The draft minutes to the council meeting of
Thursday 18th April, with the written questions and answers relating
to Pleasurama have appeared on the council’s website at http://tdc-mg-dmz.thanet.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=141&MId=2701&Ver=4
They may have been there for some time but
what with the local elections so on I hadn’t really looked.
Anyway as the relevant part of the meeting
was also recently webcast I thought I would go through the questions and
answers with the video.
I know the recent election results suggest
that there is little public interest in the videos of council meeting, probably
little public interest in our local councils, town, district or county. The
message from the voters seemed to be, “no mater who our councillors are, we
expect pretty much the civil servants running the show and paying little
attention to the public or their representatives” so we may as well sent a
message to central government.
But frankly the current situation with this
video is ridiculous, I went to the council’s website homepage and there is the
link to the wrong video, i.e the video of the previous meeting on 7th
February. To be quite honest if I hadn’t put up the information that the video
had been published on the press release blog http://thanetpress.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/thanet-district-council-meeting-webcast.html
I doubt I would have been able to find it, even knowing it was there.
How the council can justify the expense of
publishing the video and then putting it where it can’t be found is beyond me.
Sorry about all that, paying out taxes and getting
something broken in return is pretty annoying, I guess I will take this one up
with the council, is it a mistake or a deliberate attempt to make the webcast impossible
to find, so no one watches it and the council can then justify stopping webcasting
meetings.
Anyway I have read through all of the stuff
that they have put up in an effort to answer public concerns about the
development and am not really much the wiser.
Personally I am holding back on The Royal
Sands Issue until the council’s deadline of the 22nd of this month,
which is next week.
Here is the link to the details of the meeting, some
of the links on this council webpage don’t work http://tdc-mg-dmz.thanet.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=119&MId=3402&Ver=4
Update Cllr Ian Driver is his position of chair of overview
and scrutiny called in one of the issues Related to The Royal Sands, doing business
with offshore companies and a partly related issue about filming at council
meetings.
He then failed to turn up at the scrutiny meeting, so I guess
after his standing down as chair at the last scrutiny meeting, for the duration of that meeting only, there is a
question over his remaining chair of scrutiny.
On the 15th April 2013 TDC officers met with Shaun Keegan and Mike Rider to discuss the site (No Cardy nor Terry Painter at the meeting) as reported by the Thanet Gazette. As I understand it Mike Rider was the same guy that advised our jailed Council Leader. A bit odd this!!
ReplyDeleteWhy, legal advisers work for all kinds of people. Some they win some they lose so nothing odd there unless you are looking for conspiracy theories.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteBarry I have deleted your comment as I believe it is potentially libellous.
Deletecould have been expressed differently maybe. Sentiment was right tho
DeleteJames is VERY fond of making allegations he can't back with a shred of evidence Will, i wouldn;t take him to seriously, few do.
DeleteI gather tiny Terry is now looking to wrest the Pavilion from the possible hands of JD Wetherspoon, and is going around pleading with various Ramsgate organisations to help him front a bid to turn it into some kind of community space. What with Ramsgate Boulevard and the Pleasurama eyesore, that would allow him to stitch up practically the whole of Ramsgate seafront west of the slipway. The result would almost certainly be another decade or two of dereliction, with the front looking more and more run down, as, from his previous track record, he seems to have very little luck in bringing these plans to fruitation.
ReplyDeleteI guess his friend Frank has put him up to it, as gawd forbid he should have to face competition. Fortunately everyone he has approached so far has told him where to stick it.
Personally I have no problem with Wetherspoons running the Pav. At least they are a commercial enterprise who would presumably do up the interior and run it as a going concern. If big-hearted Tel really does want a community space so much, why doesn't he do up the Motor Museum?
Funny really that a couple of years or so back he opened a prestigious estate agency office smack overlooking the harbour, primarily to handle his Pleasurama development as well as sell other Ramsgate property, then closed it again a few months later when it failed miserably. Obviously he ain't that smart.
DeleteWetherspoons would be a PERFECT company to take on the pavillion Anon, I would sincerely support any scheme along those lines!
DeleteI think things are getting a bit silly here, developing conspiracy theories around lawyers giving legal advice and estate agents negotiating empty properties is a bit like complaining that the local butcher isn’t a vegetarian.
ReplyDeleteWell said Michael! Seems "FORS" really has decended to unsubstanciated rumours, highly dubious stretchs into flights of non sensicle fancy and allegations, without benefit of proof or evidence. I predicted that outcome, sadly they chose to not take heed of my warnings, and allowed the fairy tale authors to hold sway. Shame.
DeleteJohn Hamilton,
DeleteI left the FORS group on Face book. There are a couple of assiduous FORS members that are digging for information and arranging serious meetings with TDC. Against this and in the main the rest appear to be on the lunatic fringe of the Red Hall Massive. I wish the genuine FORS members every success. But I advise them to get off Facebook which has a habit of attracting the superficial and the self serving.