Connecting Crouch End and Hornsey with news, views and information
So if you wake up tomorrow confined to bed with a carapace , perhaps this is the reason.
Consider yesterday's meeting of the planning sub-committee. The agenda consists of 7 items.
Items 1 - 5 are completely standard , they give us no information at all and apply to every Haringey Council meeting that ever takes place.
Item 6 enables the meeting to exclude members of the press and public - which it clearly is going to do.
Item 7 is the business of the meeting which is entirely "exempt", that being the terminology for secret.
So we know that the planning sub-committee was to have considered a planning application, but not who has made the application, at what address, for what purpose. Presumably we will only know the outcome when the wall dividing us from Islington is built, or when Finsbury Park is replaced by a Wireless Festival Theme Park, or Lendlease move on and redevelop the entire council estate.
Consider applying for a parking permit renewal. Haringey's charging structure now mirrors the DVLA structure on CO2. As far as I can tell the one additional item of information LBH needs to charge me for the next year is that my car is rated at 111 grams per kilometre. At the moment they know it is between 100 and 150. But in addition to this I must also supply the log book and my driving licence, which contain infrmation they already know. I know they know because they tell me all this information when I enter my applicant ID. Going through this again merely occupies my time and makes work for Franz.
Consider the Red Flag farrago - as fine an example of institutional denial as you will find.
Consider the Fortismere millions - as clumsy an attempt to sneak something under the radar as may be.
The image is a direct link to a page on Anthony Hummel's blog. Click on the picture to be taken there.
So, did anyone find out what the Planning Committee sat down to consider? I notice the webcast failed to appear.
After the complete omission of any clues to the content of the Planning Committee's Feb 18th meeting, and the non-appearance of the webcast, comes the minutes of the meeting -
I shouldn't waste your time reading it. It's the meeting that wasn't there. Something to do with "Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings" perhaps. So we're not allowed to know what we're not allowed to know about. It's a known unknown unknown.
Transparency at work.