Now you see it, now you don’t …

EDA member Paul comments on the nonsensical and contradictory EDDC double-think…. this is his personal reflection.

“Is it just me or do others find the contradictory messages sent out by EDDC completely nonsensical (or perhaps from cloud-cuckoo-land)?

In this week’s Pullman’s View From Honiton

http://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/launch.aspx?pbid=03a901df-0b77-4e35-90e6-93ca8d117094

we have:

* Two similar articles about the lack of a Local Plan (pages 3 “Council criticised for delays to plan” and page 4 “Council leaders must ‘get a grip’ on local plan”);

* An article about the 300 homes between Honiton and Gittisham (page 6 “Decision on new homes expected”)

From the first of the two articles about the Local Plan, “an EDDC spokesperson said that the council still had the power to prevent development of unsuitable sites. … ‘The lack of a five-year housing land supply in effect means that we cannot refuse housing developments simply because they are outside the built-up area boundaries that define the extent of our settlements. The majority of our settlements are adjacent to Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, Green Wedges and other designations that restrict development anyway and these designations still apply anyway with equal strength regardless of whether we have a five-year land supply or not.”

Yet the 300 homes proposed in Honiton are EXACTLY THAT – adjacent to an AONB – and the development was initially approved despite this (and despite access issues and a illogical report from the county council’s Highways officer) and has been called back for review because of the strength and pressure of local opposition.

So the statement from the EDDC spokesperson (should we think this was written or approved by council leader Paul Diviani or Chief Executive Mark Williams?) is not backed up by the facts – and this is not the first time as their annual report is a masterpiece of spin and economies with the truth.

It seems to me that when these sorts of obviously contradictory statement get published in the same newspaper, it just makes EDDC look stupid / incompetent / poorly led / two-faced / full of **** / lying / away with the fairies / one sandwich short of a picnic (but judge for yourself and select the adjectives you like or add your own).”

Gittisham gone to the EDDC dogs

4-3 in favour, Helen Parr (Chair, Colyton) seconding because no-one else had the guts to do it.

For: Councillors Parr, Williamson, Gammell and Sullivan and against: Councillors Pook, Key and Atkins (note to self: where were other members of the DMC – “otherwise engaged”?)

Scorched earth yet again …..

For full information see

https://susiebond.wordpress.com/2014/09/05/great-sadness-as-300-houses-are-approved-at-planning-inspections-committee/

Nuns do it, Diviani doesn’t

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2744529/Sisters-doing-Nuns-enclosed-Irish-monastery-break-prayer-complete-ice-bucket-challenge.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

Making y(our) council more transparent and accountable to the public

We have published this before but it is worth reading and digesting it again:

https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/making-local-councils-more-transparent-and-accountable-to-local-people

Weasel words?

What is a co-optee and how different is it to a consultant?

If you want to know how much money our elected members cost us and how much their expenses add on to that figure, the information is here:

Click to access 150714correctone.pdf

Travel expenses vary wildly, some Independent and minority party councillors paying their own travel expenses out of their own pockets …. (and why is the filename listed as “150714correctone”)!

What is more interesting is the list of “co-optees appointed by the council” at the end of the list – 12 people given various quite small amounts of fees and expenses.

What on earth is the status of a “co-optee of the council” and how does it differ from the status of a consultant? Are they people expert in some particular discipline brought in for their expertise? Where is the paper trail that shows what their particular expertise was needed for? If there is not sufficient information surely this would be a device open to abuse in any council? Are they co-opted officers?

If so, why was”embedded officer and/or consultant” Steve Pratten, engaged at a cost of more than £10,000 per month not simply co-opted for his expertise as these 12 people seem to have been?

What is the point of a full council meeting?

An EDA member has sent his reflections on full Council:

Now that a month or more has passed since the last full Council meeting, my first and only experience of one to date, I have been reflecting on the impression I gained from sitting through the whole thing from start to finish. My thinking here was prompted by discovering that the next full council is not until October, 3 months after the previous one – and I couldn’t understand how EDDC could function without more frequent full council meetings, and that got me started thinking about the one I attended.

So, leaving aside my own question to the council at the start, and the detail of the anti-democracy motions that pulled me there, my overall impression was … well … nothing. What was the point? The point of the council meeting? Aside from the legal need to hold it, what was the purpose of pulling together the 50 odd councillors, several council officers, a few handfuls of members of the public, and a journalist or two?

After all, there was absolutely no real debate about local issues, difficult decisions about priorities or funding or were not even mentioned. My only real memories of the meeting were the pathetic non-answers to serious questions raised by EDA members, and the belly-button gazing, inwardly-looking discussion about democracy and stopping local people from engaging. Tourism? Nope. Local economy? Nah! The Local Plan? Not a sausage. Future phases of Cranbrook or forming a Cranbrook Town Council? Nada. The office relocation? Only a statement of ignorance by Cllr Diviani. Sainsbury’s pulling out of their distribution centre plans? Finger not on the pulse – not firing on all cylinders perhaps?

So, aside from the need to rubber stamp what is decided by Cabinet without any voting input from non-Cabinet members, what was the point?