Roger Gambba-Jones

It would appear that the underlying goal of many of Labour's policies is - as many of us have suspected for a long time - sticking it those they see as not working class and therefore not natural Labour supporters.

The latest evidence of this, is the derailing of the attempt by Conservative Peers to stop the damage being done to the character of many residential areas by ‘garden grabbing'.  We'll review it a minister said.  Some review that'll be, given that his boss claimed only recently that there were already enough policies available to councils to stop it happening - liar, liar pants on fire! I say.

Just in case you don't know what the term garden grabbing mean, it refers to the practice of developers buying properties with large gardens and then either building more properties in the garden or worse still knocking it all doen and building a block of flats. For actual examples see below.

http://www.gardenorganic.org.uk/saveourgardens/sog_gallery.php

Incidentally, flats are now being called self-contained residential units by applicants (or more often their agents), just to try to make them sound more palatable - which of course it doesn't!

The wherewithall to carry out this garden grabbing, was introduced by Mr John Prescott no less - a notable expert on all matters planning as we know! 

He and his likeminded experts cooked up a plan to stick it to ‘all those posh gits, who have the nerve to own big ‘ouses wiv big gardens' unliike the working classes, who have to live in high rise blocks of council flats, with no garden at all - not even self contained residential units!

So once Prescott had decided what a brown field site was, it only took one of his army of Government planning policy enforcers, otherwise known as the Planning Inspectorate (PINS), to determine that a garden, because it belonged to something that was built, namely a house, was indeed a brownfield site and therefore easy meat for the developers.  New Labour or Old Labour, no difference when it comes to their class war!  

Once again, this weeks press contains several stories about public organisations being miserable so and so's by banning, restricting or limiting public entertainment events because of health and safety concerns.

Like most other people, I find this type of buracracy bl**dy annoying - it makes you feel like you want to get hold of somebody and give them a good shake - get a life, get out of people's faces, get off the public's back, you petty little desk bound pen pusher!

But hold on a minute, surley these people aren't so anal and hung up on the rules for the sake of it, that they go around just looking for the chance to stop people having fun!  Well of course they're arn't, these people are actually getting paid to do what they do - some do it well and some do it very badly, but they all do it for a valid reason.  To use the jargon, those who do it badly, are risk averse - in English they don't have either the confidence or the knowledge to make the right call - so they ban everything!

Also, given that all of these people are being paid for by the taxpayer, their reason to exist has probably been, and continues to be, well scrutinised - so what is the problem with the way these people do their job?

Well, as usual of course, I have the answer and it's called no win, no fee! 

Now I fully support making access to the legal system for us ordinary folk as easy as possible.  The problem is, as soon as you introduce something that doesn't actually require people to pay up front, or even put their own money at risk, it's open to abuse and abused it has been.  What's really infuriating is that the abuse hasn't been by the public, but by the legal profession , the ones who have the expertise to abuse the system big time!

In 2001 (the most recent reliable figures available), the cumulative total cost of compensation claims is estimated at £10.1bn. This is equivalent to slightly over 1% of GDP.       

http://www.compensationculture.co.uk/economic-costs-of-the-compensation-culture.html

Given the readiness of people to reach for Yelloe Pages to find their nearest no win no fee ‘vulture', is any wonder that many of those charged with guarding the public's safety and purse, err on the side of, if in doubt ban it!

Even when the organisation that's being sued knows it's got no case to answer and the claimant and his lawyer are just trying it on, they find it cheaper to pay up than go to court, because all the cost is on the public purse whatever happens - even when you're right, you're wrong!  

I know that this doesn't really contribute to the debate on how to address the issue, but I am getting a little tired of being made to feel guilty about being a white man and over 50 and therefore apparently less and less acceptable as an elected member! 

Given that this issue appears to be almost impossible to solve in the short term - and in the long term I would argue, given the way the elected member's role has changed from keen amateur to almost full time professional since 2000 - isn't it about time those supporting and promoting member development went on the offensive?

Pointing the finger at the party political system of candidate selection is such an obvious accusation, you could almost accuse those who doing it of being too lazy to reach any other conclusion.  Who exactly are these people to criticise local political parties for the way they do business anyway?  Unless they're going to offer some direct support on how to widen the catchment, shouldn't they be out there promoting involvement in their own way?  It also ignores the supposed strength of the independents in local government.

As well as seeking to give members the operational skills required to understand the day to day functions of local government and the strategic thinking skills required to help formulate policy, they should also be helping all us old f**ts gain a wider and deeper understanding of the communities we serve.

The standard issue diversity and cohesion (D&C) training that seems to be so fashionable at the moment, doesn't really do the job in any meaningful way.  Incidentally, it's only fashionable because the government have been telling councils how rubbish they are if D&C isn't embedded in everything they do.  In fact they're so hung up on it, they score it from 1 to 4!! - Not a 4? damn there go another few brownie points!

It's a funny ol' business this politics.  George Osborn, for all his failings, has been making some robust comments about the economy and the way - and this is interesting in itself - Gordon Brown has been dealing with the global financial meltdown. 

I say interesting, because I thought Gordon Brown had stopped being the Chancellor of the Piggy Bank sometime ago and some bloke called Darling was now the mouth piece for that bit of Government.  Yet he appears to have been consigned to the back office counting what little money is left in the coffers, whilst the dour Scot tours the world telling everybody how to fix all things financial.  No doubt Alistair will very quickly be wheeled back out in to the limelight if Gordon's big idea appears to be going up the spout!!!

Anyway, George O has been accused of talking things down and being 'Mr Negative', by highlighting what is blindingly obvious and exactly what Gordon B kept telling everybody when he was the chief bean counter - spend like a lunatic when you haven't actually got any real money in your pocket and you'll end up paying for it dearly in the future.

One thing's for sure, if George had kept quiet or, dare I suggest, even tried to be supportive, he would have been slated by every journalist from the Beano to the FT for not speaking up and warning us all of the financial follies been visited upon our economic future, as soon as it all did go wrong - damned if he does and damned if he doesn't!

I'm not a lover of any of the seemingly endless flood of TV reality programmes that pass for TV entertainment these days, but at the moment I'm normally in the lounge when the dancing one is on the television.

Now don't get me wrong, I admire the hell out of those professional dancers, just for the great skill and agility they display - I wish I could do it!  I also admire those so called celebs for working so hard to learn a new skill - how fit must they be at the end of it!  As for Bruce Forsyth - I think he's really a robot!

Anyway, despite my best efforts, I've actually started to enjoy watching the programme, but not because I like ballroom dancing.  No, what I like is the fact that, having put in what they thought was a guaranteed looser, so that everybody could laugh at him whilst the judges lay into his comedy dancing, the producers now can't get rid of him!

John Sergeant's dancing skills appear to be at about my level, even after all that training, but does he give up - no sir!  Better still, does the public give up on him - no they don't!  And the more the judges lay in to dear old John, the more the public voted for him - laugh, I could dance (badly) in my glee at the thought of all the squirming that must go on as he results come in!  (Luckily, it's not 12 months ago, or the producers might of fiddled with the phone in votes by now and John would've been a goner!).

In fact, I'm enjoying listening to the frustration and outrage of the judges and their self important pontificating so much, that I'm actually thinking of voting for John myself - after all, he is my kind of dancer!     

That's how I feel everytime I read yet another report of some individual, business or organisation being trampled by bureaucracy.  The metric martyrs, Post Offices and the RNLI to name but three!

Many people of importance and who actually know what they're talking about, are equally angered by such things and yet nothing changes - so what chance do I stand! 

The link below gives details of how our own government and its ever increasing army of petty and small minded bureaucrats, who love to gold plate every rule, continues to work so hard to bury this country under an avalanche of EU legislation.  The level playing field that is supposed to be the bedrock of European unity, appears to be anything but.  This island of ours is tilting towards Europe both physically and mentally!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/09/do0906.xml

Even if you don't read it all, read the horror story about the used oil recycling company that is being strangled by our lunatic interpretation of the EU regs.  

You don't need to have real knowledge of the EU and its mountain of rules and regs, to see the difference between us and them - them being the rest of Europe.  Visit any of our European ‘partners' and you will see glaring examples of them doing their own thing and more often than not, in a way that the citizens of England have been told is no longer allowed.

Not long ago I was visiting Holland and was taken to a brand new shopping centre.  It was so new that it wasn't actually finished.  It was so not finished, that the car park everybody was using had piles of builder's stuff everywhere.  Also, the stairs out of it to the shops were rough concrete, without handrails and a 15 foot (sorry it couldn't be feet could it, it's all metric over there) a 5 metre drop either side.  Could you imagine our health and safety police allowing that to happen here?

Bottom line is, that as the credit crunch turns in to a recession, this English fixation with ‘the rules' is going to title the playing field even more!

God only knows how we are going to gloss over the farce of the recycling targets everybody is forced to chase, now that nobody actually wants to buy the stuff.  One things for sure, nobody in this government will have the balls to tell the EU where to stick their landfill taxes, even when they have to start paying 10's of thousands a day of our money to store the mountains of unwanted stuff.

Never let the truth get in the way of a good story is the journalist's mantra (ALLEDGEDLY).  A bit extreme I know, but reading the headline on the front page of a local newspaper this week, it's difficult not to see some grain of truth in it.

The current owners of Spalding's one and only power station, have suggested that they might want to do the same thing all over again.  As part of their initial publicity, they've suggested that they would consider making some sort of financial contribution to the local community.

Now remember, this is their suggestion, no planning application has been received and at the moment SHDC haven't got any details on what the power company are proposing.  So, suggesting that a payout is on its way, is not only grossly premature, it's also potentially inflammatory. 

I have no doubt that those members of the public, who already see the district council planning dept as the ‘Dark Destroyer' of our beloved rural communities, have immediately taken this headline to mean that a deal has been done and what follows will just be a rubber stamping exercise all for show.

Apart from the fact that it won't even be SHDC determining the actual application, it will be the Secretary of State for something or other, the planning issues will still have to stack up.  So, even though SHDC won't be determining the actual application, it is a statutory consultee and will therefore be asking the development control committee to approve or otherwise the comments to be submitted.  The DC committee will be asked to consider a report based on planning considerations only - not on the size of any potential contributions that might or might no be forthcoming!  

I've never really thought about the actual meaning of that phrase, so I decided to do a Google on it.  Luckily for me it was as I thought - do something in haste and it will probably take you longer to achieve a good outcome, than if you'd taken your time.

In the case of the Spalding Driver Testing Centre that closed in July 08, the haste came from the apparent need to open a new combined testing centre, in time to accommodate the new off road requirements for the motorbike test that was soon to be introduced.

Surprise! Surprise! The new driving test for motor bike riders is delayed until 30 March 09!  So, because of the unnecessary haste of the bureaucrats at the DSA, driving instructors and pupils in South Holland have had to travel to and from Peterborough or Boston, at least 6 months earlier than they needed to.

If you still needed proof that Government is now so big that, not only are the various departments pulling in different directions, but different areas within these departments are out of step with each other, see the extract below. 

Planning is already one of the most democratic processes with the majority of decisions taken by elected local councillors. But too often decisions become contentious because of the perceived lack of public involvement in decisions that leave under represented groups frustrated and disenchanted.

This quote is from the same item I was moaning about in my previous 'gombe' (grumpy old man blog entry).  The bit in bold is, to use the technical term, total cobblers! 

The majority of decisions taken by planning departments are taken by officers through the scheme of delegation. The 'guidance' for delegated decisions:

60% of major planning applications 13 weeks (BV109) - 65% of minor planning applications 8 weeks (BV109) - 80% of all other planning applications 8 weeks (BV109)

I put the word guidance in ‘' because it's more than just that (BV is short for best value performance indicator), fail to hit it and the headmaster, sorry I mean minister sends some big scary inspectors along to tell you off.

Incidentally, BV 109 has now been turned in to BV188 which is:  The number of decisions delegated to officers as a percentage of all decisions.  Target of 90% to be achieved by all authorities every year.

Do I need to say anymore to make my case?

'New funding to give under represented groups a better say on local planning'

That's the snappy title of yet another government initiative - you have to wonder in these troubled times, where they keep digging up all these pots of several million pounds to do these thing??  Read the whole thing at: http://www.communities.gov.uk/news/corporate/1006771

However, it's not actually the subject of the item that I'm doing my 'grumpy old man' routine on this time.  No, Hazel Blears or her team of never-ending civil servants (can't complain about plain speaking and then use a word like interminable can I?) have decide to show us all how cleaver they are and how lacking the English language is when it comes to new government initiatives.

‘Charrettes' - know what it means? Of course you do, coz you're not fick like me!

Anyway, these cleaver dicks have used this word in their document text, because apparently we don't have an English word for ‘an intensive period of activity at the end of a project'.  Neither do the French apparently, as the word actually means cart!

Hazel and her team are obviously not sure that everybody is as cleaver as them, especially the journalists who would be reporting on this item, as they actually go to the trouble of explaining what charrettes means at the end of the web page.

My point? If you have to explain what a word means, DON'T USE IT!  It just makes you look like a smart arse!

Even if you don't have any interest in politics with either a small p or a big P, you have to complete the registration form you received sometime in September. 

 http://www.sholland.gov.uk/council/democratic/elections/Annual+Update+of+Electoral+Register.htm

The statement on another council's website lays it out in starker terms than ours:

Each year, the electoral register is updated between August and November.  Every household is sent a household Voter Registration Form listing all the people on the electoral register as living at that address over the age of`18.  Households must check the form and update it if necessary.  You are legally required to sign this form and send to the Electoral Registration Officer.  You can be fined up to £1000 if this form is not returned.

As a local politician (a small p belonging to a big P) I should agree with it being illegal not to register to vote - but I don't!  It just seems wrong threatening people in this way, especially as it's probably more to do with the government (of whatever colour) being control freaks, than any genuine wish to ensure that everybody can vote when the time comes.  As Big Brother as it sounds, I think the diggers down under (that's the Australians just in case you're wondering) have actually made it illegal not to vote.  No doubt as soon as the EU come up with the same idea, we Pommies will gold plate it by making it a hanging offence!! 

Anyway, that's the law at the moment and it's unlikely to change until the revolution happens.  Even then the next lot will probably come up with some other reasons to fine us, lock us up, or possibly even shoot us once they're in power!  Out of the frying pan into the fire, better the devil you know, etc, etc, etc!!!

So, just in case you forgot to fill the form in or chucked it away - think again and save yourself a lot of money!  If you've still got the form, you can do it online at:

https://www.registerbyinternet.com/South-Holland/default.aspx