No confidence in planning department - MP claims

8:06am Tuesday 9th October 2012 in News

No confidence in planning department - MP claims No confidence in planning department - MP claims

HELEN Jones has called for a review of Warrington Borough Council’s planning department because it has ‘lost confidence’ of residents.

The Warrington North MP has written a letter to the interim chief executive Professor Steven Broomhead asking for an outside expert to assess the department and make recommendations on improvements.

Ms Jones said: “It is clear that this department is simply not functioning properly. The lessons of the past have not been learnt.

“Enforcement is a continuing problem and my constituents have simply lost confidence in the planning process. That situation does no one any good.”

The Labour MP said that internal efforts to review the department had not proven enough to ‘sort out this shambles’.

Ms Jones added: “Over the years I have been an MP for Warrington North there have been too many mistakes by the planning department.

“Years ago, I took up a complaint about housing which was built as affordable housing being sold to people who already had a house. It was then rented out in the private rented sector, depriving someone of a home of their own. I was told lessons had been learned.

“Then we had the fiasco over Marton Close where documents had been destroyed, including documents that the council had a statutory duty to hold. Residents had to fight for years for justice and the ombudsman found an ‘extraordinary and inexcusable act of maladministration’. No one seems to have been held to account.”

It was also through a freedom of information request that she found out council officers had met with developers of Peel Hall not once as first stated but six times in eight months.

“Residents have lost faith in the credibility of the planning department and it is important that the council takes steps urgently to restore trust in the local authority’s decision making,” she added.

Responding to Ms Jones' comments Clr David Keane, executive board member for environment and public protection, said: “We accepted the original Ombudsman report of April 2011 and quickly took a series of actions in the summer of 2011 which included the actions that Helen Jones MP is now suggesting.

“All the actions we have taken have significantly contributed to the development and implementation of a positive and robust action plan for this service.

“We immediately called for an independent investigation into matters highlighted by the Ombudsman report, the findings of which have been reported to Full Council after being considered at length by the all party Audit and Governance Committee. The recommendations of this report have now been fully implemented.

“Another major decision,was to request an independent expert review of the planning department. We requested that the Planning Advisory Service, a free service, would visit the council for an in-depth review. This happened late last year and their findings were published early this year.

“These reports formed the basis of our Planning Service Improvement Plan which was considered, in public, by the council’s Environment and Housing Overview and Scrutiny Committee in June of this year. This cross-party committee unanimously endorsed the Improvement Plan..

"A particular focus of the improvement plan is to strengthen the council’s planning enforcement function and there has been, following consultation, a re-organisation of the department in order to meet this objective.

“Looking forward, a cross-party improvement board has been created in order to monitor the delivery of the suggested improvements and ensure the best service possible in very difficult financial times.

“It is regrettable that the MP didn’t contact us to gather the facts prior to making her statements. The Planning Department is now on a journey of continuous improvement and we welcome the positive involvement of all representatives in the town in this regard.”

Comments(59)

grey_man says...
8:53am Tue 9 Oct 12

Confidence in the planning department cannot be restored until the issue of who works in it is addressed. We have one senior planning officer who we know for a fact took part in the destruction of records, lied to residents, ignored police advice and spent four years covering up the destruction. There cannot be a clearer case of gross misconduct and yet as far as I know this person hasn't even been warned, never mind sacked. It's irrelevant what systems and policies you have in place, if they are being implemented by liars.

The council had a chance to sack this person and reestablish confidence in the planning team, but it didn't take it. So unfortunately it will now have to live with its own legacy of mistrust rooted in its willingness to employ liars and law breakers in senior positions.

Report this post »

Richard65 says...
8:55am Tue 9 Oct 12

Helen Jones is absolutely right & its not only the planning department that needs looking at. A lot of people will not be aware that the Legal Services department are heavily involved in planning decisions & enforcement, and they have been found to be more deceitful than the planning department. The enquiry into the destruction of records, was a white wash and that was led by the very same WBC legal service solicitor that is aligned to the planning department. As grey_man often says, turkeys voting for Christmas. Helen Jones quite rightly points to the LGO findings of ‘extraordinary and inexcusable act of maladministration’
. what did the independent enquiry into this illegal act find? The barrister who carried out the review with the WBC legal services solicitor having editorial responsibility, came to the conclusion that it was simply a 'muddle headed mistake' To be blunt what a load b7llocks. Ladies & gentlemen of Warrington, you have one of the most corrupt planning departments in the UK, right under your noses, it really is time this situation was sorted out. The CPS need to consider charges of misconduct in a public office for those officers, past and present named in the LGO & subsequent watered down independent enquiry into the destruction of records. To be clear it was watered down, there were draft reports bounced back and to between WBC & the independent barrister! How can that be an independent enquiry? Especially so when the legal services team were aware of the destruction of records back in 2006, because they had previously told John Earle (the officer who destroyed them all) not to do it, as it would be illegal!! but legal services said nothing along with all those named and shamed in the LGO report. There was even a whistle blowers policy to allow for one of them to report it anonymously, but no one did.

The Chief Exec or the Leader of the Council needs to pick up the phone and call Warrington Central Police team.

Report this post »

Nick Tessla says...
9:07am Tue 9 Oct 12

Residents have no confidence in the Planning Department and it would now appear that the Labour MP has no confidence in Terry O'Neill and his labour colleagues on the council to sort things out.


A sad state of affairs.


Clearly it is very long standing problem - with documents being destroyed relating to events during Labour's previous decades of misrule

Report this post »

Richard65 says...
9:15am Tue 9 Oct 12

Lets hope this does not become a political slinging match, lets hope all parties focus on what is clearly a planning department & those solicitors aligned to it, that no one has any faith in. They are simply not fit for purpose.

Report this post »

grey_man says...
9:16am Tue 9 Oct 12

Nick

I don't think it's a political issue as it is a problem that has been ignored by all the major political parties locally and all three of them have had an opportunity to deal with this specific issue and failed to take it. My conclusion is that they all wish it would just go away rather than face facts. The planning department is not fit for purpose because of who works in it, not their processes so a review is a waste of time.

Report this post »

Richard65 says...
9:50am Tue 9 Oct 12

& to labour the point, the legal services officers associated with the planning department. It is they that deal with the legality of enforcement, the court cases, they are the ones who will move heaven & earth not to carry forward the instructions of the Cllrs & the planning officers, or collude with planning officers to ensure enforcement fails. The skip company in Lymm is a good example, as if of course Biffa waste. If someone builds a veranda without planning they will go for them, but when its big companies, aggressive developers, they will do all they can, to not get involved, or bend over backwards to ensure the developer gets a favourable outcome. Ignore the problems of the solicitors in the background and nothing will change.

Report this post »

Quecumber says...
10:18am Tue 9 Oct 12

Really interesting article and comments from Grey_man and Richard65. I agree that it is not a political issue, but there is quite a bit of backside covering going on and a real change in focus won't come until those backsides are either kicked into shape or out of the door. The problem with some public-sector legal departments is that they tend to be way too cautious for their own good, always advising 100% risk-free solutions and so often adding untold layers of bureaucracy to a simple decision. They should be the headache of Planning and not be colluding with them. In this case there appear to be plenty of reasons for an external investigation and I'd agree with Helen Jones that she should take this to council and push this through.

Report this post »

grey_man says...
10:19am Tue 9 Oct 12

And one more thing :-)

Questions remain unanswered about the role of John Earle who treated the inquiry into what happened with the planning record with absolute contempt. I don't believe for one minute that he made a mistake in ordering the destruction of records just before he left the employment of the council and I suspect there are people within WBC who know or suspect exactly why he wanted the records destroyed and the circumstances of his departure. An honest man would have been happy to answer the questions raised by the inquiry, but he refused and we can draw our own conclusions why that would be.

Even when the investigation into his actions is taken at face value he broke the law and did so even after he had been reminded that the destruction would be unlawful. Is there a reason why the council didn't involve the police as Cllr Kevin Reynolds suggested? Is it because they didn't want to publicly and officially ask a question they already privately knew the answer to?

We may never know but while these questions persist and while the individuals responsible continue to work for the council there can be no trust in the department.

Report this post »

Nick Tessla says...
10:59am Tue 9 Oct 12

From the Warrington Worldwide coverage of this;


"Cllr Terry O’Neill, leader of the council said: “The door is always open for the MP to come to the town hall and discuss her concerns about any council service directly with myself, the chief executive or anyone else she wishes. However at this time it is difficult to say much more as we are not yet in receipt of this letter.” "



Do these people not TALK to each other!

Report this post »

grey_man says...
11:14am Tue 9 Oct 12

I just wish somebody within the council would sort out this dysfunctional department and that can only happen with a clearout. I suspect they've missed their chance now though so Terry O'Neill, Mike Hannon, Steven Broomhead and all the others who expect the people of Warrington to trust liars and law breakers will just have to wear it.

We've got to hope they don't appoint a new CEO in their own image otherwise we'll have more years of lily-livered inability to deal with the incompetence and corruption at the heart of this council.

Report this post »

hectorshouse123 says...
11:40am Tue 9 Oct 12

Time for the police me thinks, there are definitely 2 or 3 officers who are guilty of

MISCONDUCT IN PUBLIC OFFICE

Definition of the offence from the CPS

The elements of the offence are summarised in Attorney General's Reference No 3 of 2003 EWCA Crim 868. The offence is committed when:

a public officer acting as such
wilfully neglects to perform his duty

and/or wilfully misconducts himself
to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder

without reasonable excuse or justification

Report this post »

Gorsedd says...
1:41pm Tue 9 Oct 12

grey_man wrote:
I just wish somebody within the council would sort out this dysfunctional department and that can only happen with a clearout. I suspect they've missed their chance now though so Terry O'Neill, Mike Hannon, Steven Broomhead and all the others who expect the people of Warrington to trust liars and law breakers will just have to wear it.

We've got to hope they don't appoint a new CEO in their own image otherwise we'll have more years of lily-livered inability to deal with the incompetence and corruption at the heart of this council.
I wish every elected member would put aside their party affiliations for once and get to grips with this matter in the interests of the people of Warrington. Is this too much to ask? As Helen Jones MP says this is and has been a persistent and endemic problem, not a minor admin blip. MALADMINISTRATION runs long and deep throughout the Council certainly for the past decade. Check how many critical Ombudsman reports WBC got in that time. The problem is not confined to the planning department. The cover up extends to other departments and officers, some senior. They are fairly obvious to identify from their job descriptions. Each may not have known at the time in 2006 when planning drawings were destroyed but they all certainly knew well before the Ombudsman made the Council cough it up in 2011. They all decided to keep quiet and now we expected to trust a Council which wont deal with their failure to act properly. We could be forgiven for believing the obvious reluctance of some members to deal positively with the problems points to far a more serious situation than the alleged actions of one man. It is puzzling why an administration with the political power and resources the other parties would die for seems to cling to or be beholden to officer power, when into came to power saying it would be a member led administration.

Report this post »

grey_man says...
2:03pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Absolutely. And that is why it is so important to get to grips with this. Not just to deal with the obvious deep seated problems with the planning department but also because of the way that this all subverts local democracy.

Not only is it extremely damaging when it comes to the council listening to the voice of the people in this town on specific issues, it subverts democracy when many of us conclude that our vote is meaningless if the town is being run by unelected employees, which it certainly has been.

There's another point which doesn't get talked about enough in my opinion. Which is that during the Marton Close scandal the police, having dealt with over 100 incidents in a close with 3 houses in it, asked the council to do something about a situation that was getting dangerously out of control. People in the planning department ignored this plea and continued to lie to residents and councillors about what was happening in that dispute. This is all in the public domain for people to read.

So not only do we have officers working in the planning department who have lied and broken the law. We have officers who are willing to see people get hurt or worse in the pursuit of their own agenda, whatever you might think that is.

The names of the people involved are also in the public domain and how they haven't been sacked or investigated by the police simply beggars belief.

As Gorsedd asks - where are the councillors willing to stand up and be counted?

Report this post »

grey_man says...
2:04pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Absolutely. And that is why it is so important to get to grips with this. Not just to deal with the obvious deep seated problems with the planning department but also because of the way that this all subverts local democracy.

Not only is it extremely damaging when it comes to the council listening to the voice of the people in this town on specific issues, it subverts democracy when many of us conclude that our vote is meaningless if the town is being run by unelected employees, which it certainly has been.

There's another point which doesn't get talked about enough in my opinion. Which is that during the Marton Close scandal the police, having dealt with over 100 incidents in a close with 3 houses in it, asked the council to do something about a situation that was getting dangerously out of control. People in the planning department ignored this plea and continued to lie to residents and councillors about what was happening in that dispute. This is all in the public domain for people to read.

So not only do we have officers working in the planning department who have lied and broken the law. We have officers who are willing to see people get hurt or worse in the pursuit of their own agenda, whatever you might think that is.

The names of the people involved are also in the public domain and how they haven't been sacked or investigated by the police simply beggars belief.

As Gorsedd asks - where are the councillors willing to stand up and be counted?

Report this post »

dickemery47 says...
2:38pm Tue 9 Oct 12

The top and bottom of this stinking pile of mess is the mp and her cronies who are determined to cause havoc ! .
I have voted labour all my working life and so did my parents but this is a disgrace to the labour movement .
I for one will be thinking very hard were my vote goes next time

Report this post »

grey_man says...
2:47pm Tue 9 Oct 12

The havoc is already there.

Report this post »

Richard Nixon says...
2:48pm Tue 9 Oct 12

dickemery eh? I guess you either work in WBC legal services or the planning department, or your one of the developers who is getting twitchy about one of your dodgy houses you paid the LPA a bung to get through, or get them to lose some of your planning files??

Do us a break and shut up.

Report this post »

Nick Tessla says...
2:58pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Richard65 wrote:
Lets hope this does not become a political slinging match, lets hope all parties focus on what is clearly a planning department & those solicitors aligned to it, that no one has any faith in. They are simply not fit for purpose.
Let's hope not - but I suspect it could end up with a slinging match within Labour, there are already signs of schism with a councillor suspended by the party, not good for anyone.


Fears of such is not helped when the Labour MP appears not to trust her council colleagues to remedy the situation.

Report this post »

Richard Nixon says...
3:08pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Maybe she is right, maybe its time to put up or shut up Terry O'Neil? You came to power saying no more officer led council, but that indepedent enquiry into the destruction of record was a shocker. Even a high school student could spot it was a whitewash. The planners and the solicitors are out of control, seriously, they are not answerable to anyone. Grey_man is spot on, there seems little point in voting in the elections, as the corrupt officers are untouchable. The direct debit out of your bank every month is paying these people and some of them are not to be trusted, some of them, as an earlier poster stated, do appear to be guilty of serious crimes, misconduct in a public office! It realy is that serious.

Report this post »

Gorsedd says...
4:11pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Nick Tessla said "Fears of such is not helped when the Labour MP appears not to trust her council colleagues to remedy the situation.” - TRUST was been thrown out of the window in this borough a long time ago. Surely we are better served by an MP who is prepared to stand up and be counted when it comes to sorting right from wrong than have one who papers over the cracks to preserve political unity? I hope the members of the other political parties will not stand back now Helen Jones MP has pointed out in no uncertain terms what has been obvious to most of us for a long time, namely we have a dysfuctional and maladministering bunch of officers who think they can do as they please (even break the law and lie about it) and a number elected members who can't or wont deal with them. Isn't there someone of substance in this borough to get to grips with this?

Report this post »

dickemery47 says...
7:00pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Richard Nixon wrote:
dickemery eh? I guess you either work in WBC legal services or the planning department, or your one of the developers who is getting twitchy about one of your dodgy houses you paid the LPA a bung to get through, or get them to lose some of your planning files??

Do us a break and shut up.
This is the type of reply I would expect from one of ms jones lackeys .
But what is really going on with the Labour Party ? Only a week or so ago hitesh Patel said ms jones mp and her son chris Vobe had some questions to answer regarding certain issues of treatment of other labour members is this the kind of politics we want in Warrington ?

Report this post »

grey_man says...
7:03pm Tue 9 Oct 12

It's not about politics. All of the local parties are failing to deal with this. Warrington has far bigger problems than squabbling politicians.

Report this post »

Samantha1000 says...
7:15pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Dear Dick

Everyone that has posted comments on here today, has taken the time to express opinions based on factual information that is in the public domain. Facts that can't be disputed, Helen Jones MP has spoken out because there is a need for change. Ask yourself Dick, what have you added to this debate? This is not about politics, this is about a planning department that the public of Warrington has lost faith in.

Report this post »

Gorsedd says...
7:55pm Tue 9 Oct 12

grey_man wrote:
It's not about politics. All of the local parties are failing to deal with this. Warrington has far bigger problems than squabbling politicians.
And by doing so the elected members are failing do deal with a problem they allowed to develop.and help create. They call themselves democratic but by repeatedly failing to sort out a problem of their own making they are subverting the local democratic process. No wonder none have responded to the concerns expressed here.

Report this post »

Samantha1000 says...
9:23pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Can I add, for me the most disturbing part of all of this, is the realisation that grey_man, Gorsedd & others, are quite correct . The democratic process has been subverted, this is a terrible situation, and senior Cllr's, some of them OBE's MBE's Aldermen, know the truth, yet they dither, do nothing & allow this go on. All the while ordinary people suffer injustice, maladministration, years of stress, when dealing with wrongful decisions that affect their homes and neighbourhoods.

A MESSAGE TO ALL 57 ELECTED COUNCILLORS

Cllrs all of you, I know you read the Guardian, you follow the articles, you follow the comments of those people you rely upon to vote for you, the people who put their trust in you, to carry out your elected duties, PLEASE use the power vested with you to sort this out. Otherwise quit and let more able people take over.

Report this post »

grey_man says...
9:46pm Tue 9 Oct 12

And here's a question for all those aware of or campaigning against the Peel Hall development. Does anybody trust the planning department to deal with it fairly and honestly?

Do any councillors expect they will get balanced advice from the planning team on that development? And if they do, what do they base that trust on? It can't be on advice on developments they've received in the past because we know that officers have frequently lied to them. Again, that is public knowledge, reported by the local government ombudsman.

How long do they think they can work with these people? And how long do they think the people of Warrington will continue to tolerate this?

Report this post »

Gorsedd says...
10:00pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Recently it was announced an immediate review would be set up to 'challenge...and identify any areas for improvement following the concerns expressed by members of the public' for what the public believed was a waste of £25k on a badly considered traffic scheme - Bridge Foot. But ask them to review and challenge the maladministration and misuse of power over which the public has constantly complained about for more six years, then operation cover up is immediately put into action, everyone has cloth ears and the silence is deafening.

Report this post »

comwgn says...
8:50am Wed 10 Oct 12

The only way forward isds for a police investigation intop the corruption in the planning and legal departments. Also to do this now and not be put off by waffling from some councillors. Get the police in .

Report this post »

dickemery47 says...
9:27am Wed 10 Oct 12

I believe their are bigger issues going on at the moment since the suspension of cllr Chris Vobe from the Labour Party and a ongoing police investigation .
With two labour councillors suspended already were will this embarrassing mess end up ?
There are questions to be answered by Helen jones about the conduct of her son towards members of the labour group .mr miliband needs to be informed and let him decide what suitable action is needed .

Report this post »

Richard65 says...
1:26pm Wed 10 Oct 12

dickemery47 wrote:
I believe their are bigger issues going on at the moment since the suspension of cllr Chris Vobe from the Labour Party and a ongoing police investigation . With two labour councillors suspended already were will this embarrassing mess end up ? There are questions to be answered by Helen jones about the conduct of her son towards members of the labour group .mr miliband needs to be informed and let him decide what suitable action is needed .
What has this got to do with the planning department? Please can we stay on topic?

Report this post »

HuffPuff says...
2:52pm Wed 10 Oct 12

Whatever the reasons for the spat in the Labour ranks, at whatever level, we have very serious issues with this borough's planning department and those advising it, which cannot be allowed to go unresolved.
Who knows comwgn might be right when he/she says "The only way forward is for a police investigation into the corruption in the planning and legal departments. Also to do this now and not be put off by waffling from some councillors. Get the police in"

Report this post »

Cleopatra says...
6:28pm Wed 10 Oct 12

Reading this report and all the posts something occured to me. There are two mps representing Warrington but one has remained silent during the entire discussions relating to the council and the planning dept.,. One can only wonder where he stands on this matter because he has not uttered one word on the subject.
ok, so you are mostly agreed that the police should have been/should be called in to investigate but the council appears to have dismissed that. I was wondering if there is any procedure whereby members of the public could ask the police to investigate. Might it be worth considering?

Report this post »

HuffPuff says...
12:20pm Thu 11 Oct 12

There is no chance of this Council calling in Police even though there is clear evidence of:
"a public officer acting as such
wilfully neglects to perform his duty
and/or wilfully misconducts himself
to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder without reasonable excuse or justification”
unlawful activities all of which would justify calling them in.

Report this post »

Richard Nixon says...
9:38am Fri 12 Oct 12

@ALL, there are a few comments on the WWW site hinting thtat someone senior from the planning department is no longer there? Very cryptic, the planning dept manager who's name also means a load of orange trees!!

Has John Groves fallen on his sword???

Report this post »

Cleopatra says...
11:26am Fri 12 Oct 12

Well it seems that while Helen Jones is fighting tooth and nail to get the matter of the planning dept sorted out, the other Warrington mp, David Mowatt, is too busy playing trains to be r'sed with such trivialities as a corrupt planning dept.,.
Trains must be his hobby. Anything to do with trains and the railway and he is there, but, seldom a word from him on any other matters in Warrington. Lets hope he is voted out at the next election then he can play with trains to his heart's content.

Report this post »

pnewsome says...
4:50pm Fri 12 Oct 12

Groves fell on his sword weeks ago. Ousted by the people hiding above him.

Report this post »

Richard Nixon says...
6:34pm Fri 12 Oct 12

pnewsome wrote:
Groves fell on his sword weeks ago. Ousted by the people hiding above him.
How did he go? Sacked ?

Report this post »

WH Smith says...
7:41pm Sat 13 Oct 12

From what I can understand, the planning department is being or has been re-organised, and as part of this J Groves has left the Council. I suspect he left with some kind of enhanced renumeration package rather than sacked. If that is the case, in my view it would be completely wrong; but it is typical of the way that many LA's deal with 'difficult HR problems' such as this - leave with a golden handshake as in many cases its the easiest and quickest way to get people out of the door, without creating headlines or prolonged union issues.
I have no idea whether J Groves or any of the other managers at the Council are corrupt, I suspect not, but in my view many of the officers working in the department are there trying to do a good job. Sure you will always be able to find examples of people who aren't good at what they do, and I know from experience that the planning department has at least one example of that, but I doubt that officers at the 'coal face' of the planning department are in any way corrupt.

Report this post »

Richard Nixon says...
10:57pm Sat 13 Oct 12

If John Groves got a golden hand shake it would be a scandal.

Report this post »

Gorsedd says...
1:18pm Sun 14 Oct 12

WH Smith wrote:
From what I can understand, the planning department is being or has been re-organised, and as part of this J Groves has left the Council. I suspect he left with some kind of enhanced renumeration package rather than sacked. If that is the case, in my view it would be completely wrong; but it is typical of the way that many LA's deal with 'difficult HR problems' such as this - leave with a golden handshake as in many cases its the easiest and quickest way to get people out of the door, without creating headlines or prolonged union issues.
I have no idea whether J Groves or any of the other managers at the Council are corrupt, I suspect not, but in my view many of the officers working in the department are there trying to do a good job. Sure you will always be able to find examples of people who aren't good at what they do, and I know from experience that the planning department has at least one example of that, but I doubt that officers at the 'coal face' of the planning department are in any way corrupt.
It depends what you mean by corrupt. Being dishonest, dishonourable, unprincipled, untrustworthy, deceitful or unlawful are all corrupt acts, with or without cash being in the mix. There is no doubt from what has been put into the public domain all five have been practised by some in WBC’s planning department. Getting rid of one principle planner however that was done, and I will take your word on how and agree it is a scandal if you are right, does not make for a reorganized, more trustworthy planning department in view of what has happened. Who is to say it is only the planning department that needs to be fixed? It is on record that a former head of legal in WBC warned of the consequences of destroying such records a few years before the decision was taken. Do you really believe covering up of the selective destruction of statutory planning records for five years was confined to the three principle planners, two of whom are still employed by WBC and that no other officers knew? As things stand we will never know because the consequences might be too difficult to handle. Best leave well alone and proceed as normal seems to be the official attitude, as it was when or after the records were destroyed, so should not surprise us it is more of the same once again.

Report this post »

grey_man says...
7:28pm Sun 14 Oct 12

If this is all true, you have to welcome the moves towards reorganising the planning team. However it's never good to see people being rewarded for failure rather than being managed properly. There's no question that staff needed to be removed and I think that there were clear cases of gross misconduct to be addressed. In addition, there are people still within the council who took part in and were aware of the destruction of the planning register, perhaps at a senior level, and there are others who either actively covered it up or kept quiet. As others have said, questions also need to be asked of the legal team.

I don't think the way Groves has been removed (if true) is solely characteristic of LGAs or any other public sector organisation than it is for a lot of large organisations. Better to get rid of the problem than deal with it. Especially if you're spending other people's money as councils do.

The other unresolved issue is the council's own unreasonable explanation of the destruction as a mistake. Given that the planning team had previously been refused permission to destroy records, their reminder that it was unlawful and the clandestine way it all happened and then was concealed, there's no way it was a mistake. There are people within the council who know how and why this happened, who stood to gain and the circumstances of the destruction. I don't have any inside track on any of that, but somebody does.

Moving forward, the council is still a hostage to fortune, especially when it comes to making controversial decisions such as the one on Peel Hall. There is already a whiff about that project and you wonder whether that might be the first test that the planning team is listening to residents rather than colluding with developers as they have in the past.

Report this post »

Gorsedd says...
11:37pm Sun 14 Oct 12

grey_man said
"Better to get rid of the problem than deal with it. Especially if you're spending other people's money as councils do. The other unresolved issue is the council's own unreasonable explanation of the destruction as a mistake. Given that the planning team had previously been refused permission to destroy records, their reminder that it was unlawful and the clandestine way it all happened and then was concealed, there's no way it was a mistake. There are people within the council who know how and why this happened, who stood to gain and the circumstances of the destruction. I don't have any inside track on any of that, but somebody does."
This problem will not be got rid of by showing the odd one or two persons the door and then once again pulling the wool over the electorate’s eyes as officers did for the five previous years. There are too many unanswered questions and too many people inside and outside the planning department, some in very senior positions who need to provide truthful answers and face up to the their actions or lack of them. Previously officers were shown to have covered things up, now all our elected members are aware of what went on. How can anyone seriously say all is well when virtually the same people who need to answer for their previous behaviour are safe and secure in the same roles? While this continues the council will remain a hostage to fortune when it comes to making most decisions, let alone controversial ones. The usual smoke and mirrors have not been replaced by openness and transparency with the findings of the public inquiry or the Planning Advisory Service’s review, because the questions that need to be answered were never put to them.
Helen Jones MP is right in saying the residents have lost confidence in the planning department. But her request for an outside expert to assess and make recommendations on improvements should extend to planning and other departments involved with or advising it.

Report this post »

grey_man says...
9:17am Mon 15 Oct 12

I don't think any of that is going to happen. They've muddled their way through and wasted a lot of time, effort and money on a supposed inquiry that ended up telling us less than the original LGO report precisely because the inquiry was a way of obscuring the truth. Some people know the full story behind all of this but is it likely they will go public? Maybe there are too many people with a stake of one sort or another in all of this, which is presumably why John Earle was disappeared and allowed to make the daft and arrogant statements he did following the inquiry. Because he knows no real questions will be asked and he's been reassured that the police won't be taking an interest in his finances?

I just hope that if this is the best we can expect, that the council also takes a step towards making its employees know that they cannot behave how they **** well choose, as has been the case in the past. I don't think that has happened as a result of all of this but we'll see.

Report this post »

colin007 says...
11:46pm Wed 17 Oct 12

I have a friend who lives in Whitehaven and John Groves's appointment as his council's new Head of Nuclear Energy & Planning was advertised recently. He is obviously concerned since I informed him of postings on this site!

Report this post »

Gorsedd says...
4:44pm Fri 19 Oct 12

colin007 wrote:
I have a friend who lives in Whitehaven and John Groves's appointment as his council's new Head of Nuclear Energy & Planning was advertised recently. He is obviously concerned since I informed him of postings on this site!
Nirex spent £1 billion proving Cumbria and the surrounding areas are unsuitable for the underground storage of nuclear waste. This appointment at a stroke puts that conclusion at risk.

Report this post »

Richard Nixon says...
5:04pm Fri 19 Oct 12

God help them!!

http://www.cumbriacr
ack.com/2012/09/25/n
ew-face-for-nuclear-
energy-and-planning/

Report this post »

Very worried says...
9:33pm Tue 23 Oct 12

Where can I find out more detail about the Marton Close scandal?

Report this post »

Very worried says...
9:36pm Tue 23 Oct 12

Will Copeland be aware of Mr Grove history?

Report this post »

colin007 says...
10:16pm Tue 23 Oct 12

From what my friend tells me, Copeland are always on the defensive from criticism by local press and residents for weak leadership so there is a fair chance that they won't be aware of Groves's history.
Having said this, they should be made aware to at least give them the opportunity to avoid what we've endured.

Report this post »

Very worried says...
9:11pm Wed 24 Oct 12

Maybe he has contacts/friends at Copeland, there are major trust problems between the planning dept and electorate in Copeland. The Copeland folk are desperate for honesty and democracy, there is way too much nepotism, it is alarming and causing many problems.

Where can in depth details of the Marton Close scandal be found?

Report this post »

colin007 says...
8:53pm Thu 25 Oct 12

Very worried wrote:
Maybe he has contacts/friends at Copeland, there are major trust problems between the planning dept and electorate in Copeland. The Copeland folk are desperate for honesty and democracy, there is way too much nepotism, it is alarming and causing many problems.

Where can in depth details of the Marton Close scandal be found?
The ombudsman's report can be found here:
http://www.lgo.org.u
k/complaint-outcomes
/planning/planning-a
rchive-2011-12/warri
ngton-bc-09-014-399/

Probably the tip of the iceberg!

Report this post »

Very worried says...
5:16pm Fri 26 Oct 12

It appears as though Copeland have made yet another error of judgement if they are attempting to clean up their act. It is maybe difficult for them to attract the right sort of people to the area and are grateful that anyone with a qualification applied for the position. The word will spread fast enough I would imagine.

Report this post »

colin007 says...
8:23pm Fri 26 Oct 12

Very worried wrote:
It appears as though Copeland have made yet another error of judgement if they are attempting to clean up their act. It is maybe difficult for them to attract the right sort of people to the area and are grateful that anyone with a qualification applied for the position. The word will spread fast enough I would imagine.
Seems like we in Warrington and you folks in Copeland have a lot in common!

The decision to appoint Mr Groves will have been as follows I would imagine:

Risley + Sellafield = Head of Nuclear Energy and Planning

Report this post »

Very worried says...
9:42pm Fri 26 Oct 12

colin007 - Your friend from Whitehaven has probably told you exactly what Copeland planning is like and what they allow their buddies to do.

Report this post »

WH Smith says...
10:40pm Fri 26 Oct 12

With the 'history' and reputation that Warrington's Planning Department now have, the fact that Mr Groves has left the place should be taken as a very positive move.
The post he has taken in Copeland was advertised at over £50k per year - so it isn't poorly paid, BUT at the end of the day, he is no longer in post at Warrington, and should therefore not be able to create any new havoc in the place – put simply he is now somebody else’s daily problem (although there may be other messes that he has left behind).
I understand that there was a very strong feeling that the staff management skills of Mr Groves, left a great deal to be desired and so most are 'not sad to see him go' and that many people who worked below Mr Groves (i.e. for him), feel that a great weight has been lifted from their shoulders.

Report this post »

WH Smith says...
10:42pm Fri 26 Oct 12

As I have mentioned before, in my experience most of the officers at the coal face try to do a good job, but their work reputation has obviously been tainted here by the actions of a few.
Sadly, I agree with some other comments on here about the futility of a further investigation, as it is likely that it'll cost a great deal of money, take an inordinate amount of time and turn out to be pretty worthless in content.

Report this post »

Very worried says...
1:42pm Sat 27 Oct 12

WH Smith - Oh Dear! Then it is not looking too good for Copeland, what a terribly dissappointing shame.

Mr Groves will probably find that he suddenly has some new influential friends very soon after arrival. He will need to be very careful, he may get some big surprises when he finds out how Copeland has been running their planning dept. Many folk don't even bother with the LGO because the LGO don't appear to like or consider complaints about Copeland for some perculiar reason.

Report this post »

colin007 says...
11:27pm Thu 1 Nov 12

Very worried wrote:
WH Smith - Oh Dear! Then it is not looking too good for Copeland, what a terribly dissappointing shame.

Mr Groves will probably find that he suddenly has some new influential friends very soon after arrival. He will need to be very careful, he may get some big surprises when he finds out how Copeland has been running their planning dept. Many folk don't even bother with the LGO because the LGO don't appear to like or consider complaints about Copeland for some perculiar reason.
If you are still very worried Very worried, perhaps you should contact your MP?

This story stems from our very worried MP and the two are bound to come into contact with each other.

Report this post »

Very worried says...
7:53pm Fri 2 Nov 12

Colin007 ...Maybe you should ask your friend from Whitehaven why the Copeland MP would not be the best person to contact !!

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree