Westferry Printworks: why Robert Jenrick and the government are in trouble (and the complicity of Sadiq Khan)
Below is a detailed summary of the Printworks story updated with the latest Sunday Times revelations www.thetimes.co.uk/article/robert-jenrick-watched-housing-promo-video-on-richard-desmonds-phone-bqb0s8kz2
The Daily Mail last week had a front-page headline which said ‘Minister: I knew I was saving tycoon millions’, the saving we now believe to be about £80 million. But the story started in May when the Minister, Robert Jenrick MP, Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government accepted that a planning decision he had made in January 2020 had been “unlawful by reason of apparent bias and should be quashed”. The planning decision had been to approve the Westferry Printworks development in my ward, Canary Wharf. The development is owned by Richard Desmond, a major press figure. I thought it might be useful to explain some of the background especially as it affects the Conservatives with stories of party donations, fundraising dinners, drinks with tycoons and it also involves Sir Ed Lister and the Prime Minister. I also think it should inform a much-needed reform in the way Ministers make planning decisions and also the experience required of them.
The Minister's decision was also the final reason why I quit as leader of the Conservative Group on Tower Hamlets Council and the Conservative party. I remain a member of the Conservative group as an independent Cllr (if I quit the group there would be no formal opposition group left in Tower Hamlets). But for me it was the final straw after months of doubts about the direction of and competence of the party.
As a Councillor I spend too much time in Tower Hamlets investigating corruption, fraud, dodgy decisions etc etc etc as my fellow Councillor Peter Golds has repeatedly highlighted on this site. As an example, the investigation into our current MP, Apsana Begum over allegations of housing fraud started last November but has not yet concluded.
So when a Minister makes a decision so inexplicable which benefits a developer to such an extent it was too much to take. In my attempts to understand why the Minister made his decision, to reverse it and to ensure nobody repeats it, it looks as if damage is being done to the Ministers reputation and by extension the Conservative Party, that was not my intent but his original decision to approve the development remains inexplicable despite weeks of public discussion and my residents and I need to understand it what happened and why. So it might help if I summarise what happened and explain the various mysteries which remain unanswered although the recent Sunday Times story starts to fill in some key gaps.
Westferry Printworks owned by Richard Desmond ceased printing operations in 2012. It is a prime location, next to the Millwall Outer dock, with good views of central London and Greenwich, ten minutes’ walk to Canary Wharf. In 2014 a consultation started on a new 722 home scheme, up to 30 storeys in height + a secondary school. In 2015 Tower Hamlets Council failed to make a decision within statutory time limits. Desmond then asks Boris Johnson, Mayor of London to make the decision instead. The press now reports several meetings between Richard Desmond and Boris Johnson in 2015/16. But he delegates the decision to Sir Ed Lister, his Deputy Mayor at the time, who in April 2016 approves the development. Sir Lister though made two important changes. After the developer dropped the affordable housing share from 14% down to 11% Sir Lister hired an external consultant who calculated that the site could deliver 20% affordable homes, not 11%. In retrospect and in comparison to other schemes nearby 20% was low especially as, unlike many other nearby sites the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) was set at £0 per square meter of development. The levy (CIL) is a tax on development to pay for new infrastructure much needed here as the Isle of Dogs and South Poplar has to deliver a minimum of 31,209 new homes in fifteen years and office space for 110,000 new jobs. But Sir Lister made the decision in public, opponents could speak against it, he also partially dealt with my then main objection to it, that wind flow onto the adjacent Dockland sailing centre made sailing more difficult for novice sailors in the spring. Although we did not like the decision, at the time we understood it, not true of Jenrick’s later decision.
Demolition work started in 2017 and the basement is dug, both causing major air quality and noise issues for my residents living next to the site.
Then according to the Sunday Times interview with him, Richard Desmond described meeting Mayor Sadiq Khan at the 21st April 2018 Queen's Birthday Party, he said “Khan rushed up to me . . . ‘You haven’t got enough buildings on your site. Would you like to have more buildings?’ And that’s where it all started.”
Both Sadiq Khan and the Mayor of Tower Hamlets John Biggs were then working to increase housing targets on the Isle of Dogs, Sadiq Khan later set a target for the Isle of Dogs of 29,000 new homes plus office space for 110,000 workers, up from 10,000 new homes set previously (& delivered). John Biggs ended up allocating 57% of all new housing in Tower Hamlets to the Isle of Dogs and South Poplar, about a 1/10 of the Borough.
In July 2018, Richard Desmond submits a new larger planning application, doubling the size to 1,540 homes, up to 46 storeys (later two floors are removed at the request of London City Airport, now 1,524 homes). All of the buildings are now taller and a new extra tower is added, reducing the size of the proposed green space.
The Sunday Times then says Richard Desmond told them that at midday on October 22, 2018: “Sadiq’s people [Rajesh Agrawal, deputy mayor for business, and James Murray, then deputy mayor for housing] came into my office and started waffling. I said: ‘Are you backing me on this f***ing development!?’ His planning man, James Murray, said ‘yes’. I said, will you confirm to me you’re backing this?’ Yes, yes, it was all fine. Then they U-turned.”
In November 2018, the Council miss the 16-week deadline to make a decision ( 2nd time on this site). Then in March 2019 Richard Desmond with no sign of Tower Hamlets Council being ready to make a decision asks the planning inspectorate to make a decision, within an hour of being notified the Council agrees to an inquiry. It is then decided that the Secretary of State will decide it, Robert Jenrick from July 2019.
In May 2019 Richard Desmond withdraws the offer of 35% affordable housing and in June 2019 offers 21% instead, at this point CIL is still set at £0. But other nearby sites are being approved offering 35% affordable housing, schools, and paying CIL. The value of that 14% drop in affordable housing was later estimated as broadly around £40 million. Or the revenue value of the 14% if sold privately equals approximately £106 million as some newspapers have quoted.
The public inquiry was in August 2019. Tower Hamlets Council, the Greater London Authority, and residents for once are united on a planning issue and all object to it. It went well, we think we are winning the planning argument. We ask late in 2019 when the Minister will make a decision, we are told by the 20th February 2020, so we think we have some time.
We then have the mystery of the Conservative fund-raising dinner in November 2019.
The Daily Mail on the 30th May this year report that a dinner was held at the Carlton Club in November 2019. Richard Desmond, his commercial director and several senior figures from Mace, the construction company overseeing the scheme (Richard Desmond has no development experience). Robert Jenrick is sat at the same table. This is how Harry Cole of the Daily Mail reported it “Mr Jenrick said Mr Desmond had talked about it, albeit briefly. His spokesman said: 'They were put on the same table, although Mr Jenrick was not aware of this prior to arriving at the venue. 'The developers did raise their application, but Mr Jenrick informed them that it would not be appropriate for them to discuss the matter with him, or for him to pass comment on it.”
The Sunday Times on the 21st June says the dinner was held on the 20th November at the Savoy Hotel, with the Prime Minister making a speech. The attendance details are more detailed. Three named senior figures from Northern & Shell, which Richard Desmond owns. One person from Mace. Henry Bellingham, an MP turned lobbyist, and the Daily Express and Mirror editors, were also there. But Richard Desmond says the Minister watched the first 3 to 4 minutes of a video presentation about the Printworks at the dinner on his personal phone but after that the Minister refused to discuss the scheme further (but at least 5 of 9 people at the table were linked to the development so what was discussed?). It is claimed that neither knew who would be at the table so who placed them on the same table?
On the 28th of January 2020, Richard Desmond made a personal donation of £12k to the Conservative party but we now know that was payment for the table at the dinner. His company had previously donated £10k to the Conservatives, he had also helped the Labour party but most of his political donations went to UKIP.
We assume it is the same dinner being described with a mix up over the location. But was there more than one dinner?
But we now know from court documents that I published, that Jenrick decided to approve the planning application in late December 2019, 4 weeks after the dinner, decision letter issued on the 14th January 2020. The Minister says he told his officers about the dinner. But the Minister goes further than just approving it, he agreed to make the decision before Tower Hamlets Councillors voted on a new CIL charging regime on the 15th January 2020, that lifted CIL on this site from £0 to £280 per square meter. Worth circa another £40 million. He overturned his Inspector's recommendations to reject the scheme on a number of planning grounds. It is the only time he had overturned an inspectors recommendations. We had won the planning arguments but the Jenrick decided to ignore them.
So the total benefit was around £80 million from the Minister making the decision a day early and accepting only 21% affordable homes contrary to his own Inspectors advice that the scheme could deliver a higher % which the Minister accepted to be true (a reminder that Sir Ed Lister, when presented with the same scenario in 2016, got external consultants to calculate a better number). For some unexplained reason in late December the Minister/MHCLG say they were concerned about the viability of the site. But that was contradicted by a separate public examination around the same time in late autumn 2019 that confirmed that sites in the area could pay the new CIL rates and deliver a policy-compliant 35% affordable housing as others had already done. In theory a late stage review might have reduced the £40 million affordable homes benefit but even the Minister accepted that it would have “some benefit although its effect would be limited”.
Tower Hamlets Council and the Greater London Authority in February challenge the Ministers decision through a judicial review process, each submitting their own challenge, Tower Hamlets request full disclosure of all internal documents as part of their case, the Minister calls that a fishing expedition in pre-trial discussions. But in May the Minister folds, he decides not to defend his decision (which means those documents never get disclosed, what was in them?) and accepts that his decision was “unlawful by reason of apparent bias and should be quashed”.
Of interest is that the Mayor of London and the GLA have never publicly discussed or comment on the court case despite them being party to it, the decision and what has happened in recent weeks. Tower Hamlets Council with the exception of a few quotes from Mayor John Biggs are also unwilling to make a fuss about it after winning the court case, later a journalist describes to me the Councils response to requests for information as “bizarrely unhelpful”. Did they all have something to hide as well? I had to pay go to the Courts and pay £56.50 to ensure that the court documents were put in the public domain, these documents had been submitted by Tower Hamlets Council and the GLA, both public bodies.
I won’t go into the later detail given the numerous press reports. But the Cabinet Office has been asked by Clive Betts MP, to investigate and documents have been passed on by MHCLG to the Cabinet Office, the first Freedom of Information requests are also due out shortly.
What happens next is unknown, the government's opponents smell blood, the press is interested (eleven articles in The Times in three weeks) and we now await the next steps from MHCLG, the House of Commons Select Committee and the Cabinet Office. The planning decision also still remains to be made, this time by a different MHCLG Minister probably after a 2nd new inspectors report (each inspection = £0.5 million approximately of costs to the public purse).
Some of the key lessons from this are that Ministers should not be making decisions like this alone and in secret. They should be made in public as the Mayor of London does and ideally as a Committee with others. That planning inspector reports need to be published when complete not after a decision. That all other advice is made public in advance of a decision. Ministers with planning powers also need to be left out of the normal party fundraising process. But as a local Councillor, I have been bemused by how poor the planning process is at MHCLG.
Most people with local government planning experience would have recused themselves from the decision after meeting the developer at a dinner 4-5 weeks earlier. Which leads to a more personal point. When I look at Robert Jenrick's background I see almost no planning nor local government experience. I believe he has made mistakes that a more experienced person would not have done (Sir Ed Lister for example). The Party really needs to think about how it recruits candidates with not just brains and a Cambridge education but some practical experience in the rough and tumble of politics. And I have been astonished how poor the response has been to this story so far allowing it to grow with each new revelation.
PS Can we get the desperately needed new secondary school built on this site, we do not need Jenrick’s errors to delay that any further.
lockdown is over / why covid has so badly affected tower hamlets, our leaders do not take it seriously
I have formally reported sixteen elected Tower Hamlets politicans to the Police and Tower Hamlets Council for breaking lockdown regulations. The report is also below and here as a PDF. The politicians include the most senior politicians in Tower Hamlets, the Mayor, one Deputy Mayor, four other Cabinet members, eight Councillors with additional responsibilities including the Speaker, and finally two backbench Councillors.
I was prompted to submit these reports by these social media comments.
The local MP, Apsana Begum two weeks before this event said on Twitter;
“I am inundated with emails from constituents angry with the Prime Minister & Dominic Cummings. Some lost their loved ones & missed funerals. Some missed their first birth with family. Others had arranged care for their elderly parents from other cities. They all obeyed the rules.” this was in relation to Dominic Cummings allegedly breaking lock down rules. (I believe he did). It received 299 likes and 85 retweets
A Tower Hamlets Councillor Kevin Brady also said on Twitter;
“Really quite fucked off about #cummings. I didn’t get to go to a dear family friends funeral which was devastating; I haven’t seen my mum & dad despite him having been in hospital for surgery; they haven’t seen their kids & grandkids in months. 1 rule for us-another for them!”
On the 12th June 2020, three days after the event Mayor John Biggs in an official email to residents said;
“Finally, coronavirus has not gone away and we are continuing our efforts to support local people. I’d like to remind you that as government guidance on coronavirus is regularly being updated, we all need to keep adhering to social distancing and strict hygiene practices to help keep ourselves and each other safe and well.”
These comments (I underlined key bits) all clearly indicate how important it was to maintain social distancing and follow the rules (allowed to meet up to six people – provided that those from different households stay two metres away from each other). The first response of the Council to my concerns were that they were unlikely to be covered by the Council code of conduct but I have submitted a forrmal complaint.
They were also reported to the Police last week, ref RGO-3568-20-0101-C but they have confirmed they won't act.
I have not attached the 80+ pictures I have but there are a lot of pictures/videos on social media like this one from Mayor Johns Biggs himself
These social media pictures were semi-conscious of the need to avoid pictures of the crowd, the private pictures I have are worse in terms of the numbers, lack of social distancing, lack of masks etc.
If you truly believe Black Lives Matter and that it is more then just a political stunt then you need to demonstrate in your personal behaviour that you wish to protect the vulnerable by maintaining social distancing at a time when 0.5% of the Tower Hamlets population was estimated to be showing symptoms of COVID (many more would not be showing symptoms).
But if elected politicians won't follow the rules and the Met Police won't enforce them then lockdown is over.
This 1st picture is from Mayor John Biggs own tweet, it clearly shows how close together people were but it was OK to publish this picture?
This public video shows how close people were, I have access to other private pictures which show this even more clearly.
Westferry Printworks - detail of requested investigations by sir Mark Sedwill & Clive betts MP + a summary
I have sent two letters on the 15th June to:
Sir Mark Sedwill, Cabinet Secretary repeating my 3rd June request for an investigation, letter here and below
Mr Clive Betts MP, Chair of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee, detailing why his Commitee at Parliament should investigate this, letter here and below, my previous lettter to him can be found in an earlier post
Finally a 12 page summary of the key issues, background and history, here and below. I posted drafts of these documents on the 14th June but I made a few minor tweeks to all of them.
Westferry Printworks combines political scandal (fundraising dinners with a developer 5 weeks in advance of granting their scheme planning permission plus party political donations), concerns over corruption in the absence of any other information to explain why the Minister would financially benefit a developer to such an extent but also fundamental issues about how Ministers make planning decisions in secret. The involvement of the Prime Minister in the earlier smaller planning application on this site in 2016 adds further political interest although in my opinion the decision made by Sir Ed Lister then was more transparent and logical than the 2020 decision.
The Minister Robert Jenrick deliberately timed a decision to benefit a developer by around £40 million. In doing so he went against the wishes of his own Planning Inspector, the local Council, and the Greater London Authority. He also accepted the developer dropping the affordable housing from 35% down to 21%. Last August two separate planning experts judged the scheme could deliver more affordable housing and pay the £40 million for new infrastructure which the Isle of Dogs desperately needs. He thought differently, that the development could afford neither, why? I do not believe direct corruption took place, neither party was that dumb (I assume) but what happened feeds the narrative of corruption and therefore full disclosure is required.
When first challenged with a judicial review of his decision in February 2020 he claimed Tower Hamlets Council was on a fishing expedition but then weeks later changes his mind and accepts his decision ‘was unlawful by reason of apparent bias and should be quashed’.
A related mystery is why Tower Hamlets Council twice on this site failed to make a decision within the statutory time period, in 2018 they missed the deadline by six months. That appears to have been a conscious decision.
The Cabinet Office and the House of Commons Select Committee now need to investigate. The Police won’t investigate further without more information. The Minister needs to release all of the relevant documents and declare other meetings or donations. I believe that there is still something missing from this story to explain why he made the decision that he did which is why I resigned from the Conservative Party in February. Having spent years investigating alleged corruption in Tower Hamlets having to investigate a dodgy decision by a senior Minister in my own party was too much.
BBc Radio 4 interview the world tonight and why robert jenrick should not be the secretary of state for mhclg
My interview on BBC Radio 4 The World Tonight last night about Westferry Printworks
My bit from 2 minutes 5 seconds in
I say that I have not been impressed by Robert Jenrick MP and I do not think he should be staying as the Minister responsible for Housing, Communities, and Local government. It looks as if he is about to make some fundamental changes to the planning system, but the original decision plus his poor responses over the last few weeks suggests that although intelligent he lacks experience and the competence required to be a senior Minister (he has no planning or local government experience for example )
I also talk about endemic corruption in Tower Hamlets. When we see a problem here, one of the possible explanations is some form of corruption. So when I see a decision made nationally those suspicions get aroused again. But I have no direct evidence here either, just a decision I still do not understand and I am grasping for some form of explanation.
Three documents attached;
Tower Hamlets Judicial Review application here & below
GLA Judicial Review Application here
I also have the developers response to the GLA judicial review but it is a purely legal argument but if you want a copy let me know.
These documents received 5th June date from my 3rd March request to access the judicial review documents, see picture
The only document available after that date is the signed Consent Order here
Request for investigation into the decision of the Secretary of State Robert Jenrick MP to approve Westferry Printworks
Email sent today 3rd June to the Cabinet Office, Met Police, House of Commons MHCLG Select Committee and copied into the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG). I will post later more background but my Twitter has a lot of the information.
The email to them said
"Please find attached as a PDF a letter (also click here on link) formally requesting an investigation into the decision of Robert Jenrick MP to approve the Westferry Printworks planning application in my ward (I am the Councillor for Canary Wharf ward in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets) and the reasons for that request as I do not understand why the Minister would make a decision so advantageous to a developer and against the interests of Tower Hamlets residents and contrary to the Nolan Principles, and that this needs investigation.
I understand from the Daily Mail newspaper that the Met Police Special Inquiry Team have already received a request to investigate this, can this be sent to them."
Overview & Scrutiny Questions
By tomorrow Tuesday 21st April I have to submit to the Council a list of questions/issues for the Overview & Scrutiny Committee to look at.
Attached is my draft here as a Word document, PDF below.
The unlocking section needs more work
Strawman means I will not take offence if you rip it to shreds.
Let me know what I have missed?
Peter Golds and I sent the attached letter (& copied below) to the Mayor, Cabinet members and Council officers today as to what we think they need to do as regards Covid-19 given that the Council is responsible for Public Health in TH (not an NHS responsibility since 2013). It maybe that they have already agreed to do all of this in their meetings since the 30th January WHO announcement but to be sure we sent it to them.
It is based in part on information gathered from social media and ideas from you so if we have missed anything let us know and we will amend.
Draft Emergency Response to Covid-19 – Version 1
From Cllr Peter Golds and Cllr Andrew Wood
18th March 2020
I assume that these measures have already been put into place or are being planned but if not we believe this is what needs to be done:
Communications – we need to hugely ramp up our comms on this and involve the Council in community conversations underway already
Database of vulnerable people
We need to build a database of all vulnerable people, based on:
Adult Social Care
I assume you are aware by now of Facebook groups like ‘Tower Hamlets Covid19 Community Support’ as well as a number of WhatsApp groups trying to co-ordinate a community response and to help the vulnerable;
This is not the time for strikes and other disruption by Council staff or those providing essential services, if necessary delay ‘Tower Rewards’ for a year. It is a distraction. Push Veolia harder to sort out their issues.
Food delivery for those told to self-isolate
Retail/Panic Buying/Price gouging
We clearly need to be worried about:
Suggestions might include:
This section needs more work, how will we use extra money granted by government?;
The Church of England has stopped public worship and the Muslim Council of Britain strongly recommended the same the day before. Have we passed that advice onto all faith groups and facilities?
Gyms, Libraries, Public facilities
Registering deaths & funerals
4. Lawyers in Local Government and the Association of Democratic Service Officers have come forward with proposals to lobby to permit remote meetings in the event the current situation deteriorates to the point that all meetings are cancelled;
5. Tower Hamlets operates under an Executive Mayor and so decision making is different to most other councils;
6. There is no reason why full council meetings should only undertake business that it is legally required to do;
7. The May Annual Meeting can be restricted to electing the speaker ad appointing committees. There is no need for anything else to be on the agenda and the meeting can be formalised in a short time;
8. Obviously there will not, this year, be a reception following the meeting;
9. The Cabinet should meet but it’s deliberations can be web cast and members and officers can sit with wide spaces;
10. The regulatory committees; planning and licensing, have public involvement. Again, members and officers can sit and deliberate with spaces between them. The problem comes with public representation. Meetings can be webcast and limits can be placed on those attending the meeting, with public attendance limited to those making representation;
11. Parliament has placed restrictions on access to the parliamentary estate, this includes mass lobbies and no longer being able to enter the estate and access not permitted to non-pass holders who may only attend on parliamentary business.
Another political resignation this time my own:
• I am resigning as a member of the Conservative & Unionist Party
• Therefore I quit as leader of the Conservative group on Tower Hamlets Council
• I become an independent Councillor, a member of no political party, I am not joining another existing political party
• But to ensure that there continues to be an opposition locally I will stay as one of two members of the opposition Conservative group on Tower Hamlets Council (if I quit this group there would no longer be any formal opposition group as a group needs a minimum of 2 members)
• So the nature of my work will barely change except that it will be Peter Golds rather than I that lead the group (which will mainly affect who speaks at Cabinet / Council meetings).
My reasons for leaving are mainly because I have lost confidence in the ability of the Conservative Party as an institution to make good use of the power it now has.
While it has an extraordinary ability to win elections (and is even luckier in its opponents) it is weaker on what to do with that power. I disagree with too many Conservative policies/decisions to stay in not just because I think some are wrong but that I also think too many policies are inadequate given the challenges AND opportunities we now face. I have been publicly very critical of aspects of what Tower Hamlets Council does but in truth I am almost as critical of recent decisions made by the government. Three Conservative Prime Ministers have made a series of strategic errors and I worry things are getting worse, not better so it must be systemic to the party despite the presence in it of a number of capable people.
I also support a relationship with Europe based on an EEA/EFTA economic model. The party has chosen a different harder model and like the Peelites in 1846 I think it is more honest to split then pretend that I support the proposed trade policy. I cannot support a trade border in the Irish sea nor increasing trade friction and am concerned about the lack of debate about the impact on our services industry of a Canada/WTO relationship. The modern Conservative party has ignored why Margaret Thatcher pushed so hard for the Single Market with its four freedoms and Customs Union within the EU.
And it would be dishonest of me to stay in and to stay quiet (although as one of my reasons for quitting is to focus more on local issues I may not have much time to say much about national stuff). Being an independent will allow me to focus on local issues and to support politicians who I think are doing a good job including Liberal Democrats and yes some Labour politicians. The tribal nature of British politics is one of its greatest weaknesses.
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has had an extraordinary history, we have achieved extraordinary things for such a small group of islands and had a greater impact on the modern world than almost any other country. I think that contribution has not ended and I think that we could continue to have an outsize influence on how the world develops. Brexit now forces us to ask new questions about ourselves and our place in the world. What will we do with those new freedoms? What is the balance of risk and opportunities? Is the nation-state the only model or should we work collaboratively with other nations in a structured manner and how do we do that? I am not sure that we have even asked these questions properly let alone got answers yet. That is almost entirely due to failings within the Conservative party.
In 2016 I applied to become a Parliamentary candidate for the Conservative party to try and influence the Party from the inside. I have twice been rejected (ironically the 2nd rejection arrived just before I posted this) although I know many other people in Tower Hamlets who were made candidates. Three of them are now MPs.
But the final nail in the coffin for me was Robert Jenrick’s decision to approve Westferry Printworks against the advice of his own planning inspector. There was a solid argument for staying in and fighting on behalf of my residents with the government (as I fear our local MP’s will be ineffective at doing that). But that decision was so shocking I knew immediately that I had to resign.
I need to have a think about what to do next as I have effectively ended my political career.
But my main focus this year will be on local issues as I plan to do a lot of work on;
• Youth centers on the Isle of Dogs, we only have one small one, that is not sustainable
• New playgrounds in Sir John McDougall Gardens and Millwall Park, better than those to be found in neighbouring Boroughs, we have more £ then them
• Increasing school capacity on the IoD, getting Westferry Printworks secondary school built + rebuilding George Greens + improving school buildings and working out how many schools we actually need
• Transport issues on the Isle of Dogs from Jubilee line to new river crossings
• Plus continue to support the work of the Isle of Dogs Neighbourhood Planning Forum
• Lastly asking whether we should we explore setting up a Town Council for the area to give us more power and resources locally
But I have a question for you. Should I resign now and hold a by-election? Should I stand for re-election? I got elected in May 2018 as a Conservative, does leaving the Party but staying in the Conservative group work or not? I think for most residents the work I do won’t change (many do not even know I am a Cllr) but many people vote for parties not individuals, so can I still represent you until May 2022, the next scheduled election? Let me know.
lessons from the isle of dogs
On Thursday I was asked to give a presentation about Urban Densification to the London Irish Town Planners Association, the audience was half Irish based and half London based. The Irish are looking at densifying new developments so Irelands Government Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government visited the IoD Thursday with Irish planning colleagues to learn some lessons from us.
I had to do the attached quite quickly although I re-used some slides from the IoD Neighbourhood Planning Forum presentations (but the comments are all mine)
Thought you might find interesting and I do plan to do more work on it for future presentations so comments etc welcome