Skip to content

Bottle bank

May 29, 2011

Good old greed merchants recycled their planning application, replaced the planning committee, and reinvented con-merchants.
The Sainsbury’s/Lansdown cartel win a hollow victory .

The government bottled the calling in of the Sainsburys Ashton Gate decision when it was quite obviously the most ridiculous and outrageous planning decision of the 21st century. The only way the Merchants of Greed could get this travesty through planning was by changing most of the committee at the last minute. That and invoking the  enabling argument so that thousands of football fans are then conned into supporting a supermarket chain. Don’t blame them for being coerced, the Lansdown bank roller threatened them with pulling out the funding their team so who wouldn’t be worried.

What a complete shambles of a system where a billionaire cons his way into building a massive hypermarket with the obvious damage to the surrounding communities. What a total and utter load of bankers in the council and government for bottling it and not standing up to the exiled greed merchant and his band of crooked bullies and con-merchants.

Advertisements
19 Comments
  1. May 29, 2011 6:02 pm

    Lansdown and his cronies should apply for jobs at FIFA.

  2. thebristolblogger permalink
    May 29, 2011 8:02 pm

    Lansdown’s mob – along with city politicians of every stripe and the council’s senior bureaucrats – were all very keen on FIFA and ready to sign our city over to them wholesale until they got royally screwed by them.

    FIFA were as corrupt two years ago when they all had their tongues right up them as they are today.

    Corruption only happens because the weak, gullible and stupid allow it.

  3. woodsy permalink
    May 31, 2011 8:18 am

    Corruption only happens because the weak, gullible and stupid allow it.

    Corruption also happens because campaigners usually don’t have the resources to stretch to supplying lavish hospitality to public officials and doing dodgy deals on the golf course. 😉

  4. May 31, 2011 5:52 pm

    The spineless city politicians -in awe or fear of the greed merchants with the bulging pockets of cash.
    Backhanders-why give the billionaires free land worth £££££million and other incentives to build the monster hypermarket? Tried to keep that one quiet but failed.
    Supermarket cartel -Labour Primarolo and government, what a waste of space-they’re all in on the stitch-up with their party’s funded by the greedsters. Plus all the fatcat freebie lunches and Fat Duck dinners.
    Jobs lies.
    Traffic lies.
    Only a supermarket extension over the road lies
    Retail impact lies.
    Valuation of land lies.
    World cup farce.
    Enabling argument lies.
    Green belt gobbling land grab lies.
    Town Green arbitration lies and joke costs-£56k my arse, I’d have done that bit for a couple of pints, no more no less. Expensive delaying tactics by land owners who once again shift the dodgy tab onto ratepayers.

    No reason to call it in, just another day in politics, er .

  5. bobS permalink
    May 31, 2011 6:26 pm

    The next stage of the dodgy stich up is already sown up.

    Peter Abraham – BEP 20th May – states the Town Green case is a misuse of the law and he is convinced it should be rejected.

    Peter Abraham – 26th May – Appointed chair of the PROWG committee which decides Town Green cases.

    After the Sainsbury’s gerrymanderring, its as if they think they can break any law to get the stadium.

    But, who is going to go to this new stadium now that so many people in Bristol hate their guts – especially in Southville, Ashton Vale and Long Ashton.

    Maybe Lansdown can start buying fans.

  6. Paul Bemmy Down permalink
    June 1, 2011 7:01 pm

    Perhaps the TG decision will have more national interest than granting another supermarket. Not everyday does a council reject an inspectors advice, and this will have repercussions on other TG applications. I understand the Council itself does’t know how it stands legally, so I can see this going to Full Council, which will open another can of worms.

  7. Richard Lane permalink
    June 1, 2011 8:15 pm

    All

    I have read some rubbish on these sites over a period of two years and more. This last array of posts takes the biscuit. It is absolutely crammed full of bitter sniping and lies.
    The best comment must surely come from Sacredspring (as usual), who says ” Expensive delaying tactics by land owners who once again shift the dodgy tab onto ratepayers”.
    So what possible advantage could there be for the landowners to delay the process?

    Another classic= “Supermarket cartel -Labour Primarolo and government, what a waste of space-they’re all in on the stitch-up with their party’s funded by the greedsters”.
    Would that be the same government that didn’t call in the stadium or the one that didn’t call in the supermarket, or the one that’s not part funded by Sainsbury?

    The new planning meeting and committee were only required because of the dodgy first meeting.

    You are nothing short of a bunch of childish, deluded, spoilt brats, with a few exceptions, Paul being one.

    BobS says “But, who is going to go to this new stadium now that so many people in Bristol hate their guts – especially in Southville, Ashton Vale and Long Ashton”. Answer= the same people that go there now, seeing as the average attendance has actually risen during this stadium/supermarket process of the last year (all be it by a small number), even though people hate their guts. They must be going to hurl abuse at the landowners and club officials, obvious really, why didn’t I think of that.
    Would that be the 1,200 people of Bristol that have signed the pro TVG petition, or the 30,000 people that have signed in favour of the stadium, that hate the club?
    Unbelieveable logic.

  8. harryT permalink
    June 1, 2011 8:19 pm

    On the BCFC official site, Lansdown is quoted as encouraging the council to reject the inpsector’s report for the greater interests of Bristol, otherwise he will appeal. The whole approach is one big bluff.

    1. You cannot override the statutory legal rights of local residents so as to favour the commercial interests of others. The Council know that is unlawful. Any councillor doing this risks getting disqualified from office.

    2. The Council hired the Inspector to decide the issue for them. They have stated this from the start. You cannot ignore findings made after listening to 10 days oral evidence and dozens of days reading documents and statements and writing a 252 page report. The Council know that it would be unlawful to do so.

    3. Lansdown keeps talking about an “appeal”. He keeps talking about making the applicants give evidence “on oath”. Its as if he has never listened to a word his lawyers say. There is no appeal. There will never be any evidence on oath. All the evidence has happened. He can only bring a Judicial Review, arguing that the law was applied incorrectly. A bit tough considerng the Council hired the 2nd best town green lawyer in the country as Inspector, and he hired the best as his QC.

    4. Lansdown would need to get permission for Judicial Review. There is a high chance he would not get it. Then it would be all over.

    The Council has two choices. Right or (financial) Might.

    Do the right thing, not the might thing.

  9. BobS permalink
    June 1, 2011 8:21 pm

    They have switched Richard Lane again. There is no way that’s Richard’s writing.

  10. Richard Lane permalink
    June 1, 2011 8:46 pm

    BobS

    Who are they?
    What on earth are you saying? Why do you think it’s not me? Do you think that I’m incapable of writing with passion? Over this past two years, I’ve bitten my tongue and remained as polite as possible under extreme provocation some times, I’m not going to hold back as much now, even though the main blogger will threaten a ban to those with opposite views than him.

    HarryT

    Do you think Mr Lansdown should not promote his case?
    The case will be looked at, with all the up to date evidence presented, so that the committee can make a reasoned decision(hopefully).
    In doing so, they can probably take into account if the application for TVG status was made to prevent the stadium development going ahead or if it was solely for a town green.

    If you have the extra evidence to hand, please print it for us all to see and evaluate.

  11. Richard Lane permalink
    June 1, 2011 8:52 pm

    BobS

    Look at the profile adjacent to every post I’ve written, it’s that stupid little purple thing and always has been if I remember correctly.
    There’s only my wife and myself here and she wouldn’t bother writing on this site about things she’s only remotely interested in, (she likes BCFC).

  12. Still Waters permalink
    June 2, 2011 8:37 pm

    @Richy: “Would that be the 1,200 people of Bristol that have signed the pro TVG petition, or the 30,000 people that have signed in favour of the stadium?”

    Count the local support:

    “‘Bristol wants a new stadium not a “village green”

    The breakdown of the number of ‘electronic’ (non-paper) signatures as at date of receipt of request:

    Number of signatures with valid addresses in:

    Location Number of signatures

    Bedminster ward: 294
    Southville ward: 288
    Other BCC wards south of the river Avon: 1690
    BCC wards north of the river Avon: 2273
    North Somerset: 1749
    South Gloucestershire: 2373
    Bath and North East Somerset: 994
    Outside of the West of England: 3031
    Outside of the UK: 223
    Invalid : 337
    TOTAL: 13252″

    Not 30k is it? Seems to be closer to 2.5k

  13. Richard Lane permalink
    June 2, 2011 9:32 pm

    Stilly waters baby

    When was the request made?
    Where are the corresponding figures for your petition, to form a comparison?
    Are you saying that your petition has not got signatures from anything other than local people?
    No doubt you’ll follow the usual method of figure presentation used by those opposing, and we’ll get the figures for the pro stadium petition minus all those not from BS3. It will be taken from half way through the collection of signatures, when there was a temporary postponment of collecting. It’ll be compared to the up to date all encompassing petiton for the TVG.

    This is a stadium for the use of BCFC and it’s supporters, it will also be used by people using the other facilities. As you know, they come from across the region and as such the signatures you’ve counted up to that date, are representative of the people that would use that facility. You have excluded completely the signatures collected on the paper petition, this is not surprising.

    Those people signing your petition, are on the other hand never likely to use the facility of the TVG, come to that the vast majority of the others signing it aren’t likely to use it either. Their not even likely to see it, unless they take their heads out from their arses.

  14. June 2, 2011 9:34 pm

    The best comment must surely come from Sacredspring (as usual), who says ” Expensive delaying tactics by land owners who once again shift the dodgy tab onto ratepayers”.
    So what possible advantage could there be for the landowners to delay the process?

    I have the best comments, agreed.
    The pathetic delaying tactics by Lansdowns mob is pretty obvious to the non-brainwashed.
    The place is recommended to be Town Green by a long expensive and legitimate leagle beagle process, what we are supposed to enjoy in a parliamentary democracy. Lansdown and his fellow spoilt brats disagree so they try every underhand trick in the book to undermine the true and just decision. The council should have made the decision last year, but they’ve been strung along for months under the pretext of mediation The Guernsey mafia obviously decided their best chance was to try to undermine the councils resolve with no intention of any compromise. Nothing new there either, worked for the Sainsbury Monster. Also you don’t become a top 100 greedy rich person by being nice and sticking to the rules of fair play.

  15. June 2, 2011 9:37 pm

    Local planning decision, not for Brighton whiners or any other bandwagon from across the globe.
    Not as many locals in favour as is made out by a dubious and dodgy petition.

  16. Avid follower permalink
    June 3, 2011 9:51 pm

    Lane has a ghost writer.

  17. Deano permalink
    June 4, 2011 10:08 am

    The Oracle says

    “Deano – I’m not Will. Fact. I know of him. And Lance wasn’t him either”

    So, it is just co-incidence that you know Will – aka William Powell, who briefly posted on this site under two identities (his own, and “Bryan Thompson”) before making himself look a complete prat by responding to a question to one whilst logged in as the other.

    Having made himself look an utter prat off Will slithered, and lo and behold along comes “Lance” (whose name obviously has nothing to do with the fact that William Powell’s OTIB name is Lanceloto – another coincidence hey?). He then also disappears after also being made to look a prat.

    Now suddenly a new prat arrives The Oracle, who just happens to know of both Will AND Lance well enough to “claim” that they are not each other.”.

    Yet, funnily enough, The Oracle has apparently, throughout the 2 and a half years that this stadium/Sainsburys mega-saga been going on, kept silent until now. Meanwhile Will aka Bryan aka Lanceloto having made earlier comments is now silent, whilst Lance just happens to have taken an interest after Will aka Lanceloto stopped making comments but before the Oracle came along.

    That’s the problem when you get a kid barely out of puberty who spends most of his time playing fantasy games. Especially when he’s a particularly dim individual like this one.

  18. Richard Lane permalink
    June 4, 2011 3:39 pm

    All

    I have finaly worked Sacredspring out. You read his comments and take the exact opposite of what he’s written to be the truth.
    I thought I’d seen the mother of all posts until I read his last two fictional pieces.

    Avid follower
    Have you anything constructive to say?
    As I am lambasted and abused by most on here, why would I want a ghost writer to put up with the same load of crap that I have to?
    Using Deanos theory, when someone posts after two years without hearing of them before (forgive me if you have) you must be a kid, barely out of puberty who spends most of his time playing fantasy games. Especially when he’s a particularly dim individual like this one.

  19. Richard Lane permalink
    June 4, 2011 3:47 pm

    All

    Lane here, or is it a ghost writer, someone paid by the club, or paid by Sainsbury’s, or hoping to get some building work, living in knowle, like a mythological creature, approached by the evening post, possibly Mike Ford, someone that’s never been to Ashton Vale, lies constantly, deceitful, has shares in Sainsbury and Tesco, has never lived in Ashton, never goes to Ashton, doesn’t shop or socialise there, has never made a presentation to the council, didn’t start a petition to counter another petition.
    That’s posted Sacredspring style.

Comments are closed.