Daily Archives: 2 Dec 2016

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 Dec 2016

Posted under

Democracy, Progressive Alliance

Iceland’s Pirate Party gets chance to form coalition government

Iceland’s president has asked the anti-establishment Pirate Party to try to form a government, after two rounds of coalition talks failed.
The Pirates are one of Europe’s most radical political parties and came third in Iceland’s election on October 29.

None of Iceland’s major parties won an outright majority, and President Gudni Johannesson asked the first-placed Independence Party and the second-placed Left-Greens to assemble a coalition.

The party was founded in November 2012 by Birgitta Jónsdóttir and several prominent internet activists and hackers. It has 10 seats in Iceland’s 63-seat Parliament. Members seek direct democracy, digital freedom, greater government transparency, a new national constitution and asylum for US whistleblower Edward Snowden.

Following the Charlie Hebdo attacks in January 2015, the Pirate Party began a campaign to repeal the country’s blasphemy laws. They were successfully repealed in early July 2015. Members have stated Iceland must never become a member of the European Union unless the membership agreement is put to a referendum.

Should Iceland join the EU, the party believe the country shall be a single constituency in elections to the European Parliament.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3995138/Iceland-s-computer-hacker-Pirate-Party-invited-form-GOVERNMENT-president-coalition-talks-failed.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 Dec 2016

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing

What a 24-year old has to say about homelessness and housing

“My film Half Way documents my family’s experiences when we were made homeless. I hope it goes some way towards changing the way we look at housing …

… Ultimately, we need many thousands of homes – affordable and council. We need to make the rental market affordable again, and we need to change policy so that it stops benefiting those that have multiple houses and punishing those that have nowhere to call their home. If the government can afford to renovate Buckingham Palace, do up the Houses of Parliament or support the Garden Bridge project in London, all to make Britain look like one of the greatest places in the world, don’t we have a duty to make sure everyone in the country has a decent home? Wouldn’t that be something to be truly proud of?”

Daisy-May Hudson, producer, age 24

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 Dec 2016

Posted under

Accountability, EDDC, Exmouth, Regeneration

Comments

4 Comments

“Conservative Councillors Gatecrash Save Exmouth Seafront Meeting “

Interesting that Councillor Skinner feels he can bully his way into an SES meeting but does not allow anyone to attend (and listen) at an Exmouth Regeneration Board meeting! One law for him one law for others, it seems.

“An unexpected and uninvited band of Conservative councillors descended on the Harbour View cafe last night for the meeting of the Save Exmouth Seafront (SES) campaign group.

Councillor Philip Skinner, Chair of the Exmouth Regeneration Board was flanked by two Conservative Exmouth Town councillors, Fred Caygill and Richard Scott, when they arrived to the meeting of the campaign group. SES aims to push for independent consultation on the future of the seafront before any further work, including the submissions of additional planning applications. This is in sharp contrast to the Exmouth Regeneration Board who appear determined to press ahead with their development vision without consultation.

Councillor Skinner said he’d come to listen. People at the meeting were stunned but used the opportunity to question him. Laura Freeman, an SES member explained “I attended the meeting to help with SES’s campaign for independent consultation and the support of the existing seafront businesses. I was shocked to see Councillor Skinner, but like others, I tried to use the opportunity to ask him questions. However he rudely laughed at me as I tried to ask a question, which he then avoided answering. His presence at the meeting seemed to be more about disrupting SES than listening to what any of us had to say”.

SES spokesperson Louise MacAllister has been trying for some time to organise a public Q&A session with Councillor Skinner, and despite the negative feeling surrounding Councillor Skinner’s unexpected arrival at an SES meeting, hopes that this is a sign he is willing to engage with the wider public and ensure a Q&A session is organised as soon as possible. SES are not against meeting with external stakeholders but would rather they did not gate-crash their meetings. SES are now seeking an arranged meeting with Dr Mark Dixon the benefactor of the Watersport’s Centre.
—ENDS—

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 Dec 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, EDDC, Knowle/Honiton/Exmouth relocation, Planning System, Spin

Knowle officer decision exposes hypocrisy of planning system

Unsurprisingly, planning officers have recommended the PegasusLife planning application for luxury flats at the Knowle.

Well, be honest, would you go against the wishes of your CEO, deputy CEO and all the Tory councillors?

Yet a very similar (almost identical) planning application in Bath has just been turned down – but that isn’t being built on council land and part- financing a new HQ.

Funny that.

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/knowle_demolition_wins_officer_support_1_4800636

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 Dec 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Consultation, EDDC, Exmouth, Lympstone, Transport (local)

Lympestone has to suffer to “benefit” Exmouth

“Lympstone residents have accused Devon County Council (DCC) of ignoring the village during the Dinan Way extension consultation process.

Council officers were subjected to scrutiny by the public at an open meeting in the village over a proposed £12million extension, which will link Dinan Way to the A376.

Mary Truell, who has lived in the area for 88 years and currently resides in Wotton Lane, Lymsptone, said the council had taken no notice of where the road was due to be built.

She said: “I would like to know who put in the application for the road because it is erroneous.

“All the time it talks about Exmouth and Exmouth benefits, but the whole thing is in Lympstone.”

DCC’s chief engineer for highways, Rob Richard, responded by admitting it was a project for Exmouth.

He said: “I am not going to stand here and say this is a scheme for Lympstone because it clearly isn’t. I am not pretending it is something it isn’t.

“It was quite clear the strength of feeling about the south route. It was very much the preference, not only from residents and the community of Lympstone, but also Exmouth as well.

“Unfortunately, consultation for us goes wider than the community and residents and, unfortunately, it is not us that dictates the importance of listed buildings, it’s government policy.

“We don’t get on with the National Trust and English Heritage any better than you guys do.”

Mr Richards added: “Hopefully, the road will provide a long, feasible structure that is going to help move traffic in and around Exmouth.”

DCC has voted through a compromise third route for Dinan Way after two proposed routes – a ‘south’ route and ‘valley’ route – were rejected after consultation. Despite being more popular with the public, the south route, which passed near A la Ronde in Summer Lane, was opposed by the National Trust.

Lympstone district and parish councillor Rob Longhurst accused the county council of letting everyone down with the road extension.

He said: “We are talking about loss of homes, financial hardship and social trauma.

“I am afraid I consider Devon County Council has failed us on these consultations.

“I think £12million is a ridiculous amount. It ignores the views of the consultations, raises the prospects of flooding in Lympstone and puts transient traffic problems over and above the effects on residents here.”

http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/villagers_hit_out_at_dinan_way_extension_1_4800155

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 Dec 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, Developers/ Development, EDDC, Exmouth, Regeneration, Spin, Transparency

Comments

1 Comment

Exmouth: have councillors been misled – asks councillor

PRESS RELEASE
Have Councillors been misled?

East Devon District Council’s Cabinet “rubber stamped” the go ahead for a “full planning permission” on the redevelopment at Queen’s Drive, Exmouth which they were told needs to be submitted by the end of the year.

This is part of what the Cabinet recommended on the 9th November:
“To note that under delegated powers and an exemption to standing orders, officers have engaged planning and design services to take forward a reserved matters application for the continuance of the current planning approval of Queen’s Drive.”

This means that contrary to normal procedures officers engaged the planning and design services of a company to design and submit a full planning application proposal for the remainder of the Queen’s Drive Development.

Within the submitted papers presented to the Cabinet it explains officers drew up a proposal to hire consultants in September 2016 and gave details of the costs which are estimated at £65,000.

The document states it is “necessary to submit the application by the end of 2016.” It also claims to be a “technical exercise” simply to “sustain a planning application”.

Local Independent District Councillors believe that the advice given to the Cabinet members was misleading. Rather than a “technical exercise” the proposal to submit a “reserved matters application” would provide full planning permission which in theory would allow contractors to start development as soon as it is approved. The ‘reserved matters’ application does not need to be submitted until 24th January, when the current outline application expires.

Megan Armstrong, District Councillor for Exmouth said “Independent colleagues and I cannot understand why the Council has now decided to appoint a designer to submit a full planning application at vast expense when all that is required is to submit a further outline planning application to replace the present one.

The cost of a new outline application would be far less than the ‘reserved matters’ proposal.”

Councillor Armstrong added “If this goes ahead, it contradicts the recommendation that “the Council will give Exmouth people another opportunity to have their say on what happens on that site. The Council will bring in external expertise to carry out a review. This will involve full consultation that is neither developer nor Council led.”

“I believe the District Council should put in a fresh outline planning application for phases two & three, which could be done before the current one expires. Then we can have the full consultation, rather than setting out the ‘reserved matters’ details first, which seems to be putting the cart before the horse. We understand that these Cabinet decisions will be discussed further at the next Full Council meeting on 21st December.”

— ENDS —