Somehow this post did not get from the email to the website, so I am editing to include the whole script.
| [Unless something unexpected happens! The Parties are able to make further submissions by 17 January 2025 on the revised National Planning Policy Framework (published on 12 December 20240 and on the Richmond Housing Land Supply Report which will be uploaded to the Inquiry website. It is not thought that this should delay the Inspector’s Judgment being published in March 2025.] The Stag Brewery Public Inquiry finished some time after 8pm on Thursday 12th December 2024 on the fifteenth day. Plaudits go to the Inspector Glen Rollings, who seemed to be announcing his retirement as an Inspector. His demeanour throughout was exceptional, even at the end of some long sessions, and ensured a well managed hearing. His Programme Manager Joanna Vincent showed equal equanimity. As Peter Eaton said: “I also endorse several thanks to Mrs Vincent for incredibly efficient and speedy organisation of all the information on the core documentation which has been really amazing since the April CDC six months ago.” The two stars of the show from a local viewpoint were Peter Eaton, Chair of the Mortlake Brewery Community Group, ably assisted by Nick Grant of Counsel, and Cllr Niki Crookdake, Green Party Member for Mortlake and Barnes Common. Niki’s contribution was immense, and of course informed by having access to Council documents. She combined an ability to master the voluminous varied and detailed documentation, responding to demanding questions and with skill in asking her own questions, not easy for a non-lawyer in a judicial jurisdiction. I have to add a personal note having attended most of fourteen days of the fifteen it lasted. One can recognise the Council’s position; they need money; and a glossy new school paid for by central government would be nice. There is a political compulsion for the full time employees as witnesses doing their best to achieve the objectives set by their political masters. One might have less sympathy for the hired hands, on whom large amounts of our council tax have no doubt been spent to create an urban environment, while at the same time ignoring all the attendant problems. And as noted previously concern about the apparent lack of local political interest in the hearing is rife. Perhaps they did not feel they could challenge the Leaders. Political solidarity should only go so far. Far less sympathy can be accorded to the developers. To their credit their representatives also assiduously attended almost the whole hearing, though even they gave up towards the end of their Counsel’s five hour closing submission. But bar one brief exception they avoided any attempt to engage with the local community, whom they seem to regard solely as Twickenham. They gave short shrift to the many problems highlighted by MBCG witnesses. Belittling any opposition is a technique. Maybe that is what happens when profit is the main motive. This was reflected in the personal attack by Counsel implying a breach of Professional Code of Conduct in respect of disclosure of the false letters of support for the planning applications. That allegation does not of course stand up, as shown by the false letters on the Inspectorate’s website. No explanation of the letters nor apology for that unjustified and unjustifiable attack have been forthcoming. But the last word has to go to Peter Eaton, who neatly positioned himself to have the last word. He said:”From myself and from local residents I would like to say something if I may. At the Case Management Conference it appeared that it was likely that we wouldn’t be streamed. I know that local authorities are strapped for cash so this is just a thank you to the council leadership for streaming this inquiry. It’s been very much welcomed and there’s lots of things have been sent through to me and [resulting] requests to clarify. So I actually thank the council for doing so. I think it’s a very important situation seeing democracy and transparency. It’s got great value.” [This was a brilliant piece of diplomacy from Peter. Whatever the outcome of the Inquiry in March, MBCG needs to encourage the Council not to ignore the local community, but to continue to work with it, as it was compelled to do during the hearing. The fact that the Council had to be coerced by public pressure to provide the live-streaming can be left to the likes of this blog. And it is certainly true that once the decision to livestream had been taken it was provided with enthusiasm and subject to the occasional glitsch with efficiency.] “I’ve never been to an inquiry before; it’s something that you mentioned about members of the public who came along. It’s quite a daunting aura actually for the likes of myself and residents. I think it’s a great skill in the way that you’ve organised this inquiry and the way you’ve operated it in an opening collaborative spirit . I think that has been around the room generally and certainly the way you’ve invited public members to contribute has been received really wholeheartedly.” “I did a quick calculation over the last eight years, calculating the three minutes slots you get at planning committee meetings and the GLA meetings and subsequent meetings. I reckon there have about 66 minutes of a chance to actually say anything about these schemes that have come forward. So to get to day 15 is pretty amazing.” [Another brilliant point to make as the last word which cannot have been lost on the Council or the Inspector.] The Inspector concluded:”This is my last workday. This is my last workday where I will be communicating with people in real life so I’ve worn my Christmas outfit staying in the bounds of respectability. Thank you very much everybody. It was lovely to work with you over the past few weeks Merry Christmas Happy New Year.” And then the immortal words: ‘The Inquiry is closed’. |
