Today's most viewed
Gresley Road 'fiasco' leads to calls for resignation
 |
| Cllr John Leek |
THE leader of Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council is facing renewed calls to resign after a controversial land sale was scrapped.
At a borough Cabinet meeting this week, the Conservative administration confirmed it would not pursue the sale of 8.3 acres of land at Gresley Road to a developer wanting to bring supermarket Waitrose to Basingstoke.
Now the Liberal Democrats are claiming council leader Councillor John Leek has damaged the council's reputation and have called on him to "consider his position".
The Cabinet had agreed to sell the South View site to the Michael Shanley Group for £22.5million, but it pulled out last month, blaming negative reaction from opposition parties to the high number of flats (448) in the scheme, which also involved a supermarket, offices and a hotel.
The move prompted Tory councillor Ken Rhatigan to call on Cllr Leek to "look at his position".
But instead of turning to the second-choice or "reserve" bidder, Discovery Properties, which had teamed up with Waitrose, Hilton Hotels and the Manhattan Loft Corporation, the administration indicated it was withdrawing the land from sale.
Cllr Leek told the Cabinet that although Discovery claimed it had come up with a revised plan for reducing the number of flats, it had not been submitted to the council.
Cllr Leek added: "Clearly, Gresley Road has development potential and it may well be that the reserve bidder will wish to pursue its interest in an alternative scheme."
The reserve and other developers could be considered in future, he said.
After agreeing with the Cabinet that the site should now be withdrawn, Liberal Democrat group leader Cllr Paula Baker released a statement saying: "The attempt to sell Gresley Road has been a fiasco.
"It is now undeniable that huge damage has been done to the future prospects for regenerating the town centre."
She said a development brief should have been drawn up, focusing on environmental and design considerations.
The decision to withdraw the site provoked Discovery Properties director Paul Clark to launch a scathing attack on Cllr Leek in an exclusive interview for The Gazette.
Cllr Leek told The Gazette he had no intention of resigning.
"The damage has been caused by the combination of the Labour and Liberal Democrat groups, not by the Conservatives," he said.
"The Conservatives are working to make Basingstoke a better place."
He said some sites were better left to market demand rather than a development brief.
9:41am Friday 29th February 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: Simon Preedy, Basingstoke on 10:14am Fri 29 Feb 08
Even if the Conservatives continue to run the Council after the local elections in May, surely Councillor Leek will be replaced as Council Leader. The position he currently holds clearly looks untenable to some.
Even if the Conservatives continue to run the Council after the local elections in May, surely Councillor Leek will be replaced as Council Leader. The position he currently holds clearly looks untenable to some.
Posted by: Julie, Basingstoke on 1:35pm Fri 29 Feb 08
and it doenst take rocket science to know who posted the last 3 comments does it.
and it doenst take rocket science to know who posted the last 3 comments does it.
Posted by: Darren, Old Basing on 2:06pm Fri 29 Feb 08
Well I will be opening up a Facebook group "Sack bumbling councillor Leek and bring Waitrose to bumblingstoke"
This will be supported by an ePetition too so look out for them!
Well I will be opening up a Facebook group "Sack bumbling councillor Leek and bring Waitrose to bumblingstoke"
This will be supported by an ePetition too so look out for them!
Posted by: Carlos "blacklist&qu
ot; Tilbury, Councils naughty step on 2:41pm Fri 29 Feb 08
Hi all
I'm sure cllr Leek is a nice person, its just him and most of his fellow out of touch cllrs lack the foresight into what this area needs.
Its a sham what went on and to blame the other parties is a scandle, how can anything be debating if meetings are held in secret!
I was at a meeting this week it was about the housing needs and the amount of people on the housing list, its was a complete waste of time.
Out of all of this nobody is actually asking what the resisdents of the borough want?
Well better sign off before Headmaster Tony Curtis catches me and gives me detention or litter duty!
Hi all
I'm sure cllr Leek is a nice person, its just him and most of his fellow out of touch cllrs lack the foresight into what this area needs.
Its a sham what went on and to blame the other parties is a scandle, how can anything be debating if meetings are held in secret!
I was at a meeting this week it was about the housing needs and the amount of people on the housing list, its was a complete waste of time.
Out of all of this nobody is actually asking what the resisdents of the borough want?
Well better sign off before Headmaster Tony Curtis catches me and gives me detention or litter duty!
Posted by: Simon Preedy, Basingstoke on 8:44am Sat 1 Mar 08
I read a great quote from Councillor Mrs Paula Baker in Thursday's Basingstoke Observer on this matter too ("A Grisley ending" - Page 5):
[quote]The local Conservatives have done more policy flip-flops than a gymnastics display team.[/quote]
Even as a Conservative voter in the past, I'm inclined to agree with her. Well said Paula!
I read a great quote from Councillor Mrs Paula Baker in Thursday's Basingstoke Observer on this matter too ("A Grisley ending" - Page 5):
The local Conservatives have done more policy flip-flops than a gymnastics display team.
Even as a Conservative voter in the past, I'm inclined to agree with her. Well said Paula!
Posted by: Carlos Tilbury, Overton on 9:38am Sat 1 Mar 08
I got to see the other designs for Grisley road, and I must admit that BCOT put a design in which was truely amazing, it would of been a iconic building, there was also a design by another company to have two wind turbines on the site to power the buildings, the design that was chosen was by far the worst design and looked like a prison.
Tories have a complete lack of idea whats going on in the borough on many issues, I just wish that they actually asked the voters what they wanted, instead of guessing or suffering from large amounts of nimtby (not in my tory back yard), so to all those Tory Cllr's reading this, enjoy your time in charge it will be over soon, one local reporter told me that "the time the tories have been in power has been the most destructive to this borough in living memory".
If they are in power after the next election then hopefully they will learn to listen to the public.
Instead of blacklisting people because they cant handle the questions, the council should listen to them.
Paula quote was great, and many of the cllrs have put very valid points across, Cllr James points out that the data showing that people want flats is partly taken by tick boxes on papers issued by the housing dept, thing is if your single for example you are only allowed to have a bedsit or 1 bed flat, and the same rules applies for couples with no kids.
No one wants to see the country side plastered with new towns, Overton and Whitchurch will suffer grately if Micheldever is built with large amounts of traffic, there has to be a better solution, even if its not Manydown, at the moment Hampshire County Council dont do anything, although they seem to get alot of bad press regards their £140,000 bottled water bill and £70,000 on recruiting a new chief exc, and then stump up the Council tax by 4.4%.
Anyway thats this weeks problems for the tories, is it next week for the call in on the Wardens?
I got to see the other designs for Grisley road, and I must admit that BCOT put a design in which was truely amazing, it would of been a iconic building, there was also a design by another company to have two wind turbines on the site to power the buildings, the design that was chosen was by far the worst design and looked like a prison.
Tories have a complete lack of idea whats going on in the borough on many issues, I just wish that they actually asked the voters what they wanted, instead of guessing or suffering from large amounts of nimtby (not in my tory back yard), so to all those Tory Cllr's reading this, enjoy your time in charge it will be over soon, one local reporter told me that "the time the tories have been in power has been the most destructive to this borough in living memory".
If they are in power after the next election then hopefully they will learn to listen to the public.
Instead of blacklisting people because they cant handle the questions, the council should listen to them.
Paula quote was great, and many of the cllrs have put very valid points across, Cllr James points out that the data showing that people want flats is partly taken by tick boxes on papers issued by the housing dept, thing is if your single for example you are only allowed to have a bedsit or 1 bed flat, and the same rules applies for couples with no kids.
No one wants to see the country side plastered with new towns, Overton and Whitchurch will suffer grately if Micheldever is built with large amounts of traffic, there has to be a better solution, even if its not Manydown, at the moment Hampshire County Council dont do anything, although they seem to get alot of bad press regards their £140,000 bottled water bill and £70,000 on recruiting a new chief exc, and then stump up the Council tax by 4.4%.
Anyway thats this weeks problems for the tories, is it next week for the call in on the Wardens?
Posted by: anon, Basingstoke on 10:02am Sun 2 Mar 08
[quote]one local reporter told me that "the time the tories have been in power has been the most destructive to this borough in living memory".If they are in power after the next election then hopefully they will learn to listen to the public.[/quote]
Yes many people will agree with that even some tory councillors and voters. Some of the existing cabinet members dont listen and need replacing with those that do. I cant see councillor Leek being Leader again if the tories do manage to get back in.
one local reporter told me that "the time the tories have been in power has been the most destructive to this borough in living memory".If they are in power after the next election then hopefully they will learn to listen to the public.
Yes many people will agree with that even some tory councillors and voters. Some of the existing cabinet members dont listen and need replacing with those that do. I cant see councillor Leek being Leader again if the tories do manage to get back in.
Posted by: Primrose, Basingstoke on 1:02pm Sun 2 Mar 08
The best design for the town is the one that produces the largest income from the sale of the land and return generated by domestic and commercial Council Tax payments. It's not really about what the locals want - that is why we elect a council to do what is in the best interests of the Borough.
If we went on what locals wanted, Basingstoke would be a tenth of its size, shopping would be the narrow Wote & Church Streets and most of those that come here to moan would still live in London.
As an aside. Carlos, if you do wish to be so verbose about Gresley Road, Please at least spell the word properly.
The best design for the town is the one that produces the largest income from the sale of the land and return generated by domestic and commercial Council Tax payments. It's not really about what the locals want - that is why we elect a council to do what is in the best interests of the Borough.
If we went on what locals wanted, Basingstoke would be a tenth of its size, shopping would be the narrow Wote & Church Streets and most of those that come here to moan would still live in London.
As an aside. Carlos, if you do wish to be so verbose about Gresley Road, Please at least spell the word properly.
Posted by: Carlos Tilbury on 2:20pm Sun 2 Mar 08
Primrose, you mat have noticed that I and many others refer to it as Grisley for a reason, not because I spelt it wrong!
Primrose, you mat have noticed that I and many others refer to it as Grisley for a reason, not because I spelt it wrong!
Posted by: Primrose, Basingstoke on 5:48pm Sun 2 Mar 08
Mat(sic) of spelt it wrong or May have spelt it wrong? I am cuffuddled.
In any case the best design is the one that produces the best return and the locals can lump it. If they don't like the look of the developing town they are free to move elsewhere. It is like I said before.
If we went on what locals wanted, Basingstoke would be a tenth of its size, shopping would be the narrow Wote & Church Streets and most of those that come here to moan would still live in London.
Mat(sic) of spelt it wrong or May have spelt it wrong? I am cuffuddled.
In any case the best design is the one that produces the best return and the locals can lump it. If they don't like the look of the developing town they are free to move elsewhere. It is like I said before.
If we went on what locals wanted, Basingstoke would be a tenth of its size, shopping would be the narrow Wote & Church Streets and most of those that come here to moan would still live in London.
Posted by: cllr Andrew McCormick, working in London, living in Basingstoke on 3:56pm Mon 3 Mar 08
I have to take issue with this "Primrose", whoever he or she is.
The best solution for Gresley Road is one in accordance with the Local Plan, which was industrial/commercia
l use. It's not about shoehorning in properties for maximum money.
A Council breaking the rules of its own local plan sets a dangerous precedent which could lead to other developers challenging it, and the Council losing all control of any building in the Borough in a developer free-for-all. That would be in no resident's best interest.
The Michael Shanley Group plan was predominantly residential, with 448 flats on an 8.3 acre site. It was totally inappropriate, and there were serious issues with no resolution, not least access.
A few years ago we were looking at getting IKEA on the site, they pulled out over access issues. Putting even more development on the site only makes the access issues worse. With so many flats, a hotel and a supermarket on site, potentially the whole Ringway East could have been blocked from the A33 to the M3 for large parts of the day.
I have to take issue with this "Primrose", whoever he or she is.
The best solution for Gresley Road is one in accordance with the Local Plan, which was industrial/commercia
l use. It's not about shoehorning in properties for maximum money.
A Council breaking the rules of its own local plan sets a dangerous precedent which could lead to other developers challenging it, and the Council losing all control of any building in the Borough in a developer free-for-all. That would be in no resident's best interest.
The Michael Shanley Group plan was predominantly residential, with 448 flats on an 8.3 acre site. It was totally inappropriate, and there were serious issues with no resolution, not least access.
A few years ago we were looking at getting IKEA on the site, they pulled out over access issues. Putting even more development on the site only makes the access issues worse. With so many flats, a hotel and a supermarket on site, potentially the whole Ringway East could have been blocked from the A33 to the M3 for large parts of the day.
Posted by: Primrose, Basingstoke on 4:26pm Mon 3 Mar 08
I take exception to the land sitting idle when it could be earning the town council revenue. I don't care what is put there as long as it makes a return, regardless of town plans, moaning councillors or whining locals.
It can have a million shoebox flats, a hotel or a drive through McDonalds for all I care. Any of those in preference to travellers and once a year park and ride schemes.
I take exception to the land sitting idle when it could be earning the town council revenue. I don't care what is put there as long as it makes a return, regardless of town plans, moaning councillors or whining locals.
It can have a million shoebox flats, a hotel or a drive through McDonalds for all I care. Any of those in preference to travellers and once a year park and ride schemes.
Posted by: Paul Grace, Eastrop on 8:34pm Tue 4 Mar 08
You can't trust Labour. The town looses five million quid because someone likes to tell tales. No prizes for guessing just who it was, but their supports are about to post below me...
You can't trust Labour. The town looses five million quid because someone likes to tell tales. No prizes for guessing just who it was, but their supports are about to post below me...
Posted by: Brian, Basingstoke on 7:49pm Wed 5 Mar 08
Primrose wrote about Carlos : "[italic]Mat(sic) of spelt it wrong or May have spelt it wrong? I am cuffuddled[/italic] "
I suspect Carlos' native language is not English, you can always write to him in Spanish if his spelling is of concern to you. It may also help if you did not use made up words like "cuffuddled" ... people in glass houses and all that :-)
Andrew McCormick' comments about a "council breaking its own rules" are spot on.
Primrose wrote about Carlos : "
Mat(sic) of spelt it wrong or May have spelt it wrong? I am cuffuddled "
I suspect Carlos' native language is not English, you can always write to him in Spanish if his spelling is of concern to you. It may also help if you did not use made up words like "cuffuddled" ... people in glass houses and all that :-)
Andrew McCormick' comments about a "council breaking its own rules" are spot on.
Posted by: Carlos Tilbury, Overton on 7:57pm Wed 5 Mar 08
No English is my first language, I was just rush typing, and I'll be happy to read anything in spanish or if Primrose would like to chat face to face he can pick either language as I'm fluent, or maybe we could try alittle Finnish either way I dont mind.
As it unused land Manydown cuold be worth 100's of millions of pounds.
No English is my first language, I was just rush typing, and I'll be happy to read anything in spanish or if Primrose would like to chat face to face he can pick either language as I'm fluent, or maybe we could try alittle Finnish either way I dont mind.
As it unused land Manydown cuold be worth 100's of millions of pounds.
Posted by: Primrose, Basingstoke on 6:36am Thu 6 Mar 08
Brian said: "Andrew McCormick'(sic) comments about a "council breaking its own rules" are spot on."
It's just like you say: ''people in glass houses and all that :-)''.
Perhaps the verbose Councillor from Popley would like to suggest what his preferred option is for the land at Gresley Road? He seems to hold many opinions on other parts of the town and normally likes to share them. Perhaps one day he may even offer a few on the ward he represents.
Carlos Tilbury uttered impulsively ''if Primrose would like to chat face to face he can pick either language as I'm fluent''
I can't imagine anything more boring to do. With chat up lines like that no wonder you still live with your Mummy and Daddy Carlos.
I am happy to see building at Gresley Road, Manydown, Bramley, Overton Hill, Kempshott, Brighton Hill South, Popley etc.
Getting back to the point:''Gresley Road 'fiasco' leads to calls for resignation''. The Liberal's seem to know a great deal about ''fiasco's'' as far as leadership is concerned. Perhaps John Leek is trying to be more like the top brass of 'new' Labour and just making up the rules as he goes along?
Brian said: "Andrew McCormick'(sic) comments about a "council breaking its own rules" are spot on."
It's just like you say: ''people in glass houses and all that :-)''.
Perhaps the verbose Councillor from Popley would like to suggest what his preferred option is for the land at Gresley Road? He seems to hold many opinions on other parts of the town and normally likes to share them. Perhaps one day he may even offer a few on the ward he represents.
Carlos Tilbury uttered impulsively ''if Primrose would like to chat face to face he can pick either language as I'm fluent''
I can't imagine anything more boring to do. With chat up lines like that no wonder you still live with your Mummy and Daddy Carlos.
I am happy to see building at Gresley Road, Manydown, Bramley, Overton Hill, Kempshott, Brighton Hill South, Popley etc.
Getting back to the point:''Gresley Road 'fiasco' leads to calls for resignation''. The Liberal's seem to know a great deal about ''fiasco's'' as far as leadership is concerned. Perhaps John Leek is trying to be more like the top brass of 'new' Labour and just making up the rules as he goes along?
Posted by: Idontliketrolls, Basingstoke on 9:47am Thu 6 Mar 08
Anyone with a brain cell can see that Primrose is well know local troll 'daniel'. So don't bother to get into dialogue with him.
I personally would like to see Oakley built over, knock down the slums in St John's Piece and put up some flats.
Anyone with a brain cell can see that Primrose is well know local troll 'daniel'. So don't bother to get into dialogue with him.
I personally would like to see Oakley built over, knock down the slums in St John's Piece and put up some flats.
Posted by: Primrose, Brighton Hill on 11:19am Thu 6 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Idontliketrolls[/bold] wrote:
Anyone with a brain cell can see that Primrose is well know local troll 'daniel'. So don't bother to get into dialogue with him.
I personally would like to see Oakley built over, knock down the slums in St John's Piece and put up some flats.[/quote] ''I personally would like to see Oakley built over, knock down the slums in St John's Piece and put up some flats.''
Me too. They are off to a good start with the Church. Once they are finished building the flats they can move some people across from Popley so they can afford them. Mind you, they may need to make the Post Office bigger to handle the extra benefits payments.
Idontliketrolls wrote:
Anyone with a brain cell can see that Primrose is well know local troll 'daniel'. So don't bother to get into dialogue with him.
I personally would like to see Oakley built over, knock down the slums in St John's Piece and put up some flats.
''I personally would like to see Oakley built over, knock down the slums in St John's Piece and put up some flats.''
Me too. They are off to a good start with the Church. Once they are finished building the flats they can move some people across from Popley so they can afford them. Mind you, they may need to make the Post Office bigger to handle the extra benefits payments.
Posted by: Ian, Basingstoke on 10:39am Fri 7 Mar 08
''I personally would like to see Oakley built over, knock down the slums in St John's Piece and put up some flats.''
Define "slum" please.
''I personally would like to see Oakley built over, knock down the slums in St John's Piece and put up some flats.''
Define "slum" please.
Posted by: Brian, Basingstoke on 5:26pm Fri 7 Mar 08
idontliketrolls wrote : "[italic]Anyone with a brain cell can see that Primrose is well know local troll 'daniel'[/italic] "
Ah yes, Primrose / Daniel / George_the_hippo - it is interesting that 'Primrose' encourages the destruction of Oakley St John's church and the St John's Piece community, yet at the same time feels that locals should not have a decision and it should be left up to the council only. Hypocrisy at its best.
idontliketrolls wrote : "
Anyone with a brain cell can see that Primrose is well know local troll 'daniel' "
Ah yes, Primrose / Daniel / George_the_hippo - it is interesting that 'Primrose' encourages the destruction of Oakley St John's church and the St John's Piece community, yet at the same time feels that locals should not have a decision and it should be left up to the council only. Hypocrisy at its best.
Posted by: Primrose, Brighton Hill on 7:07pm Fri 7 Mar 08
"Hypocrisy at its best". Yep, sure is. It's actually 'New Hypocrisy', a Labour thing ;-)
As to locals having a view, there is no issue with that. As to if that view should be able to make undue influence then no, it should not. Not my view, not your view.
Again, if the views of locals had been taken into consideration in the past and halted the town expansion the town would be tiny, the population small and Gresley Road would not even exist.
"Hypocrisy at its best". Yep, sure is. It's actually 'New Hypocrisy', a Labour thing ;-)
As to locals having a view, there is no issue with that. As to if that view should be able to make undue influence then no, it should not. Not my view, not your view.
Again, if the views of locals had been taken into consideration in the past and halted the town expansion the town would be tiny, the population small and Gresley Road would not even exist.
Posted by: Brian, Basingstoke on 8:53pm Fri 7 Mar 08
Primrose : "[italic]As to locals having a view, there is no issue with that[/italic] "
... but you do have an issue with that, I quote you :
"[italic]It's not really about what the locals want[/italic] "
"[italic]I hope it was conducted in secret with sweeteners to attract developers to look at the site[/italic] "
You are condoning corruption. It is a dangerous precedent to support operating in that way. Perhaps read what Councillor Stephen Reid wrote : "[italic]... These are all questions that are informed by local knowledge. In my opinion, the Government has over-centralised the planning process and too many decisions are made by people who do not represent the areas they are affecting[/italic] "
Read further into the planning law proposal, you would be supporting :
Homes & Communities Agency ability to seize land, even private property, and become their own planning authority.
Infrastructure Planning Commission would own large developments, they can build airports, sewerage, major roads & landfills and be responsible for their own planning permission.
The council is answerable to the local residents - people who voted for them. These other agencies would be answerable to a higher power and not a local one like the council. In effect you would lose any voice you may have now regardless of its strength of influence.
Primrose : "
As to locals having a view, there is no issue with that "
... but you do have an issue with that, I quote you :
"
It's not really about what the locals want "
"
I hope it was conducted in secret with sweeteners to attract developers to look at the site "
You are condoning corruption. It is a dangerous precedent to support operating in that way. Perhaps read what Councillor Stephen Reid wrote : "
... These are all questions that are informed by local knowledge. In my opinion, the Government has over-centralised the planning process and too many decisions are made by people who do not represent the areas they are affecting "
Read further into the planning law proposal, you would be supporting :
Homes & Communities Agency ability to seize land, even private property, and become their own planning authority.
Infrastructure Planning Commission would own large developments, they can build airports, sewerage, major roads & landfills and be responsible for their own planning permission.
The council is answerable to the local residents - people who voted for them. These other agencies would be answerable to a higher power and not a local one like the council. In effect you would lose any voice you may have now regardless of its strength of influence.
Posted by: Primrose, Brighton Hill on 9:36pm Fri 7 Mar 08
Brian, if you wish to quote me please make it a quote, don't re-author it.
I said: "As to locals having a view, there is no issue with that "
You said: "but you do have an issue with that"
I said there was 'No issue with that', not that I did not have an issue with it. The rest of my quoted statements are MY OPINION as a local with a view. That is what democracy is all about, and you support democracy I take it?
Or do you support democracy only when people agree with your point of view? That would be fascism, would it not?
For example, you feel that the local Council is answerable to the people who voted for them. I agree. I want to know why someone privy to private council business (and much council business is conducted in private)leaked details of the plan for Gresley Road, destroying a lucrative development plan that would have bought investment and revenue for the town.
Brian, if you wish to quote me please make it a quote, don't re-author it.
I said: "As to locals having a view, there is no issue with that "
You said: "but you do have an issue with that"
I said there was 'No issue with that', not that I did not have an issue with it. The rest of my quoted statements are MY OPINION as a local with a view. That is what democracy is all about, and you support democracy I take it?
Or do you support democracy only when people agree with your point of view? That would be fascism, would it not?
For example, you feel that the local Council is answerable to the people who voted for them. I agree. I want to know why someone privy to private council business (and much council business is conducted in private)leaked details of the plan for Gresley Road, destroying a lucrative development plan that would have bought investment and revenue for the town.
Posted by: Brian, Basingstoke on 9:52pm Fri 7 Mar 08
Primrose : I did quote you correctly - it's the first sentence in my post - you may want to read it again.
This is what you just wrote (I cut & paste) : "[italic]I said there was 'No issue with that', not that I did not have an issue with it[/italic] " ... this appears to be a contradiction, what do you mean ? do you have an issue or don't you ?
Your stand is that you support taking the decision making responsibility for planning away from the local council and giving it to a regional or national body - unless you know for sure that the majority of the locals want that then it is not democratic. I support keeping the decision making where it is, where the democratically elected council is ALREADY answerable to the locals - it has nothing to do with you agreeing with my point of view.
Then your last paragraph reveals your true motives. You are a conservative who is upset that the Gresley Rd deal went bust and you want to blame a Labour councillor for it.
Primrose : I did quote you correctly - it's the first sentence in my post - you may want to read it again.
This is what you just wrote (I cut & paste) : "
I said there was 'No issue with that', not that I did not have an issue with it " ... this appears to be a contradiction, what do you mean ? do you have an issue or don't you ?
Your stand is that you support taking the decision making responsibility for planning away from the local council and giving it to a regional or national body - unless you know for sure that the majority of the locals want that then it is not democratic. I support keeping the decision making where it is, where the democratically elected council is ALREADY answerable to the locals - it has nothing to do with you agreeing with my point of view.
Then your last paragraph reveals your true motives. You are a conservative who is upset that the Gresley Rd deal went bust and you want to blame a Labour councillor for it.
Posted by: Primrose, Brighton Hill on 10:09am Sat 8 Mar 08
Brian, Perhaps I can clarify the parts you don't understand one by one. I have NO issue with people holding a view. I DO have an issue with some of those views. For example, if a man had a view that had racist overtones he would be entitled to hold that view. It does not mean that I would agree with that point of view. Equally, if a man had a view on Gresley Road he would be entitled to that view. It does not mean that I would have to agree with it. If my language is unclear or ambiguous I apologise to you, but hopefully it is now clear.
Before moving on to your other points, are you clear on this now?
Brian, Perhaps I can clarify the parts you don't understand one by one. I have NO issue with people holding a view. I DO have an issue with some of those views. For example, if a man had a view that had racist overtones he would be entitled to hold that view. It does not mean that I would agree with that point of view. Equally, if a man had a view on Gresley Road he would be entitled to that view. It does not mean that I would have to agree with it. If my language is unclear or ambiguous I apologise to you, but hopefully it is now clear.
Before moving on to your other points, are you clear on this now?
Posted by: Billy Nomates, Basingstoke on 6:12pm Mon 5 May 08
No: 7777 is NOT daniel. '7' is a well known internet term for USENET trolls - just in case anyone coming here from that forum thinks that it is.
No: 7777 is NOT daniel. '7' is a well known internet term for USENET trolls - just in case anyone coming here from that forum thinks that it is.
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
