26 August (Part 2) - Suspicions are not proof
I
have been trying to check on whether the planning conspiracy theorists have a point. It is true that there’s an awful
lot of photos of Councillors alongside a certain Sikh family and no other
business in the borough is so consistently favoured and we all wonder why.
In 2017 a
plan was submitted for nine houses on the Leather Bottle site but 17/01745/FUL was rejected. Two Bishops plus John Davey were on the Committee at the time.
The same plan was
resubmitted in 2018 with the same result.
A different tack was then taken. Plans for a 70 bed care home,20/00857/FULM, were
submitted on 14th April 2020 but rejected on the grounds that Bexley already had
more than enough care homes. The same plan was
put in again on 4th November, 20/02852/FULM, and accepted. Suddenly Bexley
needed care homes. What changed? Hard to tell because Planning Agendas from
March to June are all missing, maybe Covid is a factor. For the 2021 Civic year Brian
Bishop became Planning Vice-Chairman and two years later Chairman.
It sheds no light on why care homes were needed in November but not in April.
The permission must have lapsed by now.
The
pictures of Brian Bishop alongside the Singhs
began to appear a year before
him becoming Chairman.
There must be a link but all the Leather Bottle applications since 2020 have been refused.
At 238 Woolwich Road since
the concrete slab was
mysteriously approved following rejection by Councillors, every application that
followed has been approved but they weren't especially controversial. 95 Woolwich Road applications
pre-date Councillor Bishop’s unwise photographs, so not really an issue.
The conspiracy theorists need more, in particular why Councillor Bishop showed up at Oakwood apparently without the prior knowledge of the Mayor.
All they have at the moment is…
• An unwise relationship between numerous Councillors and the Singhs with many photographs as evidence.
• A close association with a convict who put Bexley residents at risk.
• His house visitor backed an application identical to a previously rejected one.
• A Planning Committee Chairman and close friend of a housing developer is now elevated to Cabinet Member for Housing.
• Serving Councillors who approved planning applications without declaring a possible conflict of interest.
• A failure to follow through on Enforcement Notices.
• Conservative electoral endorsements through Nomination papers.
• Councillors negotiating and backing a scheme which involves building on Metropolitan Open Land.
Is that No Smoke Without Fire or does it merely prove that Bexley
Councillors can be reckless and possibly just plain stupid?