Tesco / ASDA !!!

[Miss Marple]

This post contained copies of two emails sent by Christina Cassidy to her staff earlier this year on April 7 and then on May 9.

I received a request to remove them from Andrew Hubert of Cheadle and Marple College at 1.20pm today (28 July 2011). Andrew provided a copy of the CAMSFC Disclaimer that the he says accompanied the original emails when they were sent out to college staff, which I have pasted below:

CAMSFC DISCLAIMER: This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is intended to be addressed. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the College. If you have received this message in error, or you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying or disclose of its contents to any other person is strictly prohibited, please notify the sender immediately, by responding to this message and then deleting it from your system. The College nor the sender accepts any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan this email.

I have sought advice regarding the legal position on this and have been advised to comply with the college's request. Admin.

[sooty2]

All valuable info' Neil, Thanks for your contributions!and if people wan't to see the money that is squandered by SMBC on cars and hotels etc they should look at past FOI questions and answers

[NeilCorrie]

...I for one would rather my council tax were spent on dealing with important matters such as these, than on dealing with endless FOI requests! 

If there's another way to have frank, open and honest discussion over this development, I'd happily take it.  Have tried meetings, tried emails, tried open forums and tried reading published minutes but the FOI route remains the one which returns the most information.

The development could impact people's livelihoods, their families, their quality of life.  In no way do I believe any of the FOIs I've submitted are trivial and pointless.

[sooty2]

Well said Lisa,and don't forget Ian Keyte the compulsory purchase guy

[Lisa Oldham]

I think the FOI requests are in fact very useful.. I prefer the little that is spent on them in comparison to the huge wages and expenses many council officials and councillors claim.. however that no doubt is another discussion

"consultation".. "guidance from council officials".... all to be used later " but we jumped through hoops"  I'm sure Belly you have had these sorts of meetings but have you ever gone back again and again and again and again?  I do know these meetings can and wll be used in any future planning appeal..


And no I don't see any reason why they should be discussing road changes and all other stuff beyond mr Lawrence meeting with them to say..actually no we wont accept any supermarket developments as its contrary to stockport planning guidance! so yes.. relatively happy to see him meeting many times with them to say no no no no no... but no reason for anyone else after they've said we wont accept...  and ESPECIALLY NOT the councillors

[Miss Marple]

Thanks belly - I take your point. I also strongly agree that the crusaders of MIA would be well advsied to moderate ther attacks on councillors and council officers. Staging what seems more and more like a vendetta against both the college and the council may not be the most effective way of winning hearts and minds!

As for Miss M's point that ' all our hard earned taxes are spent getting half of the senior SMBC officers including The Chief Executive of the council to attend meetings with CAMSFC', I for one would rather my council tax were spent on dealing with important matters such as these, than on dealing with endless FOI requests! 

Oh you can be cutting with me at times, but like I alway say WE ARE ONLY AS GOOD AS OUR OPPOSITION so thanks for you comments 

[Harry]

As for Miss M's point that ' all our hard earned taxes are spent getting half of the senior SMBC officers including The Chief Executive of the council to attend meetings with CAMSFC', I for one would rather my council tax were spent on dealing with important matters such as these, than on dealing with endless FOI requests! 

I agree.

[Dave]

Thanks belly - I take your point. I also strongly agree that the crusaders of MIA would be well advsied to moderate ther attacks on councillors and council officers. Staging what seems more and more like a vendetta against both the college and the council may not be the most effective way of winning hearts and minds!

As for Miss M's point that ' all our hard earned taxes are spent getting half of the senior SMBC officers including The Chief Executive of the council to attend meetings with CAMSFC', I for one would rather my council tax were spent on dealing with important matters such as these, than on dealing with endless FOI requests! 

[Belly]

This is all rather confusing! This may be because of different meanings of the word 'plans'. I was at the famous 'party in the park', and heard Mr Lawrence state clearly that he had met management staff from camsfc, and advised them that a major retail development on the Hibbert Lane site would not comply with the council's core strategy. That is not a planning meeting, or a pre-planning meeting, or a 'meeting with supermarket planners'. Those meetings would come at a later stage, if and when a formal planning application is being prepared.

Not necessarily Dave. I do quite a lot of pre-planning meetings with Council officers in the North West, simply to sound them out regarding different sites and the potential response of different Council departments to the principle of a planning application. Officers are, after all, the local 'experts'. The fact that officers attend such meetings and give out such advice should not be seen as anything other than good practice - it certainly does not mean that the Council are sympathetic to the cause.

Sometimes a developer will walk away from after initial pre-app consultation, if he feels that he will have a massive battle on his hands and that the Council is hard against him. Sometimes they will take a risk. Thats how planning works.

I really think that people should be careful about laying into the Council and Councillors over this. They have made the principles of their planning position very clear.

[Dave]

This is all rather confusing! This may be because of different meanings of the word 'plans'. I was at the famous 'party in the park', and heard Mr Lawrence state clearly that he had met management staff from camsfc, and advised them that a major retail development on the Hibbert Lane site would not comply with the council's core strategy. That is not a planning meeting, or a pre-planning meeting, or a 'meeting with supermarket planners'. Those meetings would come at a later stage, if and when a formal planning application is being prepared.

[Miss Marple]

From my recollection of what was said, Paul Lawrence stated that there had been no formal planning meetings between the Council & the College. It was not until David Hoyle got on the stand that they admitted that they had pre-planning meetings with the college (pre planning meetings are usually deemed to be in confidence) so Paul Lawrence acted quite correctly in not mentioning them at the meeting until after the college released the information.

What is not acceptable is that if any of the 4 COUNCILLORS (our elected representatives) who attended the meeting on 27th June then entered correspondence with local people stating that they had no knowledge of any plans for a Supermarket.

IF THAT IS THE CASE THEN THEY SHOULD RESIG


Has anyone any proof?

Yes I have one off Paul Lawrence,   Councillor Bispham   Councillor Dowling   Councillor.Sue  Ingham   Councillor Chandler   Oh yes nearly forgot,  Andrew Stunell MP
DID SOMEONE JUST SHOUT BINGO ?

[Miss Marple]

So all our hard earned taxes are spent getting half of the senior SMBC officers including The Chief Executive of the council to attend meetings with CAMSFC about planning, why was the Chief Executive of the entire council there ?  All sounds mighty fishy to me

[Dave]

Lisa is right to point out that pre-planning meetings do not involve councillors. However, she then goes on to write 'discussions going on about roads etc... this is not Pre planning... this is making sure what ever they come up with is acceptable to planning department and any other department that the development effects prior to any planning decision..'

On the contrary, that IS what pre-planning meetings are about. Submitting a planning application for a major development is a complex (and costly) business, and potential applicants invariably seek guidance from planning officers in advance as to what is likely to be acceptable - they'd be crazy not to!

[Miss Marple]

Paul Lawrence stated that he had no talks with supermarket planners from CAMCFC Yet it clearly shows that he has
Councillors denied any knowledge of a supermarket and I have got letters and emails from most of them stating that including one of Andrew Stunell
This is about what people are not saying, could you imagine the outcry in the park that night if  we had been informed by Paul Lawrence   that Stockports Chief Executive ,SMBC planning , SMBC Highways dept , CAMSFC Supermarket Planners , SMBC regeneration officers  and 4 elected members had been in talks at some point within the past 6months with Ms Cassidy and Andrew Hubert regarding the sale of the HIBBERT Lane site
What deals , alternatives are being suggested, planned or rubber stamped without due consultation with the community and why is Paul Lawrence saying that he thinks if the college move the sports facilities to Buxton Lane the covenants would be overcome on HIBBERT Lane.  No they should not be, the plots of land were given by two different MARPLE Families, and the family who donated the HIBBERT Lane Sight gave it for the education of Local People  so why are alternatives being even looked at and what are SMBC highways in on the meeting for ? I hope it's not looking at moving road, and putting roundabouts in ?  I think we need all these people round our table for a change, too many secret meetings for something that's not going to happen, don't you think

[sgk]

Alot of pre planning meetings there!! Even I'm shocked! How can all those meetings be justified?  Clearly the councillors did know about it..[snip]

It's quite odd looking back at earlier communications, such as the somewhat condescending one from Councillor Bispham on 10th June, where he dismissed the very idea of a supermarket on college land as mere rumour, comparing it to crazy conspiracy theories like GM crops on Awkwright Road and nuclear waste being dumped at Chadkirk Mill.