Sheila Oliver's Campaigning Website

Main menu

Toxic Waste Dump School

POLICE COMPLAIN ABOUT DANGEROUS TRAFFIC SITUATION AROUND THE SCHOOL WITHIN A FEW WEEKS OF IT OPENING.

28TH MAY 2012
Stockport Council Executive Meeting Question asked regarding the dangerous traffic situation around the toxic waste dump school in North Reddish.

29TH MAY 2012
I rang Stockport Council Democratic Services and asked Jonathan Valli, Committee Clerk, if my question was allowed or whether it was considered "vexatious".

He told me he checked the matter with Council Solicitor, Barry Khan, who said it was indeed a vexatious question.

Please have a look at the documents below and see whether you consider my raising this matter as "vexatious".

The Council admits problems with traffic, so why I am "vexatious" for raising this matter?

The Council admits problems with traffic, so why am I vexatious for raising this matter?

The school admits problems with traffic, so why am I "vexatious" for raising this matter?

Please see the two documents below:-

As one would expect, Chris Upjohn at the Ombudsman Service wants a quiet life - like the rest of his colleagues. He was given access to all the information on this site regarding the toxic waste dump school and was happy that nothing has been done wrong by Stockport Council.

Nothing wrong then - children will be run over, many will have disabilities due to mesothelioma and an early death, local residents have to carry new furniture for their homes circa a quarter of a mile, ambulance crews have no access to collapsed residents, the school is not big enough for the children who need to go there, the funding is circa £5 million adrift, there are no sporting facilities to replace the lost playing fields.

But, hush, hush whisper who dares, Chris Upjohn is resting at the Local Ombudsman's Office after strenuous investigation. If his colleagues had done their jobs properly at the outset, then children's lives would not currently be in danger.

The Ombudsman wants a quiet life, as usual.

If Chris Upjohn's lazy colleagues had done their job in the first place, children's lives would not now be in danger.

www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/turning_circle_toxic_waste_dump#outgoing-180550

The Council doesn't own the land for the turning circle. They would have to compulsory purchase it. They could have included this land in the compulsory purchase order but they made a deliberate decision to exclude it. It would have led to a public inquiry given the size of the public open space to be taken. There would have been uproar from local residents, as no-one ever wanted that school to go where it did (except councillors and council officers). This means that in order to implement the safety solution to a problem they themselves identified at the planning decision meeting, they would have to embark on a long, long legal process which would be bitterly opposed by local residents.

When the first child dies in a road accident there, my belief is there are very strong grounds for corporate manslaughter charges to be brought against the Chief Executive Eamonn Boylan.

No-one's child should die in the cause of a nice little earner for Stockport Council.

My account with the What Do They Know website was suspended because with his full permission I posted up details of the Town Hall Protester. I did this in a desperate attempt to prevent them repeatedly sending this completely innocent man to prison. They were driving him to suicide as they played their part in doing with other Stockport people - Andrea Adams who jumped from a tower block aged 18 and Alison Davies who jumped from the Humber Bridge with her young autistic 9 year old son Ryan. I make no apologies for trying to save a life and trying to stop appalling human rights abuses by this council.

Please see the Town Hall Protester page of this website. This page is still under construction.

IRREGULARITIES WITH THE COMPULSORY PURCHASE ORDER.

Please see above:-

The Council misled the Secretary of State, saying they had received no objections from anyone who thought they had an interest in the land. They had received a Statutory Objection from a houseowner who felt he had had an interest in the land for decades. This meant no public inquiry was held into the compulsory purchase order, which the Council was terrified of holding as they problably would have lost. Stockport Council breaks the law and defames people who try to expose what they have been up to by branding them "vexatious" and a waster of public money.

Definition of fraud

"The Fraud Act 2006 defines fraud as activity aimed at securing a gain, causing a loss or exposing somebody to a risk of loss, through false representation, failing to disclose information or through abuse of position. Crucially under the new Fraud Act, no gain or loss actually has to happen for a fraud to occur, the act of fraud is entirely defined by the actions or intent of the individual."

Click here for next page...