An interesting comment by Gary Hopkins over on Charlie's blog on what we all seem to be calling "Red Trouser Gate":
"I unlike the blogger or some others am not shocked that a developer,of whatever shade of green or none, should do his best to secure the best deal for his development.
It happens all the time and I would be suprised if any developer were not trying to lobby.It is the council officers job to act in line with council policy and in the interests of Bristol residents.
Three things though are being suggested
1 That council policy has not been followed.There is genuine concern here and whilst it has been common practice for many years at Bristol CC.it is not acceptable and it does undermine political accountability.It has been confirmed that the piece of land was part of the green space strategy and I have confirmation that no exceptions were written in to the plan. (This was in answer to queeries about Filwood park)
2 That the action is not in the interests of residents.The point of loss of accountability is that it becomes almost impossible to test this.
3 Something illegal has occured. I have seen no evidence of this but would support openness as a matter of principle.Getting basic information out of this administration is a real problem ,even for a determined questioner like myself, and a secretive administration will inevitably become a bad one even if it does not start that way."
So it seems Hopkins, former Cabinet member for sustainable environment and neighbourhoods, sees nothing wrong with developers energetically lobbying council officers.
But what is abundantly clear from the FoI emails is the power imbalance between middle-ranking council officers, feverishly pinging emails around the Council House as they try to negotiate the procedural labyrinth, and exuberant local bigwigs who are able to breeze in between trips abroad and charm the (hopefully metaphorical) pants off off-the-pay-scale council executives over cafe ristretto at Goldbrick House.
(Please note: the preceding scenario is a mere figment of Greengage's fevered imagination and any resemblance to actual events or personages is entirely accidental.)
Council policy is never going to be followed under these conditions, and the idea of any kind of genuine accountability to the people of Bristol is a complete joke.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
This council seem determined to blur the lines between the council itself and the variety of interested parties they deal with. It's called Partnership working apparently.
So in the Chocolate Factory example the developer, Squarepeg, through its agents Pegasus Planning Group et al, has entered into a Planning Performance Agreement with the council which seems to allow them to fast track through the system in a privileged way.
One manifestation of this was that the developers were invited to make an informal presentation to the Planning Committee well in advance of any Planning Application being considered, so ensuring that the Committee will be predisposed towards the Planning application when they come to determine it.
Of course Partnership working only applies to those with a lot of clout. The rest of us are even more excluded than before by an ever more arcane system.
Hopkins doesn't draw any distinction between lobbying - ie. putting your view across - and potentially corrupt practice.
When would "lobbying" become corruption in Hopkins'view? He doesn't make it clear.
Can a public land deal - that contravenes council policy - concluded in 2 weeks in private between a senior officer and a developer without any paperwork really be described as lobbying?
Are we supposed to accept that this is just a developer out to "secure the best deal for his development" and we're all a bit naive for not knowing this how the wealthy and powerful operate in this city?
Does Hopkins think the moon is made of cheese too?
Great post and comments!
Perhaps Gary could supply us with a list of examples of what he is talking about from whilst he was in the Cabinet and before. I wonder how often the same characters would crop up??
Interesting - when I tried to build a (very small) extension to my house, I was turned down despite having made informal representations to planners in advance(as one is always advised to do on makeover tv shows), and been given no reason to expect a refusal...
Post a Comment