http://www.theargus.co.uk/the_argus/news_extra/LETTERS8.html
She sounds like a very confused woman!!!!
She sounds like a very confused woman!!!!
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
De Vecchi in the Argus
- Thread starter cardboard
- Start date
Da Man Clay
T'Blades
- Dec 16, 2004
- 16,280
Good letter in there from another MP.
Bwian
Kiss my (_!_)
- Jul 14, 2003
- 15,898
DeVagi has proven herself to be a complete idiot with this letter.
LDC name the Albion as a defendant. DeVagi and co then declare that despite being named as defendants, the club doesn't need to defend itself. How does that work then you stupid fecking cow?
She, and her cronies, have shown themselves to be unfit to be in charge of public funds. Thank goodness I don't live in their district.
LDC name the Albion as a defendant. DeVagi and co then declare that despite being named as defendants, the club doesn't need to defend itself. How does that work then you stupid fecking cow?
She, and her cronies, have shown themselves to be unfit to be in charge of public funds. Thank goodness I don't live in their district.
ben andrews' girlfriend
Nurse Laura
Letter: We want a park, not a stadium
Lord Bassam was wrong when he said it was ironic Lewes District Council had not supported the National Park for the South Downs (The Argus, January 11).
Lewes District Council welcomed the proposal from the outset and supported it throughout the public inquiry designation procedures.
The true irony is John Prescott himself announced the Government's intention to create a National Park in the South Downs.
We are challenging his decision because in rejecting his inspector's conclusion that the case against a multi-purpose stadium on the Falmer site was overwhelming he did not follow his Government's policies.
Speculation about the costs of the challenge is misguided.
The city council and the football club were named in the application as court rules require but they know there is no need to spend money by taking part in the high court hearing. They can simply leave it to Mr Prescott to defend his decision.
-Ann de Vecchi, Leader of Lewes District Council
- just incase it disappears.
Lord Bassam was wrong when he said it was ironic Lewes District Council had not supported the National Park for the South Downs (The Argus, January 11).
Lewes District Council welcomed the proposal from the outset and supported it throughout the public inquiry designation procedures.
The true irony is John Prescott himself announced the Government's intention to create a National Park in the South Downs.
We are challenging his decision because in rejecting his inspector's conclusion that the case against a multi-purpose stadium on the Falmer site was overwhelming he did not follow his Government's policies.
Speculation about the costs of the challenge is misguided.
The city council and the football club were named in the application as court rules require but they know there is no need to spend money by taking part in the high court hearing. They can simply leave it to Mr Prescott to defend his decision.
-Ann de Vecchi, Leader of Lewes District Council
- just incase it disappears.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
And therein will lie your downfall, you stupid BINT. You can't challenge the decision on the basis that you "think" he's gone against Government policy (which is open to interpretation and DOES leave room for Prescott to overrule). You can only challenge the deicision on the basis that something illegal/unlawful went on in the Public Inquiry PROCESS.ben andrews' girlfriend said:
f*** SAKE.
seagullsovergrimsby
#cpfctinpotclub
How completely stupid , if the Albion and B&H city council are named they have to defend themselves or else LDC will say they agree with the JR by not taking further action.
Last edited:
Barrel of Fun
Abort, retry, fail
I feel someone has to reply to that. Whether it will get published or not is another matter.....
We will have you De Vecchi!!! (If I am allowed to say that without getting in trouble)
Disclaimer: My comment regarding "having" Ann De Vecchi is not to be seen as a threat.
We will have you De Vecchi!!! (If I am allowed to say that without getting in trouble)
Disclaimer: My comment regarding "having" Ann De Vecchi is not to be seen as a threat.
Last edited:
the wanderbus
Well-known member
your not thinking of shagging her? Id join the line if i was you
she's already f***ing LDC tax payers
she's already f***ing LDC tax payers
Last edited:
Barrel of Fun
Abort, retry, fail
the wanderbus said:
I was rather have sex with a cactus.....
Bwian
Kiss my (_!_)
- Jul 14, 2003
- 15,898
BarrelofFun said:I feel someone has to reply to that. Whether it will get published or not is another matter.....
We will have you De Vecchi!!! (If I am allowed to say that without getting in trouble)
Disclaimer: My comment regarding "having" Ann De Vecchi is not to be seen as a threat.
Done...as soon as I read it yesterday.
and I sincerely hope your 'having' DeVagi is not a sexual fantasy...
Last edited:
Les Biehn said:
Very fortunate - you can stand as a candidate for the council elections in 2007, under the Anti De Vecchi banner.
She clearly is struggling to understand the concept of the Judical review. They might score a few small points and some sympathy but nothing illegal has happened. The only point they have is for consistency in the set of rules used to make planning decisions which is a long term general objection and not Falmer specific. What a waste of money.
The more I learn about LDC and the likes of Baker the more I believe Perrys stance that they are trying to kill the club.
The more I learn about LDC and the likes of Baker the more I believe Perrys stance that they are trying to kill the club.