Weather
‘Sell art or no Titanic museum’ says council leader (From Daily Echo)
When news happens, text SDE and your photos or videos to 80360. Or contact us by email and phone.
|
|
|
|
‘Sell art or no Titanic museum’ says council leader
8:20am Saturday 18th July 2009
THE leader of Southampton City Council has laid down an ultimatum in the city’s art sell-off row – we either flog some paintings or don’t get a Titanic museum.
Tories are planning to sell paintings worth millions to help pay for a “world class” maritime attraction, dubbed Sea City Museum.
They face a race against time to get £15m to build the museum by April 2012, the 100th anniversary of the Titanic tragedy, which claimed the lives of 549 city residents.
Only 200 of the city’s vast 3,500 collection of paintings, worth around £180m, can be shown in the art gallery at any one time and some works have hardly seen the light of day in years.
Opposition councillors have slammed the proposed sale as a “betrayal of public trust” that would leave the reputation of the city’s museums in tatters.
Liberal Democrat group leader Jill Baston said: “I don’t believe its in the interests of the heritage of our city to diminish that very heritage we should be working to protect.”
Labour economic development spokesman Councillor Sarah Bogle added the plan was like “robbing Peter to pay Paul”.
But veteran council leader Alec Samuels insisted: “If we don’t sell some paintings we don’t get a heritage centre. We’ve made our choice.”
He said: “No picture will be sold if it’s unlawful to do so. And if it were to be sold it would go to an appropriate good home.”
Tory Cabinet member for art and heritage Councillor John Hannides said it was right to look at selling some of the paintings.
A review of the gallery’s collection – which includes masterpieces by Turner, Lowry, Picasso and Monet – will be carried out over the summer to identify paintings which could be sold.
Cllr Hannides said museum and art bodies were happy with the council’s approach.
Award-winning architects Wilkinson Eyre have been hired to draw up plans for the museum, which will be built in the west wing of the Civic Centre and feature a massive climb-aboard replica of the doomed liner.
Visitors will experience life on board the ill-fated voyage from the perspective of the crew, many of whom were from Southampton.
More News stories
- Motorists set for year of misery as bridge closes
- Road closed after serious accident
- Man set fire to student dressed as a sheep
- Naked rambler jailed again
- 'Tacky' city market slammed by retailers
- Surf competition to be held at artificial reef
- Worker crushed to death at Rose Bowl
- Wartime boats saved from scrapheap
- Family jump from house blaze
- NXP site still under a cloud
Your Say YourEcho
mr.southampton, Southampton says...
9:11am Sat 18 Jul 09
Here you go Echo.. open goal.. make a few FOI requests about the spiraling costs of the Cpita IT contract.
The Watcher, Oceana Boulevard says...
9:17am Sat 18 Jul 09
We should be looking to include it somewhere near the waterfront and make the most of the "Old Town".
How about the Old Customs House or acquiring/building somewhere where there are other things to look at.
Up in the Civic Centre will mean it is out of touch.
Allotmentman66, Bitterne says...
9:20am Sat 18 Jul 09
Who would want to buy copies??? When they can hire orginals.
Condor Man, Southampton says...
9:21am Sat 18 Jul 09
mr.southampton wrote:The Capita deal has saved the council- and council tax payers a fortune.
Someone please get Alec Samuels et al out of power. This Tory administration has been a disaster. The council makes cuts in one area, sell offs in another, yet wastes money on costly deals with Capita. Here you go Echo.. open goal.. make a few FOI requests about the spiraling costs of the Cpita IT contract.
There's no money in the pot, either we mark the 100th anniversary of the Titanic or we keep a few paintings in a store room. Sadly there's not the cash for both.
St.DaveH, Southampton says...
9:28am Sat 18 Jul 09
Dooody, Totton, Southampton says...
9:34am Sat 18 Jul 09
joenice, southampton says...
9:37am Sat 18 Jul 09
Interserie, Southampton says...
9:41am Sat 18 Jul 09
At present Southampton Art Gallery is widely regarded as one of the best in the United Kingdom. However this madcap scheme of Mr Samuels will mean that the City will lose access to the many travelling exhibitions which has visited the gallery over recent years attracting thousands of visitors. Who will want to lend to such a Council?
Over the years I have built up a collection of art from which I have happily lent many items to Southampton Art Gallery. I would like Alec Samuels to be aware that unless he drops his proposal to sell paintings, the City will not see another piece from my collection and my plans to bequest part of my collection to the City Art Gallery will be cancelled.
I am also urging other collectors and galleries to take similar action. Remember, not one painting, Mr Samuels.
Linesman, Fareham says...
9:51am Sat 18 Jul 09
What Titanic memorabilia and artifacts are available to put on display? The ship is many fathoms down, and other than a few letters etc there is nothing much to put on display.
A maritime museum, possibly joint funded by the Council, the Government Arts department and various shipping lines would be a viable option. There must be many ex-merchant seamen with photographs and souveniers from the Castle Line, P&O etc etc. Could even include the Hythe and Isle of Wight Ferries!
Jenjo, Southampton says...
9:59am Sat 18 Jul 09
Condor Man, Southampton says...
10:08am Sat 18 Jul 09
Jenjo wrote:I bet they never had your vote in teh 1st place
Great works of art retain their magnificence forever, and the Titanic project can be delivered at a lower cost without needing to sell any of the art. In any case it needs to be near the water, that's obvious to everyone but those who are pushing it through. The Civic Centre - it's a joke. The money should have been raised through other means (eg sponsorship), not by selling what you've already got. The council's claim to be interested in the arts will be blow to smithereens if they flog off paintings by such well-known artists. Of course the art world in general doesn't mind Southampton staging a giant car boot sale - the paintings will be better off somewhere else than in a city that hasn't got a clue about how to promote its considerable heritage. Well done to the opposition councillors - keep up the pressure and stop the Tory philistines. They've lost my vote in 2010 already.
Pikey Pete, says...
10:38am Sat 18 Jul 09
Allotmentman66 wrote:No Allotmentman66. I mean sell the originals if they are mostly in storage. "NO ONE IS LOOKING AT THEM ANY WAY." Hang the copies on public display and put 180 million raised in selling the originals in the bank for the people of Southampton....
Why sell them, why not just hire them out to other galleries for a set period of time, (say minimum of two or three years)that way everybody can see and appreciate them.
Who would want to buy copies??? When they can hire orginals.
Jenjo, Southampton says...
10:38am Sat 18 Jul 09
mick sterbs, phuket says...
10:43am Sat 18 Jul 09
why spend the money on a museum for a ship which sank nearly 100 years ago.
spend the money on something we need like a ice rink, or a mosque or more traffic lights?
Swalk, Southampton says...
10:47am Sat 18 Jul 09
Allotmentman66, Bitterne says...
10:56am Sat 18 Jul 09
Pikey Pete wrote:Pikey Pete
Allotmentman66 wrote: Why sell them, why not just hire them out to other galleries for a set period of time, (say minimum of two or three years)that way everybody can see and appreciate them. Who would want to buy copies??? When they can hire orginals.No Allotmentman66. I mean sell the originals if they are mostly in storage. "NO ONE IS LOOKING AT THEM ANY WAY." Hang the copies on public display and put 180 million raised in selling the originals in the bank for the people of Southampton....
You didn't explain that very well in your first posting did you.
If the art collection was hired out Southampton City Council would have a steady income over long period of time.
Stephen J, Fareham says...
11:10am Sat 18 Jul 09
Redback, Southampton says...
11:14am Sat 18 Jul 09
It was an expensive boat, that sank. The romanticism that has grown up around it is mawkish and more than a little desperate. Keep the art.
southy, redbridge says...
11:20am Sat 18 Jul 09
Allotmentman66 wrote:allotmentman66 i been saying that now for a long time, hire them out to the world.
Pikey Pete wrote:Pikey Pete
Allotmentman66 wrote: Why sell them, why not just hire them out to other galleries for a set period of time, (say minimum of two or three years)that way everybody can see and appreciate them. Who would want to buy copies??? When they can hire orginals.No Allotmentman66. I mean sell the originals if they are mostly in storage. "NO ONE IS LOOKING AT THEM ANY WAY." Hang the copies on public display and put 180 million raised in selling the originals in the bank for the people of Southampton....
You didn't explain that very well in your first posting did you.
If the art collection was hired out Southampton City Council would have a steady income over long period of time.
what pikey pete dont relise i think is the all the painting do get an airing, once in a while they get swoop about one that had been on show for a long time end up in storeage while others get move to another location and fresh pictures put up. this is normaly the mayor job to select whitch pictures and where they go.
Allotmentman66, Bitterne says...
11:49am Sat 18 Jul 09
southy wrote:Perhaps the Mayor should start hirng out,to other galleries and councils around the country and the world, and get some cash in the councils purse.
Allotmentman66 wrote:allotmentman66 i been saying that now for a long time, hire them out to the world. what pikey pete dont relise i think is the all the painting do get an airing, once in a while they get swoop about one that had been on show for a long time end up in storeage while others get move to another location and fresh pictures put up. this is normaly the mayor job to select whitch pictures and where they go.Pikey Pete wrote:Pikey Pete You didn't explain that very well in your first posting did you. If the art collection was hired out Southampton City Council would have a steady income over long period of time.Allotmentman66 wrote: Why sell them, why not just hire them out to other galleries for a set period of time, (say minimum of two or three years)that way everybody can see and appreciate them. Who would want to buy copies??? When they can hire orginals.No Allotmentman66. I mean sell the originals if they are mostly in storage. "NO ONE IS LOOKING AT THEM ANY WAY." Hang the copies on public display and put 180 million raised in selling the originals in the bank for the people of Southampton....
southy, redbridge says...
12:01pm Sat 18 Jul 09
Vonnie, Southampton says...
12:02pm Sat 18 Jul 09
Stephen J, Fareham says...
12:07pm Sat 18 Jul 09
Museums(and art galleries)should:
Consider financially-motivate
d disposal
only in exceptional circumstances and
when it can be demonstrated that:
• it will significantly improve the long-term
public benefit derived from the remaining
collection
• it is not to generate short-term revenue
(for example to meet a budget deficit)
• it is as a last resort after other sources of
funding have been thoroughly explored
• extensive prior consultation with sector
bodies has been undertaken
• the items under consideration lie outside
the museum’s established core collection
as defined in the collections policy.
Ring-fence any money raised as a result of
disposal through sale, if this exceptional
circumstance arises, solely and directly for
the benefit of the museum’s collection.
Money raised must be restricted to the
long-term sustainability, use and
development of the collection.
We can decide for ourselves whether what the council is poposing fits within the rules.
senseofsouthampton, Southampton says...
12:15pm Sat 18 Jul 09
southy, redbridge says...
12:43pm Sat 18 Jul 09
Vonnie wrote:southampton art is loan out but its more locally than national and very rare international.
Southampton owned artwork is already part of the national, international, and local lend/lease style of loaning out to other venues and art galleries, so do shut up, Southy. Get your facts right. Don't you remember the hoo-ha a few months ago, to which you may have contributed, regarding Southampton Police Dept returning Artwork because their budget would not allow them to pay the lease fees?? That is just one tiny example.
what would make more since would be to build an art gallery, and keep 3/4 off it on show at any one time, there be more money in a art gallery than there would be in a titanic museum over the long term, a titanic museum would make good money for a small amount of years, but an art gallery would go on making money for a long period off time, some thing like an art gallery would bring in people internationally in higher numbers over the long term.
Stephen J, Fareham says...
12:48pm Sat 18 Jul 09
senseofsouthampton wrote:I would agree if the plan was to create a new museum that could secure the future of the council's existing, diverse collections of real things from Southampton's past, important parts of which are deteriorating quickly. But I fear for the future of anything in the museum collections that doesn't have a Titanic link. Once they've got used to selling off paintings, it will be tempting to see anything else that's not directly related to the 'big project' as fair game for disposal.
Can anyone who is against this idea name one bit of art that is owned by Southampton? It makes perfect sense to sell the paintings if they are sat around gathering dust in favour of a plan that will boost visitor numbers to the city.
Interserie, Southampton says...
12:54pm Sat 18 Jul 09
£180 million !!!! What's this? Another Council fairytale?
Walk round the Art Gallery and look at the labels next to the paintings. Many were donations to the Gallery and the Council has no powers to sell them. Others are on "permanent loan" and are not the council's property.
Only a small % of the total were ever bought outright by the Council - mainly some 50 years ago. £180 million - pull the other one.
Compare the Councils - Southampton can't find money for a Titanic museum with stealing our city's art heritage whilst Eastleigh Council can raise £30 Million for developments at the home of Hampshire Cricket without spending a penny from the local taxpayers.
Makes you wonder who's running the asylum.
Pam W, Southampton says...
12:57pm Sat 18 Jul 09
allsaintsnocurves, Southampton says...
1:10pm Sat 18 Jul 09
No one will actually know the difference with a few being sold off but the city will benefit from a museum we should have had years ago!
It would have been different I think if the Tyrell and Green building development had gone ahead where the plan was to have an arts gallery. Until that happens the gallery isn't big enough and the money is needed now!
Some people just like complaining about things I think.
Paramjit Bahia, Southampton says...
2:05pm Sat 18 Jul 09
Instead of flogging the paintings People should be flogging the Tories and save the precious heritage.
Our art collection is one of the very few things left in Southampton to make it appear on the national stage and the Tories want to hand it over to their rich friends, who will buy it on the cheap under the excuse of current recession and then sell it at huge profit later. I suspect part of that profit will be donated back to the Conservative coffers.
Only way to save not only the art collection but our city, or whatever will be left of it after the conservative vultures have finished feasting, is to vote them and others like NuLabour who copy their Thatcherism OUT.
Otherwise if you keep on voting for the vultures you will get neither art nor the culture.
Ian24, Sholing says...
2:11pm Sat 18 Jul 09
It would be quite simple and much cheaper to run an attraction around the artwork. But Samuels wants to take take take while he is in power then blame blame blame when he is voted out.
Baybrit, San Francisco (via Southampton) says...
2:54pm Sat 18 Jul 09
Interserie wrote:There is no legal way that the Council would be able to sell art that does not belong to them, so this post seems a little petty, somewhat paranoid and a lot confusing.
Council Leader Samuels sounds like a throwback to the 1930s - what next? -burning books outside of the library. At present Southampton Art Gallery is widely regarded as one of the best in the United Kingdom. However this madcap scheme of Mr Samuels will mean that the City will lose access to the many travelling exhibitions which has visited the gallery over recent years attracting thousands of visitors. Who will want to lend to such a Council? Over the years I have built up a collection of art from which I have happily lent many items to Southampton Art Gallery. I would like Alec Samuels to be aware that unless he drops his proposal to sell paintings, the City will not see another piece from my collection and my plans to bequest part of my collection to the City Art Gallery will be cancelled. I am also urging other collectors and galleries to take similar action. Remember, not one painting, Mr Samuels.
'Burning books outside the library'? With all due respect, this is a ridiculous comment. Whatever Alec Samuels is suggesting, it is not the destruction of any art. Nor is he suggesting the wholesale and arbitrary disposal of any and all art. He seems to be posing the possibility of a selected sale of SOME art in order to be able to provide funds for a museum to remember yet another part of the citys rich maritime history. If the writer of this post then choses not to lend their art to the city then so be it but I suspect that city art gallery will still survive, will continue to attract important travelling exhibitions and will thrive with its reputation intact despite that 'loss'.
Stephen J, Fareham says...
3:05pm Sat 18 Jul 09
Paramjit Bahia wrote:Selling off art from the local gallery is not something from which Labour is immune. See Bury Council, 2006.
Pure blackmail, that is what Tories are trying to do when they say either flog the art collection or forget the museum. Didn’t that Tory Blair also use the similar trick to sell the Iraq war? Instead of flogging the paintings People should be flogging the Tories and save the precious heritage. Our art collection is one of the very few things left in Southampton to make it appear on the national stage and the Tories want to hand it over to their rich friends, who will buy it on the cheap under the excuse of current recession and then sell it at huge profit later. I suspect part of that profit will be donated back to the Conservative coffers. Only way to save not only the art collection but our city, or whatever will be left of it after the conservative vultures have finished feasting, is to vote them and others like NuLabour who copy their Thatcherism OUT. Otherwise if you keep on voting for the vultures you will get neither art nor the culture.
Vonnie, Southampton says...
3:10pm Sat 18 Jul 09
southy wrote:I totally agree with you about not selling an Art collection that has been, in the main, donated and/or bought from donations, and as a result of good management by the Trust Funds since the early 1920's, but you are wrong about where art work from Southampton's collections goes to. It is internationally loaned and good money is brought in to the Trust Funds that way.
Vonnie wrote: Southampton owned artwork is already part of the national, international, and local lend/lease style of loaning out to other venues and art galleries, so do shut up, Southy. Get your facts right. Don't you remember the hoo-ha a few months ago, to which you may have contributed, regarding Southampton Police Dept returning Artwork because their budget would not allow them to pay the lease fees?? That is just one tiny example.southampton art is loan out but its more locally than national and very rare international. what would make more since would be to build an art gallery, and keep 3/4 off it on show at any one time, there be more money in a art gallery than there would be in a titanic museum over the long term, a titanic museum would make good money for a small amount of years, but an art gallery would go on making money for a long period off time, some thing like an art gallery would bring in people internationally in higher numbers over the long term.
Southampton Councillors are Phillistines.
Redback, Southampton says...
3:38pm Sat 18 Jul 09
Baybrit wrote:I think you may be missing the point in part.
Interserie wrote:There is no legal way that the Council would be able to sell art that does not belong to them, so this post seems a little petty, somewhat paranoid and a lot confusing.
Council Leader Samuels sounds like a throwback to the 1930s - what next? -burning books outside of the library. At present Southampton Art Gallery is widely regarded as one of the best in the United Kingdom. However this madcap scheme of Mr Samuels will mean that the City will lose access to the many travelling exhibitions which has visited the gallery over recent years attracting thousands of visitors. Who will want to lend to such a Council? Over the years I have built up a collection of art from which I have happily lent many items to Southampton Art Gallery. I would like Alec Samuels to be aware that unless he drops his proposal to sell paintings, the City will not see another piece from my collection and my plans to bequest part of my collection to the City Art Gallery will be cancelled. I am also urging other collectors and galleries to take similar action. Remember, not one painting, Mr Samuels.
'Burning books outside the library'? With all due respect, this is a ridiculous comment. Whatever Alec Samuels is suggesting, it is not the destruction of any art. Nor is he suggesting the wholesale and arbitrary disposal of any and all art. He seems to be posing the possibility of a selected sale of SOME art in order to be able to provide funds for a museum to remember yet another part of the citys rich maritime history. If the writer of this post then choses not to lend their art to the city then so be it but I suspect that city art gallery will still survive, will continue to attract important travelling exhibitions and will thrive with its reputation intact despite that 'loss'.
An art collector lends his collection to a gallery because s/he feels that the wider public deserve to see it. If a gallery is depleted, then that collector may well feel that their collection would be better housed in a gallery of more prestige, and which attracts more visitors.
Essentially the thought is: If you're not bothered about your OWN works, why should I lend you mine?
I think that's a reasonable point of view personally.
Lone Ranger, Southampton says...
4:18pm Sat 18 Jul 09
Lets have a referendum on it.
Rob444, Southampton says...
4:30pm Sat 18 Jul 09
We already have a maritime museum (which, unfortunately, imposes a thatcheristic admission charge), so we don't need a dedicated titanic museum and can keep OUR art collection.
A win-win result all round.
mr.southampton, Southampton says...
5:50pm Sat 18 Jul 09
Condor Man wrote:Well I don't know who you're sources are but I'm hearing a different story. A few city schools certainly aren't happy with Capita's broadband charges.
mr.southampton wrote: Someone please get Alec Samuels et al out of power. This Tory administration has been a disaster. The council makes cuts in one area, sell offs in another, yet wastes money on costly deals with Capita. Here you go Echo.. open goal.. make a few FOI requests about the spiraling costs of the Cpita IT contract.The Capita deal has saved the council- and council tax payers a fortune. There's no money in the pot, either we mark the 100th anniversary of the Titanic or we keep a few paintings in a store room. Sadly there's not the cash for both.
There is a real danger of selling off a valuable art collection and creating a white elephant. After all Condor Man, you are, along with Alec Samuels, quite a free marketeer, so if there had been demand for a titanic museum/titanic experiience surely this would have been picked up by the private sector?
Alec Samuels and his administration are a disaster for this City.
If you need any evidence, take a look at this:
http://mattdeansoton
.blogspot.com/
flower49, Holbury says...
6:55pm Sat 18 Jul 09
mr.southampton, Southampton says...
7:50pm Sat 18 Jul 09
Nikki Goff, Totton says...
8:51pm Sat 18 Jul 09
Or have people got their hearts set on coveting certain works from the collection?
As for a purely Titanic museum, there is more to maritime history than just the Titanic.
Even the museum at Cobh where the ship stopped also, is an extensive museum of local history and other ocean liners.
St.DaveH, Southampton says...
10:54am Sun 19 Jul 09
Jenjo, Southampton says...
1:40pm Sun 19 Jul 09
Stephen J, Fareham says...
2:08pm Sun 19 Jul 09
Southampton, Southampton says...
4:52pm Sun 19 Jul 09
Condor Man wrote:Well well well, either you are a top bod in SCC that gets paid well or you know nothing. My mates who work for SCC are gobsmacked at what a mess CAPITA have done, as do the public, with awful call centre's.
mr.southampton wrote:The Capita deal has saved the council- and council tax payers a fortune.
Someone please get Alec Samuels et al out of power. This Tory administration has been a disaster. The council makes cuts in one area, sell offs in another, yet wastes money on costly deals with Capita. Here you go Echo.. open goal.. make a few FOI requests about the spiraling costs of the Cpita IT contract.
There's no money in the pot, either we mark the 100th anniversary of the Titanic or we keep a few paintings in a store room. Sadly there's not the cash for both.
Southampton, Southampton says...
4:52pm Sun 19 Jul 09
Condor Man wrote:Well well well, either you are a top bod in SCC that gets paid well or you know nothing. My mates who work for SCC are gobsmacked at what a mess CAPITA have done, as do the public, with awful call centre's.
mr.southampton wrote:The Capita deal has saved the council- and council tax payers a fortune.
Someone please get Alec Samuels et al out of power. This Tory administration has been a disaster. The council makes cuts in one area, sell offs in another, yet wastes money on costly deals with Capita. Here you go Echo.. open goal.. make a few FOI requests about the spiraling costs of the Cpita IT contract.
There's no money in the pot, either we mark the 100th anniversary of the Titanic or we keep a few paintings in a store room. Sadly there's not the cash for both.
MrGMan, Shirley says...
5:03pm Sun 19 Jul 09
I don't see why art which is owned by the taxpayers is sitting in a valut that we taxpayers cannot go and visit.
goard, Southampton says...
5:06pm Sun 19 Jul 09
goard
Paramjit Bahia, Southampton says...
6:59pm Sun 19 Jul 09
goard wrote:Goard,
I wanted to put a really beautiful work of art in a museum - it was worth thousands, but an employee at the B'mouth museum said 'don't bother we have thousands of valuables left by people and they never see the light of day, just gathering dust in the cellars'. I wonder if there is some agreement that these items are never sold but perhaps given back to families? goard
What you are saying is shocking but not surprising. I assure you most of us admire people like you who generously and voluntarily donate to local bodies. But it is sad that the authorities not only fail to appreciate the good deed but on top of that add insult to the injury by ignoring the wishes of the donors.
Our art collection is one example and parcels of expensive land donated for educational purposes (as was the case with old Aldermoor School in Lordshil) that have been sold for profit is another. This is immoral and scandalous appears to be going on all over the place.
Ungrateful local authorities who fail to appreciate donations and respect the wishes of donors are nothing but disgrace. Surely this must be having a knock on effects upon how many donations are made.
King Mush, Woolston says...
7:46pm Sun 19 Jul 09
Redback wrote:Sorry but it was much more than this simplistic putdown.
I don't want a museum dedicated solely to a massive failure. It was an expensive boat, that sank. The romanticism that has grown up around it is mawkish and more than a little desperate. Keep the art.
I cant be @rsed to explain again (did it before) but just do some reading on the wider picture.
The tragic (and avoidable) sinking brought about a much tighter safety profile as well as echoing the change in the class system of that time.
The clouds of war were gathering on the horizon and much was learned from the mistakes that surround the story.
Not forgetting Southampton's link with lost crew and much more
BrixtonSaint, London says...
8:58am Mon 20 Jul 09
The budget for this is derisory and should be put back up to the original £28m. Sell what's needed of the paintings, there'll still be plenty to satisfy the art lovers.
goard, Southampton says...
3:40pm Mon 20 Jul 09
wilson castaway, thornhill says...
2:55pm Tue 21 Jul 09
Jenjo, Southampton says...
10:05pm Wed 29 Jul 09
‘Sell art or no Titanic museum’ says council leader
|
|
Local Advertisers
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Pikey Pete, says...
8:40am Sat 18 Jul 09