Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

CAS Trust: Should we Protect Valley with ACV? E-petition launched

16781012

Comments

  • No I don't think so however 14 weeks would seem reasonable comparable with other applications. Our VC and others are following up
  • edited November 2013
    Valley ACV update coming shortly
  • 15 weeks now.. we should be issuing a statement on progress later in the week, meanwhile its important anyone who hasn't got around to signing does so.

    http://www.castrust.org/2013/09/granting-valley-acv-status-doubt/

  • edited November 2013
  • thanks for the update.

    so i read it as the two previous applications were done in normal time, but they are now establishing a new process and that just happens to affect CAFC application?

    that is rank. Greenwich XXXX BC doesnt have the standing to draw up its own process. it may make its own internal rules on how to APPLY the law of the Communities Act, but it cannot draw up its own time frames as those are set in statue.

    typical that the end result is delay and unaccountability. if any of us worked like this we`d soon be out on our ear.

    fecking unbelievable.
  • thanks for the update.

    so i read it as the two previous applications were done in normal time, but they are now establishing a new process and that just happens to affect CAFC application?

    that is rank. Greenwich XXXX BC doesnt have the standing to draw up its own process. it may make its own internal rules on how to APPLY the law of the Communities Act, but it cannot draw up its own time frames as those are set in statue.

    typical that the end result is delay and unaccountability. if any of us worked like this we`d soon be out on our ear.

    fecking unbelievable.

    Yes, as one of the trust personal involved with the discussion at Greenwich this was never mentioned, or discussed at a pre: application meeting,
    and why it is so important that every fan, even now signs the petition as razil mentions above.


  • edited November 2013
    Is it time to involve the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) in the absence of any meaningful response from Greenwich?

    I appreciate that the LGO is probably as useful as a chocolate teapot in reality and is likely to back the authority and its inactivity.
  • Thanks Len

    We are taking action and are under advice from experts even as far as what we should be posting on our website at the moment, but will update hopefully later this week.
  • razil said:
    No surprise there.
  • it seems very strange that not only a decision is taking longer than it should, but that also there is no word from RBG either.

    Maybe someone should tell them the story of The Valley Party..!!
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited November 2013
    There has been word from Greenwich. The official line is that the policy for ACV applications to be adopted by RBG is being taken before cabinet on 20/11/13. This is despite RBG already having passed two ACV applications in August of this year. Curious.
  • cheers SHG. utter drivel from RBG. the statute is detailed and wholly prescriptive as to the procedure that needs to be carried out by the local authority.

    the idea that your taxes are now being spent so some muppets can sit around discussing how to implement a piece of legislation that needs no implementation measures (it details all the steps and time periods that will be relevant in any ACV application) is particularly bothersome.

    hate is a strong word but i have paticular ill will towards towards Roberts and those that aid him in wasting time, money and resources basically filibustering because they have their own personal agenda.

    the Localism Act 2009 received royal ascent on 15 November 2011 and the statute came into force in April 2012.

    why, some 18 months later is RBG now looking at its obligations for the first time? a cynic would not dismiss the conicidence that it is reviewing its procedures only as a result of the CAFC application.

    that is a complete no-no in terms of public administrative law.
  • @calydon_road

    I share your particular ill-will towards Roberts and your cynicism about their handling of this. Thank you for putting a bit of legal framework around it. Well today is 20.11. I am sure the Trust will be pressing for an early public feedback from the RBG 'cabinet'. Cabinet, eh. Speaks volumes, using that word.
  • Just looking at tonight's agenda documents and it seems the valley (which they say they received on 15/8/13) is 1 of 5 pending acv's.
    Don't know the relevance of part of the meeting being "not for press or public". It says it's to discuss growth strategy masterplans.
  • Growth strategy plans. Gulp ;0)
  • Just looking at tonight's agenda documents and it seems the valley (which they say they received on 15/8/13) is 1 of 5 pending acv's.
    Don't know the relevance of part of the meeting being "not for press or public". It says it's to discuss growth strategy masterplans.

    I take it thats not a web link?
  • razil said:

    Just looking at tonight's agenda documents and it seems the valley (which they say they received on 15/8/13) is 1 of 5 pending acv's.
    Don't know the relevance of part of the meeting being "not for press or public". It says it's to discuss growth strategy masterplans.

    I take it thats not a web link?
    It is.
    On phone so can't link it.
    I've only looked at agenda frontsheet and a document relating to acv's.
    It's on the rbg site under cabinet meetings.
  • www.committees.greenwich.gov.uk
  • edited November 2013
    http://www.committees.greenwich.gov.uk

    if you put http:// before www it becomes a hyper linked (clickable link)

    Thanks for info, altho that link don't work.. doh...

    :)
  • Sponsored links:


  • From your link in post at 4:21
    It's the "second supplementary agenda" doc that lists acv's in point 9.5
  • Doesn't one of the links state its a private not public meeting ?
  • If you require further information about this meeting please contac
    t the Committee Officer:
    Robert Sutton
    Telephone: 020 8921 5134
    Fax: 020 8921 5864
    Email: robert sutton@royalgreenwich.gov.uk
    Council of the Year 2013
    CABINET
    Second Supplementary Agenda
    Place
    Rooms 4 & 5, Town Hall, Wellington Street, Woolwich
    SE18 6PW
    Date
    Wednesday, 20 November 2013
    Time
    7.00 pm
    This meeting is open to the press and public.
  • sorry am at work can't be more thorough
  • Bit confused. Is it being voted on tonight, or is the process of Acv's being reviewed tonight ? Or both ?

    It's not like its not going to be approved. Delayed by some deliberate process review possibly, but it won't be rejected.
  • edited November 2013

    Bit confused. Is it being voted on tonight, or is the process of Acv's being reviewed tonight ? Or both ?

    It's not like its not going to be approved. Delayed by some deliberate process review possibly, but it won't be rejected.

    It's the Councils strategy and policy for ACV that is being presented and voted on this evening or at least that's what we are being told. On that basis ACV will not be granted or rejected this evening.

  • I'm still confused on this too altho I just heard that decisions on the 5 pending nominations are unlikely tonight
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!