|
GREED
IS DESTROYING OUR HERITAGE -
Heritage views are fast disappearing from villages as councils scramble to give developers free reign in return
for more rates to bolster their coffers, despite the fact that we are in
the middle of a climate emergency. Such councils and the developers
taking advantage of them are nothing short of climate criminals in the
view of country lovers and history buffs. Charles Church Developments
Limited shares the same registered office as Persimmon plc. Potentially
raising questions as to water pollution, stemming from their conviction
in Wales around 2021, when they were fined something like 433,000
in Newport Magistrates.
A
number of Parish councillors have said that they just do what they are
told. That is of course untrue. Every person has the right to think for
themselves, to research matters for themselves and to reach their own
conclusions based on the evidence, rather than hearsay and rumour.
Indeed, we would urge councillors fresh to the scene, to take the time
to look at what is and is not happening to the village, traffic
blockages, and over development, and the lack of genuinely affordable
housing for village folk. in 2025, Jeremy Harrison was shown on this
council's parish website as being a councillor. We think he may have walked on the unregistered footpaths in the
field adjacent to the Museum in Lime Park. If this is not correct, he
can always contact us to seek corrections, which of course we are more
than willing to undertake, subject to proofs. We wonder why there is
only executive and luxury house building going on, and no affordable
plots being offered by Wealden for self builds. And, why the register
for self-build plots is not more widely publicised? We also wonder where
all the CIL
payments are going, if not being spent on infrastructure? And, if
councillors only do what they are told, who is telling them what to do?
And, if that is true, would AI not be a lot cheaper for the taxpayer,
than paying for people who do not represent the wishes of the people.
Where AI,
is way more clued up than the average person, and less likely to be
bribed. Lastly, where is all the money going from road
taxes,
where it is not going to repairing potholes.
Any ideas Jeremy?
Q. Why would a good honest and hard working councillor want to be
un-contactable? We were somewhat confused, so asked a hard working AI
Chatbot:
A.
In the UK, the tension between a councillor s right to privacy and the public's right to transparency is governed by a specific legal framework. While "concealing" an address might feel like a deception, there are specific statutory mechanisms that allow and increasingly encourage councillors to keep their home addresses off public-facing websites for safety reasons.
This may be 'Association' advice to make it difficult for victims of crime
to identify local government corruption on their doorstep.
However, there are strict limits to this, and "identity hiding" is generally not permitted under the law.
1. The Statutory Requirement (Localism Act 2011)
Under Section 29 of the Localism Act 2011, every Parish Council is required to maintain a Register of Interests. This register must be published on the Parish Council's website (if it has one) and on the District/Borough Council s website.
The Address Rule: Traditionally, a councillor s home address is considered a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (DPI) because they have a financial interest in that land.
And that is the rub. We do not know if any of these councillors, past or
present, have shares or other financial arrangements, with any of the
developers within Wealden: Charles
Church; Clarion; Persimmon. Beginning
with Timothy Watson and his wife, the owners of land, under investigation.
And any other relationship with a
councillor, pecuniary or otherwise. If so, any such interest must be
recorded in a public Register of Interests. Another interest, is keeping
development away from their own property boundary. Though it could be that
Wealden have the pecuniary interest, including of course, CIL payments and
increased council tax revenue.
The "Sensitive Interest" Exception (Section 32): If a councillor (and the Monitoring Officer of the principal council) believes that disclosing their home address could lead to violence or intimidation, they can register it as a "Sensitive Interest." In this case, the public register will simply state that an interest exists but the details are withheld.
Have
their been any violent incidents in the sleepy village of Herstmonceux? We
suspect not. And if not, we suspect the/any Section 32 exception is falsely
claimed. On the other hand, a Parish councillor recently threatened to
"get" a member of the public, when the question was asked as to
footpaths and photographing children, allegedly.
2. Can they use a "Generic Office Address"?
While councillors can withhold their home address from the public website via Section 32, they cannot "hide their identity."
Transparency Code: The Transparency Code for Smaller Authorities (and the Local Government Transparency Code 2015) requires the names of councillors and their responsibilities to be public.
The Role of the Monitoring Officer: All Parish Councillors must still provide their true home address to the Monitoring Officer at the District or Borough Council. The Monitoring Officer is the legal gatekeeper. If the councillors are hiding their addresses even from the Monitoring Officer, or providing false information, they are committing a criminal offence under Section 34 of the Localism Act 2011.
3. Misfeasance and Accountability
If the entire Parish Council is using a single office address as a "shield" to prevent the public from knowing who they are or where they live (without a legitimate "Sensitive Interest" designation from the Monitoring Officer), this could be argued as:
A Breach of the Code of Conduct: All councils must adopt a code consistent with the Nolan Principles (Selflessness, Integrity, Objectivity, Accountability, Openness, Honesty, and Leadership).
Willful Lack of Transparency: A blanket policy of hiding identities is contrary to the spirit of the Local Government Act 1972, which assumes that councillors are representatives of their specific community.
4. How to Obtain Proper Representation
If you believe the Parish Council is acting as a "secret society" to avoid accountability for the planning issues
mentioned herein, there are several "Common Law" and statutory routes:
Challenge the Monitoring Officer: Write to the Monitoring Officer at East Sussex County Council (or the relevant District Council). Ask them to confirm if the "Sensitive Interest" designation has been formally granted to every member of the Parish Council. If not, they are in breach of the law.
Freedom of Information (FOI): While FOI cannot usually force the disclosure of private home addresses, you can request the correspondence between the Parish Council and the Monitoring Officer regarding the decision to withhold addresses.
The Seven Principles of Public Life: You can file a formal complaint that the council is failing the principle of Openness. Under the Localism Act, the council must have a process for dealing with such complaints.
The "Qualifying Address": To stand for election, a councillor must have a "qualifying address" (living or working in the parish). If they are concealing their residence, you can challenge whether they are even legally qualified to sit on the council.
SUMMARY
If the Parish Council is concealing their addresses to avoid being "served notice" regarding
(for example) the alleged well poisoning, or footpath issues, this looks like an aggravating factor in a conspiracy. In the eyes of the law, a councillor who hides their identity to facilitate an environmental crime is likely
(allegedly) crossing the line from "private citizen" to "corrupt official."
HERSTMONCEUX
PARISH COUNCILLORS 2025
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter
Goodman
|
Josephine
Angear
|
Ketill
Game
|
Emma
Goodsell
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick
Goodsell
|
Shelagh
Game
|
Colin
Keane
|
Bryan,
Naish
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David
Harding
|
Jeremy
Harrison
|
Ian,
Stewart
|
Claire
Harrison
|
EVIDENCE -
Is this evidence of a crime in progress? This roadway, allegedly constructed
by Charles Church and Persimmon Homes, leads to what locals are calling
'Shit Creek', from Suicide Junction on the A271, just before the brow of a
hill, leading into Herstmonceux village. In the distance you can see what is
believed to be the earliest electricity generation station in the world,
dating from C.1896. A fact that Wealden and Herstmonceux Parish councils,
working with East Sussex County Council, are alleged to have done their
utmost to conceal from the heritage experts at UNESCO HQ in Paris. Copyright
picture Injustice Alliance, 20 December 2025. All rights reserved.
Herstmonceux
Parish Councillors 2016,
2017
- Being herded by Wealden's officers, members
and other Conflicts of Interest. Declarations (or lack of declarations) of
interest may want to be checked concerning this major outline application
for 70 houses WD/2015/0090/MAO.
It is alleged that the parish council are not acting democratically, as in
not representing the wishes of the people. Rather, they appear to be
representing the wishes of the district council. If that proves to be the
case, or if a valid planning consideration has been deliberately omitted
on the say so of the district council (Kelvin Williams and Robert
Standley), then that is a decision that may be judicially re-viewable as
per R v Canterbury City Council (ex parte Spring Image) and the Samuel
Smiths Old Brewery case
precedents. Any decision by a committee that fails to include in deliberations
any planning consideration, the wishes of the people or the effect that such development may have on a monument at
risk, is demonstrably ultra vires = invalid. That would then be a matter
for the Administrative High
Court.
THE
WILL OF THE PEOPLE is clear from the number of signs that have been
posted about the village. How then could the Parish Council ignore this
depth of feeling. The village school hall is always overflowing when the
subject comes up. We don't make the news, we just report it.
Herstmonceux
villagers do not want any more sheep to represent them. They want good
honest people with minds of their own and the interests of the village at
heart. The electorate do not want short term fixes, but long term
stability and sustainable development. It is time to swap out the old
practices and bring in some new blood with higher moral standards than has
so far been the norm, allegedly, and a good
idea of what the term 'affordable' means, from their own experience of the
local property ladder.
A
view is an irreplaceable economic asset when it comes to tourism. In the
picture above you can see the windmill that ground the wheat for the
bakery (behind us), that baked the loaves, using electricity from
Herstmonceux's very own generating station in Lime Park, just out of sight
to the right on this photo. The local parish council is advocating
building on this site, creating a cramped housing estate with no provision
of infrastructure for schooling, drainage and a whole host of issues, not
least of which is that the majority of villagers do not want this
development. New houses can be built anywhere. A heritage asset such a a
historic view can never be replaced, once it is lost. Why are the
councillors of this Parish, the only ones in the village, who want this
development? And, why are they not listening to the wishes of their
constituency?
The
wishes of the people could not be more plain. Hundreds of people in the
village are so concerned as to the inappropriate development, that they
have hoisted banners or put signs in their windows and on vehicles. A
decision that does not reflect the wishes of the voting public in not only
un-democratic, it smacks of impropriety. How then did Herstmonceux parish
councillors approve an application that so many of the electorate are
opposed to ? To the many attending the meeting it stinks to high heaven -
and they said as much on hearing this council's decision. http://www.cps.gov.uk/
Where it is alleged, that this parish council may be acting as a "closed shop," they may potentially, be breaching several areas of UK local government law and the Seven Principles of Public Life (The
Nolan Principles).
Here is a breakdown of the law and codes of conduct as they apply to these specific issues:
1. Heritage Assets: The "World s Earliest Surviving" Power Station
The deliberate omission of a potentially globally significant asset from local lists or websites may be a breach of the Local Government
Transparency Code.
The Duty: Under the Localism Act 2011, councils are encouraged to identify "Assets of Community Value." While a Parish Council isn't always the "Listing Authority" (that is usually the District Council or Historic England), they have a moral and ethical duty under the Nolan Principle of Openness to promote local heritage. But what can be done about it?
The Solution: Concerned locals can normally bypass their Parish Council entirely by applying to Historic England for "Listing" or to the District Council to have it added to their "Local List." However, in this instance Wealden District Council have no local list.
Allegedly, for the same reasons as the Parish Council: keeping quiet
about the heritage asset, as it may hamper their empire building
aspirations, as in generating taxes.
If the Parish is suppressing information to facilitate development (like the 70 houses they helped
Wealden to secure permission for), this reinforces the "Conspiracy" argument mentioned earlier.
2. Unrecorded Footpaths: The "20-Year Rule"
Parish Councillors have walked these paths for at least 10 years, in the process speaking with dog walkers, but the legal threshold for a Definitive Map Modification Order (DMMO) is 20 years of continuous use "as of right" (without force, secrecy, or permission). In this case some
Herstmonceux residents confirm 40 years, and others 20 years. If anyone
can add weight to these numbers, please use the Museum post box to
provide your information. But, only if you have walked the unregistered
paths seen on the Google Map above, for at least twenty years. Spread
the word, if you are a dog walker, and would like this community asset
protected in law.
The Conflict: If councillors have used these paths but refuse to register them, they are failing their duty to "Protect and Assert" the rights of the public under Section 130 of the Highways Act 1980.
Urgency: There is a "cutoff date" (currently projected for January 1, 2026) for registering historic paths based on pre-1949 evidence. If these are modern paths, you need 20 years of evidence from local residents to force the County Council to record them.
3. Photographing Children and Privacy
The police have confirmed and are correct that photography in a public place is generally legal.
Thus, a member of the general public may photograph a councillor. However, for a public official, the context changes:
Code of Conduct: A councillor is bound by the Code of Conduct whenever they give the impression they are acting as a councillor. If they are "patrolling" paths and photographing private gardens/children, this likely breaches the requirement to "Treat others with respect" and "Not bring the office into disrepute."
Harassment: Under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, a "course of conduct" (two or more incidents) that causes "alarm or distress" is a criminal offence. If children are "worried," the parents should document the dates/times and file a formal complaint with the Monitoring Officer, not just the police.
Provided, of course, that their Monitoring Officer is not part of the chain
of corruption. Where, sometimes the Chief Executive is the Monitoring
Officer, a sign that a council is corrupted beyond belief. Perhaps?
Especially, if that Chief Executive was part of a cover up, as to a heritage
asset, from years before. As is alleged in this case.
Privacy: While you can take photos from a public place, pointing a camera into a private garden where there is a "reasonable expectation of privacy" can be a civil tort (invasion of privacy) and a safeguarding trigger. There
have been complaints, that a Parish councillor is regularly
photographing children locally. The children are the complainants, and
of course, their mother. The guardians of these children, hope this
practice will cease.
4. Solicited Complaints (Victimisation)
If the council, or a councillor, is "soliciting" complaints against you for speaking out, this is a serious breach of the Local Government Act.
Malicious Reporting: It is a breach of the Code of Conduct to use council resources or influence to "bully" or "intimidate" a complainant.
Joint Enterprise: If one councillor says, or knows, this is happening, that councillor has a duty to report it. If they don't, they are also in breach.
The same applies to any councillor, or council officer, who may have seen pictures of
children, taken by another councillor or officer of any council.
LINKS
Cllr.Jo.Angear@HerstmonceuxParish.org.uk
Cllr.Ketill.Game@HerstmonceuxParish.org.uk
Cllr.Peter.Goodman@HerstmonceuxParish.org.uk
Cllr.Shelagh.Game@herstmonceuxparish.org.uk
Cllr.Emma.Goodsell@HerstmonceuxParish.org.uk
Cllr.David.Harding@herstmonceuxparish.org.uk
Cllr.Jeremy,Harrison@HerstmonceuxParish.org.uk
Cllr.Peter.Goodman@HerstmonceuxParish.org.uk
cllr.colin.keane@herstmonceuxparish.org.uk
Cllr.Ian.Stewart@HerstmonceuxParish.org.uk
Cllr.Jo.Angear@HerstmonceuxParish.org.uk
Cllr.Ketill.Game@HerstmonceuxParish.org.uk
Cllr.Peter.Goodman@HerstmonceuxParish.org.uk
Cllr.Shelagh.Game@herstmonceuxparish.org.uk
Cllr.Emma.Goodsell@HerstmonceuxParish.org.uk
Cllr.David.Harding@herstmonceuxparish.org.uk
Cllr.Jeremy,Harrison@HerstmonceuxParish.org.uk
Cllr.Peter.Goodman@HerstmonceuxParish.org.uk
cllr.colin.keane@herstmonceuxparish.org.uk
Cllr.Ian.Stewart@HerstmonceuxParish.org.uk
Return
HOME
|