This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/derbyshire/4856654.stm
Well the stop order at Longstone edge has been over turned by a clueless beuracrat that probably has no idea of what decision he is making...
The man is an utter embarrassment to our species & if you care about the environment you climb/walk/live in - can you let this man make the decisions from Parliment that affect the Peak?!
No doubt there will be further more informed details forthcoming - but at the moment I must just say my piss is boiling...
Si
In reply to Simon:
Dear simon
He could be useful for a belay bunny, if his Chauffeur could get one of his Jags to the start of a one pitch route.
Norrie
Dear simon
He could be useful for a belay bunny, if his Chauffeur could get one of his Jags to the start of a one pitch route.
Norrie
In reply to Simon:
Spokesman from the protest said on tv tonight there had been only a small amount of fluospar had actually been moved off the site, there is a huge mound of it lying there. Maybe that could be an approach the PPPB could appeal, they are using it as an excuse to get limestone and not selling fluospar.
Spokesman from the protest said on tv tonight there had been only a small amount of fluospar had actually been moved off the site, there is a huge mound of it lying there. Maybe that could be an approach the PPPB could appeal, they are using it as an excuse to get limestone and not selling fluospar.
In reply to Simon:
CHRIST ALMIGHTY!!
We are meant to live in a democracy, and this arsehole has now overturned decisions made in courts of law, I believe.
Sloper, where are you?!
CHRIST ALMIGHTY!!
We are meant to live in a democracy, and this arsehole has now overturned decisions made in courts of law, I believe.
Sloper, where are you?!
In reply to sutty:
Look, Sutty, this is all well established and has been successfully argued in law (I think, in court). All water under the bridge. The arguments just could not have been stronger. If I had a personal bulldozer, I'd be flattening John Prescott's home tonight, with just as much authority as he has, I believe, really.
Look, Sutty, this is all well established and has been successfully argued in law (I think, in court). All water under the bridge. The arguments just could not have been stronger. If I had a personal bulldozer, I'd be flattening John Prescott's home tonight, with just as much authority as he has, I believe, really.
In reply to Simon:
So how much did MMC Mineral Processing loan to the Labour Party?
So how much did MMC Mineral Processing loan to the Labour Party?
In reply to sutty:
That has been the argument all along - the fluospar is not being processed as no one will do it for them. The 1950's agreement for quarrying is about mineral vien extraction - sure they are doing that - but at a cost of tonnes of limestone for aggreagate - with the fluorspar being stockpiled...
Its been well documented & argued & still the case for a stop order has been ignored...
There is now a go ahead for quarying on a mighty scale at backdale & who know's what could be asked for, for damages for loss of earnings??
Its a pig circus...
Si
> (In reply to Simon)
>
> Spokesman from the protest said on tv tonight there had been only a small amount of fluospar had actually been moved off the site, there is a huge mound of it lying there. Maybe that could be an approach the PPPB could appeal, they are using it as an excuse to get limestone and not selling fluospar.
>
> Spokesman from the protest said on tv tonight there had been only a small amount of fluospar had actually been moved off the site, there is a huge mound of it lying there. Maybe that could be an approach the PPPB could appeal, they are using it as an excuse to get limestone and not selling fluospar.
That has been the argument all along - the fluospar is not being processed as no one will do it for them. The 1950's agreement for quarrying is about mineral vien extraction - sure they are doing that - but at a cost of tonnes of limestone for aggreagate - with the fluorspar being stockpiled...
Its been well documented & argued & still the case for a stop order has been ignored...
There is now a go ahead for quarying on a mighty scale at backdale & who know's what could be asked for, for damages for loss of earnings??
Its a pig circus...
Si
In reply to kevin stephens:
you could ask that question but I could not possibly comment & refer the honourable gentleman to my last reponse!
;0)
si
> (In reply to Simon)
> So how much did MMC Mineral Processing loan to the Labour Party?
> So how much did MMC Mineral Processing loan to the Labour Party?
you could ask that question but I could not possibly comment & refer the honourable gentleman to my last reponse!
;0)
si
In reply to Simon:
Simon, this is a disaster on a monumental scale. I don't see now how anything is safe, even in our most protected parks, or areas of SSI.
Simon, this is a disaster on a monumental scale. I don't see now how anything is safe, even in our most protected parks, or areas of SSI.
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
The most Scary thing is that it's finally got to Parliment & they have given it to Prescott to make a decision on it...
..sorry but he's not the best candidate in the country to argue the merits of outdoor recreational activity!
(or not...)
Si
The most Scary thing is that it's finally got to Parliment & they have given it to Prescott to make a decision on it...
..sorry but he's not the best candidate in the country to argue the merits of outdoor recreational activity!
(or not...)
Si
In reply to Simon:
He is clueless, just before Christmas he allowed a planning for a 25000ft Tesco's to be built in Greenfield - gateway to the Chew.
I'm not even going into how many large supermarkets there are within a 15 minute drive of here.
He is clueless, just before Christmas he allowed a planning for a 25000ft Tesco's to be built in Greenfield - gateway to the Chew.
I'm not even going into how many large supermarkets there are within a 15 minute drive of here.
In reply to Simon:
A very disapointing decision. Lets hope when Gordon Brown is king there might be a change in policy.
graham
A very disapointing decision. Lets hope when Gordon Brown is king there might be a change in policy.
graham
In reply to grahamt:
You probably don't realise just how fast and huge the damage can be in a matter of a few days, as shown by what they have done already.
You probably don't realise just how fast and huge the damage can be in a matter of a few days, as shown by what they have done already.
In reply to Simon:
Whht is the problem with the decision? I have no idea about this issue, so i'm asking because i want to know. The posts so far have put it forward as a kind of self evident fact.
The issue didn't even seem to be explained in the bbc article.
The "quarrying could cause serious damage to the environment and to local roads and bridges", how?
Is this the problem?
The quarry currently has permission to quarry flurospar, with limestone only as a by-product, but it's being accused of only quarrying a little flurospar as an excuse to quarry the limestone? Is that right?
Anyway,
awaiting an answer,
Al
Whht is the problem with the decision? I have no idea about this issue, so i'm asking because i want to know. The posts so far have put it forward as a kind of self evident fact.
The issue didn't even seem to be explained in the bbc article.
The "quarrying could cause serious damage to the environment and to local roads and bridges", how?
Is this the problem?
The quarry currently has permission to quarry flurospar, with limestone only as a by-product, but it's being accused of only quarrying a little flurospar as an excuse to quarry the limestone? Is that right?
Anyway,
awaiting an answer,
Al
In reply to grahamt: If Gordon Brown ever gets in charge we may as well give up, actually, as much as I hate to say it Blair is the only hope for the labour party now that Smith is dead and Kinnock discredited. Prescott has gone mad and Brown is right of Thatcher. I think Cameron even would be a better bet!
In reply to monks: So am I
Another Al
Another Al
In reply to craig h:
What about for people who don't have a car?
A former carless Mossley resident.
> I'm not even going into how many large supermarkets there are within a 15 minute drive of here.
What about for people who don't have a car?
A former carless Mossley resident.
In reply to Simon:
and so another southern bureaucrat dictates what happens in an area he doesn't care about.
Prescott .....words don't fail me, but most of them are unprintable.
Old 2 jabs strikes again.
Ill-conceived and badly researched - another labour party triumph
and so another southern bureaucrat dictates what happens in an area he doesn't care about.
Prescott .....words don't fail me, but most of them are unprintable.
Old 2 jabs strikes again.
Ill-conceived and badly researched - another labour party triumph
In reply to Simon:
Can you lot not read?
Sounds like Prescott's hand was forced due to a Judges decision on another similar case.
"The decision to overturn the stop order comes after a similar order imposed by a local authority on a company in Wales was thrown out by a judge."
"Peak District National Park Authority Chief Executive Jim Dixon said: "Although we are extremely disappointed, this decision has not come out of the blue. "Over recent weeks we have been looking into the legal and financial options open to us, should our enforcement action fail as a result of the case in Wales." "
This is to do with case law, not a bad decision by goverment.
Blame the Judge in Wales !
Can you lot not read?
Sounds like Prescott's hand was forced due to a Judges decision on another similar case.
"The decision to overturn the stop order comes after a similar order imposed by a local authority on a company in Wales was thrown out by a judge."
"Peak District National Park Authority Chief Executive Jim Dixon said: "Although we are extremely disappointed, this decision has not come out of the blue. "Over recent weeks we have been looking into the legal and financial options open to us, should our enforcement action fail as a result of the case in Wales." "
This is to do with case law, not a bad decision by goverment.
Blame the Judge in Wales !
In reply to Al Evans:
Think we may be getting off topic but that's the first time I've ever heard anyone describe Gordon Brown as being more right wing than Tony Blair.
> If Gordon Brown ever gets in charge we may as well give up, actually, as much as I hate to say it Blair is the only hope for the labour party now that Smith is dead and Kinnock discredited. Prescott has gone mad and Brown is right of Thatcher.
Think we may be getting off topic but that's the first time I've ever heard anyone describe Gordon Brown as being more right wing than Tony Blair.
In reply to ChrisJD:
correct me if I am wrong (i often am) but cannot 2 jabs hand it over to Jack Straw who could over rule the judge?
correct me if I am wrong (i often am) but cannot 2 jabs hand it over to Jack Straw who could over rule the judge?
In reply to DougG:
Agreed. Gordon is a dyed-in-the-wool tax-nd-spend socialist.
Tony is a disciple of Thatcher, with an extra topping of guns.
Agreed. Gordon is a dyed-in-the-wool tax-nd-spend socialist.
Tony is a disciple of Thatcher, with an extra topping of guns.
In reply to phatlad:
Jack Straw - what's the foreign secretary got to do with it?
> correct me if I am wrong (i often am) but cannot 2 jabs hand it over to Jack Straw who could over rule the judge?
Jack Straw - what's the foreign secretary got to do with it?
In reply to TobyA:
Top Mossley now has a fair sized COOP, and Staleybridge has a huge Tesco. As for Ashton and Oldham..............
Staleybridge is a couple of minutes by train, a taxi would cost £5.00, internet shopping less + there are a fair few of those old style shops which sell specialised stuff like just veg, or meat or bread.
Mr Presscott decision is to allow more choice for the consumer, many of the smaller shops however, I feel will be driven out of business giving me less choice and mean I will have to jump in the car, train, bus or taxi to find small specialist shops to buy what I want.
Top Mossley now has a fair sized COOP, and Staleybridge has a huge Tesco. As for Ashton and Oldham..............
Staleybridge is a couple of minutes by train, a taxi would cost £5.00, internet shopping less + there are a fair few of those old style shops which sell specialised stuff like just veg, or meat or bread.
Mr Presscott decision is to allow more choice for the consumer, many of the smaller shops however, I feel will be driven out of business giving me less choice and mean I will have to jump in the car, train, bus or taxi to find small specialist shops to buy what I want.
In reply to DougG: Have you seen his economic policies? His pension 'reforms'?
In reply to Al Evans:
Yep, social engineering on a massive scale through the tax system - the man's pure old labour tax and spend with a little more deviousness than normal. We certainly don't want to claim him as one of us on the right - you can keep him!
> (In reply to DougG) Have you seen his economic policies? His pension 'reforms'?
Yep, social engineering on a massive scale through the tax system - the man's pure old labour tax and spend with a little more deviousness than normal. We certainly don't want to claim him as one of us on the right - you can keep him!
In reply to phatlad:
First time I've heard Prescott described as a southerner! Where do you live, the Shetlands?! Isn't he MP for Grimsby or Hull, somewhere oop north anyway?
> (In reply to Simon)
> and so another southern bureaucrat dictates what happens in an area he doesn't care about.
> and so another southern bureaucrat dictates what happens in an area he doesn't care about.
First time I've heard Prescott described as a southerner! Where do you live, the Shetlands?! Isn't he MP for Grimsby or Hull, somewhere oop north anyway?
In reply to ChrisJD:
I was wondering when someone would point that out!
> (In reply to Simon)
> Sounds like Prescott's hand was forced due to a Judges decision on another similar case.
>
> This is to do with case law, not a bad decision by goverment.
>
> Blame the Judge in Wales !
> Sounds like Prescott's hand was forced due to a Judges decision on another similar case.
>
> This is to do with case law, not a bad decision by goverment.
>
> Blame the Judge in Wales !
I was wondering when someone would point that out!
In reply to Al Evans: I hate to say it, and I thought I never would, but I have come to the conclusion that Blair is currently the only viable leader for the Labour Party, the torys and lib dems dont have one and any one else in the LP would be a complete disaster for the working man and probably the world in general. (slight, only slight troll)
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
Utterly wrong, he in fact made this decision due to the precedent set by a judge in the welsh case. So in fact we have the judge to blame, not prescott.
> (In reply to Simon)
>
> CHRIST ALMIGHTY!!
>
> We are meant to live in a democracy, and this arsehole has now overturned decisions made in courts of law, I believe.
>
> Sloper, where are you?!
>
> CHRIST ALMIGHTY!!
>
> We are meant to live in a democracy, and this arsehole has now overturned decisions made in courts of law, I believe.
>
> Sloper, where are you?!
Utterly wrong, he in fact made this decision due to the precedent set by a judge in the welsh case. So in fact we have the judge to blame, not prescott.
In reply to kevin stephens:
Have a look and find out. You can see the register of donations to political parties on the Electoral Commission website. Nothing comes up for MMC Mineral Processing.
http://www.electoralcommission.gov.uk/regulatory-issues/regdpoliticalpartie...
> (In reply to Simon)
> So how much did MMC Mineral Processing loan to the Labour Party?
> So how much did MMC Mineral Processing loan to the Labour Party?
Have a look and find out. You can see the register of donations to political parties on the Electoral Commission website. Nothing comes up for MMC Mineral Processing.
http://www.electoralcommission.gov.uk/regulatory-issues/regdpoliticalpartie...
In reply to Simon:
Fat useless git he may be, but I suspect his hands were tied. I don't think this is a political decision, but a legal one.
I don't claim to understand the decision from the welsh case - if anyone can explain or at least provide a decent link I'd be grateful, but it sems that the enforcement notice was either incorrectly worded or ultra-vires - ie beyond the authorities powers. To have gone ahead with the inquiry at this stage would have been a farce - MMC's lawyer's would have had a field day and more of SLEGs funds would have gone down the drain.
Hopefully the PDNPA will be able to formulate an alternative strategy
Fat useless git he may be, but I suspect his hands were tied. I don't think this is a political decision, but a legal one.
I don't claim to understand the decision from the welsh case - if anyone can explain or at least provide a decent link I'd be grateful, but it sems that the enforcement notice was either incorrectly worded or ultra-vires - ie beyond the authorities powers. To have gone ahead with the inquiry at this stage would have been a farce - MMC's lawyer's would have had a field day and more of SLEGs funds would have gone down the drain.
Hopefully the PDNPA will be able to formulate an alternative strategy
In reply to Simon:
More detailed information here
http://www.longstone-edge.org.uk/060324Item4-1SUPP.pdf
More detailed information here
http://www.longstone-edge.org.uk/060324Item4-1SUPP.pdf
In reply to Simon: John Prescott is receiving substantial financial backhanders from the quarry owners. Bribes totalling over £100,000 have been illegally given to him, undeclared, to persuade him to quash the inquiry.
In reply to BrianT:
Really?
What proof do you have Brian?
I am not Prezzers biggest fan but the Planning situation here is a s other posters have said, based upon a legal precedent that Prescotts department is unable to over ride or ignore.
Really?
What proof do you have Brian?
I am not Prezzers biggest fan but the Planning situation here is a s other posters have said, based upon a legal precedent that Prescotts department is unable to over ride or ignore.
In reply to John Rushby:
Reading the above this just sounds like another poor piece of journalism by the BBC. Well, either poor or written by someone with a political axe to grind.
Reading the above this just sounds like another poor piece of journalism by the BBC. Well, either poor or written by someone with a political axe to grind.
In reply to BrianT: Yeh, how do you know that Brian? Surely this would be a national scandal we could expose if we had proof?
In reply to BrianT:
Wishful thinking...?
> (In reply to Simon) John Prescott is receiving substantial financial backhanders from the quarry owners. Bribes totalling over £100,000 have been illegally given to him, undeclared, to persuade him to quash the inquiry.
Wishful thinking...?
In reply to John Rushby:
gee, well that killed that thread.
You had to go and mention the pies! All that 'southerner' bashing and you go and mention the pies. See, they've all gone off to the chippa now.
gee, well that killed that thread.
You had to go and mention the pies! All that 'southerner' bashing and you go and mention the pies. See, they've all gone off to the chippa now.
In reply to tony: Unless it was another "loan" or it was a private donantion from a related individual.
>
> We are meant to live in a democracy,
> We are meant to live in a democracy,
Unfortunately we are not living in a democracy,and we never really will until our leader grows a set of balls, steps into the 21st century and abolishes the disgrace that is the house of lords. Surely the cash for peers is evidence that the system is unfaur, archaic and UNDEMOCRATIC!!!
Neil Kinnock lost all dignity when he accepted his peerage. The massive tw*t.
In reply to bomb:
Yes we are. We get to vote for all sorts of things. Not the Lords at the moment, but the most they can do is delay things anyway.
Once the Tories are re-elected and introduce democracy to the Lords, will you still claim that we don't live in a democracy, on the grounds that we don't get to vote on every piece of legislation?
> Unfortunately we are not living in a democracy
Yes we are. We get to vote for all sorts of things. Not the Lords at the moment, but the most they can do is delay things anyway.
Once the Tories are re-elected and introduce democracy to the Lords, will you still claim that we don't live in a democracy, on the grounds that we don't get to vote on every piece of legislation?
In reply to bomb:
What do you propose? An anarcho-syndacalist collective?
Democracy is a very loose and misused term, like community and morality.
What do you propose? An anarcho-syndacalist collective?
Democracy is a very loose and misused term, like community and morality.
In reply to Simon Caldwell:
We live in a bizarre democracy - one where we vote for people to represent our interests but who don't seem to care about public opinion; one where the governing party was voted for by only 20% of the population yet enjoys such dominance in the House of Commons that the only way for legislation to be blocked is by a massive rebellion; one where, strangely, the undemocratic House of Lords are the defenders of liberty and human rights (see the terror legislation and ID cards) because they're not subject to such strict party discipline.
Bring on PR!
We live in a bizarre democracy - one where we vote for people to represent our interests but who don't seem to care about public opinion; one where the governing party was voted for by only 20% of the population yet enjoys such dominance in the House of Commons that the only way for legislation to be blocked is by a massive rebellion; one where, strangely, the undemocratic House of Lords are the defenders of liberty and human rights (see the terror legislation and ID cards) because they're not subject to such strict party discipline.
Bring on PR!
In reply to Simon: More likely he is on the side of the quarry company because he is trying to preserve a primary industry for the benefit of his fellow Northerners (well midlanders really, its Derbyshire. But anywhere t'other of watford Gap is North for fatty two jags).
In reply to Craig Geddes:
The names of those making loans are also published on the Electoral Commission website, if you can be bothered looking.
The names of those making loans are also published on the Electoral Commission website, if you can be bothered looking.
In reply to John Rushby:
In fact, on second thoughts, that'll give him something to chew on.
> (In reply to BrianT)
>
> btw £100,000 eqautes to 50,761 Ginsters steak and onion pies
>
> btw £100,000 eqautes to 50,761 Ginsters steak and onion pies
In fact, on second thoughts, that'll give him something to chew on.
In reply to Jon Greengrass: In no way am I defending the stupid g!t but come on - he's from Hull! Don't tar us innocent southerners with the same brush as that idiot.
In reply to John Rushby:
> (In reply to BrianT)
>
> Really?
>
> What proof do you have Brian?
>
>Er. None. It's just a feeling.
>
> Really?
>
> What proof do you have Brian?
>
In reply to monks:
Spotted you stil hadn't had a reply Al. The 1952 permission, and I paraphrase, talks about "The winning of Fluorspar and byrites and any minerals that are gained in the process." The methods being used by MMC are not those usually associated with Fluorspar, ie, vein mining. That usually entails following the vein by digging a narrow trench that is back-filled. Backdale, as you can see on the Save Longstone Edge website, is an enormous hole in the ground. MMC are effectively using their permission to mine fluorspar as a cover to extract limestone. Questions that need answering:
1. Not one ounce of Fluorspar has been processed in all the time they've been quarrying. How does that tally with the permission?
2. Is limestone a mineral?
3. Why haven't MMC paid any aggregate tax?
4. The H & S Executive are known to be interested in the operations. Why haven't they stepped in?
5. And most important of all, why is the govt standing by and allowing the destruction of one of the last examples of limestone moor in the Peak?
By the way, much as I'd love to, I don't think we can blame fatty Pres. This one is down to a combination of poor drafting of the original enforcement notice and the judiciary once again siding with big business against the environment.
Cheers
JH
Spotted you stil hadn't had a reply Al. The 1952 permission, and I paraphrase, talks about "The winning of Fluorspar and byrites and any minerals that are gained in the process." The methods being used by MMC are not those usually associated with Fluorspar, ie, vein mining. That usually entails following the vein by digging a narrow trench that is back-filled. Backdale, as you can see on the Save Longstone Edge website, is an enormous hole in the ground. MMC are effectively using their permission to mine fluorspar as a cover to extract limestone. Questions that need answering:
1. Not one ounce of Fluorspar has been processed in all the time they've been quarrying. How does that tally with the permission?
2. Is limestone a mineral?
3. Why haven't MMC paid any aggregate tax?
4. The H & S Executive are known to be interested in the operations. Why haven't they stepped in?
5. And most important of all, why is the govt standing by and allowing the destruction of one of the last examples of limestone moor in the Peak?
By the way, much as I'd love to, I don't think we can blame fatty Pres. This one is down to a combination of poor drafting of the original enforcement notice and the judiciary once again siding with big business against the environment.
Cheers
JH
In reply to john horscroft:
Do judges have to declare any shares they have and who with I wonder?
Just musing, in a cynical way.
Do judges have to declare any shares they have and who with I wonder?
Just musing, in a cynical way.
In reply to john horscroft:
In case you didn't see this link amid all the fluff, I'll repost it
http://www.longstone-edge.org.uk/060324Item4-1SUPP.pdf
Looks like one possible course of action is to go to the high court to determine what the contentious phrases regarding "the working of other minerals" actually means
As was stated at the public meeting, neither the enforcement order nor the stop order can remove from MMC rights granted by the 1952 permission - could this be the reason why such orders are a "nullity" ?
Could a public inquiry actually determine a question of law ?
Unfortunately my knowledge of administrative law is 20 years out of date, incomplete and probably pretty inaccurate. Where's sloper on the one occasion he might be of use ?
In case you didn't see this link amid all the fluff, I'll repost it
http://www.longstone-edge.org.uk/060324Item4-1SUPP.pdf
Looks like one possible course of action is to go to the high court to determine what the contentious phrases regarding "the working of other minerals" actually means
As was stated at the public meeting, neither the enforcement order nor the stop order can remove from MMC rights granted by the 1952 permission - could this be the reason why such orders are a "nullity" ?
Could a public inquiry actually determine a question of law ?
Unfortunately my knowledge of administrative law is 20 years out of date, incomplete and probably pretty inaccurate. Where's sloper on the one occasion he might be of use ?
In reply to Chris the Tall:
Typical of the tory swine to keep his head down when the environmental shit is hitting the fan eh?!
As far as I know Chris, it is almost certain that the whole shebang will end up at the High Court now, which is probably where it would have ended up anyway. At least we'll know whether we have to move on to some kind of direct action.....................
JH
Typical of the tory swine to keep his head down when the environmental shit is hitting the fan eh?!
As far as I know Chris, it is almost certain that the whole shebang will end up at the High Court now, which is probably where it would have ended up anyway. At least we'll know whether we have to move on to some kind of direct action.....................
JH
In reply to john horscroft: Thank you for that John.
In reply to Simon:
Now that we are going to keep the mine open, I'm sure those who were about to be made unemployed are breathing a sigh of relief.
I imagine a lot of people are employed in that mine.
Now that we are going to keep the mine open, I'm sure those who were about to be made unemployed are breathing a sigh of relief.
I imagine a lot of people are employed in that mine.
In reply to Gordon Stainforth: Now then, first of all planning law / quarrying isn't my field so I'm unable to comment on the technicalities.
However, the decision of the ODPM is justiciable and could be described as irrational (see 'GCHQ' and 'Wednesbury') and the only reasonably likely way of taking this forward is via judicial review. The time for this application to be made is limited to 28 days and given the economic implications of a JR and injuctive relief to stop quarrying I would be suprised if th PPJPB et al have the balls or clout to go for it.
As I suggested at the BMC meeting before the last election the only likely way of dealing with this was to get all the PPC's in the peak and the areas surrounding the peak to come out against the scheme. As far as I know this course of action wasn't followed.
In short legally I see little prospect for a good outcome and would suggest that the 'fault' of this lies with every single person who voted Labour at the last election.
However, the decision of the ODPM is justiciable and could be described as irrational (see 'GCHQ' and 'Wednesbury') and the only reasonably likely way of taking this forward is via judicial review. The time for this application to be made is limited to 28 days and given the economic implications of a JR and injuctive relief to stop quarrying I would be suprised if th PPJPB et al have the balls or clout to go for it.
As I suggested at the BMC meeting before the last election the only likely way of dealing with this was to get all the PPC's in the peak and the areas surrounding the peak to come out against the scheme. As far as I know this course of action wasn't followed.
In short legally I see little prospect for a good outcome and would suggest that the 'fault' of this lies with every single person who voted Labour at the last election.
In reply to sloper:
A classic Sloper response. A bit of waffle, a bit of legal terminology and a bit of case history for good measure, then blame the whole thing on the labour party.
So Tom, would a Tory minister have ignored a high court ruling ? Or have allowed a public inquiry to go ahead if such a ruling rendered it futile ? When, exactly, have the Tories defended the environment against business interests?
Do you really think that Micheal Howard would have put Backdale Quarry on his to do list for his first year in office. At least Jim Knight made a visit to the site and gave the PDNPA the financial backing to persue the case, and will hopefully extend this backing to whatever the PDNPA are advised to do next.
Blaming this on the labour party is as relevant as blaming whoever was in power in 1952 !
A classic Sloper response. A bit of waffle, a bit of legal terminology and a bit of case history for good measure, then blame the whole thing on the labour party.
So Tom, would a Tory minister have ignored a high court ruling ? Or have allowed a public inquiry to go ahead if such a ruling rendered it futile ? When, exactly, have the Tories defended the environment against business interests?
Do you really think that Micheal Howard would have put Backdale Quarry on his to do list for his first year in office. At least Jim Knight made a visit to the site and gave the PDNPA the financial backing to persue the case, and will hopefully extend this backing to whatever the PDNPA are advised to do next.
Blaming this on the labour party is as relevant as blaming whoever was in power in 1952 !
In reply to Chris the Tall:
That would be the Tories then. Winston was getting his second chance to raid the Downing Street wine cellar.
> whoever was in power in 1952 !
That would be the Tories then. Winston was getting his second chance to raid the Downing Street wine cellar.
In reply to sloper:
"Now then, first of all planning law / quarrying isn't my field so I'm unable to comment on the technicalities."
Well then, shut the fcek up!
P
"Now then, first of all planning law / quarrying isn't my field so I'm unable to comment on the technicalities."
Well then, shut the fcek up!
P
In reply to bomb:
>>>Neil Kinnock lost all dignity when he accepted his peerage.
Er, no - he lost all dignity when he fell in the sea on Brighton beach...oh, and then there was the "Well alright!" speech...and making the Labour party completely unelectable by the simple expedient of being unable to organise any sort of bibulous celebration in an alcoholic fermentation facility...
'course he's now got his snout in the trough at the EU, so that's alright then.
>>>Neil Kinnock lost all dignity when he accepted his peerage.
Er, no - he lost all dignity when he fell in the sea on Brighton beach...oh, and then there was the "Well alright!" speech...and making the Labour party completely unelectable by the simple expedient of being unable to organise any sort of bibulous celebration in an alcoholic fermentation facility...
'course he's now got his snout in the trough at the EU, so that's alright then.
In reply to john horscroft: Direct Action, there is hope for us all yet then? Even post Thatcher? Attaboy John.
Having lived in the Peak Park for 25 years, and been involved in all sorts of planning issues, the aspect which is most galling is that the Peak Park Planning board will take individuals to court and force them to change a window of the wrong design, but can't stop 573,963 tonnes of limestone being quarried from a previously peaceful and beautiful piece of countryside they're supposed to be protecting. What use are the national parks if the bully boy quarriers can get away with it?
For those who are confused about the issue see the pictures on the Save Longstone Edge website - you can now see the quarry from 10 miles away.
For those who are confused about the issue see the pictures on the Save Longstone Edge website - you can now see the quarry from 10 miles away.
In reply to Pete Tapping: Depressing but its the same in Spain, probably worse actually. The most depressing thing is that we no longer have a socialist party to turn to
In reply to Al Evans: In either country actually
In reply to Al Evans:
I think I heard a chap on Radio 4s Today programme mention a "coincidence" that he found out. It was something like - one of John Prescott's advisers in the ODPM is the Chairman/CEO of Tarmac or MacAlpine. I guess it might be hard to find a direct association - but I guess "influence" can go a long way.
I think I heard a chap on Radio 4s Today programme mention a "coincidence" that he found out. It was something like - one of John Prescott's advisers in the ODPM is the Chairman/CEO of Tarmac or MacAlpine. I guess it might be hard to find a direct association - but I guess "influence" can go a long way.
In reply to Jonny W: I think you'll find that in countries like the UK there will always be contacts. It's a small world. You will always be able to find a link.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...