Stephen Heard's speech at BDC's Extraordinary Meeting

I wonder as I listen to the debate around the JCS whether this ruling group actually get it.  After all it must be difficult to comprehend large 200 page documents placed in front of you just before a meeting or as Judge Ouseley put it “wading through treacle”.

The Judge was very clear in declaring that what you did was UNLAWFUL and the work has to be redone.  You haven’t done this but merely window dressed and regurgitated the previous results without a full and transparent process whilst using the offices of POS Enterprises that has Mr Kirby listed as a Director.  Hardly transparent although I’m sure he expressed an interest as they are described as a “critical friend”!

This is treating the judgement with contempt and taking us for fools particularly as your own so-called independent inquiry has not yet been completed. 

We continue to receive legal advice on this contemptuous point with national backers who see the significance of this judgement as the case illustrates the potential future pitfalls as local planning authorities tackle their duty to co-operate as defined in the new Localism Act, and National Planning Policy Framework.

You are attempting, by rushing through with a consultation in the holiday month of August and refusing legitimate requests to extend the time period, to minimise the impact of the judgment. 

Lets face it; can Broadland's housing strategy be reconsidered without affecting the rest of the JCS? The answer surely must be no.  It is hard to see how proper consideration of the alternatives to growth can exclude the possibility of some or all of that growth being reallocated to where the jobs are.

Perhaps the reason for the rush is the abolishment of the East of England regional strategy opening the way for all Norfolk community groups to collaborate, with the help of CPRE, and successfully argue that a lower level of growth overall is more appropriate, potentially affecting the whole JCS area.

Or is it because you need these houses as income generators and not to satisfy housing need at all.  After all Broadland is facing bankruptcy if its financial reserves are not replenished.  Even now we could still see the dual prospect of huge council tax increases and large estates of empty and unsold new homes.  A future that none of us would like to see.   

Or are you rushing to get this through before county council elections next year fearing the backlash from the clear lack of democracy in the county and the loss of twin hatter seats?

Our campaign continues and we will take whatever actions, direct and indirect, to ensure that you understand that local people do not want or see a real need for this level of development.  There is plenty of evidence that confirm this view but for some reason you do not seem to get it. 

The smoke and mirrors that are being deployed including the Postwick Hub deliberations trying to divorce it from the NDR, the investment of over one million pounds in the small village of Rackheath in union with a leading national house builder and the secret agreement with Salhouse to restrict new house to no more than 70 do not fool anyone.  You decide whether these are bribes or incentives.

Please do not treat us as idiots or underestimate us.  Let’s see some reality and candour rather than arrogance and untruths.