Sunday, 29 September 2013
Ramsgate Shanty Town Shit Camera and Ferrygate
Home after a great night at Shanty Town with Mrs D. But the filming didn't work. Still a grand night . Lovely people. Good music and lots of fun and a picture of Transeuropa Ferries on the way to home
Saturday, 28 September 2013
Who's Going to Ramsgate Shanty Town Tonight?
Heading for Ramsgate Shanty Town tonight with Mrs D. Hope to see you there.
Here's Max Romeo to get you in the mood!
CPRE Protect Kent Opposes Gas Drilling Applications
Protect Kent (The Kent Branch of CPRE), Queens Head House, Ashford Road, Charing, Ashford Kent TN27 0AD, Telephone: 01233 714544 www.protectkent.org.uk
Press Release:
Fracking in Kent? The Public Say No!
Friday 27th September 2013
Almost 300 concerned members of the public crowded in to Sheperdswell village hall on Wednesday night to listen to CPRE Protect Kent’s views on the 3 applications for exploratory boreholes in Dover district. CPRE Protect Kent Chairman Richard Knox-Johnston introduced the organisations views and briefed the crowd on the serious concerns that CPRE Protect Kent has with the test boreholes being drilled, whilst the Chairman of our Environment Committee, Graham Warren, gave a technical description of the geology of the area and the potential impact that drilling may have on Kent’s water resources. CPRE Protect Kent’s experts believe that in an already water-stressed area of the country, the prospect of loss or contamination of water resources that are already heavily committed is too great a risk and that the geological uncertainties of the Kent coal fields remain too great a hazard
Members of the public were given the opportunity to ask questions of the CPRE experts in attendance, whilst the local MP Charlie Elphicke also attended to hear the views of the public and to answer questions. He echoed the concerns raised by Protect Kent over the particular risks of gas exploration in this location and announced that he would raise these concerns with Ministers.
CPRE Protect Kent has a number of serious concerns about test boreholes being drilled in these rural areas, not least the landscape and traffic implications whilst our Environment Committee has raised serious concerns regarding the potential for groundwater contamination due to the particular formation of geological layers and fault lines beneath the chalk.
CPRE Protect Kent Chairman Richard Knox-Johnston said:
“There is considerable concern amongst those in the area about this drilling operation, the way in which it needs to be regulated and the unseemly speed with which the planning application is being processed. We are also concerned by the many impacts these developments will have on the tranquil landscapes of the Dover district. We would ask all members of the public who are concerned by these developments to respond to the Kent County Council planning applications to ensure that their voice is heard.”
-Ends-
NOTES FOR EDITORS
1.To access the planning applications, please follow the links below:
2. CPRE, the Campaign to Protect Rural England, is a charity which promotes the beauty, tranquillity and diversity of rural England. We advocate positive solutions for the long-term future of the countryside. Founded in 1926, we have 60,000 supporters and a branch in every county. President: Sir Andrew Motion. Patron: Her Majesty The Queen. www.cpre.org.uk
3. Protect Kent (The Kent Branch of CPRE) is one of the charity’s largest county groups, with more than 3,000 supporters, 12 district groups and four special-interest groups, which focus on transport, planning, historic buildings and the environment.
4. Protect Kent (The Kent Branch of CPRE) exists to promote the beauty, tranquillity and diversity of rural England by encouraging the sustainable use of land and other natural resources in town and country.
5. Registered office: Queens Head House, Ashford Road, Charing, Ashford, Kent TN27 0AD, Telephone: 01233 714540, www.protectkent.org.uk or www.cprekent.org.uk, email: info@cprekent.org.uk. A company limited by guarantee, registered in England number 4335730, registered charity number 1092012.
Thursday, 26 September 2013
Shepherdswell People Power
Last night I went to a public meeting at Shepherdswell Parish Hall to discuss a planning application for exploratory drilling for shale and coal bed methane gas just outside the village. I was amazed how many people were there. By my estimation about 200. It was standing room only and the back doors had to be opened to let in fresh air and provide more standing room. The meeting was organised by the Campaign to Protect Rural England - a big thank you to CPRE for doing something which KCC and the Environment Agency should have done weeks ago!
CPRE Hydrologist, Graham Warren, explained how exploring for, or extracting, gas from the former East Kent coalfield area was fraught with risk, especially the danger of polluting the East Kent chalk aquifer which provides water for tens-of-thousands of homes in Kent. He talked about the danger of atmospheric pollution from the drilling operation and the problems associated with disposing of hundreds of thousands of gallons of polluted water which will be brought to the surface by drilling. He then explained that the gas bearing seams are located in an area of geological faults caused by seismic activity. He said it was not a clever idea to drill thousands of metres below the ground in such an area as it might well lead to fresh seismic events.
I must say, that whenever I have previously been to complex scientific or technical presentations I, and others in the audience, have nodded off, begun to doodle on our notepads, started to daydream, raised eyebrows and indicated boredom to our neighbours or all of the above. But not last night! Mr Graham Warren transfixed all 200 souls in that room. He was heard in riveted silence and I am sure that more once I heard collective intakes of breath when he described some of the more awful consequences that might arise from the drilling.
So powerful was Mr Graham Warren's contribution that local Conservative MP Charlie Elphicke, did a rapid U-Turn on his position on unconventional gas exploration and extraction. less than a week ago in an interview on BBC Radio Kent Elphicke was extolling the virtues of fracking and accusing CPRE as being muddled in their approach to unconventional gas extraction. But last night, after listening to Mr Warren he told the meeting that he was now totally opposed to uncovential gas extraction on his patch.
But perhaps it was not entirely Mr Warren's powers of persuasion that brought about this U-Turn, but rather the result of Mr Elphicke asking for a show of hands for and against drilling in East Kent. When at least 95% of the audience raised their hands against drilling Mr Elphicke's fence sitting suddenly stopped. After all 2015 is not long way off!
But seriously, last night was one of the finest examples I had seen, in a long time, of a community getting its act together and influencing the decision makers. There is now a group in Shepherdswell campaigning to oppose the planning applications and last night membership of that group exploded as people queued up to give their contact details to the organisers. I hope that the people of Shepherdswell will inspire residents of nearby Guston and Tilmanstone who face similar planning applications to begin to organise themselves as well. After seeing for myself a community in action I am convinced that drilling in East Kent will be defeated.
CPRE Hydrologist, Graham Warren, explained how exploring for, or extracting, gas from the former East Kent coalfield area was fraught with risk, especially the danger of polluting the East Kent chalk aquifer which provides water for tens-of-thousands of homes in Kent. He talked about the danger of atmospheric pollution from the drilling operation and the problems associated with disposing of hundreds of thousands of gallons of polluted water which will be brought to the surface by drilling. He then explained that the gas bearing seams are located in an area of geological faults caused by seismic activity. He said it was not a clever idea to drill thousands of metres below the ground in such an area as it might well lead to fresh seismic events.
I must say, that whenever I have previously been to complex scientific or technical presentations I, and others in the audience, have nodded off, begun to doodle on our notepads, started to daydream, raised eyebrows and indicated boredom to our neighbours or all of the above. But not last night! Mr Graham Warren transfixed all 200 souls in that room. He was heard in riveted silence and I am sure that more once I heard collective intakes of breath when he described some of the more awful consequences that might arise from the drilling.
So powerful was Mr Graham Warren's contribution that local Conservative MP Charlie Elphicke, did a rapid U-Turn on his position on unconventional gas exploration and extraction. less than a week ago in an interview on BBC Radio Kent Elphicke was extolling the virtues of fracking and accusing CPRE as being muddled in their approach to unconventional gas extraction. But last night, after listening to Mr Warren he told the meeting that he was now totally opposed to uncovential gas extraction on his patch.
But perhaps it was not entirely Mr Warren's powers of persuasion that brought about this U-Turn, but rather the result of Mr Elphicke asking for a show of hands for and against drilling in East Kent. When at least 95% of the audience raised their hands against drilling Mr Elphicke's fence sitting suddenly stopped. After all 2015 is not long way off!
But seriously, last night was one of the finest examples I had seen, in a long time, of a community getting its act together and influencing the decision makers. There is now a group in Shepherdswell campaigning to oppose the planning applications and last night membership of that group exploded as people queued up to give their contact details to the organisers. I hope that the people of Shepherdswell will inspire residents of nearby Guston and Tilmanstone who face similar planning applications to begin to organise themselves as well. After seeing for myself a community in action I am convinced that drilling in East Kent will be defeated.
Tuesday, 24 September 2013
Thanet Ferrygate Incompetent Fools ?
I wrote to Thanet Council's Chief Executive asking why, in her role as the Council's Section 151 Officer (finance officer), she had failed to ensure that the financial interest of the Council had been secured though a charge on the assets of Trasnseuropa Ferries should this company fail to pay back the £3.3 million fees and charges it owed to the Council.
Ostend Port and the fuel suppliers felt that having Transeuropa's debts secured against the failing ferry operators assets was a sensible and prudential thing to do. By doing this they were able to force the sale of Transeuropa's ferry the Gardenia and share in the 750,000 euros raised at auction last week.
Thanet Council, obviously had better ideas than Ostend Port and the fuel suppliers, but they refused to share them with me. Rather than provide an answer to my enquiry, the Chief Executive delegated the response to another officer who e-mailed me saying that the "Council confirms that it holds relevant information but declines to disclose that information to you". The letter writer went on to quote the Freedom of Information Act to justify why The Chief Executive had not been open, transparent and accountable about her role in the management of this appalling , secretive gamble with £3.3 million public money which went horribly wrong.
Incredible as it may seem, at the same time that TDC officers denied my request for information about debt security, they had actually provided journalist from Kent Online, who were asking for same information as me, with a press statement detailing why the Council failed to securitise its £3.3 million debt. So it would now appear that senior officers of Thanet District Council are free to withhold information from elected councillors, but provide that same information to the press! This is an extremely sad day for local democracy in Thanet.
But it gets worse! Let's have a look at the reasons why the Section 151 Officer decided that there was no reason to mitigate financial loss by securing a charge on Transeuropa's assets. Well if Kent Online is to be believed this decision was made because the Council as port authority has a legal right "to seize Transeuropa assets in the port to cover any debts" therefore "a secured status was not sought at the time the (debt deferral) arrangement was set up". So why did Ostend Port who has similar rights to Ramsgate Port insist on having additional security through charges on Transeuropa's assets. Perhaps because ferries are able to move from A to B making it easy for them to escape the clutches of unsecured creditors such as TDC.
But would Thanet have ever dared to exercise its right to seize Transeuropa's assets to cover the debt? Apparently not! When the debt stood at £1million they did not move to seize Transeuropa's assets. When the debt stood at £2million they did not move to seize Trasnseuropa's assets. When the debt approached £3million and Transeuropa and its erstwhile Italian investors had, despite their agreement to do so, not paid a penny in re-payments for over 6 months, the Council still unbelievably refused to seize it assets! In fact the Council is on record as saying "seizing the vessel at this time would have sent Transeuropa into liquidation". This can only mean that the Council was happy to stand by and let the debt grow bigger and bigger and gamble with more and more of your money without taking any action to safeguard its financial interests. Where would it have ended? A secret debt of £4, £5 or even £6miillion paid for by you!
Ostend Port and the fuel suppliers felt that having Transeuropa's debts secured against the failing ferry operators assets was a sensible and prudential thing to do. By doing this they were able to force the sale of Transeuropa's ferry the Gardenia and share in the 750,000 euros raised at auction last week.
Thanet Council, obviously had better ideas than Ostend Port and the fuel suppliers, but they refused to share them with me. Rather than provide an answer to my enquiry, the Chief Executive delegated the response to another officer who e-mailed me saying that the "Council confirms that it holds relevant information but declines to disclose that information to you". The letter writer went on to quote the Freedom of Information Act to justify why The Chief Executive had not been open, transparent and accountable about her role in the management of this appalling , secretive gamble with £3.3 million public money which went horribly wrong.
Incredible as it may seem, at the same time that TDC officers denied my request for information about debt security, they had actually provided journalist from Kent Online, who were asking for same information as me, with a press statement detailing why the Council failed to securitise its £3.3 million debt. So it would now appear that senior officers of Thanet District Council are free to withhold information from elected councillors, but provide that same information to the press! This is an extremely sad day for local democracy in Thanet.
But it gets worse! Let's have a look at the reasons why the Section 151 Officer decided that there was no reason to mitigate financial loss by securing a charge on Transeuropa's assets. Well if Kent Online is to be believed this decision was made because the Council as port authority has a legal right "to seize Transeuropa assets in the port to cover any debts" therefore "a secured status was not sought at the time the (debt deferral) arrangement was set up". So why did Ostend Port who has similar rights to Ramsgate Port insist on having additional security through charges on Transeuropa's assets. Perhaps because ferries are able to move from A to B making it easy for them to escape the clutches of unsecured creditors such as TDC.
But would Thanet have ever dared to exercise its right to seize Transeuropa's assets to cover the debt? Apparently not! When the debt stood at £1million they did not move to seize Transeuropa's assets. When the debt stood at £2million they did not move to seize Trasnseuropa's assets. When the debt approached £3million and Transeuropa and its erstwhile Italian investors had, despite their agreement to do so, not paid a penny in re-payments for over 6 months, the Council still unbelievably refused to seize it assets! In fact the Council is on record as saying "seizing the vessel at this time would have sent Transeuropa into liquidation". This can only mean that the Council was happy to stand by and let the debt grow bigger and bigger and gamble with more and more of your money without taking any action to safeguard its financial interests. Where would it have ended? A secret debt of £4, £5 or even £6miillion paid for by you!
What sort of financial management is this? I've said it before and I'll say it again, the Transeuropa Ferry issue is a major public scandal. Senior politicians and mangers have, in my opinion, grossly mis-managed pubic money. There should be a full independent investigation into this scandal and some prominent careers should be swiftly and robustly ended. Sadly Labour and Conservative party councillors have spinelessly followed the orders of their party whips like so many frightened sheep and voted to cover up this scandal.
But I remain confident that the truth will eventually come out. The District Auditor has contacted me to tell me that he is still investigating my complaints about the Transeuropa scandal and hopes to advise me of his findings by November. I am waiting for the Information Commissioner to get back to me about having access to all the secret Transeuropa papers. If he agrees I will publish them so you can make own minds up about what happened
I must say I am becoming increasingly frustrated by the appallingly bad political and managerial culture at Thanet District Council. It reminds of the political corruption and dishonesty of 1930s Chicago City Hall. Thankfully 2015 is not far away and I sincerely hope that the good people of Thanet will take that opportunity to rid themselves of this thoroughly rotten political regime and some of its less than inspiring civil servants .
Here's the Kent On Line article
Monday, 23 September 2013
Kent County Council Breaks Planning Rules
This post is about exploratory drilling for shale and coal bed methane gas in the former Kent Coalfield. Why would I write about something that does not seem to be related to Thanet? Simple, because these planning applications involve test drilling, possibly leading to gas extraction and maybe fracking, in the middle of the chalk aquifer which provides the people of Thanet (and many other areas) with their water. This could become a major issue for Thanet in the next few months
Ian
East Kent Gas Drilling Applications - KCC Breaks the Rules
Shepherdswell resident Pamela Mudge-Wood said: “I heard nothing from the developers or KCC about this application. No letters have been sent to me and no public meetings organised by KCC or Coastal Oil and Gas. I found out about the applications from Facebook and was so worried that I started leafleting Shepherdswell myself. We now have a small group of about 20 residents who are beginning to campaign against the applications.”
For more information contact Councillor Ian Driver on 07866588766
Notes
Local Government Association Probity in
Planning 2010 p7
Text of Ian Driver’s letter to Sharon Thompson
The Green Party
Thanet istrict Council
Ian
KEITH TAYLOR GREEN PARTY MEP AND CAMPIGNERS AT SHEPHERDSWELL DRILLING SITE |
PRESS
RELEASE
22
September East Kent Gas Drilling Applications - KCC Breaks the Rules
Campaigners against exploratory shale and coal bed methane
gas drilling at Guston, Tilmanstone and Shepherdswell have accused Kent County
Council of breaking planning rules and best practice (1).
In a letter to KCC Planning boss, Sharon Thompson, East
Kent Against Fracking supporter and Thanet Green Party Councillor, Ian Driver, accuses
officers of:
- failing to
ensure that the drilling company, Coastal Oil and Gas Ltd, organised public meetings with residents
of the three villages to discuss the applications and answer questions;
- failing to advertise
the planning applications in local newspapers;
- failing to
notify all village residents about the applications, rather than just those
living in the immediate neighbourhood of the proposed drilling site;
- failing to
organise village public meetings at which residents could find out how to
object to the applications;
- failing to provide parish, district and county
councillors with technical briefings on the three applications.
Shepherdswell resident Pamela Mudge-Wood said: “I heard nothing from the developers or KCC about this application. No letters have been sent to me and no public meetings organised by KCC or Coastal Oil and Gas. I found out about the applications from Facebook and was so worried that I started leafleting Shepherdswell myself. We now have a small group of about 20 residents who are beginning to campaign against the applications.”
Chair of East Kent Against Fracking Rosemary Rechter said:
“KCCs management of these applications has been absolutely appalling. Their
failure to follow the rules means that local people are being denied their
democratic rights to make informed comments about extremely important issues in
their villages.”
Driver is now calling upon KCC to terminate the “fatally
flawed” consultation process and re-start it, allowing residents more time to understand
and comment on these complex applications and providing councillors with
technical briefing sessions. If KCC fails to do this, Driver says that he will
complain to the Local Government Ombudsman.
In a separate development, countryside charity
CPRE-Protect Kent will be holding a public meeting at Shepherdswell Village Hall
on 25th September at 7.00pm to discuss the applications.
Ends For more information contact Councillor Ian Driver on 07866588766
Notes
(1) Kent
Minerals and Waste Development Framework Statement of Public Involvement 2011
can be found at
Dear Ms Thompson
I am writing to express my
concern about the management of the consultation process for the exploratory
gas drilling planning applications at Guston, Tilmanstone and Shepherdswell.
It is my view that the
Planning Authority has failed to adhere to its own guidance as set out in the
Kent Minerals and Waste Development Framework Statement of Public Involvement
2011. This failure is of a sufficiently serious magnitude to justify the
termination of the current consultation process and for you to begin a new one,
which accords more fully with the Statement.
According to Paragraph 4.2
and Policy 6 of the Statement of Public Involvement, your department must encourage
“applicants of potentially controversial proposals to engage with the relevant
communities as early as possible and subsequently demonstrate how they have
responded to the issues raised”.
I am sure you will agree
that these applications are extremely controversial, but I am unaware that
Coastal Oil and Gas Ltd have engaged, to any meaningful degree, with the local
communities concerned. To the best of my knowledge, this company has not set up
public meetings at Guston, Tilmanstone or Shepherdswell at which they have
presented their plans to residents,
answered questions and taken into account any comments or proposals.
I would be grateful if you
could provide me with evidence (e-mails, meeting records etc) that your
officers made genuine efforts to implement this policy. Please provide me with
evidence (e-mails, meeting records etc.) of how your officers managed any
resistance or refusal by the applicant to engage with the communities
concerned.
According to KCC’s Planning
website, a notice of the planning applications was published in the Kent on
Sunday newspaper on 15.09.2013. Policy 7 and Para 4.4.1 of the Statement of
Public Involvement requires that the application is published in local newspaper(s). The editorial of Kent on Sunday on 21st September
described itself as a “county newspaper” and Wikipedia describes Kent on Sunday
as a “regional newspaper”.
It would therefore appear
that in placing the planning notice in Kent on Sunday on 15th September you
have acted contrary to your Statement of Public Involvement, which requires the
notice to be published in a local newspaper(s). Could you please advise me
whether any notices of application have been published in local newspapers and,
if so, in which publications. If such notices were published after the 15th
September, then I assume that you will alter the consultation timetable
accordingly.
Paragraph 4.4.9 of the
Statement of Public Involvement states that, depending upon the nature of a
planning applicant, you may sometimes exceed statutory consultation requirement
by notifying all local residents rather than just adjoining neighbours of a
planning application. I would argue that the controversial nature of the
applications at Guston, Shepherdswell and Tilmanstone merit the application of
this discretionary power. Please provide me with evidence (e-mails, meeting
notes etc) to demonstrate that consideration was given to notifying all local
residents about these applications and evidence as to why it was decided not to
do this.
Para 4.5.5 of the Statement
of Public Involvement states that in the case of controversial applications, or
applications which have a high level of interest from the local community, a
“public meeting may be arranged”. I am sure you will agree that these three
applications are extremely controversial but I am unaware of your having made
any arrangements to hold public meetings at Guston, Shepherdswell or
Tilmanstone. Could you please inform me whether it is your intention to hold
public meetings at each of these locations?
Even if you do, belatedly,
decide to hold public meetings, I feel that the time required to organise them
and notify residents means that they will be held very close to the
consultation deadline, which will be extremely unfair to residents.
Finally, test drilling for
gas is a very complex and technical issue. I am very surprised therefore that
the Planning Authority appears to have failed to provide democratically elected
consultees and decision makers, at parish, district and county level, with any
background briefing or training so that they can make informed comment on
behalf of their constituents.
I was at the Shepherdswell
Parish Council meeting last week and no planning officer was present to provide
advice to councillors. I understand that no planning officer was present at the
Guston or Tilmanstone Parish Council
meetings either. In fact, to the best of my knowledge, all 3 parish councils
have decided not to make formal comment to KCC about these applications because
they feel that the information provided by KCC has been insufficient.
The Local Government
Association, of which KCC is a member, recommends in its Guide for New
Councillors 2013-14 and its 2010 publication, Probity in Planning, that because
planning is a complex and changing area, councillors must be specially trained
and that this training should be supplemented with special briefing sessions on
planning issues which may be technical or controversial, such as those at
Guston, Shepherdswell or Tilmanstone.
I have found no evidence to
demonstrate that KCC, in partnership with Dover District Council, have made any
effort whatsoever to provide parish, district or county councillors with
special briefings to help them understand the issues involved before they make
formal comments about, or decisions on, these applications.
I am extremely disappointed
that the Planning Authority appears, in relation to these three applications,
to have clearly disregarded its own guidance on public involvement in the
planning process and to have ignored the advice of LGA about providing training
and briefing sessions for councillors commenting or deciding on complex
planning issues. This is particularly worrying when the nature of the three
applications concerned is taken into account.
I trust that, in light of my
comments, you will now begin a new and proper consultation process and initiate
a programme of councillor briefings, otherwise I will have no option but to
take this matter to the Local Government Ombudsman on the grounds of
maladministration and injustice.
I look forward to hearing
from you.
Yours sincerely
Councillor
Ian DriverThe Green Party
Thanet istrict Council
Sunday, 22 September 2013
Thanet Council Open, Transparent, Backside Watchers
It's perfectly reasonable for an elected councillor to ask to see documents related to the secret deal with Transeuropa Ferries which has cost Thanet taxpayers £3.3. million. It's perfectly reasonable for an elected councillor to ask the Council why it did not seek security on the £3.3 million debt and what action it proposes to take to recover taxpayers money.
Unfortunately the Council's Regulatory Manager does not see it that way and continues to refuse my requests to see the key documents relating to this scandal. Would I be wrong to speculate that the Council's refusal to open the filing cabinet might possibly be something to do with corporate and political backside watching? Is it conceivable that the Council do not want to reveal information which might show how political bosses from the Tory and Labour groups and senior council officers might have grossly mismanaged their relationship the Transeuropa Ferries leading to the accumulation of a massive secret debt? Would it be wrong to fantasise that the reason the Council does not wish to talk about debt recovery plans is because it has no plans and knows it is unable to get back of penny of the £3.3 million it has secretly gambled? Is it remotely possible that if the documents about Transeuropa Ferries were to be released, they could seriously embarrass some very important people and perhaps prematurely end some careers?
Of course not! This is clearly groundless speculation on my part, which cannot possibly be true. Everybody knows that Thanet Council is a professionally run organisation, with political leaders and senior officers working tirelessly on behalf of local people to kick start Thanet's economy, secure inward investment and create jobs. Just look at Dreamland and the Turner. Consider the jewel in Ramsgate's crown Pleasurama and the plans to open the port to another Transeuropa-style ferry company. This evidence clearly demonstrates that our political leaders and senior officers are not, as some people believe, incompetent fools unfit to run Legoland.
But there again when I receive e-mails such as the one below I sometimes wonder about all sorts of scenarios and possibilities. But who knows my complaint to the Information Commissioner might soon be dealt with and the Regulatory Services Manager could be forced as John Lennon said to "Gimme Some Truth". The we shall see.
Dear Councillor Driver
I refer to your e-mail of 6 September 2013 where you requested information about the steps being taken by the Council to recover the Transeuropa debt and the nature of the debt deferral arrangements between the Council and Transeuropa Ferries. You also wrote to the Chief Executive on 10 September concerning the recent auction of the Gardenia where you raised similar issues and so she has asked me to reply to you on her behalf .
It is clear that you have made both these requests under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 . Consequently , in formulating a response I will take into account that any information disclosed to you would, necessarily, enter the public domain. In addition , much of what you request, particularly in your e-mail to the Chief Executive, is a not actually a request for information but a request explanation. There is no right to an explanation so none will be forthcoming.
Formal Response - Debt Recovery Steps
The Council confirms that it holds relevant information but declines to disclose that information to you
Relevant Exemption - Section 43 Freedom of Information Act 2000 - Disclosure would harm the commercial interests of the Council and therefore the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosure. - Section 42 of the Freedom of Information Act 200- Some of the information is protected by legal privilege and therefore the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosure
Formal Response - Nature of Debt Deferral Agreement
The Council confirms that it holds relevant information but declines to disclose that information to you
Relevant Exemption - Section 43 Freedom of Information Act 2000 - Disclosure would harm the commercial interests of the Council and therefore the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosure.
You have the right to request an internal review of my decision or complain to the Information Commissioner. However, the Commissioner will expect you to exercise your right to an internal review before accepting a complaint from you.
Yours sincerelyHarvey Patterson
Corporate & Regulatory Services Manager
Thanet District Council
Unfortunately the Council's Regulatory Manager does not see it that way and continues to refuse my requests to see the key documents relating to this scandal. Would I be wrong to speculate that the Council's refusal to open the filing cabinet might possibly be something to do with corporate and political backside watching? Is it conceivable that the Council do not want to reveal information which might show how political bosses from the Tory and Labour groups and senior council officers might have grossly mismanaged their relationship the Transeuropa Ferries leading to the accumulation of a massive secret debt? Would it be wrong to fantasise that the reason the Council does not wish to talk about debt recovery plans is because it has no plans and knows it is unable to get back of penny of the £3.3 million it has secretly gambled? Is it remotely possible that if the documents about Transeuropa Ferries were to be released, they could seriously embarrass some very important people and perhaps prematurely end some careers?
Of course not! This is clearly groundless speculation on my part, which cannot possibly be true. Everybody knows that Thanet Council is a professionally run organisation, with political leaders and senior officers working tirelessly on behalf of local people to kick start Thanet's economy, secure inward investment and create jobs. Just look at Dreamland and the Turner. Consider the jewel in Ramsgate's crown Pleasurama and the plans to open the port to another Transeuropa-style ferry company. This evidence clearly demonstrates that our political leaders and senior officers are not, as some people believe, incompetent fools unfit to run Legoland.
But there again when I receive e-mails such as the one below I sometimes wonder about all sorts of scenarios and possibilities. But who knows my complaint to the Information Commissioner might soon be dealt with and the Regulatory Services Manager could be forced as John Lennon said to "Gimme Some Truth". The we shall see.
Dear Councillor Driver
I refer to your e-mail of 6 September 2013 where you requested information about the steps being taken by the Council to recover the Transeuropa debt and the nature of the debt deferral arrangements between the Council and Transeuropa Ferries. You also wrote to the Chief Executive on 10 September concerning the recent auction of the Gardenia where you raised similar issues and so she has asked me to reply to you on her behalf .
It is clear that you have made both these requests under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 . Consequently , in formulating a response I will take into account that any information disclosed to you would, necessarily, enter the public domain. In addition , much of what you request, particularly in your e-mail to the Chief Executive, is a not actually a request for information but a request explanation. There is no right to an explanation so none will be forthcoming.
Formal Response - Debt Recovery Steps
The Council confirms that it holds relevant information but declines to disclose that information to you
Relevant Exemption - Section 43 Freedom of Information Act 2000 - Disclosure would harm the commercial interests of the Council and therefore the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosure. - Section 42 of the Freedom of Information Act 200- Some of the information is protected by legal privilege and therefore the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosure
Formal Response - Nature of Debt Deferral Agreement
The Council confirms that it holds relevant information but declines to disclose that information to you
Relevant Exemption - Section 43 Freedom of Information Act 2000 - Disclosure would harm the commercial interests of the Council and therefore the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosure.
You have the right to request an internal review of my decision or complain to the Information Commissioner. However, the Commissioner will expect you to exercise your right to an internal review before accepting a complaint from you.
Yours sincerelyHarvey Patterson
Corporate & Regulatory Services Manager
Thanet District Council
Thursday, 19 September 2013
Thanet Council Ferry Stupid Gamble
After losing £3.3million of taxpayers money in a secret payments deferral deal with TransEuropa ferries, Thanet Council bosses, like gamblers desperate to recoup their losses, are having one last irresponsible punt at your expense, to attract a new ferry service to Ramsgate.
According to a recent notice of tender the Council is "looking to re-establish a suitable ferry services as a priority at the Port of Ramsgate and any additional business associated with RoRo and port operations. The council invites fee bids for locating and delivering a suitable operator (freight/passenger/combination) to service the Port of Ramsgate to the near Continent. It is our aspiration that this service should commence as soon as possible but no later than Summer 2014".
Confirming that the Council has indeed lost what remained of its Corporate marbles the front page of the Maritime Journal quotes Harbour Master, Mr Brown, has saying Ramsgate is Port "who's time has come again". Well sorry Mr Brown, sorry Ms McGonigal and sorry Councillor Hart. Ramsgate is a port which never had and never will have "its time". The best it ever did was tick over on a life-support machine. And its now time to turn it off.
Just look at the facts. Over £7 million in subsidies from the fuel companies, Ostend Port and Thanet's disastorous secret £3.3 million gamble, failed to keep Traseuopa Ferries afloat. Before that the Sally Line service hit the rocks. Doesn't this tell us something? That there is simply no long-term sustainable future for a ferry service operating out of Ramsgate and goodness know the council tax payer of Thanet have paid dearly finding this out.
And why might that be? With due respect to Harbour Master Brown, his otherwise excellent article fails to mention that Ramsgate Port is a run down, ramshackle affair of a continental gateway which needs many £millions to get it into a decent state. Where is this money going to come from?
But the real issue which no one appears to want to talk about is our proximity to Euro Tunnel and Dover. How can Ramsgate compete against these modern transport giants. Especially Dover which is investing more than £400million in updating its existing infrastructure and building a brand new second ferry terminal. Honestly, to see a future for Ramsgate Port in the shadow of these infrastructure colossi is to believe that the world is flat. But what's that I hear - Ramsgate could become a niche port. Again that's nonsense. For niche read dodgy low quality operators managing a fleet of rust buckets who like pirates of old will rip you off. Sounds familiar?
So come on Thanet Council stop being so Ferry stupid. The Port has amazing potential to become something special. A magnet for inward investment, job creation and a unique opportunity to do something right by Ramsgate. But that potential is not as a commercial ferry port, but more likely as a major leisure centre.
According to a recent notice of tender the Council is "looking to re-establish a suitable ferry services as a priority at the Port of Ramsgate and any additional business associated with RoRo and port operations. The council invites fee bids for locating and delivering a suitable operator (freight/passenger/combination) to service the Port of Ramsgate to the near Continent. It is our aspiration that this service should commence as soon as possible but no later than Summer 2014".
Confirming that the Council has indeed lost what remained of its Corporate marbles the front page of the Maritime Journal quotes Harbour Master, Mr Brown, has saying Ramsgate is Port "who's time has come again". Well sorry Mr Brown, sorry Ms McGonigal and sorry Councillor Hart. Ramsgate is a port which never had and never will have "its time". The best it ever did was tick over on a life-support machine. And its now time to turn it off.
Ramsgate Port Run Down Needs TLC |
And why might that be? With due respect to Harbour Master Brown, his otherwise excellent article fails to mention that Ramsgate Port is a run down, ramshackle affair of a continental gateway which needs many £millions to get it into a decent state. Where is this money going to come from?
DOVER HARBOUR IMPRESSION OF NEW TERMINAL |
So come on Thanet Council stop being so Ferry stupid. The Port has amazing potential to become something special. A magnet for inward investment, job creation and a unique opportunity to do something right by Ramsgate. But that potential is not as a commercial ferry port, but more likely as a major leisure centre.
Tuesday, 17 September 2013
Fracking Coming Our Way?
PROPOSED SITE AT FORMER TILMANSTONE COLLIERY |
PressRelease
Hundreds of
people will be attending public meetings to discuss three controversial
planning applications to allow exploratory drilling for coal and shale bed
methane gas at the East Kent villages of Shepherdswell, Guston and Tilmanstone this
week(1).
On Monday 17
September Tilmanstone Parish Council meets to discuss an application to drill
on the village’s former colliery site. Neighbouring Eythorne Parish Council is
expected to meet shortly to discuss this application. On Wednesday 18th
September Shepherdswell Parish Council are meeting to consider an application for
test drilling near the village. On Thursday 19th September, there is
a village meeting at Guston to discuss a similar application (2).
Dover
District Council will be discussing a motion calling for a full report on the
implications of the planning applications at its meeting on 18th
September(4).
Protect Kent,
an affiliate of the charity Campaign to Protect
Rural England (CPRE) has issued a statement expressing its concerns
about the planning applications and will be holding a public meeting for
residents of Guston, Shepherdswell and Tilmanstone on 25th
September(3).
The
applications have been submitted to Kent County Council by Coastal Oil and Gas
Ltd, which already has permission to conduct exploratory gas drilling at nearby
Woodnesborough.
Campaign
group East Kent Against Fracking and the Kent Green Party oppose the
applications. They argue that exploratory drilling could pollute the Chalk
Aquifer, part of which lies beneath the
drilling sites and provides water for thousands of homes in Kent. They point
out that additional vehicle movements and noise, as well as light pollution
resulting from 24-hour drilling operations, will industrialise the East Kent
countryside. If gas is discovered and permission granted for extraction, they
warn that this may lead to full-blown fracking, which could well cause serious
damage to the area.
Green Party
Euro-MP and anti-fracking campaigner, Keith Taylor, will be visiting the Shepherdswell
site and meeting local campaigners on the evening of Friday 20th
September(5).
EndsFor further information contact Ian Driver on 07866588766
Notes
(1) The planning applications can be seen
at
Coastal Oil
and Gas already has KCC planning permission to conduct exploratory gas drilling
at Woodnesborough near Sandwich. See: http://host1.atriumsoft.com/ePlanningOPSkent/loadFullDetails.do?aplId=34407)
(2) Tilmanstone Parish Council 16th
September, Tilmanstone Village Hall 7pm. Contact Parish Clerk Mrs Cathy
Skinner 01304 830200. Shepherdswell
Parish Council Wednesday 18th September 7pm Shepherdswell Parish Hall.
Contact Parish Clerk Steven Durbidge 01304 830242. Guston residents’ meeting
Thursday 19th September Burgoyne Community
Centre from 7.30pm CT15 5LY Parish Clerk Glynis Farthing gustonparishclerk@btinternet.com
(3) Dover District Council meeting 6pm Wednesday
18th September will be discussing the following motion:
“This
Council is concerned by the prospect of fracking and related drilling activity
in the Dover District area and requests that a report is brought forward to the
next meeting of this Council to inform the Council of the nature of the
process, the potential impact on subsurface water resources and geological
formations, the type and scale of the surface structures, and the impact of
anti-fracking demonstrations in the light of recent experience in Sussex on the
local communities and on the police."
(4) CPRE Protect Kent pubic meeting Wednesday 25th
September 7.15pm Shepherdswell Village Hall. CPRE statement on the planning
applications can be seen here: http://protectkent.org.uk/blog/fracking-coming-kent/
(5) Keith Taylor Green Party MEP will be
visiting Shepherdswell and meeting local campaigners on Friday 20th
September. Full details to be announced in separate media release soon.
Saturday, 14 September 2013
Spacecraft Discovery finds Parallel Thanet Universe
This week the spaceship Discovery was reported to have left the solar system. I understand NASSA has confirmed that the spaceship has found two previously unknown parallel universes which are remarkably similar to Margate and Ramsgate. The first universe appears to be developing into in a modern, space age, seaside resort with lots of inter-galactical investment. The second is run down, unloved and dilapidated. a bit like the surface of Mars.
Discovery has just transmitted some pictures back to earth which I have reproduced below. Need I say more. Beam me up Scotty!
Universe Margate
Discovery has just transmitted some pictures back to earth which I have reproduced below. Need I say more. Beam me up Scotty!
Universe Margate
DREAMLAND PARK ATTRACTING SPACE TRAVELLERS FROM ACROSS THE UNIVERSE |
MARGATE RENDEZVOUS GALACTIC HOTEL TRES-EXCELLENT TO BE LINKED TO A WINTER GARDEN PLANETARY CONFERENCE CENTRE |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)