a son of this town but have a passion for history and know of what caused it to be built. Whilst many recall the slaughter of the Accrington Pals, where so many died; few recall the broken and shattered bodies of those whom survived. This hospital, built through public subscription was supposed to commemorate that and being built in engineering brick, to last forever. It just goes to show how fickle that some are, when it comes to the past. Were it within my remit to do so, I'd have any vandals caught within this area, sentenced to clean up bricks; sufficient to build the garden wall. woolywords
  • Score: 20

4:03pm Fri 1 Aug 14

bow1974 says...

woolywords wrote:
It is a complete wonder that Mo Bateson doesn't have a matching set of cauliflower ears with the amount of ear bashing that I've given her in regards to this building.
As far back as 2006, I've been trying to get the Council to preserve as much as possible, the fabric of this building, being aware of it's historical significance to the town. Unfortunately, it was sold into private hands, as a speculative venture that never came to fruition. And so, like many other places, it has been never been properly secured against theft and vandalism. Even it's decrepit state, it still attracts the ne'er-do-wells, to the point where the Police don't bother attending if one reports anything.
How ironic that, in the year that we commemorate the Great War, that this buildings fate has finally been sealed. Only now do people come forwards with vain attempts at rescue, after the fact. Which is a shame really, because if more pressure were applied some time ago, we might have had a better outcome than demolition.
I take small comfort in knowing that some parts of it are saved in the new hospital, as I think that they rightly belong in the new building and doubt that the BRH will surrender them, if asked for their return.
By that I mean, the eight panels that used to be in the top of the octagon tower of the old building, that are now in the BRH, (on the left, just past WH Smith's shop).
And that, some of the fabric of the old building is to be saved for a memorial garden, for the pleasure of those with fading memories..
Have yet to hear if my suggestion of using the balustrade, that sits on top of the tower, can be used as a fence around a Willow tree. As I think that this would be a fitting tribute to those that this wing was built to honour.
You might think that I have some personal connection with this building, given my concerns for it's future but I don't. Am not even a son of this town but have a passion for history and know of what caused it to be built. Whilst many recall the slaughter of the Accrington Pals, where so many died; few recall the broken and shattered bodies of those whom survived. This hospital, built through public subscription was supposed to commemorate that and being built in engineering brick, to last forever. It just goes to show how fickle that some are, when it comes to the past.
Were it within my remit to do so, I'd have any vandals caught within this area, sentenced to clean up bricks; sufficient to build the garden wall.
Well said wooly hope you sign upto the cause the more peeps that do the better lets hope something is done we belive english heritage is looking into it aswell now.
[quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: It is a complete wonder that Mo Bateson doesn't have a matching set of cauliflower ears with the amount of ear bashing that I've given her in regards to this building. As far back as 2006, I've been trying to get the Council to preserve as much as possible, the fabric of this building, being aware of it's historical significance to the town. Unfortunately, it was sold into private hands, as a speculative venture that never came to fruition. And so, like many other places, it has been never been properly secured against theft and vandalism. Even it's decrepit state, it still attracts the ne'er-do-wells, to the point where the Police don't bother attending if one reports anything. How ironic that, in the year that we commemorate the Great War, that this buildings fate has finally been sealed. Only now do people come forwards with vain attempts at rescue, after the fact. Which is a shame really, because if more pressure were applied some time ago, we might have had a better outcome than demolition. I take small comfort in knowing that some parts of it are saved in the new hospital, as I think that they rightly belong in the new building and doubt that the BRH will surrender them, if asked for their return. By that I mean, the eight panels that used to be in the top of the octagon tower of the old building, that are now in the BRH, (on the left, just past WH Smith's shop). And that, some of the fabric of the old building is to be saved for a memorial garden, for the pleasure of those with fading memories.. Have yet to hear if my suggestion of using the balustrade, that sits on top of the tower, can be used as a fence around a Willow tree. As I think that this would be a fitting tribute to those that this wing was built to honour. You might think that I have some personal connection with this building, given my concerns for it's future but I don't. Am not even a son of this town but have a passion for history and know of what caused it to be built. Whilst many recall the slaughter of the Accrington Pals, where so many died; few recall the broken and shattered bodies of those whom survived. This hospital, built through public subscription was supposed to commemorate that and being built in engineering brick, to last forever. It just goes to show how fickle that some are, when it comes to the past. Were it within my remit to do so, I'd have any vandals caught within this area, sentenced to clean up bricks; sufficient to build the garden wall.[/p][/quote]Well said wooly hope you sign upto the cause the more peeps that do the better lets hope something is done we belive english heritage is looking into it aswell now. bow1974
  • Score: 9

4:08pm Fri 1 Aug 14

greenscreener says...

woolywords wrote:
It is a complete wonder that Mo Bateson doesn't have a matching set of cauliflower ears with the amount of ear bashing that I've given her in regards to this building.
As far back as 2006, I've been trying to get the Council to preserve as much as possible, the fabric of this building, being aware of it's historical significance to the town. Unfortunately, it was sold into private hands, as a speculative venture that never came to fruition. And so, like many other places, it has been never been properly secured against theft and vandalism. Even it's decrepit state, it still attracts the ne'er-do-wells, to the point where the Police don't bother attending if one reports anything.
How ironic that, in the year that we commemorate the Great War, that this buildings fate has finally been sealed. Only now do people come forwards with vain attempts at rescue, after the fact. Which is a shame really, because if more pressure were applied some time ago, we might have had a better outcome than demolition.
I take small comfort in knowing that some parts of it are saved in the new hospital, as I think that they rightly belong in the new building and doubt that the BRH will surrender them, if asked for their return.
By that I mean, the eight panels that used to be in the top of the octagon tower of the old building, that are now in the BRH, (on the left, just past WH Smith's shop).
And that, some of the fabric of the old building is to be saved for a memorial garden, for the pleasure of those with fading memories..
Have yet to hear if my suggestion of using the balustrade, that sits on top of the tower, can be used as a fence around a Willow tree. As I think that this would be a fitting tribute to those that this wing was built to honour.
You might think that I have some personal connection with this building, given my concerns for it's future but I don't. Am not even a son of this town but have a passion for history and know of what caused it to be built. Whilst many recall the slaughter of the Accrington Pals, where so many died; few recall the broken and shattered bodies of those whom survived. This hospital, built through public subscription was supposed to commemorate that and being built in engineering brick, to last forever. It just goes to show how fickle that some are, when it comes to the past.
Were it within my remit to do so, I'd have any vandals caught within this area, sentenced to clean up bricks; sufficient to build the garden wall.
Congratulations Wooly, an excellent comment.

Many of your contributions wander off into surreal areas which are frankly often not worth the effort but that was a very coherent piece.

Your ideas are also to be encouraged, it's a pity that commercial interests resulted in what may now be irreversible but reclamation and reuse of character pieces and materials is essential.
[quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: It is a complete wonder that Mo Bateson doesn't have a matching set of cauliflower ears with the amount of ear bashing that I've given her in regards to this building. As far back as 2006, I've been trying to get the Council to preserve as much as possible, the fabric of this building, being aware of it's historical significance to the town. Unfortunately, it was sold into private hands, as a speculative venture that never came to fruition. And so, like many other places, it has been never been properly secured against theft and vandalism. Even it's decrepit state, it still attracts the ne'er-do-wells, to the point where the Police don't bother attending if one reports anything. How ironic that, in the year that we commemorate the Great War, that this buildings fate has finally been sealed. Only now do people come forwards with vain attempts at rescue, after the fact. Which is a shame really, because if more pressure were applied some time ago, we might have had a better outcome than demolition. I take small comfort in knowing that some parts of it are saved in the new hospital, as I think that they rightly belong in the new building and doubt that the BRH will surrender them, if asked for their return. By that I mean, the eight panels that used to be in the top of the octagon tower of the old building, that are now in the BRH, (on the left, just past WH Smith's shop). And that, some of the fabric of the old building is to be saved for a memorial garden, for the pleasure of those with fading memories.. Have yet to hear if my suggestion of using the balustrade, that sits on top of the tower, can be used as a fence around a Willow tree. As I think that this would be a fitting tribute to those that this wing was built to honour. You might think that I have some personal connection with this building, given my concerns for it's future but I don't. Am not even a son of this town but have a passion for history and know of what caused it to be built. Whilst many recall the slaughter of the Accrington Pals, where so many died; few recall the broken and shattered bodies of those whom survived. This hospital, built through public subscription was supposed to commemorate that and being built in engineering brick, to last forever. It just goes to show how fickle that some are, when it comes to the past. Were it within my remit to do so, I'd have any vandals caught within this area, sentenced to clean up bricks; sufficient to build the garden wall.[/p][/quote]Congratulations Wooly, an excellent comment. Many of your contributions wander off into surreal areas which are frankly often not worth the effort but that was a very coherent piece. Your ideas are also to be encouraged, it's a pity that commercial interests resulted in what may now be irreversible but reclamation and reuse of character pieces and materials is essential. greenscreener
  • Score: 8

4:24pm Fri 1 Aug 14

thoroughbred says...

this building never belonged to BwDBC, it belonged to the 'people', as for leaving it till it's too late. The council and the developer have been ear-bashed for years to it....fallen on deaf ears, again and again, deliberate action...
Shame on you Wilson and BwDBC
this building never belonged to BwDBC, it belonged to the 'people', as for leaving it till it's too late. The council and the developer have been ear-bashed for years to it....fallen on deaf ears, again and again, deliberate action... Shame on you Wilson and BwDBC thoroughbred
  • Score: 10

4:49pm Fri 1 Aug 14

goldiebambino says...

What the hells wrong with these people, does the word DECAYING MEAN NOTHING TO YOU????
yes put old people in and see the death, injury and health rates rise by the DECAYING walls, ceiling and floors.
IDIOTS
What the hells wrong with these people, does the word DECAYING MEAN NOTHING TO YOU???? yes put old people in and see the death, injury and health rates rise by the DECAYING walls, ceiling and floors. IDIOTS goldiebambino
  • Score: -13

6:14pm Fri 1 Aug 14

bow1974 says...

goldiebambino wrote:
What the hells wrong with these people, does the word DECAYING MEAN NOTHING TO YOU????
yes put old people in and see the death, injury and health rates rise by the DECAYING walls, ceiling and floors.
IDIOTS
And it's comments like yours we are losing all our historical buildings. With abit of imagination this building could be brought back to its former glory which the people of blackburn paid for all those many years ago out of thier own hard earned money.SAVE THE INFIRMARY
[quote][p][bold]goldiebambino[/bold] wrote: What the hells wrong with these people, does the word DECAYING MEAN NOTHING TO YOU???? yes put old people in and see the death, injury and health rates rise by the DECAYING walls, ceiling and floors. IDIOTS[/p][/quote]And it's comments like yours we are losing all our historical buildings. With abit of imagination this building could be brought back to its former glory which the people of blackburn paid for all those many years ago out of thier own hard earned money.SAVE THE INFIRMARY bow1974
  • Score: 17

6:44pm Fri 1 Aug 14

Excluded again says...

When did the council own the infirmary? It was part of the NHS, so the NHS must have sold the building to the developers
When did the council own the infirmary? It was part of the NHS, so the NHS must have sold the building to the developers Excluded again
  • Score: 9

6:48pm Fri 1 Aug 14

madmurphy says...

To be perfectly honest I for one would rather see it demolished and a new purpose built nursing home put in its place. Yes it could be restored but would be a nightmare to bring up to current building regs and energy rating. No builders would touch it, and this is nothing to do with allowing it to decay. It would have needed full renovation anyway.
The counsel don't want to renovate it either as the cost would escalate too much.
Yes it's a crying shame I know, but these are the times we live in. I can honestly say any building company taking on the restoration of such a large building is on a hiding to nothing as they would even struggle to get EU funds for such an undertaking.
If some private developer came and took it on I for one would applaude this, but as for the counsel taking it on, they simply couldn't afford it.
It's a marvelous thing that people come together and fight, but I can't see you winning this one I am afraid.
Any new building that does go up however should be dedicated to the people of Blackburn.
To be perfectly honest I for one would rather see it demolished and a new purpose built nursing home put in its place. Yes it could be restored but would be a nightmare to bring up to current building regs and energy rating. No builders would touch it, and this is nothing to do with allowing it to decay. It would have needed full renovation anyway. The counsel don't want to renovate it either as the cost would escalate too much. Yes it's a crying shame I know, but these are the times we live in. I can honestly say any building company taking on the restoration of such a large building is on a hiding to nothing as they would even struggle to get EU funds for such an undertaking. If some private developer came and took it on I for one would applaude this, but as for the counsel taking it on, they simply couldn't afford it. It's a marvelous thing that people come together and fight, but I can't see you winning this one I am afraid. Any new building that does go up however should be dedicated to the people of Blackburn. madmurphy
  • Score: 3

6:59pm Fri 1 Aug 14

caballo says...

Were the original site developers not charged with saving this wing? Or have I made that up?
Were the original site developers not charged with saving this wing? Or have I made that up? caballo
  • Score: 5

7:01pm Fri 1 Aug 14

woolywords says...

Excluded again wrote:
When did the council own the infirmary? It was part of the NHS, so the NHS must have sold the building to the developers
According to my research, mainly on the web, there was a board of trustees appointed, whom monitored it's building. Then, once completed, there was the usual shuffling of chairs on the board, to allow for more medically qualified individuals to have a say.
After this is where is all gets a bit hazy, because of the National Health Service Act of 1946, which came into effect on 5 July 1948 and created the National Health Service as we know it now. A lot of private hospitals, which BRI was at that time, slipped into the evil clutches of government and civil servants.
Which means that I will have to do a bit of digging in the old library archives, to find out how it all came to be transferred without the will of the donors.
...
It's a bit like trying to find out whom was responsible for allowing those guns that used to be in Corporation Park to be sold for scrap, after they were gifted to the townsfolk.
These dodgy Burghers of Blackburn, have a good way of covering their tracks..
And once again, history is repeating itself..
[quote][p][bold]Excluded again[/bold] wrote: When did the council own the infirmary? It was part of the NHS, so the NHS must have sold the building to the developers[/p][/quote]According to my research, mainly on the web, there was a board of trustees appointed, whom monitored it's building. Then, once completed, there was the usual shuffling of chairs on the board, to allow for more medically qualified individuals to have a say. After this is where is all gets a bit hazy, because of the National Health Service Act of 1946, which came into effect on 5 July 1948 and created the National Health Service as we know it now. A lot of private hospitals, which BRI was at that time, slipped into the evil clutches of government and civil servants. Which means that I will have to do a bit of digging in the old library archives, to find out how it all came to be transferred without the will of the donors. ... It's a bit like trying to find out whom was responsible for allowing those guns that used to be in Corporation Park to be sold for scrap, after they were gifted to the townsfolk. These dodgy Burghers of Blackburn, have a good way of covering their tracks.. And once again, history is repeating itself.. woolywords
  • Score: 6

7:11pm Fri 1 Aug 14

madmurphy says...

caballo wrote:
Were the original site developers not charged with saving this wing? Or have I made that up?
I believe you are quite correct, and a heavy fine should be sought.
Although they said it, they probably had no intention of doing so.
[quote][p][bold]caballo[/bold] wrote: Were the original site developers not charged with saving this wing? Or have I made that up?[/p][/quote]I believe you are quite correct, and a heavy fine should be sought. Although they said it, they probably had no intention of doing so. madmurphy
  • Score: 6

7:32pm Fri 1 Aug 14

woolywords says...

Anyway, I may as well share what I know, with those with an interest...
...
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Elma_Yerbur
gh#Blackburn_Royal_I
nfirmary
...
http://www.lancashir
etelegraph.co.uk/new
s/1598881.victorian_
infirmary_to_be_pull
ed_down/
...
http://www.lancashir
etelegraph.co.uk/new
s/9811063.Blackburn_
__s_former_Royal_inf
irmary_homes_plot_na
med_The_Royals/
...
http://www.lancashir
etelegraph.co.uk/new
s/9887855.Blackburn_
Infirmary_site_homes
_fit_for____Royal___
_families/?ref=ar
...
Not in chronological order but you can glean a lot from what people say at different times. Note how the original plans included single bedroomed apartments...not any more they don't.
And now what is the town seriously short of?
...
Note how pleased that Jack Straw looks, or should that be, relieved?
He was an huge supporter of the BRH/PFI super-hospital, that wasn't fit for purpose before it opened it's A and E doors, as it's designed capacity was 70 000 patients, when the closing BRI was already seeing as many as that... With a predicted growth of around 3-5% per annum.
Unfortunately, a Land Registry search, doesn't reveal when or how PJ Livesey gained ownership of the Memorial Wing... unless someone else wants to take up that challenge?
...
And for your late night reading, type Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh
into Google and then select news..
This is their super-hospital, built by the same firm that built BRH. After two or three stories, you have to give your head a wobble (love that expression!), to make that you aren't reading about BRH...
Anyway, I may as well share what I know, with those with an interest... ... http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Elma_Yerbur gh#Blackburn_Royal_I nfirmary ... http://www.lancashir etelegraph.co.uk/new s/1598881.victorian_ infirmary_to_be_pull ed_down/ ... http://www.lancashir etelegraph.co.uk/new s/9811063.Blackburn_ __s_former_Royal_inf irmary_homes_plot_na med_The_Royals/ ... http://www.lancashir etelegraph.co.uk/new s/9887855.Blackburn_ Infirmary_site_homes _fit_for____Royal___ _families/?ref=ar ... Not in chronological order but you can glean a lot from what people say at different times. Note how the original plans included single bedroomed apartments...not any more they don't. And now what is the town seriously short of? ... Note how pleased that Jack Straw looks, or should that be, relieved? He was an huge supporter of the BRH/PFI super-hospital, that wasn't fit for purpose before it opened it's A and E doors, as it's designed capacity was 70 000 patients, when the closing BRI was already seeing as many as that... With a predicted growth of around 3-5% per annum. Unfortunately, a Land Registry search, doesn't reveal when or how PJ Livesey gained ownership of the Memorial Wing... unless someone else wants to take up that challenge? ... And for your late night reading, type Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh into Google and then select news.. This is their super-hospital, built by the same firm that built BRH. After two or three stories, you have to give your head a wobble (love that expression!), to make that you aren't reading about BRH... woolywords
  • Score: 4

7:58pm Fri 1 Aug 14

Bellypork says...

New nursing home for me. Would love to see it stay but cost would be too much. No matter who turns up on the day to smoke fags and drink coffee, it will still get demolished.
New nursing home for me. Would love to see it stay but cost would be too much. No matter who turns up on the day to smoke fags and drink coffee, it will still get demolished. Bellypork
  • Score: 0

8:46pm Fri 1 Aug 14

Excluded again says...

woolywords wrote:
Excluded again wrote:
When did the council own the infirmary? It was part of the NHS, so the NHS must have sold the building to the developers
According to my research, mainly on the web, there was a board of trustees appointed, whom monitored it's building. Then, once completed, there was the usual shuffling of chairs on the board, to allow for more medically qualified individuals to have a say.
After this is where is all gets a bit hazy, because of the National Health Service Act of 1946, which came into effect on 5 July 1948 and created the National Health Service as we know it now. A lot of private hospitals, which BRI was at that time, slipped into the evil clutches of government and civil servants.
Which means that I will have to do a bit of digging in the old library archives, to find out how it all came to be transferred without the will of the donors.
...
It's a bit like trying to find out whom was responsible for allowing those guns that used to be in Corporation Park to be sold for scrap, after they were gifted to the townsfolk.
These dodgy Burghers of Blackburn, have a good way of covering their tracks..
And once again, history is repeating itself..
So even prior to 1948, the Council never owned the building. Their only power would be as a planning authority to approve or not plans - and if the plans were within the scope of planning law their hands would be largely tied.
[quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Excluded again[/bold] wrote: When did the council own the infirmary? It was part of the NHS, so the NHS must have sold the building to the developers[/p][/quote]According to my research, mainly on the web, there was a board of trustees appointed, whom monitored it's building. Then, once completed, there was the usual shuffling of chairs on the board, to allow for more medically qualified individuals to have a say. After this is where is all gets a bit hazy, because of the National Health Service Act of 1946, which came into effect on 5 July 1948 and created the National Health Service as we know it now. A lot of private hospitals, which BRI was at that time, slipped into the evil clutches of government and civil servants. Which means that I will have to do a bit of digging in the old library archives, to find out how it all came to be transferred without the will of the donors. ... It's a bit like trying to find out whom was responsible for allowing those guns that used to be in Corporation Park to be sold for scrap, after they were gifted to the townsfolk. These dodgy Burghers of Blackburn, have a good way of covering their tracks.. And once again, history is repeating itself..[/p][/quote]So even prior to 1948, the Council never owned the building. Their only power would be as a planning authority to approve or not plans - and if the plans were within the scope of planning law their hands would be largely tied. Excluded again
  • Score: 8

9:08pm Fri 1 Aug 14

bossindian says...

Too little , too late
Too little , too late bossindian
  • Score: -1

6:17am Sat 2 Aug 14

woolywords says...

Dear Mr Straw,
A friend of mine tells me that you originally trained as a Barrister before going into politics. Once elected, you went on to achieve some of the highest Offices of State that is possible and it is through these jobs that you will have gained knowledge about Constitutional Law. With this in mind, can I pick your brains on a piece of law, from 1923 and subsequently tweaked a bit in 1948?
You see, I have this really sneaky suspicion that my Local Authority has been falling down in it's statutory duties and by that, guilty of corporate negligence, either by ignorance or whatever. And don't forget, ignorance is no excuse in law, or so they say.
A piece of legislation was passed in 1923 called the War Memorials (Local Authorities’ Powers) Act 18th July 1923, (13 and 14 GEO.5, Chapter 18), which was later tweaked in another act in 1948, namely, Local Authorities Act 1948 / Local Government Act 1948 (11 and 12 GEO.6, Chapter 26, Clause 133\3) and other odd bits of subsequent legislation, to sort of reinforced the basic tenets of the 1923 Act, by making it clear that they had a statutory duty of care.
With these bits of legislation in mind, would I be right in thinking that, any War Memorial founded in say 1924 and completed in 1928, would, to all intents and purposes, be subject to the above cited laws?
It may be a 'moot point' to suggest that, when originally drafted, the law had in mind the sort of standard war memorial of the day, say an obelisk or plinth, such as the Cenotaph, in Whitehall but not every town or city has such a thing. Blackburn just has it's little Garden of Remembrance, in Corporation Park, because it had previously spent a fortune on another War Memorial, namely the War Memorial Wing, at the local hospital.
Which brings me to the nub of the issue; has Blackburn with Darwen Borough council been negligent in it's statutory duty, under the above laws and/or others, in allowing the War Memorial Wing of the former Blackburn Royal Infirmary to fall into such a state of disrepair that demolition is the perceived only option? Many of us think that some should be held accountable, if this is the case.
Try as I might, I cannot find any repeal of the original law, only amendments to it, so to all intents and purposes, the law is still in effect and therefore, I think, a prima facia case exists of corporate negligence.
A key difficulty could be the proof of criminal intent (the mental element of a crime). However, the offence is that of negligence, with a lower burden than specific intent, and one that requires (depending on the offence) an act to be careless, inattentive, neglectful, wilfully blind, or reckless. Which is basically what they have done, in my opinion and am sure that I could persuade a jury of it too!
Many would greatly appreciate your opinion on this, both as the local MP and a legal mind, as there is a lot of local concern regarding this matter. There is no need to reply here, as I feel the right place would be in your weekly column.
Thanking you in anticipation of a response,

Wooly.
ps. This link directs to the relevant legislation, which may assist you...
http://www.legislati
on.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5
/13-14/18
Dear Mr Straw, A friend of mine tells me that you originally trained as a Barrister before going into politics. Once elected, you went on to achieve some of the highest Offices of State that is possible and it is through these jobs that you will have gained knowledge about Constitutional Law. With this in mind, can I pick your brains on a piece of law, from 1923 and subsequently tweaked a bit in 1948? You see, I have this really sneaky suspicion that my Local Authority has been falling down in it's statutory duties and by that, guilty of corporate negligence, either by ignorance or whatever. And don't forget, ignorance is no excuse in law, or so they say. A piece of legislation was passed in 1923 called the War Memorials (Local Authorities’ Powers) Act 18th July 1923, (13 and 14 GEO.5, Chapter 18), which was later tweaked in another act in 1948, namely, Local Authorities Act 1948 / Local Government Act 1948 (11 and 12 GEO.6, Chapter 26, Clause 133\3) and other odd bits of subsequent legislation, to sort of reinforced the basic tenets of the 1923 Act, by making it clear that they had a statutory duty of care. With these bits of legislation in mind, would I be right in thinking that, any War Memorial founded in say 1924 and completed in 1928, would, to all intents and purposes, be subject to the above cited laws? It may be a 'moot point' to suggest that, when originally drafted, the law had in mind the sort of standard war memorial of the day, say an obelisk or plinth, such as the Cenotaph, in Whitehall but not every town or city has such a thing. Blackburn just has it's little Garden of Remembrance, in Corporation Park, because it had previously spent a fortune on another War Memorial, namely the War Memorial Wing, at the local hospital. Which brings me to the nub of the issue; has Blackburn with Darwen Borough council been negligent in it's statutory duty, under the above laws and/or others, in allowing the War Memorial Wing of the former Blackburn Royal Infirmary to fall into such a state of disrepair that demolition is the perceived only option? Many of us think that some should be held accountable, if this is the case. Try as I might, I cannot find any repeal of the original law, only amendments to it, so to all intents and purposes, the law is still in effect and therefore, I think, a prima facia case exists of corporate negligence. A key difficulty could be the proof of criminal intent (the mental element of a crime). However, the offence is that of negligence, with a lower burden than specific intent, and one that requires (depending on the offence) an act to be careless, inattentive, neglectful, wilfully blind, or reckless. Which is basically what they have done, in my opinion and am sure that I could persuade a jury of it too! Many would greatly appreciate your opinion on this, both as the local MP and a legal mind, as there is a lot of local concern regarding this matter. There is no need to reply here, as I feel the right place would be in your weekly column. Thanking you in anticipation of a response, Wooly. ps. This link directs to the relevant legislation, which may assist you... http://www.legislati on.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5 /13-14/18 woolywords
  • Score: 3

7:39am Sat 2 Aug 14

Reasons says...

Blackburn has neglected its past by wanton destruction and they have the audacity to say in past articles about promoting events about Blackburns Heritage !!!!
Look at the lost buildings ,the overgrown war graves and the history that is never mentioned
Blackburn has neglected its past by wanton destruction and they have the audacity to say in past articles about promoting events about Blackburns Heritage !!!! Look at the lost buildings ,the overgrown war graves and the history that is never mentioned Reasons
  • Score: 7

7:43am Sat 2 Aug 14

woolywords says...

@excluded again,
I don't think that they ever owned it in the normal sense of the word but as I've shown above, my belief is that they did have a legal duty of care..
Just as you send your kid to school and a teacher acts, (in loco parentis), on your behalf by caring for them.
Before the NHS was born, the hospital was in private hands, under the supervision of a board of trustees, it is these people who will either have been gifted or accepted liability for the wing. Then along comes the NHS, the trustees all die off and then it all gets a bit vague..
Were the NHS aware, when it sold off the 'land' about the provenance of the wing? On top of that, as if it wasn't bad enough, who own the land that it is built upon? This is where I need the newspapers of 1864 or before, to find out. I'm hoping that the library has back copies of the Blackburn Standard, the local newspaper of the day.
Normally, I'd use Wiki but it's page(s) has been modified by an amateur, whom failed to archive the original page(s), so they are gone forever.
(I edit for Wiki, so have written out a complaint about the failure to archive, in crayon!)
Whilst I'm having a whale of a time doing all this research, you have to bear in mind that it does have rather serious consequences for BwDBC, in that, buried deep in the fine print of the 1923 law is a financial rule. They are supposed to spend 1d (that's one old penny) in the Pound on maintaining war memorials, so I think I'd be justified in asking that they spend that towards a newer one.
Now that's job in of itself, working out the total amount of local rates paid since 1924 up to 2014, dividing that by 240 (which is old pennies in the £), plus compound interest accrued (as a financial penalty), less what they have spent on other memorials and having them spend what's left, on a fitting memorial.
As I said earlier, am certain that I can convince a jury of their guilt and I'm not even a lawyer and so it should be a 'no-brainer' to a proper one. This is why I've asked Jack Straw to help and if he doesn't, I've no qualms about writing to the Attorney General for an opinion, as he is responsible for dealing with questions of law arising on government Bills. Although he does act for the Crown, he also has a remit that covers legal aspects of domestic litigation.
It's always best to go to the organ grinder, if the monkey is giving you trouble!
...
As an aside, I did have this idea of saving a few bricks from the building and using them to erect a memorial wall but, to date, neither BwD nor Cotton Town websites have updated their figures for the casualties..
So I don't know how many bricks, one per person, to save and use. Which means, more research in the library..
It's a good job that I like reading.
@excluded again, I don't think that they ever owned it in the normal sense of the word but as I've shown above, my belief is that they did have a legal duty of care.. Just as you send your kid to school and a teacher acts, (in loco parentis), on your behalf by caring for them. Before the NHS was born, the hospital was in private hands, under the supervision of a board of trustees, it is these people who will either have been gifted or accepted liability for the wing. Then along comes the NHS, the trustees all die off and then it all gets a bit vague.. Were the NHS aware, when it sold off the 'land' about the provenance of the wing? On top of that, as if it wasn't bad enough, who own the land that it is built upon? This is where I need the newspapers of 1864 or before, to find out. I'm hoping that the library has back copies of the Blackburn Standard, the local newspaper of the day. Normally, I'd use Wiki but it's page(s) has been modified by an amateur, whom failed to archive the original page(s), so they are gone forever. (I edit for Wiki, so have written out a complaint about the failure to archive, in crayon!) Whilst I'm having a whale of a time doing all this research, you have to bear in mind that it does have rather serious consequences for BwDBC, in that, buried deep in the fine print of the 1923 law is a financial rule. They are supposed to spend 1d (that's one old penny) in the Pound on maintaining war memorials, so I think I'd be justified in asking that they spend that towards a newer one. Now that's job in of itself, working out the total amount of local rates paid since 1924 up to 2014, dividing that by 240 (which is old pennies in the £), plus compound interest accrued (as a financial penalty), less what they have spent on other memorials and having them spend what's left, on a fitting memorial. As I said earlier, am certain that I can convince a jury of their guilt and I'm not even a lawyer and so it should be a 'no-brainer' to a proper one. This is why I've asked Jack Straw to help and if he doesn't, I've no qualms about writing to the Attorney General for an opinion, as he is responsible for dealing with questions of law arising on government Bills. Although he does act for the Crown, he also has a remit that covers legal aspects of domestic litigation. It's always best to go to the organ grinder, if the monkey is giving you trouble! ... As an aside, I did have this idea of saving a few bricks from the building and using them to erect a memorial wall but, to date, neither BwD nor Cotton Town websites have updated their figures for the casualties.. So I don't know how many bricks, one per person, to save and use. Which means, more research in the library.. It's a good job that I like reading. woolywords
  • Score: 3

8:51pm Sat 2 Aug 14

Biscay says...

woolywords wrote:
Dear Mr Straw,
A friend of mine tells me that you originally trained as a Barrister before going into politics. Once elected, you went on to achieve some of the highest Offices of State that is possible and it is through these jobs that you will have gained knowledge about Constitutional Law. With this in mind, can I pick your brains on a piece of law, from 1923 and subsequently tweaked a bit in 1948?
You see, I have this really sneaky suspicion that my Local Authority has been falling down in it's statutory duties and by that, guilty of corporate negligence, either by ignorance or whatever. And don't forget, ignorance is no excuse in law, or so they say.
A piece of legislation was passed in 1923 called the War Memorials (Local Authorities’ Powers) Act 18th July 1923, (13 and 14 GEO.5, Chapter 18), which was later tweaked in another act in 1948, namely, Local Authorities Act 1948 / Local Government Act 1948 (11 and 12 GEO.6, Chapter 26, Clause 133\3) and other odd bits of subsequent legislation, to sort of reinforced the basic tenets of the 1923 Act, by making it clear that they had a statutory duty of care.
With these bits of legislation in mind, would I be right in thinking that, any War Memorial founded in say 1924 and completed in 1928, would, to all intents and purposes, be subject to the above cited laws?
It may be a 'moot point' to suggest that, when originally drafted, the law had in mind the sort of standard war memorial of the day, say an obelisk or plinth, such as the Cenotaph, in Whitehall but not every town or city has such a thing. Blackburn just has it's little Garden of Remembrance, in Corporation Park, because it had previously spent a fortune on another War Memorial, namely the War Memorial Wing, at the local hospital.
Which brings me to the nub of the issue; has Blackburn with Darwen Borough council been negligent in it's statutory duty, under the above laws and/or others, in allowing the War Memorial Wing of the former Blackburn Royal Infirmary to fall into such a state of disrepair that demolition is the perceived only option? Many of us think that some should be held accountable, if this is the case.
Try as I might, I cannot find any repeal of the original law, only amendments to it, so to all intents and purposes, the law is still in effect and therefore, I think, a prima facia case exists of corporate negligence.
A key difficulty could be the proof of criminal intent (the mental element of a crime). However, the offence is that of negligence, with a lower burden than specific intent, and one that requires (depending on the offence) an act to be careless, inattentive, neglectful, wilfully blind, or reckless. Which is basically what they have done, in my opinion and am sure that I could persuade a jury of it too!
Many would greatly appreciate your opinion on this, both as the local MP and a legal mind, as there is a lot of local concern regarding this matter. There is no need to reply here, as I feel the right place would be in your weekly column.
Thanking you in anticipation of a response,

Wooly.
ps. This link directs to the relevant legislation, which may assist you...
http://www.legislati

on.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5

/13-14/18
www.nas.org.uk
[quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: Dear Mr Straw, A friend of mine tells me that you originally trained as a Barrister before going into politics. Once elected, you went on to achieve some of the highest Offices of State that is possible and it is through these jobs that you will have gained knowledge about Constitutional Law. With this in mind, can I pick your brains on a piece of law, from 1923 and subsequently tweaked a bit in 1948? You see, I have this really sneaky suspicion that my Local Authority has been falling down in it's statutory duties and by that, guilty of corporate negligence, either by ignorance or whatever. And don't forget, ignorance is no excuse in law, or so they say. A piece of legislation was passed in 1923 called the War Memorials (Local Authorities’ Powers) Act 18th July 1923, (13 and 14 GEO.5, Chapter 18), which was later tweaked in another act in 1948, namely, Local Authorities Act 1948 / Local Government Act 1948 (11 and 12 GEO.6, Chapter 26, Clause 133\3) and other odd bits of subsequent legislation, to sort of reinforced the basic tenets of the 1923 Act, by making it clear that they had a statutory duty of care. With these bits of legislation in mind, would I be right in thinking that, any War Memorial founded in say 1924 and completed in 1928, would, to all intents and purposes, be subject to the above cited laws? It may be a 'moot point' to suggest that, when originally drafted, the law had in mind the sort of standard war memorial of the day, say an obelisk or plinth, such as the Cenotaph, in Whitehall but not every town or city has such a thing. Blackburn just has it's little Garden of Remembrance, in Corporation Park, because it had previously spent a fortune on another War Memorial, namely the War Memorial Wing, at the local hospital. Which brings me to the nub of the issue; has Blackburn with Darwen Borough council been negligent in it's statutory duty, under the above laws and/or others, in allowing the War Memorial Wing of the former Blackburn Royal Infirmary to fall into such a state of disrepair that demolition is the perceived only option? Many of us think that some should be held accountable, if this is the case. Try as I might, I cannot find any repeal of the original law, only amendments to it, so to all intents and purposes, the law is still in effect and therefore, I think, a prima facia case exists of corporate negligence. A key difficulty could be the proof of criminal intent (the mental element of a crime). However, the offence is that of negligence, with a lower burden than specific intent, and one that requires (depending on the offence) an act to be careless, inattentive, neglectful, wilfully blind, or reckless. Which is basically what they have done, in my opinion and am sure that I could persuade a jury of it too! Many would greatly appreciate your opinion on this, both as the local MP and a legal mind, as there is a lot of local concern regarding this matter. There is no need to reply here, as I feel the right place would be in your weekly column. Thanking you in anticipation of a response, Wooly. ps. This link directs to the relevant legislation, which may assist you... http://www.legislati on.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5 /13-14/18[/p][/quote]www.nas.org.uk Biscay
  • 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