Runswick Bay Kayak Fishing Match And Festival Runs Over The Weekend Of June 15th and 16th 2013

Runswick Bay Kayak Fishing Match And Festival Runs Over The Weekend Of June 15th and 16th 2013. The 2 day festival of Kayak Fishing will involve : a safety course, VHf Radio course, Kayak Modification demonstration, RNLI and Coastguard Demonstrations, camping, barbecues, bar, raffles and of course the grand fishing match with masses of prizes. This is one of the largest kayak fishing festivals in the whole of the UK.

Match organiser Ken Oliver says, it really should be a fun filled weekend, there really is so much going on, remember its all based around the East Barnby Outdoor Centre, we have classrooms, camping, full board with warm dorms and meals all included for those that book. There is a bar both Friday and Saturday evenings with live entertainment on the Saturday.

There are all sorts of workshops going on, for a start with have two BCU Kayak Fishing Safety Courses running, Sunday is now full but I think there is still one, maybe two spaces on Saturdays course.

There is also a RYA VHF Radio Course running on the Saturday, again I think there is just two spaces left on this.

We have a basic navigation and tidal planning workshop for an hour or two on Saturday evening, Not sure if there is any space left on this but I will find out.

The RNLI are coming down, they will have their roadshow trailer with them, there is also all sorts of interaction going on down in Runswick on the Saturday, this includes flare demos and rescue scenarios with the lifeboat, from experience this is really good fun and gets the old adrenalin pumping. :happy:

Also on an evening we have a Moken 14 that is crying out to be drilled and modified, power tools will be provided :cheesy: under the careful supervision of our top modifier Phil. :happy:

There’s a foraging walk, a great one for the families and kids :happy:

We also have a couple of BCU coaches who will be available on the beach to take people out on little Sit on Top kayak taster sessions in the bay..

There’s a fire pit we can use out on the field at centre if we so wish…

And of course then theres the BIG MATCH on Sunday that anyone could win :happy:

Its going to be busy and its going to be fun :cheesy: :cheesy:

If you haven’t already, print those forms off, book your camping/accommodation and start sorting your gear for what’s going to be to the first of its kind, a full on kayak fishing symposium and a fun filled weekend to boot. :cheesy: There’s a link at the top of this page

Further information on the Runswick Bay Kayak Fishing festival Can Be Found Here

• a brief introduction to the satirical cartoons of  ‘Yorkie Gull’, long-time favourite amongst the Scarborough ‘bottom-enders’ – keen observers of local government intrigue and connoisseurs of that timeless tradition in British politics – the pictorial lampoon. Join us now for a light-hearted look at some recent causes of dire embarrassment. Enjoy!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Anyone for a Dip?

Have you invested your DOUBLE Allowances wisely?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A slip of the tongue?

. . . of which there are many, ‘twixt “authority” and “accountability”.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nice day for a white – erm, lie?

“Sing us another one, do . . .”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ As a matter of fact?

. . . a blast from the past . . .

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Caught in a trap?

. . . that’s ready to spring!

• an update by Vanda Inman on new information that casts a long shadow over the prospects for York Potash Ltd and their bid to establish a polyhalite mine in the North York National Park.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

• “That’s not just a miscalculation, it’s a massive error”

Chris France (Chief Planning Officer at the NYMNPA) is showing  serious doubts over York Potash’s  Mine Project, according to the front page of the Whitby Gazette; http://www.whitbygazette.co.uk/

It is a shame that most of the shareholders only get their information via the internet, with a front page screaming – “New Mine would be threat to Tourism”.

Chris France, again . . .

“People might say ‘There’s two mines in that area, its just not a place I want to go anymore’” as visitors avoid congested roads and a spoil heap the size of Wembley Stadium”.

‘Miscalculations have put the future of the York Potash project at risk says planning chief . . . the impact on the National Park is much bigger than what we imagined (imagination lacking here then CF?) …  if we hadn’t asked for more information we would be making a decision on things that are completely wrong now”.

Chris France goes on to say “That’s not just a miscalculation, it’s a massive error”.

On another report on the viability on the economics of marketing the Potash product, Chris France says;

• “ That throws into doubt the whole economic outlook of the project”.

. . . ouch!

And all that despite the editor of the Whitby Gazette, Ed Asquith being a personal beneficiary if the Potash project goes ahead; he is listed as one of the circa 400 Landowners and Mineral Rights holders, within the planning application documents.

“The trick is William Potter, not minding that it hurts.” T.E.Lawrence – ‘Lawrence of Arabia’.

- In the third of his Operation Countryman II series of articles investigating corruption in North Yorkshire Police (NYP), TIM HICKS continues his investigation into the way Alderman Peter Jaconelli (arguably Britain’s most successful and longest running paedophile) and Sir Jimmy Savile OBE (Britain’s most prolific paedophile) were protected from arrest and allowed to operate unhindered for about fifty years.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Enter the IPCC

Regular readers of Real Whitby will know that it has been consistently alleged on the Real Whitby website and in the national press that Officers of North Yorkshire Police ignored clear intelligence about Peter Jaconelli, Jimmy Savile and others committing sexual offences in Scarborough, because of Jaconelli’s local status.

Jaconelli’s obituary shows that he was a Scarborough Councillor, Mayor of Scarborough, a prominent Conservative politician, an Alderman, a  prominent local and national businessman, Chairman of North Yorkshire County Council Planning Committee, of the Economic Development, Planning, Land and Harbour Committees of Scarborough District Council for many years, and a major force in revitalising Scarborough. This shows how influential and powerful he was locally – and why he was left alone.

As a result of the Real Whitby Investigation, two witnesses have come forward and formally alleged that Savile-associate Jaconelli was a paedophile and sexually assaulted them.

On this basis, if Jaconelli was still alive, he would probably now be under arrest as a suspect in the second tier of Operation Yewtree which is investigating offenders that were associated with Savile.

Following our investigation into this over the last six months, I requested that the IPCC investigate these claims of failure by North Yorkshire Police in the same way as the other Police forces concerned in the Savile investigation.

This request was accepted:

“In the light of information received, the IPCC is writing to North Yorkshire Police to ask them to review all relevant material and information to establish whether there are conduct matters that should be referred to us.”  The information received was from Real Whitby.

“The IPCC has received the recently published report from West Yorkshire Police arising from the Savile case. The IPCC has received an earlier referral from the force in relation to the alleged actions of a former West Yorkshire police inspector which is being assessed.

“The IPCC is collating responses from a number of forces we have written to asking them to review all relevant material and information to establish whether there are conduct matters that should be referred to us. These forces are West Yorkshire, Surrey, Sussex, Thames Valley, Greater Manchester, the Metropolitan and Lancashire police forces. The only referrals the IPCC has received at present are from West Yorkshire. The IPCC has asked that each force provides the relevant documents and, if they decide not to record or refer any matters, the rationale for not doing so.

“All the information received is being assessed by the IPCC and we will make decisions as soon as we are able as to whether or not there are matters in relation to the conduct of individual officers that require an IPCC investigation.”

The BBC report on this is here.  The Yorkshire Post report is in more detail and confirms that this step has been taken “as a result of allegations in media reports” which again, can only be a reference to Real Whitby, the only local media organisation that has investigated this aspect of the Jaconelli/Savile scandal.

Scarborough is the area that Savile operated in for the longest period of time (1960 – 2009), and it appears he operated there in joint enterprise with a paedophile-ring led by Peter Jaconelli (who was offending there from about 1955 until about 1999). and involving others.  It now appears probable that Savile was moving hospital patients into Scarborough to meet Jaconelli and others, although I have not been able to find any evidence that they were abused there.

According to Operation Yewtree statistics, there were eight victims of Savile in North Yorkshire, making it the fifth most prolific force area of offending by Savile. However, I assert that if all of the ring’s victims over fifty years were included, (including victims of offences committed by a man with a caravan overlooking the sea, suspected to be Savile), there would be a significantly larger number of victims, probably moving Scarborough to the number one position.

For some time, witnesses have alleged that there was institutionalised corruption in North Yorkshire Police, the local Council, child protection services and the Local Education Authority (NYCC) which allowed Savile’s associate Peter Jaconelli to offend with impunity in Scarborough because of his lofty status and local influence.  Savile’s close association with Jaconelli meant that he was left alone as well.

Concerns about the conduct of the Savile investigation by North Yorkshire Police have already been raised in the national press and by the local MP Mr Robert  Goodwill.

The response of Scarborough Borough Council

Former Scarborian Mr Trevor Harrington wrote to Scarborough Borough Council making the gravest possible allegations about Jaconelli. These allegations have been made by other people who knew Mr Jaconelli and in the local and national press. Mr Harrington has had no response from Scarborough Borough Council at all. Not even an acknowledgement. In short, his complaint has been ignored and stonewalled.

On 18^th February 2013, Nigel Ward wrote to the leader of Scarborough Borough Council Councillor Tom Fox (Conservative: Weaponness) (who served a full Police career in Scarborough during the height of Savile and Jaconelli’s offending, rising to Command all policing in Scarborough as acting Chief Inspector Tom Fox) asking this question:

“What is the intention of the Leader in respect of the many serious allegations, every bit as horrific as those against Jimmy SAVILE, against former Councillor and Mayor Peter JACONELLI, in respect of his status as Alderman of the Borough. Is there a process in train for the Council to adopt the same approach as in the SAVILE case?” 

Councillor Fox’s response was to deny he had received any correspondence from Nigel Ward concerning Jaconelli, although he obviously has. He then indicated that he would not respond to any further correspondence on this matter.

Although Councillor Fox’s motion to remove Savile’s position as an honorary Freeman of the Borough of Scarbrough obtained him national publicity, and he publicly denied any knowledge of Savile’s offending (which we published in full), to this day we have had no comment from Councillor Fox on Jaconelli.

In short, the Council has ignored evidence and buried the complaints.

However, we have received one comment from someone in Scarborough Borough Council. This was from Councillor Colin Haddington (Filey, Conservative). Following email correspondence from me raising concerns about the Jaconelli/Savile scandal, Councillor Haddington emailed me and copied in two victims of Jaconelli’s offending. His sole comment was:

      “Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz”

Which I can only presume is meant to indicate boredom and contempt for the issue.

So in response to concerns that there was a paedophile vice-ring operating in Scarborough run by a member of his party who was a Councillor, Alderman and Mayor, in which possibly hundreds of children were abused over fifty years and a dangerous rapist was introduced to local schools; Councillor Haddington emailed two of Jaconelli’s victims in these insensitive and offensive terms.

This appears to be typical of the attitude Scarborough Borough Council displayed over Jaconelli at the time. It is typical of the attitude that allowed Jaconelli to prey on children with impunity and it is completely unacceptable that the Council should continue to display it.

The response of North Yorkshire Police

The investigation into the conduct of North Yorkshire Police will have to explain why North Yorkshire Police were ostensibly unaware of Jaconelli’s offending for over fifty years, when every schoolboy, teacher, Councillor and most local people in Scarborough were completely aware of it. Had Jaconeli been arrested, that would have led the Police straight to Savile and the rest of the ring.

Most particularly, it will have to explain why in response to an enquiry from Surrey Police during an investigation in July 2007 – which was the best chance that existed of bringing Savile to justice – for any intelligence on Savile, North Yorkshire Police responded with an all clear. In fact everyone in Scarborough knew he was a close associate of Jaconelli, a known paedophile and had apparently been investigated by North Yorkshire Police during a major paedophile investigation back in Scarborough in 2003. North Yorkshire Police Force Intelligence Bureau failed to pass on the intelligence it undoubtedly had about Saville and Jaconelli to the Surrey investigation from 2007 until after Savile’s death in 2011.

The evidence from Mr Harrington and Councillor Geoff Evans, alleging that the North Yorkshire Police had ignored Jaconelli’s offending, was sent to the Police by Scarborough Borough Council when it was received. However, entirely predictably, neither complainant has been contacted by the Police  – or a Crime Number issued – and North Yorkshire Police are refusing to comment. In short, it appears that intelligence on Savile and Jaconelli has again been ignored by North Yorkshire Police.

Another force to conduct an impartial investigation into North Yorkshire Police?

I submit that any impartial investigation into Savile and Jaconelli may reveal offences of misconduct by North Yorkshire Police Officers over a number of years. It may still be possible that some Officers could be prosecuted.

However, following on from the blatantly perverse West Yorkshire Police investigation, in which WYP exonerated itself from any responsibility and which has been widely condemned as a disgraceful whitewash, neither force will confirm if an Officer of North Yorkshire Police was the ninth man who attended Savile’s infamous Friday Morning Tea Club in Leeds.

It appears obvious that North Yorkshire Police will not conduct an impartial investigation into itself that will reveal publicly such serious shortcomings. Even now, in 2013, intelligence received from victims on Savile and Jaconelli from complainants is apparently being ignored by North Yorkshire Police.

I therefore wrote to the Metropolitan Police, the IPCC, Police and Crime Commissioner for North Yorkshire and Chief Constable Madgwick of North Yorkshire Police asking for the investigation to be conducted by officers from another force.  I have had two responses.

• A Detective Chief Inspector of the Metropolitan Police (MPS) working on Operation Yewtree confirmed that my correspondence had been passed to North Yorkshire Police: “Any future e-mails sent by you to MPS officers associated with Operation Yewtree will be dealt with in the same way. I understand that you have brought your concerns to the attention of the IPCC and the HMIC, I therefore feel that the matters you raise are being properly considered and I will make no further comment”. I have, not in fact, brought any matters to the attention of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabularies.

• The IPCC acknowledged receipt of my concerns and responded “We are completely independent of the police service and are responsible for making sure that the police complaints system in England and Wales works effectively and fairly. However, each police force is responsible for considering complaints made against that force and recording your complaint.  Our role at this stage is to forward your complaint to the relevant police force. If you are not happy with the police’s decision on recording your complaint, you have the right to appeal to us. I have passed the matter to the Professional Standards Department (PSD) of the North Yorkshire Police for them to consider whether your complaint would come under the Police Reform Act 2002, the police will be contacting you soon.”

Following on from the West Yorkshire investigation, I think it should be obvious that in a high profile case like Jaconelli/Savile, the Police will not investigate themselves impartially. Hence, my request for an external investigation. However, in response to my request to Operation Yewtree and the IPCC to refer the investigation to another force, both organizations have referred me back to North Yorkshire Police.

Scarborough Borough Council, Surrey Police, Julia Mulligan – the Police and Crime Commissioner for North Yorkshire – and Chief Constable Madgwick of North Yorkshire Police were all given the opportunity to comment on this article, but did not comment.

In this respect, the silence of Chief Constable Madgwick and Police and Crime Commissioner Mulligan, – who have the authority to call in another force – on any aspect of the Jaconelli and Savile allegations since they first arose is Thunderous.

• an ‘In My View’ article by Nigel Ward – reporting on some disturbing revelations regarding serious doubts about the impartiality of the local press coverage of the Sirius Minerals planning application. Click here to read “Economical With The Truth?” [Part One].

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“SSX, Lies and Print-Media”

In a recent conversation with the producer of an investigative-journalism television series, I was asked just what it is that empowers me to scrutinise so diligently the conduct of democratically elected representatives and paid public servants. It is a fair question.

I explained that I regard the activity colloquially known as “feathering one’s nest” as an unforgivable breach of the public trust.

The Free Dictionary defines “feathering one’s nest” thus:

• Verb – feather one’s nest – enrich oneself by taking advantage of one’s position; “The congressman feathered his nest through his connection with big business”

In my view, that definition bears a striking resemblance to the subject matter of this present two-part article – though “nest-feathering” is by no means confined to elected representatives and paid public servants; there are others who carry the burden of the public trust. It is important to us all that they do not betray that trust. I have quoted before the Transparency International definition of “corruption”:

• CORRUPTION is the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. It hurts everyone who depends on the integrity of people in a position of authority.”

I was concerned (but not surprised) that the story of the referral to the North Yorkshire Police Major Fraud Investigation Team of Tim LAWN (resigned Conservative SBC Councillor and erstwhile Chair of the North York Moors National Park Authority Planning Committee) did not appear in the on-line versions of the Scarborough News and the Whitby Gazette (Johnston Press sister newspapers of the Yorkshire Post, which published the Tim LAWN story on 3^rd May 2013 – the day after the NYCC elections). Between them, the Scarborough News and the Whitby Gazette serve all of the immediate area surrounding the proposed Sirius Minerals polyhalite mine.

(Incidentally, we have since learned that the investigation is now in the hands of Scarborough C.I.D.).

I would have expected that the editor of Scarborough News and the Whitby Gazette would feel a sense of duty to inform the public of such a serious development through his two newspapers’ widely-read websites – where much of the public debate about the Sirius proposal has been raging since first it was announced more than two years ago.

So, on 4^th May 2013, I emailed the editor of our local newspapers, Mr Ed ASQUITH, requesting a comment for publication.

Ed ASQUITH has not responded to that email – nor to a follow-up email a few days later on 7^th May 2013, in which I expressed my disappointment at his reticence.

It has long been suggested to me, by people of a wide range of age-differences and of diverse station in life, that the coverage of the Sirius proposals in the Whitby Gazette and Scarborough News has been slanted markedly – some would say exaggeratedly – in favour of the Sirius proposals.

Quite obviously, news of a Major Fraud investigation into aspects of company formation, land ownership and share-holdings on the part of anyone closely connected with the NYMNPA Planning Committee could only have one impact on the good-standing of everyone involved in the planning process – a very negative impact.

But let us now turn our attention to the editorial comment in the Whitby Gazette last week, on Friday 17^th May 2013.

This is how editor Ed ASQUITH, whom the Whitby Gazette has described as the “Paper’s chief who helped to create Whitby ‘feelgood’ factor” (page 21, Friday 3^rd May issue) addressed his readers in response to recent objections to the proposal:

“Dear Reader; The arguments for and against the development of a Potash Mine in the National Park have reached a deep divide with the latest statements by the NYMPA and the points made in two independent surveys. The PA as clarified its concerns to the extent that only a national directive in the country’s wider interests might be able to put the mine plan back on track. It is raising sharp questions which is at the core of the issue. In doing so, the authority has moved the debate on from what might have been seen as maverick and fringe protest to more informed scepticism. The issues now being raised about whether we actually need the minerals and whether or not that need can actually be met, plus the growing concern about the environmental and tourism impacts, threaten to undermine full permission. The potash company might perhaps be forced to look outside the National Park for its mine head. Ultimately the govt. might step in on the basis that the country needs to benefit from the potential export value which would help redress our woeful balance of payments, and to boost the Gross Domestic Payments. In the meantime, all the new shareholders and landowners hoping to benefit, all the staff given jobs by the potash company, and its student support beneficiaries will be aghast at the idea that the members of the PA could at least delay the scheme which has significant backing from a number of quarters. Regards, The Editor.”

I have highlighted one passage in bold type for good reason.

• “all the new shareholders and landowners hoping to benefit will be aghast”.

Indeed.

I now have in my possession a 36-page document entitled “Certificate of Ownership Under Article 12” and rubber-stamped NYMNPA – a list of landowners in the Sirius Minerals ‘Area of Special Interest’ within the North York Moors National Park. I would suggest that it goes almost without saying that these landowners are the very ones whom Ed ASQUITH refers to as “hoping to benefit” in his editorial comment, quoted above.

The seventh entry on the first page of that document appears below, with suitably redaction of the names shown above and below the highlighted entry:

In my considered opinion, this would appear to be the same Mr E ASQUITH as the Mr Edward ASQUITH who appears here on the COMPANIES IN THE UK website.

(There are other interesting names on the list; but more of that on another occasion).

This gives cause to view the Whitby Gazette and Scarborough News coverage of the potash/ polyhalite project in a new light. That coverage has, at best, exhibited an extraordinary degree of gullibility in propagating the extravagant claims of the Sirius Minerals PR-campaign, or, at worst, a carefully orchestrated positive ‘spin’ calculated to sweep public opinion in favour of the development has been conducted by the “Paper’s chief who helped to create Whitby ‘feelgood’ factor”.

Would this be entirely appropriate – if it were under the editorial control of a man with a significant vested interest in the success of the Sirius planning application?

Accepted that – in a democracy – the Press must be free to be partisan, is an editor at liberty to “create” amongst the trusting public a “feelgood” factor that will weigh strongly in favour of his own personal interests?

I would say not.

The Press Commission Guidance on this question is illuminating.

When one bears in mind that the Whitby Gazette and the Scarborough News, with a combined circulation of around 25,000 copies per week, together constitute the sole local sources of print-media information on the progress of the Sirius proposals, one might easily conclude that public opinion is in large degree susceptible to being pro-actively moulded by the local press.

One cannot easily dismiss the suspicion that Ed ASQUITH’s editorial integrity may have fallen victim to the temptations of his own self-interest;

• “all the new shareholders and landowners hoping to benefit will be aghast”.

Aghast, indeed.

So I emailed Ed ASQUITH once again yesterday, offering him an opportunity to offer a statement for publication in regard to any vested interest he may wish to declare, making clear that I felt free to report on his response, if any.

There has been none. Not a word.

There is an old Yorkshire adage: “Where there’s muck, there’s money”.

The reverse appears to have some validity, too: “Where there’s money, there’s muck”!

In summary, then, this two-part article has hopefully demonstrated two salient points:

1) In the first article; that SBC’s Lisa DIXON – who, on 28^th March 2013, threatened legal action against Tim THORNE, Tim HICKS and myself, and against the Real Whitby Magazine – appears to have benefited considerably from the helping hand provided to her, as Monitoring Officer to both SBC and the NYMNPA, by Real Whitby, in the form of the Formal Complaint which she received on 21^st March 2013. She then needed a further six weeks before she referred it to the Major Fraud Investigation Team – thus keeping the matter under wraps until after the NYCC elections.
One wonders if she would ever have scrutinised Tim LAWN’s Register of Interests so diligently (or at all) without the information provide in the Real Whitby Formal Complaint. (No doubt there will be a letter of commendation to Real Whitby from the Council in the post any day now – not!).

2) And in the present article; that the independence and transparency of an editor of local newspapers is by no means something that may safely be taken for granted.

As for the planning decision, with so many new limited companies featuring the word “Minerals” in their titles having been registered through one and the same Whitby accountancy office (and at around the same time that Tim LAWN’s Hollybush Minerals Ltd was registered), one could be forgiven for entertaining a suspicion that some selective sharing of privileged information may have been taking place. It is hard to see how that could serve the public interest.

Our continuing investigation will no doubt progress more quickly as new informants come forward in the noble cause.

Meanwhile, we wait with bated breath for the Whitby Gazette and the Scarborough News to report on the significance of the latest set-back for Sirius Minerals – the Environment Agency has written to the NYMNPA declaring its position – OBJECT (the bold BLOCK capitals appear in the original, here) – in a letter dated 15^th May 2013.

• a short bulletin by Vanda Inman.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

An update on one of the three main outstanding ‘issues’, that of hydrology, has been submitted in response to the Potash ‘Project’.

“The Environment Agency OBJECT to the planning application submitted on the basis that inadequate information has been provided … in relation to the (TWO) following matters . . .

Groundwater Protection – The impact the sub surface elements of the development will have on groundwater and its associated springs, watercourses, abstractions and habitats;

Foul Drainage Disposal – The impact the proposed foul drainage discharg from the welfare facilities will have on Sneaton Thorpe Beck and adjacent waterbodies .

The letter from the Environment Agency:

The ‘buzz’ words being;

“Overcoming our Objection . . . insufficient  information . . . independent terrestrial ecosystems . . . mitigation measures.”

To summarise, the Environment Agencies OBJECTS to the present application because York Potash have not supplied the correct information that allows the Environment Agency to approve. The main contention being Groundwater protection, with more submissions needed, with guidance given on how to achieve approval status. Mainly to do with the management of sub-terranean hydrology, sub-aquifiers and the risks associated with extremes conditions of drought and flood.

The secondary consideration of Foul Drainage Disposal is more clear cut, my surmise is that they are requesting that a mains based drainage system is installed. End of.

Conclusions:

• Risk taken by the Environment Agency – None whatsoever.
• Risk and Cost to Sirius Mineral – Total

That said, the Environment Agency seem to be  bending over – backwards to try and assist this project adding comment to the Major Development Test and further adding regarding the siting of the mine;

“. . . we are likely to have objected in principle had the mine-head been proposed within a Source Protection Zone 1. Whilst we would not necessarily have objected in principle had the minehead been proposed within other Source Protection  Zones or on the Corallian Limestone principal aquifer further south, the degree of risk to the groundwater resource would have been considerably higher. As such we welcome that the minehead proposed has successfully avoided these more sensitive locations.”
Next Steps – given that we are currently objecting due to the lack of information, our preference would be for determination of the application to be deferred in order to allow York Potash to assemble the necessary information.

Should the National Park Authority be minded to grant planning permission contrary to our current objections, we request to be re-consulted and given the opportunity to comment on the inclusion of planning conditions.

We would be pleased to meet with York Potash and their relevant consultants at the earliest opportunity to discuss the additional information needed . . . ”

That reads to me that the Environment Agency have a due responsibility and would like to examine all the risks add infinitum but, should the Park Authority be pressed into making a decision on 2^nd July – then just get back to us,

So an agreement in principle, but not in detail.

Looks like the Project still has wings, but some more cranking up before blast off!

• - an ‘In My View’ article by Nigel Ward, reporting on some widely-believed assertions about the NYP Major Fraud Investigation Team’s investigation into the formation of new minerals companies in the NYMNP.                [Part Two to follow in the course of the week].

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

An article appeared in our regional newspaper, the Yorkshire Post, on Friday 3^rd May 2013, entitled “Councillor probed on ‘failure to register company”, in which Scarborough Borough Council Legal Director Lisa DIXON was quoted as stating that former SBC Councillor (Con) and erstwhile Chair of the NYMNPA Planning Committee Tim LAWN’s failure to register his formation of, and directorship in, Hollybush Minerals Ltd in October 2012 had been reported to the North Yorkshire Police. She went on:

“Although a member of the public referred this to us as a complaint, we were already taking steps in relation to the matter. However, the investigation has now been referred to North Yorkshire Police and we are unable to comment any further at this time.”

Is that so?

Real Whitby had broken the story of Tim LAWN’s Register of Interest irregularities eight weeks before, on 8^th March 2013; “From York Potash, With Love”.

Tim LAWN resigned from SBC – and thus from the NYMNPA – on 18^th March 2013. Strangely, his Register of Interests was adjusted to include his interest in Hollybush Minerals Ltd just two days later on 20^th March 2103.

Real Whitby subsequently expanded on that first article a fortnight later on 2^nd April 2013, in a follow-up article entitled “From Scarborough Town Hall, With Anger”, commenting on the belated appearance of Hollybush Minerals Ltd on Tim LAWN’s Register of Interests.

It has since been confirmed by the North Yorkshire Police that the matter was referred to their Major Fraud Investigation Team only a matter of days before the publication of the Yorkshire Post article – in fact, during the week 29^th April to 3^rd May 2013.

And I have in my possession an email from a Johnston Press (JP) reporter, sent earlier this month, asserting that in a telephone conversation to SBC a month previously (circa Monday 8th April 2013), the assurance was given that Tim LAWN’s apparent failure to have declared his interest in Hollybush Minerals Ltd was nothing more than an oversight – an inadvertent failure to update the on-line Register of Interests in a timely manner.

In fact, a Formal Complaint from a member of the public was sent by email to Lisa DIXON, in her capacity as Monitoring Officer of SBC, on 21^st March 2013 – at least a fortnight before SBC asserted to the JP journalist that everything was in order.

In other words;

IF

SBC’s assertion to the JP journalist on around 8^th April 2013 (nearly three weeks after the Formal Complaint of 21^st March 2013) that there were at that time no grounds for taking action against Tim LAWN  – let alone reporting him to the Police – was the truth  . . .

THEN

Lisa DIXON’s statement to the Yorkshire Post on 3rd May 2013 that it was already known before the Formal Complaint of 21st March 2013 that a serious breach of the law had taken place was outright disinformation – a lie.

Conversely, if Lisa DIXON was telling the truth, why had the JP journalist been provided with blatant disinformation – a lie.

Let us be clear; both cannot be true.

Somebody has been  “economical with the truth”.

But who? And why?

One explanation may be that any delay in reporting the matter to the Major Fraud Investigation Team was motivated by a desire to avoid any further adverse publicity damaging to the Council, the NYMNPA and the prospects of re-election of the ‘double-dippers’ (predominantly Conservatives) in the NYCC elections on 2^nd May 2013.

Another explanation might be that Lisa DIXON’s letters threatening legal action against Real Whitby and the Corruption Busters (28^th March 2013) would be terminally undermined by an admission that it was, in fact, Real Whitby who had alerted her to a very serious breach of the Code of Conduct on the part of Tim LAWN that she, as Monitoring Officer, had completely overlooked.

But there is more.

Stay tuned to Real Whitby – and ask yourself this:

If everything in the garden is rosy – why are they distributing so much ‘fertilizer’?

• Recently-elected Borough Councillor Mike WARD offers his personal view – not as an elected member, but as a PRIVATE CITIZEN – on the important issues underlying Scarborough Borough Council’s recent threats of legal action against Real Whitby and its main contributors the Corruption Busters.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Real Whitby website is performing a valuable function by, amongst other things, highlighting concerns in local governance across North Yorkshire.

Some may have issues with the banner headlines or the tone of the language used, but if the question is “does the site raise issues that are in the public interest” then the answer is most definitely yes.

It could be argued that, at times, the tone of the language used is too hard, which in turn could come from frustration with the lack of answers and meaningful communication.

That said, it should not be allowed to divert attention away from the key issues being presented.

“Fraudulent”, “corrupt”, “criminal” maybe could be replaced by “ill-advised”, “foolish”, “morally indefensible”; but everyone needs to look beyond the language and ensure constructive dialogue is encouraged. The concerns highlighted must be appropriately addressed.

Whatever words are chosen, there can be no excuse for anyone ‘milking’ the system – any abuse of the public purse must be highlighted and the appropriate action taken.

Public awareness has been raised and the issues below, amongst others, have most certainly deserved  investigation, comment and action.

“Me Too!” Vouchers – poorly thought out and badly administered, which in turn lead to serious abuse of the system. NYCC have now admitted this but as there appears to be no evidence to bring any criminal charges it may now be time to move on. We can only hope lessons have been learnt.

Broadband Allowance – fixed allowances of this kind mean that double payments for the same service were made to the dual-hatted Councillors and Councillors living at the same address. A waste of the public purse and morally indefensible. Two Councillors realised this and refused payment from one Authority. Another has now accepted his mistake and paid back the money. Maybe others could acknowledge how their actions were perceived by residents and even now make a charitable donation in lieu of the payments they received. Fixed allowances need to be regulated so this can not happen again going forward. More thought is required.

Mileage Claims – apparently changes are now being made by NYCC to close certain ‘loopholes’. Checks and balances should be in place to ensure that only the shortest route is paid for and again there can be no double claims to different Authorities.

Declarations of Interest - anomalies, oversights, inconsistencies and omissions have been highlighted. Regulations are in place and should be enforced. Councillors have to understand how their actions may be perceived and show some common sense.

Selflessness, openness, transparency and integrity in public life is essential.

• In the second of his Operation Countryman II series of articles investigating corruption in North Yorkshire Police (NYP), TIM HICKS continues his investigation into the cover up over the way Alderman Peter Jaconelli (arguably Britain’s most successful and longest running paedophile) and Sir Jimmy Savile OBE (Britain’s most prolific paedophile) were protected from arrest and allowed to operate unhindered in Scarborough for forty years.
  

• In a stunning development, the IPCC has today accepted his recommendation that North Yorkshire Police should be directed to review all relevant material and information to establish whether there are conduct matters that should be referred to it. Here is the full story:

Savile Gate:  Operation Newtree:  The West Yorkshire Police Connection.

The recent publication of West Yorkshire Police’s (WYP) investigation into its failure to arrest Jimmy Savile (Operation Newgreen) in which it exonerated itself from any blame, alleging there was “no evidence” Jimmy Savile was protected from arrest or prosecution by his very cosy relationship with the officers of WYP has raised a storm of indignation and widespread disbelief

The full report can be read here  for an incisive forensic examination of the errors and inconsistencies in the Operation Newgreen Report click here.

Although Assistant Chief Constable Ingrid Lee admitted that:

• There was “over-reliance on personal friendships” between Savile and some officers.

• “Mistakes were made” in handling intelligence. “There clearly was information available that we should have tied together and we did fail victims in relation to tying that evidence together and we should have done.”

• West Yorkshire Police “did fail victims”.

There are still some glaring inconsistencies:

ACC Lee asserts that in spite of the rumour and speculation surrounding Savile’s Friday Morning Tea Club Meetings which took place with senior police officers while they were on duty most Friday’s for twenty years at which according to Savile complaints against him were destroyed (by the police officers that were supposed to be investigating him) “no evidence has been found of any police impropriety or misconduct.“ This of course ignores the facts that:

• The IPCC is investigating an unnamed  WYP Inspector who is alleged to have acted for Savile.

• The Inspector referred to the IPCC received “advice” from his supervisor at the time.

• The circumstances surrounding the processing of allegations about Savile in 1998 (Paragraph 7.20) have been referred to the IPCC.

• Inspector Mick Starkey, acted as Savile’s driver and bodyguard which may be a breach of discipline because Police Officers are not allowed to perform private security work

• In 2007, Surrey Police asked the West Yorkshire force to check what records it held relating to Savile in connection with its investigation at Duncroft School and an inquiry into suspected offences dating back to 1964.  The latest report said that even after it had received this request, “WYP continued to use him as part of local crime prevention campaigns’.

Currently it appears that 76 crimes involving 68 victims were committed in the WYP area relating to Savile and 72 of those crimes were in Leeds where his police connections were the closest. The youngest of these victims was five years old at the time and eight others were aged nine or under.  Incredibly WYP claimed none of these crimes were reported to the force before Savile’s death.

If I had to summarise Operation Newtree with a phrase, it would be: “Not enough chalk in the whitewash”.

However, the most intriguing inconsistency for me is that the number of Police Officers that attended Savile’s Friday Morning Tea Club has mysteriously decreased from nine to eight.  Well why should that be?

Savile Gate:  Who is the ninth man?

For some time Real Whitby has been pressing NYP and WYP to confirm the names of the Officers who attended Savile’s Friday Morning Tea Club and which forces they were from.  Our requests for clarification on this have been ignored by both forces, although the British Transport Police confirmed straight away that none of their Officers were involved.

Well if all the Officers were from WYP, why should NYP refuse to confirm this and end the speculation with a simple, open, on the record denial, as the British Transport Police did?

Bear in mind that Operation Newgreen is an investigation into “the WYP only” and therefore excludes Officers from NYP. The only conclusion I can draw is that the reference to eight officers attending for meetings is a reference to eight WYP Officers. The ninth officer referred to in the above uPSD article who has been expunged from the Operaton Newgreen report is thought to be a senior Officer from another force, probably the NYP, hence presumably the refusal of either force to deny that Officers of NYP were members of the Friday Morning Tea Club.  

Savile Gate:  Operation Ornament and the Surrey Police Connection

The best chance of apprehending Savile occurred in July 2007, when Surrey Police commenced an investigation into allegations that Savile had abused children at Duncroft approved School.

The Surrey detectives conducting the investigation obviously meant business and conducted a most diligent and commendable investigation. All of the required steps were taken, they collected evidence, interviewed witnesses, carried out background checks on Savile with all UK forces in July 2007 by asking them for any intelligence they had on him. They then called him in for interview under caution at a police station in Surrey in the normal way.  However, the investigation failed totally because:

1. A Police Officer referred to as “Inspector 5” of WYP rang Surrey Police and arranged for Savile to be interviewed at Stoke Mandeville Hospital instead of being interviewed at a Police station, thereby preventing a full interrogation. This is the same Police Inspector referred to above that is currently under investigation by the IPCC and was a member of the Friday Morning Tea Club.

2. West Yorkshire Police Force Intelligence Bureau failed to pass on intelligence about Savile to the Surrey investigation.

• “As Savile’s home police force, WYP would have been the obvious place to collect all such information, but investigation has shown that much of the available information during Savile’s lifetime was never shared with WYP and, when it was, WYP did not connect the events to recognise a potential pattern of offending.”
• “2.14 It is acknowledged that there were gaps in WYP’s knowledge regarding some pieces of intelligence as the force does not have a record of receiving it or the action taken”.
• WYP had computerized intelligence systems since 1993 and a specialized Sexual Offences Intelligence Officer from 1998 onwards, so their failure to amass, collate, analyse and disseminate  intelligence (a standard intelligence function) is inexplicable

3. North Yorkshire Police Force Intelligence Bureau failed to pass on the intelligence they undoubtedly had about Saville and his associate Jaconelli, to the Surrey investigation.

There can be no doubt now that NYP knew that Peter Jaconelli, the Mayor of Scarborough was a paedophile and was protected because of his status as a prominent local Councillor, business man and a close friend of Savile.  North Yorkshire Police had interviewed witnesses about Savile in 2003 during a major paedophile investigation in Scarborough. This information should have been passed on but was not.

The key issue is: why not?  Could it be that the Surrey investigation was deliberately sabotaged by withholding information, or was this simply incompetence?

No one other than Real Whitby has been asking these questions. We have been asking it for months and North Yorkshire Police simply did not comment. It is, in short, maintaining its right to silence.

North Yorkshire Police, The Friday Morning Tea Club, Jaconelli and Savile

It appears possible that a member of NYP was a member of the Friday Morning Tea Club. Although, it is not known if he was a member of the Force Intelligence Bureau, or if he had access or influence over the NYP Force Intelligence Bureau.

However it is known that if Savile had been arrested, he would have spilled the beans on how NYP covered up for Jaconelli at great embarrassment to NYP, possibly leading to disciplinary action against NYP Officers. Hence perhaps the reluctance of NYP to comment  and that when the Savile story first broke, the NYP response was denial: “When the allegations surrounding Jimmy Savile were publicised, we carried out extensive searches of force records which did not reveal a local connection.”

Subsequently, following the Sunday Express and Real Whitby investigations, this denial of any local connection was promptly removed. Then it transpired that Savile had committed eight offences in North Yorkshire. If the offences of Jaconelli and the other members of the ring that he operated with in joint enterprise in Scarborough were added in, it would no doubt be many, many more.

All information collated and processed by Operation Yewtree relating to sexual offences committed by Jimmy Savile and Peter Jaconelli in North Yorkshire has been passed to North Yorkshire Police for investigation. Like WYP, it appeared that NYP was to investigate and exonerate itself. So I therefore wrote to the officer commanding Operation Yewtree in the following terms:

“I am writing to raise my concern that the IPCC has written to Surrey, Sussex, Thames Valley, Greater Manchester, the Metropolitan, Lancashire and West Yorkshire forces asking them to review all relevant material and information to establish whether there are conduct matters that should be referred to the IPCC and to re-look at all information relating to the late Jimmy Savile.”

I understand the IPCC has asked that each force provides the relevant documents and, if they decide not to record or refer any matters, the rationale for not doing so.  However, North Yorkshire Police have been excluded from this directive. 

 In 2007 an enquiry from Surrey Police on Savile received a response from North Yorkshire Police Force Intelligence Bureau that he was unknown to them, when in fact he was a known associate of Peter Jaconelli who was known to Police to be a paedophile and North Yorkshire Police had questioned witnesses about Savile in the 2003 Rutter and White investigation.  Clearly this was a catastrophic failure of Police intelligence, in that from July 2007 to Savile’s death in 2011, North Yorkshire Police knew Savile was under investigation and failed to provide the intelligence it undoubtedly had on Savile to officers from Surrey. 

 I would therefore request that the IPCC extend this directive to North Yorkshire Police so this force is treated in the same way as the other forces that failed to apprehend Savile.

 Because any investigation into Savile in North Yorkshire must now include the Jaconelli paedophile ring first exposed by the Sunday Express, and the allegations of blatant police corruption surrounding him, I would additionally request that the North Yorkshire investigation is conducted by another force or by the IPCC, to ensure an impartial investigation and avoid the lack of confidence over the recent West Yorkshire Police investigation.”

An IPCC spokesman contacted me today out of the blue with the following comment:

“In the light of information received, the IPCC is writing to North Yorkshire Police to ask them to review all relevant material and information to establish whether there are conduct matters that should be referred to us.

“The IPCC has received the recently published report from West Yorkshire Police arising from the Savile case. The IPCC has received an earlier referral from the force in relation to the alleged actions of a former West Yorkshire police inspector which is being assessed.

“The IPCC is collating responses from a number of forces we have written to asking them to review all relevant material and information to establish whether there are conduct matters that should be referred to us. These forces are West Yorkshire, Surrey, Sussex, Thames Valley, Greater Manchester, the Metropolitan and Lancashire police forces. The only referrals the IPCC has received at present are from West Yorkshire. The IPCC has asked that each force provides the relevant documents and, if they decide not to record or refer any matters, the rationale for not doing so.

“All the information received is being assessed by the IPCC and we will make decisions as soon as we are able as to whether or not there are matters in relation to the conduct of individual officers that require an IPCC investigation.”

Summary

Most police officers are good, decent, hard working and do a difficult job with integrity and enforce the law without fear or favour to the best of their ability. We must never forget that. In the case of Savile and Jaconelli, some of them in Scarborough and force headquarters did not meet that standard, over a period of forty years.

Although the Police have made a point of going after high profile celebrities, no police officer has as yet been charged with any offence, or disciplined in connection with the undoubted and admitted incompetence and unprofessional conduct that characterised the investigation of Jimmy Savile.

Although it is a disappointment that the Operation Yewtree investigation has been handed over to NYP, which will do everything it can to evade responsibility for its failure to arrest Jaconelli and Savile. Real Whitby will continue to press for an independent investigation into the conduct of North Yorkshire Police and Scarborough Borough Council over the way Peter Jaconelli and Jimmy Savile were protected.

We will continue our investigations.

I recently received the following email from life long Whitby Resident Ian Wilson. Im sure those born and bred in the town will know Ian and his lovely wife Cherry. Ian’s father was the the old caretaker at Whitby School and you always see him in and around town. Anyway, I’m sure you’ll agree, Ian’s Email highlights the sheer lunacy that is dealt out on a regular basis from the SBC headquarters in Scarborough.

just a little laugh for you my name is ian wilson and i live up larpool drive with my wife cherry, last year we purchased a field next to our house on larpool drive (not the football field) the field had had nothing done to maintain its boundaries gates ect for 20 years.

The field was shrinking in size due to the brambles extending from the edges so we cleared the field of all brambles removed all the dumped rubble and garden waste, cleaned out the french drain put new fencing up in the style of the old or missing replaced the missing gate and posts with a traditional wood farm gate bought locally as was every thing else, replanted the edge rows with over 200 hawthorn/blackthorn/and dog rose about another 200 are still needed.

we also planted shrubs around the french drain to match the lower part of the field and encourage wildlife. most people who live up here or walk past say how much better it all looks sounds like a good improvement to the local area yes ,wrong we received a letter from s.b.c planning enforcement saying that they have monitored the development of the field and have seen evidence of regular mowing of the grass ect suggest i apply for planning permissom for change of
use to a garden a phoned up and explaind that we didnt want it as a garden and would like to keep it as a field but was told basically your cutting the grass to often i cut about every 2 weeks for ease of maintenance if this doesn’t stop this will lead to a formal enforcement order what a laugh cross over the drive from our field onto larpool football field and have a look at the state of it.

the boundaries barriers are rotten and grown over in places there is churned up grass from cars and vans driving over larpool drive onto the field (larpool drive is private ) we have pride in what we own house/ field instead of sbc complainging to us maybe they should come and take a leaf out of our book or is it the fact that our tidy field makes Therese look so bad

Real Whitby says, Come on SBC for gods sake, get Real !!!