search pnForum latest posts Note: Registered users can subscribe to notifications about new posts Note: Registered users can subscribe to notifications about new posts

to previous topic Print topic to next topic

Start ::  Cornwall24 Discussion ::  Cornwall24 Discussion Board ::  The dangers of the SWRDA
Moderated by: Admins

Goto page : Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 Next Page
Bottom 

The dangers of the SWRDA

CK Posted: 17.11.2006, 07:36



registered: Apr. 2006
Posts: 383

Status: offline
last visit: 08.01.09
Tolskithy, have a look on the CPR site, the TRIP plan does not include crofty
Top  Profile send PM
 
morgarrow Posted: 17.11.2006, 07:36

morgarrow

registered: May. 2005
Posts: 379

Status: offline
last visit: 04.01.09
QuoteI see that Kerrier have approved the plans for Pool - which covers the area the RDA want. Three things spring to mind - why do Kerrier just back all of this?......


The Lib Dems, Labour and MK all have councillors representing their parties on Kerrier. Are they all in agreement with what's going on? Or might some of them just as well be independents ie they don't consult with their respective organisations or don't meet as a group and discuss issues i.e. they might as well be independents that can easily be divided and ruled (the story of Cornwall it seems to me).
Top  Profile send PM Homepage
 
Ian Posted: 18.11.2006, 11:15



registered: May. 2005
Posts: 334

Status: offline
last visit: 28.11.08
QuoteThe Lib Dems, Labour and MK all have councillors representing their parties on Kerrier. Are they all in agreement with what's going on?....

I think it's fair enough for councillors to vote with their conscience and if councillors or political groupings on the council support SWRDA/CPR plans that's fine, but if the public in Kerrier don't know what councillors/party groupings support or don't support then Kerrier for one, becomes a politically dark place and we're all left without even a sliver of a candle (in a matter of speaking). Camborne MK are the only political group that have voiced its opposition in the press so I suppose we know how MK stands at a town council level, but as for other groupings :?:

The only time we seem to get information (and I repeat what other members of the public say frequently, because it's necessary even if it's only to tweak their conscience, is during the run up to an election when we get an unstoppable flood of propaganda through the letterbox from the Lib Dems and New Labour).

QuoteThe five Cornish MPs today released a statement of their intent to argue and argue strongly for a powerful, directly elected strategic body for Cornwall as the cornerstone of the future governance of the Duchy.

Having lightly criticised the Lib Dems at a district level I welcome the above but even when we get a powerful directly elected strategic body for Cornwall, it will still be important to keep the democratic process at a more 'local' level alive and also public involvement in it.
Top  Profile send PM Homepage
 
TolskithyTribune Posted: 18.11.2006, 16:39



registered: Apr. 2006
Posts: 214

Status: offline
last visit: 19.11.08
Yes some interesting stuff there Ian. It seems there are a number of issues - whether cornwall has a strategic body and who runs it are pretty important, but what about real debate about options and alternatives to current policy? Seems that one reason why most councillors support the rda and urc is that we effectivley have a one party state where the major parties all follow the same policies. One reason i guess why so few people vote theres no real difference is there?
Top  Profile send PM
 
TolskithyTribune Posted: 19.11.2006, 20:18



registered: Apr. 2006
Posts: 214

Status: offline
last visit: 19.11.08
Just to reply to CK
The CPRAAP does include the crofty land see the maps online at kerrier
CPR P5 and CPR R1
Top  Profile send PM
 
CK Posted: 20.11.2006, 07:41



registered: Apr. 2006
Posts: 383

Status: offline
last visit: 08.01.09
You're right on that one TT, but that wasn't the plan approved as far as I'm aware. That plan was CPR's draft plan drawn up in 2001. Whatever it is, its Camborne Redruth And Pool (CR*P)
Top  Profile send PM
 
Anonymous Posted: 25.11.2006, 23:17
Unregistered User Camborne Pool Redruth Area Action Plan, is CPRAAP or CRAAP with a P!
Top 
 
CK Posted: 26.11.2006, 20:42



registered: Apr. 2006
Posts: 383

Status: offline
last visit: 08.01.09
Tolskithy, just had a look at the timetable for implementation of the CPRAAP on the kerrier website, there is a hell of a way to go: -

Pre Consultation started in August
The prefered options are due in March 07
Submission in October 2007
Pre Inquiry in May 2008
Public Examination in August 2008
Adoption in February 2009

I would say baseresult will be producing by then!
Top  Profile send PM
 
TolskithyTribune Posted: 26.11.2006, 21:49



registered: Apr. 2006
Posts: 214

Status: offline
last visit: 19.11.08
maybe CK, but lots of the ideas in the CPR - AAP are being set up now like the new road!!! Odd seeing the plan has NOT been agreed!!
Top  Profile send PM
 
CK Posted: 27.11.2006, 18:23



registered: Apr. 2006
Posts: 383

Status: offline
last visit: 08.01.09
Tolskithy, have a look at what I've posted of the Crofty thread.
Seems to me that CPR and CCC need to find a common hymnsheet, one says redevelop crofty, the other says protect it for mining.
Top  Profile send PM
 
angofbew Posted: 28.11.2006, 11:48

angofbew

registered: May. 2006
Posts: 984

Status: offline
last visit: 03.01.09
Quote
The Lib Dems, Labour and MK all have councillors representing their parties on Kerrier. Are they all in agreement with what's going on?


definately not. MK has only four Councillors on Kerrier. SWRDA are an unelected Quango, who's main goals seem to be overriding Local Public opinion, and making a grand profit for certain Building Companies. Their track record stinks, and they come over as bumbling, reckless amatures.
MK believe that any Development should be for Local needs, without disregard for the infastructure already in place, i.e; sewage, water, roads etc. Also that any Development should be carried out by Local Cornish Construction Companies, therefore keeping the Finace in Cornwall.
MK also believe that any Development proposals should come under Local Democratic Authority, not some unelected Source. MK is not against progress, but that progress should be the right choice for Local needs. We all want a better future for ourselves and our Children. Better Housing etc; what is most important though is how to get better long term employment for our People, Jobs that will enable them to Buy Housing and be able to afford to do so. The proposals put forward by SWRDA fall way short of this.
Top  Profile send PM
 
CK Posted: 30.11.2006, 21:34



registered: Apr. 2006
Posts: 383

Status: offline
last visit: 08.01.09
I'm getting confused, I have just read a report from Kerrier's new principle planning officer due to go to the planning commitee next week link below:
-
http://www.kerr..._2206-01.pdf

which seems to fly straight in the face of SWERDA and CPR regarding housing provision area, with the planners being asked to make the following recomendation to the SW regional assembly: -

QuoteA fourth way would be a combination of pro rata and dispersal thereby limiting any growth in the CPR area, but allowing growth in the villages.


I'm getting more confused by the minute, the situation looks like this: -
1. SWERDA and CPR says build more houses in CPR, Kerrier planners say CPR can't cope.
2. SWERDA & CPR say redevelop Crofty, CCC says you can't and set up mineral protection zones to prevent any development near 6 of the main shafts effectively preventing development.

What the hell is going on?
Top  Profile send PM
 
Mike Posted: 30.11.2006, 22:32

Mike

registered: Jul. 2004
Posts: 2744

Status: offline
last visit: 09.01.09
I hope CCC are not in a boot licking exercise to Prescott's build houses everywhere business!
Top  Profile send PM Homepage
 
Coady Posted: 30.11.2006, 23:46

Coady

registered: May. 2006
Posts: 2107

Status: offline
last visit: 08.01.09
Angofbew, MK, on what you say, are looking at the issues from a purely Cornish perspective. Bearing in mind that they ARE MK, thats not really a surprise I s'pose.

The other agencies are looking at it from a point of view where Cornwall is an integral part of the United Kingdom, and has to meet NATIONAL needs.

It all depends on your personal definition of National.

Graham.
Top  Profile send PM
 
frenchie Posted: 01.12.2006, 00:25



registered: Jan. 2006
Posts: 1691

Status: offline
last visit: 28.04.07
QuoteThe other agencies are looking at it from a point of view where Cornwall is an integral part of the United Kingdom, and has to meet NATIONAL needs.


United Kingdom is not a Nation. England is.. They are looking at it as an intergral part of England, to meet the english needs.

One of the points raised by the CSP is that the Framework convention for national minorites that the Government signed to, states that there can not be too much meddling in the population balance of the minority group. If the Gov can be forced to accept Cornwall as a national minority - as it rightly should - then it raises the issue of how many non-Cornish can actually live here. This could be significant in the current rush to build loads of houses for people up country to move into.
Top  Profile send PM Homepage
 
Goto page : Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 Next Page


Users online:
gokyreloaded - morvran - ThingsThatGoFlirInTheShla - Allister

This list bases on the users active in the last 60 minutes
Cornwall24 2006 (c) web design & web hosting by a-connect
Sponsors: Cornwall hotels, Cornwall self-catering, Cornwall restaurant guide,Devon
Cornwall 24 news feed
Cornwall 24 News and Views