Sir Bob Russell says Colchester Council planners are 'inflexible and rigid' amid claims they are holding back on £6million veterans project

Sir Bob Russell says Colchester Council planners are 'inflexible and rigid' amid claims they are holding back on £6million veterans project

Sir Bob Russell says Colchester Council planners are 'inflexible and rigid' amid claims they are holding back on £6million veterans project

First published in News
Last updated

A £6MILLION project in Colchester to help war veterans get back on their feet could have been ruined by Colchester Council, the town’s MP has claimed.

Prime Minister David Cameron allocated the cash to fund temporary and permanent housing for veterans in the town.

But Sir Bob Russell says the project has been held up because of Colchester Council’s “inflexibility and rigidness”.

He said more than six months ago a suitable plot of land was identified by him and housing trust Riverside, for the project.

Agreement had been reached with the private landowner to buy the land.

Initial plans were made and the name Helmand House selected.

But Sir Bob said when council planning officers got involved, they put the brakes on the project, because the land was not zoned for housing.

He also said he was told homes specifically set aside for Armed Forces veterans are not classed as social housing. Sir Bob said: “I despaired Colchester Council, which is in charge of a Garrison town, was so rigid and inflexible.

“To me, the landowner had made a real gesture and it was thrown back in their face.”

It is understood Riverside are now looking at a number of other sites in the borough.

SEE TODAY'S GAZETTE FOR THE FULL STORY

Comments (39)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:06pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Say It As It Is OK? says...

Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet!
Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet! Say It As It Is OK?
  • Score: 38

5:10pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Say It As It Is OK? says...

On this subject it's clear the Planners may not be following the spirit of the project but if they were less flexible and less rigid they would be criticised for favouritism. Now Bob wouldn't want that! Particularly as his own stance on the development of Jumbo was extremely rigid and clearly inflexible. Can't have it both ways Bob, talk to your Son, he works in the CBC planning office!
On this subject it's clear the Planners may not be following the spirit of the project but if they were less flexible and less rigid they would be criticised for favouritism. Now Bob wouldn't want that! Particularly as his own stance on the development of Jumbo was extremely rigid and clearly inflexible. Can't have it both ways Bob, talk to your Son, he works in the CBC planning office! Say It As It Is OK?
  • Score: 39

10:18pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Shoosh1905 says...

Bob outraged? How much was he due to make out of this little development. I don't believe this man has a clue about what's good for this town! If you vote for Bob your mad get him out!!!
Bob outraged? How much was he due to make out of this little development. I don't believe this man has a clue about what's good for this town! If you vote for Bob your mad get him out!!! Shoosh1905
  • Score: 15

10:56pm Mon 21 Jul 14

jut1972 says...

Like Bob was flexible over Jumbo...
Lib dems have a word with him he's not helping you you know...
Like Bob was flexible over Jumbo... Lib dems have a word with him he's not helping you you know... jut1972
  • Score: 26

11:11pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Boris says...

Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet!
This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.
[quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet![/p][/quote]This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly. Boris
  • Score: -27

11:20pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Boris says...

I should have added that Bob, as reported here, was bang out of order. It doesn't matter who the housing is for, for war veterans or anyone else. Planning guidelines must be respected. it is the planners, and the planning committee, and certainly not the MP, who determine whether a piece of land is suitable as a building plot.
The same, obviously, goes for Jumbo, which is a listed building and therefore must not be disfigured by a gimcrack commercial development. In this case, bob was in the right. There is no scope for flexibility over Jumbo, and it is idle to claim otherwise.
I should have added that Bob, as reported here, was bang out of order. It doesn't matter who the housing is for, for war veterans or anyone else. Planning guidelines must be respected. it is the planners, and the planning committee, and certainly not the MP, who determine whether a piece of land is suitable as a building plot. The same, obviously, goes for Jumbo, which is a listed building and therefore must not be disfigured by a gimcrack commercial development. In this case, bob was in the right. There is no scope for flexibility over Jumbo, and it is idle to claim otherwise. Boris
  • Score: -23

12:10am Tue 22 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

Boris wrote:
I should have added that Bob, as reported here, was bang out of order. It doesn't matter who the housing is for, for war veterans or anyone else. Planning guidelines must be respected. it is the planners, and the planning committee, and certainly not the MP, who determine whether a piece of land is suitable as a building plot.
The same, obviously, goes for Jumbo, which is a listed building and therefore must not be disfigured by a gimcrack commercial development. In this case, bob was in the right. There is no scope for flexibility over Jumbo, and it is idle to claim otherwise.
Boris, it's me angry, and on jumbo I have to pull you up and state my disagreement with your comment. Jumbo is not an ancient monument, it's a victorian water tower of architecture, which while of technical interest to fans of the victorian period, is not worthy of bring preserved as it is at whatever cost, even if by support of indirect taxation. It's time to move on, use jumbo's quite amazing outline to develop a new productive structure, which will pay it'd way.
[quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: I should have added that Bob, as reported here, was bang out of order. It doesn't matter who the housing is for, for war veterans or anyone else. Planning guidelines must be respected. it is the planners, and the planning committee, and certainly not the MP, who determine whether a piece of land is suitable as a building plot. The same, obviously, goes for Jumbo, which is a listed building and therefore must not be disfigured by a gimcrack commercial development. In this case, bob was in the right. There is no scope for flexibility over Jumbo, and it is idle to claim otherwise.[/p][/quote]Boris, it's me angry, and on jumbo I have to pull you up and state my disagreement with your comment. Jumbo is not an ancient monument, it's a victorian water tower of architecture, which while of technical interest to fans of the victorian period, is not worthy of bring preserved as it is at whatever cost, even if by support of indirect taxation. It's time to move on, use jumbo's quite amazing outline to develop a new productive structure, which will pay it'd way. Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 23

6:22am Tue 22 Jul 14

Say It As It Is OK? says...

Boris wrote:
Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet!
This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.
Bob will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.

Been there, Done that! All talk, he failed abysmally!
[quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet![/p][/quote]This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.[/p][/quote]Bob will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly. Been there, Done that! All talk, he failed abysmally! Say It As It Is OK?
  • Score: 17

6:29am Tue 22 Jul 14

Shrubendlad says...

Boris wrote:
I should have added that Bob, as reported here, was bang out of order. It doesn't matter who the housing is for, for war veterans or anyone else. Planning guidelines must be respected. it is the planners, and the planning committee, and certainly not the MP, who determine whether a piece of land is suitable as a building plot.
The same, obviously, goes for Jumbo, which is a listed building and therefore must not be disfigured by a gimcrack commercial development. In this case, bob was in the right. There is no scope for flexibility over Jumbo, and it is idle to claim otherwise.
Once again the Jumbo issue raised by Russells Anoraks.
A Grade 2 structure can be DEMOLISHED. Stop brainwashing the town about the Law.
Mark Russell needs to teach his father about Planning Law.
KRO-Kick Russell Out.
[quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: I should have added that Bob, as reported here, was bang out of order. It doesn't matter who the housing is for, for war veterans or anyone else. Planning guidelines must be respected. it is the planners, and the planning committee, and certainly not the MP, who determine whether a piece of land is suitable as a building plot. The same, obviously, goes for Jumbo, which is a listed building and therefore must not be disfigured by a gimcrack commercial development. In this case, bob was in the right. There is no scope for flexibility over Jumbo, and it is idle to claim otherwise.[/p][/quote]Once again the Jumbo issue raised by Russells Anoraks. A Grade 2 structure can be DEMOLISHED. Stop brainwashing the town about the Law. Mark Russell needs to teach his father about Planning Law. KRO-Kick Russell Out. Shrubendlad
  • Score: 16

7:07am Tue 22 Jul 14

Shrubendlad says...

Lets face it the Veterans housing issue is a vote counting exercise for next May.
Russell cant count on the 4000 Labour votes he "borrowed" in 2010-hes been attacking Colchester Labour party for 4 solid years.
He thinks by replacing his friend the discredited Mike Hancock on the Defence Committee and focusing on army housing he will pick up the Army vote-2/3000.Wrong-Ar
my families can see behind the Clowns mask.
KRO-Kick Russell Out.
Lets face it the Veterans housing issue is a vote counting exercise for next May. Russell cant count on the 4000 Labour votes he "borrowed" in 2010-hes been attacking Colchester Labour party for 4 solid years. He thinks by replacing his friend the discredited Mike Hancock on the Defence Committee and focusing on army housing he will pick up the Army vote-2/3000.Wrong-Ar my families can see behind the Clowns mask. KRO-Kick Russell Out. Shrubendlad
  • Score: 15

8:13am Tue 22 Jul 14

RonnieClegg says...

And of course, the landowner's "real gesture" meant was rubbing his hands in glee at the prospect of selling land that was otherwise not zoned for housing for the project. Our armed forces do a brave, tough job - but housing is housing, whoever it's for. Goodness knows there's plenty of other land scheduled to be built over in Colchester without adding more.
And of course, the landowner's "real gesture" meant was rubbing his hands in glee at the prospect of selling land that was otherwise not zoned for housing for the project. Our armed forces do a brave, tough job - but housing is housing, whoever it's for. Goodness knows there's plenty of other land scheduled to be built over in Colchester without adding more. RonnieClegg
  • Score: 11

8:18am Tue 22 Jul 14

RonnieClegg says...

And of course, the landowner's "real gesture" meant he was...
And of course, the landowner's "real gesture" meant he was... RonnieClegg
  • Score: 0

9:16am Tue 22 Jul 14

Shrubendlad says...

RonnieClegg wrote:
And of course, the landowner's "real gesture" meant was rubbing his hands in glee at the prospect of selling land that was otherwise not zoned for housing for the project. Our armed forces do a brave, tough job - but housing is housing, whoever it's for. Goodness knows there's plenty of other land scheduled to be built over in Colchester without adding more.
The housing has to be in his constituency to ask for the votes.
The Jaywick area is run down with loads of building potential.
Of the 22151 votes he picked up in 2010-1000 will have died, the Students wont vote for a man who trebled their tuition fees, the coalition participation will have cost another 2000 votes and young voters wont vote for a 69 year old.
If Russell picks up 10,000 in May it will be a miracle!!
KRO.
[quote][p][bold]RonnieClegg[/bold] wrote: And of course, the landowner's "real gesture" meant was rubbing his hands in glee at the prospect of selling land that was otherwise not zoned for housing for the project. Our armed forces do a brave, tough job - but housing is housing, whoever it's for. Goodness knows there's plenty of other land scheduled to be built over in Colchester without adding more.[/p][/quote]The housing has to be in his constituency to ask for the votes. The Jaywick area is run down with loads of building potential. Of the 22151 votes he picked up in 2010-1000 will have died, the Students wont vote for a man who trebled their tuition fees, the coalition participation will have cost another 2000 votes and young voters wont vote for a 69 year old. If Russell picks up 10,000 in May it will be a miracle!! KRO. Shrubendlad
  • Score: 6

9:53am Tue 22 Jul 14

sam vines says...

I cannot see the logic behind this giving cash to Garrison towns very few military personnel come from Colchester and those who are injured out of service probably do not want to settle down here but closer to their home towns nearer their parents and other family members. This money should have gone to organisations like the British Legion and Haig Housing who have the respect and the ability and the support staff to achieve something lasting without political interference.
I cannot see the logic behind this giving cash to Garrison towns very few military personnel come from Colchester and those who are injured out of service probably do not want to settle down here but closer to their home towns nearer their parents and other family members. This money should have gone to organisations like the British Legion and Haig Housing who have the respect and the ability and the support staff to achieve something lasting without political interference. sam vines
  • Score: 12

1:13pm Tue 22 Jul 14

AngryManNewTown says...

Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet!
I still have not had my formal response from Sir Bobalot about the knife crime issue!!!
[quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet![/p][/quote]I still have not had my formal response from Sir Bobalot about the knife crime issue!!! AngryManNewTown
  • Score: 10

3:33pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Shrubendlad says...

AngryManNewTown wrote:
Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet!
I still have not had my formal response from Sir Bobalot about the knife crime issue!!!
3.30 Tues-BBC Parliament-Russell trying to speak in the nonsense Recess Debate-??What important issue is he going to address??
[quote][p][bold]AngryManNewTown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet![/p][/quote]I still have not had my formal response from Sir Bobalot about the knife crime issue!!![/p][/quote]3.30 Tues-BBC Parliament-Russell trying to speak in the nonsense Recess Debate-??What important issue is he going to address?? Shrubendlad
  • Score: 1

3:57pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Shrubendlad says...

TUES 15.50pm.BBC Parliament Recess Debate.
Russell has made a five minute statement in the HofC Chamber.
What did he say at this important time for Colchester?
Well he waffled on about the 40th anniversary of the Health and Safety at Work Act.
The Recess Debate is a nonsense session before MPs go on holiday to get themselves on record for Hansard. The house had about 20 members present.
Once again it demonstrates that he has completely lost the Colchester plot and must go.
KRO
TUES 15.50pm.BBC Parliament Recess Debate. Russell has made a five minute statement in the HofC Chamber. What did he say at this important time for Colchester? Well he waffled on about the 40th anniversary of the Health and Safety at Work Act. The Recess Debate is a nonsense session before MPs go on holiday to get themselves on record for Hansard. The house had about 20 members present. Once again it demonstrates that he has completely lost the Colchester plot and must go. KRO Shrubendlad
  • Score: 10

12:48am Wed 23 Jul 14

Boris says...

Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Boris wrote:
Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet!
This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.
Bob will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.

Been there, Done that! All talk, he failed abysmally!
Fair enough, if you actually asked him to do something for you, and he failed, then you are entitled to say what you say. My issue is with the ones on here who just talk and take no action.
[quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet![/p][/quote]This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.[/p][/quote]Bob will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly. Been there, Done that! All talk, he failed abysmally![/p][/quote]Fair enough, if you actually asked him to do something for you, and he failed, then you are entitled to say what you say. My issue is with the ones on here who just talk and take no action. Boris
  • Score: 1

12:53am Wed 23 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Boris wrote:
Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet!
This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.
Bob will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.

Been there, Done that! All talk, he failed abysmally!
Boris, you do seem to be a bob supporter. I really don't have a problem with that - your judgement. But perhaps you need to read the writing on the wall of threads. Bob has crossed a number of lines recently. He has tripped the totalizer switch on the creeping dissonance calculator of more Colchesterians - and been found wanting.
[quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet![/p][/quote]This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.[/p][/quote]Bob will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly. Been there, Done that! All talk, he failed abysmally![/p][/quote]Boris, you do seem to be a bob supporter. I really don't have a problem with that - your judgement. But perhaps you need to read the writing on the wall of threads. Bob has crossed a number of lines recently. He has tripped the totalizer switch on the creeping dissonance calculator of more Colchesterians - and been found wanting. Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 9

12:57am Wed 23 Jul 14

Boris says...

Angry of Lexden wrote:
Boris wrote:
I should have added that Bob, as reported here, was bang out of order. It doesn't matter who the housing is for, for war veterans or anyone else. Planning guidelines must be respected. it is the planners, and the planning committee, and certainly not the MP, who determine whether a piece of land is suitable as a building plot.
The same, obviously, goes for Jumbo, which is a listed building and therefore must not be disfigured by a gimcrack commercial development. In this case, bob was in the right. There is no scope for flexibility over Jumbo, and it is idle to claim otherwise.
Boris, it's me angry, and on jumbo I have to pull you up and state my disagreement with your comment. Jumbo is not an ancient monument, it's a victorian water tower of architecture, which while of technical interest to fans of the victorian period, is not worthy of bring preserved as it is at whatever cost, even if by support of indirect taxation. It's time to move on, use jumbo's quite amazing outline to develop a new productive structure, which will pay it'd way.
Angry, you have stated your personal opinion, and just as you say I am wrong, I say you are wrong. We shall never agree. At one point (in May, I think), it seemed we could have a dialogue, but when I proposed to meet you to discuss it at the foot of Jumbo, you ignored my challenge. So I am not going to re-open that argument with you now.
[quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: I should have added that Bob, as reported here, was bang out of order. It doesn't matter who the housing is for, for war veterans or anyone else. Planning guidelines must be respected. it is the planners, and the planning committee, and certainly not the MP, who determine whether a piece of land is suitable as a building plot. The same, obviously, goes for Jumbo, which is a listed building and therefore must not be disfigured by a gimcrack commercial development. In this case, bob was in the right. There is no scope for flexibility over Jumbo, and it is idle to claim otherwise.[/p][/quote]Boris, it's me angry, and on jumbo I have to pull you up and state my disagreement with your comment. Jumbo is not an ancient monument, it's a victorian water tower of architecture, which while of technical interest to fans of the victorian period, is not worthy of bring preserved as it is at whatever cost, even if by support of indirect taxation. It's time to move on, use jumbo's quite amazing outline to develop a new productive structure, which will pay it'd way.[/p][/quote]Angry, you have stated your personal opinion, and just as you say I am wrong, I say you are wrong. We shall never agree. At one point (in May, I think), it seemed we could have a dialogue, but when I proposed to meet you to discuss it at the foot of Jumbo, you ignored my challenge. So I am not going to re-open that argument with you now. Boris
  • Score: -5

1:05am Wed 23 Jul 14

Boris says...

Shrubendlad wrote:
Boris wrote:
I should have added that Bob, as reported here, was bang out of order. It doesn't matter who the housing is for, for war veterans or anyone else. Planning guidelines must be respected. it is the planners, and the planning committee, and certainly not the MP, who determine whether a piece of land is suitable as a building plot.
The same, obviously, goes for Jumbo, which is a listed building and therefore must not be disfigured by a gimcrack commercial development. In this case, bob was in the right. There is no scope for flexibility over Jumbo, and it is idle to claim otherwise.
Once again the Jumbo issue raised by Russells Anoraks.
A Grade 2 structure can be DEMOLISHED. Stop brainwashing the town about the Law.
Mark Russell needs to teach his father about Planning Law.
KRO-Kick Russell Out.
The Jumbo issue was raised by Say It. Get your facts right, laddie.
.
And yes, a listed building can be demolished, with planning permission to do so. But CBC will not give such permission, and quite right too.
.
You clearly have no knowledge of the law, so spare us your irrelevant opinions on the subject.
[quote][p][bold]Shrubendlad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: I should have added that Bob, as reported here, was bang out of order. It doesn't matter who the housing is for, for war veterans or anyone else. Planning guidelines must be respected. it is the planners, and the planning committee, and certainly not the MP, who determine whether a piece of land is suitable as a building plot. The same, obviously, goes for Jumbo, which is a listed building and therefore must not be disfigured by a gimcrack commercial development. In this case, bob was in the right. There is no scope for flexibility over Jumbo, and it is idle to claim otherwise.[/p][/quote]Once again the Jumbo issue raised by Russells Anoraks. A Grade 2 structure can be DEMOLISHED. Stop brainwashing the town about the Law. Mark Russell needs to teach his father about Planning Law. KRO-Kick Russell Out.[/p][/quote]The Jumbo issue was raised by Say It. Get your facts right, laddie. . And yes, a listed building can be demolished, with planning permission to do so. But CBC will not give such permission, and quite right too. . You clearly have no knowledge of the law, so spare us your irrelevant opinions on the subject. Boris
  • Score: -6

1:16am Wed 23 Jul 14

Boris says...

RonnieClegg wrote:
And of course, the landowner's "real gesture" meant was rubbing his hands in glee at the prospect of selling land that was otherwise not zoned for housing for the project. Our armed forces do a brave, tough job - but housing is housing, whoever it's for. Goodness knows there's plenty of other land scheduled to be built over in Colchester without adding more.
Well said, Ronnie. Glad you got a majority of Likes.
Does anyone know where this land is? The Gazette does not tell us, not even in the printed paper.
[quote][p][bold]RonnieClegg[/bold] wrote: And of course, the landowner's "real gesture" meant was rubbing his hands in glee at the prospect of selling land that was otherwise not zoned for housing for the project. Our armed forces do a brave, tough job - but housing is housing, whoever it's for. Goodness knows there's plenty of other land scheduled to be built over in Colchester without adding more.[/p][/quote]Well said, Ronnie. Glad you got a majority of Likes. Does anyone know where this land is? The Gazette does not tell us, not even in the printed paper. Boris
  • Score: -3

1:40am Wed 23 Jul 14

Boris says...

Angry of Lexden wrote:
Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Boris wrote:
Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet!
This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.
Bob will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.

Been there, Done that! All talk, he failed abysmally!
Boris, you do seem to be a bob supporter. I really don't have a problem with that - your judgement. But perhaps you need to read the writing on the wall of threads. Bob has crossed a number of lines recently. He has tripped the totalizer switch on the creeping dissonance calculator of more Colchesterians - and been found wanting.
Yes, Angry, it is true I have voted for Bob in recent years, for two main reasons. He supported several local campaigns that were important to me, such as Jumbo but also several others. Also, I look at the other candidates, and I could not possibly vote for any of them. I have no time for any of the parties nationally, but I respect certain individual members of those parties (none of whom, as it happens, is standing for parliament next year).
[quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet![/p][/quote]This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.[/p][/quote]Bob will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly. Been there, Done that! All talk, he failed abysmally![/p][/quote]Boris, you do seem to be a bob supporter. I really don't have a problem with that - your judgement. But perhaps you need to read the writing on the wall of threads. Bob has crossed a number of lines recently. He has tripped the totalizer switch on the creeping dissonance calculator of more Colchesterians - and been found wanting.[/p][/quote]Yes, Angry, it is true I have voted for Bob in recent years, for two main reasons. He supported several local campaigns that were important to me, such as Jumbo but also several others. Also, I look at the other candidates, and I could not possibly vote for any of them. I have no time for any of the parties nationally, but I respect certain individual members of those parties (none of whom, as it happens, is standing for parliament next year). Boris
  • Score: -2

6:54am Wed 23 Jul 14

Shrubendlad says...

Boris wrote:
Shrubendlad wrote:
Boris wrote:
I should have added that Bob, as reported here, was bang out of order. It doesn't matter who the housing is for, for war veterans or anyone else. Planning guidelines must be respected. it is the planners, and the planning committee, and certainly not the MP, who determine whether a piece of land is suitable as a building plot.
The same, obviously, goes for Jumbo, which is a listed building and therefore must not be disfigured by a gimcrack commercial development. In this case, bob was in the right. There is no scope for flexibility over Jumbo, and it is idle to claim otherwise.
Once again the Jumbo issue raised by Russells Anoraks.
A Grade 2 structure can be DEMOLISHED. Stop brainwashing the town about the Law.
Mark Russell needs to teach his father about Planning Law.
KRO-Kick Russell Out.
The Jumbo issue was raised by Say It. Get your facts right, laddie.
.
And yes, a listed building can be demolished, with planning permission to do so. But CBC will not give such permission, and quite right too.
.
You clearly have no knowledge of the law, so spare us your irrelevant opinions on the subject.
Once again Boris you are waffling.
Yes I do have an extensive legal knowledge and qualifications-That tower will be demolished unless your bunch of Anoraks becomes less "RIGID AND MORE FLEXIBLE"-to quote your hero.
Once again stop trying to brainwash the town old chap.
[quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shrubendlad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: I should have added that Bob, as reported here, was bang out of order. It doesn't matter who the housing is for, for war veterans or anyone else. Planning guidelines must be respected. it is the planners, and the planning committee, and certainly not the MP, who determine whether a piece of land is suitable as a building plot. The same, obviously, goes for Jumbo, which is a listed building and therefore must not be disfigured by a gimcrack commercial development. In this case, bob was in the right. There is no scope for flexibility over Jumbo, and it is idle to claim otherwise.[/p][/quote]Once again the Jumbo issue raised by Russells Anoraks. A Grade 2 structure can be DEMOLISHED. Stop brainwashing the town about the Law. Mark Russell needs to teach his father about Planning Law. KRO-Kick Russell Out.[/p][/quote]The Jumbo issue was raised by Say It. Get your facts right, laddie. . And yes, a listed building can be demolished, with planning permission to do so. But CBC will not give such permission, and quite right too. . You clearly have no knowledge of the law, so spare us your irrelevant opinions on the subject.[/p][/quote]Once again Boris you are waffling. Yes I do have an extensive legal knowledge and qualifications-That tower will be demolished unless your bunch of Anoraks becomes less "RIGID AND MORE FLEXIBLE"-to quote your hero. Once again stop trying to brainwash the town old chap. Shrubendlad
  • Score: 9

8:32am Wed 23 Jul 14

Shrubendlad says...

Boris
I don't want to bicker with you.
I believe that after years of weak leadership the town needs a new generation of strong councillors/MPs who will take the town forward over the next 5/20 years---this is a cross party issue but Russell is the main problem.
KRO
Boris I don't want to bicker with you. I believe that after years of weak leadership the town needs a new generation of strong councillors/MPs who will take the town forward over the next 5/20 years---this is a cross party issue but Russell is the main problem. KRO Shrubendlad
  • Score: 10

12:27pm Wed 23 Jul 14

Madcowmac says...

Pity he didn't give a toss when my hubby was discharged from the forces, but told by colchester council, no housing for you, even with your spinal injuries, because you have no connection to colchester, I have lived and worked in colchester, but no connection as I to was in the forces.
Pity he didn't give a toss when my hubby was discharged from the forces, but told by colchester council, no housing for you, even with your spinal injuries, because you have no connection to colchester, I have lived and worked in colchester, but no connection as I to was in the forces. Madcowmac
  • Score: 9

5:02pm Wed 23 Jul 14

Shrubendlad says...

BORIS
Youll be pleased to know that Im off to the Channel Is for a holiday.
Hope Ive not caused you too much distress.
My thanks to Manchester University Law Faculty and Chester Law School
who taught me Planning,Defamation and Constitutional Law many years ago.
BORIS Youll be pleased to know that Im off to the Channel Is for a holiday. Hope Ive not caused you too much distress. My thanks to Manchester University Law Faculty and Chester Law School who taught me Planning,Defamation and Constitutional Law many years ago. Shrubendlad
  • Score: 3

5:18pm Wed 23 Jul 14

AngryManNewTown says...

Shrubendlad wrote:
Boris I don't want to bicker with you. I believe that after years of weak leadership the town needs a new generation of strong councillors/MPs who will take the town forward over the next 5/20 years---this is a cross party issue but Russell is the main problem. KRO
There were a number of new candidates for last years local elections. Which was nice to see, if you want change within your ward etc you will need to get behind them and give them a hand!!
[quote][p][bold]Shrubendlad[/bold] wrote: Boris I don't want to bicker with you. I believe that after years of weak leadership the town needs a new generation of strong councillors/MPs who will take the town forward over the next 5/20 years---this is a cross party issue but Russell is the main problem. KRO[/p][/quote]There were a number of new candidates for last years local elections. Which was nice to see, if you want change within your ward etc you will need to get behind them and give them a hand!! AngryManNewTown
  • Score: 2

5:57pm Wed 23 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

Boris wrote:
Angry of Lexden wrote:
Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Boris wrote:
Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet!
This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.
Bob will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.

Been there, Done that! All talk, he failed abysmally!
Boris, you do seem to be a bob supporter. I really don't have a problem with that - your judgement. But perhaps you need to read the writing on the wall of threads. Bob has crossed a number of lines recently. He has tripped the totalizer switch on the creeping dissonance calculator of more Colchesterians - and been found wanting.
Yes, Angry, it is true I have voted for Bob in recent years, for two main reasons. He supported several local campaigns that were important to me, such as Jumbo but also several others. Also, I look at the other candidates, and I could not possibly vote for any of them. I have no time for any of the parties nationally, but I respect certain individual members of those parties (none of whom, as it happens, is standing for parliament next year).
Thanks Boris for your candid and honest answer. I do believe things have drifted into decline in the town because "we", the electorate, have by default enabled a weak elected and salaried group of town officers to take over Colchester. They lack leadership and the courage to think outside the huge wobbly box "we" have allowed them to build. Perhaps we could ask Rodney Bass- he seems a fairly strong charactor? .......Joke! Bass is an interesting contrast to bob. One tends to champion low risk projects and engage whenever possible with the press about anything at all. The other has declared open war on the citizens of essex but will not talk about his antics to anyone. You and I are to blame for this mess because we let it happen. The big Q is what can we do now?
[quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet![/p][/quote]This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.[/p][/quote]Bob will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly. Been there, Done that! All talk, he failed abysmally![/p][/quote]Boris, you do seem to be a bob supporter. I really don't have a problem with that - your judgement. But perhaps you need to read the writing on the wall of threads. Bob has crossed a number of lines recently. He has tripped the totalizer switch on the creeping dissonance calculator of more Colchesterians - and been found wanting.[/p][/quote]Yes, Angry, it is true I have voted for Bob in recent years, for two main reasons. He supported several local campaigns that were important to me, such as Jumbo but also several others. Also, I look at the other candidates, and I could not possibly vote for any of them. I have no time for any of the parties nationally, but I respect certain individual members of those parties (none of whom, as it happens, is standing for parliament next year).[/p][/quote]Thanks Boris for your candid and honest answer. I do believe things have drifted into decline in the town because "we", the electorate, have by default enabled a weak elected and salaried group of town officers to take over Colchester. They lack leadership and the courage to think outside the huge wobbly box "we" have allowed them to build. Perhaps we could ask Rodney Bass- he seems a fairly strong charactor? .......Joke! Bass is an interesting contrast to bob. One tends to champion low risk projects and engage whenever possible with the press about anything at all. The other has declared open war on the citizens of essex but will not talk about his antics to anyone. You and I are to blame for this mess because we let it happen. The big Q is what can we do now? Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 3

6:11pm Wed 23 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

Boris wrote:
Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet!
This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.
Boris, just seen this. The knife thing is not boring to some of us for personal reasons I have already shared. Bob got it wrong - he seems to have folded under pressure from the lib dem party centre. I'm given to understand that despite the name of their party, the leadership is anything but democratic. I might be wrong again, but I'm given to understand bob in turn pressured local lib dem councillors to vote in the matter of Jumbo. Finally on your note - I was at one period tempted by the lib dem's, till that is I had direct dealings with Bob.
[quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet![/p][/quote]This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.[/p][/quote]Boris, just seen this. The knife thing is not boring to some of us for personal reasons I have already shared. Bob got it wrong - he seems to have folded under pressure from the lib dem party centre. I'm given to understand that despite the name of their party, the leadership is anything but democratic. I might be wrong again, but I'm given to understand bob in turn pressured local lib dem councillors to vote in the matter of Jumbo. Finally on your note - I was at one period tempted by the lib dem's, till that is I had direct dealings with Bob. Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 3

1:24am Thu 24 Jul 14

Boris says...

Shrubendlad wrote:
Boris
I don't want to bicker with you.
I believe that after years of weak leadership the town needs a new generation of strong councillors/MPs who will take the town forward over the next 5/20 years---this is a cross party issue but Russell is the main problem.
KRO
Thanks, Shrubendlad, I don't want to bicker with you either. I hate bickering, except with Jess Jephcott, a self-confessed wind-up merchant, so it is quite fun to argue with him.
[quote][p][bold]Shrubendlad[/bold] wrote: Boris I don't want to bicker with you. I believe that after years of weak leadership the town needs a new generation of strong councillors/MPs who will take the town forward over the next 5/20 years---this is a cross party issue but Russell is the main problem. KRO[/p][/quote]Thanks, Shrubendlad, I don't want to bicker with you either. I hate bickering, except with Jess Jephcott, a self-confessed wind-up merchant, so it is quite fun to argue with him. Boris
  • Score: -3

1:32am Thu 24 Jul 14

Boris says...

Shrubendlad wrote:
BORIS
Youll be pleased to know that Im off to the Channel Is for a holiday.
Hope Ive not caused you too much distress.
My thanks to Manchester University Law Faculty and Chester Law School
who taught me Planning,Defamation and Constitutional Law many years ago.
Have a great holiday, Shrubendlad. Support Guernsey and/or Jersey in the Commonwealth Games.
No, you have not distressed me. And congratulations on your legal studies. Since you are an expert on the law of defamation, I'd better be careful what I say to you in this forum in future.....
[quote][p][bold]Shrubendlad[/bold] wrote: BORIS Youll be pleased to know that Im off to the Channel Is for a holiday. Hope Ive not caused you too much distress. My thanks to Manchester University Law Faculty and Chester Law School who taught me Planning,Defamation and Constitutional Law many years ago.[/p][/quote]Have a great holiday, Shrubendlad. Support Guernsey and/or Jersey in the Commonwealth Games. No, you have not distressed me. And congratulations on your legal studies. Since you are an expert on the law of defamation, I'd better be careful what I say to you in this forum in future..... Boris
  • Score: -3

1:46am Thu 24 Jul 14

Boris says...

Angry of Lexden wrote:
Boris wrote:
Angry of Lexden wrote:
Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Boris wrote:
Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet!
This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.
Bob will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.

Been there, Done that! All talk, he failed abysmally!
Boris, you do seem to be a bob supporter. I really don't have a problem with that - your judgement. But perhaps you need to read the writing on the wall of threads. Bob has crossed a number of lines recently. He has tripped the totalizer switch on the creeping dissonance calculator of more Colchesterians - and been found wanting.
Yes, Angry, it is true I have voted for Bob in recent years, for two main reasons. He supported several local campaigns that were important to me, such as Jumbo but also several others. Also, I look at the other candidates, and I could not possibly vote for any of them. I have no time for any of the parties nationally, but I respect certain individual members of those parties (none of whom, as it happens, is standing for parliament next year).
Thanks Boris for your candid and honest answer. I do believe things have drifted into decline in the town because "we", the electorate, have by default enabled a weak elected and salaried group of town officers to take over Colchester. They lack leadership and the courage to think outside the huge wobbly box "we" have allowed them to build. Perhaps we could ask Rodney Bass- he seems a fairly strong charactor? .......Joke! Bass is an interesting contrast to bob. One tends to champion low risk projects and engage whenever possible with the press about anything at all. The other has declared open war on the citizens of essex but will not talk about his antics to anyone. You and I are to blame for this mess because we let it happen. The big Q is what can we do now?
Angry, I don't see what we can do about Rodney Bass's antics. We don't live in Great Totham so we can't vote him out. All we can do is vote for parties other than Conservative in the hope of reducing them to a minority party, so that Bass, Finch etc go into opposition. But we have about 3 years to wait for that.
You could also say we are to blame for not standing for election, getting elected, and running the town properly. But that is easier said than done. You have to belong to a party to do that, and you have to observe party discipline. We would not enjoy that.
The Conservative administration who ran Colchester till 2008 were a pretty inept bunch who were totally dominated by the senior officers. Their decisions still constrain the present coalition administration.
[quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet![/p][/quote]This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.[/p][/quote]Bob will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly. Been there, Done that! All talk, he failed abysmally![/p][/quote]Boris, you do seem to be a bob supporter. I really don't have a problem with that - your judgement. But perhaps you need to read the writing on the wall of threads. Bob has crossed a number of lines recently. He has tripped the totalizer switch on the creeping dissonance calculator of more Colchesterians - and been found wanting.[/p][/quote]Yes, Angry, it is true I have voted for Bob in recent years, for two main reasons. He supported several local campaigns that were important to me, such as Jumbo but also several others. Also, I look at the other candidates, and I could not possibly vote for any of them. I have no time for any of the parties nationally, but I respect certain individual members of those parties (none of whom, as it happens, is standing for parliament next year).[/p][/quote]Thanks Boris for your candid and honest answer. I do believe things have drifted into decline in the town because "we", the electorate, have by default enabled a weak elected and salaried group of town officers to take over Colchester. They lack leadership and the courage to think outside the huge wobbly box "we" have allowed them to build. Perhaps we could ask Rodney Bass- he seems a fairly strong charactor? .......Joke! Bass is an interesting contrast to bob. One tends to champion low risk projects and engage whenever possible with the press about anything at all. The other has declared open war on the citizens of essex but will not talk about his antics to anyone. You and I are to blame for this mess because we let it happen. The big Q is what can we do now?[/p][/quote]Angry, I don't see what we can do about Rodney Bass's antics. We don't live in Great Totham so we can't vote him out. All we can do is vote for parties other than Conservative in the hope of reducing them to a minority party, so that Bass, Finch etc go into opposition. But we have about 3 years to wait for that. You could also say we are to blame for not standing for election, getting elected, and running the town properly. But that is easier said than done. You have to belong to a party to do that, and you have to observe party discipline. We would not enjoy that. The Conservative administration who ran Colchester till 2008 were a pretty inept bunch who were totally dominated by the senior officers. Their decisions still constrain the present coalition administration. Boris
  • Score: -1

2:04am Thu 24 Jul 14

Boris says...

Angry of Lexden wrote:
Boris wrote:
Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet!
This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.
Boris, just seen this. The knife thing is not boring to some of us for personal reasons I have already shared. Bob got it wrong - he seems to have folded under pressure from the lib dem party centre. I'm given to understand that despite the name of their party, the leadership is anything but democratic. I might be wrong again, but I'm given to understand bob in turn pressured local lib dem councillors to vote in the matter of Jumbo. Finally on your note - I was at one period tempted by the lib dem's, till that is I had direct dealings with Bob.
Angry, I am certainly worried about knives too. I have teenage grandchildren and I fear for their safety. What I find boring is you and others challenging Bob to break party discipline, which politicians cannot afford to do.
You will recall that Bob was a strong supporter of the abominable "Horkesley Park" project. That was overwhelmingly rejected by the planning committee, including all its Lib Dem members. So if Bob is so good at pressurising Lib Dem councillors, how come they did not do so in that case? I'm sure he speaks to councillors of his party, but then it is up to them whether they vote the way he invites them to.
[quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet![/p][/quote]This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.[/p][/quote]Boris, just seen this. The knife thing is not boring to some of us for personal reasons I have already shared. Bob got it wrong - he seems to have folded under pressure from the lib dem party centre. I'm given to understand that despite the name of their party, the leadership is anything but democratic. I might be wrong again, but I'm given to understand bob in turn pressured local lib dem councillors to vote in the matter of Jumbo. Finally on your note - I was at one period tempted by the lib dem's, till that is I had direct dealings with Bob.[/p][/quote]Angry, I am certainly worried about knives too. I have teenage grandchildren and I fear for their safety. What I find boring is you and others challenging Bob to break party discipline, which politicians cannot afford to do. You will recall that Bob was a strong supporter of the abominable "Horkesley Park" project. That was overwhelmingly rejected by the planning committee, including all its Lib Dem members. So if Bob is so good at pressurising Lib Dem councillors, how come they did not do so in that case? I'm sure he speaks to councillors of his party, but then it is up to them whether they vote the way he invites them to. Boris
  • Score: -2

11:15am Thu 24 Jul 14

daveb says...

I just wish Tendring council were as keen to protect our remaining green areas as Colchester appear to be.
Whilst I have the utmost respect and admiration for our Armed forces to override local planning regulations for a project that would break so many rules should be a source of disgust for Sir Bob, rather than demonising Colchester Council, theres plenty of us in Tendring suffering because of Colchesters decisions and overarching control, that can do that.
As far as the comment about Jaywick, it won't happen as long as Tendring Council is so intent of flattening what already exists in favour of overpriced sea front properties.
I just wish Tendring council were as keen to protect our remaining green areas as Colchester appear to be. Whilst I have the utmost respect and admiration for our Armed forces to override local planning regulations for a project that would break so many rules should be a source of disgust for Sir Bob, rather than demonising Colchester Council, theres plenty of us in Tendring suffering because of Colchesters decisions and overarching control, that can do that. As far as the comment about Jaywick, it won't happen as long as Tendring Council is so intent of flattening what already exists in favour of overpriced sea front properties. daveb
  • Score: 3

7:49am Sat 26 Jul 14

Over G says...

They do want they want to do, generally it is what suits them, or they run along with a tidal-wave of protest.
If you do not like what they do, or what they have done to you, trying to make a complaint about them is a bit like trying to bring down a king.
The Parliamentary Standard brigade, does not do in civil issues or attitude adjustment.
I am afraid unless a clanger in expenses or improver business dealings is the issue, we are stuck with Dr Who or (Dr Who isn't), until Colchester can find a way to get rid of him.
They do want they want to do, generally it is what suits them, or they run along with a tidal-wave of protest. If you do not like what they do, or what they have done to you, trying to make a complaint about them is a bit like trying to bring down a king. The Parliamentary Standard brigade, does not do in civil issues or attitude adjustment. I am afraid unless a clanger in expenses or improver business dealings is the issue, we are stuck with Dr Who or (Dr Who isn't), until Colchester can find a way to get rid of him. Over G
  • Score: 5

3:17pm Sat 26 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

Boris wrote:
Angry of Lexden wrote:
Boris wrote:
Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet!
This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.
Boris, just seen this. The knife thing is not boring to some of us for personal reasons I have already shared. Bob got it wrong - he seems to have folded under pressure from the lib dem party centre. I'm given to understand that despite the name of their party, the leadership is anything but democratic. I might be wrong again, but I'm given to understand bob in turn pressured local lib dem councillors to vote in the matter of Jumbo. Finally on your note - I was at one period tempted by the lib dem's, till that is I had direct dealings with Bob.
Angry, I am certainly worried about knives too. I have teenage grandchildren and I fear for their safety. What I find boring is you and others challenging Bob to break party discipline, which politicians cannot afford to do.
You will recall that Bob was a strong supporter of the abominable "Horkesley Park" project. That was overwhelmingly rejected by the planning committee, including all its Lib Dem members. So if Bob is so good at pressurising Lib Dem councillors, how come they did not do so in that case? I'm sure he speaks to councillors of his party, but then it is up to them whether they vote the way he invites them to.
Boris, sorry only just seen your response. I hadn't considered the H.park business - good point. I don't really know the inner workings of political parties. Perhaps naively, I believed the town's mp worked for the best interests of the local population, which a significant number Colchesterians seem to believe includes a move to reduce injury by knife. I seem to recall a number tory mps voting against the whip recently - I'll see if I can research the details.
[quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet![/p][/quote]This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.[/p][/quote]Boris, just seen this. The knife thing is not boring to some of us for personal reasons I have already shared. Bob got it wrong - he seems to have folded under pressure from the lib dem party centre. I'm given to understand that despite the name of their party, the leadership is anything but democratic. I might be wrong again, but I'm given to understand bob in turn pressured local lib dem councillors to vote in the matter of Jumbo. Finally on your note - I was at one period tempted by the lib dem's, till that is I had direct dealings with Bob.[/p][/quote]Angry, I am certainly worried about knives too. I have teenage grandchildren and I fear for their safety. What I find boring is you and others challenging Bob to break party discipline, which politicians cannot afford to do. You will recall that Bob was a strong supporter of the abominable "Horkesley Park" project. That was overwhelmingly rejected by the planning committee, including all its Lib Dem members. So if Bob is so good at pressurising Lib Dem councillors, how come they did not do so in that case? I'm sure he speaks to councillors of his party, but then it is up to them whether they vote the way he invites them to.[/p][/quote]Boris, sorry only just seen your response. I hadn't considered the H.park business - good point. I don't really know the inner workings of political parties. Perhaps naively, I believed the town's mp worked for the best interests of the local population, which a significant number Colchesterians seem to believe includes a move to reduce injury by knife. I seem to recall a number tory mps voting against the whip recently - I'll see if I can research the details. Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 3

5:51pm Sat 26 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

Angry of Lexden wrote:
Boris wrote:
Angry of Lexden wrote:
Boris wrote:
Say It As It Is OK? wrote:
Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet!
This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.
Boris, just seen this. The knife thing is not boring to some of us for personal reasons I have already shared. Bob got it wrong - he seems to have folded under pressure from the lib dem party centre. I'm given to understand that despite the name of their party, the leadership is anything but democratic. I might be wrong again, but I'm given to understand bob in turn pressured local lib dem councillors to vote in the matter of Jumbo. Finally on your note - I was at one period tempted by the lib dem's, till that is I had direct dealings with Bob.
Angry, I am certainly worried about knives too. I have teenage grandchildren and I fear for their safety. What I find boring is you and others challenging Bob to break party discipline, which politicians cannot afford to do.
You will recall that Bob was a strong supporter of the abominable "Horkesley Park" project. That was overwhelmingly rejected by the planning committee, including all its Lib Dem members. So if Bob is so good at pressurising Lib Dem councillors, how come they did not do so in that case? I'm sure he speaks to councillors of his party, but then it is up to them whether they vote the way he invites them to.
Boris, sorry only just seen your response. I hadn't considered the H.park business - good point. I don't really know the inner workings of political parties. Perhaps naively, I believed the town's mp worked for the best interests of the local population, which a significant number Colchesterians seem to believe includes a move to reduce injury by knife. I seem to recall a number tory mps voting against the whip recently - I'll see if I can research the details.
Boris, still looking at this, but I've found a Hansard entry for 2007 when a certain mp tabled a petition aimed to have knife crime treated in the same way as gun crime in terms of mandatory sentencing. The petition details include statistics that three times as many were killed by knives as by gun. I don't know what the ratio is now, but I'm guessing it's not heat different. So to my mind our mps situation has not improved, in fact, for the obvious reasons his credibility has crashed. I really wish this had not come to my eyes. He had good excuse to ignore a three line whip based on his 2007 position and Colchester's recent knife crime - but he bottled. Tell me if you are able, his excuse.
[quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Say It As It Is OK?[/bold] wrote: Come on Bob lets hear from you why you voted against the Government Bill to increase the penalties for people caught carrying knives? To date you have been very quiet![/p][/quote]This banging on about the vote on knives from you and others is getting boring. Write him an e-mail and you will get a reply. He is actually a very effective MP if you approach him directly instead of sniping behind hisd back. And he won't mind the fact that you, Shoosh etc are dyed-in-the-wool Tories who will never vote for him. He will still listen to you and act for you if you have presented the case convincingly.[/p][/quote]Boris, just seen this. The knife thing is not boring to some of us for personal reasons I have already shared. Bob got it wrong - he seems to have folded under pressure from the lib dem party centre. I'm given to understand that despite the name of their party, the leadership is anything but democratic. I might be wrong again, but I'm given to understand bob in turn pressured local lib dem councillors to vote in the matter of Jumbo. Finally on your note - I was at one period tempted by the lib dem's, till that is I had direct dealings with Bob.[/p][/quote]Angry, I am certainly worried about knives too. I have teenage grandchildren and I fear for their safety. What I find boring is you and others challenging Bob to break party discipline, which politicians cannot afford to do. You will recall that Bob was a strong supporter of the abominable "Horkesley Park" project. That was overwhelmingly rejected by the planning committee, including all its Lib Dem members. So if Bob is so good at pressurising Lib Dem councillors, how come they did not do so in that case? I'm sure he speaks to councillors of his party, but then it is up to them whether they vote the way he invites them to.[/p][/quote]Boris, sorry only just seen your response. I hadn't considered the H.park business - good point. I don't really know the inner workings of political parties. Perhaps naively, I believed the town's mp worked for the best interests of the local population, which a significant number Colchesterians seem to believe includes a move to reduce injury by knife. I seem to recall a number tory mps voting against the whip recently - I'll see if I can research the details.[/p][/quote]Boris, still looking at this, but I've found a Hansard entry for 2007 when a certain mp tabled a petition aimed to have knife crime treated in the same way as gun crime in terms of mandatory sentencing. The petition details include statistics that three times as many were killed by knives as by gun. I don't know what the ratio is now, but I'm guessing it's not heat different. So to my mind our mps situation has not improved, in fact, for the obvious reasons his credibility has crashed. I really wish this had not come to my eyes. He had good excuse to ignore a three line whip based on his 2007 position and Colchester's recent knife crime - but he bottled. Tell me if you are able, his excuse. Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 1

8:37am Sun 27 Jul 14

Over G says...

He is not the chap we knew of years ago and I mean years ago.
Politics at the top flight has changed him and it will change everyone, Bob's no exception.
He is a good bloke at the end of the day, however it it time now for him to leave and let someone else have a go. PREFERABLY LIB DEM !
His last tenure from 2010, was a rather cynical 4 and half years of some quite disastrous developments in the borough.
He has been in a few scrapes over the years and has boat hopped on numerous occasions, i suppose they all do that in some way.
I think quit while you are at the top.
Making mileage out of lambasting the Council, near the run up to next years big one, was an unnecessary blow.
PS: Someone is having the Gazette removing posts, on this subject. Naughty Mr Channon & Co.
He is not the chap we knew of years ago and I mean years ago. Politics at the top flight has changed him and it will change everyone, Bob's no exception. He is a good bloke at the end of the day, however it it time now for him to leave and let someone else have a go. PREFERABLY LIB DEM ! His last tenure from 2010, was a rather cynical 4 and half years of some quite disastrous developments in the borough. He has been in a few scrapes over the years and has boat hopped on numerous occasions, i suppose they all do that in some way. I think quit while you are at the top. Making mileage out of lambasting the Council, near the run up to next years big one, was an unnecessary blow. PS: Someone is having the Gazette removing posts, on this subject. Naughty Mr Channon & Co. Over G
  • Score: 3

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree