Is it contageous?
On offer: 2 Planning Officer posts, 1 Enforcement Officer post, 1 Regeneration Officer, 1 Estates and Management Technical Officer.
Could this have anything to do with masses of development, little or no enforcement and new and novel ways of selling off the family silver to pay for Skypark?
Oh, and do we see the PERFECT new job for departing Economic Development Officer Nigel Harrison (ex Hon Sec of the controversial East Devon Business Forum)at our sister council – South Somerset DC, which shares our CEO Mark Williams:
An extraordinary revelation by Cllr Ken Potter at last night’s Newton Pop parish council meeting.
He said in his report that he attended a recent meeting of the Local Government Association to discuss the future of post offices.
The meeting was addressed by a minister who predicted that within ten years “there would not be a single free-standing district council left”.
Several astonished members of the public tried to ask why, then, was EDDC planning to spend many millions building a new HQ, but the Chair moved on to discuss Himalayan balsam in the Otter.
Cllr Bloxham savaged at last night’s lively Newton Pop parish meeting, after “icing on the cake” comment.
Newton Pop District Councillor Ken Potter must be regretting his invitation to the unfortunate Ray Bloxham to explain EDDC’s decision to reduce public speaking at council meetings.
Cllr Bloxham, architect of the controversial new restrictions, struck completely the wrong note. He blamed verbose public speeches for endless DMC meetings. He argued EDDC were much more generous than other councils in time allowed, and concluded that ,anyway, the chance for a few people to speak was “the icing on the cake” of a long planning process!
Several Newton Pop councillors and residents couldn’t wait to get their teeth into the speaker. They expressed angry distrust of the planning system. The impression given at DMC meetings was that many applications were “predetermined”, they said. Public comments were ignored. The management and chairing of planning meetings was abysmal. Councillors waffling and repeating each other were the real time-wasters.
Finally asked one resident, “What is the point of your coming here tonight when the decision has been taken already?”
Poor Ray could only stammer something about it only being an experiment for a year. Any gamblers at NP last night wouldn’t have put good money on it lasting that long.
The Government introduced a system of “buddying” MPs with multinational companies:
David Heath of the Department of Agriculture is paired with food businesses Nestlé, Unilever, Mondeléz (formerly part of Kraft, and includes Cadbury) and Associated British Foods (owner of Primark and Kingsmill). Statoil is added to the oil companies already in touch with Vince Cable; foreign office minister Hugo Swire has been buddied with Procter and Gamble, and David Willetts with Cisco. The culture minister Ed Vaizey is paired with Telefonica (O2) and Everything Everywhere (Orange and T-Mobile), while Green adds engineering firm GKN to his list.
Here is a list of Proctor and Gamble brands:
Now, we all look forward to Mr Swire getting a lifetime supply of Fairy Liquid to clean out Ottery’s drains, though he might want to look at Aerial Stain Remover for the drains in Feniton, which are discharging effluent of a very different kind.
But if all fails, he can at least offer the residents of Feniton free samples of Pampers nappies in emergencies.
Although it might be hard to parody something that is in itself a parody …!
EDDC suddenly sprang a planning application for an “artwork” in a very prominent position in Seaton – an area known as Fisherman’s Gap in the middle of the town’s seafront. It was accompanied by much trumpeting of its beauty, its form, its desirability! Several town councillors were not enamoured, saying thar the view itself already had beauty, form and desirability but that did not stop the town council from supporting EDDC’s planning application.
However, the Environment Agency slapped everyone’s wrists:
A letter, dated September 18th, to EDDC from the Environment Agency said: “We object to this proposal for the following reasons.
“The proposed sculptures are located on land that forms part of the Seaton Coastal Defence Scheme; a flood alleviation scheme that is operated and maintained by the Environment Agency.
“The proposed sculptures and interpretation pillar appear to be located in a manner that would: a) prevent the closure of the main flood gates that facilitate vehicular access through the sea wall, and, b) would restrict our access to the flood wall for necessary inspection, repair and maintenance purposes.
“It is also important that the applicant notes that any structures such as those proposed within seven metres of such coastal flood defences will require our Flood Defence consent under the terms of the Water Resources Act 1991.
“We will withhold our consent for any structures that would restrict our ability to safely access, operate, maintain and rebuild such a structure.”
An EDDC spokesperson said: “We are working with the Environment Agency to address their concerns about the exact location of the hot spot.
“Of course public safety with regards to flood defence is always our priority and we will therefore be considering how we can overcome any such concerns. We are committed to the hot spots as a way of extending the reach of Seaton Jurassic to the seafront and encouraging visitors to see for themselves our amazing beach and coastline.”
Full details of the proposal and how to comment are available on EDDC’s website at http://www.eastdevon. gov.uk via the planning portal (planning ref 14/1897).
Some thought- provoking thoughts from an EDA member:
An argument often used by EDDC Councillors when they wish to ignore local opposition to an unpopular decision is to appeal to their instinctive knowledge of the real wishes of the “silent majority”.
Here is a cautionary tale of an attempt to turn a school in Sussex into an academy using just such an argument which appears to have backfired. The story appeared in the Independent last week written by columnist Mark Steel. Mark Steel’s style is to intersperse facts with wry comment – here are the facts extracted from the article:
“In March, the head…… announced his plan for the school to become an academy, subject to a “consultation”. Because the rules decree there must be a consultation……. A meeting was called in which parents, students and teachers expressed outright opposition, but the consultation went on, in the form of a series of presentations by the head and his executives. These included an “artist’s impression” of the gleaming structure – linked with magical walkways and smiley children – that the school would surely become once it was an academy.
On the other hand, we were told, if it remained as it was, that there would be “no money” for repairs, and we were shown a photo of a decaying art block. …….
Despite this, hundreds of our children wore badges in opposition to the plan, posters went up in countless windows, there was a march, and the teachers went on strike. Then the local council, sticking to the obsolete definition of “consultation”, arranged a ballot of parents. The head and his allies contacted parents personally to win their vote, but the result was 29 per cent for the academy and 71 per cent against, on a turnout of 40 per cent………..
Immediately those pushing for the academy responded by insisting the vote was irrelevant. A local Conservative councillor told me: “It counts for nothing, because if you add the Yes vote to those who didn’t vote that’s a majority for those in support”…………………………….
Still the school, backed by the Department for Education, marched on with its plans. ………..
But, amazingly, and who could have predicted this, their response made people even more furious. More strikes were planned, elections for vacant governor posts were won overwhelmingly by opponents of the academy, and on Monday this week it was announced that the plans had been dropped entirely, due to the scale of opposition.