• The post you are reporting:
   
  I agree, Sue. You alone of the Tory hegemony seem to have stood on a point of principle in this one. One could add to your argument sites like Buckland Mill, Connaught Barracks, Westmount where development seems to have fallen by the wayside. All are much more appropriate sites than burying the Farthingloe Valley in concrete for perpetuity.
  
  But there is something wider going on here. CGI has no assets except Farthingloe. There are new faces on board. The main man resides in Cambodia. This is about one thing and one thing only - money. Money which has been borrowed on the expectation of a compliant council and MP who will, however long it takes, force this development through. Our professional planning offices at DDC paid due regard to AONB legislation initially and greatly reduced the original plans. CGI then called in their consultants (BNP Paribas) who obediently said that the reduced development was impossible to make sufficient profit from (in a nutshell). The High Court and finally the Law Lords (Supreme Court) rejected both arguments and simultaneously made rare and direct criticisms of the councillors who met in secret to overturn their own officers' recommendations.
  
  DDC has seen fit to squander a quarter of a million pounds of taxpayers money fighting the decision. Why is Charlie so vocal on this project but happy to stay quiet on other sites? Why has he chosen to vilify the CPRE so blatantly? The whole thing stinks.
  
  I love the Farthingloe Valley along with many other people. If it has to go in the name of progress then it should be done in a manner commensurate with its AONB status. I hope that planning officers retain the courage to scrutinise this next attempt to wipe out CGI's debts with the thoroughness it deserves. And thereafter I hope that DDC councillors will put environmental value ahead of financial gain.

Report Post

Your Name

Reason