Owl gets its talons tapped

Owl has received a comment which says it must immediately take down a comment that local tory parties, freemasons and developers get more listened to than town councils in matters of planning. The commentator says it casts aspersions on an upright and moral group of charitable people – specifically the freemasons (but does not mention the others).

Owl, of course, implied no such thing. Of course ALL the groups mentioned are upright and moral – including town councils. It is just that the town councils, which many think have greatest clout, have, in many cases in practice, less clout than practically every other group.

So, in the interests of fairness, Owl adds more upright and moral groups whose remarks are more likely to carry weight than those of a town council. They include, but not exclusively:

Ice-cream van sales people
Dog groomers
Traffic wardens
Bank mamagers

Hope that clears up the misunderstanding.

One thought on “Owl gets its talons tapped

  1. You know full-well that I did not object to the mention of local Tory parties and developers in my criticism of your piece because it may well be justified. You also know, because I said so, that Freemasons Lodges do not get involved in making comments on planning applications (except when it affects their own buildings) – they do not involve themselves as a group in politics, although individuals may do so as individuals. The number of Freemasons (male and female) involved in politics is small and it is unlikely that they are over-represented as a group (personal observation). So your assertion that councils listen to freemasons lodges more than local councils is hypothetical at best and adds no value to your argument.
    Your comment about other upright and moral groups is very childish – YOU specifically mentioned freemasons and I specifically defended them. Had you mentioned other groups who in my opinion don’t as a group seek to influence councils (including your list from ice-cream van sales people to bank managers) I may well have defended them to. Why did you specifically mention freemasons in the same category as local Tory parties and developers if not to try and sub-consciously link them in readers’ minds?
    I thought it was clear, but may not have been, that I only asked you to remove the reference to freemasons and not the whole piece, which is otherwise sound.
    Let me be clear – Freemasons avoid all talk of politics (and religion) at their meetings and social occasions in orders that all members of whatever political (or religious) persuasion can meet as equals.


Comments are closed.