Major legal decision goes against borough on Manydown (From This is Hampshire)
When news happens, text SDE and your photos or videos to 80360. Or contact us by email and phone.
High Court judge rules against Basingstoke and Deane housing plans
4:24pm Tuesday 17th April 2012 in Gazette
A HIGH COURT judge has ruled against Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council in a stunning defeat for the borough’s controversial plans for where houses should be built.
Mr Justice Lindblom delivered his judgement this afternoon after The Manydown Company, a major landowner to the west of Basingstoke, began legal action last year.
The company sought judicial review of the Conservative administration’s decision to omit 820 hectares of land jointly owned by the borough and Hampshire County councils from house-building plans between now and 2027.
In a 40-page judgement, Mr Justice Lindblom said: “I cannot see any escape from the conclusion that the council’s decision was not only inconsistent with the purpose for which the Manydown land was acquired and held, but plainly contrary to that purpose.”
It was an "irrational" decision, he said.
The Manydown Company sold a 999-year lease on the land to the two authorities in 1996 claiming it entered the deal believing the councils would be the “best stewards” of the land when it was developed.
The judge’s decision means the borough council will have to go back to the drawing board on its housing and development plans and is likely to be faced with substantial legal costs.
See Thursday’s Gazette for more.
Comments(156)
TheBlade
says...
5:50pm Tue 17 Apr 12
Now lets hope we get local councillors making decisions based on the local population that voted for them and not on some stupid party political decision.
P Heath
says...
6:23pm Tue 17 Apr 12
DCSharps
says...
7:03pm Tue 17 Apr 12
The _right_stuff
says...
7:04pm Tue 17 Apr 12
I hope to get a copy of the judgement unless it's confidential.
It will be interesting reading.
The _right_stuff
says...
8:00pm Tue 17 Apr 12
willerby caravans
says...
5:17am Wed 18 Apr 12
klorane
says...
9:57am Wed 18 Apr 12
The _right_stuff
says...
10:45am Wed 18 Apr 12
I'm sure your right. It will certanly be interesting.
Klorane. Keep watching the Audit Governance and accounts webcasts and the minutes etc. for the meetings. It should all be detailed there. but now the council are in a bit of a pickle, not sure what will happen.
The Development Control meeting tonight at 18.30 (webcast) should be interesting too.
TheBlade
says...
10:53am Wed 18 Apr 12
The _right_stuff
says...
11:03am Wed 18 Apr 12
He, he I wonder why. I guess the council will want to keep it as quiet as possible till then as it might impact on who gets re-elected (or elected) or not.
The _right_stuff
says...
11:17am Wed 18 Apr 12
There are some very interesting points there.
THX 1138
says...
11:23am Wed 18 Apr 12
willerby caravans wrote:If you had read the article you would have realised that it was the Manydown Company that took the council to the High Court, not the other way round. Are you suggesting that the council is not entitled to defend the charges?
So how much of our Council Tax money has been spent on manydown and the High Court Legal battle. High Court is expensive. What right do these Councillors have to waste our money. Lets show our gratitude on May 3rd
If you and others think it is a good day for democracy when an unelected High Court judge in London can overturn the decisions of elected councillors, then so be it. Personally, I have always believed if you don't like the decisions of your elected representatives then you should vote them out at the ballot box.
Do you think the Manydown Company took this action because they believed in a fair and transparent planning process or because they were annoyed that they haven't been able to make the money they expected from having Manydown developed? I believe it is the latter, but a lot of naive people seem to believe the former.
I note you are a UKIP supporter. A couple of questions for you or other supporters. Why do you support this judge, but yet are constantly slagging off other judges when they make judgements you don't like, especially on human rights cases? Finally, if the Tories are as unpopular as you believe then I assume they will lose the seats they are defending - so why aren't UKIP putting up candidates in Basing, Bramley and Sherfield, and Chineham - surely victory would be assured if you did? And why aren't UKIP putting up a candidate against Stephen Reid in Buckskin? Seems odd that you didn't put up candidates in the wards where Manydown is a big issue.
Buster Preciation
says...
12:08pm Wed 18 Apr 12
ng Basingstoke. But I do hope those of you who are revelling in party political glee enjoy your concrete and tarmac.
P Heath
says...
12:08pm Wed 18 Apr 12
Matching human rights issues to this judgement is desperate and foolish.
The land discussions came fro Cllr Stephen Reid as leader with the then Chief Exec the County Council was invited to join.
adiebb
says...
12:40pm Wed 18 Apr 12
UKIP Basingstoke
says...
1:19pm Wed 18 Apr 12
That is the bottom line here - the Tories have misused public funds for political expediency.
adiebb
says...
1:30pm Wed 18 Apr 12
, if the Tories are as unpopular as you believe then I assume they will lose the seats they are defending - so why aren't UKIP putting up candidates in Basing, Bramley and Sherfield, and Chineham - surely victory would be assured if you did? And why aren't UKIP putting up a candidate against Stephen Reid in Buckskin? Seems odd that you didn't put up candidates in the wards where Manydown is a big issue.
UKIP Basingstoke
says...
1:33pm Wed 18 Apr 12
P Heath
says...
1:42pm Wed 18 Apr 12
this year we could not afford to campaign everywhere.
We do what we can where we can, Labour will oust Reid any way, Sven is a backed by SOLVE in Basing would love to cover all areas but can not.
We are not against or for Manydown we are against bad planning, Conservative illegal practices and the lack of transparency in consulting and listening to all residents views
UKIP Basingstoke
says...
1:49pm Wed 18 Apr 12
pip the planner
says...
2:39pm Wed 18 Apr 12
Keep_Calm_And_Comment
says...
6:35pm Wed 18 Apr 12
UKIP Basingstoke wrote:Didn't Nazi Nigel, your Führer, admit to wasting £10 million pounds worth of tax payers money too?
You will be saying next that this is a satisfactory and worthwhile use of taxpayer's money.
That is the bottom line here - the Tories have misused public funds for political expediency.
UKIP Basingstoke
says...
7:18pm Wed 18 Apr 12
There are racists, bigots and chauvinists in every party. So you should be calling all parties Nazis.
Anybody in any political party that denies that point is a liar.
So that we are playing level - which party do you vote for or follow?
It is only right that anyone reading this can compare like with like put your colours to the mast.
Or is that beyond you?
klorane
says...
7:22pm Wed 18 Apr 12
UKIP Basingstoke
says...
7:24pm Wed 18 Apr 12
popleyrebel2
says...
7:25pm Wed 18 Apr 12
There has been talk as to the money spent protecting their “Gerrymandering” and rightly so, however, what price do put on the utter contempt shown by the Borough Council???
Heads should roll, those who are responsible for this” Gerrymandering” scam should be named and shamed and then shown the door,” for good”
The _right_stuff
says...
7:38pm Wed 18 Apr 12
I bet they would rather the judgement wasn't just before the elections though.
Keep_Calm_And_Comment
says...
8:08pm Wed 18 Apr 12
You didn't answer the question. Let me rephrase it as you didn't feel it worthy of an honest response:
Didn't UKIP's leader Nigel Farage admit to, AND BOAST ABOUT, *PERSONALLY* wasting £10 million pounds worth of tax payers money too?
Yes or no?
The *issue* is not the bumbling local Freemasons that hold power - tell us something we *don't* know - the real issue here is your gobsmacking hypocrisy!
You can't bang on about standards in public life, such as wasting public money, given your leader's own admission.
What makes it exponentially worse is the very fact that it is YOUR LEADER (not some low level local lay councillor) that admitted doing it.
Remember now, the answer to my question is just 'yes' or 'no'. Please, enlighten local readers - so we are clear and on the same page:
Didn't UKIP's leader Nigel Farage admit to, AND BOAST ABOUT, *PERSONALLY* wasting £10 million pounds worth of tax payers money too?
The _right_stuff
says...
8:29pm Wed 18 Apr 12
I've googled this from the net.
I think your £10 million is way out. Where did you get the £10 million ?
In May 2009, The Guardian reported that Farage had said in a speech to the Foreign Press Association that over ten years as a member of the European Parliament he received and spent nearly £2 million of taxpayers' money in expenses and allowances, on top of his £64,000 a year salary.
The former Europe Minister, Denis MacShane, said that this showed that Farage was "happy to line his pockets with gold". Farage called this a "misrepresentation", pointing out that the money had been used to promote UKIP's message, not salary, but he welcomed the focus on the issue of MEP expenses, claiming that " over a five year term each and every one of Britain's 78 MEPs gets about £1 million. It is used to employ administrative staff, run their offices and to travel back and forth between their home, Brussels and Strasbourg." He also pointed out the money spent on the YES campaign in Ireland by the European Commission was "something around 440 million", making the NO campaign's figure insignificant in comparison.
I make no comment on political views.
The _right_stuff
says...
8:33pm Wed 18 Apr 12
KCACMV
On the subject of answering questions, you haven't answered mine yet on the bus fares thread.
Keep_Calm_And_Comment
says...
8:38pm Wed 18 Apr 12
You didn't answer the question. Let me rephrase it as you didn't feel it worthy of an honest response:
Didn't UKIP's leader Nigel Farage admit to, AND BOAST ABOUT, *PERSONALLY* wasting £10 million pounds worth of tax payers money too?
Yes or no?
The *issue* is not the bumbling local Freemasons that hold power - tell us something we *don't* know - the real issue here is your gobsmacking hypocrisy!
You can't bang on about standards in public life, such as wasting public money, given your leader's own admission.
What makes it exponentially worse is the very fact that it is YOUR LEADER (not some low level local lay councillor) that admitted doing it.
Remember now, the answer to my question is just 'yes' or 'no'. Please, enlighten local readers - so we are clear and on the same page:
Didn't UKIP's leader Nigel Farage admit to, AND BOAST ABOUT, *PERSONALLY* wasting £10 million pounds worth of tax payers money too?
Keep_Calm_And_Comment
says...
8:42pm Wed 18 Apr 12
Excuse my typo. This should read £2 million pounds in ten years. That makes it better then, eh?
Expenses disclosure
In May 2009, The Guardian reported that Farage had said in a speech to the Foreign Press Association that over ten years as a member of the European Parliament he received £2 million of taxpayers' money in staff, travel, and other expenses on top of his £64,000 a year salary.
The former Europe Minister, Denis MacShane, said that this showed that Farage was "happy to line his pockets with gold". Farage called this a "misrepresentation",
pointing out that the money had been used to promote UKIP's message"
UKIP Basingstoke
says...
8:43pm Wed 18 Apr 12
The _right_stuff wrote:hahahahaha - I think The_right_stuff answered it clearly and concisely for me.
KCACMV.
I've googled this from the net.
I think your £10 million is way out. Where did you get the £10 million ?
In May 2009, The Guardian reported that Farage had said in a speech to the Foreign Press Association that over ten years as a member of the European Parliament he received and spent nearly £2 million of taxpayers' money in expenses and allowances, on top of his £64,000 a year salary.
The former Europe Minister, Denis MacShane, said that this showed that Farage was "happy to line his pockets with gold". Farage called this a "misrepresentation", pointing out that the money had been used to promote UKIP's message, not salary, but he welcomed the focus on the issue of MEP expenses, claiming that " over a five year term each and every one of Britain's 78 MEPs gets about £1 million. It is used to employ administrative staff, run their offices and to travel back and forth between their home, Brussels and Strasbourg." He also pointed out the money spent on the YES campaign in Ireland by the European Commission was "something around 440 million", making the NO campaign's figure insignificant in comparison.
I make no comment on political views.
When are you going to let all and sundry know which party you support?
You could come along to Nigel's meeting Friday and ask him yourself - you would be warmly welcomed.
Keep_Calm_And_Comment
says...
8:44pm Wed 18 Apr 12
Keep_Calm_And_Comment
says...
8:45pm Wed 18 Apr 12
Didn't UKIP's leader Nigel Farage admit to, AND BOAST ABOUT, *PERSONALLY* wasting **£2** million pounds worth of tax payers money?
Or do you deny your leader ever said that?
The _right_stuff
says...
8:48pm Wed 18 Apr 12
UKIP Basingstoke
says...
8:48pm Wed 18 Apr 12
Labour...Lib Dems...Conservatives
....??
From what I see you like to challenge but not answer anyone else's questions of you!
UKIP Basingstoke
says...
8:50pm Wed 18 Apr 12
Keep_Calm_And_CommenWhich party? Answer the question..!
t wrote:
Let me ask you again:
Didn't UKIP's leader Nigel Farage admit to, AND BOAST ABOUT, *PERSONALLY* wasting **£2** million pounds worth of tax payers money?
Or do you deny your leader ever said that?
Keep_Calm_And_Comment
says...
8:50pm Wed 18 Apr 12
UKIP Basingstoke
says...
8:52pm Wed 18 Apr 12
Keep_Calm_And_CommenCome on Keep_Calm
t wrote:
Much that I find what the local Tory freemasons did abhorrent in relation to Manydown, I'm just wondering how much public money they 'wasted' on the lease (and it is just a lease) - and how that stacks up against the golden pockets of Nigel Farage? The Farage money is lost, at least we still have that lease and can use the land!
Which party - you challenge other parties..let us challenge yours..have some credibility!
Keep_Calm_And_Comment
says...
8:54pm Wed 18 Apr 12
UKIP Basingstoke wrote:As we've established Farage did pocket the money, the grumblings of some low level UKIP oink on a small town newspaper website really don't matter - but it does bring it into focus just how desperate UKIP are!
Keep_Calm_And_CommenWhich party? Answer the question..!
t wrote:
Let me ask you again:
Didn't UKIP's leader Nigel Farage admit to, AND BOAST ABOUT, *PERSONALLY* wasting **£2** million pounds worth of tax payers money?
Or do you deny your leader ever said that?
£2 million pounds to 'get UKIP's message across' could have paid for a decent reputation management company to do the job properly, instead we end up with an unemployed disgraced former Tory councillor, and a couple of his mates, half doing the job - and doing it hilariously badly, and very spammily.
UKIP Basingstoke
says...
9:08pm Wed 18 Apr 12
Can't even say which party you align with - never mind.
Hiliter
says...
9:36pm Wed 18 Apr 12
Take time to read the judgement against the Council because if you do you cannot fail to see how wrongfully and unlawfully this unscrupulous Tory administration has acted over this matter.To say this Administration has brought the Council into disrepute is an understatement and the actions of Stephen Reid and Rob Golding in particular should be condemned by the electorate in Basingstoke and Deane.Presumably some of the Tory group who have some integrity will rue the day they allowed Reid to manipulate them in the way he has,all for his own political advancement.Never has it been more true to say that all power corrupts but absolute power corrupts absolutely.The gerrymandering of the Winklebury and Buckskin elections by Reid and his co conspirators is shameful and hopefully they will be removed from office as soon as possible.Of course it will be too much to hope that Reid together with Golding and the Tory Cabinet will resign over this disgrace,but they should,so the electorate whose hard earned money has been mis-spent by the hundreds of thousands will have to do it for them.Reid's dirty hands have been all over the Manydown project from the mid 90s when he was leader of the Borough Council.Who would imagine he would return to corrupt the Council and undermine its reputation in 2012.Having set up his well paid cabinet post in the County Council lets hope we never hear of him again at a local level.
The _right_stuff
says...
9:42pm Wed 18 Apr 12
Hiliter wrote:An excellent post Hiliter. And couldn't agree with you more.
We are in danger of losing discussion around the real issues on Manydown and the High Court decision because of the organised campaign of UKIP - any platform will do for them to promote their narrow agenda.
Take time to read the judgement against the Council because if you do you cannot fail to see how wrongfully and unlawfully this unscrupulous Tory administration has acted over this matter.To say this Administration has brought the Council into disrepute is an understatement and the actions of Stephen Reid and Rob Golding in particular should be condemned by the electorate in Basingstoke and Deane.Presumably some of the Tory group who have some integrity will rue the day they allowed Reid to manipulate them in the way he has,all for his own political advancement.Never has it been more true to say that all power corrupts but absolute power corrupts absolutely.The gerrymandering of the Winklebury and Buckskin elections by Reid and his co conspirators is shameful and hopefully they will be removed from office as soon as possible.Of course it will be too much to hope that Reid together with Golding and the Tory Cabinet will resign over this disgrace,but they should,so the electorate whose hard earned money has been mis-spent by the hundreds of thousands will have to do it for them.Reid's dirty hands have been all over the Manydown project from the mid 90s when he was leader of the Borough Council.Who would imagine he would return to corrupt the Council and undermine its reputation in 2012.Having set up his well paid cabinet post in the County Council lets hope we never hear of him again at a local level.
The _right_stuff
says...
9:47pm Wed 18 Apr 12
I make no comment on political issues.
Dragon*Puff
says...
9:58pm Wed 18 Apr 12
Senior Officers and the Cabinet must be held to account.
With power comes responsibilty. Who has been responsible for this disgraceful debacle?
If the Cabinet did not understand the risks why not? Were they not warned? If they did understand the risks why did they take this course of action in our name? Was it a gamble at our expense?
The Cabinet's role is like that of a Board of Directors. Who are going to fall on their swords?
The Chief Executive of this Council and his team said the JR was devoid of merit.
"Bring it on"....was said by some....."Make my day" ...was said by others......"Over my dead body will a house be built on Manydown" ....was said by one......."No houses shall be built on Manydown in my lifetime"......was said by another....Oh and there is always that public statement cited at the High Court of the Portfolio Holder who maintained he "has an open mind"...........
The public is fed up with politicians in particular, and the Government in general, not taking personal responsibility when it has done wrong and is found wanting.
The public demands that those who are guilty do the honourable thing and resign.
Who is going to resign?
Who has honour?
Committing perjury is a serious offence.
popleyrebel2
says...
10:03pm Wed 18 Apr 12
The Council should be bought to account over their “Gerrymandering” furthermore, our MP Maria Miller should face the public i.e. those areas that have suffered due to their “Gerrymandering”
.
Protecting their own interest has cost many areas, including my own “Popley” therefore, all Cllrs who’ wards have suffered should demand an inquiry.
Jonty11
says...
10:44pm Wed 18 Apr 12
One of the other posts referred to Reid being voted in on the basis of being against development at Manydown - providing him a "mandate" for his approach.
Question of the day - if the land at Manydown was bought in 1996 (simple google search brought that up!) when was the election of Reid?
It is possible that the land was bought, then there was a change of administration - with part of that mandate being not to develop?
Just a thought (and trying to find some way through the murk!)
The _right_stuff
says...
10:48pm Wed 18 Apr 12
I whole heartedly agree, Who has honour and who is responsible. They must go. The people will demand it.
And Popleyrebel2. I absolutely agree with your sentiments about what the council have done to Popley.
MrNosey
says...
11:13pm Wed 18 Apr 12
Then we can once again have democracy flowing in the Borough Council.
I firmly believe that something good can come out of this.
The Mad Mike 1
says...
11:42pm Wed 18 Apr 12
P Heath
says...
12:04am Thu 19 Apr 12
He resigned as a councillor and leader to stand for parliament refusing to stand as councillor "as it would look bad if he lost as councillor or leader an election for his parliamentary prospects"
in the May the conservatives lost control and the LIB/lab alliance finished the deal within a few months but based on Cllr Reids ground work.
He was elected to HCC some 4 years later his Manydown Campaign was invented by me and others in the party as a foot hold in Labour areas, he was then very reluctantly put for election in Buckskin, he wanted Hatch Warren, Kempshott or anywhere safe but not Buckskin.
He took the nomination "reluctantly"and we got him elected, he has successfully used this as the only issue he has ever fought on in 4 elections.
Oh how I should be punished for getting him in this position
klorane
says...
3:55am Thu 19 Apr 12
willerby caravans
says...
7:48am Thu 19 Apr 12
Look guys. Here is the deal. You can join UKIP as I know how very much you like and respect us. If you didn't you would not spend all your time mentioning us. (Any News is GOOD news) as they say. And of course we are polling above you. Now we have momentum and we are the only party getting bigger. So amnesty for Lib Dems. Next election we may even let you stand in the Riverdene area. As we would not want you to lose that seat would we. We will increase our votes this year and our BIGGEST threat is Labour who seem desperate VERY desperate even obsessional to Win. Good help us what they have planned. After totally breaking this country destroying our school here they now want to wreck Basingstoke. Labour like an atomic bomb coming to a neigbourhood near you.
Best_Name_Ever
says...
7:59am Thu 19 Apr 12
Buster Preciation
says...
8:35am Thu 19 Apr 12
THX 1138
says...
9:36am Thu 19 Apr 12
P Heath wrote:This is a very revealing post. I had a look on the Kempshott Forum site last night and they have a long thread going back many years on Manydown. As well as personal views it also has many articles from the Gazette.
Cllr Reid as leader organised the move to investigate buying the land. He resigned as a councillor and leader to stand for parliament refusing to stand as councillor "as it would look bad if he lost as councillor or leader an election for his parliamentary prospects" in the May the conservatives lost control and the LIB/lab alliance finished the deal within a few months but based on Cllr Reids ground work. He was elected to HCC some 4 years later his Manydown Campaign was invented by me and others in the party as a foot hold in Labour areas, he was then very reluctantly put for election in Buckskin, he wanted Hatch Warren, Kempshott or anywhere safe but not Buckskin. He took the nomination "reluctantly"and we got him elected, he has successfully used this as the only issue he has ever fought on in 4 elections. Oh how I should be punished for getting him in this position
What no one gloating about this ruling mentions is that back in 2005 a government planning inspector was very critical of the Lib/Lab coalition then in power on BDBC. He rejected their plans for promoting development on Manydown as unsustainable and said it should be removed from the local plan.
In the Gazette on 17 November 2005 the following article appeared:
Cllr Phil Heath, who resigned his post on HCC's Cabinet in October 2003 over his opposition to Manydown, claimed this was a victory for the Conservatives and local residents, as well as vindication of his position. Cllr Heath said: "I am delighted to be vindicated for all the times I have said Manydown is not needed and the plan should have not gone beyond 2011".
It is also interesting to note that Lib Dems and Labour were widely criticised for wasting money on promoting Manydown at the time! Taking away the political point scoring (and they are all as bad as each other), this raises some further questions. If Manydown development was unsustainable in 2005 why isn't it still unsustainable now? Why didn't the Manydown Company take legal action in 2005 if they had such a strong case for development?
I think some people need to get real. When it comes to planning, whoever is in power will not be able to make decisions that please everyone. Unfortunately, if you believe in a planning system where elected representatives have a say then you have to spend money, especailly when developers make appeals against planning decisions they don't like.
I would be interested in someone from SOLVE explaining how this judgement is going to help in stopping large scale greenfield developments, when Mr Pinder told me that SOLVE are against all such developments (rejecting my assertion that SOLVE are promoting Manydown development believing that this will 'save' the Loddon Valley from large scale development).
popleyrebel2
says...
9:49am Thu 19 Apr 12
The Council and MP Maria Miller have lot of explaining to do, (the consequences of their Gerrymandering)
Dragon*Puff
says...
10:00am Thu 19 Apr 12
I would suggest that many of the commentators on this site should read the Judgement and the Order. It does not make for pretty reading in terms of its criticisms of this Administration and the irrational and unlawful decisions which have been taken by this Cabinet at great risk to the long term financial health and well being of this Borough.
THX 1138
says...
10:33am Thu 19 Apr 12
Dragon*Puff wrote:You sound like a politician! Good spin about 2005, but total bull - I suggest you re-read the report.
The reasons for the Manydown land being removed by the Inspector in 2005 was because the Plan Period had been reduced by the Government from 2016 to 2011. The Inspector was concerned with generic infrastructural deficit issues which applied to all potential developments...He requested that more work be done on the GENERIC infrastructural problems. I would suggest that many of the commentators on this site should read the Judgement and the Order. It does not make for pretty reading in terms of its criticisms of this Administration and the irrational and unlawful decisions which have been taken by this Cabinet at great risk to the long term financial health and well being of this Borough.
'Generic infrastructural deficit issues' - LOL! Meaningless corporate management speak. Anyway, the infrastructure issues still apply now, so the case against development hasn't changed since 2005.
As for the 2nd part of your statement - sure they screwed up - but if it is such a big deal then people can vote them out at the ballot box as I said earlier.
Opinions_opinions
says...
10:39am Thu 19 Apr 12
Dragon*Puff
says...
10:48am Thu 19 Apr 12
" I am conscious that the extension of the Plan's horizon to 2016 at Revised Deposit stage was made on the advice of the Government Office in line with PPG12 and subsequent Ministerial Statements. However, the full local situation may not have been appreciated at the time and subsequent decisions by the South East England Regional Assembly have not clarified the broader picture. My Recommendation to delete the Manydown MDA at this stage should not be taken as rejecting the concept of a sustainable western urban extension to Basingtoke. It may well be the right long term solution, but it remains to be properly demonstrated that this is the case. The waste water treatment issues raised by the Environment Agency and Thames Water also need to inform the Regional situation, as the future wider role of the Borough may depend upon the ability to comply with future water quality standards at acceptable costs"
Why is THX 1138 so aggressive?
TheBlade
says...
11:21am Thu 19 Apr 12
This is partly the reason why we are in this mess in the first place due to elected councillors following party orders and not representing the views of the people that voted for them in the first place.
clivep
says...
11:31am Thu 19 Apr 12
clivep
says...
11:37am Thu 19 Apr 12
Best_Name_Ever
says...
1:23pm Thu 19 Apr 12
clivep
says...
2:00pm Thu 19 Apr 12
Best_Name_Ever
says...
3:11pm Thu 19 Apr 12
Opinions_opinions
says...
4:06pm Thu 19 Apr 12
BugBear
says...
4:27pm Thu 19 Apr 12
t who does not seem able to put a point across on any subject without resorting to personal abuse and the digging up of questionable misdeeds by one party or another. He does himself and whichever party he supports no service by acting in such a bullying, yobbish and disrespectful way.
Best_Name_Ever
says...
5:24pm Thu 19 Apr 12
Best_Name_Ever
says...
5:25pm Thu 19 Apr 12
The _right_stuff
says...
5:34pm Thu 19 Apr 12
The first is the 40 page judgement and the second is the order of the court.
Download it or print it out and have a read....saved me from an FOI request :)
And there is some VERY interesting reading.
The _right_stuff
says...
5:56pm Thu 19 Apr 12
clivep
says...
6:36pm Thu 19 Apr 12
Best_Name_Ever
says...
7:35pm Thu 19 Apr 12
clivep
says...
7:07am Fri 20 Apr 12
clivep
says...
7:21am Fri 20 Apr 12
clivep
says...
8:30am Fri 20 Apr 12
The _right_stuff
says...
10:23am Fri 20 Apr 12
I agree with your comments.
I thought that the disciplining of Councilors Cubitt and Godeson was wrong and smacked of them not following the party line.
The two councilors were sticking up for their ward and those that voted them in and all respect to both.
P Heath
says...
11:48am Fri 20 Apr 12
He as Leader of the Group now has a whole Cabinet and many councillors proved to have broken the law, bad advice or not they have broken the law Cllr Saunders and co plus Cllr Reid Chairman of Infrastructure Scrutiny at the time included must be sacked or his Hypocracy (appologies for spelling if wrong) will shine a beacon of shame on the party, oh!! his ward includes Manydown land next to it he voted for and he backed the same plan he has to sack himself
popleyrebel2
says...
12:30pm Fri 20 Apr 12
Those who suffered under this dictatorship didn’t act retrospectively /in hindsight they were fully up to speed on the legalities, and again, they must be applauded.
Who advises this administration and what advice was given, are there documents stating the advice given, it would interesting to read them, and the cost to the tax payer, for this shambolic attempt to protect their own interest.
klorane
says...
2:07pm Fri 20 Apr 12
clivep
says...
2:38pm Fri 20 Apr 12
klorane
says...
3:20pm Fri 20 Apr 12
klorane
says...
3:24pm Fri 20 Apr 12
popleyrebel2
says...
3:43pm Fri 20 Apr 12
So why Manydown? There are green fields all around Basingstoke. Un-quote.
Quote from the High Court judgment.
Mr Justice Lindblom said: “I cannot see any escape from the conclusion that the council’s decision was not only inconsistent with the purpose for which the Manydown land was acquired and held, but plainly contrary to that purpose.” Un-quote.
With respect, Klorane, I think that explains why its Manydown.
clivep
says...
4:15pm Fri 20 Apr 12
Mac Heath
says...
4:30pm Fri 20 Apr 12
Oh - so now it’s all the fault of the council employees. Shame on him. When are these councillors going to be big enough to take responsibility for their own actions and stop blaming others.
clivep
says...
4:41pm Fri 20 Apr 12
Mac Heath
says...
4:59pm Fri 20 Apr 12
asingstoke.gov.uk
clivep
says...
5:06pm Fri 20 Apr 12
klorane
says...
5:07pm Fri 20 Apr 12
klorane
says...
5:16pm Fri 20 Apr 12
The _right_stuff
says...
5:33pm Fri 20 Apr 12
Mac Heath
says...
5:42pm Fri 20 Apr 12
I don't think it’s a secret. There's a very useful document on the Council's website. Just paste this into your web browser to get to the right page - http://bit.ly/trifz1
. It’s the judgement from the Court case.
Paragraphs 8, 9 and 10 seem to answer your question.
klorane
says...
5:44pm Fri 20 Apr 12
klorane
says...
5:49pm Fri 20 Apr 12
Freedom of Information request might take 20 days, after the election and I still don't know what to make of this.
klorane
says...
5:53pm Fri 20 Apr 12
So can you just tell me then, please: Mover of the motion to get the council to buy (or the lease, whatever) Manydown and their party (as I don't believe it was a Conservative, and the seconder plus party. Also something about the rationale for it as it seems to gone against the then national govt. objectives on the economy and housing.
popleyrebel2
says...
5:59pm Fri 20 Apr 12
Personally, I would like see them sent packing, however, we live in democracy (believe it or not) and that decision is up to those they represent.
The _right_stuff
says...
6:46pm Fri 20 Apr 12
I have a feeling though it was agreed at a meeting of the council. But I might be able to find the names. A strong google search can also help.
The _right_stuff
says...
6:55pm Fri 20 Apr 12
A very quick look, but a FOI was asked for in 2011.
Here is the text of the request.
'Minutes of meetings and decisions relating to the purchase by the council of
the site known as ‘Manydown’ (LDF/SHLAA BAS098). Please include cost
and intent of purchase'.
So someone has that information, unless it was rejected.
The _right_stuff
says...
6:59pm Fri 20 Apr 12
'Minutes of the following meetings are attached (at attachment 1). It should be
noted that the minutes are those contained in the Full Council minutes, which
refer to the relevant Committee. These documents are not available
electronically so have been scanned in as a PDF document:
:_ Policy Committee 18 July 1995.
:_ Policy Committee 17 October 1995.
. Policy Committee 2 November 1995.
:_ Full Council 2 November 1995
There is no reference to cost of purchase within the minutes. However, we can
confirm that the purchase cost was £10,000,000'.
I can't find the scanned docs at the moment
klorane
says...
7:19pm Fri 20 Apr 12
Thanks. But this is a lot of work for no real return isn't it really? They went against the govt of the day, and I stand to be concreted over near where I live, so I can't help feeling a little peeved!
klorane
says...
7:22pm Fri 20 Apr 12
klorane
says...
7:23pm Fri 20 Apr 12
The _right_stuff
says...
8:44pm Fri 20 Apr 12
Personally, I think, there will probably be a number of people (including councilors probably) FOI'ing right now to get that info.
Sorry to hear that you might be concreted over, do you live near Manydown or one of the other areas ?
I think the main problem is the unlawfulness, as now it means that the LDF has to start again at square one and all areas are now to be included, and will upset those who voted for the councilors (with the manifestoes to stop the Manydown development) in the hope Manydown wouldn't be developed in the first place.
But this time, the process will be fair, honest and transparent, so there is some good come out of the judgement.
klorane
says...
8:56pm Fri 20 Apr 12
P Heath
says...
11:10pm Fri 20 Apr 12
Lib/Lab alliance completed deal year later.
klorane
says...
7:28am Sat 21 Apr 12
Mr Heath, as you were there, please tell me who proposed the motion, as the minutes of meetings were simply a suggestion as to a course of action. I'm particularly concerned as to why development at Newbury was seemingly held back and Basingstoke promoted as a major development site, contrary to national government objectives. Thanks.
P Heath
says...
3:38pm Sat 21 Apr 12
klorane
says...
9:33pm Sat 21 Apr 12
popleyrebel2
says...
10:26am Sun 22 Apr 12
It all depends on what you class as affordable, are we talking rented (housing Association) or private rent?
What is affordable housing???????
klorane
says...
7:55pm Sun 22 Apr 12
Neither. I'd rather see more private family housing.
popleyrebel2
says...
12:25am Mon 23 Apr 12
Who can afford a private family home?
What we need are more Council houses/housing Association for rent. People can’t even afford a ladder never mind putting one foot on that property ladder.
It must be soul destroying seeing all these housing developments springing up all over the place knowing its only a pipe dream ever getting one, and the majority who get one face bankruptcy after a short time. Private ownership leads to personal disaster for many young families.
klorane
says...
8:12am Mon 23 Apr 12
GC31
says...
12:15pm Mon 23 Apr 12
clivep wrote:All the more reason to wait. Develop land elsewhere and sit on Manydown until the price goes back up!
A more general point about Manydown. In all the debate about how the Council have been proven to have developed a plan that is "irrational and "unlawful", the fact that the Manydown Executive Committee and this Administration have presided over an asset that has lost 35% of its value under its stewardship has been lost. It was bought with tax payers money for £10 million pounds and is now valued at around £6.4m! So to recap this Administrations financial track record on this asset. Bought for £10m and lost £3.5m. Spent over £700,000 in consultant fees to date and now they want to spend another £500,000+ to evaluate its suitability for development. Finally spent an estimated minimum £150,000 defending a legal action they had been warned by many they would loose, and they lost emphatically. This from an Administration that claims to manage our money effectively! And so far no apology, no one accepting responsibility and no one being held accountable!
clivep
says...
3:04pm Mon 23 Apr 12
popleyrebel2
says...
4:40pm Mon 23 Apr 12
you right and to put in nut shell, people are forgetting that B&DBC acted unlawfully in their decision “Not” to add Manydown to their list.
Furthermore, what needs to be explained by our Council members who made that decision is “WHY” did they protected Manydown that lead to a high court judgement condemning their action.
If this an example of giving local authorities more power then B&DBC have not only shot themselves in foot but have clearly thrown that policy in to disrepute and not worth the paper it’s written on.
It a clear indication if you give these people more powers they will abuse them.
klorane
says...
7:12pm Mon 23 Apr 12
clivep
says...
7:33pm Mon 23 Apr 12
klorane
says...
9:30pm Mon 23 Apr 12
popleyrebel2
says...
10:41pm Mon 23 Apr 12
You say and I quote “You mean you need a group of people with nothing else to do”
If that was the case then that small group of people has exposed our council for acting unlawfully therefore, that small group of people have done the borough a great service.
That said, it was not a small group of people it was large group of people including Cllrs who I might add were punished for standing up for their principles and the wards they represent.
The high court judgment supported those who challenged the Council to the extreme by saying they acted “unlawfully”
popleyrebel2
says...
10:03am Tue 24 Apr 12
“You mean you need a group of people with nothing else to do” un-quote.
“nothing else to do” That’s an insulting to those who have worked very hard to expose this Council.
THX 1138
says...
10:06am Tue 24 Apr 12
clivep wrote:So I take it from that, if the position concerning Manydown and Loddon Valley was the same but the other way round you would be actively campaigning for the Loddon Valley to be considered and included! I know you have a lot of supporters and have managed to cultivate a friendly local press, but some of us are sceptical concerning the motivations of SOLVE.
@klorane. Like any fair-minded Resident of Basingstoke, my and SOLVE's interest in Manydown relates to a desire to see our Council act lawfully and rationally and develop a sound Core Strategy where all greenfields are treated equally under the law so planning decisions are made fairly and rationally. Anything unreasonable about that?
First, you should be aware that you can't treat all greenfields equally - for example the North Wessex Downs AONB has extra legal protections and wouldn't expect large scale development to be proposed on it. Second, there are greenfield areas without special protections that don't appear to have been considered - e.g. the land south of the M3 - do you think these areas should be considered?
I am also curious as to why you congratulated the Manydown Company on your website when they openly propose development on Manydown - earlier you said you were opposed to large scale greenfield developments.
The council have proposed an average of 594 new homes per year up to 2027. Assuming this figure stays the same and you win your battle against housing in the Loddon Valley, then those houses would have to be built elsewhere - you must know that Manydown is the most likely. So a 'victory' for your group would be at the expense of other areas. Are you campaigning for a reduction in the 594 figure? Is your group's motivation purely selfish to maintain house prices or are we to believe that your group is really opposed to large scale greenfield developments in ALL parts of the borough?
clivep
says...
10:42am Tue 24 Apr 12
THX 1138
says...
11:16am Tue 24 Apr 12
Finally, I don't wish to make party political points, but I do find the criticisms of local Labour and Lib Dem councillors rather opportunistic. I think if they were in power the figure would be higher than 594, especially if they had retained power nationally at the last general election. So I don't think they have much to offer residents in the Loddon Valley opposed to large scale developments. Some Labour councillors also opposed development on derelict brownfield sites in their ward - although the scheme fell through for financial reasons rather than their objections, it would have eased pressure on greenfield numbers.
clivep
says...
11:30am Tue 24 Apr 12
popleyrebel2
says...
12:49pm Tue 24 Apr 12
(After hearing all the evidence) the high Court judgement ruled that B&DBC acted unlawfully. People have the right to campaign and in this case it proved successful and our Council acted unlawfully.
You can’t have a more damming endorsement that the campaigners were right to take their chances in the high Court.
That said, you must question B&DBC judgement.
popleyrebel2
says...
1:39pm Tue 24 Apr 12
Best_Name_Ever
says...
1:54pm Tue 24 Apr 12
I think everyone will agree that the Borough needs more housing. Hopefully now, this decision can be moved forward and all sites can be considered and the right amount of housing proportioned around the Borough for the people who need it.
popleyrebel2
says...
3:28pm Tue 24 Apr 12
What would help the situation is an inquiry in to the conduct of Cllrs during committee and the subsequent actions taken by the committee to fellow cllrs on the committee as many people believe their dictatorial /bullying tactics were unacceptable.
It would also help the situation if people accept the courts findings and start holding the Council to account and not criticise those who helped the court arrive at their findings.
Is there the right to appeal against the courts finding, if so, it would interesting to know if the Council are considering an appeal.
Keep_Calm_And_Comment
says...
8:01am Wed 25 Apr 12
I'm confused. You make a big deal about asking a question and emphasising the point with (???) but then go on to ask:
"Is there the right to appeal against the courts finding, if so, it would interesting to know if the Council are considering an appeal."
Now call me the pedant, but did you use up all the question marks on your keyboard at the start of your post so you didn't have any left for your closing question?
If you don't use the ? properly, how can anyone understand that you are asking a question and not making a statement?
I hear your local school offer some courses in basic adult literacy - if that helps, and if you are on benefits you may get it free. May be worth you checking it out?
pip the planner
says...
11:49am Wed 25 Apr 12
HCC have had it comming when they started to mix up their role as developer with that of strategic planner. I can sympathise with the land owner because HCC and B&DBC would have been selling the landowners the dream that they would be best placed to get planning. They signed the deal and then they've naturally got got up in the politics. I also understand that HCC would have promised the landowners that they would have been best placed to deliver a good quality scheme. This too was pants and you only have to look at Merton Rise to see the modern rubbish HCC have delivered us.
popleyrebel2
says...
1:32pm Wed 25 Apr 12
I’m sorry I confused you, it was not intentional, however, I have taken it on board that you are easily confused and will endeavour not exacerbate your problem in the future.
I’m pleasantly surprised however, your only criticism of that post was a? leading me and other to believe you agree. And I thank you for that.
Once again, sorry for the confusion.
Best_Name_Ever
says...
1:44pm Wed 25 Apr 12
robertspet8
says...
3:15pm Wed 25 Apr 12
t says... 'Now call me the pedant, but did you use up all the question marks on your keyboard at the start of your post so you didn't have any left for your closing question?'
You are an amateur pedant. Wouldn't the English language be boring if it conformed to all the rules of grammar you were taught at school! Rhetorical question with exclamation mark used to show indignation.
Wouldn't it be great if you were able to make some worthwhile and non-abusive comments. Full stop used to show that I am thinking allowed and I am not interested in an answer.
Wouldn't we all just love to know who you really? Question mark to show that I am really interested.
Today's lesson in pedantry is now finished. Class dismissed!
robertspet8
says...
3:53pm Wed 25 Apr 12
robertspet8
says...
4:03pm Wed 25 Apr 12
popleyrebel2
says...
5:15pm Wed 25 Apr 12
Therefore, I would strongly recommend lying down in a darken room (in order to clear the mind of any confusion) KCAC must also avoid confusion as to who is entering the room, as it wildly believed KCAC uses multiple names and therefore it would add to the confusion.
I hope this advise helps.
Keep_Calm_And_Comment
says...
5:44pm Wed 25 Apr 12
Can I ask, did you check out those classes on adult literacy like I suggested? I think you may have an urgent need for them.
Best_Name_Ever
says...
10:09pm Wed 25 Apr 12
popleyrebel2
says...
9:45am Thu 26 Apr 12
Has there been a statement from Maria Millers MP on the High Court judgement?
Keep_Calm_And_Comment
says...
10:48am Thu 26 Apr 12
You really do need those classes because the only thing you are treating with contempt is the English Language.
robertspet8
says...
10:58am Thu 26 Apr 12
Keep_Calm_And_CommenNearly every contributor, present company not excepted, has made mistakes in their posts. There are no checking tools provided by The Gazette and life is too short to prepare comments in Word, copy and paste or get somebody else to proof read them before hitting 'SUBMIT'. Most fluent readers do not not notice small mistakes because they do not read every word, but perhaps you do. (Rhetorical musing not requiring a '?' or an answer).
t wrote:
What 'Advise' do you mean? Don't you mean 'Advice'? Can I ask, did you check out those classes on adult literacy like I suggested? I think you may have an urgent need for them.
This is not a literary competition and the main criteria is to be understood. In both instances, which you have highlighted above, the meaning was clear. And in the first you have demonstrated that even you do not have a full grasp of the many and delightful nuances of rhetoric which are part of our rich language.
So ditch the schoolboy rules of grammar, stick to the point (Major legal decision regarding Manydown), and drop the petty, personal and vile comments.
Keep_Calm_And_Comment
says...
12:46pm Thu 26 Apr 12
popleyrebel2
says...
4:17pm Thu 26 Apr 12
If that’s all KCAC can criticise in my postings then I have done very well when you consider the vile attacks made by KCAC on others taking part (not only this thread) but many others, and it begs the question, why does he do it, Personally, I believe he just can’t help himself and it’s in his nature to create controversy not have the ability to conduct/take part in a constructive debate, he doesn’t have anything constructive to say and as a consequence he become vile and abusive.
I think I right in saying our path have crossed on many occasions, that said, I can’t be 100% however, I am 99% sure, the tone, aggression, insults are a dead giveaway.
It’s been said he uses a number of names and I believe that to be true (including women’s) hence the name, (the black widow) used in parts of Popley.
A prime candidate for anger management?
Keep_Calm_And_Comment
says...
8:20pm Thu 26 Apr 12
The latest issue with you is this little chestnut in this very thread where you became the grammar policeman and said:
"It was raised as a question (please note the ???)"
You then wet your pants when you were pulled up on numerous mistakes you had made, and your clarity in writing. So, remember, you brought the issue up - don't run away like a weasel trying to distract attention from that very inconvenient little fact.
@robertspet8
I'm sorry, your Majesty, I did not recognise you. God has asked me if you would mind if he takes a day off this weekend?
popleyrebel2
says...
9:53pm Thu 26 Apr 12
Popleyrebel is still active, check out yourself , there was technical problem and I used popleyrebel2. as for wet your pants, in your dreams.
The _right_stuff
says...
11:49pm Thu 26 Apr 12
Yes, I'm back. The spammy troll and who I think I fell out of the idiot tree... didn't I KCACMV ? was that right ?
(Is that the right use of the question mark....and do I really care..not really).
Can we get back to the topic !?! please.
The _right_stuff
says...
11:54pm Thu 26 Apr 12
I know I've 'inter trolled' myself, by hey, at least I'm always the same person :-))
Keep_Calm_And_Comment
says...
8:19am Fri 27 Apr 12
You say "Can we get back to the topic !?! please."
Then go on to harp on about a completely different thread.
Pot-kettle-black-tro
ll?
The _right_stuff
says...
4:57pm Fri 27 Apr 12
so....bus fare thread ? still waiting.
and hey, now the pot-kettle-black-tro
ll.
you do come up with some stuff.
You , might just see me change my thread name to 'a_bit_duff' as I actually like it. Please don't register it before me, I would be so upset.
Keep_Calm_And_Comment
says...
6:49pm Fri 27 Apr 12
The _right_stuff
says...
7:44pm Fri 27 Apr 12
And no, I'm definately not lonely, but I was waiting to have my tea and a bit bored. Had it now, yum yum.
Please explain how you came to the assumption I am lonely ?
Your mind seems to work differently than others.
Did you register my new thread name, as I've tried and it's been blocked !?!
And, can you please tell me if my use of the question mark is o.k ?
The _right_stuff says...
5:03pm Tue 17 Apr 12
Lets have transparency, fairness and decisions not based on councilors manifestos.