Green Party Driver Local Plan Consultation Undemocratic and Insulting

Green Party Councillor and General Election Candidate for Thanet South, Ian Driver, has criticised the  public consultation arrangements for  Thanet Council’s Local Plan as being  “undemocratically short and totally insufficient”. He had argued that the consultation should be at least 12 weeks, but the Council’s Labour controlled Cabinet decided on 8 weeks. Driver said that the 8 week consultation period (9^th January to  9^th March) “does not provide enough time for people to read and make comments on the 262 page document”. He added “the local plan is one of the most important documents to

have been produced by the Council in a long time. It sets out the Council’s policies about regeneration, employment, transport, housing and the environment covering the next 16 years. It’s a long and very complex document which directly effects everyone living in Thanet, that’s why local people should be allowed more time to read and comment on it”.

Driver pointed out that last year’s public consultation on setting up a town council in Margate and parish council in Westgate took 13 weeks and that Canterbury Council’s local plan consultation in 2013 lasted 10 weeks. He also highlighted  Government  guidance on public consultation which recommends that;

“Timeframes for consultation should be proportionate and realistic to allow stakeholders sufficient time to provide a considered response. The amount of time required will depend on the nature and impact of the proposal (for example, the diversity of interested parties or the complexity of the issue and might typically vary between two and 12 weeks. For a new and contentious policy, 12 weeks or more

may  be appropriate”. (1)

“Its clear to me” said Driver “that because of its size complexity and importance,  the local plan consultation should fall within the “12 weeks or more” category. Allowing only 8 weeks on a matter as important as this is an insult to the people of Thanet and proves once again that TDCs bosses and political leaders are contemptuous of democracy and want to exclude residents from having an influence over the future of their district.”

If elected to the Council in 2015, Green Party Councillors, will be fighting for improved communication with the public including properly managed consultations on policies which effect the lives of Thanet residents.

1.   See Consultation Principles Guidance, The Cabinet Office 2013

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/consultation-principles-guidance

  

Green Surge Hits Thanet

Thanet Green Councillor, Ian Driver, has welcomed  the huge surge in membership of the Green Party, making the Greens with 47,000 members the third largest UK wide political party ahead of UKIP and the Lib Dems. In Thanet the  membership has trebled in the past six months to 100 and support grows daily.

Driver, the  Green Party Parliamentary Candidate for Thanet South said: "While the establishment continue to claim that the Green Party is not a major party but the Lib Dems and UKIP are, we are not only polling higher than the Lib Dems but we have more members than either party.

"We had an MP four years before UKIP and we now have more MEPs than the Lib Dems. Despite the establishment wanting to silence us, there is a Green revolution happening.

"I welcome all our new members in Thanet  and across Kent. With this rapidly growing support we can get Green Councillors elected to Thanet Council this year  and begin to transform it into an open and transparent organisation which is accountable to the people. We may even have some  Green MPs elected, including here in Thanet. Events are showing that the old fashioned political parties are collapsing. Its time for modern 21st century parties with fresh new ideas to run the council and the country”

O'Regan Ramsgate Port Plans Transparency & Meeting Video

I publish below and exchange of correspondence between Steven Boyle TDC Legal Officer and myself about about the O'Regan Group proposals for Port of Ramsgate. I am very intrigued to know how many meetings the O'Regan Group and/ or its agents have  held with the Council and what internal discussions have taken place between senior council managers and political bosses. The Council said they want to be open. Lets see how open they will actually be, espescially due the to the massive public interest demonstrated at the meeting on Monday.

Dear Mr Boyle,

Thank you for your e-mail. 

I am pleased to note that the Council is aware of the need to be open and transparent about its  dealings with the O'Regan Group and its agents Mr White and Mr Brown.

With this in mind I would be grateful if you could tell me how many meetings  Council has had with the O'Regan Group over the past 18 months. Could you let me have the dates of these meetings and the names of those who attended including agents acting on behalf of the O'Regan Group. Could you also provide me with copies of minutes/ notes of these meetings and copies of any documents discussed at these meetings. I would be grateful if you could tell me if the Cabinet and/ or the senior management team have discussed the O'Regan proposals. If so when and could you please let me have copies of any reports, notes, emails etc pertaining to such discussions.

I would also be grateful if you could tell me whether there have been any discussions about rentals and costs which might have to be  paid by the O'Regan Group for use of council land at the Port or elsewhere. Could you also let me know if  the council has  adopted a view as to whether planning permission will be required for the O'Regan group to implement its proposals.

Finally as the Green Party PPC for Thanet South and as a Ramsgate Councillor I would be grateful if you could keep me up to date with any ongoing discussions with the O'Regan Group or its agents about their plans for the port. I would also like to be notified as soon as the Council receives any planning application from the O'Regan Group regarding its proposals for the Port.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Cllr Ian Driver 

  

---

From: Steven Boyle
To: Cllr-Ian Driver
Sent: Thursday, 15 January 2015, 9:50
Subject: RE: Proposed Development at Ramsgate Port

Dear Councillor Driver

Thank you for your e-mail concerning the O’Regan Group of Companies and the potential

for them using former employees.

You cite two former employees as being involved with the company. As far as I have been able to ascertain there is no restriction on these two former officers in terms of their work preventing them working for a company in relation to this matter and I note that you are not seeking to imply any impropriety on either of their parts. That said given the former status I agree that the Council needs to be open on its dealings and mindful that no advantage is conferred.

You are perfectly entitled to raise this as an issue and as such I will be ensuring that those who have involvement with the company in their dealings with the Council are aware that they need to be open and transparent in their dealings.

I am grateful for the notification.

Yours sincerely
Steven Boyle

 ________________________________

From: Ian Driver <ianddriver@yahoo.co.uk>
To: "steven.boyle@thanet.gov.uk" <steven.boyle@thanet.gov.uk>
Sent: Tuesday, 30 December 2014, 15:24
Subject: Proposed Development at Ramsgate Port

Dear Mr Boyle
Proposed Development at Ramsgate Port
I understand that discussions are (or are likely to be)  underway between the Council,  the O’Regan Group of Companies and its agents about the development of waste wood processing and concrete block manufacturing operations at the Port of Ramsgate. I understand that there is a public meeting in Ramsgate about this matter on 12th January which will be attended by Council officers and that planning permissions, statutory licences and lease agreements may have to be secured if these proposals are to be implemented.
I have many concerns about these proposals particularly the environmental implications which I will raise at the appropriate time through the appropriate channels. However my reason for writing to you as the Council’s Monitoring Officer is my concern about the agents working on behalf the O’Regan Group.
It is my understanding that the agents are Mr Brian White former Director of Regeneration at Thanet District Council and Mr Doug Brown formerly a senior planning manager at Thanet District Council. I believe that Mr White may have had director-level responsibility or involvement in  the management of Ramsgate Port and Harbour and was involved in dealing with the  TransEuropa Ferries  debt problem. I believe that Mr Brown was also involved as a Council officer in the work of the Port including managing the development of the Port and Harbour Master Plan.
I am not any way suggesting or implying any inappropriate behaviour, but because Mr White and Mr Brown were both formerly very senior council officers and both had in-depth involvement and knowledge of the workings of Ramsgate Port and Harbour, I believe that Thanet Council should in the interest of transparency and accountability proceed with the greatest of care in its management of this matter.
As you are probably aware the House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee, the Committee  for Standards in Public Life and the highly regarded anti-corruption charity Transparency International have all recently published reports which highlight  the dangers of the so-called “revolving door”  in the public sector. These reports recommend  that where former public employees take up employment with other organisations which requires them  to negotiate  with their previous employers great care must be taken to ensure that old or continuing relationships with former work colleagues are not exploited to gain advantage for the new employer.
As I have previously stated  I am not suggesting for one moment that what is happening  in this case is any way untoward, however  as an elected Councillor who is aware of the controversial nature of the O’Regan Group plans and the involvement of 2 very senior ex-employees in their  execution, I seek your reassurances that the Council will take the utmost care in managing this sensitive matter. In this regard  I would be grateful if you set out in writing what practical steps the Council will be taking to manage this unusual situation.
I look forward to hearing from you.

Cllr Ian Driver

Two Pub Landlords and an Election P*** Up

Here's my letter to the press. Al Murray if you are reading this please get in touch and I will buy you a pint!

Al Murray the Pub Landlord has a democratic right to stand for election in Thanet South. I respect  this right, but the cynic in me suggests that this is more about reviving a stalled career on the back of Thanet South’s  voters,  than a serious effort to engage in the  politics of one of the most deprived parliamentary constituencies in the country.

True, Murray’s candidature may provide  huge comic potential, which might undermine  UKIPs  angry Little England appeal, but conversely   irony and satire can sometimes  lend  credibility to the target.

However, the important point is this: Farage and the Labour, Conservative and Lib-Dem candidates  are all members of politics'  “austerity establishment”  and are firmly tied to a programme of draconian cuts to  public services.

With the exception of the Greens, not one of them is campaigning on the extremely serious issues facing many people living in the constituency,  such as tackling  the massive health inequalities in a district served by a hospital in special measures; dealing with significant educational  under achievement  in a constituency with its  major comprehensive school also in special measures;  regenerating an economy with the highest rate of unemployment and the lowest wages in south east England;   calling to account an out of control  Jobcentre, which is  sanctioning benefits at twice the rate of anywhere else  in the county;  providing more social housing for the 6,000 people lingering on the longest housing waiting list in Kent;  campaigning to reform a council described by the Local Government Association as “toxic” and by Eric Pickles as a “democracy dodger”.

Sadly, Murray’s candidature will  detract attention from these issues and provide yet another excuse for the “austerity establishment” to avoid talking about  the consequences of their actions in a seat they aspire to win. In my opinion,  Murray’s candidature is counterproductive and an insult to the people of Thanet South,  many of whom are struggling to get by in hard times. 

Finally for those not familiar with Thanet South politics, you may like to know that there already is a pub landlord standing for election in the constituency. He is Nigel Askew, who runs the Queen Charlotte, my local,  in Addington Street  Ramsgate. It is, as far I know, the only anti-fracking pub in the world! Nigel is standing for Bez's Reality Party.

My fear is that, rather than campaigning about social justice, public services  and regeneration in one of  the most deprived areas of the country, we will have the spectacle of two pub landlords and a well know pub regular vying for votes in a contest which, with the help of the media circus which is already gathering in Ramsgate,  soon be reduced to a pissup in brewery.

Councillor Ian Driver, Thanet District Council

Green Party Prospective  Parliamentary Candidate Thanet South

People Power Ramsgate Style

Last night about  250 people braved stormy weather to attend a public meeting about the O’Regan Group plans to locate a waste wood processing and concrete block manufacturing facility at the Port of Ramsgate. Mr Doug Brown and Mr Brian White, both former senior employees of Thanet District Council presented the plans on behalf of the O’Regan Group. It was clear that everyone attending the meeting was opposed to the O’Regan plans. Questions were asked and points raised about the dust, noise and traffic that will be generated by the plant.Concerns were expressed about the impact of the plans on Ramsgate’s reviving  tourist industry.Some people were worried about the amount water to be used to process the wood and manufacture the concrete block and how the polluted water would be managed. Others were very worried about the impact on the plans on the site of special scientific  interest and the European special area of conservation adjacent to the Port and  a number of people expressed their fear about the airborne dust and aggregates on the health of people living in Ramsgate.Sadly the presenters were unable to provide convincing answers to any of these important questions, much to the annoyance and frustration of  those attending the meeting. Quite clearly O’Regan and its plans are not wanted in Ramsgate. But I suspect this is not the last we will hear from them. As one of the O’Regan presenters let slip; they have chosen Ramsgate as a base for their potentially polluting activities because its cheaper than Medway and Sheerness ports!

So I think over the course of the next few months we can expect to see a planning application and an application for environment agency permit to allow  O’Regan’s to operate their  ill-conceived plans at the port. We need to be ready to organise and work together to oppose these plans and I’m sure we can easily transform  the 250 or so people who turned up last night into a formidable force of thousands. It was clear to me last night that people care passionately about
Ramsgate and they don’t want to sell it cheaply to dirty, noisy, smelly industrial development on our beautiful seafront.

The people spoke loud and clear  last night. If O’Regan’s come back they can expect to learn what People Power is all  about, especially People Power Ramsgate style . This is what John Lennon had to say to about it and here is a video  of Ramsgate people telling it like it is last night 

O'Regan Meeting Part 1

Mr White Truly Loves Ramsgate Seafront

At tonight’s packed public meeting to discuss the O’Regan Group plans for the Port of Ramsgate I spotted 2 familiar faces who had turned up to  represent  the developer; Mr Doug Brown a former planning manager with Thanet Council and Mr Brian White the former Director of Regeneration and Planning at  Thanet Council and Mr Brown’s ex-boss.

I am sure they are doing a great job for O’Regan and providing excellent value for money. I am equally sure what they are doing is perfectly legal and above board. But I do believe that there is something unethical about  former senior  public servants moving into to the private sector and then using their public sector knowledge, expertise  and contacts to negotiate with their former employer on behalf of their new bosses – the so called revolving door. It simply doesn't feel right to me.

Nor does it feel right to House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee, or the Committee  for Standards in Public Life or the  highly regarded anti-corruption charity Transparency International  all of whom have recently published reports which highlight  the dangers of the so-called “revolving door”  which they argue can sometimes give rise to corruption, preferential treatment and unfair advantage in business dealing. Not that I am suggesting that this is the case here.

But seeing Mr White and Brown  did get me to  thinking and I suddenly remembered that as  Director of Regeneration Mr White had more than passing interest in the future of the port of Ramsgate. In fact Mr White was one of main architects of the ill-fated and top secret TransEuropa debt-deferral agreement which resulted in council tax payers having to stump up £3.4 million to cover the unpaid fees when the ferry company went bust 2 years ago. It was the same Mr White who was involved in the Pleasurama development which continues to blight the seafront more than 12 years after SFP Ventures was appointed as the developer.

Mr White has now teamed up with the O’Regan Group to use his  undoubted knowledge, skills and experience, and his remarkable track record of successfully  managing developments and business on Ramsgate seafront, to bring us something we desperately need  to kick start our leisure and tourist economy – a large waste wood and concrete block manufacturing facility. Located right next to the Royal Harbour; adjacent to a site of special scientific interest and a European special conversation area; within a stones throw of residential areas and cafes and bars.Likely to be noisy, smelly and dusty and use massive amounts of fresh water in an area described by experts as being water stressed  – this development is just what we need!

Despite the unanimous opposition of the 250 or so people who turned up to the O'Regan consultation meeting, Mr White appeared to suggest that his client will continue to  push on with its plans to develop a potentially polluting facility at the port of Ramsgate which if it gets the go ahead will almost certainly impact negatively on the revived tourist economy in Ramsgate.

But who am I to make comment on this issue  because Mr White has demonstrated through his actions over the years that he is man who truly loves Ramsgate seafront and who would do nothing to harm its interests.

By the way, before anyone gets the bright idea of serving another injunction on me the Council was ordered by the Information Commissioner to release these confidential TransEuropa Ferry  papers to me last year. This is the  ill-fated deal which cost you £3.4 million and which was kept secret from you for more than 2 years by council bosses and the Conservative and Labour Party Leaders. This was a shameful and expensive scandal  which demonstrates Thanet Council's continuing culture of secrecy and mis-management

 If you want honest and open government in Thanet vote Green in 2015 

Thanet's Hard-line Job Centre Bosses Top of Sanctioning League

Green Party Councillor and Parliamentary Candidate for Thanet South Ian Driver says he believes that Thanet Job Centre bosses are operating an “unfair and hard-line” sanctions policy against the district’s benefits claimants.

His comments follow an  analysis of Department of Work and Pensions statistics which reveal that during the 21  month period from October 2012 – June 2014, Thanet Jobcentre managers disallowed or  sanctioned  5,273 Jobs Seekers Allowance claims; that’s an average of 251 sanctions per month which is twice the rate of any other district in the Kent County Council area  and over  20% of all sanctions and disallowance decisions  in Kent (1).

Said Driver “even allowing for Thanet’s high unemployment,

the number of sanctions are massively  disproportionate when compared to other areas of Kent. I can only assume that this is because Jobcentre bosses in Thanet are more  hard-line  toward sanctioning claims  than their colleagues  elsewhere in Kent. Perhaps they are operating unofficial sanctions targets and  putting pressure on frontline staff  to sanction first and ask questions later. Either way the statistics for Thanet suggest that something very unusual and unfair is happening. The victims of this approach are most likely to be vulnerable and disabled people especially those with mental health problems and learning disabilities ”.

Driver’s criticisms are supported by growing evidence which indicates that  the application of benefits sanctions is beset by problems. Reports to the Scottish Parliament and the House of Commons in 2014 and countless press articles have demonstrated that the sanctioning  regime  is unfair, applied inconsistently, subject to abuse, and is the cause of extreme hardship; and even suicide  for some claimants,  especially those who are vulnerable or disabled(2).

Such is the level of concern about this issue that a Department of Work and Pensions Select Committee on Benefits Sanctions has been set up by Parliament to look into the matter. At its first meeting on 7 January,  leaders of several influential campaign  groups and charities called for the immediate suspension of benefits sanctioning and the major review  of how the DWP deals with claimants who fail to follow the rules(3).

Said Driver “there is no doubt in my mind that some of the most vulnerable people in Thanet have been abused and forced into severe hardship and poverty  by the insensitive and hard-line approach  of senior Job Centre bosses. I sincerely hope that the Select Committee will demand  a root and branch overhaul of a system which is clearly unfit for purpose and dangerous to boot”

Ends for more information contact Ian Driver on 07866588

Notes

1. Number of sanctions per benefits office and per Kent County Council District set out below. Figures extracted  from https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/jobseekers-allowance-and-employment-and-support-allowance-sanctions-decisions-made-to-june-2014

Benefit Office
Ashford - International House	1,473
Canterbury - Northgate House	1,264
Dartford - Lowfield Street	2,311
Dover - Maison Dieu Road	2,028
Folkestone - Trinity Road	2,807
Gravesend - The Grove	2,248
Herne Bay - Bank Street	955
Maidstone - County Gate	2,273
Margate - Mill House	3,720
Ramsgate - Queens Street	1,553
Sheerness - Millennium Way	1,109
Sittingbourne - Roman Square	1,469
Tonbridge - Bradford Street	806
Tunbridge Wells - Northgate	942
Whitstable - High Street	35
	24,993
District Council
Ashford	1,473
Canterbury	2,254
Dartford	2,311
Dover	2,028
Gravesham	2,248
Maidstone	2,273
Shepway	2,807
Swale	2,578
Thanet	5,273
Tonbridge and Malling	806
Tunbridge Wells	942
	24,993

2.    Sanctioned ; what benefit? Citizens Advice Scotland 2014, Tough Love or Tough Luck: Report of the Scottish Parliament Welfare Reform Committee 2014, Independent Review of the Operation of Jobseekers Allowance sanctions DWP 2014

3.    Government urged to suspend benefit sanctions regime The Guardian 8 January 2015 

Ramsgate Seafront Pollution Threat

Maternal Wisdom & O'Regan's Port Plans

My mum always used to say to me "its not what you know but who you know that counts". My subsequent life experience has  proved her to be right about  this and many other things. However before I digress on to the subject of maternal wisdom, I have  contacted Thanet Council's Monitoring Officer Steven Boyle, to seek assurances that mum's wise words will not apply in any shape or form to the O'Regan Group's plans for the Port of Ramsgate. 
Dear Mr Boyle - Proposed Development at Ramsgate Port

I understand that discussions are  underway between the Council,  the O’Regan Group of Companies and its agents about the development of waste wood processing and concrete block manufacturing operations at the Port of Ramsgate. I understand that there is a public meeting in Ramsgate about this matter on 12^th January which will be attended by Council officers and that planning permissions, statutory licences and lease agreements may have to be secured if these proposals are to be implemented.

I have many concerns about these proposals particularly the

environmental implications which I will raise at the appropriate time through the appropriate channels. However my reason for writing to you as the Council’s Monitoring Officer is my concern about the agents working on behalf the O’Regan Group.

It is my understanding that the agents are Mr Brian White former Director of Regeneration at Thanet District Council and Mr Doug Brown formerly a senior planning manager at Thanet District Council. I believe that Mr White may have had director-level responsibility or involvement in  the management of Ramsgate Port and Harbour and was involved in dealing with the  TransEuropa Ferries  debt problem. I believe that Mr Brown was also involved as a Council officer in the work of the Port including managing the development of the Port and Harbour Master Plan.

I am not any way suggesting or implying any inappropriate behaviour, but because Mr White and Mr Brown were both formerly very senior council officers and both had in-depth involvement and knowledge of the workings of Ramsgate Port and Harbour, I believe that Thanet Council should in the interest of transparency and accountability proceed with the greatest of care in its management of this matter.

As you are probably aware the House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee, the Committee  for Standards in Public Life and the highly regarded anti-corruption charity Transparency International have all recently published reports which highlight  the dangers of the so-called “revolving door”  in the public sector. These reports recommend  that where former public employees take up employment with other organisations which requires them  to negotiate  with their previous employers great care must be taken to ensure that old or continuing relationships with former work colleagues are not exploited to gain advantage for the new employer.

As I have previously stated  I am not suggesting for one moment that what is happening  in this case is any way untoward, however  as an elected Councillor who is aware of the controversial nature of the O’Regan Group plans and the involvement of 2 very senior ex-employees in their  execution, I seek your reassurances that the Council will take the utmost care in managing this sensitive matter. In this regard  I would be grateful if you set out in writing what practical steps the Council will be taking to manage this unusual situation.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Ramsgate Port Slag Heaps & Pallet Mountains

I’m  very worried about  proposals to locate  waste wood processing and concrete block production facilities  at the port of Ramsgate. The proposals have been made by the O’Regan Group.  According to the company check website, DueDil, the group doesn’t appear to be financially robust. Most of the companies within the organisation have negative financial valuations, or are dormant with no recent trading history and no accounts submitted. Although it’s very worrying that an organisation which intends to develop a large industrial processing facility at Ramsgate Port, does not appear to have much money, my foremost concern is the impact that these activities might have upon the town and its residents.  According to documents produced by the O’Regan Group their concrete block manufacturing and waste wood processing operations will take up about one third of the port area. The production of concrete blocks will require the delivery by sea of vast quantities of aggregates which will be stock piled in large slag heaps several metres high. The waste wood processing plant will be supplied by road creating massive mountains of pallets etc. The operations are likely to generate considerable noise and dust, which, considering the close proximity of residential areas of Ramsgate to the Port, could be very

problematic. There will also be a significant increase in lorry movements to and from the port resulting from the O’Regan operation and an elevated risk of fire due the vast quantities of flammable wood which will be stored at the port. Last but not least, what impact will these operations have on the quality of our bathing waters and beaches and on the nearby nature conservancy and scientific interest sites?

I was taken aback to learn that O’Regan’s proposals are being piloted through the council system by 2 former, and very senior TDC planning managers. Not that I am suggesting anything untoward or improper, but I am  mindful of comments made by anti-corruption charity Transparency International, in their 2013 publication, Corruption in UK Local Government, which warn of the possibility that former council officers who are now working for the private sector “might influence his or her former colleagues in a way that favours the company” the former officer is representing. Because this proposals is likely to subject to planning permission and because O’Regan’s agents were formerly very senior planning officers, this an application which must be managed with the fullest transparency and sensitivity.

Finally, I have long argued, that the future of Ramsgate Port is best served by its transformation into a modern marina. Newhaven, Brighton and  Eastbourne marinas have all demonstrated that sustainable and very successful businesses can be developed by investing in leisure based  marine activities. They have created hundreds of local jobs and many opportunities for local business. In my opinion developing Ramsgate Port into a modern marina, rather than a noisy, dusty and potentially polluting industrial facility, is the best solution to regenerating the local economy, creating jobs and attracting more visitors.

I'm  sure I will be saying a lot more about this wrongheaded plan in the next few weeks.