Tag Archives: Matthew Melias

HI HO, HI HO IT’S OFF TO THE OMBUDSMAN WE GO …

Opening salvo against that scabrous little Tory shit, housing boss, Hooper …

From: s-norman123@hotmail.co.uk
To: faircomment@bristol.gov.uk
CC: wayne.harvey@bristol.gov.uk; matthew.melias@bristol.gov.uk; sw1ne2001@yahoo.co.uk
Subject: RE: FORMAL COMPLAINT
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 10:14:48 +0000

On December 17 I received a letter, ‘Re: report of anti-social behaviour’ from Nick Hooper, Service Director, Housing Solutions and Crime Reduction. A copy of the letter is attached. An identical letter was sent to XXX XXXXXX.

The letter is partial, inaccurate and breaches my rights under Article 6 of the ECHR. I further believe that Hooper’s correspondence is a crude attempt to bully and harass me.

My specific concerns are:

  1. Hooper appears to have conducted some kind of investigation in to me, which I was unaware of and which I was not invited to take part in. I have been given no opportunity via Hooper’s ad hoc process to provide evidence nor cross examine the evidence of others. There therefore appears to have been a covert investigation in to me by Hooper who has then gone on to draw conclusions. This breaches natural justice and my rights under Article 6 of the ECHR while Hooper’s covert investigation also meets the definition of ‘directed surveillance’ under RIPA. Hooper’s failure to inform us of an investigation and involve us in his investigation is therefore unlawful.
  2. Hooper is a housing officer. He is neither a lawyer nor a police officer. He is therefore neither skilled nor qualified to undertake an investigation into potentially criminal matters. Hooper is acting beyond his limited powers.
  3. Hooper accuses me of “behave[ing] in an anti-social manner” and “disrupt[ing] a councillors’ surgery” but provides no supporting evidence to back up these claims. The statements are therefore defamatory, intended to bully and harass.
  4. Hooper has failed to follow your Code of Conduct for Investigations policy, which provides an easy to follow format to conduct, “Formal management investigations arising where managers request an issue to be investigated where that issue does not fall within one of the recognised policies”.
  5. I am concerned that as a candidate at the last election in Avonmouth, I have been the victim of political bias. Hooper’s letter has been written on behalf of a Conservative councillor for Avonmouth and is totally accepting of and biased to their point of view. Hooper’s post is politically restricted. This means not only should he not engage in party politics but that he needs to be seen to not be engaging in party politics

What I require:

1. Hooper to withdraw his letter and all the claims and accusations contained therein.

2. Hooper to write and apologise to me.

3. If you still wish to pursue this pointless matter, a proper investigation into the events of December 3 needs to take place that is conducted openly, fairly and according to your policies and the law by a suitably qualified and skilled practitioner.

Finally, I note that Hooper is a Service Director. Your complaints procedure states, “The manager responsible for the service will look into the concerns”. As the manager of the service, however, I do not expect to see Hooper investigating himself. I therefore request that a senior officer at a grade above Hooper look into our concerns. I’d be grateful if you could inform me, at the earliest opportunity, who this will be. Please note, I will expect this investigating officer to personally sign off their conclusions rather than dumping it on to an unsuspecting and disposable minion.

Kind regards,

Steven Norman

Tel: 0117 2398042
Mob: 07747490902

 

BOOMTERRAGATE: MORE STINKS IN AVONMOUTH!

From our Avonmouth correspondent

For once it’s not a product from one of either Boomeco, Churngold, New Earth Solutions or Wessex Water’s latest ventures with the Evading Agency that’s creating A STINK down in Avonmouth but it might be closely connected.

It would seem that our old friend Councillor WAYNE “DEE” HARVEY, protector of the faithful and lickspittle to ‘the boys in the boardroom’ at his other employers the BRISTOL PORT COMPANY, might have misinformed the public about his involvement in the recent VICTORY by Avonmouth residents who stopped the Nexterra biomass plant from getting planning permission.

Even local MP “CHARDONNAY” CHARLOTTE LESLEY congratulated Wayne for his spandex stretching heroics in apparently forcing planning supremo “KING PRAWN” CALABRESE to stop dealing with this matter under his self-awarded delegated powers. And knowing Chardonnay’s penchant for bandwagons and publicity, we applaud her selflessness in standing slightly out of the limelight to allow Wayne some much needed glory before he blunders toward his next POLITICAL DISASTER.

Admittedly Chardonnay had been crowing about her own efforts to get permanent air quality measurements in place at Avonmouth and her success in getting some form of analysis for “another year”. So she probably thought she could chuck a bone to Wayne before he commits POLITICAL SUICIDE the next time someone lets him out to play unsupervised.

Residents understand that BCC will only be extending the monitoring for NINE MONTHS at ONE site yet to be identified. And after listening to the woeful air quality study put forward by BCC’s in-house ‘air quality expert’ at the Nexterra planning meeting, residents expect this study to be handled with the same forensic, laser-like focus as the current one.

We therefore anticipate the project will run thus; FUCK it up, COVER it up and SHUT UP about it.

However, unfortunately for Wayne, as the chair of Planning Committee ALEX “DEAD” WOODMAN indicated before a packed Council House last Wednesday night, his claims are, er … utter bollocks! Tweedle Dee had NOTHING to do with getting this application before a planning committee as the time for a councillor to do this had lapsed. The plans were called in by a council officer, possibly ‘KING PRAWN’ although we await clarification about that.

BCC are truly amazing in their depth of knowledge though aren’t they? The peasants of Avonmouth should feel privileged we have the gigantic minds of people like DR MARK “NOT QUITE” WRIGHT (what’s he a doctor of? Ginger beards?). He told the planning meeting that wood dust was fine because his experience of constructing flat pack furniture that weekend after a week designing an incomprehensible IT strategy for the abysmal telephony and data management systems in place at BCC, indicated that BACON, yes BACON, was far more carcinogenic than the tonnes of unsuppressed dust settling on any unfortunate Avnomouthonian daring to eat a butty between zero hour contracts.

To be fair, another Councillor did point out that you have a choice about eating bacon, which might skew DR NOT QUITE‘s expert analysis of respiratory cancer anomalies and the huge variance from the national average of heart attacks and strokes in in non meat eating and non-christian or multi-faith but no-bacon-thank-you Avonmouthians in the coming decades. Until then, we suggest he can sod off and stop belittling the absolute nightmare his policies are causing far from his own leafy ward.

Outstanding questions that need to be asked around this bizarre planning application episode include:

    • Why did Councillor Wayne “Dee” Harvey claim to have intervened in a planning process which he had previously endorsed despite multiple objections from residents? In fact neither Wayne, the local MP nor the other Councillor Matt ‘Dumb’ Melias objected to the application in the first place despite strong objections by residents. This begs the question of whose interests they actually serve if not the residents of the ward?
    • Was the original attempt to rubberstamp the application through delegated powers legal or lawful? As we understand it, the application should have by its content and impact on the community been put before a planning committee for scrutiny and not been considered under delegated powers in the first place. We await BCC’s response about the ‘extra training’ or other such outcome from their investigation into ‘King Prawn’s’ professional conduct as a public servant in this matter.
    • Why have the Bristol Evening Post not printed a retraction of their story despite their own reporter being present at ‘Boomterragate’ last Wednesday evening and witnessing the exchange with her own eyes? A serving Councillor seemingly misinformed the public via a newspaper article. This was clarified via a formal question by a member of the public to the chair in the public chamber. The public record needs to be corrected. It would be nice if the Post could devote the same size content and position within the paper to allow Wayne to clarify his position but we’ll settle for two sentences sandwiched between Gimp costume suppliers in the small ads if that’ll help. A conversation with one of the reporters at the Post promises to bear fruit so we’ll give them the benefit for the meantime.
    • Is the appointment of an employee of the Port, as a non-executive director looking after BCC’s (and therefore residents) interests ethical or legal? Doesn’t the Councillor have a massive conflict of interest? Another recent incumbent non-executive director also had some interesting business connections and held positions of public office whilst presiding over the introduction and development of the wood chipping industry that sprang up at the Port during her tenure. An industry with such stellar names as Boomeco, Churngold, Stobarts Biomass, EGNI International, A&A Recycling and AW Jenkinson forest products. An industry that was prised tooth and claw from their positions of near immunity granted by the Evading Agency and BCC pollution control staff. Regulators who seem more interested in killing off fledgling businesses on the other side of the city with actions that could be construed as malfeasance in public office, rather than taking on multi-million pound industry players to protect the health and wellbeing of the public they are paid handsomely to serve.

Planning law seems to be a hot topic in CHERNOBYL, sorry Avonmouth at present. It has now emerged that Councillor Dee Harvey’s latest PET PROJECT to shore up his woeful performance in building community spirit after the civil unrest in the summer may be going off piste at an alarming rate.

It seems that Tweedle Dee has neglected to consult with the community he apparently serves and has decided that he will personally ensure that Avonmouth is put firmly on the map, well Google Earth at least ,with a MASSIVE XMAS TREE parachuted into an Avonmouth park probably by Chinook at 3am.

We understand that this Avonmouth Park, or the ENCHANTED WOOD as it shall be known going forward, will require a hard standing and electrical supply to be installed to support the illuminated tower of power Councillor Harvey has helped to secure via an anonymous benefactor from the Port.

However, it seems this development hasn’t been near the planning department and no public consultation has taken place as far as we can ascertain. Given the short space of time before the event is scheduled one wonders if ‘King Prawn’ will be called upon to grease the wheels of government after his recent successes with power stations and highly toxic ash storage within meters of residential homes,

We’ll have to wait and see. BCC officer APRIL RICHMOND of some local partnership quango or other indicated that because ‘it would be hidden’ in some sort of Tracey Island kind of way, the advice she had been given was no planning application or lawful process needed to be served; we can only hope the advice didn’t come from ‘DR DEATH’ MARK WRIGHT after a weekend building a shed.

Although, if they’re wrong, it sends out a very poor message indeed if the city’s planning authority doesn’t see the need to bother getting planning permission.

On a positive note for the west country, Swindon got twinned with Disney, Avonmouth gets BHOPAL.

Anyway, time to sign off from Avonmouth as I need to decontaminate my kids before bed.

REMEMBER, REMEMBER 5 NOVEMBER BIOMASS, PLANNING AND LIES

AVONMOUTH NEEDS YOU ON THE FRONT LINE

Avonmouth councillors will be at the local NEIGHBOURHOOD FORUM. We want to challenge them over there over their continued failure to represent the best interests of the residents of Avonmouth and their support of the building of the Biomass incinerator.

Venue: Avonmouth Community Centre
Time: 6.30pm

On Wednesday we need further support at Shitty Hall which is when the planning application will be heard to approve the incinerator. Lets make sure we make it a 5 November to remember!

Lets give ’em one hell of a firework display!

Photocall on the Green: 5.15 -5.30
Main Event: 6.00pm

KNOWLE NOISE ANNOYS?

>> HOPKINS, THE “TRAINED EAR” AND THE GREAT LANDVEST MYSTERY

‘Meat Zeppelin’, Councillor Gary Hopkins, watercolours, 2013, @guriben

‘Meat Zeppelin’, Councillor Gary Hopkins, watercolours, 2013, @guriben

BRISTOL City Council boss, Senior Environmental Health Officer, MARK ‘BUNGLE’ CURTIS displays an interesting approach to his enforcement work.

Up in leafy Knowle he’s been showing zero tolerance to noise pollution, slapping a noise abatement notice on the so-called TOWN HOUSE, a business hiring out a large house for family gatherings. They also run the GOTHIC MANSION on Redcatch Road, which has recently been refused retrospective planning permission because of just one verified complaint and lots and lots of hearsay evidence.

Indeed, so enthusiastic is Bungle to prevent pollution in the leafy south Bristol suburb many neighbours of the Town House and the Gothic Mansion claim to have never heard any noise from either place at all!

However this hasn’t stopped the local councillor, GARY ‘FUCKBUCKET’ HOPKINS, who resides a long way from either house on the other side of Redcatch Park, from running a one man campaign against the business via his regular excruciating assault on the English language, the Lib Dem Focus leaflet for Knowle.

The few local supporters FUCKBUCKET has managed to recruit to his campaign also display similar signs of mental disorder towards both the Town House and the Gothic Mansion. One neighbour, when visited by the owners of the nearby mansion to discuss any problems, opened his door and announced, “I have dealings with LANDVEST,” and promptly shut the door again.

Why would anyone care if this neighbour has dealings with Landvest? A PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY registered in the Isle of Man, presumably for tax reasons, who recently built a load of executive homes on land next to the Gothic Mansion on the site of the old St Peters cancer hospice.

It’s also reputed that Landvest got the land despite bidding £150k less for it than a local consortium headed by that old friend of The BRISTOLIAN, Bristol Labour leader HRH Helen of Holland.

So far, so murky. But now we hear that pollution control man BUNGLE, having issued the paperwork to get the Town House in court and fine them in the region of £140k for noise is now backing out and getting the council’s legal team to settle out-of-court.

Why would that be? Does Bungle not want these local witnesses with “dealings with Landvest” and his ‘evidence’ – all of which is based on his ‘trained ear’ rather than from certified audio reports from the calibrated equipment he has access to – cross-examined in court?

This is a strange – and expensive – turn of events when you consider the council will happily settle the case if the defendants agree to cover their own legal costs. Thus dumping us, the council taxpayer, with a large bill for the legal costs BUNGLE and FUCKBUCKET have run up over their weird Knowle NOISE OBSESSION.

Meanwhile, over in the working class suburb of AVONMOUTH, we find Bungle taking a very different approach to enforcement when there’s no obsessive Lib Dem councillor with an agenda; no shady property firm in the background; lots of certified audio reports from calibrated equipment and a set of very credible witnesses able to back up their claims and itching for action.

The SIMS METAL plant at Avonmouth docks has been, since at least 2010, the subject of literally hundreds of RECORDED COMPLAINTS for noise and dust pollution. While whistleblowers have come forward and stated that noise and dust suppression equipment has not been used at the plant for years, apparently with the full knowledge of the plant’s regulators Bristol City Council and the Environment Agency.

However, the council boss responsible, BUNGLE, has done NOTHING whatsoever about the plant. It seems, in this case, Bungle popping down for a friendly chat over a cuppa and a slice of cake every now and then with the wealthy businessmen in charge is all that’s needed.

This informal, light-touch approach seems to be backed by BUNGLE’s employers, Avonmouth Tory councillors WAYNE “DEE” HARVEY and MATTHEW “DUM” MELIAS who are happy to tell any complainants crap such as, “it’s none of your business you’ve only lived here four years” and our favourite response to this major public health threat – “you just have to put up with it”.

It’s enough to make you wonder what drives and influences Bungle’s regulatory decisions isn’t it? It’s not witnesses or evidence that’s for sure.

ARE COUNCIL BOSSES BARRA MAC RUAIRI AND ANGELO CALABRESI BENT?

bribes

Senior Bristol City Council planning officer ANGELO “KING PRAWN” CALABRESI along with his boss, head of planning and place, BARRA MAC “NUGGET” RUAIRI have decided that planning permission for a 10MW BIOMASS INCINERATOR in Avonmouth can be decided by themselves, behind closed doors, on Tuesday.

How have they reached this bizarre anti-democratic decision not to put this application in front of a planning committee? Their written guidance clearly states:

(a) Delegated officers must refer matters to the relevant committee as
they consider appropriate having regard to the following factors:-

i) whether the matter would have such an effect on communities, businesses or individuals such as the matter ought to be considered/determined by councillors;

How can anyone seriously believe burning 60,000 tonnes of waste wood a year near a residential area will not have an effect on “communities, businesses or individuals”?

Their decision is perverse. Moreover, why have they not attempted to publicise this application to the community? And why haven’t they displayed notices at or near the proposed site as required by law?

There’s two reasonable explanations for the pair’s conduct:

1. They’re thick and incompetent and simply do not have the basic reading and comprehension skills required to do the jobs they’re handsomely paid to do.

2. They’re bent and in the pockets of biomass corporations.

While there’s considerable circumstantial evidence – judging by his lack of performance in post over his nine months in Bristol – that BARRA MAC “NUGGET” RUAIRI is a posh, thick incompetent who ain’t up to the job, we also think other avenues need to be explored.

We therefore believe that Bristol City Council needs to start an immediate investigation into this pair for potential breaches of THE BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION ACT.

We also think the city council should inform the police with a view to having the pair’s bank accounts searched for any unusual payments.

Can’t do any harm can it?

THEY ARE SHAFTING AVONMOUTH ON TUESDAY

nbbing_header1

On Tuesday October 21 October, Bristol City Council planning officer, ANGELO CALABRESI will rubber stamp under delegated powers a planning application for Balfour Beatty and Nexterra Systems Corp (NXT) to build a 10MW wood burning (BIOMASS) incinerator opposite the old Phil Black Site.

This means that this application WILL NOT even go before a planning committee. Only councillors can now call this decision in to put before a planning committee.

Lib Dem councillor in Lawrence Weston, TIM LEAMAN, has been seeking the assistance of Avonmouth councillors Wayne “DEE” Harvey and Matthew “DUM” Melias. And guess what? They’re dragging their heels.

An Avonmouth resident said, “we need to make the summer protests look like a garden party. Once again we need to wake up the people who think it’s ok to play RUSSIAN ROULETTE with our health and wellbeing and that of future generations.”

The planning application is here. And you can make a comment here. Reasons to oppose the plant include:

·      Carcinogenic dust hazard

The plant is stated to burn 60,000 tonnes per annum of waste wood. Boomeco, with whom this plant is stated to operate, at present exports about half this figure from Avonmouth docks.  The dust created by the stacking and loading of this current quantity of waste wood already causes significant nuisance and health hazards in Avonmouth. These have already been widely reported in the Press. Wood dust is classified by the World Health Orginisation as a grade 1 carcinogen (causing cancer of the nasal passages.) The proposed handling of double the quantities of wood would continue in the open air, causing a serious, possibly illegal, health hazard.

·      Toxic Wood Fuel

The Atkins EIA states (3.2) that the waste wood will not include Grade D waste categorized as hazardous waste and including all grades of wood including treated material such as fencing.  Anybody who has visited Days Road or the other Council domestic wood waste reclamation sites – which will provide the fuel – can see that decking, fencing, lead-painted wood etc. containing heavy metals is a standard component.  This is not separated out and thus will be included in the fuel. If burnt, these toxic materials will pass through to the ash and flue emissions of the plant. As PM2.5s and nano-particles they can disperse poison over the whole city.

·      Source of Fuel too dispersed

This will be trucked from as far afield as Oxford, Wiltshire and Hereford. Wood has a low specific energy content as a fuel – it is bulky for the amount of heat delivered – So transport emissions of greenhouse gases will be high.

·      Competition for waste wood Fuel

The Mayor of Bristol has proposed local district heating schemes using waste biomass as fuel. These would compete with Boomeco for the fuel. Other waste-wood plants are proposed and the source of supply may be threatened.

·      Greenhouse gas consequences of inadequate supply of waste wood.

Throughout the UK waste-wood power-plants are being built and it is almost certain that the supply of waste wood will not be sufficient to guarantee long-term availability of this fuel source.  The companies will be using the fall-back position that they can always import wood pellets/chips. Experience (eg. Drax power station) shows that this wood is likely to come from clear felling old-growth forests in the USA, or plantations that have displaced old-growth forests. DECC have stated that they expect 80 per cent of biomass to be burnt in the UK for power generation will have to be imported. DECC have published figures to show that this fuel is WORSE for greenhouse gas emissions than the current fossil fuel mix for electricity generation. http://www.foe.co.uk/blog/blind-carbon-burning

The sustainability of the fuel source IS  a ‘material consideration’ for planning purposes.

·      Alternative re-use of waste wood

Wood is a valuable resource. The Bristol Wood Recycling Project state that 25% of scrap wood can be reused. Waste wood can also be used for making chip and particle board. A technology that sees it only as fuel to burn, is an outdated technology that has no place alongside the ambition of Bristol as Green Capital 2015.

·      Fire Hazard

The 2012 fire at Tilbury power station in the wood pellet store – which took three days to bring under control and destroyed the storage facility – shows the dangerous nature of storing wood chips/pellets. There are no plans to handle the fuel under an inert atmosphere.

 ·      Dangerous Wood Dust disposal

The plant will not accept ‘fines’ from Boomeco. This is the wood dust which must be removed before the fuel is burnt. This is an explosive and carcinogenic substance. There are no details of how and where the fines will be disposed of by Boomeco.

·      Toxic Ash disposal

The ash will contain heavy metals and other toxic substances from the waste wood burnt. There are no details of how and where this will be disposed of.

·      The plant is in a flood zone

What precautions will be taken to stop wood fuel, toxic ash etc. from being scattered by a flood?

·      Impact on Natura 2000 classified Severn Estuary wildlife refuge.

No figures are supplied modelling the deposition of nitrogen. The deposition already exceeds permitted levels on the reserve, which is less than a kilometre from the site. If the potential impact of the pollutants directly attributable to the installation exceeds 1% of the permitted level, the effect of background concentration, and also the potential effect of all other planned facilities that could contribute the same pollutants, must be assessed. This has not been done.  Atkins admit (8.6.1.3)

‘there may be indirect impacts on the ecology and wildlife of the estuary’

·     Untried technology.

The company behind this application, Nexterra, and the process they use, have been beset with serious problems, which go far beyond those of ‘conventional’ biomass plants.  Recently, Nexterra were forced to close a similarly designed plant in Tennessee because within less than 18 months, the weak acids in the woodgas had corroded key components.  Luckily it got shut down without a serious incident. Whereas their similar plant at the University of South Carolina exploded.  Which is not an unusual record for this technology.

http://ubyssey.ca/features/ubc-biomass432/

MORE POISONOUS DUST VENTED OVER AVONMOUTH RESIDENTS

An as yet unidentified farming collective have again been tipping grain on the quayside at Avonmouth under the watchful eyes of the Quay Wall Safety Supervisor without using SUPPRESSION TECHNOLOGY that has taken many years of pressure by residents to actually get provided by the Port to its tenants.

A telephone call was made immediately to the Port Safety Manager who then telephoned an associated minion on the dock itself and you can see by the photos appended to the video that a sub-minion was then dispatched to plug a mister unit, which had not been used, into the water supply. Presumably to save money?

The Port has been contacted many times over this activity and the WILLFUL TRANSGRESSION of the law by the Port’s tenants. Will there be any firm public action by the Port to restore residents’ confidence?

WAYNE “DEE” HARVEY and MATT “DUMB” MELIAS, as elected councillors for Avonmouth also must take action. It is not acceptable to tell residents “to put up with it”; “it’s a dusty port” or “they have been doing it for years” or any of the other bollocks received when residents raise issues with them in regard to law breaking at the Port.

TORY SAYS “VOTE GREEN” AND WANTS AVONMOUTH IN THE SHIT!

The Steve Norman campaign bumped into fellow candidate for Avonmouth, Matthew Melias, today. And what a meeting it was as Melias went a little off message.

“Personally I wouldn’t vote Conservative or for any of the main parties at a general election,” explained the, er, Tory candidate, “but if I did it would be Green”!

Melias then went on to rant about the gypsies camped under Avonmouth Bridge and complain that the council shouldn’t have supplied them with a portaloo.

Yes, much better to leave a load human excrement lying around Avonmouth creating a health hazard.

Vote Tory, get shit!