Sheila Oliver's Campaigning Website

Go to content

Main menu

Miscellaneous Shenanigans 2

Dodgy LibDems Toxic School
 

Regarding Rob Peters of GVA Grimley suggesting putting political pressure on members of the planning committee to pass the contraversial, too small, on toxic waste, £5 million adrift in its financing school!

"It seems hard to underestimate the significance of your findings of
criticisms of the Standards Board regarding Stockport Council Planning
Dept. Even worse, this comes on the back of several correspondents in
your Letters Column complaining of many costly errors in the same
Department.

The Council backpedals on the circumstances of your findings saying
they can’t control what people say on such Planning Matters. Well they
would say that wouldn’t they on such a hugely controversial subject
and with such a recent bad press on so many different apparent errors.
The fact is they can and should control the behaviour of professional
consultants hired by them and handsomely paid by us to do a specific
job. Even the Standard Board set up by the Council agreed the
Consultant had overstepped the mark and all the Council appears to say
is that their only safeguard for the public good is to ignore his
request. That attitude is unbelievably lax. Apparently the
Consultants’ remarks were not reported up the chain of command nor was
the matter taken up with the Consultancy firm involved. This cannot be
acceptable and in line with a Best Working Practice. Surely there is a
formal vetting and accptance procedure before a Consultant is taken on
or is it all done on the Old Boys network. Surely there is some
checking against a Code of Practice that the procedures referred to by
the Standards Board are rigorously adhered to, or is it a case of if
no one finds out then anything goes. Mrs Oliver has to be
congratulated by all of us, including the senior Officers of the
Council for shining a glaring spotlight on this subject. As she says
there are still many unanswered questions. Will all the Councillors
from all groups on the relevant Committees unequivocally confirm that
the Council gave them full and unbiased information on this Planning
Application without taking any partisan stance. At least that would
restore some public confidence. Especially will the governing LibDem
Party mindful of our precious 4 Star Rating with the Audit Commission
take a public stance on what has become an ongoing and everspreading
scandal and will they ensure proper safeguards are put in place to
make sure this cannot happen again."




From:
FOI Officer
To:
sheilaoliver
Cc:
FOI Officer
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 11:55 AM
Subject: RE: Fairway school - Ref 1311
Dear Mrs Oliver,

I am writing in response to your request for information below (ref 1311).
The Fairway school project was completed in 2006. As a result, there are a large number of files in a number of different locations, some of which have been archived. Please could you refine your request by stating what kind of information you are interested in regarding the construction of the school?

Yours sincerely,

Claire Naven

Claire Naven
Data Protection & Freedom of Information Officer
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council

From: sheilaoliver [
mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 31 August 2008 07:50
To: FOI Officer
Subject: Re: Fairway school - Ref 1252
Dear Ms Naven
I should like to come to your premises at a time to suit you simply to read through the files pertaining to the construction of the Fairway Primary School which opened in November 2006.

If you have any problems with this request, please let me know and I shall refine it.
Kind regards

Sheila
----- Original Message -----
From: FOI Officer
To:
sheilaoliver
Cc:
FOI Officer
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 1:05 PM
Subject: RE: Fairway school - Ref 1252
Dear Mrs Oliver,
I am writing in response to your request for information below (ref 1252).

A new school has been constructed on the existing site at Fairway Primary School. This building was opened in November 2006.
Fairway Primary School is included in the opening values on schedule 7 'Assets Under Construction' and schedule 3 'Other Land & Buildings'. When the scheme was 'financially' completed in 2007/08 the value was transferred from Assets Under Construction to Other Land & Buildings. The corresponding entry can be seen in column 12 on each schedule.

I trust this answers your request; however if you still wish to proceed, please clarify which documents you wish to view in light of the above.

If you are unhappy with the way we have handled your request you are entitled to ask for an internal review. Any internal review will be carried out by a senior member of staff who was not involved with your original request. To ask for an internal review, contact foi.officer@stockport.gov.uk in the first instance.
If you are unhappy with the outcome of any internal review, you are entitled to complain to the Information Commissioner. To do so, contact:
Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
www.ico.gov.uk
01625 545 745
Yours sincerely,
Claire Naven
Claire Naven
Data Protection & Freedom of Information Officer
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council

From: sheilaoliver [
mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 03 August 2008 19:41
To: FOI Officer
Subject: Fairway school
Dear Ms Naven
Thanks for the accounts documents. I notice under Assets Under Construction that a new Fairway School is to be constructed at Offerton. Please may I come and read any documents SMBC holds regarding this. I have attended Stepping Hill Area Committee for years and have taken a keen interest in Offerton in general, yet I have never heard any mention of any proposed Fairway new school. I would be very interested especially in the finance for this.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

Sheila

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




To my mind the killer question bearing in mind my info that money was to be diverted from Harcourt to Fairway to pay for buildings/assets that weren't allowed under the government rules of the TCFS; Has further capital expenditure been approved or is there any further capital expenditure planned or in a preliminary discussion stage for Fairway school other than that covered by the £2.6m referred to in your reply and how will that be funded?

£2.6m is very very much cheaper than the £10m for Harcourt St.


Was Fairway a green field startup so therefore directly comparable to Harcourt St (with inflation cost corrections)

"Targeted Capital Fund
Description:
Bids for additional funding can be made by Local Education Authorities (LEAs) for support under the Targeted Capital fund (TCF). TCF is intended to support projects which provide good evidence of educational improvement as a result of the investment, and which might not otherwise be supported through formulaic allocations to LEAs and schools."











Further to your email, I apologise for the omission of the documents referred to in the letter. Please note that the documents have been posted to you this afternoon.

Regards
Michelle
P Save Paper - Do you really need to print this e-mail?

From: sheilaoliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 26 January 2008 11:32
To: Andrew Webb
Subject: Risk assessment - Harcourt Street
Mr Webb
There was no Harcourt Street risk register or highlight report enclosed with your letter dated 23/01/08. Please send them.
Kind regards
Sheila


**********************************************************************
This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business Services via email.query@stockport.gov.uk and then permanently remove it from your system.

Thank you.

http://www.stockport.gov.uk





Mrs Oliver,

Thank you for your email which was received this morning via Ms. Naven.

Being received (by me) today, your question could not have been put at Monday's Executive Meeting but I am once again advising you that questions from you about Harcourt St have been deemed and remain to be vexatious and therefore would not have been put.

Notwithstanding that, colleagues have suggested that I advise you that Stockport Council is committed to providing a safe environment for the children of North Reddish and to making long term and lasting improvements to provide even better learning facilities for children and local communities for many years to come.

In April 2006 GMGU (now Urban Vision) issued a ground Investigation report based on guidelines at that time. More recently, the Council commissioned an updated version of the report based on the most up-to-date guidance. This has provided the contractors with remediation strategies to ensure safe development and a safe environment for children in the future. The contractors will implement these and will fully comply with the recommendations of the report. The measures are in line with planning conditions for the site.

Regards,

Mike
Mike Iveson
Head of Committee Services
Chief Executive's Directorate
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
( 0161 474 3208
) 07973 319071
Fax: 0161 474 3328
* mike.iveson@stockport.gov.uk
Please visit our website....click here

From: Claire Naven
Sent: 14 July 2010 11:12
To: Mike Iveson
Subject: FW: Easy to get information from the MOD about the Trident Nuclear Weapons programme; impossible to get information from LibDem Stockport Council about a school on a still gassing toxic waste dump
Mike,
For information.
Thanks,
Claire
Claire Naven
Data Protection & Freedom of Information Officer
RIPA Co-ordinator
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
Tel: 0161 474 4048
Email: claire.naven@stockport.gov.uk

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 10 July 2010 08:45
To: Mike Iveson
Cc: Jennifer Williams; Hough, Trevor; e-sullivan@audit-commission.gov.uk; DAVID PENKETHMAN; Tim Watkinson; Cheryl Latham; Cllr Sheila Bailey(EXT); david cameron; STUNELL, Andrew; ballse@parliament.uk; voice@mirror.co.uk; richard.littlejohn@dailymail.co.uk; alan.rusbridger@guardian.co.uk; FOI Officer; cleggn@parliament.uk; Mark Hunter - MP
Subject: Easy to get information from the MOD about the Trident Nuclear Weapons programme; impossible to get information from LibDem Stockport Council about a school on a still gassing toxic waste dump
Hi Mr Iveson
Hope you are well.
A question for the exclusively LibDem councillors at Stockport Council's next Excutive Meeting next Monday. Please send me a written reply if I am unable to attend. I will then pass the reply on to all the people ccd into this email. Please bear in mind that Councillor Goddard wrote to me on 23rd June 2010 stating:- "The Council...is committed to continuing to increase the transparency of its activities." Also bearing in mind the same people who are keeping this information secret are all responsible for this week's story in the Guardian, and should be hanging their heads in shame:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/jul/08/andrea-adams-care-leaver-death-inquest
The same people/department are also responsible for the following issues:-
http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1200975_council_rejected_probe_into_asthma_death_boy_three_times
http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/211937_alison_family_anguish_at_river_body_find
http://menmedia.co.uk/stockportexpress/news/s/1111053_council_fined_23000_for_safety_failings_at_pavilion
http://menmedia.co.uk/stockportexpress/news/s/1189653_protester_cleared_in_court_of_sneezing_on_security_guard
My question is:
Will Stockport Council now release the information it has been keeping secret for approximately four years, despite being told to answer by the Information Commission, on the subject of the school they are building on a still gassing, former toxic waste dump where they tried to leave the arsenic, lead and asbestos in situ and protect the children by the truly astonishing measure of prickly bushes? Will it also reply regarding the financial irregularities of several millions of pounds, the lethal traffic situation it will be creating and the fact that land was illegally compulsory purchased without holding the legally required public inquiry when a statutory objection from someone with an interest in the land was received? All the questions are posted up on the What Do They Know website under Stockport Council. I thought it might be easier to obtain information even on the Trident Nuclear Weapons Programme from the Ministry of Defence than to obtain any information from this obviously failing department regarding the above-mentioned, very serious issue. It is!
Kind regards
Sheila



**********************************************************************
Stockport Council - providing over 600 different services to local people . More information on http://www.stockport.gov.uk/boost
(free internet access is available at all Stockport libraries)

This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business Services via email.query@stockport.gov.uk and then permanently remove it from your system.

Thank you.

http://www.stockport.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Mrs Oliver,
Thank you for the question and your separate e mail both of which were received via Claire.
All executive councillors have been made aware of the question. Once again I have to advise that questions from you about Harcourt St have been deemed vexatious and as a result, your question will not be put at Monday's Executive Meeting.
Regards,
Mike
Mike Iveson
Head of Committee Services
Chief Executive's Directorate
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
( 0161 474 3208
) 07973 319071
Fax: 0161 474 3328
* mike.iveson@stockport.gov.uk
Please visit our website....click here

From: Claire Naven
Sent: 05 August 2010 09:38
To: Mike Iveson
Subject: FW: My question
Claire Naven
Data Protection & Freedom of Information Officer
RIPA Co-ordinator
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
Tel: 0161 474 4048
Email: claire.naven@stockport.gov.uk

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 05 August 2010 07:39
To: Mike Iveson
Cc: DAVID PENKETHMAN; Eamonn Boylan
Subject: My question
Mr. Iveson
Please make sure every executive councillor is aware of the question I have asked for the 9/8/10 Executive and is happy with the presumed refusal. There will be massive financial and legal implications down the line. Don't let them subsequently say you didn't tell them.
Kind regards
Sheila



**********************************************************************
Stockport Council - providing over 600 different services to local people . More information on http://www.stockport.gov.uk/boost
(free internet access is available at all Stockport libraries)

This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business Services via email.query@stockport.gov.uk and then permanently remove it from your system.

Thank you.

http://www.stockport.gov.uk
**********************************************************************


Mrs Oliver,
Once again I have to advise you that questions from you about Harcourt St have been deemed vexatious and as a result, your question will not be put at Monday's Executive Meeting.
In addition to that, questions about planning applications being consulted upon are specifically excluded from the procedure and will not be entertained from any party.
Mike
Mike Iveson
Head of Committee Services
Chief Executive's Directorate
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
( 0161 474 3208
) 07973 319071
Fax: 0161 474 3328
* mike.iveson@stockport.gov.uk
Please visit our website....click here

From: Claire Naven
Sent: 14 October 2010 17:07
To: Mike Iveson
Cc: Barry Khan; Michelle Booth; Donna Sager
Subject: FW: Question for the next meeting of the LibDem Executive Liars
Claire Naven
Data Protection & Freedom of Information Officer
RIPA Co-ordinator
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
Tel: 0161 474 4048
Email: claire.naven@stockport.gov.uk

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 14 October 2010 16:23
To: Mike Iveson
Cc: DAVID PENKETHMAN; Andrew Gwynne - MP; FOI Officer; Helen Johnson; Michelle Booth; Monitoring Officer
Subject: Question for the next meeting of the LibDem Executive Liars
Hi Mr Iveson
Hope you are well.
These are my questions for the next meeting of the LibDem Executive
Liars, and we know this is an acceptable council term because Goddard used it to me in a full council meeting and that was fine by the Monitoring Officer.
1) Regarding planning application DC0/45578 - why has it been submitted altering the layout of the Harcourt Street school now from separate nursery to integrated nursery class, when the "consultation", and I use the term loosely, is still going on? Also, the Chief Schools Adjudicator will make the decision as to whether the nursery can close and not the Council. So, why is it being done now?
I shall, off course, pass the reply or more likely non-reply to the Chief Schools Adjudicator, who has already been seriously lied to by Webb.
Go on, Mr. Iveson, make my day and refuse, as usual.
2) Why is the Learning Resource Centre being replaced with a classroom? My supposition is that the school is not big enough, as I have said all along, and at the last minute other facilities are being turned into classrooms.
Kind regards
Sheila



**********************************************************************
Cut Carbon, Save Money, Save the Environment.

Take the climate challenge and reduce your carbon footprint at www.stockport.gov.uk/carboff

This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business Services via email.query@stockport.gov.uk and then permanently remove it from your system.

Thank you.

http://www.stockport.gov.uk
**********************************************************************


Mrs Oliver,
Once again I have to advise you that questions from you about Harcourt St have been deemed vexatious and as a result, your question would not have been put at last night's Executive Meeting.
In addition to that, questions about planning applications being consulted upon are specifically excluded from the procedure and will not be entertained from any party.
Mike
Mike Iveson
Head of Committee Services
Chief Executive's Directorate
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
( 0161 474 3208
) 07973 319071
Fax: 0161 474 3328
* mike.iveson@stockport.gov.uk
Please visit our website....click here

From: Jen Re On Behalf Of Info Services
Sent: 01 November 2010 19:28
To: Mike Iveson
Subject: FW: DC/045578 Question for Monday's Exec meeting, Nov 1st
Hi Mike – this came in Saturday and Claire is on leave this week – I have just picked up the inbox – Mrs Oliver says that this question is for the 1 st – which is today! We normally pick these up once a week and complete a check to make sure none for you – hope this hasn’t caused you too many problems?
Thanks
Jen

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 30 October 2010 11:26
To: Mike Iveson
Cc: Jennifer Williams; DAVID PENKETHMAN; Cllr Dave Goddard; Cllr David White; Cllr Helen Foster-Grime; Cllr John Pantall; Cllr John Smith; Cllr Kevin Hogg; Cllr Mark Weldon; Cllr Martin Candler; Cllr Stuart Bodsworth; Cllr Syd Lloyd; Cllr Sue Derbyshire; Cllr Sheila Bailey(EXT); stephen@libdemvoice.org; mark@libdemvoice.org; Michelle Booth; Jim Seymour; FOI Officer; hughess@parliament.uk; johnsona@parliament.uk; cruddasj@parliament.uk; STUNELL, Andrew; Andrew Gwynne - MP; Barry Khan; Eamonn Boylan - DO NOT USE THIS CALENDAR; picklese@parliament.uk
Subject: DC/045578 Question for Monday's Exec meeting, Nov 1st
Hi Mr Iveson
Socially cleansing the children of the poor in LibDem Stockport by killing them.
Hope you are well.
I asked my question about DC/045578. I assume your political masters haven't yet given you your orders to metaphorically slap my legs for having the temerity to question the LibDem ruling elite, as the customary refusal email has not yet arrived. I want to know why the above planning application has been submitted to alter the layout of the toxic waste school nursery to change it from a nursery school to a nursery class even before the public consultation is finished and the Schools Adjudicator has made his decision about whether the nursery can be closed? Also, why is the School Learning Rescource Centre changed to a classroom???? Answer, because I said all along the school was never big enough (evidence already submitted and again available on request). Planning matters have to be in the public domain to avoid corruption. The planning officer will not reply - not his fault but that of the well-iffy senior council officers and LibDem executive councillors.

Do you remember the last time I was refused to question planning matters when the Council
"forgot" to inform the Environment Agency about the toxic waste primary school and then when the EA told them not to decide the planning application on grounds of contamination, they "forgot" to tell the planning committee that (details attached)?

Something has got to be done about the corrupt planning practices in Stockport. If the Council refuses my question on Monday, I shall take the matter to my local MP and Junior Minister at the Department of Communities and Local Government, Andrew Stunell, and we shall see what action he takes about this.

I shall cc this to Bert 'n' Ernie at
LibDem Voice, who banned me too. Banning must be a LibDem thing.

Kind regards

Sheila



**********************************************************************
Cut Carbon, Save Money, Save the Environment.

Take the climate challenge and reduce your carbon footprint at www.stockport.gov.uk/carboff

This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business Services via email.query@stockport.gov.uk and then permanently remove it from your system.

Thank you.

http://www.stockport.gov.uk
**********************************************************************


Dear Mrs Oliver,
I refer to the question you submitted for the Executive Meeting on 1 November, 2010. As you were not present at the meeting the question was not put but you are entitled to a written response. The Executive Councillor (Children & Young People) has asked me to respond on his behalf.

For ease of reference your question is set out below in italic type -

"Nick Clegg of the ConDem government has announced that:- "all disadvantaged two-year-olds will have an entitlement to 15 hours a week of pre-school education, in addition to the 15 hours already available to those aged three and four. The cash will go to the poorest 20% of children."

This has an impact on the Fir Tree area, where the children most certainly are disadvantaged. Stockport Council has built the new school too small, with changes now having to be made to the nursery to accommodate this and with a Learning Resource Centre having to be replaced with a classroom.

How does the Executive intend to provide this new level of nursery education, announced by their own government, for the Fir Tree area people within the proposed cramped, no room for expansion, amalgamated toxic waste dump school?"

Your question was admitted because it relates to a general issue about education provision rather than specifically to Harcourt St School. You are well aware that questions from you relating to that school have been ruled vexatious and will not be put to meetings.

The response to your question is as follows -

Stockport Council is pleased to hear the announcement of the extra provision for 2 year olds.
It is anticipated that most of the borough's 2 years olds who are eligible for this additional free preschool education will attend local childminders, preschools and private nurseries as is the case in our current pilot. However the Council will be reviewing the need for all such places as part of the Childcare Sufficiency Assessment.

In accordance with procedure I am copying the response to all executive councillors

Regards,

Mike
Mike Iveson
Head of Committee Services
Chief Executive's Directorate
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
( 0161 474 3208
) 07973 319071
Fax: 0161 474 3328
* mike.iveson@stockport.gov.uk
Please visit our website....click here



**********************************************************************
Cut Carbon, Save Money, Save the Environment.

Take the climate challenge and reduce your carbon footprint at www.stockport.gov.uk/carboff

This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business Services via email.query@stockport.gov.uk and then permanently remove it from your system.

Thank you.

http://www.stockport.gov.uk
**********************************************************************


Mrs Oliver,

I thought I had replied to all your e mails but in case not, once again I advise you that questions from you about Harcourt St have been ruled vexatious and will not be entertained. That includes the one which is the subject of the email attached below

Mike

Mike Iveson
Head of Committee Services
Chief Executive's Directorate
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
( 0161 474 3208
) 07973 319071
Fax: 0161 474 3328
* mike.iveson@stockport.gov.uk
Please visit our website....click here

From: Claire Naven
Sent: 29 November 2010 13:51
To: Barry Khan; Mike Iveson
Subject: FW: Will my question for the next executive meeting be allowed

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 25 November 2010 08:41
To: FOI Officer; Mike Iveson
Cc: DAVID PENKETHMAN; Andrew Gwynne - MP
Subject: Will my question for the next executive meeting be allowed

Dear Mr Iveson

I asked a question about what action the Council had taken when shown video evidence of failure to follow safety procedures on the toxic waste dump school at Harcourt Street. I have heard nothing from you. Is this question being illegally blocked as usual?
Please ask the LibDem Executive liars for me. (And we know liar is an acceptable council term because Goddard used it about me and the Monitoring Officer was fine with that).

Kind regards

Sheila



**********************************************************************
Do you know someone who makes you Proud of Stockport? Is there someone who goes out of their way to make our borough a special place? Then nominate them for an award in our 2011 citizen awards by going to www.stockport.gov.uk/proudofstockport

Entries close on Friday 26 November.

This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business Services via email.query@stockport.gov.uk and then permanently remove it from your system.

Thank you.

http://www.stockport.gov.uk
**********************************************************************


Fir Tree Nursery issue please see SMBC Excecutive Agenda documents 29th November 2010.

Mrs Oliver,

Sorry but I only received your e mail this morning. Your question about Fir Tree was admitted last night as you know. Provided your questions comply with the Council's provisions relating to public questions they will always be admitted.

The only exception relates to questions from you about Harcourt St which as you are well aware have been ruled vexatious.

Mike

Mike Iveson
Head of Committee Services
Chief Executive's Directorate
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
( 0161 474 3208
) 07973 319071
Fax: 0161 474 3328
* mike.iveson@stockport.gov.uk
Please visit our website....click here

From: Claire Naven
Sent: 03 December 2010 08:41
To: Mike Iveson; Barry Khan
Subject: FW: Another broken LibDem promise to the poor
From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 30 November 2010 07:23
To: Mike Iveson
Cc: DAVID PENKETHMAN; lib dem leader; Jennifer Williams; Andrew Gwynne - MP; Eamonn Boylan; Leader; FOI Officer
Subject: Another broken LibDem promise to the poor
Dear Mr Iveson

It was lovely to see you last night. I wouldn't, of course, ever put you up on a
string up the LibDems website - just the assorted rogues at Stockport Council. One site alone has about a thousand hits a day. If I keep posting, then a thousand people a day keep reading about the vile LibDems at Stockport and their antics.

I need to put further information up on the sites and inform the Union Top Bananas about the Fir Tree nursery broken promise against a consultation where absolutely everyone was against - local people and professionals.

Am I allowed to ask questions at the next council meeting about the Fir Tree nursery closure, which, of course, is a completely separate issue from the toxic waste dump school?

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

Sheila



**********************************************************************
Do you know someone who makes you Proud of Stockport? Is there someone who goes out of their way to make our borough a special place? Then nominate them for an award in our 2011 citizen awards by going to www.stockport.gov.uk/proudofstockport

Entries close on Friday 26 November.

This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business Services via email.query@stockport.gov.uk and then permanently remove it from your system.

Thank you.

http://www.stockport.gov.uk
**********************************************************************


Dear Mrs Oliver,

I refer to the question you submitted for the Executive Meeting on Monday, 6 December, 2010. For ease of reference your question is copied below

"The planning application Councillor Weldon said tonight didn't exist is DC/045578. It states Minor material amendment to DC024537 but when you read the actual files it states in them these are major changes. It changes the layout of the nursery school classrooms, presumably to reflect changes from a nursery school to a nursery class. It is strange because the consultation hadn't even taken place at that time to change the nursery class. It also changes a Learning Resource Centre to a classroom, so I would like to know how this other change would affect the nursery children, if at all?

I would like to know as per my question tonight - why these very very late stage changes are taking place now, necessitating a further planning application. If the nursery changes are as important as the Council tries to claim, why are they only just being done now."

Your question was not put at the Executive Meeting yesterday afternoon for two reasons. The question relates to the Harcourt Street and questions from you on that subject have been ruled vexatious. The question relates to a planning issue and questions on such matters are excluded from the public question time provisions.

Notwithstanding the above Councillor Mark Weldon, Executive Councillor (Children & Young People) has asked me to respond to you on his behalf. pointing out the facts relating to the issue you have raised.

For the avoidance of any doubt, there have been no planning applications made in respect of Fir Tree Nursery School.
The application to which you refer relates only to the new school building at Harcourt Street, and does not relate to the proposal to close Fir Tree Nursery School. The application, for a minor material amendment was granted on 9 th November 2010. The description is provided below. This is not a planning application in the regular sense. It is a new type of permission which has formalised the consideration of minor material amendments to planning applications and is considered under Section 73 of the Planning Act 1990 as a variation of condition, (non material amendments are considered under Section 96a). It runs concurrently with the main permission DC024357 and although there is no statutory requirement to do so the Council consulted 44 residential properties on this application, no letters were received from residents in opposition or support to the proposal.

Description :
Minor material amendment to DC024357 to:
Widen the footpath in accordance with Planning Inspectorate decision including the removal of 3 additional trees on the Mill Lane site frontage,
Introduction of ventilation louvres and skylights,
Repostioning of windows and replacement of windows with louvre panels,
Replacement of flat roof to pitched roof over single storey section of building to the rear of the main hall,
Additional firescape from hall and small hall resulting in new doorway,
Increased size of existing louvre panels,
Addition of a flue from plantroom,
Addition of solar and photovoltaic panels,
Alterations to location of bin store and cycle store,
Additional doorway to plantroom,
Insertion on additional door and window to two elevations, and
Alterations to the internal layout.

The changes in the planning application are not related to the proposal for future nursery provision and would be required regardless of the outcome of the nursery process. The change to the Learning Resource Centre would not affect the nursery children. Changes such as these are a normal process in building developments.
I hope this finally clarifies the position for you.
Regards,

Mike
Mike Iveson
Head of Committee Services
Chief Executive's Directorate
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
( 0161 474 3208
) 07973 319071
Fax: 0161 474 3328
* mike.iveson@stockport.gov.uk
Please visit our website....click here



**********************************************************************
This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business Services via email.query@stockport.gov.uk and then permanently remove it from your system.

Thank you.

http://www.stockport.gov.uk
**********************************************************************


Mrs Oliver,

The question set out in your email dated 29 December, 2010 will not be entertained at the Executive Meeting because it relates to Harcourt Street and questions from you on that subject have been deemed vexatious for reasons outlined to you on many occasions.

The question you asked at the Council Meeting on 2 December was inadvertently admitted because it was received (by Democratic Services) only briefly before the Council Meeting and referred to "Fir Tree Nursery".

Mike

Mike Iveson
Head of Committee Services
Chief Executive's Directorate
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
( 0161 474 3208
) 07973 319071
Fax: 0161 474 3328
* mike.iveson@stockport.gov.uk
Please visit our website....click here

From: Claire Naven
Sent: 05 January 2011 17:06
To: Mike Iveson
Cc: Barry Khan; Donna Sager
Subject: FW: Question for the next Executive Meeting
Claire Naven
Data Protection & Freedom of Information Officer
RIPA Co-ordinator
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
Tel: 0161 474 4048
Email: claire.naven@stockport.gov.uk
Confidentiality: This email, its contents and any attachments are intended only for the above named. As the email may contain confidential or legally privileged information, if you are not, or suspect that you are not, the above named or the person responsible for delivery of the message to the above named, please delete or destroy the email and any attachments immediately and inform the sender of the error.

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 29 December 2010 18:12
To: Mike Iveson
Cc: DAVID PENKETHMAN; Andrew Gwynne - MP; FOI Officer
Subject: Question for the next Executive Meeting
Hi Mr Iveson

Hope you had a good Christmas and all the best for the New Year.
My question is, and don't forget Weldon answered a question on this issue at the last Council meeting, so if this is refused they are hardly being consistent:-

What were the changes made to the car parking at the Harcourt Street Toxic Waste Dump School in July 2010 planning application? The Head of Highways, Nick Whelan, said in an email that the original drop off facility was inadequate. Have the car park spaces been increased or decreased from the original application?

If they don't reply, I shall post the entire question up on the Internet and let everyone know secrecy continues to rule under the LibDems.

Interestingly, the Guardian thinks Stockport is one of the places the LibDems are most at risk of losing councillors - no, please don't laugh. Any future Executive Committee of a different policital persuasion might not be willing the keep the LibDem's grubby secrets quiet. Officers should consider their position carefully with regards to the illegal keeping secret of planning iffyness.

Oodles of love

Sheilla



**********************************************************************
Stockport Council, in partnership with the Police, have launched the Safer Stockport initiative to show how working together with local communities can help to create safer places in which to live, work and visit. To find out how you can get involved, visit http://www.stockport.gov.uk/safer

This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business Services via email.query@stockport.gov.uk and then permanently remove it from your system.

Thank you.

http://www.stockport.gov.uk
**********************************************************************


Email received 22/01/2008 at 14.41 via Stockport Council, apparently.

Sheila

With regard to your Freedom of Information Request we assert that Faber Maunsell is a Private Limited Company and as such is not a Public Authority subject to the Freedom of Information Act. All information held by Faber Maunsell on behalf of the Stockport MBC has been submitted to Stockport MBC.  

Therefore you should redirect your request to Stockport MBC.
Best  Regards

Gareth

Gareth Davis
Regional Director
Faber Maunsell
Lynnfield House
Church Street
Altrincham
WA14 4DZ

Direct Tel 0161 927 8320
Recep     0161 927 8200
Fax         0161 927 8499
Mobile     07957 271119
gareth.davis@fabermaunsell.com

www.fabermaunsell.com  

From: sheilaoliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 05 January 2008 17:49
To: Enquiries (Europe)
Subject: Freedom of Information and Environmental Information Regulations 2004 request
Dear Sir or Madam
Under the above mentioned legislation you have a duty to disclose any information you hold on behalf of a public authority. I should like to come to your premises to read through all your files regarding the proposed school at Harcourt Street, North Reddish, Stockport for Stockport Council.

Should you refuse a complaint will be lodged with the Information Commissioner, who has stated his New Year Resolution to tackle FOI abuses by local authorities and the consultants they use. You have 20 working days to provide the information.

Kind regards
Sheila

**********************************************************************
This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business Services via email.query@stockport.gov.uk and then permanently remove it from your system.

Thank you.

http://www.stockport.gov.uk
**********************************************************************
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

This Email is confidential and is for the intended recipient only. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the author and you must not disclose or use the contents in any way. The author bears responsibility for any legal action or disputes arising from views or professional advice expressed which do not relate to the business of Faber Maunsell Ltd.

Faber Maunsell Registered in England No: 1846493
Registered Office: Marlborough House, Upper Marlborough Road, St Albans, Herts AL1 3UT


Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

This Email is confidential and is for the intended recipient only. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the author and you must not disclose or use the contents in any way. The author bears responsibility for any legal action or disputes arising from views or professional advice expressed which do not relate to the business of Faber Maunsell Ltd.

Faber Maunsell Registered in England No: 1846493
Registered Office: Marlborough House, Upper Marlborough Road, St Albans, Herts AL1 3UT

http://www.stockport.gov.uk
**********************************************************************



Email received 07/08/2012 at 09.45

Dear Shelia,

Thank you for your email to Sarah Teather MP. As your message relates to Sarah’s role as a Minister in the Department for Education rather than as constituency MP I have forwarded your message to Sarah’s ministerial office who will ensure that it is dealt with appropriately.

XXXX

Head of Office

Tel: 020 8459 0455

Fax: 020 8830 3280

Office of Sarah Teather, Member of Parliament for Brent Central

Minister of State for Children and Families

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 06 August 2012 17:17
To: Unmonitored.ACCOUNT@education.gsi.gov.uk
Cc: Bailey.Harding; David Penkethman; TEATHER, Sarah; leader@stockport.gov.uk; barry.khan@stockport.gov.uk; andrew.webb@stockport.gov.uk; donna.sager@stockport.gov.uk
Subject: Re: Case Reference 2012/0048745

Dear Nicholas Smith

Thank you so much for getting back to me.  

I am a bit fed up of all our snoozing watch-pussycats, so I intend to put your response up on my website - I will black out your name.  I shall also put up any follow up from you or the Children's Minister.

The fact is that her political cohorts at Stockport are corrupt, which has left the council taxpayer of Stockport out of pocket to the tune of several millions of pounds in having to re-open a closed school a few yards away within one year of a megashed, amalgamated school opening.  I told them what they were doing was insane and they publicly branded me as "vexatious".  They still do!  Ms Teather has publicly expressed concern about the lack of primary school places, pointing the finger at Labour. So, the question is will she bury the wrongdoing of her Liberal Democrap (I must get this spellchecker fixed) cohorts, or will there be openness and honesty?  

Also, in this wonderful Olympic euphoria, the new ueberschool shouldn't have been built until the replacement sports facilities demanded by Sport England (bless 'em) were in place to replace lost public playing fields on the site. They are nowhere to be found and I think this means the school is built illegally, as that is one of the main reasons this got through planning:-

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/no-playing-fields.html

I shall give any reply from you wide circulation to all enemies of the LibDems.

Kind regards


Sheila

----- Original Message -----

From: Unmonitored.ACCOUNT@education.gsi.gov.uk

To: sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com

Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 2:47 PM

Subject: Case Reference 2012/0048745

Dear Ms Oliver,

Thank you for your email dated 17 July addressed to Sarah Teather, the Children's Minister, about Stockport Council. Your email has been passed to me as the Education Funding Agency is responsible for ensuring that Government funds allocated for building schools are used appropriately.

I am grateful to you for bringing this matter to our attention. I have shown your email to collegues within the Agency and I have begun an investigation into this matter. It is difficult to say at this stage how long this may take but I hope you will leave it in my hands at present.

In the meanwhile if you have any questions or I can help further please feel free to contact me.

Yours sincerely,


Nicholas Smith
EFA Capital
Nicholas.SMITH@education.gsi.gov.uk
www.education.gov.uk


Your correspondence has been allocated the reference number 2012/0048745.



The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.



No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2197 / Virus Database: 2437/5179 - Release Date: 08/05/12



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UK Parliament Disclaimer:
This e-mail is confidential to the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying is not permitted. This e-mail has been checked for viruses, but no liability is accepted for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2197 / Virus Database: 2437/5183 - Release Date: 08/07/12

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mrs Oliver,
I merely announced the ruling of the school adjudicator who was extremely sympathetic to the unexpected delays the project had encountered. We had to get the formal agreement of the adjudicator before any final formal decision is taken by the executive.
Regards,
Mark Weldon

From: sheilaoliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: Fri 07/03/2008 17:29
To: FOI Officer; John Schultz
Cc: Cllr Paul Carter; Cllr Mark Weldon; Cllr Dave Goddard
Subject: Re: Risk register - ref 933

Dear Ms Naven
Ah well, that was before Cllr Weldon announced in this week's Express the actual opening date of the school. That announcement to the press changes everything. How can this development be progressed when no account of further costs have been made public and it hasn't even gone to the Executive yet for a decision?

Cllr Goddard has promised to intervene on the costs issue to get the Internal Auditor to actually respond to me. I am just waiting for some further FOI evidence before I write to him. That is all very interesting and useful. Thank you very much .

Kind regards

Sheila
----- Original Message -----
From: FOI Officer
To: sheilaoliver
Cc: FOI Officer
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 4:09 PM
Subject: RE: Risk register - ref 933

Dear Mrs Oliver,
I am writing in response to your request for information below (ref 933).

The information you have requested is due to be published in the near future as a paper regarding this matter will be presented to the Executive. The information is therefore exempt under section 22 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
Section 22 states that:

(1) Information is exempt information if-
(a) the information is held by the public authority with a view to its publication, by the authority or any other person, at some future date (whether determined or not),
(b) the information was already held with a view to such publication at the time when the request for information was made, and
(c) it is reasonable in all the circumstances that the information should be withheld from disclosure until the date referred to in paragraph (a).
(2) The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent that, compliance with section 1(1)(a) would involve the disclosure of any information (whether or not already recorded) which falls within subsection (1).
Section 22 is a qualified exemption; therefore the Council must carry out a public interest test:
In favour of disclosure:
1. Earlier scrutiny of the Council’s actions
2. Allowing the public a deeper understanding enabling the community to participate more fully in the debate which in turn, enables the public to better understand the Council’s decisions.
In favour of withholding:
1. Information will shortly be in the public domain through a tried and trusted disclosure route.
2. Public and members will have opportunities to comment and influence decision making
The Council has decided that the public interest lies in withholding the information in this case.
If you are unhappy with the way we have handled your request you are entitled to ask for an internal review. Any internal review will be carried out by a senior member of staff who was not involved with your original request. To ask for an internal review, contact foi.officer@stockport.gov.uk in the first instance.
If you are unhappy with the outcome of any internal review, you are entitled to complain to the Information Commissioner. To do so, contact:
Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
www.ico.gov.uk
01625 545 745
Yours sincerely,
Claire Naven
Claire Naven
Data Protection & Freedom of Information Officer
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council

From: sheilaoliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 31 January 2008 07:32
To: FOI Officer
Cc: Cllr Paul Carter; f-blatcher@audit-commission.gov.uk
Subject: Risk register
Dear Sir

I note from the Harcourt Street risk register, which again I had to fight really hard for was it three months to see, that the Council considers the risk of requiring drainage works in excess of the allowed prov sum as high and also the risk of the Environment Agency requiring additions surveys with implications on delays or costs is also high. Given that, I would like to see any documents anywhere in the Council where any account has been taken of these potentially huge costs on this already massively rising cost of this school. The risk register was written in November and the planning application was rushed through in January. I presume in the interim someone took some sort of account of these potential costs - or maybe not.

Kind regards

Sheila

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------







Dear Mr Khan

At long last I have now received a copy of the Lightning Protection System (LPS)Results for your Vale View School , which,I thank you for. In essence, these results have confirmed my allegations that your Vale View school LPS is substandard..

My comments on the test results are

1.This report confirms remedial works have been undertaken. What remedial works and why were remedial works required on a BRAND NEW SCHOOL.

2. The report claims there are 25 # down conductors but only 23 conductors were tested?

3.The average test results are 46 Ohmms, which is non- compliant to the BS/EN 62305.2008.

4. There appears to be a huge ohms resistance variance reading between the 23 test points which, is most strange!.

5. The report comments at the bottom of the page are most disconcerting " the system has been returned to a safe and serviceable condition", which suggests the system was unsafe and not serviceable before the test.That statement concur my allegations of sub-standard LPS!

I look forward to receiving a full report of the LPS remedial works,how much it costs and why it was necessary etc. I also look froward to receiving a copy of the schools Lightning Risk Assessment LRA.

I feel we are making some progress Mr Khan and I now await the LRA and the status of the external  football pitch and changing rooms.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dansfield


 
 
Back to content | Back to main menu