Bill Johnson & Sean Parker-Perry - bogus environmentalists

You may have noticed that not much that occurs in the local press escapes our attention. So we've decided to chronicle a series of little 'spats' taking place in public between a couple of individuals over the past few months who like to portray themselves as in some way concerned with the environment. 

One of these we all know far too much about - Councillor Sean Parker-Perry. The other person - Bill Johnson - is not someone we've looked at in detail before, but he certainly deserves more attention. 

It's possible to view these spats as a bit of a 'turf war' for environmental credibility. We've done a lot to document the history of Councillor Parker-Perry's Active Longdendale, but Bill Johnson has his own environmental organisation - Longdendale Heritage Trust (LHT) - which seems to have a record that Cllr Parker-Perry can only dream about. Interestingly, the LHT has also attracted funding from 'Awards for All' - in this case £5,000 to rebuild a drystone wall, a tad more tangible than Cllr Parker-Perry's spending of his grant (about which, at the time of writing details are still not publicly available).

The first of the latest spats come about in May 2007, when TMBC set about felling trees that lined the sides of the deep cutting at Mottram, ostensibly to prevent root growth from destabilising the masonry. Johnson was annoyed, and ran to the Reporter/Chronicle, who duly provided an article. 

Parker-Perry then replied to Johnson in the last 5 paragraphs of a letter on various topics in a later letter to the Chronicle/Reporter. One of them makes clear his priorities:

"Any loss of trees such as this is always a shame, but our engineers must do what is best to maintain major engineering works"

And then Parker-Perry pulls out the classic Greenwash trick - an offer to plant trees elsewhere to mitigate the loss. But in a response to Parker-Perry's letter, Johnson points out the folly of removing trees which stabilise the sloped sides of the cutting and also that cracked masonry has still not been attended to.

All had then been quiet until a couple of weeks ago, when the spats erupted again. This time it was over a request for funding from the Friends of Etherow Lodge Park, in order to fund an orienteering course. The minutes of the District Assembly clearly don't do justice to the passionate feelings in evidence in the local press over the following couple of weeks, and Bill Johnson's subsequent letter to the press is a well-argued illustration of the sound reasons why pathways in the protected woodland have been historically minimised. But then he blows it by attacking and insulting the the 'friends' group in a rather snobbish and condescending manner. 

We've no doubt that Bill Johnson has credentials - but it's always galling to hear someone flout them vainly rather than offer an argument based on evidence and facts. And whilst we tend to sympathise perhaps a little more with him in this dispute, it's all the more puzzling why he has taken a wholly contradictory stance with regard to Swallow's Wood.

For he has always shown much less concern about the fate of this Ancient Woodland. As recently as November last year, he was writing to the Glossop Chronicle to roll out the 'nature will recover' flannel we too often hear from Councillors and Siege, the fig leaf to cover their destructive urges. He even goes as far as to eulogise the M67 Roundabout at Mottram! Johnson's principles may be in short supply possibly because he lives on Ashworth Lane and the traffic queues outside his front door - but then we know he hasn't formally written in to support the bypass either. So where does he stand? 

We'd rather a little consistency was applied in Mr Johnson's concern for the environment, and given that Swallow's Wood is classified by the Woodland Trust as Ancient Semi Natural Woodland, we would have thought that fell under the remit of concern for the Longdendale Heritage Trust. And his eloquent argument against holding orienteering courses in Etherow Lodge Park must surely also apply to Swallow's Wood, where there are plays to destroy it for good. 

**UPDATE 28th October 2008: we are reliably informed that the same Mr Bill Johnson used to be very much against the Bypass - in the early 1990s, he participated in a fledgling (and now defunct) group called PATROL (People Against the Road Over Longdendale). We get the feeling he likes to monopolise concern for the environment if not personify it. But there's no hard feelings - there's room for all kinds of weird people and ego-tripping in this campaign, so come on Bill, get with the program!

Roadmunkey is Sean Parker-Perry - the evidence

Tonight, we present the evidence we have accumulated that the Longdendale Labour Councillor Sean Parker-Perry is more actively involved in the fight for the Longdendale Bypass than the occasional letter to the press or election leaflet would suggest.

Exactly 12 months ago today, a new weblog appeared called 'Support the Hollingworth Bypass'. Over the next 61 days, a series of posts appeared which attempted to lampoon and contradict posts appearing on this weblog, all the while displaying a cavalier sense of design and poor grasp of grammar.

Posts to the blog were signed by the contributor 'Roadmunkey', who left a comment on our very first blog post (scroll down to view). The link to his profile clicked through (and still does) to display info about him. Our first warning as to the existence of the blog came from a comment left on one of our posts by someone anonymous who wanted to bring attention to it (they plugged it again later on that month on this post). We kept following the link back to the profile, and eventually, on April 13th 2007, the blog appeared (the roadmunkey profile used to link to the blog, until it was removed).

With the appearance of this blog, the evidence started to form into a picture of the culprit. We had been tracking edits to wikipedia for some time, and it was clear that someone with a particular IP address - 83.104.50.161 - had been making lots and lots of edits, and had obsessions with subjects familiar and unfamiliar - but unsurprising (we later found out that someone else had decided to chronicle these edits on a separate weblog here).

In one of the more entertaining edits made by this IP address, someone purporting to be Sean Parker-Perry complained vigorously (highlighted in green) about edits made to his (and other fellow Councillor's) pages on wikipedia. The language and tone matched that of an article about these edits that appeared in the Glossop Chronicle on 7th June 2007. The article was instigated by someone outside our circle, seeking to bring the attention of the press to Sean's antics. It backfired - the Chronicle is virtually TMBC's house journal and it's chief journalist David Jones is a hack who mixes and matches with the Longdendale Labour mafia. The article was highly sympathetic to Sean, making him look whiter than white.

But all the while, we had the crucial evidence. Going back to the 'Roadmunkey' blog (since restored by us so anyone can read what he said), the user profile featured an email address - roadmunkey@hotmail.co.uk. We set about sending spoof emails with tracers attached to all of the email addresses linked to Sean as well as this one. They all came back with the following results (click through to see the tracer results):

roadmunkey@hotmail.co.uk
seanparkerperry@hotmail.com
parker-perrys@parliament.uk

We also sent an email to Sean's secretary at Tameside, and it was then forwarded to him, as this tracer shows. All the enquiries returned the same IP address - 83.104.50.161, the same IP address that edited the wikipedia pages. If you click through to this IP address, you get a login screen. This is because it is the server at James Purnell MP's office and presumably allows remote working (from home), and Sean clearly uses his office computer for all his activities, under whatever pseudonym he chooses.

So Sean was Roadmunkey and did edit wikipedia (and still does as far as we can tell). Whilst none of this is illegal, it certainly raises questions about his methods - he'll no doubt do all that he can to disassociate himself with anything that makes him look devious and spiteful.

And what about us? One of roadmunkey's accusations was that we are cowards - largely because we are anonymous. As far as we are concerned, the difference is that we are not running for office as a Councillor and do not claim to represent all the people in Longdendale.

It is far too easy for Politicians to say one thing in public, and do another in private. They are quite rightly held up to scrutiny, though not often enough in our view. It's not our fault that Sean chooses to leave dirty great skidmarks all over the internet, but why should those who point out that the emperor has no clothes have to take huge personal risks to do so?

The information is out there, and all that we are doing is bringing it to light. Watch out for more Sean Parker-Perry stories this month.

Vanished...

...but not quite without a trace.

In this post, we drew attention to some suspicions we had formed (and also that were out there on the world wide web) about whether or not a Longdendale Councillor, Sean Parker-Perry, was the pipsqueak behind the roadmonkey pro-road weblog.

Then, last week, a long article appeared in the Glossop Chronicle about how Sean Parker-Perry (poor iccle lamb) and Roy Oldham (erm, poor old mutton) were the victims of a horrible internet conspiracy to call them potty names on the internet, specifically wikipedia. Or something.

Looking at the edit histories their respective pages (here and here), it's clear that there's been something of an edit war going on. But what's more interesting is that the one complaining loudest about editing has been no slacker himself. He outed himself on wikipedia last year, and this list of contributions by the user with the IP address 83.104.50.161 yields a lot of obsessive activity on certain pages, some of which lead back to complaints by Cllr Parker-Perry of editing on his own page. Coincidentally, the same IP address is a frequent visitor to this site, often leaving comments. Furthermore, if you plonk this IP address in an IP search engine, it comes out as the ISP demon.co.uk.

But the best bit is the page set up by wiki administrators mulling over whether Sean Parker-Perry's only other corner of the internet should be deleted. Apparently, it's not worth the hassle and he's not notable enough. We could have told anyone that...

So what a surprise that when one visits http://www.bypasswarrior.blogspot.com/ today - it's disappeared. As quickly as it appeared. One can only surmise that if it was not our Sean behind it, then surely, it would carry on. After all, roadmunkey himself said he would 'fight to the end'. Or until the local papers started digging too deep - or until he took advice to shut his mouth.

And the councillor's myspace page seems to have been also similarly shorn of all content in somewhat of a hurry.

But he's also been lazy. So look here for his Technorati page which shows parts of the blog. And the Google cache of one his last incarnations is here.

This issue is by no means over. There's strong evidence that a Longdendale Councillor has been meddling with information on an encyclopedia to make him, his colleagues, and his employer look good, as well as silence any form of dissent. Furthermore, the roadmunkey blog took vicious potshots at people known only to him and some of us, in a manner calculated to intimidate.

But he hasn't vanished - he's left his pawprints all over the web for further study and analysis. And no doubt his blog will re-appear soon (we'll let you know when).

NB - update on Friday 15/06/2007: it appears that admins have decided to delete the Parker-Perry wikipedia page and therefore it no longer exists. This also means that a log of his and others contributions to this page also no longer exist. In any effort to erase history, someone (with the IP address 83.104.50.161 again), is also asking that the Longdendale Bypass page suffer the same treatment.

Ground Farce: Sean Parker-Perry's right of reply

Last week, the Tameside Reporter published an (unacknowledged) rejoinder to the articles we had published in April about Longdendale Councillor Sean Parker-Perry and his Active Longdendale (AL) project. Needless to say, the article did not acknowledge us directly, nor provide a reference point for where to read any alternative view of Parker-Perry's project.

Cllr Parker-Perry was scathing about criticisms the Active Longendale project had drawn from certain quarters recently. He said: “It has been hard work to set up this project which is for the good of the whole community. For the project to draw criticism from one individual who tries to remain anonymous and whose wild allegations are totally unfounded, is unfair. It is a pity these armchair critics do not utilize their energy by doing community work themselves, rather making outrageous allegations.”

'Certain quarters' is clearly us, and the spoof Active Longdendale blog. Our joint 'wild allegations' are merely a critical analysis of all of the information in the public domain about AL - an anathema to a politician, who hate being put under the spotlight. As for 'community work' we think this blog is just that, and Sean has no idea about what we get up to in our spare time - unlike him, we do not make it everyone's business. But his comments about the 'hard work' of setting up AL are a joke - it's been running for 18 months and in that time has carried out 3 'clean ups', published no material, has not met publicly, and used the services of voluntary rangers and a private company to conduct it's work. A piece of piss by anyone else's standards.

Following the successful retention of his seat as Councillor following the May 1st elections, Sean is clearly now conscious that he has to do a lot to whiten his reputation. However, we believe the article has merely served to bring up more questions than it does provide answers. Let's look at it in detail.

With a budget of £12,000 he has secured premises and a vast array of power tools for the benefit of locals

The article talks about "£12,000" of funding having being obtained - £3,600 more than we knew about. However, note that there's still no mention of the Awards for All Grant. The other implication is that the funding makes AL self-sufficient - that the cost of leasing the Railway arches is included. Sean's talk of negotiating a deal with Spacia may mean that he has negotiated a vastly reduced rent for the first year or two.

If that's the case, then Sean will have to recruit a lot of members to make up a future shortfall. Let's say he does need £6,000 per annum for the arch - that's 600 members in Longdendale renewing annual subs. He's certainly ambitious.

And also note that 'power tools' have crept into things. We understood the original purpose of the grant from o2 was the pay for gardening implements, not power tools. Speaking of tools, there's no mention that the 02 grant was meant to pay for tools - the article says they were 'borrowed from Tameside Council' - so was the grant spent on tools or not?

Residents wishing to benefit from the scheme will pay a token membership fee of £10 and then a small charge to use the tools as they need them

The article is full of the details of membership, but there still no details on how to become a member. And Sean's website still hasn't been updated since January.

Currently, Active Longdendale is seeking charitable status so it can be run more efficiently financially. It has also appointed auditors, an accountant and a committee that is required to comply with charitable status.

Sean's going legit. He'd better get a move on - the income in the last year was £12,000, and under the Charities Act 2006, registration is compulsory for charities with an annual income of over £5,000. We look forward to the AGM, plus the published accounts.

The only other thing worth noting is that the article has been written by our old friend Nigel Pivaro. We already noted the involvement of this (ahem) journalist once before, and he has made himself busy since writing several fawning articles about James Purnell. It seems Sean now has his ear, so we promise to display the banner (modelled on his Tameside Reporter column masthead) at the top of the blog each time he publishes an article worthy of the attention of our readers. Think of it as our bullshit detector (we'd do the same for David Jones, but we're having trouble finding a picture of Lord Longford).

Sean Parker Perry's Family Commitments

We have an exclusive tonight: word has today reached us that the Work and Pension Secretary of State & local MP, James Purnell, has sacked his office boy (sorry, Parliamentary Political Operative) Councillor Sean Parker-Perry.

The official line is that Sean has quit due to 'family commitments' - he clearly thinks he's got as much on his plate as Ruth Kelly. We suspect it's a resignation in the same mould as that of another former Purnell employee who fucked up, Mike Doherty.

The truth is, we knew something was afoot 8 days ago when someone searched Google for the phrase 'Sean Parker-Perry Resigns' and landed on the blog. It would be hard to search with a more specific term that that!

If this news is correct, we would like to remind readers that it comes after the following set of circumstances in recent months:

1) Police charges are brought against the blogger, Tameside Eye, for material posted on his blog about Sean, and promptly dropped a few days ago. Tameside Eye revealed that the complaint against him had been brought by Sean, in collusion with a Police Officer on the Longdendale District Assembly.

2) James Purnell's website had material relating to Sean's Environment-cum-Tool Hire Business Active Longdendale removed from it last April, after a series of articles by us about Sean, one of which produced fairly conclusive evidence that Sean was behind the (now deleted) 'Roadmunkey' blog and had used Purnell's office to create and maintain it, and also that he had edited Wikipedia on many occasions to make himself and his employer look good.

All of this also suggests that Purnell is going through his closet and removing any skeletons prior to jostling for place in the bid to replace Gordon Brown as Party leader. 

No doubt Sean will trot out the line that he's enough on his plate being a Councillor and Small Businessman to work full-time for Purnell, but it seems that his father-in-law's efforts to hoist him up the political ladder have failed miserably - his star is no longer in the ascendant. After all, there's no room for sentiment in politics...

Op-Ed: Cash Stash funds Tool Pool & Arch Lark

We're proud to present the second op-ed from Digger regarding Sean Parker-Perry and Active Longdendale. Based on their post over at the alternative Active Longdendale blog, it looks at the murkey world of funding for this virtually underground clean-up team.

"...It would appear that Councillor Sean Parker-Perry's (nee Sean Perry) blogspot is suffering from a period of inactivity. In fact his one and only post came in late January just after his return from Spain. No doubt this is because he has been busy writing up his research on the aromatic effects of burning olive stones on open fires. The residents of Longdendale are awaiting this vital information with baited breath, and so are we. The story can also be viewed at the Bad Air Sponge

On the subject of bad smells we continue to dig for the truth behind the creation and purpose of Active Longdendale. In this post we shall look specifically at the financial aspect.

The story begins with an 'It's Your Community' Award from mobile phone company O2 in late 2006. Whilst details of the award are no longer available from the O2 website, they have been kindly preserved for posterity in an obscure online magazine entitled 'Parish Pump News' (at the foot of page 13 - opens PDF).

Here we are told that Active Longdendale is an "ingenious scheme to create a sustainable and self-funding tool resource for local groups wishing to improve their immediate neighbourhood but who lacked the tools to carry out the work". I want you to remember the words 'self-funding' for later in the article.

You may also wish to ponder the fact that there is in fact a Rangers outpost within Cllr. Parker-Perry's immediate neighbourhood at Lymefield in Broadbottom, only a couple of hundred yards from the infamous Railway Arch where he plans to store the said tools. Furthermore, one of the two alleged clean-ups that Active Longdendale take credit for was in Etherow Park, who also have a 'Friends' group along with their own tools and store!

The Parish Pump article goes on to say O2 awarded a cheque for £400 to buy several start-up tool kits and quotes Active Longdendale's 'co-ordinator' Sean Parker-Perry:

"This support has enabled us to buy the tools necessary to seed self-help groups who will now be able to tackle trouble spots because they have recourse to a tool pool."

Finally, the ever helpful Pump informs us that since receiving their O2 award the project received more attention ... aah, that will explain this article in the Glossop Chronicle then:

Oh yes. What's more, this attention has apparently led to additional funding and consequently new opportunities to inspire other groups to to start their own clean-ups in areas within the Longdendale Valley. I'll let you, the readers, be the first to give me the news on such inspirational examples that AL has created.

Personally I am more intrigued by the additional funding aspect.

Whilst the £400 grant from O2 was widely publicised, a much larger award - £8,000 from the 'Awards For All' (Award No. 121) Lottery Fund (yes that's right £8,000!) didn't rate a mention in the local press. Odd. Particularly so when one considers that Sean is particularly keen on publicity and photo opportunities (a future blog!). Let's face it, even if we disregard the New Labour penchant for PR and pizazz, any politician worth his or her salt would want to shout it from the rooftops if they secured an £8,000 windfall for their community. Yet not a dicky bird!

So the next obvious question is "What do AL want £8,000 for?". It sure would buy a lot of tools! According to the blurb "this new group will hire out more tools and create a disabled access to its storage building to encourage more users of the service". Ah yes. The storage building - that's the infamous Railway Arch remember? Now this really is odd.

The conversion of the said Railway Arch begins with this planning application to his own council which, unsurprisingly, gave the nod. There are two things of note about the Arch itself. First of all it is not of any use in its present state to act as a secure lock-up for said tools. Basically it is derelict and it will take an awful amount of spending to make it anything like secure.

It is literally an open archway with no doors or any form of security and with rocks and rubble strewn throughout - derelict in every sense of the word.

One can't help wondering why they don't opt for a standard lock-up like an existing garage or shed? Something that is relatively cheap, secure and immediately available for members of the community who actually want to hire some tools, now that Spring is in the air.

The other puzzling aspect of acquiring a derelict archway is the cost. Spacia is the name of the company that rents out these arches and to get some idea of the cost, type 'Stalybridge' into 'property search' on the site - property reference SYB03904 (Unit 3 Waterloo Court) is the nearest example to Broadbottom where there is something available. Wow. £6,100 per annum +VAT. Not cheap then. Admittedly, this one comes fully furbished, but still not cheap.

I would suggest that the £8,000 Awards For All would just about cover the cost of refurbishment plus rental costs for the first year, but then what? They would have to rent out an awful lot of tools to cover rental costs of the archway per annum. Particularly when one bears in mind that this is a not-for-profit enterprise. Awards For All cannot award grants to companies that aim to make a profit! This is made plain on page 2 of their Guidance Notes. Hence, this brings into question the feasibility that this can ever be a self-funding project, something I alluded to earlier...

Readers of this blog may have also noticed a political dimension to AL so at this point I would simply draw your attention to the fact that on page 4 of the Guidance Notes above, it also states quite clearly that they will not fund political activities.

In summary, we have an organisation with an undefined legal status that allegedly hires out tools to the community and has acquired known income to the tune of £8,400 to do so. Yet does anyone know how to contact Active Longdendale, and how to join them? Has even a single person ever actually hired any tools from this spurious organisation and if so when, how, from whom and from where?

It seems certain that had Active Longdendale purchased any tools for the community we would have heard about it in the local press, to whom Sean as a Councillor, clearly has access. It's equally certain that if a rental service had been established, the community would know about it by now.

Apart from the Archway, the only other known expenses that Active Longdendale have incurred come from the Spanish expedition. You may recall that Cllrs Parker-Perry and Jonathan Reynolds went to Moclin in Spain as representatives of AL which brings us full circle.

Moclin, Moclin. Mmm. That rings a bell. Ah, yes. Didn't the Longdendale District Assembly grant 'Friends of Moclin' £500 recently? Yes that's right. In December 2007. Just a month before our local Cllrs went to Moclin themselves. What a rare coincidence! People do say we live in a global village these days and when unfathomable events like this just happen to occur in a quirky manner you just know it's true. Well blow me dahn, who'd of thowt it possible? I wonder though. Is it possible that lightning could strike in the same place twice?

Surely not. Better wait and see though!..."

Once again, we have our own thoughts on this matter.

Firstly, the status of Active Longdendale. It's been variously described as a trading co-operative, a charity, and a small business enterprise. The latter description is of particular interest, since those were the words of fellow Longdendale Councillor Roy Oldham, upon defending AL and Sean and Jonny in the press when the Olive Stones debacle reached the newspapers. As Digger has noted, were AL to be a profit-making enterprise, that would breach the terms of the grant from Awards for All.

To be a Co-operative, AL would have to be either a Limited Company or an Industrial and Provident Society, and there's no evidence it's either of those.

It's clearly not a Charity, as Sean's website and literature would then have to display their registration number.

Also of interest is that Awards for All make it clear that the money must be able to be spent within one year, in this case of August 2007. So this raises the question, how has it been spent? Has Sean in fact bought the railway arch? It would seem not, because the planning application documents make it clear he's the lessee from Spacia. Given that the arch is derelict, it's not yet been spent on restoration. They're in no hurry to spend the money.

We await August 2008 with interest.

Sean Parker-Perry the rubbish rebel

Here's us thinking that Longdendale Councillor Sean Parker-Perry's career is virtually over and he sets himself firmly on the political centre stage in Tameside - at least for now. Not only that, but his 'green credentials' (such as they exist) are again at the centre of it all.

What are we talking about? Well Sean's decided to come over all rebellious regarding the recent conversion of Tameside MBC towards fortnightly bin collections. But as is usually the case with these things, you have to read between the lines. 

The Tameside Advertiser article makes it clear that Sean favours a weekly collection, but smaller bins which it says will 'force people to divide rubbish'. The current plan sees Tameside residents receiving a number of containers for different types of rubbish. Also, Sean says that recycling facilities in various parts of Tameside have disappeared.

And Sean seems to have hit a nerve - in the Reporter/Chronicle, there's a whole page devoted to the issue, with letters of support for Sean's stance. Or is there? The praise seems to have come from those who think the collections should stay weekly, rather than Sean's idea of smaller bins 'forcing' people to recycle. 

It might be easier if we get out own views on the subject out of the way first before we move onto the implications of this kerfuffle. 

Firstly, there's the issue of Public Services. The move to a less frequent collection is clearly an attack on a vital Public Service. There has been an increasing tendency over the past couple of years for Local Authorities to contract out their waste management services to private companies, with all the usual and predictable results, both for the public and employees in the public sector. Sean doesn't mention this, so presumably he's in favour of it. The idea that this is a clash of political ideologies is absurd - all the political parties agree with the continued privatisation of Public Services. 

Secondly, in this 'debate' there is a complete absence of analysis, both at the local and national level. Who is talking about the commodification of waste for example? 4 multinational corporations - whose turnover number in the billions of pounds - control three quarters of all refuse collection contracts (many of which are to last for 25 years). Rubbish is very big business. And whilst the contracts keep political responsibility for waste management with Local Authorities, they do not allow them to keep any direct operational control. That is determined by only multinational corporations in response to national regulations. 

Local Authorities simply have no power, and on a local level neither the Tories, Liberal Democrats or Labour can do anything about it. And last time I looked, none of them were arguing for returning waste management services to Local Authority control.

And this brings us on to you and I, and our 'responsibility' for recycling and waste management. We are continually told that 'we have to take more responsibility' for 'our' waste. That this is an individual problem, even a moral problem (i.e. it is we that are 'lazy' or 'wasteful'). But all of that misses the point completely and is in fact a smokescreen for what it actually happening. The fact of the matter is that 'we' have no control  - not only do we not produce the waste (excessive packaging, junk mail etc etc) but also it is actually the Local Authorities that have swallowed the government (Tory and then Labour) line on the commodification of waste and awarded lucrative and long-term contracts to private companies that can do exactly as they please.

Waste management policy wants to make rubbish into a profitable commodity. This is why the onus for sorting waste is being put onto us, and the collections are happening less frequently - so that capitalist enterprises don't have to employ as many workers to sort the rubbish and collect it on a regular basis. Which is in order for them to widen their profit margins. It has nothing to do with us becoming 'greener' or becoming more 'environmentally aware'. 

We don't see Sean Parker-Perry, or anyone else for that matter, talking about any of that.

So what is this argument really about? Roy Oldham's career is clearly in it's twilight months now. This could also be true of Sean - his credibility in the local Labour Party has nose dived in the past 12 months, what with his sacking from James Purnell's team, and the foundering of his relationship with the daughter of one of Tameside's most powerful political figures. It's do or die, and what better way to revive his fortunes - with a slanging match in the press with the leader of the Council over an issue neither of them have control over.

What a load of rubbish...

Free speech for the dumb

Following our post last night about the slow movement of this country to a Police State, we felt the need to highlight a very interesting blog post from a fellow blogger, Tameside Eye. This post details his arrest, detention and charging with various offences following material posted on his blog over the past few months - and how local politicians have connived to achieve this outcome.

The blog regularly features articles on politics in Tameside. We should make it clear at this point that the views expressed on this blog are light years away from ours, and are more concerned with the 'left versus right' (of liberal democracy) dead-end arguments amongst sections of the Tameside political class. It's also, to it's detriment, a village pump for all kinds of unsavoury right-wing earthlings (the kindest word we could find), some of whom in our view have egged on the blogger in a particular political direction. So reading it should come with health warnings - we do not endorse the views expressed upon it.

Having said that, it has dealt with the cut and thrust of politics in Tameside in a fairly uncompromising manner. Chief targets have been Dukinfield Councillor John Taylor (a political opponent of most of the readers/participants of the blog, but someone who actually has far more in common with them than they realise - i.e. he's a right wing prick), and our favourite Councillor in Tameside - Sean Parker-Perry.

Coincidentally, just before local election time in May, Tameside Eye (aka Liam Billington) was busted by the local Police, who proceeded to confiscate hs computers whilst he was in police custody - without a warrant we might add. They still have them to this day.

We'll let Liam explain what he was busted for, but suffice to say, it wasn't for dishing all kinds of dirt about Parker-Perry, Oldham, Taylor or any of that lot. So presumably, that was fair game?

But what makes us curious is his revelation that the cops are very interested in this blog - amongst others - and who publishes it. But what exactly has that got to do with them? If digging the dirt on Oldham, Parker-Perry et al is fair game on Liam's blog, then it must be OK here. So why do the powers that be want to know who we are?

We can only assume that it's because they want to try to harass and intimidate us in a similar fashion.

And Liam tells us that what seemed to have been the catalyst was a Freedom of Information request he sent to James Purnell and his links with Active Longdendale. Keen readers will know that this was around the same time that Purnell had details of Active Longdendale removed from his website. Liam tells us he was warned off by Purnell, and that Parker-Perry then emailed local PC Susan Moss to complain.

What cannot be overlooked is the fact that the arresting officer in this case - PC Susan Moss - is a member of the Longdendale District Assembly. These idiots couldn't even choose a copper who had no connection to Parker-Perry and also who worked in the area the 'defendant' lives. No, it's clearly a blatant parading of power.

But it's one that must be doomed to failure. For Liam has stated his intention to fight his case at a Trial if he is prosecuted by the CPS, and we're sure that Councillor Parker-Perry would not relish appearing to give evidence, especially given his track record with the Police and CPS.

This is certainly one to watch, and it will be interesting to see if the media goes anywhere near it in future.

Op-Ed: Sean & Johnny - come on down

What follows is a post from the alternative Active Longdendale blog that has been set up to shadow the posts from Sean Parker-Perry's 'Environmental Clean-Up' and/or 'Community Tool Hire' official blog:

"... Just what is the point of Active Longdendale? What is its role or raison d'etre? What values and/or aspirations underpin its foundation? More intriguingly, how does it differ to already existing groups that provide a similar service?

Trawling the Internet in an attempt to find some answers reveals that information on Active Longdendale is very thin on the ground. What little information that is available tends to be somewhat contradictory.

Nevertheless, buried in the Minutes (paragraph 42) of the Longdendale and District Assembly, which was chaired by Cllr Sean Parker Perry (Labour) held on 07/12/2006, lies the following nugget in which the Town Manager appears to provide a succinct definition of its aims and purpose:

(Active Longdendale is a) "project that provides an opportunity for community groups and members of the public to participate in clean ups in the area". He qualifies this by quoting an example of their alleged work at Hurst Clough on 18/11/2006 which he states was "successful in dealing with undergrowth and flytipping". In a nutshell it's a tidy campaign group.

So far so good. This all seems to be innocent and innocuous enough - in fact it appears to be positively praiseworthy. Unless and until one realises that the local council (Tameside MBC) already provides a Countryside Ranger Service which is responsible for the management of the Borough's countryside and helps the local community and visitors alike to appreciate, enjoy and care for the natural environment.

Moreover, the Countryside Service comprises not only of full time rangers, information officers, admin support and an estate team but also has an additional 60 Voluntary Rangers that provide invaluable support and assistance to the Service.

The work of the Voluntary Rangers is of particular interest since the type and scale of the projects they tackle is quite comprehensive and usually of high conservation or amenity value. This link to the official Tameside MBC website lists many of these projects and explains the scope of their work more fully.

Suffice to say that it includes:

* Litter picking and rubbish collection
* Footpath and bridleway clearance and improvement

...which in itself appears to nullify any reason for the creation of Active Longdendale.

In fact it rather begs the question as to why its only known members Councillor Sean Parker-Perry (Labour) and Councilor. Johnny Reynolds (Labour) don't just simply join the Volunteer Ranger Service where, throughout the year, there is an opportunity to participate in conservation tasks with the countryside rangers and their team of dedicated volunteers (as opposed to showboaters).

If SEAN or JOHNNY would like to get involved they can apply online here or by phoning 0161 330 9613. Alternatively they can snail mail to:

Chief Rangers Office
Park Bridge Heritage Centre
The Stables
Park Bridge
Ashton-u-Lyne
Tameside
OL6 8AG

Yes, that's right, they have their own premises (and tools) so no need to lease expensive railway arches or to tap up the lottery for funds! ..."

We have our own take on this, with a little more background info. Firstly, below is a photo of a poster promoting one of AL's clean-ups in July 2006 (click for bigger version):

With this poster, Sean displays for all to see the somewhat contradictory nature of this organisation that scrutineer has identified above. Firstly, as a volunteer you are reassured that you don't need to join, there is "no joining fee or reason to commit to anything", you just register your interest and turn up on the day (that you will presumably be notified of beforehand). In other words, you do as you are told. But when one looks at the poster to find out "who organises the event", we're told "...the volunteers" - is this the same people who "don't have to join" and "just have to turn up"? How will they be able to organise anything in this way?

None of this is transparent. There's no suggestion you can participate in any other way than to simply come along and dig when you are told to do so.

Whether or not anyone turns up is another matter. In fact, we've been told by a reliable source that AL's work to clear Himalayan Balsam from Lymefield was actually carried out by contractors, who were paid for the work they did. Was this because not enough volunteers showed up? And who paid for the work to be done? It can't have been cheap. Or was this activity that was being done by TMBC anyway, and Sean decided to stick his 'Active Longdendale' badge on it? At the time, this work was fêted by Sean's boss, James Purnell, on his website. So he's implicated too.

Watch this space for more articles this month...

Sean Parker-Perry - 'I Quit my job to learn Sign Language'

One thing's for sure, Sean Parker-Perry has sure got a very 'active' imagination. A wonderful story in tonight's Advertiser has Sean issuing a press release about his departure from James Purnell's office, and we'll reprint it here for posterity:

A Tameside councillor has quit his post as James Purnell’s right hand man — for his love of sign language.

Councillor Sean Parker-Perry decided to seek a fresh challenge after several years working in Hyde town hall as parliamentary political operative for the Stalybridge and Hyde MP.

The Longdendale councillor is returning to college to complete his sign language qualifications.

But he has moved to quash rumours there was anything sinister behind his sudden move.
"Nothing could be further from the truth. I have not been sacked and the door is always open," he said. "I’ve been planning to leave for a while and I’ll be enrolling back at college to update my skills. It was purely my decision. Working for four years at that level in parliament is a long time. Most people take stock of their careers every few years and I’m no different. If it was 10 years ago, the obvious route would be to move to London and climb the ladder that way. But I’m 33 and have a young family so I have commitments here. That has to take priority. My first love is my job as a councillor and chairing the district assembly. That’s why I got into politics. It has been a juggling act. Now I can dedicate more time to concentrate on council business."

A spokesman in Mr Purnell’s office said: "We wish him every success for the future."

We have our own views about how truthful this latest twist is, and a prize of a limited edition 'No Mottram Bypass' badge (can't get them in the shops or anywhere else) goes to the first person to translate the above phrase, no doubt popular at Sean's BSL class. Answers in the comment to this post please!

Update, 6th October 2008: we forgot to note that the article was written by our favourite Advertiser journalist Adam Derbyshire. 'Nuff said...

Oh, and the Chronicle/Reporter have a run a similar article which, as Tameside Mafia have pointed out, has aspects which contradict the Advertiser article.

Sean Parker-Perry - no Bypass Mandate

Sean Parker-Perry - along with the other Longdendale Labour candidates that support the Bypass - have always made much of their 'mandate' in the area. They trot out the typical refrain of politicians, that they 'campaigned on the bypass issue' and therefore they were also elected on the back of it, as if it is the only point in their manifesto, and as though the electorate have a huge choice to vote for those who oppose it (or at least actively oppose it, eh Green Party? - NOT).

Indeed, both Johnathan Reynolds and Parker-Perry have made their views known to the Inspector at the Public Inquiry, as has Roy Oldham (although rather oddly, his evidence has yet to appear online, though it is available for all to see in the library). So let's take a look at what they say.

First Reynolds. You can read his letter here. The best bit reads:

"...In addition, I would like to make a point about the democratically expressed wishes of the people of Longdendale. As a newly elected Councillor in 2007, who had until very recently lived on Mottram Moor, I made clear my unequivocal support for the bypass during my election campaign and the reasons for this. My support for the Bypass was the subject of a specific leaflet I produced and distributed in Hollingworth and Mottram. Despite claims from the organised opposition that local opinion is not in favour of the project going ahead, I received more votes than all the opposing candidates combined. If local people are against the bypass, as some would claim, then they are certainly not registering this view through the ballot box. In fact, quite the opposite is true."

Of course, as we've pointed out before, most people in Longdendale don't vote, and since most of the candidates are for the bypass, there's not really any choice if you don't support it. No doubt Reynolds would point out that if you don't take part then 'tough', but you can't crow about a 'mandate' if the majority of a minority of the total population voted for you.

And then we come to Sean's letter to John Watson, which you can read here. He doesn't waffle and come over all pro like Johnny, but here's his bit:

"The elected members of TMBC who represent the Longdendale Ward have done so on a mandate from the electorate of supporting the bypass. Both I and my ward colleagues have run campaigns of clear support for the Bypass at each election and we have been returned with increasing majorities." (our emphasis)

Well, it seems that isn't the case this time. Because we've had Sean's leaflet through our letterbox. We've looked high and low, and there's no sign of any mention of the Bypass, let alone transport. Most of it is about how low the Council Tax is and it brags about vile crap like ASBOs and IKEA, as if they are laudable achievements. If you want to scrutinise it, we've produced scans below (click through for larger versions).
















No doubt a lot of canvassing is going on, but you can bet that most of it is concentrated on known Labour voters. So if Sean wins this time, he won't be able to talk about a mandate, at least not with a straight face. We''ll be there to remind him - and everyone else at every opportunity...

Four more years...

...of Sean Parker-Perry. That's what Longdendale voted for last Thursday. Or did it?

To give Sean some credit, after our lambasting him for not campaigning on the bypass issue, he did talk about it in his statement which appeared in the local Reporter Group Newspapers publications. Whether or not he went door-to-door on the issue, we have no information. But we have been told that James Purnell was seen delivering leaflets in Longdendale 6 days before the election - when was the last time you heard of a Government Secretary of State out helping a local councillor to retain his seat?

This tells us 3 things - that the Government is in the shit. That Parker-Perry is in the shit. And that James Purnell is also in the shit. Indeed, on Thursday night's election programme, there was a report that projected that were the same voting patterns repeated at a General Election, Purnell would have lost his seat. Amen to that, the sooner he's back in Islington, the better.

So Sean will probably now claim that he has a mandate as a councillor, and that those electing him voted for the bypass. Apart from the fact that people vote for all kinds of reasons, and that his leaflet mentioned ASBOs, IKEA and cheap Council Tax and not the bypass, how do the stats stack up?

Firstly, his majority. Sean had 259 votes more than his nearest rival (Sue Barker, the Tory candidate with 1057 votes to Sean's 1316). Hardly a convincing margin of success. Indeed, if 130 of those people had voted for Sue, Sean would have been out.

Secondly, the turnout. A total of 2895 people turned out, with 7 spoiling their ballot papers. This is 37.6% of the (registered) Longdendale electorate. Hence, 6376 people didn't vote for Sean (or anyone else) - 83%. So if, as he alleges, all of Longdendale are screaming for a bypass and see Sean as the answer, he must be disappointed. Using these percentages, Sean's 'majority' is 3% of Longdendale's electorate.

Thirdly, following on from that, let's play devil's advocate. Let's pretend Sean's majority voted for him solely on the bypass issue. If it's the case that 83% didn't vote for Sean on any issue, then clearly only 17% may have voted for him on the bypass issue. How often are Longdendale Siege - of whom Sean is a member - quoting that 90-odd percent of people in Longdendale want a bypass? So often, we've lost count. The truth is that they're clearly neither motivated to vote for it, nor for a politician who has personally identified himself with the campaign for it.

So from now on, let's hear Siege quote their figures in the following way - 17% of people in Longdendale might be in favour of the bypass. Because that's the only thing they can say with any degree of certainty.

As for Sean, we're looking forward to the next 4 years. With his track record, he can only make things a lot worse, and you will read all about it here.

Review of 2008

In many respects, it only seems a short time since we published our review of 2007 post for this blog - in other ways, it seems an age. It's much like life itself. 

So to our second annual review. We hope you enjoy it - it has taken us a fair while to compile and write this. We'd like to say 'here's to another year of the blog', although as we've said before it can only logically exist for as long as the plans for a bypass through Longdendale do, that isn't strictly true - more like 'here's to the end of this blog, and plans for the bypass alike'. Hear, hear!

January

January started with our predictions for the coming year - a separate post about how far we were right and wrong along with our predictions for 2009 will appear here shortly.

We opened the year with revelations about the plans of Tameside MBC to bring Tesco to Mottram & Hattersley. Our sources told us that the machinations surrounding this planned venture were the reasons why the Public Inquiry (PI) has been halted - we were told that an application for planning permission would only be forthcoming once the PI had re-started, and this was because traffic flows created by the store had to be factored-in. Though it's somewhat ironic that Roy Oldham was in the press this month decrying the PI delays saying they were 'holding back business' - no doubt alluding to the Tesco at Mottram. Twelve months later, the PI has been suspended again - more than once - and there's still no planning application. 

This was also the month that Tom Levitt MP tried to make predictions for 2008, and in amongst them was that the PI would conclude in favour of the damned road. Someone should tell Levitt that this road is as doomed as his career will be after the next election, along with his utterly crap predictions. Not doubt he'll parrot the same bilge again in a few days time.

January also saw excellent Freedom of Information  releases about the cost of the Bypass so far - £13,782,505.24 back then (a figure which has increased by more than £2 million over the space of the following 12 months), and we also covered leading Objector John Hall's route to procuring this information a few days later. To mark the revelations, we hoisted our counter which has been steadily counting up the cost ever since. Though it was based on the workings of the cost accruals to date, it has shot ahead of later cost revelations, but we have decided not to re-set it until more fuller information is released about costs.

And we also had a quick look at High Peak Councillor Ivan Bell's comments on the blog, as well his views about the hated Rossington Park.

This month also saw the closure of the Longdendale Siege Committee's public petition on number10.gov.uk with a wholly unconvincing 198 signatures.

Near the end of the month, we reported on Stephen Greenhalgh's dismissal from heading the Bypass project, whilst an article by John Hall sought to enlighten us as to the extent of connection between government departments, local authorities and private companies - all advancing private and personal agendas to build the road.

We rounded off January with an article about the severe flooding at Woolley Bridge, where the Glossop Spur roundabout to the A57 is planned.

February 

February brought a slip of the tongue from the MEN, unless they have secret knowledge about Doozers starting construction of the Bypass - if it's the latter, progress is slow down at Fraggle Rock.

We also reported that the (now departed) Transport Secretary of State Ruth Kelly was reviewing the viability of road schemes given 'cost escalation' - we're still unaware about the outcome of this review to date, but the longer the delays continue, the more likely it may be that the Bypass scheme could be nixed.

Sinking without trace was a plan to open a Travelodge near to the A57 in Hadfield - this was a plan which fully indicated the clandestine long-term strategic plans for the area, these hotels only being found near to Motorways.

And after Stephen Greenhalgh's departure, we were keen to welcome the newly appointed  Highways Agency Bypass Project chief Alex Bywaters - a spot of detective work confirmed he was the leader of a Morris Dancing troupe that paid homage to Luddites - the irony could not have been more apposite.

Mid-month we reported on James Purnell's sacking of one of his staff for writing to the local newspapers and not admitting who he was and giving a false address - our slant was that other staff members Barbara Charlesworth and John Bibby had also taken it upon themselves to write in to papers supporting the bypass. The blog post went on to draw a significant amount of Internet traffic after Iain Dale's blog latched on to it.

And costs were again an issue this month - this time those accrued by the Glossop Spur - a rather suspect £800,000 (a figure that had been projected to be reached by February 2007).

Very little time usually goes by without Roy Oldham opening his mouth and spewing venom, and this month was no exception - he attacked an MEN journalist at February's Full Council meeting, accusing Brian Lashley of bias regarding the Bypass and suggesting he would seek to interfere with the press to shut him up.

Near the end of the month, we had the pleasure of revealing to the world the semi-secret project that Tameside MBC had sponsored - the North European Trade Axis (NETA) - a plan to connect businesses across Europe via a Trans-European transport network,and how the project was headed by a particularly vocal Hollingworth resident, David Moore. Mysteriously, the website is no longer accessible, but facsimiles still reside in the Internet Archive, and the domain is still registered to Tameside MBC.

The penultimate day of the month saw a long article in support of Town & Village Green applications, the use of which had proved to be a lifesaver for many green spaces under threat from developers, and all because Tom Levitt MP in collusion with High Peak Borough Council had chosen to campaign to change the law as to their use.

March

We kicked off March with a short article about Longdendale's quiet Councillor Jonathan 'Jonny' Reynolds who - like his fellow Councillors - is content to write to the newspapers supporting the bypass, but not to stand up at the PI and stand up to scrutiny. John Hall later wrote an article for us about the duplicity of Politicians in this project.

The Public Inquiry was set back again - this time to October 2008. Later in the month, the Inspector John Watson had to remind the Highways Agency that they'd missed a deadline he set for them to outline how they planned to proceed.

And Longdendale Siege updated their website again with some rather dodgy figures about pollution locally - which contradicted evidence given at the Inquiry and did not provide any sources or evidence for their claims. And they're clearly not willing to produce this information at the PI. 

Later in the month, we reported on how Tameside MBC have made much of an application by the Trail Rider's Fellowship to use a local byway as a 'Byway Open to All Traffic' (BOAT) for motorcycles - but that their own incompetence had led to this scenario.

This month saw our first birthday, and we also published a long article about how the Government's words on Climate Change are contradicted by their actions. 

At the end of the month, John Hall was back to report on the mystery surrounding who the members of the Highways Tender Selection Panel were. 

At the last day of March saw a report on developments surrounding Active Longdendale - the once 'Eco Clean-Up' volunteer brainchild of Councillor Sean Parker-Perry, now morphing into a Tool-Hire Business. 

April

We started April with an April Fool, played upon the Longdendale Siege Committee. They took it badly, and the Glossop Chronicle made a meal out of it, as did we.

During this month, we carried a series of posts about the duplicitous Longdendale Councillor Sean Parker-Perry. Our 'April is for Fools' series exposed his rather dodgy organisation Active Longdendale, plus his meddling with the Internet, as well as how his (now ex) employer, James Purnell MP was distancing himself from Sean. 

We also wrote a feature on the Government's response to the result of an anti-Longdendale Bypass petition on number10.gov.uk, which appeared to dash hopes for the re-use of the Woodhead Tunnel for rail. We also carried John Hall's response to this news, arguing that the promoters of the scheme are manipulating pollution data for Denton and Longdendale in order to get what they want. John Hall also wrote an article a couple of days later about his email to the Public Inquiry Inspector about the implications of the Government's response for the Public Inquiry itself.

April also saw a post about 'local demagogue' Ivan Bell and made a plea for 'clear analysis' rather than 'plain speaking' in relation to his calls for 'local development by local people'.

This month also saw revelations emerge about Bypass contractor Carillion's collusion to artificially inflate public sector contracts. John Hall posted his own thoughts, pointing the finger of suspicion firmly at Tameside Council leader Roy Oldham, and in another post 'joined the dots' between the individuals and firms involved in the scandal. 

At the end of the month, we looked at how the Highways Agency was dealing with people who had proposed alternatives to their Scheme through the Inquiry process. The case we highlighted can only be described as 'shabby', and this was someone who had advocated a similarly ambitious pro-road scheme.

May

Polticians were definitely the theme this month. We looked at our old friend Councillor Sean Parker-Perry's re-election, concluding that the best that he could say about the bypass was that 17% of people in Longdendale might be in favour of it. And we also looked at how Sean used the Reporter/Chronicle to respond to our concerns about Active Longdendale - without specifically mentioning who we were.

The other politician we looked at is the High Peak Borough Councillor Ivan Bell, and allegations about 'misconduct'. We concluded this due of posts by wondering if he might be more immune from such allegations if he became an MP, as he seems to be planning.

We broke more news about further increasing costs of the bypass (now at £15 million - money spent so far).

And we posted a trio of features about High Peak Borough Council's seeming love affair with Corporate Supermarket Giants in the Glossop area, with features on Tesco, Sainsburys and two about a possible (now actual) Lidl application (here and here).

Lastly, we looked at the strange withdrawal of some objections, as well as pressure that may be being applied to other to do so, given the abeyance in the Public Inquiry.

June

We started June by looking at the (hopefully) ill-fated Howard Town Mill development in Glossop, part and parcel of High Peak Borough Council's plans to 'transform' the area through 'regeneration', a plan that - if unchecked - will inevitably lead to more demand for road building. Later in the month, we returned to look at HPBC's contradictory behaviour with regard to other types of business.

We also wrote three posts this month about the game of chess that is the Public Inquiry - firstly about an increasingly pathetic looking John Watson having to remind the Highways Agency of a deadline he imposed, secondly their evasive reply, and thirdly the media's reaction. 

We also published an email from a pro-bypass reader - who had said we'd 'never publish it'. Although we did respond to the issues he raised, he never gave us the courtesy of a reply (a shame, this could have been a new series).

And at the end of the month, we revealed the proposed new home of Mottram Show - not in Longdendale & with no view of it's former home. 

July

The main theme of July was money. We featured no less than 3 posts on Bypass/Spur projected cost increases - 54% for the Glossop Spur and up to 70% for the bypass. At the end of the month, the media caught up and we wrote about the coverage.

We also contrasted Tom Levitt's backing for the Green (but insignificant) Hydro Electric Power scheme at the Torrs in New Mills and his backing for a dirty polluting bypass through the heart of Longdendale. 

August

During this month, we looked at the response of the State to activists both local and national: locally, the treatment at the hands of the police by the blogger Tameside Eye, and nationally, the police's action to virtually lockdown Climate Camp.

We also reported on the cancellation of Mottram Show, and the documentation of TMBC's website which shows how much has been paid for alternative site, and who the owners are.

One positive development in August was that against development - in this case, people in Stalybridge mobilising against Tesco's plans for expansion in the town.

This month also brought news from the Highways Agency about when they'd be ready to resume the Public Inquiry - May 2009, 2 years after it started. 

And in the last post of the month, we looked at how the press had reported the story, with the Tameside Advertiser both refusing to acknowedge their source (us) and deciding to use absurd and misleading images to go with the story.

September

We opened September with a post about further revelations about Public Inquiry delays, as revealed by the Glossop Chronicle. We questioned how it could be possible for the Highways Agency to hold further public exhibitions and consultations when the road scheme is already at a Public Inquiry. 

This was also another month which featured much about our favourite Councillor, Sean Parker-Perry. We noted how the deadline for the spending of a Lottery Grant for his Active Longdendale project had passed, yet the organisation seemed to be almost underground in terms of its public profile. We later broke news that he had been sacked by his employer James Purnell, and revealed that the catalyst for this may have been because he spoke out against the Congestion Charge at the Labour Party Conference.

Sean's was not the only political ruction this month - the Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly decided to resign this month. Our call for Crash Gordon to replace her with James Purnell didn't work - we're not that influential yet.

Not entirely unconnected was the news that the blogger, Tameside Eye, had had all charges laid against him by the police dropped this month.

And we also reported on Tameside MBC's plans to remove roadside memorials. Without a trace of taste, let alone irony, their mouthpiece for the press release was Councillor Peter Robinson, a former funeral director.

October

Our opening gambit this month was our response to Councillor Sean Parker-Perry's explanation for his 'leaving' his job with James Purnell - he wanted to learn sign language. It just gets better and better...

In another post, we looked at the writings of the former Transport Minister Tom Harris, who listed his hobbies to include hill walking, even though his department wanted to destroy one of ours. 

And as the latest global crisis of capitalism started to well and truly unfold, we asked how long could plans to spend £315 million on the Bypass survive in the current climate. Like local Tintwistle Parish Councillor Bill Clarke, we called for a lorry ban as a much cheaper alternative.

We also looked at the lack of care Tameside MBC take in maintaining their roads, which has resulted in at least one death person, and the casual brutality of Roy Oldham's remarks positing potholes as a 'traffic calming measure'.

Two of our posts this month focused on woodlands - one highlighted the work of the Woodland Trust who had reported that 50% of Ancient Woodland had been lost in the past century. Our other post looked at the war of words over Etherow Lodge Park in Longdendale between Bill Johnson and Councillor Sean Parker-Perry - both pseudo-environmentalists who are very concerned about this wood, but less vocal about Swallows Wood, which faces destruction from the Bypass.

Finally, in what would become a long running feature over the rest of the year, we posted about the traffic disaster engineered by Derbyshire County Council and Tameside MBC in allowing two sets of roadworks along the A57. 

November

In November, we turned our focus upon the fact that the Longdendale Bypass Inquiry is now the longest-running Public Inquiry into a road scheme ever, with a series of articles about the Inquiry.

First off was the trials and tribulations experienced by John Hall in trying to obtain the minutes of a meeting between the Highways Agency and Statutory Objectors which we dubbed 'Watsongate'. 

We also looked closely at the progress of the Planning Reform Bill, a piece of legislation which seeks to remove any remaining semblence of openness and accountability for the planning process, and how this may relate to our Public Inquiry.

November also brought an update about the latest accrued costs of the Bypass - £16 million, or more than £1 million for each sitting day. The story was subsequently taken up by most of the regional newspapers. 

This month also found us writing a letter to - and getting published in - the Glossop Chronicle regarding the roadwork hell we had commented on the previous month. 

Finally, we looked at a meeting between the new Transport Secretary of State Geoff Hoon (or Geoff Who?) and various local politicians - an attempt to subvert and sideline the Public Inquiry which would feature heavily over the coming weeks under the title 'Hoongate'. 

December 

One theme dominated December: posts about the 'Hoongate' meeting the previous month. Our first article compiled information from different sources about the meeting, with a second article looking at the 'official notes' which emerged later. Another post looked at TMBC's travel expenses, which a more humourous post introduced (hopefully) the first in a series of 'lolprats' (loosely modelled upon the lolcats of icanhascheezburger.com). 

Long in the writing was a critical post about the Manchester Congestion Charge and TiF bid, appearing more or less 24 hours before the polls officially closed, we had no idea which way the vote would go, but this post was the view of one of us on why they considered it a white elephant.

We also continued with our traditional Oldham-bashing in a post about the blinkered and outmoded approach to traffic problems and transport policy espoused by this cretin. 

And we also contrasted Tameside MBC's contradictory espousal of mass tree planting when they plan to destroy the Ancient Semi-Natural Woodland of Swallow's Wood. 

December 18th saw the first anniversary of the last sitting day of the Public Inquiry, with the Inspector John Watson setting out his stall for the way he enivsaged things proceeding.

And the last month of the year also saw a (public) return to Direct Action as a response to road schemes - this time at the site of the Weymouth Relief Road in Dorset, where the County Council set about clearing Ancient Woodland. Protestors took to the trees and we carried a call for help.

Last but not least, we reminded people in the High Peak of Tom Levitt's wish for a 'Green Christmas'. The man has clearly had his irony removed.

And that's it for another year. We'd like to extend our thanks to John Hall and Tameside Eye for their help and inspiration this year, along with all the other persons unknown who contribute in their own way to making this blog what it is.  Thanks also go to Virtual Glossop for recognising the value of this blog to the political and cultural climate in Glossopdale and Longdendale by featuring us on their homepage from time to time. 

See you in 2009 - sometime tomorrow.