Warren Bradley would say that Dave, wouldnt he but where is the evidence for his comments or have you just taken his word for it.
My understanding is totally different to the view of Mr Bradleys.
http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/liverpooldailypost/news/regionalnews/tm_headline=charles-calls-for-need-to-preserve-heritage-site%26method=full%26objectid=18931210%26siteid=50061-name_page.html

Wayne that letter Prince Charles wrote to you says precisely nothing. His aide merely thanks you for your comments, for bringing the matter to his attention and repeats his already well known views on architecture. No more and no less.

This is just another example of the way you have misleadingly twisted pieces of information since your campaign began. But I think you have cried wolf once too often. It has even dawned on the Daily Post that, despite your many and frequent almost gleeful predictions to the contrary, UNESCO are not going to remove the title.

Architecture divides opinion. That is one of its joys - it creates discussion and debate. Wouldn't life be boring if we all loved the same things and if all design remained the same?

Your opposition to all things new and modern isn't a reason for the city to stand still. What counts as quality design now is not the same as it was 100, 500 or 1000 years ago. But I guess if you'd been around in the Stone Age you'd be campaigning for us all to stay living in caves. Then again, maybe you do!

Hi Correspondent,
Thanks for the comment. A bit of clarification on where this piece came from. It was featured in a wider article written by my colleage Alan Weston on the debate between Warren Bradley, Conservative home affairs spokesman Chris Grayling, and health secretary Andy Burnham. I spotted it at the end of the story and decided to pull it out to see what people made of it.

Thanks Correspondent. Who-ever Shane is. I am more than happy to speak out......and put my name to my views . I have other correspondence from HRH marked Private.
What counts is quality design and why are they building out of date Le Corbusier rip-offs and saying its modern.

I agree - this is out of context and probably spin.

However, and although I am not against good contemporary architecture, what is going on on the waterfront is cultural vandalism. I wonder if this would ba allowed in the vicinity of, say, the Taj Mahal? No is the answer.

The view from the Albert Dock of the egg box is dreadful, and how it ever got through planning (setting of listed buildings etc) I have no idea.

Well, I do, but laws prevent me from saying so.

I wouldn't crow too loudly about UNESCO either. It's just rapped Bath and Edinburgh over the knuckles(as well as, finally, taken away WHS status from Dresden). And many have learned how to grab UNESCO attention through Bath and Edinburgh campaigns.

Sadly, the black stump and the ugly duckling egg box are already underway, unlikely that anything can now be done, apart from point the finger of shame at those who allowed this to happen., in the mistaken idea it's 'progress' and 'regeneration'.

Far too much rubbish has been allowed to be built in Liverpool, while decent historic buildings are allowed to rot or be demolished.

Much of what is going on seems to be about hard cash and city centre prime land-grab. I heard that the company who bought Belem Towers and the adjacent 60s tower blocks on the Ullet Road end of Sefton Park wanted to build new apartments in a modern style, which to my mind would fit quite comfortably in that environment, given the other tower blocks around the park and that it was replacing two rather ugly utilitarian high rises. I heard that planning through it out and told them they had to build something of matching Victorian Architecture with turrets. Since then, for the last few years, the block has stood gutted and an eyesore. Why is it not acceptable in an area where it replaces 60s grot and yet acceptable to put up these montrosities in the World heritage site destroying one of the finest views of our waterfront.

Dave you should make the blog so that people have to admit to who they are instead of allowing anyone who is anonymous to have a rant. Thats not very democratic really and it is the sort of debate that allows a hanfull of people to carve up the world heritage site.
I always stand by my opinions.
I consider that we do not deserve to have a world heritage site the way 10 people from the council and the NWDA to carve it up and as planning committee member Steve Hurst to pass the plans.

Bad British Architecture has though.

http://badbritisharchitecture.blogspot.com/2009/07/pier-head-ferry-terminal-liverpool-by.html

Carry on like this and the world will be laughing.

I have instructed my solicitors, Sue, Grabbit and Runne to take the appropriate libel action against your, er, Leader, Councillor Bradley for misrepresenting my views to try and gain party political advantage. If I was the King now I would have Bradley clapped in leg-irons and thrown in the Tower.