After several months most of the comments for Liverpool City Council's Draft Liverpool Local Plan seem to be in or at least the first 1137 of them. So as a follow up to my seminal Hell in the PDF:Liverpool’s Draft Local Plan Consultation I thought I would comment on the comments.
There is only one set of cloned comments from the supporters of Sefton Meadows, the idea seems to be that if you repeat a lie often enough it will become true. The are filled with the normal false environmental claims and due to a mistake by LCC, some of the locations of these commenters was released. Showing that the vast majority could only be termed vested interests.
Some councillors seem to have gone for the mass voting scheme as well where all 3 of a ward's councillors would submit the same comments.
One of the main misconceptions of the green commentators is that grass can somehow aid in the fight against global warming. It cannot for a couple of reasons, every so often it is mown down, doing this uses energy which at the moment if diesel. I'm not sure exactly what happens to the cuttings but unless they are sealing in vacuum packs and placed into the disused coal mines around St Helens, then the carbon they contain will soon be back in the atmosphere.
One of the councils own departments recommends adopting a system pioneered in Bristol where instead of replacing any trees removed with a sapling. The number of saplings planted is proportional to the girth of the tree. This is the Bristol Tree Replacement Standard it seems very sensible to me.
The exact process from now on is a little unclear but by the end of 2017, the comments the full plan is supposed to be ready. Though when it becomes legally binding is not clear. How the comments will be assessed and integrated has not be made clear, there dow not seem to be anything other than a very vague provision for some kind of feedback. I suspect a lot of the comments will just quietly be ignored. No public committee meetings no week of debate on a comment by comment basis by the councillors. For a document that may be very important to the future of the city, the lack of public debate is quite astounding. Especially if you consider the kind of scrutiny thatHS2 was given the transport committee, were multiple members of the public were called in to expand or explain on their comments.
Surely it is worth a week of the councils time to debate this in public and with the public, if for no other reason than to let the population see how the council works.
Any chance Malc?
There is only one set of cloned comments from the supporters of Sefton Meadows, the idea seems to be that if you repeat a lie often enough it will become true. The are filled with the normal false environmental claims and due to a mistake by LCC, some of the locations of these commenters was released. Showing that the vast majority could only be termed vested interests.
Some councillors seem to have gone for the mass voting scheme as well where all 3 of a ward's councillors would submit the same comments.
One of the main misconceptions of the green commentators is that grass can somehow aid in the fight against global warming. It cannot for a couple of reasons, every so often it is mown down, doing this uses energy which at the moment if diesel. I'm not sure exactly what happens to the cuttings but unless they are sealing in vacuum packs and placed into the disused coal mines around St Helens, then the carbon they contain will soon be back in the atmosphere.
One of the councils own departments recommends adopting a system pioneered in Bristol where instead of replacing any trees removed with a sapling. The number of saplings planted is proportional to the girth of the tree. This is the Bristol Tree Replacement Standard it seems very sensible to me.
The exact process from now on is a little unclear but by the end of 2017, the comments the full plan is supposed to be ready. Though when it becomes legally binding is not clear. How the comments will be assessed and integrated has not be made clear, there dow not seem to be anything other than a very vague provision for some kind of feedback. I suspect a lot of the comments will just quietly be ignored. No public committee meetings no week of debate on a comment by comment basis by the councillors. For a document that may be very important to the future of the city, the lack of public debate is quite astounding. Especially if you consider the kind of scrutiny thatHS2 was given the transport committee, were multiple members of the public were called in to expand or explain on their comments.
Surely it is worth a week of the councils time to debate this in public and with the public, if for no other reason than to let the population see how the council works.
Any chance Malc?
No comments:
Post a Comment