TOWN Hall bosses at Warrington want local people to get involved in the future planning of the borough.
They want to hear residents’ views on the emerging planning framework for the borough – and promise that people will 
be able to influence the future development of the town.
Warrington’s core strategy is the key document which will guide the location and level of development in the borough from now until 2027 and the council wants to know residents’ thoughts on it.
Leader of the council Terry O’Neill (pictured) said: “This is an exciting opportunity to influence and comment on a key document which will help to shape the future development of Warrington for the next 15 years. Your views really matter so please let us know what you think.”
A copy of the draft core strategy can be downloaded from the council’s website and commented on here: (http://warrington-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/
Alternatively it is available to view at all libraries in Warrington, or at Warrington Borough Council offices.
Paper copies are also available on request – call 01925 442826.
Comments can be sent to the council by email to [email protected] or by post to the Policy and Programmes Team, Environment Services Directorate, New Town House, Buttermarket Street, Warrington, WA1 2NH.
The document is available for consultation from until Friday January 20.
14 Comments
None of this can happen until the planning department sorts itself out. The main issue is not do with processes, documents, procedures and policies because those have been ignored in the past, including by existing planing officers. I do not understand why the council cannot get its head around this. It’s all a complete waste of time unless we can be sure that employees of the planning department can be trusted.
Outsource the planning department
This is a real departure from what currently exists!! I agree that until trust is restored in the Planning Department residents will NOT engage with this process. It is not the process that needs attention is, in fact, the Officers who staff that Department. Until WBC realises the value in consulting its residents it will extremely difficult to make any meaningful progress. Staff from the CE and down need to see that residents of the Borough can make a valuable contribution in ensuring that Warrington is developed as a leader in the North West.
Get involved in planning? – Do we have to supply our own shredder? 🙂
After reports by the Ombudsman and District Auditor in 2003, critical of WBC's planners, planning procedures and dealings with developers, a senior council officersaid “In terms of establishing a formal and auditable record of how the council handles a planning application Warrington will operate a process as clear and as transparent as any other council”. The Ombudsman's report of 2011 shows no progress was made towards that objective in seven years. It also shows within three years of the 2003 assurance being given planners, officers, managers and executives were willing to mislead, cover up, be economical with the truth and break promises in order to conceal, for another five years, the destruction of statutory planning records, from the very people with whom they now wish to discuss the town's Core Strategy. Rebuilding trust should be the Council's overriding priority. Until that has been achieved, and it will be difficult with some of the present incumbents in place, the public will remain sceptical and justifiably so.
Wasn’t that discussed last year, combining with Halton and outsourcing the whole lot to Capita Symonds. I think the idea got dropped as there would have been no worthwhile savings. Interestingly another local authority, Sefton, has just announced that it is terminating its contract with Capita Symonds and bringing all of its technical services back in house due to the predicted savings not materialising.
Maybe one solution (given that the council is clearly not going to take disciplinary action against individuals for what may justifiably be claimed as gross misconduct) is to stop referring to these people as officers. They are employees and the sooner somebody reminds them, the better. Where are our councillors?
I really wish someone of substance in the Council would emerge to face these issues and people involved down and then begin the process of trying to restore integrity into the offices (as opposed to officers) we should all be entitled to trust; it is long overdue.
It's amazing isn't it Karl? Their response to an issue that involves council employees ignoring policies and procedures, is to introduce new policies and procedures, not new employees.What would be needed for disciplinary action to be taken?
I can guarantee the one thing that would make sure this would never happen again would be the sight of one or two officers escorted off the building with black bin bags of their stuff as would happen in an organisation with a sense of perspective.
The problem for the Council is that the vein of culpability runs pretty long and deep. Anyone (if they have the gumption) who tries to give the culpable ones their bin bags before showing them the door has some sizeable organizational hurdles to jump over before getting to the numb of this situation.
I wonder will Councillor O’Neill or any other high ranking Councillor read any of this? I doubt it, since it would clearly mean them doing something about it. It is quite clear to me that what residents think is not in any priorty list of “things to do”. We clearly need a clear out at the top of the organisation to then work towards getting back the trust needed for residents to feel that they are valued. We can live in hope!
I know some councillors read this and not just web hound Geoff Settle. But I imagine many agree with Bob Barr that it’s all some big conspiracy theory. Of course it can’t be that because we’re talking about things we know took place, not using our imaginations. I am still bewildered as to what it would take for anybody to hold individuals responsible.
Maybe Karl is right and the problem is that they don’t want to open this as a can of worms. All I know is that they can introduce as many new policies, procedures and documents as they like but we all know they are being implemented by people who will ignore them if they want knowing full well that the consequence of even unlawful breaches is absolutely nothing. In fact more than that, they will be asked for their opinion about what action should be taken. It’s a farce.
The only elements of conspiracy in all of this are being put about by those who really do have something to hide, in yet more vain attempts at putting people off the scent. They hurriedly emptied part of ‘that building’ to provide space for the planning archives, having destroyed at a stroke those of yesteryear. But kept no formal record of what had gone on and who had done what or when. Overconfidently they obscured what they had done (gross corporate maladministration no less) by acting as though there had been no wrongdoing and conspired to hide this from everyone, until the residents in Marton Close, tired of continual brushoffs, in face of obvious malpractice went to the Ombudsman. Had this not happened the five year conspiracy of deliberately misleading the public and those residents on destroyed records would be ongoing. And claims of ‘conspiracy theorists’ would abound. As you say grey_man its a farce.
As you say Karl conspiracy runs long and deep here and would have continued but for those residents growing tired of brushoffs. They were misled by it for more than the destruction of records. Planners told them a few times if the developer wanted to use their cul de sac as an access to his development plot, he would have to make a fresh planning application. No application was made and the Council did not press for one to be made. Officers however had a meeting with the developer to discuss crossing the footpath and gave the developer its specification for the footpath crossing but never disclosed this to the residents, who continued to have faith in the planners assurances. As we all know, from the Ombudsman’s report, the developer used the cul de sac as the route to his site with the Council’s agreement and without making the promised fresh application.