Lewes District Council deceive the people - Episode 94

[Gilliver's Travels]

Excellent letter, Jim. Not so long ago these shenanigans would have resulted in a full-on Roger Cook doorstepping job on De Vecchi, and some great TV!

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Excellent letter, Jim. Not so long ago these shenanigans would have resulted in a full-on Roger Cook doorstepping job on De Vecchi, and some great TV!

Especially as Cook would end up being threatened with having his balls cut off by her psycho of a boyfriend

 

[mona]

Do you really think that the Lib Dems are on their own on this one? Or that the Tories would have acted any differently if they were in control of LDC?

I don't understand why some people see it as a party political issue, it's all about country folk not wanting the urban unwashed football fans within 5 miles of their beloved town. It ticks all their boxes - Countryside vs Town, urban encroachment, class warfare, football hooligans.

But our enemies are not countryside people. Norman Baker grew up in Aberdeen and suburban East London. Several of the Lewes councillors are Londoners who've moved out.
Ditto Falmer village which has quite a few people who've made their money in Brighton and moved out.
I agree with your comments on the party political aspects. It's simply that the LibDems have been so vociferous in their opposition.

 

[Jim in the West]

I woke up too early this morning, and decided to write another letter to ALL councillors in Lewes. I never get much of a response from these letters, and I'm never totally sure whether they do much good. But it's the only way I know to vent my frustration....

Dear X,

Falmer – the deception continues!

Well, it’s about a couple of months since my last letter. “I just wish it were your last letter” I hear you cry! And believe me, so do I. Unfortunately, Lewes District Council’s desire to deceive all and sundry over the Falmer issue means that people like myself who believe in local democracy cannot just sit back and ignore what is going on.

In my last letter I concentrated on the steps which LDC was taking to mislead councilors and council tax payers regarding the financial risks LDC was taking in seeking a Judicial Review. The fact that the Judicial Review did not take place in no way justified this deception, although I did receive a rather bizarre letter from the Chairman’s secretary effectively claiming this to be the case!

I am sure that you will be aware that in the last couple of days further evidence has come to light of Lewes District Council’s attempts to mislead the public. The issue relates to a lengthy article in the spring edition of the Council’s newsletter, “districtlink”, covering the Council’s decision to seek a judicial review of the Falmer Stadium decision. Unfortunately, two illustrations in the piece appear to have been either doctored, or used, to give a mis-leading impression of the Falmer site.

In the main illustration, the image of two walkers has been super-imposed, obscuring the university buildings in the background. This (a) erroneously implies that the Stadium site is used by walkers; and (b) gives a false impression of the countryside surrounding the Stadium site.

Page 8 of the newsletter is headed “the proposed site”, and contains a photo towards the foot of the page which was actually taken at Ditchling Beacon! Most casual readers of the article would assume (and who could blame them) that the photograph actually depicted the Stadium site. This impression is probably enhanced by the wording immediately above the picture, which states “Illustration of the proposed site”. This wording is no doubt intended to refer to the aerial photograph of the site which is above the wording. However, it is interesting to note that no other illustration in the newsletter is treated in the same way….in all other cases where a description of an image is provided, the wording clearly indicates it’s relationship to the image.

I have written to the Chief Executive of the Council asking whether an investigation will be undertaken into who was responsible for this very obvious attempt to deceive the residents of Lewes. It is, indeed, attempted deception on a very large scale – as the newsletter states, it is distributed to 42,000 properties throughout the district.

I am sure that you will agree with me that the mis-representation is, at best, unfortunate, and at worst extremely concerning. The Stadium site at Falmer is clearly an issue of vital importance to many thousands of people in Brighton & Hove, Lewes, and beyond. The fact that a district council has seen fit to doctor a photograph relating to such a high-profile issue is, to my simple mind, incredible.

Fortunately for all of us, there seems to be some end in sight to this long-running, extremely wasteful saga. Ultimately we all know, thanks to the exhaustive Public Inquiry process, that Falmer is the only suitable site for the stadium. Most importantly it is by far the most sustainable site on many counts – in particular public transport accessibility. I am very hopeful that the government’s reworded decision will address all the issues raised by Lewes District Council. If this is the case, then the only grounds for appeal against the decision will be that it is irrational. And, as the House of Lords has recently proclaimed: “If there is one principle of planning law more firmly settled than any other it is that matters of planning judgment are within the exclusive province of the ... Secretary of State”.

In the mean time I would urge you to join with me and others in deploring the actions of those responsible for the misleading photographs in “districtlink”. The public’s confidence in local democracy relies to a great degree on the acts of local councilors and their officers. Hopefully in future the residents of Lewes District will be able to read LDC’s publications without wondering whether photographs have been doctored, or otherwise presented in a way to distort reality.

Yours sincerely...

 

[mona]

Excellent letter.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Another superb letter.


So how can we get this more out in the public domain...?

 

[mona]

This episode sums up so much about the opposition to the stadium. Not only because Lewes DC are fundamentally dishonest but also they are deluding themselves. They are desperate to cast themselves as the defenders of the South Downs which is a noble cause in itself. However, they have effectively airbrushed the last fifty years of development out of the stadium site. They are pretending that there is no busy dual carriageway, no sprawling university campuses, no ugly racquets club or Southern Water offices and that Stanmer Great Wood is still intact. Sadly, people who have not visited the site can be swayed by these lies and delusions.

Has anybody sent a copy of the scurrilous publication to the Brighton and Hove MPs.

 

[scotjem]

Sorry, I don't quite see the benefit of a march this time. Whilst we are all outside, Norman Baker and co. are inside busily spreading their lies.

I think the priority should be to get the truth across to the delegates. We want to embarrass Lewes Council and get the Lib Dem hierarchy to express their support for Falmer.

There is a great deal about Falmer (public transport, the democratic way B&H council went about it), that sits very closely with Lib Dem philosophy.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Sorry, I don't quite see the benefit of a march this time. Whilst we are all outside, Norman Baker and co. are inside busily spreading their lies.

I think the priority should be to get the truth across to the delegates. We want to embarrass Lewes Council and get the Lib Dem hierarchy to express their support for Falmer.

The march would be the highest profile way of attracting national media attention to the matter - when was the last time anybody cared enough either way about the Lib Dems to have thousands of people march on their conference? And once we have their attention, we can tell 'em all about the doctored photos, the closed-door decision-making and all the rest of it.

I really don't see any benefit in NOT marching. Can understand if the club itself have to be seen to be distancing themselves from it, but if there was ever a time for the fans to get behind a march, and publicly shame the club's vindictive self-centred enemies, then this is it.

Don't get mad, get even.

 

[scotjem]

Not sure that the last two marches have attracted national media attention, but...

The important thing is we get attention from the Lib Dem hierarchy, get them to hear the facts and get them to voice their support.

 

[mdotw]

Not sure that the last two marches have attracted national media attention, but...

The important thing is we get attention from the Lib Dem hierarchy, get them to hear the facts and get them to voice their support.

So not only should we march then, how about the week of the conference somehow the Argus runs daily stories about the objections & deceit from LDC, sure their delegates have the Argus in hotels etc.

 

[ac gull]

to be fair to DK we normally do very well on the publicity front re Falmer - seeing as PR/advertising is what he used to do for a living - would back his judgement re next moves for FFA campaign

am sure Lord B and co will keep us updated on next plans etc

 

[mona]

Sorry, I don't quite see the benefit of a march this time. Whilst we are all outside, Norman Baker and co. are inside busily spreading their lies.

I think the priority should be to get the truth across to the delegates. We want to embarrass Lewes Council and get the Lib Dem hierarchy to express their support for Falmer.

There is a great deal about Falmer (public transport, the democratic way B&H council went about it), that sits very closely with Lib Dem philosophy.

We MUST do both. The Lib Dems won't listen if there isn't a march though. Your Scottish LibDems are probably more reasonable and less class conscious than the slime in Lewes. Don't kid yourself.

 

[Caveman]

Sorry, I don't quite see the benefit of a march this time. Whilst we are all outside, Norman Baker and co. are inside busily spreading their lies.

They can't hide from the fact that a huge crowd is outside protesting, don't forget we're dealing with politics and this, providing the numbers turning up are big, will be very embarrassing for them.

March on!

 

[Pavilionaire]

I emailed Ming Campbell a couple of months ago about the damage the Liberal stance on Lewes has done to Liberal support across Sussex and have got nothing back, not even an acknowledgement.

The fact that I mentioned I used to be a Liberal Party member does not seem to have made any difference, so I'm pretty disillusioned.

I have mixed views re a march on the Liberal Party Conference. I don't think the national media or the national Lib party will have much of a clue, and I don't think it will have that much of a positive effect.

The issue is essentially local and it's all about the voters within the LDC catchment being educated about the waste of time, money and resources being made by their elected officials.

 

[mona]

Sorry, I don't quite see the benefit of a march this time. Whilst we are all outside, Norman Baker and co. are inside busily spreading their lies.

We will never change the minds of Baker and the Lewes DC mob but we can burst the LibDem lie about how close they are to local communities. They seem oblivious to the fact that the Albion aren't just Brighton's team but represent the whole of Sussex.
If we can get 10,000 to march it will make a difference.

 

[bhaexpress]

I am in full support for a march but might I suggest that we try to appoint a spokesperson or persons so that should there be an opportunity for a sound bite its comes across as both lucid and accurate.

 

[Jim in the West]

Here's my response from the Chief Exec:

"The Chief Executive has asked me to acknowledge your letter of 20 May with these comments.

The two photographs in District Link were respectively a genuine photograph of the site of the proposed stadium and fair representation of the attractiveness of the South Downs. The Chief Executive approved the article. The article gives a clear statement of the Council's reasons for challenging Mr. Prescott's decision and does not breach any procedure or code."

So, now we know - in LDC, doctoring a photograph is absolutely fine. What code of conduct allows that sort of behaviour? Note how there was no reference in the response to "doctoring" itself....a carefully worded avoidance of the key issue.

 

[Curious Orange]

Not saying something is clearly not lying then!!

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

...

So, now we know - in LDC, doctoring a photograph is absolutely fine. What code of conduct allows that sort of behaviour?

Not sure, apart from the intelligence services, but feel pretty confident that there's some kind of ombudsman LDC can be reported to