| In this video we see clear evidence
of Neath-Port Talbot Council corruption. .
At 7.57 in the video the chairperson Suzanne Paddison states
that all members of the planning committee have received a
document.
7.57 - You will be aware that certain literature arrived
yesterday, you will have all received literature. This will not
partake as part of the aaaaaaahh proceedings today but obviously
you have had it, you have read it. You may ask questions, um any
questions on the debate part of it so if anybody wants to ask
questions, but we won't be actually questioning that document
This is in the interests of fairness and equity, it arrived
after the deadline of Friday at 2.00 o'clock so officers [the
planning department] have had very little time to look at it,
members may, one member received it last night when the came
home after a day out so, its not been fully accessible to
everybody so that's why its not going to be included in the
proceedings but obviously if there are any questions that any
member wishes to ask they can do that .
The document to which the chairperson and the planning
development officer Steve Ball refer provides evidence that the
planning committee breached the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT
1990 in 2010 when they rubber stamped planning department
malpractice. The chairperson Suzanne Paddison, the Deputy Chair
Sean Pursey and local councillors Del Morgan and Simon Knoyle
were copied to a series of emails between myself (David
Richards) and the Council Leader Rob Jones on 15th May 2020. The
planning department had also been made aware of this in at least
20 representations from local residents.
At 51.10 in the video the planning office Steve Ball confirms
this when he states that:
"I do just want to again mention the literature, you may
or may not have seen it but regardless of that you are able to
answer questions on item at anytime so Mr Ball would you please
take us through the application.
Of course, thank you chair and just to re-iterate the point you just made in terms of the correspondence being received late and that's why the
amendment sheet doesn't refer to that at all (51.40) because its outside of the process and protocol um but you will note that um one of the registered speakers is a Mr Richards who is the author of the submission that came round so no doubt Mr Richards will be able to raise um whatever he wishes in his presentation to you and then obviously at that point you will be able to draw any matters or any issues you wish to raise with me as a consequence.
Ah Mr Ball, just.....
yes councillor
I just wondered how you knew that Mr Richards was the author, because I couldn't see anywhere on it that somebody had signed it.
I believe that came through from his email (misinformation) is my understanding and we've also had um correspondence from Mr Richards throughout the course of this application which has raised if not all, certainly almost all of the matters raised within the literature in any event.
so what I was gong to say under the representation section is quite a lengthy representation summary has been provided um and that I would say summarises everything within the submissions which are largely raising significant concerns about land contamination and obviously we'll come to that in my
response and in any discussion we may have
that's fine - thank you Mr Ball, carry on
|
