Tag Archives: censorship

Persimmon approach the First Hurdle for Canvey Island’s Dutch Village Green Belt Development! CPBC Censorship!

Persimmon have Housing Development plans for Canvey Island. However they appear happy to play the Long Game.

Plans have been registered with Castle Point Council for Stables for 3 Horses at the Dutch Village. This will include the “Change of Use of Land” as it is Green Belt.

Their Application stresses the stables will be “Built Development”.

We have covered this in a previous blog post HERE.

For those concerned or wishing to make comment we thought it might be helpful to make public our Grounds for Objection as registered with Castle Point Council, these should be visible below for you to see:-

cpbc

Runnymede Towers

Please be advised WE DON’T HAVE TO MAKE COMMENTS VISIBLE TO OTHER RESIDENTS on  the Castle Point website. This may be due to us not wanting others to know what Residents think or just us choosing to Censor information.

Anyway we don’t care, cos the legislation says we don’t have to! Editor.

“As prescribed in article 15 of the Development Management Procedure Order, local planning authorities are required to undertake a formal period of public consultation, prior to deciding a planning application. There is however, as you correctly stated, no legislative requirements for any comments received as part of that consultation to be available to view online.

The Castle Point website does however show the number of comments that have been received on any application so the level of public interest can be clearly identified. We are not alone in this approach, it is commonly adopted by a number of authorities, our neighbouring authority of Basildon being one such example.

We have been working in this way for some time now and we certainly have no evidence to suggest that this is in anyway deterring people from commenting. Indeed we have an application which is currently open for consultation that has received 135 comments to date, demonstrating I believe that the community remain fully engaged in the process.

Planning guidance states that officer’s reports should include the ‘substance of any objections, contain technical appraisals which clearly justify the recommendation and should have a written recommendation for the decision to be made’.

Comments received in respect of a planning application can only be considered if they are, what is commonly known as, ‘material planning considerations’. Comments which are not material cannot be considered in the determining of a planning application and any such comments will not therefore be referenced in a report by an officer nor should they be considered by members at Committee.

The information you have appended below your email is indeed an ‘extract’ from a much longer report however I should point out that it omits to make reference to the consideration of all relevant objections in more detail throughout the body of the report, which more fully explain how the objections have been considered against planning policies and guidance.

Development Control Committee can, and often do, make a decision which is different from the officer recommendation and this will often reflect a difference in the assessment of how a policy has been complied with, or different weight ascribed to relevant matters.

Thank you again for contacting us.

Regards, Castle Point Borough Council”

Advertisements

Echo ‘Why press freedom is vital in our democracy,’ except where Castle Point Council is Concerned?

Are Castle Point Council preparing the first steps to demolish the Paddocks?

Could it also be that Canvey Island residents are being Censored by the Echo Newspaper on Behalf of Castle Point council?

stock-vector-censored-stamp-208931752

Following the exhaustive Leveson judicial public inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the British press,  the Echo Under a banner Headline proclaimed; 

‘Why press freedom is vital in our democracy’

“Imagine a world where newspapers were unable to challenge hospitals over care and councils over spiralling costs.”

“Imagine a world where newspapers were fearful of taking their MPs to task over government policies.”

We must wholeheartedly support their dedication to democracy on this issue, especially on many occasions the Echo’s investigative journalism has in the past exposed many important issues.

However it has been brought to our attention that perhaps all may not be quite so transparent!

A Canvey resident has informed us of a letter he sent to the Echo regarding his concerns over Castle Point council’s approach towards certain issues.

The Resident apparently persisted with enquiries as to why the letter had not been published, and only following contact from the Echo to verify his credentials, did the letter eventually appear in the Letters column!

Why would the Echo delay in publishing a Canvey resident’s letter on a Castle Point matter, rather than reproducing at the time the information was topical?

This is not the first occasion, as at least one of the Canvey Green Belt Campaign group’s letters was also only printed following re-submission.

Now we learn of  yet another Letter from a different Canvey resident that has also been delayed from publication.

This time querying Castle Point council’s intentions for the Paddocks!

The Canvey Resident’s letter explained fears that, despite the reassurances of cllr Smith, concern remained for the continued existence of the Paddocks Hall, the number of Car Parking spaces already shared with the Health Centre and the possibility of the partial release of the site for more Town Centre Flats!

Once again this resident has not had his letter published, and has needed to write again, And then a third time, to ask the Echo staff to explain, WHY NOT?

We appreciate that what the Echo publish, or chose to omit, is entirely their perogative, but surely the Echo do not have to run a letter’s content past the powers that be at Castle Point council!

We note there is never a glut of Letters from Canvey residents printed in the Echo columns, whilst there are certain contributors that appear to find it easy to have their letters approved on a regular, often too regular, basis, despite many topics verging on being considered banal, or even more suited to a National Publication!

Maybe there is even a “Sensitive” Warning Alarm Bell that rings on the Echo Letters Desk when a Letter is received from a Canvey Island address?

The Echo asked us to “Imagine a world where newspapers were unable to challenge …councils.”

Is there a Transparency issue regarding Echo Editorial content and Castle Point Council?

We sincerely trust not!

If certain contributions from Canvey residents are becoming too sensitive for the Echo editor or Castle Point council for immediate publication, then there needs to be a closer inspection of what is considered “challenging” and yet fit for publication in Print, weighed against what appears on the Echo website!

The Echo allows, and fails to remove spurious, damaging and possibly libellous accusations of the receipt of “Brown Envelopes” and Back-handers, aimed at our Castle Point councillors, published under pseudonyms, to remain visible on the newspaper’s website!

And yet Canvey residents have difficulty in legitimately calling into question Castle Point council cabinet decisions, through the Echo Letters column!

Image credit: Shutterstock