This is a farce.Shame on our Parish Council for doing such a stupid thing. I do not want nor trust any employee of Broadland to have our interests at heart. This person will be nothing other than a "Trojan Horse", mark my words.I am asking myself what our P.C. thinks they will get from this?
Appeasement! Ooh, please eat me last.No compromise no build.
This is probably the District Council's version of community involvement. They are not able to get cooperation from local people because their plans are wholly destructive to life in Rackheath and they have been so dictatorial.However they desperately need to show community involvement because their plans will not be allowed to go ahead without the support of the Community.So they impose another 'solution'. The Broadland Council employee will take notes of all public participation at Parish Council meetings and 'help' the Parish to manage the issues. She will then presumably report this back to her bosses.Why would the Parish Council agree to this?What are the consequences for the role for our elected representatives? Perhaps they are concerned that they are now seen as the agents for the Council and no longer give a voice to residents views.
Are communications between the District Council and the Parish Council so bad that they need this solution.Or is it just that the Parish Council will not do what the District want! What price localism?
Strikes me that Broadland must have a lot of contentious issues coming up and they want an insider to feed back all the reactions and objections so they can come up with even more spin to try to placate the locals!What is going on round here? A major change of councillors is called for as so many of the current lot are merely puppets.
It is deeply suspicious that both Parish Councils most affected by the development plans for the North East growth triangle ie Rackheath and Salhouse now have unelected people influencing the way the PC runs it business. We have Ms Flack in Rackheath who lives in North Norfolk being paid overtime and expenses to spy on the PC and report back. In the meantime there is a vociferous unelected resident in Salhouse who speaks whenever she wants to and ignores the protocols and rules about how local residents can speak at a PC meeting. There is never any reproach for this undemocratic intervention and one wonders what the motives for these interruptions are. Is it once again an attempt by BDC to influence and control those PC's most affected by the growth plans. Check out who signed the nomination papers for the candidates in the forthcoming District Council election! We should insist that the rules of governance for these PC's are upheld and challenge these undemocratic interjections.
Fascinating blog - it gets more like some of the conspiracy theories which you would normally expect from Daily Mail readers pontificating on whatever or whoever that paper's chosen as its latest target. Not a compliment in case you are Daily Mail readers!As someone new to this blog I get the feeling that some of you are losing the plot and that doesn't make membership of SNUB seem at all attractive. Too much bitching and not enough logical reasoning as to why, as a resident of Salhouse, I should want to have a large housing estate on my doorstep, with no infrastructure to support it, instead of an ecotown with full facilities in Rackheath.When you can explain why then you might win me over - until then, hasta la vista baby!
Win you over? Why would anyone bother?'A large housing estate or an eco-town' - you have obviously not taken the trouble to find out what is being planned in this area. It would be a waste of time seeking to elaborate.I recognise a a lost cause a mile away.
Ok Geoff, well why bother? Because I reckon if smaller villages knew they would be getting large housing estates with no infrastructure backup then they wouldn't be so keen to knock the eco town. Perhaps you could just tell me how many houses SNUB would expect Salhouse to accommodate if your Dispersal option wins the day?
Anonymous misses the point all together and these are the reasons why. First we have always maintained that we need more houses but not the target level that was dictated to us by the last government which thankfully have now been scrapped. Secondly we have always maintained that the level of new houses needs to be reviewed taking into consideration the present economic situation, the need to manage down the overall carbon footprint, the lack of the NDR and other key infrastructure projects, the provision of new brownfield sites (and more coming on stream all the time), the use of empty housing and commercial buildings with the latter ripe for conversion, the reallocation of affordable housing on a needs basis rather than a want basis (downsizing for single occupancies from 3 bedroom houses for example and the completion of the thousands of approved houses in the planning system all ready. We firmly believe that this will reduce the number of new houses needed considerably.Once this number is known we would then disperse these across the whole region and county and not just in the North East of Norwich. We would expect these to go to areas of existing employment rather than areas where there is no existing employment and to existing communities who are dying on their feet due to the lack of inward investment. We know of communities who want more housing but are not allowed as they fall outside of the JCS geographic footprint. This would allow families to remain in the community were they were brought up rather than being forced to move to a soul less new concrete community like White Woman Lane, Dussindale, Thorpe Marriott etc.Finally we would not presume to tell Salhouse how many houses it would need as we are not dictators like BDC. Instead we would relay on the Parish Plan predictions and not see all the hard work and endeavour that went into the plan go to waste. I think this answers the points raised by Anonymous but I would be happy to debate further should they wish to identify themselves. I am somewhat saddened that the residents of the conservation area of Salhouse have no regard for the third of Salhouse residents who do not live in the conservation area and are faced with thousands of houses on their doorstep which will leave a blight on the whole area including the protected parts of Salhouse.
I am amazed that a resident of Salhouse is so naive as to believe that the proposed Ecotown at Rackheath will be built with all the necessary facilities and Infrastructure that is necessary. Just reflect on the last large development in Rackheath two decades ago when the parish was offered a new school in return for accepting the hundreds of new houses around Wilkinson Road. The school wasn't built until 8 years after the estate was completed and then the school was barely large enough to accomodate the new influx of children.The parish had to fight tooth and nail to get the school and nearly didn't get it at all.Does this Salhouse resident really believe that Broadland Council will keep their promise of providing infrastructure when they have already broken several Ecotown promises.This person lives in "Cloud Cuckoo Land" not Salhouse.
To counter at least one of the factual inaccuracies on this topic, the BDC employee concerned has NOT been co-opted. Please allow me to present some indisputable facts: Fact: The Parish Council is legally obliged to admit anyone to their public meetings, except during 'closed' confidential discussions.Fact: District Council employees cannot be excluded from PC meetings.Fact: Anyone attending a PC meeting is allowed to make written notes.Fact: No recordings may be made during PC meetings unless authorised by the PC.Fact: Only duly elected Councillors are members of the Parish Council and only they can speak during the main business of the meeting.Fact: We suspend the meeting for public participation to hear reports from the District Councillors and the Police, and from others attending the meeting.Fact: The BDC employee in question admits that she attends in her capacity as an employee.Fact: The employee concerned has NOT been co-opted onto the Council.Fact: If we do not communicate with this employee, we will remain in the dark - this is why the employee has been invited to submit an occasional brief report on her activities (from the public seats, just as the DC and Police reports are presented).What a great shame that those who complain the loudest do not volunteer to become Parish Councillors themselves. Or maybe the many hours of unpaid and unseen work isn't as attractive as posting on this blog?
This appointment is just like the Police Presence at the Council, another sign of a Dictatorship. The refusal by Broadland Council to listen to local people is the reason why several will not stand for the Parish Council. What can they achieve if the Parish Councils are ignored ? Remember FIVE Parish Councils expressed concern at the JCS, but nobodfy listened to them. If only we can get our Democracy back then more people might stand.
I thought the job of the Elected District Councillor was to represent the Parish Council and be the link. Why do we need to pay an Employee of the Council as well. Or is this just empire building. Does she attend all the other Parishes ?
To answer any doubts and suspicians from 'Local' residents regarding the intentions of the appointed BDC oficer to Rackheath PC meetings ...Fact; under FOI's, BDC, the GNDP and various County planners and officils have been 'recorded' as stating in various 'closed' meetings' that Rackheath PC is at a low ebb and SNUB are getting 'far too much attention' which must be countered by more community invlovement by an appointed PR company and a 'community- officer'....also,Fact; the appointed community officer does not attend or take notes at any other Parish Council meeting ie, Salhouse, Wroxham,Belaugh etc????????...Fact; the so-called Rackheath programme boards' monthly meetings had an occuring attendee who always was noted as 'apologies for her non-attendance'....this was Paula lownes who was NEVER even ON the board?????Fact; this appointed community Officer has not only 'lied' about certain facts pertaining to Rackheath and meetings, but shamefully, openly sneered and passed comment with regards to certain Parish Council Clerks' inability to keep correct notes and answer emails etc. when she knew that this to be an absolute LIE.....so Mr.Vice Chairman, if you can stand and defend this kind of action ( and hundreds of similar), and you can fail to act on a faulty Joint core strategy,fail to Listen to hundreds of your 'local' voices ( yes, they may be 'appathetic when voting...but when asked on the doorstep, they state very 'LOUDLY' that what SNUB are doing is correct in representing them)....you need to seriously consider wether you are the right man for the job, because to be quite honest...like Mr.Green, if that many people spoke about me in that way...I would 'jack-it-in'......so pleasae don't try and preach any facts to me!...just do what you were elected toi do...represenr your Parish!...very annoyed Rackheath resident.
Stewart Lindsay says " i don't often 'play' the blog as I believe if I have something to say, i'll say it to your face , but I feel I must say that I am becoming truly saddened by the 'back and forth' comments especially from Parish and local people due to frustrations and misunderstandings ! the reason I am becoming very saddened is that 'CERTAIN' Broadland officers and 'CERTAIN' Broadland district councilors ( ONLY ), are succeeding in doing what they started out to achieve; to drive a wedge between our community so they can 'divide and conquer'.If our Parish or local people or local community representative groups have something to discuss with each other, the contacts and communications are freely available, please do not 'air-it' in the public arena where it can be 'used' or open to scorn by other 'parties', talk to each other and discuss these matters as 'locals' without intervention from what is usually 'looked-upon' as external influencial parties because after all, we are ALL working for the same Goal; the protection of our villages and countryside and we mustn't forget that! ( my Tel; number is on all the SNUB sheets or contact detail sheets if you want to call me).
Stewart Lindsay on the 'Rackheath appoint.......' page makes some excellent and long overdue points about the 'open' debates and in particular that about 'divide and conquer'. Unfortunately, the Chairman of SNUB is guilty of that on the ' Rackheath appoint.....' and 'Join the Debate' pages when he stated:- "I am somewhat saddened that the residents of the conservation area of Salhouse have no regard for the third of Salhouse residents who do not live in the conservation area and are faced with thousands of houses on their doorstep which will leave a blight on the whole area including the protected parts of Salhouse." As someone who does not live in the Salhouse Conservation Area, having searched the blogs high and low I can see no reference that indicates that any blog post, prior to this statement, came from someone in a Conservation Area. Stephen Heard's response was to a resident who queried numbers in the Parish if the JCS was not passed. The issue of Conservation Areas was never raised and anyway, Conservation Areas do not protect any community from development, they simply influence the manner of development and style. However, Stephen Heard deliberately presumed it to be from someone in the Salhouse Conservation Area and used it as an opportunity for a 'targetted' attack on an individual or individuals by SNUB - and not the first by this Group. It is an excellent example of SNUB shooting themselves in the foot and trying to divide communities themselves. Why? What is the point? Added to this, I see that another blog post refers to an ANONYMOUS as "she" in response. Does this tell us that SNUB web master/mistress has a way of identifying Anonymous and if so, apart from that being dishonest, perhaps SNUB should now abolish the ability to use that term and all blog posts should carry a proper identification. That way, we could all see not only 'who is getting at who', but also those who have the courage to declare themselves. This would then, in some cases, raise the debate to a level above the banal. Until then, I too shall remain semi-anonymous as I, like others, have no wish to be subject to a personal attack for expressing my views openly in a Democratic society.
Just why do we need to pay Susan Flack to attend the Rackheath PC meetings, surely this is the job of our elected District Councillors. This sounds like spying to me.
Oh come on RESIDENT! Spying?? Parish Council meetings are OPEN MEETINGS. We try to attend all the Parish Meetings in the NE Triangle. Are you now saying that we are 'spying'? Have YOU ever attended one – in which case are you 'spying'? Incidentally it is the 'job' of all of us to take an interest in our Parish Council meetings, particularly at the moment.Please can we get into a decent debate instead of this type of slanging match which does not show us up in a good light or do us any good?This applies to all the blog posts. At the moment some of them are not reading at all well and do not help the cause. We need to up our game and stop this sort of nonsense.
The sooner Rackheath's concreted over, the better. It's a right dump at the moment, and you can see fields like the ones you're so precious about pretty much anywhere. It's not remotely in the Norfolk Borads, nor is it worth "saving" for turnips.