Cheadle and Gatley Lib Dems are moving
Your Lib Dem team for Cheadle West & Gatley Learn more
by Lib Dem team on 13 November, 2011
We normally try to steer clear of political claims and counter-claims on this blog, but we feel, after being contacted by several residents, that in this case we have no option to correct claims the Conservatives are making.
The Conservatives have made a claim in their latest leaflet that’s so misleading – and worrying for people – that we’ve decided that we do need to let people know the facts.
The Conservative leaflet says:
You may be interested to note that 7 “travellers’ sites” have been proposed for our immediate Ward and neighbouring areas:
* 2 in Cheadle & Gatley
* 4 in Cheadle Hulme North
* 1 in Heald Green
This is untrue. No travellers sites are being proposed anywhere. Nor is this in any way a “first step” towards proposals for travellers’ sites in any of these locations.
The Council’s going through a legal exercise, part of which involves identifying places which could potentially be developed into travellers’ sites at some time in the future. There’s no reason to think they will be, there are no proposals to do so, and it might well be that they turn out to be unsuitable anyway.
You’ll see from the list below that all the areas identified are currently being used for other purposes, and there is nothing in these proposals that might change that.
It’s a shame that the Conservatives have decided to spread this misinformation and worry people needlessly.
Here’s the detail from the Council:
As described in ‘Providing a Decent Home for Everyone’, providing sites for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople is a borough-wide issue. There were no sites put forward specifically for this use during the Call for Sites exercise, therefore it is necessary to seek a site(s) in each area.
Using the Core Strategy’s basic criteria, the sites/areas below have been identified as being suitably located for Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople sites. The basic criteria used do not, however, take account of things such as residential amenity, transport/highway issues, a site’s individual physical characteristics, etc. which would have to be considered before any site was allocated or developed for this use.
At this stage the Council is not proposing that these sites should be used for this purpose or that these are the only sites which may be suitable – it is, rather, wanting to know if there are any reasons why sites that are suitably located should be ruled in or out. Another consideration is that the sites listed may be more suitable for other uses.
Cheadle Issue 8 – Option/Question 1
If they were available, are there any reasons why the sites listed below should be considered suitable or unsuitable for Gypsies, Travellers and/or Travelling Showpeople? Please note that as stated above these sites are not being proposed for this purpose, they are included simply because they meet basic locational criteria.
032 Demmings Industrial Estate, Brookfield Road, Cheadle
043 Barnes Hospital, Kingsway, Cheadle
086 Cheadle and Marple College, Cheadle Campus, Cheadle Rd,
Cheadle Hulme
089 Outwood Farm, Bolshaw Road, Head Green
115 Carrs Road, Cheadle
146 Bullocks Coaches garage, Stockport Road, Cheadle
160 Lawnhurst Trading Estate and adjacent land, Bird Hall Lane
10 Comments
If they are not proposed take them of the list
The Council can’t do that – the Government legally requires us to identify sites across Stockport that could potentially be developed into traveller sites. If we don’t, the whole framework will be rejected by the Government inspector.
However, the facts as stated above are correct. There are no proposals for traveller sites, and it’s most likely that none of the sites listed would ever be proposed for traveller sites.
Further, at this stage the Council is not even saying that these are appropriate, or that other locations aren’t. This is simply an exercise to identify sites that meet the basic locational criteria.
The Tories may have jumped the gun but at least we know about it now. People are very suspicious about travellers so why didn’t the Libdems publish this information before? The answer is they only tell us what is convenient for them. Two examples – remember a Libdem leaflet before the council elections mentioning a new railway station in Cheadle (pure sophistry) as opposed to their complete silence on the new Tesco store in Gatley when they had opposed the previous application for a similar store on the site of the Tatton eyesore.
But back to the original point – we want to be informed on any news regarding emotive issues such as travellers’ sites.
Hi Bruce,
If you look back on this website, we have invited and asked people to get involved in the development plan – I even wrote an article on it for the Stockport Mail. What we did not do, and would not do, is mislead and worry people by claiming there are travellers’ sites being proposed when there are not.
On your other points, the Cheadle Station is still very much a live issue and we’re working with TfGM to ensure their strategy and our strategy both include a train or tram-train service with new stations at Adswood, Cheadle and possibly Gatley. It’s not an overnight thing – I’m sure even the most fervent optimist doesn’t think new train lines and stations can be built overnight, but it is an ongoing campaign.
The new Tesco, of course, did not need planning permission. There was not silence – you can see what we wrote about it on this website – but there was no planning application.
I agree with Bruce. When were you going to infoerm us about this issue? When they had moved in? There are other more suitable sites elsewhere in the area that would not be on such busy main roads. are there not allocated sited already around Stockport? Hopefully mick jones will keep us up to date with news – I wonder why there aren’t any in Gatley???
No surprises there then!!
surely if Mike Jones is sending out false information to the electorate then he can be brought before the appropriate committee as this is a serious offence.
Barnes hospital…..I can’t see the owners selling this site, they obviously want the present building to become dangerous so they can get permission to demolish the listed building and build a much cheaper more profitable building in it’s place.
Look at the difference in the building now compared to when most haunted filmed in there. Also check out the 28 days later website where dozens of people have gained access to the building to explore it over the years, with little trouble form the security guards.
Why did you remove my comment from yesterday??
Hi Julie,
Your comment wasn’t removed, I just hadn’t been through the comments waiting for approval.
The moment there are actual proposals for travellers’ sites we will both inform people and work hard on residents’ behalf.
What we will not do is make false claims, suggest there are proposals which don’t exist and worry people needlessly.
Iain
[…] misinformation put out by the Conservatives has worried a lot of people into thinking that travellers’ sites are being […]