Traveller Sites: Hart Village

[Kato]

I think where ever it was it was going to cause objection, it is just currently placed at the two most unsuitable sites based on the councils own criteria.  I think the fact it is a small community proves that it is an easy target, any other area would have had thousands of people protesting and they wouldnt need our pensioners to show up or our farmers to wave their pitchforks.

The funniest thing about all of this is that the council does not allow real reasons for objection to be taken into account, instead a list is created of allowed and not allowed objections.  Of course people are worried about crime, house prices, the area becoming over run, people not visitng, the 2 pubs dying off and the general quality of life. 

Lots of people walk in the village on weekend and cycle through it, come here to eat and have a drink in the countryside a little bit away from the town, walk their dogs and just have a wander around taking pictures.  Its a nice place and open for people to visit in relative safety and they do.  I cant say the same about the other areas but we all share the same concerns where ever the site is placed as they will travel  freely around the town exploring it, theres not much in Hart for them to be too occupied with.  If the village becomes a seldom visited shabby part of the town it really will be a shame, I hope that doesnt happen whatever the outcome of the travelers site debacle is.

[steveL]

There's an interesting document floating round, a newsletter from the Foggy Furze Councillors Christpher Akers-Belcher, Kevein Cranney and Kaylee Sirs praising themselves up for the way that they fought to have Brenda Road(around B&Q) discounted as the preferred site for the Travellers.

Under Drummond's Cabinet, the Brenda Road site had been chosen as the most suitable site largely because it was already where the Travellers went and if it could be converted to an official site with proper facilities then that would be good enough.

The three Labour Councillor's fought against the site because it was in their ward (even though the travellers had already been there for donkeys years) and this was what triggered the current selection process.
Cllr Peter Jackson infamously screamed 'not in my f***i*g backgarden' at the meeting when he first realised that his own Wiltshire Way was on the original list.

Two glaring examples of Not In My Back Yard . . . but OK in Yours.

[steveL]

"The funniest thing about all of this is that the council does not allow real reasons for objection to be taken into account, instead a list is created of allowed and not allowed objections."

To be fair to the council, it's not them who set the criteria for valid objections. It's a combination of the Planning Inspectorate/Government who do this. It's not often appreciated that the scope for our local Planning Committee to reject planning applications is extremely limited because they are bound by criteria that come from elsewhere. If they do object, knowing that they are going against laid down criteria, then they leavee themselves wide open to losing any appeal complete with the hefty bill that would come with it.

Having said that, it is this same insistence on observing set criteria which makes any appeal over Traveller sites in Hart so win-able because following the selection criteria is clearly what the Finance and Policy Committee has NOT done.

[beanzontoast]

Just came away from the Hart Ward meeting, AB was shouted down to resign, Hart Ward was choosen for the Gypsy site most probably for the reason stated on this site namely less fall out for the Labour, especially when one person present mentioned Manor Ward election and said he had seen the Labour candidates leaflet which stated we have worked very hard to make sure the Gypsy site did not come to the Manor Ward, It`s a blatant stitch up for the Hart Ward and people vote for these people time after time. 

[mk1]

Just came away from the Hart Ward meeting, AB was shouted down to resign

Was that the 'they all love me' SCAB?

[brassed off monkey]

Just came away from the Hart Ward meeting, AB was shouted down to resign

Was that the 'they all love me' SCAB?

I think it was, "They all Love Ste as The Ceremonial Mayor" 

What a bunch of shysters, they haven`t got the brains they were born with, they have tried to make sure they hang on to the Manor & in doing so have proved themselves to be duplicitous over the Gypsy Sites in Hart.

More & more people are starting to see this lot for what they are & this little scam will come back to haunt them & not just in the Hart Ward come next May.

[clavering codhead]

I know i've been critical over Fisher's role in this so far but he showed his true colours tonight, him and Beck were both kept in the dark about the meeting to decide the location of the gypsy site but full marks to them for the way they carried themselves tonight.

I saw Jean Robinson lurking at the back with Simmonds and the little fat bloke (Carl), she should be ashamed that she never got up to say anything.

Wright and CAB were roundly booed by the crowd and they deserved it, if there was a general election tomorrow Fisher would walk it in this part of town.

[beanzontoast]

Fisher might have shown his true colours but not as you may imagine, he was not at the first discussion at the Hart village hall, said he did not know about it, also the other Labour councillor, also missed it, you guessed it did not know about it either, seems a little convienient dont you think, how deep doe`s the rabbit hole go.

[fred c]

I know i've been critical over Fisher's role in this so far but he showed his true colours tonight, him and Beck were both kept in the dark about the meeting to decide the location of the gypsy site but full marks to them for the way they carried themselves tonight.

I saw Jean Robinson lurking at the back with Simmonds and the little fat bloke (Carl), she should be ashamed that she never got up to say anything.

Wright and CAB were roundly booed by the crowd and they deserved it, if there was a general election tomorrow Fisher would walk it in this part of town.

Exactly which meeting were they kept in the Dark About to decide the Gypsy Sites ? the meeting that took place to decide the Gypsy Sites took place in the council chamber & was attended by myself & quite a few more members of the public, plus a boat load of Councillors, the CEO & Planning Officers ............. How come we weren`t kept in the Dark ?

[Lord Elpus]

If the Dear Leader had been looking out for his members he would have made sure they were aware of the meeting, if he didn't and I was a member of the Labour group I'd want to know why not.

Fisher played a blinder, but I still find it hard to believe he was not aware of this meeting, he certainly should have been it directly effected his Ward.  To offer to donate his allowance was a noble act but will only effect one or two months money as the process should be over and done with once the Planning Inspector has made his decision.

[steveL]

Fisher loves to play to an audience and does well at it but I'm afraid that there's no excuse for either himself or Beck to play the 'I know nothing' card. If Fisher and Beck knew nothing about the meeting of the Finance and Policy Committee that would decide on the Traveller's site, then they were the only two councillors in the Civic that didn't.

This whole issue had gone on for months. It was always going to be controversial and Hart Ward voters were entirley dependent on their three councillors keeping on top of the subject in case their own ward was ever put forward as a possible site.

It was - weeks ago

.... . . and once two sites in Hart Ward had been identified it was down to the three councillors to track the issue and make sure it didn't slip by them. The agenda for the finance and policy meeting was published a full week in advance and the fact that the meeting was to take place was trailed well in advance both on this site and in the Hartlepool Mail.

In fact, so well was the meeting trailed - and this is the killer - that the meeting, when it did take place, was well attended by members of the public. So how can it be that a significant number of the public knew all about the meeting but  the three Civic 'insider's as Councillors did not?

It really doesn't hold water, does it?

Fisher's final excuse was that as a member of the Planning Committee, he didn't want to prejudice his 'impartial' position as a planning committee member by turning up or speaking at the Finance and Policy Meeting.

Again, this falls down when it was made clear that there is to be no Planning Committee involvement and that any appeals must be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate direct who will solely make the decision on any appeal.

So sorry, Keith. You made a good attempt at a juggling act tonight but one by one, the balls hit the deck.

The allowance donation was a recovery stunt offered because he quietly knew fine well that he'd dropped a major bollock.

[DRiddle]

I was there too. Sat right at the front row. Whatever the motivations of the people present at the meeting in terms of the residents, it was brilliant to see so many people actually get of their backsides and show their frustration at a political issue.

There must have been 2 or 3 hundred people crammed into the meeting and as many again outside who couldn't get in.

I felt a bit sorry for Damien Wilson in that for a long while people seemed to think it was HIS decision. Whilst that was going on Councillor Akers-Belcher was basically happy to just keep quiet and let him take the flack.

Ultimately, people realised that CAB had basically ignored his officers main recommendations and there were multiple calls for him to resign.

The most interesting thing I noticed was that a lot of things that WERE absolutely definitely 100% said in last weeks committee meeting, (I know because I was there along with FredC) were denied having ever been said by various members of the 'top table'.

I had a very public stand up confrontation with Councillor Akers-Belcher regarding comments he made in last weeks meeting about wind from trains. He denied saying it initially. A resident then pointed out that it was apparently referred to in the councils own minutes from the meeting.

Later it was denied that the possibility of the site expanding was discussed in last weeks meeting. Again, initially it was denied by various people on the top table as having ever been discussed in the meeting.

Again, a resident pointed out it was in their own minutes.

I genuinely despair.

[steveL]

I had the same thought, though a less sympathetic one, about Damien Wilson who spent far too much time acting as a human shield for C. Akers-Belcher. He is, after all, a council officer and not one of the the decision making councillors.

Less sympathetic because he will know that he will have scored massive points for taking the flak away from C. Akers-Belcher during the meeting. Wilson, remember, had put himself forward as Director and with Councillor Stubbs(Labour) already well passed his sell-by date, Damien will have his eye firmly focused on the main chance.

Most notable of all was Councillor Stubbs(Labour) himself who could easily have replaced himself with a Swiss Cheese Plant and probably have improved the quality of his contribution at the same time.

[steveL]

There will be no Traveller sites in Hart. The way that Labour have ignored the criteria is so blatant and so obviously political that the Planning Inspectorate will see through it very quickly. However, to be sure, what does need to happen next is that people need to write those e-mails to the Programme Officer within the next 3 days - yes 3 days is all the time left as August 18th is the cut-off point.

Forget any talk of house prices - they'll be ignored - and concentrate on the 16 site short-list and how the most suitable sites on that list were ignored in favour of the least suitable sites.


Just as a reminder:

The Inspectors name is Kevin Ward BA (Hons.) MRTPI

However, in correspondence from Mr Ward it states that all correspondence on the examination must be addressed to the Programme Officer at jimriddle@tiscali.co.uk

Letter from Planning Inspector (worth a read)http://www.hartlepool.gov.uk/download/9526/inspectors_letter_regarding_suspension_of_examination

[Mr H]

So for the people who attended the meeting 2 simple questions

1. Do you think the traveller site will still be built in hart

2. If not where do you think it will go?