council

Planning objection petition – River Lane, Leatherhead, Surrey

May 16th, 2011

The residents of River Lane, Leatherhead, Surrey, are in a legal battle over the inappropriate use of Green Belt land.

There has been a temporary gypsy and traveller site on the land for the past 8 years, having been granted temporary planning permission twice, under the grounds that Mole Valley District Council had the legal obligation to find an alternative site. The council failed to do so, having done no research at all until November 2010, and are now allowing the gypsy families to apply for permanent planning permission.

The site has been deemed by the Government Planning Inspector as “inappropriate development in the Green Belt” and it is paramount that this development is rejected in order to stop this becoming an example for the allowance of future similar developments.

This has been an ongoing battle for the last 8 years and it is coming to a conclusion this year, so PLEASE can you sign the petition and preserve the green belt of River Lane.

THIS IS A SERIOUS PLANNING ISSUE. THIS IS NOT AN ISSUE OF PREJUDICE. IT IS A LEGAL ISSUE.

THE LAND IS DESIGNATED GREEN BELT AND IT HAS BEEN AGREED BY THE PLANNING INSPECTOR THAT THE CURRENT SITUATION IS “INAPPRORIATE DEVELOPMENT IN THE GREEN BELT.”

The petition can be found at the following address: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/riverlaneleatherhead/

If you have any questions do not hesitate to contact us at claracuffe@aol.com

Thank you so much for your support,

The residents of River Lane

Share and Enjoy:

Dunfermline Building Society backs Highland Housing Fair

Mar 11th, 2009

by Editor.

No comments yet

So the Dunfermline Building Society emerges as probably the sole sponsor of this fiasco which is thought to have cost the tax payer some £3Million so far.

The farce recently attracted headline TV and Press comment following the approach to MSP’s at Holyrood Parliament for funding guarantees off the back of a grossly misleading brochure produced by its organisers claiming that substantial community facilities were in place when in actual fact the only community facility for the existing development of around 600 properties was a single post box.

Time for Housing Fair chairwoman Jean Urquhart to face up to the reality that the whole process has been flawed from start to finish and provides no community benefit whatsoever.

A building society has offered £15,000 to support a controversial show of innovative housing.

Stone House, designed by NORD Architects

The fair organisers claim The Development is being organised to showcase innovative designs

Scotland’s Housing Expo – The Highland Housing Fair is to be held at Balvonie Braes, Inverness, in 2010.

Dunfermline Building Society’s offer of sponsorship was announced at the latest meeting of the fair’s board of directors in Inverness.

Complaints about how Highland Council handled the project were rejected by the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman.

In April 2008, two members of the public raised concerns with the SPSO about how outline planning was dealt with.

They said there had been inadequate consultation and permission for the site should not have been granted.

The SPSO declined to uphold 11 complaints and concerns about the council’s handling of the application.

Housing Fair chairwoman Jean Urquhart said: “This is a great indication of the kind of support within the private sector for such a ground-breaking project.

“Dunfermline Building Society are one of the first to come forward showing great foresight to give money and support to the Housing Expo.”

BBC original article link

Share and Enjoy:

West Lothian Council Sleaze charge alleged

Jan 5th, 2009

by Editor.

2 comments

Sleaze charge rocks West Lothian Council

Dec 24 2008 by Alistair Watson, West Lothian Courier

AN award winning council is in turmoil as allegations of corruption and sleaze threaten to tear it apart.

Council leader Peter Johnston faces calls for his resignation after Councillor Gordon Beurskens was reported to police over his role in an £8 million planning application for a mixed development scheme at Whitrigg, Whitburn.

Councillor Beurskens, who helps prop up the SNP administration, was working as a consultant for Aftondale Ltd, the firm who lodged the application, while sitting on the local authority’s development committee.

Councillors on the committee must show impartiality on planning applications but the Action to Save St John’s councillor is at the centre of a row regarding a financial interest in the plan being approved.

Despite the plan being rejected by planning officials the proposal was pushed through by councillors at a meeting last month with the casting vote coming from SNP committee chairman Jim Dickson. Councillor Dickson has since stood down from his post pending an independent inquiry.

Graeme Morrice, Labour group leader on the council, claims the allegations of wrong-doing go straight to the heart of the administration. He has called on Councillor Johnston to step down while the police and Standards Commission investigate.

But the council leader called the complaints a politically motivated campaign from the Labour party to discredit his administration.

He added that he was unaware of any substance to the allegations, which will also be investigated in an independent inquiry.

Councillor Johnston continued: “I think it’s important to recognise that the council has no evidence whatsoever to substantiate the claims made by Labour councillors in relation to irregularities by Councillor Beurskens.

“The council has, quite rightly I think, passed them on to the police for them to investigate.

“I would expect any responsible political party to wait for the results of the inquiry before celebrating.

“I am confident that the matters will be fully investigated and he will be completely exonerated.

“The results will be fully published and we will do that in an open and transparent manner and there will be no hiding anything.

“I think the political administration will come out of this clear and clean.”

It has also been revealed that council leader Peter Johnston was copied into e-mails sent to planning staff by Councillor Beurskens in his capacity as a consultant on the Whitrigg plans.

In some he uses choice and threatening language and in one he wrote it would take him “two minutes to change the complexion of a council”.

Councillor Johnston added: “I can’t condone his use of language in the e-mails. It wasn’t appropriate for council officers to be addressed in this way.

“We want the officers working in an environment that they are completely comfortable with.

“I think everyone will learn lessons from this. One of them will be that officers are to be treated with respect and not as political footballs.”

Labour leader, Councillor Morrice, said the council leader couldn’t distance himself from the actions of those members of his administration.

He added: “These actions go to the heart of the administration. It has now been revealed that Councillor Johnston was aware of these alleged wrong doings and did nothing about it. He is therefore complicit.

“Public confidence in the planning system is essential and people need to know that they can trust those who are taking the decisions.

“Before the SNP, Conservative and single issue local hospital councillors took over control of the council from Labour at the election, West Lothian Council was regarded as one of the best politically managed and highly regarded local authorities in Britain.

“Today, this reputation has been left in tatters.”

As the Courier went to press, Councillor Beurskens was unavailable for comment.

A West Lothian Council spokesman commented: “A serious complaint about a planning issue was made to the council. Given the nature of the allegation we have asked the police to investigate. As this is now an on-going enquiry it is not appropriate to comment further.”

Link to original article

Share and Enjoy:

Tax Payers Alliance – Council Spending Uncovered: Councils spend average of £1 million a year on publicity

Dec 13th, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

In December 2007, the TaxPayers Alliance produced the first ever examination of the growth of town hall spending on publicity over the last decade, which is itemised in the annual accounts of the 450-plus local authorities in the UK. It found that councils had doubled their spending on publicity, creating a £450 million publicity machine, at the same time as doubling council tax. A year later, in the midst of the economic crisis, the first paper in the new Council Spending Uncovered series updates the data for the last financial year.

The report, released today, shows that the average local authority spends almost £1 million (£971,985) on publicity. There are 6 local authorities spending more than £5 million on publicity and the 20 councils spending the most money on publicity accumulated an over £100 million bill. However, it’s not all bad news. At least 217 councils have decreased spending on publicity, collectively cutting over £25 million from their budgets and proving that councils can cut unnecessary spending. To read the full report, please click here.

The media coverage is coming in thick and fast, and so far includes:

The Sun, £430m for UK councils’ PR

Teletext, £430m for council publicity

Daily Express, Town Hall spin doctors wasting £430m of our money on propaganda

BBC News Online, Council ‘spin budgets’ condemned

Daily Telegraph, Councils spend £1m each on spin and publicity

The Mirror, £430m bill to promote town halls

ConservativeHome, Mark Wallace: Councils spend £1 million each on PR

Hull Daily Mail, £4.5m spent by council on ‘propaganda’

Belfast Telegraph, Councils shell out £4m for publicity in a year

Liverpool Daily Post, £7.5m bill for council publicity

Birmingham Post, Taxpayers slam councils for millions spent on spin

Western Mail, Big council bill to make penny drop

Watford Observer, County council ‘spin’ budget revealed

Evening Standard, Councils spending £65m on public relations in year

Ealing Times, Ealing’s PR spend in top ten per cent

South Wales Echo, South Wales councils spent at total of £4.3m on publicity last year

Kent Messenger, Publicity costs reined in – but KCC still among the big spenders

St Alban’s & Harpenden Review, Council’s PR spend revealed

Boston Standard, Lincolnshire council named in top 10 publicity spenders

Brand Republic, Pressure group slams councils’ adspend

LocalGov.co.uk, Group slams councils £1M publicity bill

Politics.co.uk, Average council spends £1 million on advertising

Southern Daily Echo, Hampshire’s Councils £12m bill for publicity

Wigan Evening Post, Cost of council publicity has gone up 77%

TPA spokesmen also appeared on BBC London, BBC Radio Humberside, BBC Radio Essex, ITV Central, ITV North East, BBC Radio Solent, Time FM and Town 102 FM

Gordon Brown responds to the TPA

You may remember TPA Campaign Manager Susie Squire’s ‘Ask the PM’ question, which was included in the bulletin a few weeks ago.

Thanks to all your votes, Gordon has answered – well, sort of. He posted this last night.

Susie is in the process of compiling a video response, but you may have noticed there are a few things he has neglected to mention. Yes, depsite that winning smile Gordon, you can’t get anything past us! Even by official estimates, our current debt stands at £633 billion. But, when you include such off balance-sheet costs as PFI debt created under Brown (£110 billion), the Nuclear Decomissioning bill (£73 billion), Public Sector Pensions (£1,071 billion) and Network Rail (£20 billion) our debt adds up to a whopping £1.9 trillion, or 129% of GDP.

Crucially, Mr Brown doesn’t answer Susie’s question. Ultimately, Britain’s economic picture, as shown by the above figures, is bad enough. But what about going forward? The picture is bleak. Alistair Darling announced in the recent pre Budget report that a gigantic £512 billion will be added to this our nation’s debt. This will amount to more money (taking into account RPI inflation) than we borrowed to win World War 1. This is terrifying, as it will double official debt to £1 trillion, and push up the cost of servicing our debt from £30.8 billion to £40 billion. The longer term implications of this are higher interest rates – markets will decide we are not such a safe economic bet any more, sterling will devalue further, and everyone will feel even worse off than they do now.

But the real question is: why all this borrowing in the first place? Because the other side of this equation is that public spending has gone through the roof under Brown. And if we constantly have to feed this government’s addiction to a big state and a bloated, costly public sector, we won’t ever be able to stop the steam train of debt.

A bittersweet victory for the ‘No’ campaign

It was announced this afternoon that the people of Greater Manchester voted in force against the proposed congestion charge, with the 53.2% (1,030,000) turnout voting overwhelmingly against this additional road tax.

No less than 79% of those who voted wanted to reject the charge, and no more than 28% voted yes in one any local authority area. This landslide victory marks the death of the Manchester TIF bid and has hopefully discouraged other areas - not least the West Midlands councils - from further pursuing this unpopular scheme.

Yet, though our congratulations go out to the No campaign, it is worth noting that this is a very bittersweet victory with huge amounts already having been spent on a project that was disliked from its inception. Though families in Greater Manchester will no longer have to pay the hefty £1,200 per year that a congestion charge would mean, a startling £34million has already been spent consulting, debating, drawing-up and promoting the TIF bid according to the Drivers Alliance, all funded by ordinary taxpayers. It just makes it worse that the very residents whove paid for this road pricing ambition seem to have been dead against it from the start, and in the end this £34million bought 218,860 yes votes thats £155 each.

This money has been frittered away by those with a blind commitment to the congestion charge, encouraged by those who stood to benefit. Perhaps, at this very moment the proponents of road charging are busy wondering how to bring its spectre back to life with a different guise and new spin and, if they manage a successful resuscitation, lets hope our councils recognise it for what it is and remember this Manchester vote.

Letters to follow up our reports

As you will have seen in the papers, on the radio or local TV today, our report on local council publicity spending has hit the headlines. But we need your help to follow up our reports with short, sharp letters to your local paper making the points that councils spend and waste too much of our money. TPA activist Bruce Lawson emailed in a letter he got in the Shropshire Star to promote our Public Sector Rich List 2008. You can read his letter here. If you get any letters printed in your local paper, do let us know. Weve already seen here the publicity our supporters can get when they write into their local papers.

2009 Action Days

Were busy compiling a list of leafleting and petition days across the country for 2009. If youd like us to have an action day in your area with other TPA supporters and campaigners, email our grassroots coordinator Tim Aker and well organise an action day near you.

In response to last weeks bulletin we have action days already booked for 2009. The dates and venues are:
Swanage 6 February and 30 April
Shipley 6 June
If youd like to come to these campaign days, please email Tim.

Bristol and South West TPA branch established

Last Saturday our Bristol branch met to formally set up a branch to monitor Bristol council and, for the time being, other councils in the South West. If youd like to get involved please email our organiser James Barlow. You can keep up with the campaign by visiting their blog.

A council is not a bank

We found this week that Lancashire County Council has been using taxpayers money to lend to other councils in the UK. Today TPA activist Steve Atkinson found through a Freedom of Information request that Cumbria County Council has £112 million deposited in foreign and domestic banks. You can ask Lancashire County Councils leader why theyre lending to other councils instead of cutting tax here.

Stoke Council rejects TPA offer to find savings

TPA supporter and Stoke councillor Gavin Webb recently tabled a motion at Stoke Councils full council meeting inviting the TPA to come in and find savings in the council budget. Sadly, the motion failed Stokes councillors are clearly happy with politics as usual and higher taxes for all. You can read our blog on the debate and Gavins comments here.

Best of the blogs

Campaign: Leek TPA Action Day attracts attention
Campaign: The us and them Olympics
Better Government: Fiddling with Human Rights Law
Better Government: Ageing Britain
Burning our Money: Servicing The Government’s Debt
Non-job of the Week: Non-job of the week

www.taxpayersalliance.com

Share and Enjoy:

Construction Council to be established by CBI

Jul 12th, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

The CBI has announced that it will be enhancing the role it undertakes on behalf of the construction industry.

Following discussions with the major construction companies, the CBI has agreed to set up a Construction Council chaired by John McDonough, chief executive of Carillion plc and vice chairman of the CBI’s Public Services Strategy Board.

The Council, which will represent contractors, house builders, civil engineers, component and product manufacturers, designers and support services, will begin its work in September.

The CBI’s director-general, Richard Lambert said: “The UK construction industry consists of over 250,000 firms, employing 2.1 million people in a wide variety of roles, and accounts for almost 9 per cent of GDP.

“Until now, this important industry has not had the single unified voice it deserves.

“The Construction Council will work closely with the major trade bodies to strengthen their efforts to represent the construction industry and ensure its concerns are clearly heard.”

John McDonough, who will lead the work of the new Council, added: “These are challenging times for the construction industry. While many companies continue to enjoy good markets in the UK and overseas, others, particularly those with exposure to the UK residential market, are facing challenging times.

“Setting up the new Construction Council is, therefore, particularly timely. The Council’s new strategic role at the heart of the CBI will enable the whole sector to benefit from the CBI’s unrivaled access at the highest levels in Whitehall, Westminster and Brussels.”
The Construction Council will be considering a broad range of issues including the economy, energy, land use planning, procurement, climate change and skills.

Share and Enjoy:

Staffordshire residential home fiasco

May 18th, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

Golden oldies

The Express and Star reports that residents of a Staffordshire residential home deemed ‘not fit for purpose’ have been moved out to a luxury care home at a cost of £1,000-per-person-per-week.

Staffordshire County Council shied away from revealing just how many former residents of Billbrook House are now living in the £21million Sunrise Residential Village in Tettenhall, which can charge residents up to £50,000 per year, and their reluctance to release the numbers really just says it all.

Billbrook House was closed despite campaigners’ pleas, as the council insisted that they could not afford to keep it open, and yet so many private residential care homes potter along perfectly efficiently for years and years. We are left to wonder how Billbrook House got into such an unsalvageable state in the first place and why taxayers’ are having to shoulder these huge costs.

One thing is for sure, failing to maintain this residential home has certainly cost them dear, as the paper also reports that twenty residents have chosen to move to the 5* Wergs Road complex, with plasma TVs and silver service.

No-one resents these elderly people decent accommodation, let’s just make that clear, but this situation should have been foreseen by the council and more suitable provision should have been arranged. Must these people be moved again once a more inexpensive solution is found? Or will the council continue to pay these extortionate fees for as long as they have to?

This is just another costly muddle that could have been avoided by proper planning, but when planning isn’t paramount because costly mistakes have few consequences and the coffers can be boosted quite easily by the public purse, situations like this will arise time and time again.

Article by Fiona McEvoy on May 16, 2008

Share and Enjoy:

Audit Scotland Auditors to probe Highland Housing Fair payout

Apr 2nd, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

Watchdog to assess council input
Press and Journal – Published: 02/04/2008

AUDITORS are to investigate the use of public money to establish the controversial Highland Housing Fair planned for former greenbelt at Balvonie Braes on the south side of Inverness.

The accounting watchdog Audit Scotland has asked the local auditor to assess Highland Council’s contribution to starting up the not-for-profit development company the Highland Housing Alliance (HHA), which is now deemed a private operation despite substantial funding from the public purse to establish an expo at which a fundamentally private housing development will be exhibited.

Prompted by public concern, including that of various Inverness councillors, SNP MSP Dave Thompson wrote to Audit Scotland requesting an investigation into the sale of land by construction giant Tulloch to the HHA.

Audit Scotland has said it is unable to audit the HHA because it is “not within its remit”. But it is able to instigate an audit of the council, which part-funded the project.

Mr Thompson told the Press and Journal: “I support the fair and wish it well, but I am pleased that my concerns over the land transactions have been taken seriously.

“Audit Scotland has contacted the council’s external auditors so that they are aware of our concerns, and they have been asked to establish the background and to assess whether there are any issues arising from the council’s involvement which require further investigation.

“Of course, the auditors will not consider planning-related matters and those issues reportedly under consideration by the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO). But I very much look forward to hearing the outcome of their investigations."

A spokeswoman for Audit Scotland said: “An audit of HHA is not within our remit. However, we do audit Highland Council and have an interest in the council’s arrangements for monitoring how its money is used to support other organisations.

“With this in mind, in line with our routine procedures the correspondence has recently been passed to the council’s external auditors and they will seek to establish the background and assess whether there are any issues arising from the council’s involvement which require further investigation.”

She added: “The correspondence that we received refers to planning concerns and to consideration of issues by the SPSO. We have advised Mr Thompson that the auditors will not consider planning related matters and those issues reportedly under consideration by the SPSO.”

Share and Enjoy:

council

Planning objection petition – River Lane, Leatherhead, Surrey

Dunfermline Building Society backs Highland Housing Fair