Saturday, September 08, 2007
I've heard something similar before...
Below are links that I have posted relating to articles I came across in the Yorkshire Post and other publications about the infamous 'Donnygate' scandal.
Before you read them, think about all of the things that we have posted on this blog site about the actions and behaviour of Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council.Think about the planning meeting for Coatham this April. The planning meeting that was described by the now Labour leader of the council as ''tainted''. The meeting that the same man said would "come back to haunt the council and individuals in it". The planning meeting that saw members of the committee be 'canvassed' by an anonymous letter before it advising that "the members should pass it at all costs" and that saw the planning committee members treat to a lunch and drinks before it. A planning meeting that saw the developer and council officers state that the developer was going to provide leisure as part of the scheme, when in truth, there has been no 106 agreement signed between them that ties the developer to providing anything other than houses.
A planning committee meeting that saw officers presenting the report, not give the committee the full facts. A planning meeting that was pushed through at all costs during purdah, so breaking planning law, when there was 'seemingly' no need to because the council only had to wait another three weeks for the local elections to be finished. A planning meeting that since it was held has seen both the Chief Executive and the project manager for the scheme resign their positions.
A planning decision that saw planning consent be granted in May, after the council had gone directly against the Environment Agencies planning condition and added their own more lenient planning condition to the consent!
Think about how the Coatham scheme was never meant to be a housing scheme at all.How the brief they issued in 2002 stated it was to be a leisure development. Keep in mind that although the councils brief was a leisure brief and leisure developers answered that brief, the council ignored them and went with a housing developer that now wants to deliver a housing estate. Ask why the countries biggest housing developer answered a leisure brief and why the council wanted them so much when they have no obligation whatsoever to provide any leisure facilities?
Keep in mind that although the MP called the scheme botched before the local elections and that there was no money for any sports facilities that had been promised for three years, and the Labour leader had called the process tainted and had last year called for it to be taken back to the drawing board, no investigation has been called for, the scheme has not been halted or taken back to the drawing board. Infact according to the local press a few weeks ago, its now got cross party backing?
Think about these things. Then read the links below about one of the biggest council corruption cases ever recorded in this country. Does any of it sound familiar?
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/viewarticle.aspx?sectionid=55&articleid=296192
http://www.redpepper.org.uk/inv-archive/May2002.html
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=21321§ioncode=1
Before you read them, think about all of the things that we have posted on this blog site about the actions and behaviour of Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council.Think about the planning meeting for Coatham this April. The planning meeting that was described by the now Labour leader of the council as ''tainted''. The meeting that the same man said would "come back to haunt the council and individuals in it". The planning meeting that saw members of the committee be 'canvassed' by an anonymous letter before it advising that "the members should pass it at all costs" and that saw the planning committee members treat to a lunch and drinks before it. A planning meeting that saw the developer and council officers state that the developer was going to provide leisure as part of the scheme, when in truth, there has been no 106 agreement signed between them that ties the developer to providing anything other than houses.
A planning committee meeting that saw officers presenting the report, not give the committee the full facts. A planning meeting that was pushed through at all costs during purdah, so breaking planning law, when there was 'seemingly' no need to because the council only had to wait another three weeks for the local elections to be finished. A planning meeting that since it was held has seen both the Chief Executive and the project manager for the scheme resign their positions.
A planning decision that saw planning consent be granted in May, after the council had gone directly against the Environment Agencies planning condition and added their own more lenient planning condition to the consent!
Think about how the Coatham scheme was never meant to be a housing scheme at all.How the brief they issued in 2002 stated it was to be a leisure development. Keep in mind that although the councils brief was a leisure brief and leisure developers answered that brief, the council ignored them and went with a housing developer that now wants to deliver a housing estate. Ask why the countries biggest housing developer answered a leisure brief and why the council wanted them so much when they have no obligation whatsoever to provide any leisure facilities?
Keep in mind that although the MP called the scheme botched before the local elections and that there was no money for any sports facilities that had been promised for three years, and the Labour leader had called the process tainted and had last year called for it to be taken back to the drawing board, no investigation has been called for, the scheme has not been halted or taken back to the drawing board. Infact according to the local press a few weeks ago, its now got cross party backing?
Think about these things. Then read the links below about one of the biggest council corruption cases ever recorded in this country. Does any of it sound familiar?
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/viewarticle.aspx?sectionid=55&articleid=296192
http://www.redpepper.org.uk/inv-archive/May2002.html
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=21321§ioncode=1
// posted by Chris McGlade @ 7:36 AM 
