Neville, it will be remembered, in his role as one of the Canvey Island Independent Party (CIIP) councillors for the island’s Winter Gardens Ward, was responsible for raising the shroud of the CIIP’s Blog last Tuesday – so it is not surprising that he should attend Cabinet when the subject of his post, the government inspector’s examination of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy, should be on the agenda.
The main surprise was that he actually attended one of those meetings that he has always vigorously insisted takes place in secret and behind closed doors; but another came when he decided to ask his question during the Cabinet’s Housing Update.
I was surprised; and Neville was hesitant and confused. He lost the thread of his question on three separate occasions and stuttered his way through its delivery. When he had finished, I was no clearer about what point he was trying to make. I read and re-read my notes – and then replayed the Webcast; again and again.
I decided that Neville was asking Wendy Goodman, Cabinet Member for Homes (whom happened to be on holiday) what the effect would be on homes, empty properties and the landlords’ accreditation scheme if Thames Gateway funding was cut back. And he also wanted to know what the effect would be on the ‘Pathmeads initiative.’
That, as I understand it, was his question; but Neville had apparently just tagged it onto the end of some quote made by the MP for Bromley and Chislehurst concerning an Exocet missile.
Now Neville’s Blog post, last week, had attempted to prove his party’s case that the Tory’s are in favour of 5,000 new homes being built on the island, by accusing them of ‘not turning up’. But what he does not say, and what was made clear by Steve Rogers, during his presentation on the government inspector’s examination of the council’s core strategy to Cabinet, is that the subject of new house building has been postponed until the Autumn (awaiting further announcements on policy from central government). In other words, the topic of new housing in the borough has not yet been investigated – let alone discussed at the public enquiry. But, despite this, Neville says, in his post: ‘As they [the Conservatives] never turned up that means they were for mass development on Canvey Island. We told you at election time and we were right.’
It is not clear what planet Neville is on, or whether there is actually a form of direct communication that he shares with us lowly earthlings; but it stands to reason that his cabinet question must contain a point – and I was determined to discover what it was.
Google led me to an article contained on the Inside Housing Website. It carried the quote from Bob Neill, MP, which Watson related in his question. The only problem was that there was no mention of the government intending to cut the Thames Gateway budget. Far from it: the article was about the coalition government pledging support for the Thames Gateway regeneration project and its associated Crossrail plans.
So, what on earth was Watson on about?
It appears that Neville was just as confused, when extracting quotes to introduce his cabinet question, as he was when raising it. Had he been sober (one can only assume the opposite) he would have seen the phrase, which he needed to use, glaring at him from the article’s second paragraph:-
‘Bob Neill said that the plan to build 160,000 homes in the 40-mile strip of land to the east of the capital was “a great and important initiative.”’
What Watson should have asked, was: ‘Does the Cabinet Member for Homes welcome the coalition government’s intention not to cut-back on the Thames Gateway budget? And does she agree with her party colleague, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Department of Communities and Local Government, Bob Neill, when he said that: ‘…the plan to build 160,000 homes in the 40-mile strip of land to the east of the capital was “a great and important initiative?”’
Now that would have been a good question, Neville – had you been up to the task of asking it…
No comments:
Post a Comment