Middlesbrough Westgarth Club demolition 'symbolic loss' for music
Mr Allcock said he was "gutted" to hear the venue could be demolished."This place isn't just bricks and mortar – it's where countless Teessiders fell in love with live music," he said.
The Tees Music Alliance, a charitable organisation in nearby Stockton aimed at promoting music, said losing the location would be a sad reminder of what was once there and put a "definite end to the prospect of it ever reopening as a venue".Programme and Venue Manager Chris Cobain said the prospect was sad as "it's a building with a lot of memories attached to it". "It was one of only a handful of spaces across Teesside where emerging talent could be showcased."Mr Cobain said the real sadness came at the point when it closed its doors, ending its use as a venue.
The social club, which was founded in 1911, closed amid rising costs following the Covid pandemic.Applicants Biz Investments Limited had previously said it wanted to clear the site to make way for "future development".However, Middlesbrough Council planners said they wanted "further detail on the restoration of the site to prevent long-term visual harm to the character of the area".If approved, demolition would take approximately five weeks and involve some temporary road closures.Biz Investments Limited has been contacted for comment.
Follow BBC Tees on X, Facebook, Nextdoor and Instagram.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
2 minutes ago
- The Independent
‘Owning a £500k home does not make you rich': Readers challenge Reeves' property tax plan
Independent readers are divided over proposals being considered by Chancellor Rachel Reeves for a new tax on homes worth more than £500,000, with many questioning whether the threshold would unfairly affect ordinary homeowners rather than the truly wealthy. Several argued that in high-priced areas, £500,000 is not a marker of wealth, with smaller homes often costing more than that. 'In London and parts of the South East, owning a £500k home… does not make you rich,' noted one reader, while others suggested a higher threshold or regional variations to avoid penalising middle-class families. Some readers welcomed the idea of targeting unearned property wealth, arguing that decades of house price rises have created inequalities that younger generations cannot overcome. 'Taxing property, targeting unearned income, is what the government needs to do,' one wrote. Others warned the tax could have unintended consequences, including discouraging downsizing, reducing housing market mobility, and forcing homeowners to raise asking prices to offset the levy. There were also concerns that pensioners or couples on modest incomes could be hit unfairly. Across the board, readers emphasised the need for a fair approach that distinguishes genuine wealth from ordinary homeowners. Here's what you had to say: Regional house price disparities I have recently moved from Berkshire to Yorkshire. The semi-detached house I've bought was £200,000 in Yorkshire, but the equivalent and possibly terraced house in Berkshire would have been £500,000. So this tax would certainly be a detriment to workers in the South East. The salary weighting is far from compensating for the house price difference. Over a £1,000,000 might be a more appropriate national figure, but possibly there would need to be some regional differences. This could also be reflected in IHT rates for inherited property. The problem that really needs to be addressed is ensuring that richer people actually pay tax on all their income and/or property, and that they are not able to legally "evade" tax using loopholes. DavidWR Property wealth tax concerns A tax on the unearned wealth of property due to the housing market of the last 40 years is a sensible tax. However, £500,000 is too low. It will bring many people who are just making ends meet into paying a tax they can't afford. In many parts of the country, especially the South East, £500k will barely get you a two-bed terrace house. If a couple has scrimped and saved to buy one in the last few years and can just afford the mortgage, they may end up being stuck in a property they can't afford to sell. That will impact both job mobility and the housing market. Maybe raise it to £750k to ensure it's only the genuinely wealthy that pay it. Tabbers Redistribution of unearned property wealth A lot of people are missing the point… too much of the nation's wealth has been tied up in property, with huge increases in prices over the last 20–30 years, all to be passed on to siblings. Younger generations without rich parents don't stand a chance. The government has no choice but to try and extract this unearned income and attempt to redistribute it to give other people a future. Taxing property, targeting unearned income, is what the government needs to do (and ignore the naysayers). ChrisMatthews Regional variation needed £500K is far too low… no way is this a wealth tax, more just about managing tax. The average cost of a home around here is about £450K, and that is a two-bed terrace. Surely the price should not be a blanket one but reflect different areas? mindful Impact on downsizing All that is going to do is make it far more likely that people in larger houses won't downsize, leading to increases in the value of those houses as the market dries up. The cost of moving house is already stopping many pensioners from downsizing. The level should be far higher or adjusted for regional differences at the very least. KrakenUK Inefficient housing stock In the south of England, developers only want to build large homes as that's where they can make the most profit. They justify the need for large homes by stating there is a terrible shortfall. In reality, there are millions of large homes in the UK with single elderly people rattling about in them, when a smaller, more efficient, quality home would make far more sense. Older people balk at the thought of selling up and paying loads in Stamp Duty for their new home. A new 'selling' tax will just cement this inglorious cycle. Hardly Surprised Council tax outdated This Council Tax was a last-minute replacement for the Poll Tax. It has become as unpopular because it is based on property prices nearly 35 years ago. Things have moved on since then, and so should this tax system. jadfg Illusion of wealth through property The illusion that you create wealth while sitting on your backside checking Zoopla to see how much your house has gone up has to be broken. Work creates wealth. Property prices just redistribute it unfairly. The worst result of house price booms is the emergence of millions of little property empires of buy-to-let investors who retire at 45 and contribute nothing thereafter. Ironically, they end up renting to each other's kids, but their imagination doesn't stretch that far. Carolan Middle-class southern households Labour seem determined to lose all support everywhere. In London and parts of the South East, owning a £500k home, which is often smaller than a £300k home up north, does not make you rich. This is partially about trying to win over people who call middle-class southerners 'the London elite'. Has Starmer not realised that no amount of red meat can satisfy the rabid? They just grow bigger and stronger on it. Starmer and co are reluctant to penalise the super-rich who can get rich after their term in office or use their media clout to hound them out. BrotherChe Economic warning More adjusting of the net curtains while the house crumbles… Prof Richard Wolff and Analyst Sean Foo on China dumping increasingly worthless US bonds, but after Japan and China, the UK, the third largest holder of worthless bonds, is buying more – collapse is on the horizon, especially as Trump blunders with little understanding of the impact: Meanwhile, here in the UK, our chancellor is buying US Treasury Bonds like there's no tomorrow! At the same time, we are told we are so skint we'll have to cut back on help for the disabled. This will wreck our economy – all to try and crawl to Trump, who hates them! Dolphins Impact on pensioners A property tax doesn't take account of residents' incomes. Four wage-earners in a £499k property would not pay, but a couple of pensioners in a £501k property would have to starve – and freeze – to death. Lucy Lastic Property as investment People look to accumulate profit in house ownership to compensate for low wages. If their gaff is going up by 5 per cent year on year, they're quids in and can retire in style. Lots of people own houses as a business – what percentage of homeowners actually live in that home? Stop anyone owning more than one house, especially foreign buyers. We are rife with investors dispossessing us here. covergo Want to share your views
Telegraph
3 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Noisy employees irritating older workers is ‘not age harassment'
Older workers who are disturbed by 'noisy and disruptive' younger colleagues are not the victims of age harassment, a tribunal has ruled. Employees in their 20s who socialise during office hours and spend time on their mobile phones are not breaking workplace equality rules, an employment judge said. The ruling came in the case of Catherine Ritchie, an administrator in her 60s, who took her bosses to an employment tribunal after they 'allowed' her younger co-workers to stand around and socialise during work hours. Ms Ritchie said she found it difficult to watch the 'extreme time-wasting' by her 'boisterous' colleagues who were mostly in their 20s and 30s. Employment Judge Sally Cowen dismissed Ms Ritchie's claims and said that it is 'not reasonable' to assume that loud behaviour in the office is age-related harassment. Instead, the judge said that it was unfair of Ms Ritchie to project her own standards of working onto her colleagues. 'Extreme time wasting' The tribunal, held in Watford, was told that Ms Ritchie started working as a booking administrator for Goom Electrical in December 2020. She was the oldest person in the workplace at 66 when she joined. From September 2021, Ms Ritchie told a manager that she found the office to be a 'very noisy environment' and that it was 'distracting' when she was trying to make calls. The administrator said that she found it 'unprofessional' that her colleagues engaged in personal conversations 'when they ought to be working'. In an email, she said that her colleagues did not have the correct work ethic and that it was difficult to watch 'extreme time wasting and low productivity'. She also said that her colleagues had their phones out on their desks and were often standing around chatting. Ms Ritchie said her colleagues were 'not paid to socialise'. Complaint to HR In early 2022, Ms Ritchie was allegedly told by one manager that she should concentrate on reaching her call targets and that 'she should not concern herself with the problems of others'. In July of that year, Ms Ritchie asked to work remotely to avoid 'the noise and disruption' and the following month she wrote a grievance to HR. Ms Ritchie said that her head was 'pounding' at the end of the working day and that she believed she may have been suffering from dysphonia, a medical term for a hoarse voice. Shortly afterwards, she went on sick leave and in September 2022 she resigned. The administrator attended a grievance meeting after she left the company in which she complained that she had 'not been respected' when she asked her colleagues to be quiet. Her grievance was partially upheld and her employers said that they were working to resolve the noise levels. Managers failed to intervene Ms Ritchie took the company to the tribunal, claiming age discrimination, harassment related to age, and public interest disclosure, among others. During the proceedings, Ms Ritchie complained that the 120 calls she was expected to make every day were an example of discrimination, as older people might be more susceptible to arthritis and would struggle to sit still for long periods. She also complained that one of the managers had failed to intervene when staff were behaving in a 'noisy and boisterous' manner. Instead, she said one manager 'allowed' the loud behaviour and had even 'joined in'. The judge said she took into account that these actions took place shortly after offices had reopened following the Covid pandemic.
BBC News
3 minutes ago
- BBC News
Super League 2026 line-up set for October reveal
Super League's 2026 club line-up will be confirmed on Thursday, 16 October, the Rugby Football League (RFL) has top flight is set to expand from 12 to 14 teams in time for next season, with the expansion taking place by combining the current club grading system with an independent have until next Tuesday in order to register their intent to apply for one of the two new spots, while clubs must supply all relevant information in a formal application by 12 addition to the club grading system's criteria, the league also said the panel would judge applications against each club's financial performance in 2025, as well as their financial performance and sustainability forecasts for 2026 to 2028 and their ability to "field a competitive team in 2026 and beyond".The additional criteria comes as Salford Red Devils' financial difficulties continue to plague their season, with last Sunday's fixture against Wakefield Trinity being called off as the club only had two senior players 2025 campaign has played out against the backdrop of prolonged financial issues, culminating in 14 first-team players leaving the club while they have regularly fielded team line-ups filled with youth players, conceding 940 points in 21 league games this term. Members of independent panel confirmed Clubs have been graded under media giant IMG and Rugby League Commercial's 'Reimagining Rugby League' initiative in the past two seasons, but only 2025's league structure has been decided by its criteria, which saw London replaced by Wakefield in the top flight for this the system, Super League, Championship and League One clubs are assessed based on points calculated by on and off-field performance and this system is set to be used alongside an independent panel to decide which clubs will form the expanded Super League chair Lord Jonathan Caine will be two fellow non-executive RFL directors, Abi Ekoku and Dermot Power, as well as RFL chief executive Tony Sutton and interim head of legal Graeme Rugby League Commercial's managing director Rhodri Jones and Peter Hutton, a senior independent non-executive director of RL Commercial and Super League (Europe) Board member, complete the panel's seven members."I am honoured to have been asked to chair the panel to determine whether the Betfred Super League expands from 12 to 14 in 2026 and, if so, which clubs will take up the 13th and 14th positions in the competition," Caine said."This panel consists of individuals with the considerable knowledge and expertise necessary to ensure that the process is both thorough and robust. All of our proceedings will be conducted on the basis of absolute fairness, rigorous impartiality between the applicants, total independence and, of necessity, complete confidentiality."
