Blog Image

Stockport Council News

The Wharf, Marple

Marple Wharf, Uncategorised Posted on Wed, November 13, 2019 18:34:24

The Canal and River Trust put in a planning application to Stockport Council to build seven houses on the site of Marple Wharf. This planning application was refused by the local councillors.

These are the directors of the newly formed Wharf Project Company –

New Horizons, who provide the special narrow boat for the disabled boat trips, is also under jeopardy. What the planning doesn’t state is once the houses are built they will no longer have a mooring and have not been offered an alternative. 


Susan Ingham is a previous Stockport Council LibDem councillor.



Malcolm Allan is a Stockport Council LibDem councillor.



The local Community’s take on this project:

The Stockport Council planning application:


“Redevelopment of Marple Yard comprising the change of use and conversion of the former canal warehouse for a mix of uses including cafe (Use Class A3) with shared space for heritage and visitor display/information, community meetings (Use Class D1) and ancillary gift shop on the ground floor, and wellbeing and fitness room for floor-based activities (Use Class D2) on the first floor, demolition of outbuildings and structures; erection of 7no. dwelling houses (Use Class C3) and a storage building incorporating a waterway service station, together with associated landscaping, parking and alterations to access road. | Canal & River Trust Yard Church Street Marple Stockport SK6 6BN”

Planning Officer – Dominic Harvey

Dodgy Stockport LibDems’ road for votes disaster

Bypass Posted on Sat, November 02, 2019 16:19:51

Stockport Council, forever secretive.

SMBC FOI Posted on Sat, November 02, 2019 16:13:35

Is Vicki Bates, Monitoring Officer at Stockport Council, guilty of offences under the Fraud Act 2006?

Vicki Bates, Monitoring Officer, Stockport Council Posted on Thu, September 19, 2019 11:35:25

“2 Fraud by false representation (1) A person is in breach of this section if he— (a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and (b) intends, by making the representation— B 2 Fraud Act 2006 (c. 35) (i) to make a gain for himself or another, or (ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2) A representation is false if— (a) it is untrue or misleading, and (b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading

3 Fraud by failing to disclose information A person is in breach of this section if he— (a) dishonestly fails to disclose to another person information which he is under a legal duty to disclose, and (b) intends, by failing to disclose the information— (i) to make a gain for himself or another, or (ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.”  “The document says unused school buildings could be reopened and council bosses said they have not ruled out reopening closed schools such as North Reddish Juniors.”

This newspaper report is from June 2012 and talks of re-opening the existing Edwardian school the new still gassing toxic waste dump school was intended to replace. The toxic waste dump school opened in September 2011, less than a year earlier.

“You are building the new school too small” I said to the entirely LibDem Executive at Stockport Council.  “Don’t be vexatious”, they replied.

They knew the birth rate in the area was growing like Topsy and not falling.

Vicki Bates, Monitoring Officer Stockport Council, says asking questions about missing community facilities is “vexatious”.

Vicki Bates, Monitoring Officer, Stockport Council Posted on Thu, September 19, 2019 11:19:26

At the still-gassing, toxic waste dump primary school site, because public playing fields were being developed, Sport England imposed a £650k planning condition.  These new facilities should have been provided before the new school opened in 2011.  To date there is absolutely nothing on the site, and all questions as to why there is nothing there are deemed “vexatious”.

They cheated local people out of their legal right to replacement community sports facilities, and as there is absolutely nothing there, who trousered the hundreds of thousands of pounds which should have been spent on these?

Vicki Bates, Monitoring Officer at Stockport Council, does she ever uphold the law?

Vicki Bates, Monitoring Officer, Stockport Council Posted on Thu, September 19, 2019 10:34:06

When the Stockport LibDem councillors decided to develop a recreation ground, as I understand it they should have consulted the public and held a public inquiry if there were any objections under the Acquisition of Land Act 1981.  Obviously, they did nothing of the sort and every time I tried to raise the matter I was branded “vexatious”, and I still am.

This is how they treated recreation grounds they destroyed to build their bypass for votes (fourth row down on the right), with a newspaper announcement of their plans and the right to object.

No such protection for a recreation ground Stockport Council wanted to develop for the school.

Vicki Bates, Stockport Council Monitoring Officer, at ease with financial corruption.

Vicki Bates, Monitoring Officer, Stockport Council Posted on Sat, September 14, 2019 16:30:06

LibDem planning corruption, with a large proportion of the miscreants coming from the Hazel  Grove constituency – financial abuses.

There is no functioning fraud and financial irregularities policy at Stockport.  I have tried to report this for a decade, but keep being stopped by Vicki Bates, Monitoring Officer at Stockport Council, Michelle Dodds, Deputy Monitoring Officer, other senior council officers and councillors of the cabinet. 

This is an explanation of the rise in the cost of the toxic waste dump school, obtained after talking to a now dead Executive Councillor for Finance, Cllr Carter, in the town hall car park, as I was not allowed to question him in meetings.

As you will see from sheet 2, a figure of £1450m2 was adopted within the cost plan.

As you will see from sheet 1 for the increased floor area from 2600m2 to 3185m2 a cost of £1.050 million is given –

3185 -2600 = 585m2 x £1450 = £848,250 and not £1.050 million.

 Surely, it is in no way “vexatious” to question a financial irregularity of £207,750.  But it is at Stockport firstly under the LibDems and now still under Labour.

In addition, changing areas Sport England – £280,000 – additional 167m2.  Firstly, 167m2 x £1450 – £242, 150 and not £280,000.  Secondly, as far as I am aware there is didley squat there on the site and, of course, I am not allowed to check whether these are hidden inside the school as that would be “vexatious”.

There is no football pitch at the school site – another £75k abnormality Michelle Dodds and others won’t allow me to question.

I asked then LibDem leader of the Council Goddard, now Lord Goddard, chum of notorious gangsters and the person who had sick, innocent Mr Parnell imprisoned.  I have submitted the evidence countless times as I have done to you. This was his response:

Stockport Council Monitoring Officer Vicki Bates and her deputy Michelle Dodds claim it is “vexatious” to question these multi £m financial irregularities. Are these women fit people to hold public office?

LibDem planning corruption at Stockport – Monitoring Officer fine with this.

Vale View School, Vicki Bates, Monitoring Officer, Stockport Council Posted on Sat, September 14, 2019 07:54:02

The Stockport Council assistant monitoring officer Michelle Dodds and Vicki Bates, Strategic Head of Service & Monitoring Officer (Legal, Democratic Governance and Estate and Asset Management), say I am vexatious to have ever raised this issue.  Ms Dodds and Ms Bates obviously care nothing for children’s safety.

The Stockport then-entirely LibDem Executive decided to build the new 500 pupil, still gassing toxic waste dump school at this location where traffic was already horrendous:

Most of the cars  from the houses within the red lines on the photo below, which have to exit their housing estate along narrow Mill Lane past the new, still gassing toxic waste dump primary school, were ignored at the planning meeting. What about the traffic from all these houses I asked and asked?  Don’t be vexatious they replied, and they still do –  Ms Dodds and Ms Bates, Stockport Council panjandrums.

Within weeks of the new school opening the police had complained about the dangerous traffic situation, which I had previously warned the Council about:

The school was issuing letters to parents and residents about the dangerous traffic situation, but still my questions on the subject were and still are “vexatious”.

It would be bad enough that Ms Dodds and Ms Bates, Monitoring Officers, don’t care about children’s safety enough to allow questions to be asked about the traffic situation, but my young son died in a traffic accident aged just 16.  For these women to call a mother who lost her child in a traffic accident “vexatious” for correctly identifying the dangers to primary school children is so offensive to me as to be off the scale.

My son

Next »