Skip to content

Town Green and the Judicial Review-its good enough for Barry Hearne

September 1, 2011

Back in the news again. The Evening Roast once more prints details of judicial proceedings plus the inevitable Sextons opinion and the usual rent-a-quote. How does the rag get this information? Phone tapping or just a kindly mole drawing a fat council-tax funded salary?
Fact is campaigners are entitled to apply for judicial review.
Just look at Barry Hearne desperate to save his Leyton Orient club. Finally have just been granted leave to take on the might of the Olympic Legacy wallahs, West Ham and Newham council, Boris, and the dept of culture etc. There’s been unfair loans and dodgy payments flying round, the judge feels a case to be answered.

The Ashton Vale decision fudge-up by the biased and ill-informed council committee is procedural balls-up well worthy of the higher court. Not to mention the millions in council land asset sweeteners handed over for the monster Sainsburies and the luxury housing complex-state aid its called. Which breaks EU law and is another thing the judge will take a good look at in East London.

Advertisements
10 Comments
  1. thebristolblogger permalink
    September 1, 2011 6:52 pm

    It seems that McNamara of Khartoum (I’ll explain that reference one day) works out of a leaky bucket rather than an office these days.

  2. Richard Lane permalink
    September 1, 2011 8:39 pm

    Of course people are entitled to ask for a JR, it’s only right that this option exists for the little people and the likes of Barry Hearne to question authority. Whether that option is being abused in this case, is open to much speculation. “How does the rag get this information?” you ask. Council press officer perhaps, as it is a topical item of news which is important to the people of Bristol, even the leader of yet another new group (but the same people) didn’t mind going on the radio to talk about it. But poor old stillwaters pops a FOI in about the leak, sad aint it? Even Bristol 24/7 didn’t hesitate printing the story, and they’ve had plenty of leaks handed to them from your side of the fence.
    As for your last statement about the judge looking at the EU case (which as you know is utter bollocks),can you inform us of the status of that complaint? It seems to have gone mighty quiet on that front.

  3. thebristolblogger permalink
    September 2, 2011 5:27 pm

    “How does the rag get this information?” you ask. Council press officer perhaps, as it is a topical item of news which is important to the people of Bristol …”

    The term ‘council’ is not straightforward in this context. On the one hand there’s the political governing body run by the Liberal Democrats that’s perfectly entitled to support the club’s stadium, lobby for it and – with caveats – release information to the press supporting their case.

    On the other hand, the council is the Registration Authority – a quasi judicial body that’s supposed to be objective in deciding the Town Green case.

    It is as the Registration Authority that the council is receiving information from solicitors, which chief council press officer, Peter Holt, is passing on (on an ‘exclusive’ and commercial basis to help increase newspaper sales for a private company) to the Post’s Ian Onions.

    It is highly unusual for a judicial body to leak information regarding a case to the press as it tends to undermine their authority, independence and objectivity. Consequently the public can lose confidence in such a judicial process, which appears biased.

  4. Farnsworth permalink
    September 3, 2011 3:28 pm

    Whatever happened to “that awkward item known as democracy” eh?

    Interesting to see a Rollason in at corporate and community.

  5. Richard Lane permalink
    September 5, 2011 7:27 pm

    BB
    As I’ve suggested in my first post, isn’t that his job as a press officer?
    If the officer never did his job in releasing information about this process or any process come to that, then knowbody would know. It’s only information and nobody can act to alter the effects of it, can they? The public/ratepayers have a right to know about possible costs to our city council, just as opposition parties found out about land transfers and made them public. What is so wrong about releasing this information to the press, so letting as many people as possible, aware of the goings on in this case? I fail to see the problem, when even the spokesperson is willing to speak publicly about it through our national broadcaster. Or is it a question of, “it’s not fair”.
    I wonder how much the sales of the EP increased by with this exclusive revelation, 20?
    Stillwaters seems to be trying to dig the dirt though, and how will he reveal that? through 24/7 no doubt, or indymedia or will he tell his neighbour and hope the news just spreads.

    You say “It is as the Registration Authority that the council is receiving information from solicitors, which chief council press officer, Peter Holt, is passing on (on an ‘exclusive’ and commercial basis to help increase newspaper sales for a private company) to the Post’s Ian Onions”. Could you inform us how you get this exclusive information? Or is it a question of one rule for you and one for another, if they happen to have opposing views than you?

  6. Still Waters permalink
    September 5, 2011 9:44 pm

    “Stillwaters seems to be trying to dig the dirt though”

    So Rich, you consider the information I seek is ‘dirt’… You could be right.

    Rich and loamy in evidence of malfeasance, merely grubby and tainted, or possibly just sterilised topsoil.

    Personally, I’m not after ‘leaks’ – I’m requesting documented evidence, be it via official press release, notes taken during meetings, whatever.

    As any information I requested becomes public domain immediately (unlike the releases to the BEP, who will publish only what suits them) I really don’t need to reveal or leak anything to anybody.

    Are you afraid that something will turn up to benefit the applicants in any potential JR?

    Should I be afraid that something will turn up to help BCC defend a potential JR?

    Neither of us know until one or both of us asks the right questions. But at least we’ll both have a better picture of the events – or would you prefer I submit FoI’s privately, and ‘leak’ them to a select few?

  7. Richard Lane permalink
    September 5, 2011 10:19 pm

    Stillwaters or shall we use your real name?
    You seek dirt, is my implication. Whether there is any or, whether you’d like there to be any is different. I doubt you’d publiscise anything that was detrimental to your case, that’s for sure. But heaven forbid if there was a little scuff on a piece of paper somewhere, which might help you in whatever small way you’d like to think and then shout “it’s not fair” and spread the evidence far and wide.
    You’re no angel when it comes to lying for you campaign. “Personally, I’m not after ‘leaks” Says – – -. He’s doing it for impartiallity, that’s why you regularly write giving the other point of view eh!

  8. Richard Lane permalink
    September 5, 2011 10:24 pm

    Stllwaters, S Waters hahahaha
    “or would you prefer I submit FoI’s privately, and ‘leak’ them to a select few?” This is exactly what you are doing, and under a false name.

  9. Thomas S permalink
    September 7, 2011 9:50 am

    What is the status of the Judicial Inquiry application?

  10. Richard Lane permalink
    September 7, 2011 9:19 pm

    Stillwaters/S Waters/- – – – – – – – – r

    (By law, you must use your real name for the request to be a valid Freedom of Information request. See the next question for alternatives if you do not want to publish your full name).

    I have just taken this small section of information from the council FOI website.
    Is it possible that, any information gained using a pseudonym will not be eligable in law because of how it has been obtained?
    The police are supposed to use proper procedures whilst gathering evidence, perhaps enthusiastic campaigners are covered under the same laws.

Comments are closed.