Comments on: How not to respond to a planning objection http://www.libdemvoice.org/how-not-to-deal-with-a-planning-application-1221.html Our place to talk - an independent website for supporters of the Liberal Democrat party in the UK. Sun, 12 Feb 2012 00:35:27 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Angus Huck http://www.libdemvoice.org/how-not-to-deal-with-a-planning-application-1221.html#comment-28296 Angus Huck Fri, 24 Aug 2007 23:29:24 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/how-not-to-deal-with-a-planning-application-1221.html#comment-28296 Ward councillors and planning committee members should never destroy correspondence relating to planning applications. To do so constitutes a dereliction of their duty. Read AND file. I simply don't understand No 3. How can knowledge prejudice the Chairman and Vice Chairman? Are they brainless idiots incapable of coming to a reasoned judgment? Are all councillors on planning committees merely zombies there to listen politely to the spin of officers and rubber stamp recommendations in total and blissful ignorance? Like the Labour councillors in Manchester claim they do? Sounds like the Soviet Union. Councillors are elected to uphold the public interest. Those who close their ears to constituents, or are officers' poodles, should be voted out of office. Ward councillors and planning committee members should never destroy correspondence relating to planning applications. To do so constitutes a dereliction of their duty. Read AND file.

I simply don’t understand No 3.

How can knowledge prejudice the Chairman and Vice Chairman? Are they brainless idiots incapable of coming to a reasoned judgment? Are all councillors on planning committees merely zombies there to listen politely to the spin of officers and rubber stamp recommendations in total and blissful ignorance? Like the Labour councillors in Manchester claim they do? Sounds like the Soviet Union.

Councillors are elected to uphold the public interest. Those who close their ears to constituents, or are officers’ poodles, should be voted out of office.

]]> By: ColinW http://www.libdemvoice.org/how-not-to-deal-with-a-planning-application-1221.html#comment-28292 ColinW Fri, 24 Aug 2007 21:49:13 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/how-not-to-deal-with-a-planning-application-1221.html#comment-28292 3.Utter rubbish 3.Utter rubbish

]]> By: Matthew Scott http://www.libdemvoice.org/how-not-to-deal-with-a-planning-application-1221.html#comment-28288 Matthew Scott Fri, 24 Aug 2007 20:41:17 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/how-not-to-deal-with-a-planning-application-1221.html#comment-28288 Had the application gone to a planning committee, the Chairman and Vice Chairman would have been prejudiced if they had read it Had the application gone to a planning committee, the Chairman and Vice Chairman would have been prejudiced if they had read it

]]> By: Adrian Sanders http://www.libdemvoice.org/how-not-to-deal-with-a-planning-application-1221.html#comment-28287 Adrian Sanders Fri, 24 Aug 2007 20:37:26 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/how-not-to-deal-with-a-planning-application-1221.html#comment-28287 Careful, I can read emails of up to 300 words without opening them and often delete such emails once read. If the sender has set their email for a receipt they will receive a message saying it had been deleted unread. Careful, I can read emails of up to 300 words without opening them and often delete such emails once read. If the sender has set their email for a receipt they will receive a message saying it had been deleted unread.

]]> By: Jock http://www.libdemvoice.org/how-not-to-deal-with-a-planning-application-1221.html#comment-28262 Jock Fri, 24 Aug 2007 12:01:51 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/how-not-to-deal-with-a-planning-application-1221.html#comment-28262 I'm sure it's probably more common than one might think - spam filters and so on. I’m sure it’s probably more common than one might think – spam filters and so on.

]]>