Sunday 8 November 2015

Truth, Lies and Politics

"In a propaganda war the first casualty is the truth" and it's the same in any campaign especially in the fight to reopen Manston airport.
The other quote is "never let the truth get in the way of a good story" and that is the essence of a propaganda campaign as the pro supporters have a history of salting their "facts" with a dose of truth. Take the following post:
Firstly the Girdler's were tenants albeit for a number of years therefore by definition it wasn't their hangar..
Riveroak's CEO is Stephen DeNardo is an independent director of Brookfield Property Partners based in the West Indies who with a Quatari consortium forced a buyout of Canary Wharf. He isnt the Chief Financial Officer but is the Chair of the Audit Committee and as Brookfield is listed on the New York Stock Exchange they have to abide by their rules
According to the NYSE rules "no director qualifies as 'independent' unless the board of directors affirmatively determines that the director has 'no material relationship' with the listed company, either directly or as a partner, shareholder or officer of an organization that has a relationship with the company" So why bring this tenuous statement up at all? Unless you are trying to portray Riveroak as something they aren't.

"As CFO George (Yerrall) has investors committed to 5 times any reasonable value of Manston"
This is in an apparent move to say how rich RO actually are however the statement is let down by several things. Firstly no one knows what Manston is worth but more to the point why didn't RO offer a reasonable sum in 2014 for the airport seeing it had been up for sale for 22 months previously to being bought by Ann Gloag.

"TDC officers are refusing to prepare papers for the Overview and Scrutint Committee meeting on the 16th November" 
Sorry Bryan, but did you understand the reason for the O&S Committee? Papers do not need to be prepared per se as their raison d'etre to ensure the Cabinet's decisions are based on proper controls. "It does not have any decision-making powers, but monitors the performance of the Leader and Cabinet and scrutinises services and policies throughout the district." Therefore by definition it looks at the evidence that has been prepared for the Cabinet and if they believe decisions are incorrect then they have to refer it back to the Cabinet.

"Due to the lack of a CPO the hangar is currently owned by Ann Gloag and her cronies"
Talk about incorrect and emotive. Firstly there isn't a CPO because no suitable partner has been found to start one, secondly Land registry says the owners of that company are cartner & Musgrave not Ann Gloag. (She does have a pecuniary interest but not ownership)
"Sir Roger Gale is currently calling for a coalition at TDC to vote the CPO through"
He certainly is however not for the reasons he would have you believe this is politics after all. In case anyone wondered TDC cannot vote a CPO through they have firstly to find a legitimate partner then they have to set the ball rolling and its the Secretary of State that makes the final decision based of some fairly fundamental rules.


Re Manston Airport

Section 226 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

______________________________

NOTE OF ADVICE
_______________________________
1.      The new ownership of the site since previous legal advice will be a major factor when the Council is deciding to make the CPO and when the Secretary of State is deciding whether or not to confirm a CPO. The overarching public interest test is whether there is a compelling case in the public interest. As the Circular advises (17), an authority should be sure that the purposes for which it is making the CPO sufficiently justify interfering with the human rights of those with an interest in the land affected.
 

1.      It should be emphasized that any decision to make a CPO requires proper consideration of a likely interference with the owners’ human rights. Before proceeding to any CPO the Council should seek further information on their plans for the site from the new owners. The Council must be in a position to assess the degree of interference with the landowner’s human rights, and also, if appropriate, to consider the benefits of their alternative proposals for the site to strike the public interest balance.


1.      In seeking to justify any CPO the Council would have to show that the benefits of what it proposed would be so extensive that (notwithstanding the merits of the new owners’ proposals) the public interest v human rights balance would still be in favour of the CPO.

52 comments:

  1. The sooner Tdc actually has some policies other than failed Manston the better.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The whole pleading tone of Girdler's posting is somewhat pathetic and desperate. Even more desperate is his attempt to calculate the numbers of people who can be reached by sharing the posting. He comes up with some bizarre calculation whereby the 170 people who bothered to share his post (what happened to the 9000?) somehow become 31,000 supporters. It's all a bit strange. As far as I'm aware the Girdler's had a lease which was terminated when the airport closed. They went to court and things didn't go their way, so they ended up in arbitration at the Royal Aeronautical Society. Some kind of settlement was agreed and money changed hands. Now, he's getting all militant about his family's hangar. But it isn't his family's hangar. It belongs to the legal owners of the site. It almost sounds like somebody had promised to give it back to him if the CPO went ahead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sounds about right,Go with your gut feeling,it's normanly the correct one.

      Delete
    2. If count Dracula trunned up to pay un blood and promised what ever,These people would trun to the dark side and threaten people,Oh thay do,and with Freudmann,which by now thay know all about,its like thay've all been coersed,with an airport ,oh I mean promised from Gale/Freudmann/riveroak/TDCsome/KCCsome,and last but bit least themselfs.

      Delete
  3. HUMPTY DUMPTY
    All the kings horses and all the kings men could'nt put manston together again.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dig up the runway

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yea,the runway comes to about 5million in fondations for some houses/workspace/leisure space/ect,which would mean JOBS,from day one.

      Delete
  5. Humpty Dumpty says Oh yes the hardcore under that long/deep/wide runway would easy come to 5 million pounds.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Freedom of speech does not grant you the freedom to abuse. Keep posts polite this is not a local pub where drink fuels the debate

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Humpty Dumpty agrees with you Barry,where are the others?

      Delete
    2. Freedom of speech... if you agree with Bazza and his eggy mate

      Delete
    3. Eggy here,you don't have to agree,I'm just being polite Can u?

      Delete
  7. What's the abuse? An overly prissy approach only stifles debate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. you should run your own blog then you can set the rules

      Delete
    2. Explain the abuse before you take your bat and ball home...

      Delete
    3. Why? since when did proper debate rely on language from the gutter?

      Delete
    4. What was the abuse or gutter language? There's nothing here.

      Delete
    5. Certainly there isn't. This blog has better standards than allowing it. If someone has a point to make they make it. No one needs to use such language. Standards ave to be maintained. If people don't like that then tough

      Delete
    6. Only polite language will be published and don't you have anything to say about the OP?

      Delete
    7. Whats the OP mean,Barry please.

      Delete
    8. OP = Original post. Which means lets keep on topic and stop trying to sidetrack

      Delete
    9. you raised gutter language presumably to spice u-p your OP which is simply Girdler having a moan that Manston has closed. Let him pay to keep it open

      Delete
    10. I see Girdler as soneone that loved Gloag when she bought manston,but now hates her,Now loves riveroak UNTIL they close down and build the nightmare housing which deep down they really want.Thay did'nt buy manston while it was on offer for nearly Two years,only having in the words of Tony Freudmann"Having a chance meeting"decides to link up with Freudmann and Invest in this airport,which never ever made a pound note/coin.But can have Houses on the northside,which by chance Freudmann made sure of before he said"lm making it my bisness" Come on! Can you not see the master plan here? You don't need a cristal ball for this one!
      Ask Humpty Dumpty the egg KNOWS.

      Delete
  8. Why have they pursued so much in the court of public opinion ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. do you mean SMA or Riveroak?

      Delete
    2. SMA seem to be the evangelists of the set up

      Delete
    3. SMA and evangelists are oxymorons

      Delete
    4. That would rather depend upon whether you believe what evangelists tell you Barry.

      Delete
    5. Hardly hence the repudiation with the OP

      Delete
  9. Humpty Dumpty Thinks both SMA/Riveroak they are nearly one,MP for Riveroak advises sma and Riveroak orders the MP to do their bidding.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Or is there someone else pulling the strings?
    The owners want some houses/workspace/leisure ect,
    The Riveroak Backed MP Team want an airport,which should it fail would become fullup with maxinum profit,Houses/no jobs,just houses for their share holders.Thay do what it says on the tin,PROPERTY.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And perhaps more worryingly Gale and Sma and Riveroak think they could squeeze an airport together for a few years before a property site?

      Delete
    2. Humpty Dumpty says 100% It would'nt be a perhaps its part of the Masterplan Gale/riveroak has in mind,SMA could'nt do anything then coz the airport did not work again,under riveroaks airport man Tony Freudmann.

      Delete
  11. So who thinks Riveroak is the real deal when they need propaganda to make their case

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Amongst various errors Riveroak shot themselves in the foot by hiring Freudman to make their case.

      Delete
    2. Being a struck off Lawyer is a bit of a poor mark on his CV

      Delete
    3. Although ukip also shot themselves in the foot by selecting Tory Wells as Leader. Is there nobody else that could delay Manston?

      Delete
    4. Humpty Dumpty sees being struck off as a Lawyer as the least of Freudmanns troubles,this time round.I would imagen he and quite a few others are going to be quizzed/grilled over this one.

      Delete
    5. Failing to run manston is even worse if you're trying to use public funds to run it again

      Delete
    6. Humpty Dumpty said not only public funds again but Gale/Freudmann,again,and don't forget marsh VP of Annex avation.

      Delete
  12. I don't,and I would of thought like the TDC most people following the manston story ser bit the real deal,thats why some time ago people left sma and wnm hace kept themselfs to themselfs.

    ReplyDelete
  13. It will soon be 2 years since manston closed and it will never be an airport again so thanet needs some better plans than just manston. What have ukip at kcc or tdc done?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have'nt got a clue,all I can see is that Chris Wells is protecting TAX payers from being used/robbed.

      Delete
    2. Wells and UKIP misled the public at election with essentially a fake manifesto. None of the issues are difficult and were known before election. The election should be canceled and rerun.

      Delete
    3. Most of the UKippers realized they wouldn't be able to fund the airport (as with Labour Infratil and Gloag before them) and a few of the SMA fanatics linger on with Spitfire fantasies or baggage handling jobs.

      Now Bob's Tories have the opportunity to fall on their face: Gale may have destroyed Mackinlays MP career already.

      Delete
    4. Thay all did,remember! If it had been one of Riveroaks mates the CPO would be up and running by now,with all the legal problems which would come from the legal owners to fight un court to KEEP there property,9/10ths of the law.Riveroaks cultue like freudmann would be sue every man and his dog!
      Why you might ask?Coz the land comes to hundreds of millions of £s not $ pound notes.I can't see riveroak finishing the whole nine yards,BUT I know the truth will be found by going the whole,as we brits like to say,The Whole Hog!.
      Regards Humpty Dumpty.

      Delete
    5. Gales looking to retire, he cares nothing for Mackinlays Job or anybody body elses jobs,he wants a airport,for his close freinds Freudmann and VP Marsh of Annex Aviation who are annexed to Riveroak Try building property groupect,so manston can go skint again I WONDER WHY!
      Humpty Dumpty knows,that you can be sure of,100%.

      Delete
    6. All this SHP/manston lark will always be in the history books,of Truth,lies and polítics of Great Briton.With all the palyers involed,coz take it from Me everyone un the UK are going to read/see the Truth on this one.

      Delete
  14. Humpty Dumpty 100% agees with that.It has been about Two years now,think of all the Jobs that would of happend un that time.Gale really has a lot to answer to,would you not agree?Or am I missing somethink?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anybody got any thing to say about all that? you can say what feel,your skeletons are quite safe under Anonymous!
    Where as others who have undertook to save manston airport come monster Building plot.com.USA, can't hide there Master/Monster plan.Good things come to those who wait,and the good things for East Kent are coming,JOBS ect.Manston Airport has sucked the life out of the local área for to long,Imagen the fulture remember the past!
    Humpty Dumpty

    ReplyDelete