Introduction (back to my election leaflet) | The whole leaflet and commentary | Site map |
I haven't time to reproduce the whole leaflet now - today is
election day - but, subject to legal advice, shall do so
shortly. Here is the element of it that I most object to
because it is so written as to give the impression that I have
behaved at best improperly, at worst, corruptly.
I have not, so I have nothing to fear. So here is the lie, as
published by the LibDem agent and the truth, which is a matter
of public record.
The Truth
West Devon's Local Plan, adopted in 1997, contains a policy
"TH2", thus:
"IN THE AREA AROUND DOWN ROAD AND CHOLLACOTT LANE AS SHOWN ON
THE PROPOSALS MAP, DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD LEAD TO A LOSS OF
RESIDENTIAL AMENITY, OR OF THE MATURE LANDSCAPE CHARACTER OF
THE AREA WILL NOT BE PERMITTED."
During public consultation on the Local Plan during the last 2
years or so, one or more objections were lodged by the public
at the "First Deposit" stage to the continued inclusion of this
policy in the revised Local Plan. All the objections were
considered by a "working group" of councillors. I sat on the
working group, as Chairman of Planning Committee, but I took no
part in consideration of TH2; the working group did not
recommend that the policy be deleted or changed in the revised
Local Plan; I took no part in consideration of that policy,
which was incorporated into the Second Deposit Draft as policy
H36. Furthermore, I never sat on the Strategic Development
Committee which is the committee that the working
group reported to. My Planning Committee decides planning
applications; it does not make the planning
policies. The distinction is analogous to that between
Parliament, which makes laws and the Courts which apply them.
Officers did not recommend that the policy should be
deleted. No Borough Councillor, LibDem or other, submitted any
motion to delete the policy, either at committee or at the
subsequent Council Meeting that agreed the Second Deposit
Version of the Revised Local Plan.
Furthermore, as a matter of fact, nowhere within the Local Plan area has been "designated for infill development". Infill may be permitted subject to a series of criteria in appropriate policies on land within defined settlement limits. The Down Road area is within the settlement limit for Tavistock. In addition, neither the adopted policy (TH2) nor the draft policy (H36) preclude infill development in the Down Road and Chollacott Lane areas. The policies do however add additional criteria against which proposals in those locations would be judged.
At no time since 1997 has any proposal to delete policy TH2 been moved by any West Devon Councillor. This is a matter of public record. Any contrary statement is a lie. Whether it is a careless lie or a deliberate one is not for me to say.
At the risk of confusing the issue, a LibDem councillor did raise the issue at a Tavistock Town Council meeting. I withdrew from the meeting during the discussion (for obvious reasons), so I do not know what he said, though I believe he wanted the Town Council to object to the policy. As the councillor in question was also a Borough Councillor, one must ask why he did not move to delete the policy at WDBC, where he could have sought the support of his group and had the issue debated by the council that actually had power to change or delete it.
You may think that, given the layout of the LibDem election leaflet, where the lie about "The Down Road Issue" was published as a direct criticism of me as Chairman of the Planning Committee, the intention was to imply that I had misused my office for some personal reason. If so, then the lie is more than a political debating point: it is a deliberate attempt to make those reading it think that I am a corrupt councillor. Needless, to say, I have instructed my solicitor to take counsel's opinion about what action I ought now to take to set the public record straight.
It would be easy for me to say "this is typical of LibDems and a good reason not to vote for them". Or I could say "this is typical of party politics and a good reason to vote for independents like me". Neither would be true. What I do say, as I have before, is that there is a thread running through party politics that twists complicated facts into untrue or misleading headlines or sound bites and that there is a thread that runs through LibDem electioneering in my experience of the last 16 years in Tavistock that reinforces my view. Their literature claims credit for achievements that are not their own; it denigrates, ignores or marginalises the roles of others; it makes wildly extravagent personal attacks on the integrity of others; it uses barely legitimate techniques to exaggerate the positive achievements of its own people.
The truth is that all political parties do these things to some extent. My impression is that LibDems do it more systematically than the other major parties. That is a generalisation and I freely admit that my impression may be coloured by my own broad conservatism.
I could have published wholly truthful disparaging facts about
my LibDem opponents. I could have been scathing about the fact
that they couldn't even find a single candidate for Tavistock
South Ward who lives in the ward: two don't even live in
Tavistock. I could have pointed out that one of their
candidates spoke just once during the four years that he
previously served on West Devon Borough Council. I could have
told the story of another who used the Town Council's public
question time to make a most unpleasant political attack on a
candidate whilst stating that he was himself non-political.
I have lots of these stories. I don't need to invent them.
I do not do that sort of thing because I don't want to win a seat with those sort of tactics. I don't need to. If I ever do feel that need, I don't think I shall want to be a councillor any more. The price would be just too high.
Top |
Introduction (back to my election leaflet) | The whole leaflet and commentary | Site map |