A brilliant new blog has emerged locally and we welcome this, wholeheartedly and congratulate those behind it.
The new campaign for those who love Dinnington, Anston and Laughton Common
Rotherham Politics has just learned that Michael Gazur has summoned the parish council to a meeting on Monday 25 February at 7pm in the parish hall!
Democracy in action? An experience not to be missed by the locals.
Couldn’t resist bringing readers up to date on this one:
From: Anne Jarvis
Sent: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 10:18
Subject: lord conyers planning appeal
I am in receipt of your reply (undated) to my email of 3rd January 2013 regarding the Planning Inspectorate Appeal Hearing. I was fully aware of the history of the application, and although dis-satisfied with the outcome my concerns were more to do with the actions or in-actions of RMBC.
You state in your reply that ‘The officer recommendation to Board was that the demolition of the building was acceptable in this instance as it had been proved that it was not economically viable to retain or convert the building.’
Yet the very same Officer recommending demolition had on the 29th Nov 2011 stated in his role as Conservation Officer that ‘the building represents a significant heritage aspect for the Wales Conservation Area as part of a link to its past’
See attachment *peckjpg (1.4MB) Below.
Since when has it been the duty of RMBC to ensure a developer who has overpaid for a building ‘turns a profit’? There would appear to be a ‘conflict of interest’ in the Officer holding two roles within the Planning Department.
You state that English Heritage have responsibility for the listing of buildings. The Borough Council can ask them to consider listing and given the Conservation Officer’s report of Nov 2011, I would have thought that this would have been a logical step for the Borough Council to have taken.
If the Borough Council had pursued the retention of The Lord Conyer’s Arms as being an integral part of the Wales Conservation Area and refused demolition under the Conservation status, the planning application would not have had any chance of succeeding.
The Inspector states ;
‘The Council refused the applications for conservation area consent and
planning permission, which are the subject of these appeals, for a single reason
relating to the provision of inadequate information with the applications to
justify the demolition of the existing building’
You say ‘you are satisfied that the Officer representing the Council substantiated the reason for refusal’
How you are able to make that assertion when the planning department have failed to promote the Conservation of Wales Square and after writing a report for retention they then fail to take action to ‘conserve’ at which point the proposed planning application for houses would have been academic.
the Inspector further states;
Members (Refs. RB2012/0852 and RB2012/0851), no additional expert advice
was sought. Hence the refusals relate to generalised concerns, unsupported by
substantial evidence either in writing or other form, with no detailed objective
I am at a loss as to how this equates with your statement :’The Planning Officer who represented the Council at this Hearing is a qualified and experienced officer, who is the lead officer in the Council for Conservation matters, and I therefore cannot accept your criticism in relation to the representation at the appeal’.
It would appear to the layman that there is implicit criticism in the Inspector’s statement and that your ‘qualified and experienced officer’ did little to support members decision.
Under the heading VENUE of your reply you state;
In this particular case the Planning Inspectorates admin team did request that the Hearing be held at Riverside House, although the Council could have requested that it be held an alternative venue. I have asked that in the future the Council gives consideration to the suitability of other venues closer to the application site.
I wrote to the Inspectorate quoting your reply to me and asked for clarification of your assertions. Find attached (2179568 reply to Mrs J) a letter from the Inspectorate in total contradiction of your reply. Indeed had the Inspectorate requested the venue be at Riverside House they would have been contravening their own guidance. P.I. Advise & Equality Act 2010. Guidance which RMBC chose to ignore. Wales has a perfectly adequate village hall with all facilities required by the public and the inspectorate within 1/4 of a mile of the subject of the appeal.
It would seem to me that someone is adept in the art of lying.
The Officer’s and member’s of the Planning department and committee have failed in their duty to protect our local heritage. For what reason can only be left to the imagination!
I wonder just how much of Rotherham’s heritage you are willing to sacrifice in the pursuit of profit, either yours or the developers who you seem to favour over local heritage, Herringthorpe playing field and Stubbin Lane are they next on RMBC’s hit list?
From the BBC – Rotherham Borough Council job losses in new budget:
Up to 60 full-time posts at Rotherham council are to be cut as part of plans to save £20m.
The workforce has already been reduced by 1,000 people over the last two years and staff pay has been frozen.
The cuts were announced as part of budget proposals recommended by the council’s cabinet for 2013-14.
Council leader Roger Stone said it would continue to “maintain high level services to those who need them the most”. Read on………
This was published by the Star on Thursday 21st : Sixty jobs axed in Rotherham Council budget cuts
This report from last nights meeting of Anston Parish Council, it’s brilliant!
Dominic Beck last night, 18th February, provided us with the answer to the conundrum, who does the Rotherham Labour Party believe are the more important themselves or the electorate?
Last night I attended the monthly meeting of the Anston Parish Council, better known as the comedy club, with shouter Beck in the chair.
Amongst the public attending was a 70 year old disabled retired miner. Over four weeks ago he wrote to the council clerk with a complaint about the conduct of a Parish councillor, he never received a reply. Yet here it was as an item on the agenda.
So, as we all would, he expects to get a response, Beck with the help of Dalton attempt to fob the man off, this is no surprise as the councillor being complained about is none other than St John, better known as Sinjin.
However the man is not in any mood to allow his complaint to be swept under the carpet and demands the letter be read out.
Beck using his usual vociferous demeanor orders the man to shut up, his reply to this was just read out the letter.
Beck once again shouts at him to be quiet, all this does is antagonise him further.
Any chairman worth his salt would realise that the situation was getting out of hand, so to placate the man he would have had the letter read out.
However the egomaniac that is Dominic Beck can not see this so he escalates it by vehemently ordering the 70 year old disabled man to leave the meeting, he of course refuses.
So in the best traditions of the Labour party, remember the 80 year old man they had forcefully ejected from their conference, shouter Beck adjourns the meeting and calls the police to eject this man.
The majority of the public remain behind to support the dissident.
An hour goes by with no sign of the police, things are now developing into a major farce Beck is making himself and the rest of the council a laughing stock. 9.30 pm arrives the time that standing orders dictates that proceedings should finish so Beck with due aplomb reopens the meeting councillor Dalton immediately leaps to his aid and moves suspension of standing orders for half an hour Beck straight away adjourns the meeting again.
This proves how inept he is at chairing the meeting he can not adjourn the meeting again without discussion.
It was patently obvious the tactics being used by Beck and Dalton was to delay proceedings until the police arrived, they wanted to show the rest of us what could be in store for us if we step out of line; we were quaking.
Alas the well laid plans of Beck and Dalton came to naught, at ten o’clock he had to close the meeting with barely a quorum of councillors left.
At this point the police arrived to much cheering and clapping from the public, Beck still attempts to get the police to eject the protagonist.
I point out that he has closed the meeting so there is nothing to be ejected from, at this he lambastes the police for their tardiness.
They quite rightly reply that they have had far more urgent things to do than eject 70 year old disabled people from Anston Parish council meetings.
It descends further into farce when Beck attempts to get the police to stop a man from filming, the man just carried on and calmly stated this is going on UTUBE can’t wait.
The moral of this story is that Beck and his cronies believe they are more important than a 70 year old disabled retired miner who only wanted an apology.
To read more on Rotherham Comedy Club click here.
This is a press release from the TUSC campaign:
On Sunday the campaign began for TUSC in Maltby, where Joe Robinson is standing in the North ward for Maltby Town Council. The ward was leafleted on Sunday, outlining who Joe is, his policies and some information about TUSC in Rotherham.
On Monday a stall was set up in the morning near Tesco, where leaflets were handed out to voters about the election, and also a petition on NHS cuts in Rotherham which was quite well received, pictured below.
After the stall a larger portion of the ward was leafleted – many households in the ward should now have received a leaflet, with further campaigning planned at the weekend. Policies outlined include the saving of the bowling greens and tennis courts in Maltby and improving the conditions of parks and greenspaces in the town. Joe has given support to a community group aimed at a new play area for children around the New Estate. Greater transparency and accountability between MTC and the residents of Maltby is also called for and pledged in the leaflet.
The public seem to be quite pleased, being part of the campaign myself I’ve spoke to a few people who like what Joe is standing for and are glad there is a Labour alternative standing in Maltby. No sign of the other candidate, Jeanette Mallinder, yet – whether she’ll be campaigning or not is unknown, for now.
Vakas Hussain is one of Moofy’s nephews, currently a post graduate student studying criminal litigation in London.
Strange then, that his name keeps appearing on our radar associated with some of the most outrageous public utterances on Facebook and elsewhere.
Today we bring you some Facebook contributions Vakas made when trying to intimidate a critic. Rothpol apologises in advance for the unacceptable language used by Vakas Hussain in the following:
22 November 2012
“So give me names of people who have told you this and I will make sure he say sorry to them. If you don’t tell me who these people are then I can’t sort this out. You get what I mean?”
30 November 2012
“Yo milkshake all I want to say is your a fucking lier you silly wanker chatting bullshit. Laughing my fucking ass off at the spanking respect got. Seems like you wasted your time campaigning. Stupid bus and truck dint do shit for ya. So glad respect will fuck of back to Bradford now.
No thanks to joeys like you. Respect, galloway and ridley will be no where to be seen tomorrow and it will be us who have to pick up the pieces. Thanks a lot you moron. You should be ashamed of yourself and so to should respect. Respect kept talking about a cover up by the council in relation to grooming when there was a cover up but what the fuck were groomers like you doing campaigning for respect? Respect are nothing but hypocrites!! Thank god labour won and to be honest I weren’t bothered if labour won or lost as long as respect dint win. I would rather vote BNP then liers like respect and their campaigners. Tell your Bradford mates to take their dirty and vile politics with them. Respect is finished hahaha!!!!”
“Erm you a lier because I know 100% my brother didn’t say it to him and I’m more then happy speak to his face. Also your wrong labour won in Boston castle mate that’s a fact so stop chatting shit pal. getting a lot of supprort in bostan castle my ass you got 1700 in a parlaimenry election cllr marhoof for more then that in a council election in boston castle. Yea lets see if Yvonne moves to Rotherham I highly doubt it. And your a lier because how can you say your not part of respect when you went out of your way to help commented on the Facebook group. If you help someone that means you suport them so stop being a pussy and just admit your part of respect. And respect will not get a single councillor in Rotherham. There 5000 Muslim votes in Rotherham and you dint even get anywhere near half the votes. And everybody knows about your past with underage girls you don’t need me to say it. And the reason I’m swearing at you is cause I was being reasonable with you when I thought my brother was in the wrong but you turned out to be a lier.”
“Yea the reason you haven’t got a criminal record is because the police failed to prosecute you. You got lucky. You were arrested but never charged because of shitty South Yorkshire police. It’s because of people like you that the EDL and NF came. And yea i did have a lot of respect for Yvonne but after watching how she behaved and said stuff on twitter about uncle when he never said a single thing about her then I lost all respect for her.”
“Just because you been arrested doesn’t mean you can’t do a law degree. But the point it you were arrested and the police failed to prosecute you and you got off unlike your cousin. Are you really that stupid? he’s doesn’t even know who he is so if he did cry then it weren’t my brother cause when I messaged him he had no idea what I was going on about. So you are a lier.”
“Your fucking stupid cant you read English?. I believe you that he was crying BUT is wasn’t my brother who made him cry. You understand that? Can’t make it any easier for you.”
“I told you that’s your a fucking lier.”
1 December 2012
“You a two faced lying idiot who’s causing more shit that you can deal with. By the way Saj Boston is looking for you cause he wants to have a word with you”
“What’s you mobile number Saj Boston wants it. He wants to talk to you about some comments you been posting about him on the Rotherham politics website”
“You gone into hiding? I’ve asked you a question and can you now do what I’ve asked you and give me you number so I can pass it onto him”
“Give me your number I need to speak you. It’s urgent. You rather sort this out with me rather then Saj and haq Boston.
My number is 07921841596 ring me or give me your number and al ring you but we need to sort this out tonight. Trust me you better of sorting this out with me rather then Saj Boston”
“Don’t think by ignoring me this will go away because it won’t”
“I really don’t want to argue with you. To me you are an idiot and I don’t want to waste my time arguing with you. But you really fucking need to stop spreading shit about me. One of your fucking fake shaykh bum boys called hasan messaged me giving me shit. He told me that you mentioned to him that I’ve been going around spreading shit about you and people in Rotherham and the council are complaining about me. What the fuck you chatting you silly fool. I don’t even live in Rotherham and live in London you joke so you really need to stop chatting shit. I have not spoken to anyone about you or spread any shit about you. you a stupid joker so why the fuck would I waste my time spreading shit about you. i got much better things to do. Also I know for a fact that you have have set up a twitter account called Vakaasrotherham and put a picture up of me. I dont have twitter. I have reported it to twitter who are dealing with it but I’m giving you till tomorrow 5pm for the account to be deleted. If not I will report you to the police for imprisonment and I’m not shitting you. I will report you kasam so I want it gone. And tell your stupid friend not to message me again I will report him for harassment. And don’t fucking use my name on Rotherham Politics. You remember when I challenged you on it you gave me an email address called email@example.com or something like that. I know it’s you cause your English is shit and I can stop you a mile of. So don’t use my name on that blog either. You have been warned. You have till 5pm tomorrow to delete the twitter account if not the police will be informed!!!
“I told you yesterday to delete the Vakaasrotherham twitter account. I have just checked and its still there. I have reported its to twitter and after sending this message I will be contact South Yorkshire Police. I did warn you but you decided not to listen and though I was joking.”
“This is proof that it has been reported to Twitter the same evidence is going to go to the police. Don’t pick battles you want win you joke”
Rothpol particularly liked this statement from Vakas Hussain, “I need to speak you. It’s urgent. You rather sort this out with me rather then Saj and haq Boston.” and “we need to sort this out tonight. Trust me you better of sorting this out with me rather then Saj Boston”
This looks to me to be an outrageous threat of intimidation by Sajid Bostan and Haq Bostan acting under direct instruction from others!
Who are Saj and Haq? Mahroof ‘Moofy’ Hussain’s chief enforcers. I have myself experienced intimidation from Sajid over the telephone and by means of social media, even that is not pleasant, I can assure you. I wouldn’t blame anyone, if they didn’t want to experience their full force in person.
Rothpol really would like to know what Sajid meant, when he told me,”we’ve fixed the Council, we’ve fixed the Police, we’ve fixed the Advertiser and the local BBC!”?
Don’t miss Vakas’s comment on: Why did Labour overlook Mahroof Hussain – Further Speculation? Rosiecarson098@yahoo.co.uk, revealed!
Interesting this letter only made it as far as the Advertisers online letters:
Published on 13 February 2013, by J Morgan of the Herringthorpe Playing Fields Community Group
LOCAL residents have asked me to draw reader’s attention to the Public Notice in the back of the newspaper advertising the “Disposal of Open Public Space” on Herringthorpe Playing Fields. This will enable Rotherham Rugby Club Ltd to lease and fence part of the field. It’s entitled “Local Government Act 1972”.
Please take this final opportunity to send your comments to RMBC by February 22. The club’s current home on Clifton Lane isn’t big enough to meet its current ambitions. The proposed development will fulfil its rugby needs and provide obvious benefits for amateur rugby in Rotherham, but to justify this with additional claims that it will meets the wider community and schools needs are misleading.
There is already a purpose-built stadium on the same site which the community can and do use now. It is also available for schools to use. It’s got everything needed by community sport, secure fencing, toilets, changing rooms, ample parking, floodlights and none of the flooding problems of the field. Does the “community” need two developments on the same field, one with ideal facilities and the other without? Read on……
Haven’t we seen similar in Rotherham?