| Topic: | Re:Re:Re::Re: STENCH of the TORIES PREVAILS | |
| Posted by: | Phil Andrews | |
| Date/Time: | 24/09/11 13:29:00 |
| The Environment department is not incompetent. It has as a Chief Officer a man who does not in my view have any respect for the democratic mandate exercised by the Lead Member, and who has even less respect for organised residents who are deemed to be amateurs in matters of planning and therefore intrinsically incapable of comprehending its complexities. Remember this is a man who tried to have a very highly respected Isleworth residents' leader (a Conservative Party member as it happens) deemed a "vexatious complainant" so that he would no longer even have to read her e-mails! Unfortunately many councillors do seem to share this view of the general public. Consultation and engagement are fine in the abstract as long as people are only expecting to be heard rather than really listened to. That this is the case was clearly evident by the treatment meted out to the MRAG spokesperson at SDC when the application was being heard. The residents' representative, Barry Edwards, was belatedly given the opportunity to speak but nobody really took any notice of what he was saying because he was a resident and ipso facto could not possibly therefore have had any idea of what the really complicated issues involved really were. The look of strained tolerance on the faces of some of the members said it all. The fact that he was an environmental scientist just didn't register with any of them. He was there as a resident, as was thus to be humoured. The great irony of it all was that to any outside observer Barry was quite obviously more clued up than any of the elected members present, not only on the environmental question itself but also on the planning arguments, and if anybody was out of their depth....well, watch the video and see for yourself. I can only repeat that in approximately ten years of serving on planning committees this was the first and only occasion on which I have known relentless pre-lobbying of members by chief officers, continual asking of the applicant what it would and would not be prepared to accept as part of the S106 agreement, and what was effectively a refusal by officers to accept the first decision that the Committee reached. The Environment department is one that really does need strong political leadership. The Conservatives on LBH frequently boasted that, unlike under Labour, the coalition was "member-led", but to be really honest I never really felt this was the case with Environment. Or, if it was, then a tough stance would only be taken on those issues which were important to the Lead Member, and Mogden sadly wasn't one of them. In retrospect (hindsight being a wonderful thing) things would probably have been different had the ICG successfully insisted upon taking the portfolio as part of the coalition agreement, but we are talking about 2006 when Housing was still out of control and making essential changes there were our absolute first priority. I don't think, bearing in mind the size of our Group, we could reasonably have asked for both Housing and Environment. There is not the slightest shadow of a doubt in my mind that there is something "dodgy" about the relationship between Thames Water and the London Borough of Hounslow. I have seen no evidence whatsoever to suggest any kind of financial wrongdoing and indeed I do not think this to be the case, however I do think there is some serious probing to be done and it would take an elected member who is really on top of his or her brief to take on such a task. The problem is that this is clearly not going to happen with the council's current political representation. The borough urgently needs some kind of third party presence from somebody who is capable and willing to sink their hands into the meat. This is so important that it almost barely matters whence this presence comes. |