|
|
|
|
MEMBER’S WORKING
PARTY DOCUMENT, 16th MARCH 2006
Page 3 of 8
A file of all
the original letters, e-mails and standard forms will be
available for inspection by Members at the meeting.
The Council has consulted on a number of occasions during
the development of a sustainable future for the Castle
and Country Park as shown below:-
| 2000 |
Initial consultation to determine
objectives and possible uses (2,100 responses) |
| |
|
| 2004 |
Three petitions totalling 61,500
signatures submitted together with 466 letters
mainly in pre-printed formats of similar content |
| |
|
| 2005 |
Notice
issued re the proposal to lease “public open
space” (51 responses) |
| |
|
| 2005 |
Highgate
Sanctuary consultation on the hotel and golf
course proposals (135 responses) |
| |
|
| 2005 |
Lanarca
Garden consultation (3 rounds over 4 months) |
| |
|
The DCC states in the above chart
that it has consulted but fails to publish the results.
The 2000 survey actually produced a response from the
public showing that 78.15% of respondents were against
the lease or sale of Elvaston Castle Country Park, 63.1%
STRONGLY DISAGREED!
In a letter to the Ombudsman’s Investigator DCC
admitted that the fact that it had claimed that 70% of
respondents were in favour of the proposal was incorrect
and due to the figures being ‘transposed’.
In the 2004 survey it omits to point out that ALL of the
signatures (the number of which is in the table), were
AGAINST the proposal to sell or lease the Estate.
The first 2005 figure of 51 responses fails to point out
that 49 of these were objections, with two
objections/further enquiries requests.
The second 2005 figure refers to the publicly distributed
Highgate Sanctuary leaflet which also contained
inaccuracies, most notably that Highgate Sanctuary would
match fund a Gardens restoration bid for HLF funding.
Under HLF rules on commercial involvement this would not
be allowed.
Secondly, although 135 responses are quoted it seems that
the public is not to be made privy to these so we cannot
judge what the responses were.
Finally, the third 2005 consultation referred to, the
Lanarca consultation, was also inaccurate. It excluded
questions about the Local Nature Reserve because it was
outside the area of the Core Gardens but included areas
such as the Showground, Fox Covert car park and the Old
English Garden which are also outside the Core Gardens.
Also, as the restoration was supposedly going to be to
William Barron’s original specifications the content
of some of the questions asked was totally inappropriate.
|
|
