What Transparency?
Oh dear, it seems like The Environment Agency aren't happy with us. It would seem they're in a bit of a funk.
Not content with asking for £37,000 for a Freedom of Information request, the EA now refuse to talk to us about anything they deem to be "not directly to do with the determination" and have now wheeled out "discretionary powers" without explanation - ladling on the irony by simultaneously citing "improving transparency".
From our perspective it is foolish and prejudicial to ask idle, time wasting and vexatious questions for what should be entirely obvious reasons. Amazingly, really... we would actually rather be doing something else than communicating with the EA (or worse, moaning about them) - but we are stuck with it. The EA are now over three times the supposed legal time limit for deciding on the water licences at Avoncliff and behaving like a stroppy 18 year old .... oh, wait....
It's a rattle / pram thing?
ReplyDeleteMy understanding of transparency is to allay fears and keep people informed- no timescale and not willing to respond to genuine concerns is deceitful and underhand and leaves a nasty taste in everyone's mouth!
ReplyDeleteWell I live in Bradford-on-Avon someone has put a notice through my door telling me to oppose the north mill application because it will flood Bradford I now this is a lie because i am an engineer this is dirty scare tactics employed by weavers mill TARRANT IS A LIAR do not believe it.
ReplyDeleteBelieve THE HIGH COURT JUDGE ask DUNCAN HAMES MP and CLIMATE FRIENDLY B-ON-A and WILTSHIRE COUNCIL North MILL was always the better scheme. JON B-ON-A
Yes Tarrant told all his neighbours lies last time he is quickly loseing all credibility he should be ashamed i back North Mill. Tarrant Weavers mill scheme was trying to raise the weir by 300mm now that would have flooded B-ON-A It was North Mill that stopped him raising the weir because they own 50% North Mill reduces flood risk. B-ON-A RESIDENT
ReplyDeleteWe will post WEAVERS MILL story soon with all the evidence. You can decide on fiction or fact.
DeleteI think the EA are trying to hide the truth but it will come out in the end.They should put right what they have done issue the licence to North Mill the weavers mill scheme cannot even come close to the north mill merits. John Frome
ReplyDeleteWell my 86 yr old mum has been worried sick about a note that has been put through her door in B-ON-A telling her that her house will be flooded if north mill gets a license,i have spoken to a friend who knows about both schemes.She explained that this note was written by weavers mill applicant Mr Tarrant to scare people to object to the better scheme.This is disgusting behaviour to lie to residents of Bradford for your own agenda you should be ashamed Mr Tarrant and i will tell all. Susan Potter
ReplyDeleteHow one-sided all these posts are. I wonder how it would be if the other mill had a right to reply? Frankly the nastier these posts get the less I trust anythng written by the North Mill people. Bet they censor this too!
ReplyDeleteI've got no axe to grind either way as I live on a hill well way from it all, but the tenor of this whole website leaves a nasty taste in the mouth.
BoA resident.
Anon 19thJan @22:53,
Deletethe posts (n.b. not the comments) are one sided because this is our story...
If somebody else wants to tell a different story - they can do the same as we've done = that's the right to reply - unless there are factual inaccuracies in which case we are entirely happy to acknowledge those. It's clear from the comments that a number of folk aren't happy at all with what's been going on at Avoncliff and quite a few potty mouthed ones have been deleted.
There is obviously some rivalry between the two schemes and it's obviously out contention that North Mill is overall the most appropriate scheme at this location.
Local issues aside, the PRIMARY problem at Avoncliff (that leaves a foul taste in our mouths) has been - and actually continues to be - the behaviour of The Environment Agency. To say that the EA has failed in its statutory duties is only the smallest part of what has gone down in this matter.
There actually isn't a way to sugar coat and render palatable the nasty procession of dishonest, illegal, high handed, bullying, incompetent antics perpetrated by officials employed at taxpayer expense.
In 3 years of wrangling - the direct bill to the public purse is well over £600,000 and our out of pocket costs in challenging the EA, lost income and increases in construction costs are definitely not trivial. The amount of time spent on this matter is beyond accounting for on our side.
In short, this has descended into a fairly bitter dispute with the Environment Agency - and the Environment Agency do not do nicey-nicey. We really would prefer it otherwise - but we are telling the story from our perspective. I note the Environment Agency have yet to even try and tell their side of the story...
Then, they'd have to justify other appalling decisions we *know* they've made that have cheated honest people out of their livelihoods on on the basis of bureaucratic whim.
As a person who recieved a letter with no author, I did respond to it and now feel stupid this scare tactic is wrong, it is quite clear it is meant to help the other scheme that i was not even aware of, this is wrong.
ReplyDeleteHI someone says the posts are one sided, But the posts seem to be backed up with what looks like factual e-mails and information so even though you may live on a hill??? it seems you are grinding your axe. DAVID FROME
ReplyDeleteTo enter into this tactic is out of order,seems weavers mill scheme is poor and damaging.Why would a good scheme be risked,AVONCLIFF for hydro has been talked about for 20 years + to my knowledge don"t talk get it done !
DeleteHu no access cross guns side talker not not able to do.When i grew up the girls said----LITTLE MAN BIG IDEAS---- that spells it out. Stop wasting time as above GET IT DONE best of luck u have the obvious site opposite.Stick with it.mmmmmm
ReplyDeletekeep it civil.
Delete