David Laurence Philips - Wealden District Council's Enforcement ManagerDavid Laurence Philips - Wealden District Council's Enforcement Manager

David L Philips - Wealden's enforcer






Home

Aerial photographs -
and how they use them

Ashley Brown -
The District Planning Officer

'Best Demolition' disposes of
materials for Wealden

Bridge Poultry's Flooding

Bridge Poultry's new road

Bushy Wood Stables get smashed

Bushy Wood Stables own website

Case Law

Civil Rights

Councillors resign because of planning officers' secrecy

Cross examining Ian Kay -
Deputy District Planning Officer

Deception

Discrimination

Enforcement -
the D L Philips enforcer's way

Government policy

Hackhurst Lane piggeries

Harassment

Health and Safety

Local Cases

Local Councillors list -
with email addresses

Missing documents

Lord Newton's Petition

Missing photographs

Pantomime

Planning permission at £ 2k a go ?

Standards - for some

Stream Farm

Survival guide

Sussex Act 1981

'Bully Town' -
an anti-corruption website

(Agenda 21 -
the Solar Navigation project)
WEALDEN
ACTION GROUP


Investigating and lobbying against corruption in
Wealden District Council's legal & planning departments




STANDARDS


Family First

Hi boys and girls ! A little chat to-day on family values, like the ones that John and Edw.... sorry, NORMA thought were so important.

A long time ago, when the Charleston was all the rage and the rest of us were enjoying the Great Depression, the Duke of Devonshire had a pavillion on the beach at Pevensey. Nip down Valprinseps Road one sunny day and check it out. Turn right at the end and you will see it topped off with a circular glass gallery. Locally it is known as the sandcastle. It was fabled as a venue for fabulous parties, and some say the Duke and Duchess of Windsor darkened it's doors. But I digress. Time went by and it was bought by a lovely man, Denis Best. Mr Best thought it would be nice to continue the party atmosphere, so he put in for a change of use to a restaurant. There was a meeting of concerned local residents, because the road leading up to it is private, (with some large ponds in places) and they were worried about the late night traffic. So they had a chat, and then went to the Area Plans South sub-committee to hear the debate.

Amnesian Kay (Wealden's deputy chief planning officer) kicked off, and gave the officer commentary. Then an awkward question was asked, the sort that never should be allowed in polite company. Mr Kay was asked what the relationship was between him and the applicant. He turned beetroot red and admitted that the applicant was his father in law.

Denis Bernard Best was arch standard bearer in a Masonic Lodge over towards Horsted Keynes i.e. a senior Mason. Those of us who merely agonise over the football and the mortgage may be inclined to say, 'So what ?' Well, if you click on Charles Wardle's swan-song (as reported in Hansard), you can admire the Masonic shenanigans which he told the Commons about a million miles away in Cooden, and they make very uncomfortable reading, (an old widow called Mrs Ward Lock owned some extremely valuable land and was being bankrupted). Freshfield Properties were concerned, and Freshfield is very close to ......... Horsted Keynes.

Of course it is terribly easy to forget that some-one is your father-in-law, and quite clearly nothing untoward whatever was going on in Pevensey.

The situation is not helped by Archbishop Rowan Williams rabbitting on about Masonic "backscratching" (The Independent 15/11/02). Since he has never been to a Lodge meeting he is clearly speaking from a position of ignorance and he should shut-up.

If you can add to the details above, we would be delighted to hear from you via info@wealden.org.uk Or perhaps someone has the yellow agenda mouldering in the attic, if so we would love to see it.



Planning - the perverts paradise.

Hi boys and girls ! Making career choices ? Have you thought about planning ? The potential for perversion is prolific and you get both paid and pensioned for it. Could you develop passion for this work ? Let's analyse a typical snotty letter and see if you could do as well. Note the use of very basic techniques that you will find invaluable throughout your working life.

Adopting a lofty tone

I would not be replying to any further correspondence with you regarding your unsubstantiated allegation

Note how we massage in the word unsubstantiated. Inconvenient tape recordings may be sufficient to convict Dr Bhagat Singh Makkar (who was found guilty on 30/8/02, having denied taking part in and encouraging the trade of human organs from live donors), but tape recordings cannot be used to expose serious professional misconduct amongst Planning Officers because we deem them unsubstantiated.

Be patronising - a little, not a lot.

.......you are clearly intent upon ignoring ........

Bleed in sorrow to provide a platform for disinformation. ...your letter ... to certain members of this Council. In these particular circumstances, therefore, and for their information and clarification, I am prepared to offer my final comments....

Note the skilfully introduced rationale for breaking the succession of one liners. We move the goalposts because Horrid Mr H. has written to individual members (not by internal mail I hasten to add because his letters are considered "abusive"

Adjust the territory so you can fight on prepared ground.

no photographs or other documents were stolen or 'surpressed' at the Inquiry as you claim

Clearly there is no need to resort to Chambers dictionary here. Telling an Inspector that this is the only one we have when there are at least two others back at the ranch (that we have all been using for the last eight years) is not supression, it's well ... um, er ...

And stolen ! Fortunately recent campaigns against Mr H. have been so effective that everyone knows 'he is out to lunch', so we do not need to analyse this to any great extent. Obviously an exhibit that an Inspector says he will "keep" should never be allowed back to the Planning Inspectorate at Bristol ! It must be kept off file in Pine Grove, because having defaced it to the point of zero evidential value, we now claim it will be useful in determining other applications (at least, that's our line, so we'll stick to it). Remind me to warn Mr H. about his language.

Now deliver a skewed lecture on procedure.

For your information, it is normal and accepted practice for a local planning authority to decide what evidence to submit to an Appeal Inspector in support of it's case .....

Of course, we all know about the DTER's recommendations to authorities about not needing to go to any great lengths to provide information, but they do not mention providing 'disinformation' do they ? So along with West Dorset we occasionally need to airbrush out the inconvenient when deciding what evidence to submit. One cannot allow these Inspector chaps too much info, they might be able to do their jobs properly !
Admire the way we use the word decide and not select. There was that irritating petition murmuring something about false, misleading and selective information and we cannot have folk reminded of that !

Subtly introduce a complete red herring.

there was no dispute with you over the existence of polytunnel number 7.

Safe ground that. Areas of no dispute are good stocking fillers in a one page letter. Mr H. had made a downward revision based on the 'photo we didn't allow the Inspector to see (where lorry body 8's absence could be identified by comparison with body number 9 whose presence was obvious). so clearly, a version that showed neither is the one to create for the Inquiry. If there is any base reference feature in a piece of evidence, clearly one excludes it and introduces a substitute. We all know that ! We don't waste our time at planning summer school !

Now for the whopper.

I am aware that during the Inquiry you submitted to the Inspector an unreferenced copy extract of any aerial photograph which was obtained from this Council.

Whoppers are winners. Use them like stun grenades. Total perversions can leave the opposition speechless. Note how skilfully we now acknowledge the existence of that which we had previously denied (for four years) via the Chief Exec. and the press, but we say you submitted whereas in the recording, we submit it.

Introduce the justification.

Now we slip in the word monochrome. So simple,bit it works every time ! Since this is a letter that nobody is going to pick us up on the fact that Mr Kay can now recall whereas previously he couldn't.

Perfect ! What a masterpiece. How do you think you would measure up ? Is this the career for you ? We do of course offer on the job training. Teflon trousers plus a friendly and cultured canteen. Lord Neale prefers us to move on occasionally to prevent cronyism and patronage, but as we don't go in for corrupt practices here at Wealden, we tend to stay for ever.




PLEASE CONTACT US :
e-mail:   chester@wealden.org.uk   -   07836 210363

Copyright © 2001 to 2003 Wealden Action Group.