Wharfedale Trail opponents push to have their say
OPPONENTS of the proposed Wharfedale Trail were determined to have their say at a meeting of Addingham Parish Council despite a decision to defer discussion of the consultation report.
Chris Battersby, whose property the proposed path crosses, repeated his claim that North Yorkshire County Council had threatened to impose the trail on reluctant landowners.
He said he had been told by a council officer that the Highways Act would be used to force landowners to accept it, whether they agreed or not. Mr Battersby dismissed the consultation as a propaganda act.
"I feel the parish council has no mandate to recommend that the Wharfedale Trail be adopted," said Mr Battersby.
Parish council members deferred their discussion on the contentious issue until they each had a chance to study the lengthy document which is more than 2cms thick.
Chairman Councillor Gordon Campbell said that the document would be discussed at the parish council meeting in April and would be debated by the whole village at the annual parish meeting in May.
Coun Ian Taylor disagreed with Mr Battersby's dismissal of the report. He said: "I don't agree with the point made from the public area tonight. I think it is a fair report - it was never a report of a ballot or a vote. To say we have no mandate - if anybody has a mandate it is us as elected members of the parish council."
Coun Campbell said he was surprised that the report contained allegations of dirty tricks and intimidation by the Addingham-based opposition group.
It also accuses the opposition of posting libellous and false allegations on an internet web site forum.
Coun Campbell said: "I thought it would stick to the facts not bring in the other side."
But council vice-chairman Alison Widdup said that if the dirty tricks had affected the methodology of the study then they had to be mentioned.
Coun Danny Palmer said that a section of the report blamed the theft of consultation leaflets from Ilkley Library on opponents of the scheme.
"I don't think that should be in there," said Coun Palmer.
According to the study, there is widespread support for the proposal in Ilkley and Addingham, whereas in Bolton Abbey only four people responded.
Coun Alan Jerome said he wanted to know what the next stage of the process was before it was debated at the next meeting.
He said: "Will it not be a good idea for the clerk to find out what it is, so we all know what the process is going forward."
Coun Andy Scull, a supporter of the trail, said that it would stand or fall depending on the opinion of members of the public.
6:42pm Thursday 27th March 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: Jenny, Addingham on 7:45am Fri 28 Mar 08
The answer to Alan Jerome's enquiry about the next stage in the process is that the decision to hand the Trail to Sustrans , submit planning applications and bully the landowners into submission has already been made !!
It has been publicly stated the if the Councils ( Not Addingham Parish Council who will not have any say in this respect ) approve McQuillans biased and flawed Consultation the project will be handed over to Sustrans. Since both North Yorkshire and Bradford Councils have vociferously backed McQuillan in the media , have provided thousands of pounds of funding for the Consultation and have flagrantly allowed their Council Logos to be used on and add credence to Trail propaganda , what possible chance is there of not recommending Sustrans to get on with the job. The answer quite clearly is no chance at all.
The funding for this consultation has been obtained by Councillor Andrew Scull from the local Councils involved. Many people are asking where the records of how this money is being spent are kept and how this information can be made available to the rate paying public who have ultimately financed this Consultation. Perhaps Messrs Kelly and White who appear to be members of the Forum can provide us with this essential information. That does not seem likely because almost every facet of the Forum's work appears to have been dealt with by Councillor Andrew Scull and nearly every member of the Forum except perhaps Cllr McLachlan has been effectively "dumped" and has had no say whatsoever in what has been done in the Forum's name. Particularly in respect of the Forum's disgraceful Web Site. Gordon Campbell had the good sense to realise this and resign with honour whilst his good name was still intact
Since large amounts of public money have been allocated for the Consultation ( £6150.00 plus an unspecified secret contribution from Yorkshire Dales National Park and possibly others ? ) what checks and balances are in operation to ensure that this public money is being properly spent and accounted for ?? What qualifications and prior experience does Councillor Scull have in this respect ?
Too much doubt has been cast on almost every facet of this Consultation for it to have sufficient credence to be carried forward. Whilst all those wishing to push forward this flawed and botched Consultation and I include all the Councils who have provided our money , ultimately this project will have have to be dropped because there is growing evidence that the process will ultimately attract the attention of the statutory regulatory and audit process. The Councils concerned should ignore this at their peril.
The answer to Alan Jerome's enquiry about the next stage in the process is that the decision to hand the Trail to Sustrans , submit planning applications and bully the landowners into submission has already been made !!
It has been publicly stated the if the Councils ( Not Addingham Parish Council who will not have any say in this respect ) approve McQuillans biased and flawed Consultation the project will be handed over to Sustrans. Since both North Yorkshire and Bradford Councils have vociferously backed McQuillan in the media , have provided thousands of pounds of funding for the Consultation and have flagrantly allowed their Council Logos to be used on and add credence to Trail propaganda , what possible chance is there of not recommending Sustrans to get on with the job. The answer quite clearly is no chance at all.
The funding for this consultation has been obtained by Councillor Andrew Scull from the local Councils involved. Many people are asking where the records of how this money is being spent are kept and how this information can be made available to the rate paying public who have ultimately financed this Consultation. Perhaps Messrs Kelly and White who appear to be members of the Forum can provide us with this essential information. That does not seem likely because almost every facet of the Forum's work appears to have been dealt with by Councillor Andrew Scull and nearly every member of the Forum except perhaps Cllr McLachlan has been effectively "dumped" and has had no say whatsoever in what has been done in the Forum's name. Particularly in respect of the Forum's disgraceful Web Site. Gordon Campbell had the good sense to realise this and resign with honour whilst his good name was still intact
Since large amounts of public money have been allocated for the Consultation ( £6150.00 plus an unspecified secret contribution from Yorkshire Dales National Park and possibly others ? ) what checks and balances are in operation to ensure that this public money is being properly spent and accounted for ?? What qualifications and prior experience does Councillor Scull have in this respect ?
Too much doubt has been cast on almost every facet of this Consultation for it to have sufficient credence to be carried forward. Whilst all those wishing to push forward this flawed and botched Consultation and I include all the Councils who have provided our money , ultimately this project will have have to be dropped because there is growing evidence that the process will ultimately attract the attention of the statutory regulatory and audit process. The Councils concerned should ignore this at their peril.
Posted by: Jenny, Addingham on 7:45am Fri 28 Mar 08
The answer to Alan Jerome's enquiry about the next stage in the process is that the decision to hand the Trail to Sustrans , submit planning applications and bully the landowners into submission has already been made !!
It has been publicly stated the if the Councils ( Not Addingham Parish Council who will not have any say in this respect ) approve McQuillans biased and flawed Consultation the project will be handed over to Sustrans. Since both North Yorkshire and Bradford Councils have vociferously backed McQuillan in the media , have provided thousands of pounds of funding for the Consultation and have flagrantly allowed their Council Logos to be used on and add credence to Trail propaganda , what possible chance is there of not recommending Sustrans to get on with the job. The answer quite clearly is no chance at all.
The funding for this consultation has been obtained by Councillor Andrew Scull from the local Councils involved. Many people are asking where the records of how this money is being spent are kept and how this information can be made available to the rate paying public who have ultimately financed this Consultation. Perhaps Messrs Kelly and White who appear to be members of the Forum can provide us with this essential information. That does not seem likely because almost every facet of the Forum's work appears to have been dealt with by Councillor Andrew Scull and nearly every member of the Forum except perhaps Cllr McLachlan has been effectively "dumped" and has had no say whatsoever in what has been done in the Forum's name. Particularly in respect of the Forum's disgraceful Web Site. Gordon Campbell had the good sense to realise this and resign with honour whilst his good name was still intact
Since large amounts of public money have been allocated for the Consultation ( £6150.00 plus an unspecified secret contribution from Yorkshire Dales National Park and possibly others ? ) what checks and balances are in operation to ensure that this public money is being properly spent and accounted for ?? What qualifications and prior experience does Councillor Scull have in this respect ?
Too much doubt has been cast on almost every facet of this Consultation for it to have sufficient credence to be carried forward. Whilst all those wishing to push forward this flawed and botched Consultation and I include all the Councils who have provided our money , ultimately this project will have have to be dropped because there is growing evidence that the process will ultimately attract the attention of the statutory regulatory and audit process. The Councils concerned should ignore this at their peril.
The answer to Alan Jerome's enquiry about the next stage in the process is that the decision to hand the Trail to Sustrans , submit planning applications and bully the landowners into submission has already been made !!
It has been publicly stated the if the Councils ( Not Addingham Parish Council who will not have any say in this respect ) approve McQuillans biased and flawed Consultation the project will be handed over to Sustrans. Since both North Yorkshire and Bradford Councils have vociferously backed McQuillan in the media , have provided thousands of pounds of funding for the Consultation and have flagrantly allowed their Council Logos to be used on and add credence to Trail propaganda , what possible chance is there of not recommending Sustrans to get on with the job. The answer quite clearly is no chance at all.
The funding for this consultation has been obtained by Councillor Andrew Scull from the local Councils involved. Many people are asking where the records of how this money is being spent are kept and how this information can be made available to the rate paying public who have ultimately financed this Consultation. Perhaps Messrs Kelly and White who appear to be members of the Forum can provide us with this essential information. That does not seem likely because almost every facet of the Forum's work appears to have been dealt with by Councillor Andrew Scull and nearly every member of the Forum except perhaps Cllr McLachlan has been effectively "dumped" and has had no say whatsoever in what has been done in the Forum's name. Particularly in respect of the Forum's disgraceful Web Site. Gordon Campbell had the good sense to realise this and resign with honour whilst his good name was still intact
Since large amounts of public money have been allocated for the Consultation ( £6150.00 plus an unspecified secret contribution from Yorkshire Dales National Park and possibly others ? ) what checks and balances are in operation to ensure that this public money is being properly spent and accounted for ?? What qualifications and prior experience does Councillor Scull have in this respect ?
Too much doubt has been cast on almost every facet of this Consultation for it to have sufficient credence to be carried forward. Whilst all those wishing to push forward this flawed and botched Consultation and I include all the Councils who have provided our money , ultimately this project will have have to be dropped because there is growing evidence that the process will ultimately attract the attention of the statutory regulatory and audit process. The Councils concerned should ignore this at their peril.
Posted by: HAROLD, ADDINGHAM on 11:52am Fri 28 Mar 08
[bold]"But council vice-chairman Alison Widdup said that if the dirty tricks had affected the methodology of the study then they had to be mentioned"[/bold]
May I suggest that Ms Widdup not only read McQuillan's Report BUT also for the sake of fairness bring herself up to speed on what has gone on since this Trail was first suggested such as:
1) The very first invitation only meeting held by [bold]David Hall of SUSTRANS[/bold] and attended by the so-called [bold]"independent" SUSTRANS consultant Jeff McQuillan[/bold] ([italic]MEETING - Tuesday 12th July 2005 in the Old School, Addingham at 7.00pm[/italic] ).
JD CYCLES were invited BUT where were the LANDOWNERS & FARMERS over whose land the proposed Trail was to pass - NOT INVITED ?!
2) [bold]David Hall of SUSTRANS[/bold] was quoted in the minutes of this meeting:
[italic]"He (David Hall) said he had spoken to the major landowners and received a positive reaction, particularly from the Bolton Abbey estate"[/italic]
Which "major landowners" provided them with a "positive reaction" - it certainly was not the Bolton Abbey estate" ?!!!
3) Check the [bold]Addingham Parish Council minutes (June/July 2006)[/bold] and you will find that [bold]David Hall of SUSTRANS was barred from all future APC meetings[/bold] due to his wholly unreasonable behaviour
4) Let's not forget that neither ex-Forum member and Chair of APC [bold]Councillor Gordon Campbell[/bold] OR [bold]Danny Jackson of BMDC[/bold] (who provided funding for the Consultation) knew nothing about [bold]the "independent" SUSTRANS consultant Jeff McQuillan's professional and financially beneficial working relationship with SUSTRANS who first promoted this Trail[/bold] .
[bold]Councillor Scull's excuse to this has always been that this info was in the public domain and could have been unearthed if anybody had chosen to go digging for it ........ IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISCLOSED !!![/bold]
5) Scurrilous accusations on Scull's website AND within McQuillan's Report of intimidation, theft and more - all unsubstantiated
I have read [bold]the "independent" SUSTRANS consultant Jeff McQuillan's Report[/bold] from cover to cover and see no mention of the lies and [bold]unscrupulous tactics employed by SUSTRANS, SCULL or McQUILLAN[/bold] .
[bold]
LIES
LIES
LIES
THE WHARFEDALE TRAIL
A CORRUPT, FLAWED & HIGHLY PREDICTABLE PUBLIC CONSULTATION[/bold]
"But council vice-chairman Alison Widdup said that if the dirty tricks had affected the methodology of the study then they had to be mentioned"
May I suggest that Ms Widdup not only read McQuillan's Report BUT also for the sake of fairness bring herself up to speed on what has gone on since this Trail was first suggested such as:
1) The very first invitation only meeting held by
David Hall of SUSTRANS and attended by the so-called
"independent" SUSTRANS consultant Jeff McQuillan (
MEETING - Tuesday 12th July 2005 in the Old School, Addingham at 7.00pm ).
JD CYCLES were invited BUT where were the LANDOWNERS & FARMERS over whose land the proposed Trail was to pass - NOT INVITED ?!
2)
David Hall of SUSTRANS was quoted in the minutes of this meeting:
"He (David Hall) said he had spoken to the major landowners and received a positive reaction, particularly from the Bolton Abbey estate"
Which "major landowners" provided them with a "positive reaction" - it certainly was not the Bolton Abbey estate" ?!!!
3) Check the
Addingham Parish Council minutes (June/July 2006) and you will find that
David Hall of SUSTRANS was barred from all future APC meetings due to his wholly unreasonable behaviour
4) Let's not forget that neither ex-Forum member and Chair of APC
Councillor Gordon Campbell OR
Danny Jackson of BMDC (who provided funding for the Consultation) knew nothing about
the "independent" SUSTRANS consultant Jeff McQuillan's professional and financially beneficial working relationship with SUSTRANS who first promoted this Trail .
Councillor Scull's excuse to this has always been that this info was in the public domain and could have been unearthed if anybody had chosen to go digging for it ........ IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISCLOSED !!!
5) Scurrilous accusations on Scull's website AND within McQuillan's Report of intimidation, theft and more - all unsubstantiated
I have read
the "independent" SUSTRANS consultant Jeff McQuillan's Report from cover to cover and see no mention of the lies and
unscrupulous tactics employed by SUSTRANS, SCULL or McQUILLAN .
LIES
LIES
LIES
THE WHARFEDALE TRAIL
A CORRUPT, FLAWED & HIGHLY PREDICTABLE PUBLIC CONSULTATION
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
