Help
Business Reviews
Loading...
Labour Councillors Question Cheshire West Gypsy Site Process
| Published: 11th November 2011 14:52 |
The Labour Group of Cheshire West and Chester Council has "called in" the decision by the Conservative Executive to withdraw proposals to establish two Gypsy and Traveller sites in Saughall and Neston.
Clayhill, Neston which was considered for
a Gypsy & Traveller site.
Concerns have been expressed by members of the public in all parts of the Borough about the site selection process, which led to unsuitable sites being proposed in Neston and Saughall, before being withdrawn by the Executive on the 2nd November. The Labour Group is asking the Council's Corporate Scrutiny Committee to take a detailed look at the plans, to ensure that any remaining issues are addressed.
Cllr Ben Powell, Labour spokesperson for Regeneration said: ""We are calling this decision in, not because we disagree with the decision to remove two sites from the process, but because real concerns have emerged about the way this matter has been handled.
"The Labour Group fully supports the decision to provide sites for the travelling community, but we believe that it's vital we have a process in which the public and importantly, the travelling community can have confidence."
Labour Group Leader, Cllr Justin Madders commented: "The requirement for the Council to provide Gypsy and Traveller sites is an extremely sensitive issue which needs to be handled carefully and diligently. While the Executive has made the right decision to withdraw the Neston and Saughall sites, it's clear they have failed in their duty. Had they done their homework properly, these sites would never have come forward in the first place.
"The Executive has shown no contrition and given no apology for the upset and distress they have caused by the unnecessary identification of these sites. What is even more alarming is that one of the Executive members publicly admitted not reading the report upon which his decision was based.
"We now face months of uncertainty while the Council find another site. Given the confusion their handling of the process has caused so far, how can our communities be confident they will handle this sensitive matter any better in the future?" he added.
Cllr Louise Gittins
Cllr Louise Gittins who represents the Little Neston and Burton ward added: "I welcome the Executive's decision to withdraw Oakwood Farm as a transit site and Neston as a permanent site. What is very worrying however is the absence of appropriate surveys and assessments prior to the sites being chosen.
"There has been no acknowledgement of the views of the thousands of people who objected to green belt development at Oakwood Farm. Indeed the Executive has made no mention of the protection of the green belt and a worrying precedent has been set."
Commenting on the proposal to locate an additional site in Winsford, local Councillor Stephen Burns said: "Winsford's councillors have had no say at all in this decision. Our town already has a traveller and show people's site which has become part of our community. But it seems unfair to put another site in the town when it may have a disproportionate impact on the town's resources.
"All we are asking for is fair distribution of sites across Cheshire West," he added.
Related content:
Travellers Will Not Have New Home at Neston's Clayhill
Report this article as inappropriate
Comments
You need to log in before you can do that! It's only a quick registration process to join the AMA network and completely free.
Help