It’s Chasmal here and
its been a long while since my last post. Let’s face it, TonyN has
been doing sterling job on the blog, but nonetheless, sometimes
there are things that I read about that I think deserve some
attention on the blog. The first of these is about an application to
open a club in Worcester in an area called ‘The Butts’ – (not
joking, it’s really called that). Business man Ash Patel had a plan
to refurbish a grim and run down set of premises that at some time in
the past had been a nightclub.
Then things got weird……
Worcester Council
decided in 2009 to adopt The Police and Crime Act 2009, from which
the current SEV framework sprang from. Well, they decided to adopt
the powers, but by the time the next council meeting came around, it
seems they forgot to do it and as a result, horror of horrors, Ash
Patels proposal to turn a derelict eyesore into a lap dancing club
could only have been considered under the prior legislation. In other
words, had he pursued the application, he would have been preparing
his club for a Christmas opening as you read this article.
Then it got weirder…..
The Chair of the
Licensing Committee is Cllr Paul Denham. He has a wife, Cllr Lynn
Denham who is the ward councillor for the area where Mr Patels club
was going to be opened. Lynn was vehemently opposed to the club and
had said so. Therefore hubbie Paul decided to pull out of the meeting
to decide the future of Mr Patels club.
There was apparently
masses of local outrage. In fact retired senior local government
official and father-of-three Adam Scott expressed his horror….
“……I was appalled
to see that there is an application for a pole dancing club being
made on The Butts. It proposes being open for seven days a week, all
night long, where men can go for sexual gratification…..”.
Outraged father of
three Mr Scott also said…
“This is completely
unsuitable in such a location that is used by many young people (near
a library complex with a bar) and is right opposite the houses of
Magdala Court. Whether you agree with the morality of such places or
not, it’s something we don't want to see anywhere in the city
centre and certainly not here.”
All of this can be
found at this link
(http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/10502757.print/)
in an article published on 23rd June 2013.
But there is an issue
here, because it turned out that Mr Scott was absolutely a ‘retired
senior local government official and father-of-three’, but it what
he is now that has relevance. Confused? Please read on…..
Cllr Lynn Denham was a
very busy bee behind the scenes in the summer, because she had sent a
letter to virtually everyone that lived in the ward that explained
that she was fighting the proposal for a club in The Butts.
The letter, written on
paper with an official city council letterhead said she was being
“helped” in her campaign by Adam Scott, a resident and it urged
people to contact him if they shared her worries. The letter said
that Mr Scott could “help residents draft letters” of objection
and answer other questions.
What the letter did not
say was that Mr Scott is a Labour party organiser and campaigner, as
well as a former council candidate, having fought the St Peter’s
seat at the county council elections in May.
Concerned citizen Mr
Scott is also in line to stand again for Labour in next year’s city
council elections in the Cathedral ward. Mr Scott is apparently
widely touted as being Labour’s community organiser in the city
centre.
What are the issues
here?
Well both Lynn and Andy
are members of the Labour Party and it is possible that to see an
interesting combination of interests being served here. It could be
argued that the mere fact that the letter was written on Council
notepaper implies that the City is against, on principle, lapdancing
clubs, which it is not because of the existence of due licensing
process. I suppose if one has a fertile imagination, it is possible
to conceive that maybe Lynn was told about the licensing screw up,
decided to shake some action and build some opposition and remembered
someone who lived in the ward…….
Ash Patel decided to
withdraw his application to open a club in The Butts, but is still
looking for suitable premises in Worcester. The total number of
objections was 13, how many were inspired by Andy Scott, is unknown.
Cllr Lynn Denham is
currently under investigation for her activities in this matter. She
has expressed concern about a ‘smear campaign’ against her. No
worries Lynn, no one needs to do that because you already smeared
yourself….
Now let’s move north
and return to Leeds. Lots and lots of things have been going on in
Leeds in the past few months.
You may know that Black
Diamond applied to extend its premises upwards. They were granted
planning permission. The story is covered in detail by the
outstandingly good blog, ‘The Leeds Citizen’.
The planning committee
found no reason to deny the club its planned extension. In fact, they
stated categorically that lap dancing clubs in Leeds city centre
“rarely result in complaints of public nuisance”. They went onto
say that “It is understood that music levels associated with such
establishments are significantly lower than that of a typical city
centre bar,”.
The police had no
objection to the club at all….
Remember that Leeds is
fighting to close clubs on the basis that they might affect children.
Well the planning committee had something to say about that as well….
“The position of the
building relative to the city centre attractions for young people is
such that pedestrian footfall in this part of New Briggate is low,”
the report says.
“Further, as the
building’s windows are blanked out; no external reference to the
nature of the use within the building are allowed; and given the
proposed hours of use (between 9pm and 6am) it is not considered that
it would be readily evident to children and young people what the
premises was used for,”
The committee looked at
the suitability of lap dancing clubs in general in Leeds..
“…………The
premises are located within the Entertainment Quarter where UDPR
policies seek to focus evening entertainment and associated uses. The
nature of the use is an entertainment use opening during the
night-time and consequently, in principle, the use reflects the type
of use identified in the Development Plan…………”
Then the committee
looked at the moral issue…..
”…… In principle,
any consideration which relates to the use and development of land is
capable of being a planning consideration, but whether it is in any
given case will depend upon the particular circumstances. The
courts are the arbiters of what constitutes a material consideration
and have held that public opposition per se is not. In cases
where fears or concerns are genuinely held by members of the public,
these may constitute a material consideration but case law suggests
that such fears would have to be shown to relate to material
considerations, or be objectively justified or have land use
consequences in their own right. Moral objections to developments,
such as those involving gambling, drinking or sex,
are given little weight in decision making unless there is
some tangible land use or amenity impact deriving from such
activities which can be shown……”
It’s an interesting
paragraph. Almost seems to send a message to the Licensing Committee
doesn’t it. Not that they took any notice of it because they denied
its license application anyway, but it wasn’t a straightforward
process.
The licensing hearing
was set to take place on September 16th, but when the
clubs representatives turned up they noticed that one of the panel
was Cllr Karen Bruce, whose husband seems to spend his spare time
campaigning against lap dancing clubs in Leeds. Mind you, Cllr Karen
has been campaigning against them since 2008 and the Chair of the
Licensing Committee, Becca Charlwood has made no secret of the fact
that she wants to see them all closed.
Isn’t there some
issue about conflict of interest or doesn’t Leeds Council see fit
to follow it?
Now back to the
present. The Licensing Committee meeting on the fate of the other 6
clubs was held last week. A decision will be announced within two
weeks. Let’s take a look at the objections for Purple Door and see
who made them and what they had to say….
Objection 1.
‘Anonymous’ – Quotes Lilith.
Objection 2. Kirklees
Rape and Sexual Abuse Counseling Centre. – Quotes Lilith.
Objection 3.
‘Anonymous’ – writer refuses to go into Leeds town centre
because of the clubs.
Objection 4.
‘Anonymous’ – Quotes Lilith.
Objection 5.
‘Anonymous’ – Quotes Lilith.
Objection 6.
‘Anonymous – Quotes Lilith.
Objection 7. RASAC
South London – Quotes Lilith.
Objection 8.
‘Anonymous’ – Says very little.
Objection 9.
‘Anonymous’ – Quotes Lilith.
Objection 10.
‘Anonymous’ Quotes Lilith.
Objection 11. ‘Justice
for Women’ – Sensible enough not to quote Lilith.
Objection 12.
‘Anonymous’ – Doesn’t quote Lilith but has great map that
explains why every club should be closed as they are close to
everywhere where they can do harm.
Objection 13.
‘Anonymous’ – Quotes Lilith.
Objection 14. SARSVL –
Original piece of work that doesn’t quote Lilith.
Objection 15.
‘Anonymous’ – Doesn’t quote Lilith but has the same map as
Objection 12.
Objection 16.
‘Anonymous’ – Doesn’t say a lot, but at least it doesn’t
quote Lilith.
Objection 17.
‘Anonymous’ – Doesn’t quote Lilith.
Objection 18.
‘Anonymous’ – Doesn’t quote Lilith but like Objections 12 and
15, goes on about historic buildings.
Objection 19.
‘Anonymous’ – The best objection so far as it presents a
mathematical formula that expresses the extent to which women avoid
the immediate area of a venue. Written by a maniac who admits they
dislike clubs on moral grounds, so they can fuck off then.
Objection 20.
‘Anonymous’ – Doesn’t quote Lilith.
Objection 21. ‘
Anonymous’ – Quotes Lilith.
Objection 22.
‘Anonymous’ – Quotes Lilith.
Objection 23.
‘Anonymous’ – Quotes Lilith.
Objection 24.
‘Anonymous’ – It’s the historic building objection with the
map.
Objection 25.
‘Anonymous’ – It’s the historic building objection with the
map again.
So we have 25
objections, but if I marked the objection number above with the
phrase ‘Quote Lilith’ it is because not only does it quote a
totally discredited report, the text of the objection is exactly the
same. It’s a boilerplate and it appears 11 times. The historic
building proximity objection appears three times, so it’s a
boilerplate. I disagree with boilerplates for the simple reason that
it is clear a group of self interested individuals have colluded and
in this case they are all almost certainly connected with Object.
I spent some time going
through the objections for the other clubs, they are all the same
objections received for Purple Door. So basically it’s all
bullshit.
In July of this year I
predicted that Wildcats and Red Leopard would get the chop. I didn’t
anticipate Black Diamond, but I still say that Wildcats and Red
Leopard will be lined up for license refusal.
That said, both Red
Leopard and Wildcats have stated publicly that will initiate legal
action against Leeds Council if they are refused their licenses. Both
clubs have very good lawyers and wouldn’t be making statements such
as that unless they thought they had a very good chance of winning
their cases.
I note in the article
in TheLeedsCitizen blog that covers Red Leopards reaction that there
were 25 objectors and none of them turned up at the Licensing
Committee hearing. Hardly a surprise…..
If Becca Charlwood and
Kaz Bruce are stupid enough to deny any clubs their licenses they are
going to end up in court. I look forward to this. There is nothing I
would wish to see more than these two lose their cases and cost Leeds
Council a great deal of money in the process.
I gather that Rachel
Reeves is now the Shadow Employment Minister and has earned the
condemnation of a number of trade union officials because of her hard
core views about the way that the unemployed will be treated under
labour. Maybe she plans to try out her plans on the 750 people that
will lose their jobs if the campaign that she initiated to close
every club in Leeds is successful.
So that’s it from me
for a while. I imagine I will be back to examine the outcome of the
Licensing debacle in Leeds, until then, thanks for supporting the
blog.
No comments:
Post a Comment