My KCC Election Manifesto & Video

Thursday, 25 September 2014

Labour Tries to “Shaft” People of Ramsgate. Green Party Driver Stops Them!

 
Thanet Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Panel met tonight to discuss the latest developments concerning the troubled Pleasurama development which has blighted Ramsgate’s seafront for over a decade.

Council officers and Labour Cabinet member Rick Everitt tried their best  to bamboozle and scare  councillors into accepting a deal whereby Canterbury  building contractors, Cardy, would buy out the controversial development company SFP Ventures (UK) Ltd and complete the project within a three year period. Everitt said that the stalled legal action against SFP Ventures for breach of agreement would cost a fortune and that a deal with Cardy might be the best option. Chief Executive Madeline Homer said that she though legal action would “take years” and that it would be preferable to make a deal with Cardy.
 
Conservative leader Bob Bayford and his colleague Councillor Chris Wells challenged much of what Everitt had to say. Green Party Councillor Ian Driver pointed out that everything Everitt and Homer had said was based on legal and valuation advice which members of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel had not seen. He expressed his concern that the Panel was being asked to make recommendations on an incredibly complex issue without having seen the key information. This was an highly improper abuse of process. Driver then moved a motion calling for the members of the Panel to be provided with copies of the legal and valuation advice and the officers report about progress on the Cardy takeover of SFP.

Driver’s motion was passed  by 7 votes to 5 with 2 abstentions. It was notable that the 5  votes against and 2 abstentions  were Labour Councillors, Campbell, Huxley, Moore,  Matterface and Poole voted against Driver’s motion. Worrow and Fenner abstained.
Said Driver “Labour showed their true colours tonight. They voted to prevent the Panel from having sight of key documents about Pleasurama before they make a decision. This is undemocratic and appallingly irresponsible. Quite clearly Cabinet member Everitt and his labour colleagues, supported by senior council officers,  are determined to drive through this deal with Cardy and foist   on the people of  Ramsgate a development which is extremely unpopular and which many people oppose. 

What makes this this worse is that Everitt and 6  of the Councillors who voted against or abstained on  my motion  (Campbell, Fenner, Huxley, Moore, Poole and Worrow), represent, or have been selected to represent,  Ramsgate wards. These people have shown by their actions tonight that they don’t give a damn  about their constituents concerns over Pleasurama. They have demonstrated that they cannot be trusted by the voters, preferring to stab  local people in fthe back in  a cynical pusuit  of party politics.
A source close to senior council officers  reported that Chief Executive Homer was incandescent with rage as her plans to have the Cardy/ SFP takeover rubber stamped were scuppered by Driver and Conservative councillors. Apparently the air turned blue at a hastily convened officer pow-wow called by Homer immediately after the Scrutiny meeting had ended. Said Driver the Chief Executive must  realise that if councillors are being asked to make important decisions, such as the future of the of the Pleasurama site, we must be provided with all the relevant background documentation instead of second hand explanations and vacuous summaries We are not a rubber stamping factory we are supposed to be scrutinising and evauating  decisions on behalf  of the public. We can't do this without the relevant information.

16 comments:

  1. Why do they still call themselves the Labour Party? Is it something to do with their agonising and painful decisons they inflict on the public in an attempt to produce a satisfactory outcome? It's certainly nothing to do with closing the gap between the rich and the poor by attempting to contribute, in the form of Royal Sands, to blighting our seafront permanently with a grotesque white elephant primarily for the benefits of the rich.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its not any Labour party I know

      Delete
  2. ... and that was a party political broadcast on behalf of UKIP!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Is there anything in the building leases or development agreement that gives TDC any control over changes of ownership of of the *development company* - as opposed to changes in ownership of the leasehold interest in the site? I can't see any, but admittedly, these documents do ramble on for many many pages.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Without any political bias, would you please post timescales up so that those concerned over this fiasco can be as prepared as possible in adequate time. Wasn't the three sides of A4 with points produced just the morning of the meeting - for example? Leaving little time for proper reflection.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well done Ian. Everitt must go. This is a hasty deal with Cardy and scaremongering.

    TDC can cancel any contract since at least February and take back the site. 7 months have been wasted by Everitt.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Everitt is still in charge of the Port too? That's another disaster

    ReplyDelete
  7. Worse, I am reminded of how some of the attitudes to general purposes committee considerations of the furore surrounding EKO and the chief executives actions were treated. All classic labour machinations, do as I say, not as I do! Perhaps Michael Vhild should read all this and consider his own positions on Pleasurama and Manston. His heroes were looking to run both the CPO debate, and Pleasurama through the same extraordinary cabinet on the same evening. Pretty good way to stifle real debate. As ever, Micheal's silence When it comes to criticising labour politicians is deafening.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Michael won't post on blogs other than his own, as he can't control the replies. Same reason why he doesn't answer comments on twitter.

      Delete
  8. Both pleasueama and cpo look finished. Iris will go if she cannot sort this mess. The election will be a clearout of these idiots

    ReplyDelete
  9. Iris and Everitt must go.

    ReplyDelete
  10. In a slightly off topic, have I missed the going of Sue Mc. as Chief Ex.? Or is she still taking her salary. For sitting at home.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Who is Edwina Crowley mentioned with Pleasurana? In charge of it now at TDC?

    ReplyDelete
  12. You are not off topic 18:22, these events are symptoms of the shambles created by McGonigal and her hopeless team of supporters she surrounded herself with. Yes she is still being paid sitting at home, but her clone (and just as untrustworthy) Homer is being paid a second Chief Ex salary, and then there is the S.151 Officer, a third high salary, all three being paid to do what McG. was actually appointed to do in the first place according to her own reckoning in one job and one salary. Her appointment and plan was rubber stamped by Bayford and Hart of course.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Well said 9:04 Iris needs to get a grip of this. And for a useless council we're paying high salaries for continued failure...

    ReplyDelete