Sleaze from the 'nasty party' has re-started !!!

The scumbag 'nasty party' are re-starting their sleaze yet again - bastards !!!


Call For Police To Investigate Housing Secretary Over £30m Planning Favour For Tory Donor Richard Desmond
Robert Jenrick's "biased" decision over Isle of Dogs development would have robbed cash-strapped council of between £30m and £50m.

• 
  By Sara C Nelson

ASSOCIATED PRESS
Britain's Secretary of State for Housing Robert Jenrick
Housing secretary Robert Jenrick has admitted “unlawfully” signing off a 1,500-home development by Conservative Party donor Richard Desmond – in a move that would have saved the billionaire publishing tycoon some £40m.


Labour peer Lord Andrew Adonis has called for the Metropolitan Police to look into the matter, and the Conservative Party leader in Tower Hamlets has resigned from the party altogether because it looks “very suspicious”.

The £1bn project on the former Westferry Printworks on London’s Isle of Dogs was approved in January by Jenrick – despite the council and then the independent Planning Inspectorate both deciding it should be refused over a lack of affordable housing and because it conflicted with local planning policy.

His decision came a day before Tower Hamlets Council approved a new rate for its Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), which would have increased Desmond’s financial liability to the council by between £30m and £50m.

In March, the council began legal action, alleging that the timing of the decision appeared to show bias. It asked the High Court to order the government to disclose documents that, it argued, would show Jenrick was influenced by a desire to help Desmond save money by avoiding the charges.

Faced with the prospect of having to publicly release documents relating to the decision, Jenrick accepted his decision letter was “unlawful by reason of apparent bias” and confirmed it was deliberately issued before the new CIL policy could be adopted. He agreed planning permission should be quashed and decided by a different minister.

A High Court order states: “In pre-action correspondence, pursuant to the duty of candour, the first defendant [Jenrick] explained that the DL [decision letter] was issued on 14 January 2020 so that it would be issued before the claimant [Tower Hamlets] adopted its new local plan and CIL charging schedule.”

It adds: “He [Jenrick] accepts that the timing of the DL, on the eve of the approval of the claimant’s new CIL charging schedule, thereby avoiding a substantial financial liability which would otherwise fall on the second defendant [Westferry Developments Ltd], would lead the fair minded and informed observer to conclude that there was a real possibility that the first defendant was biased in favour of the second defendant.”

Westferry Printworks Consent Order now public
Key points 2 to 6 on page 3 @RobertJenrick accepts his 14th Jan decision "was unlawful by reason of apparent bias" & that he made decision on that date so as to avoid 15th Jan decision on new CIL rates helping developer avoid £40m
1/ pic.twitter.com/wVfk0uPZDy

— Andrew Wood (@Andrewwood17) May 27, 2020
Cllr Wood, who resigned as leader of a local Conservative group after Jenrick’s decision, has called for the council and Greater London Authority (GLA) to put more information about the matter in the public domain.

He told The Times: “The reasons for the minister’s decision and his correspondence with the developer should be put in the public domain and investigated by the appropriate authorities.”

Speaking to HuffPost UK, he added: “The whole thing looks very suspicious and I was so angry that I chose then to quit as leader of the Conservative group on the council and as a member of the Conservative Party.

“For me it was the final nail in the coffin. I had decided to stay in because I thought the ability to write to ministers as Conservative group leader was worth me suppressing my increasing doubts about the direction of the party nationally. But Jenrick’s decision was so shocking that I could not continue.”

Lord Adonis tweeted: “I hope the Metropolitan Police are looking at this. By taking the decision he did, Jenrick excused this party donor £40m in tax, maybe more in other respects. His lawyers appear to have conceded it was done in a highly inappropriate manner & Jenrick won’t disclose documents.”

I hope the Metropoitan Police are looking at this. By taking the decision he did, Jenrick excused this party donor £40m in tax, maybe more in other respects. His lawyers appear to have conceded it was done in a highly inappropriate manner & Jenrick won’t disclose documents The Times on Twitter

— Andrew Adonis (@Andrew_Adonis) May 27, 2020
Tower Hamlets mayor John Biggs said: “We may never know what emails and memos the secretary of state received before making his decision and what influence they had, but his reluctance to disclose them speaks volumes.

“In siding with the developer, he went against not only the planning inspector but also the council’s strategic development committee and the residents whose lives would be directly impacted by this scheme.”

Tower Hamlets planning chief Cllr Rachel Blake added: “We were shocked that in taking his decision, the secretary of state went against the government’s own planning inspector’s recommendation.

“The timing, which meant the developer would have been able to pay significantly lower infrastructure costs than if it had been made the following week, meant we had no choice but to challenge it through the courts.

“We feel strongly that these decisions should be taken locally but where they’re not, our residents must still be able to trust the integrity of the processes that are followed.”

In an interview with Sky News on Wednesday, Jenrick told Adam Boulton the application was decided “on its merits” and done “without any actual bias”.

He added: “But clearly the way that the process was run gave rise to some concerns and so that’s why we’ve chosen to quash the decision.”

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government did not respond to HuffPost UK, but a spokesperson told The Times: “While we reject the suggestion that there was any actual bias in the decision, we have agreed that the application will be redetermined.”

 

Scumbag 'nasty party' Minister too scared to attend Parliament, because he is being asked to publicise all the papers relating to his 'kick back' deal with a builder.


Robert Jenrick: Housing secretary refusing to answer questions over unlawful help for Tory donor’s property scheme
Mr Jenrick had been summoned and told to publish all correspondence on Richard Desmond controversy - to prove no 'cash for favours'

• Rob Merrick Deputy Political Editor @Rob_Merrick
• 10 minutes ago
• 12 comments

After a High Court challenge, Robert Jenrick accepted his decision had been 'unlawful by reason of apparent bias' ( PA )
Scandal-hit cabinet minister Robert Jenrick is refusing to turn up in the Commons to answer questions about his go-ahead for a billionaire Tory donor’s property scheme, it has emerged.

Labour attempted to summon the housing secretary to defend the decision – subsequently ruled unlawful – but he is sending a junior minister instead.

The no-show, revealed on Commons documents, is certain to pile further pressure on Mr Jenrick, after the murky affair remained partly shrouded by the coronavirus crisis.

In January, he approved Richard Desmond’s plan to build 1,500 homes on the site of a former printworks on east London's Isle of Dogs – overturning rejections by the local council and independent inspectors.

The decision came just a day before changes to the planning system which would have cost the developer's company Northern & Shell an extra £30-£50m.

It has now emerged that Mr Desmond donated £12,000 to the Tories on 29 January, having shared a table at a Conservative fundraising dinner last November.

Labour has demanded the housing secretary publish all correspondence related to the planning decision, warning that there must be no “cash for favours”.

Ahead of the urgent question, it also urged Mr Jenrick to:

* Clear up whether he disclosed his earlier conversation Mr Desmond to his department’s top civil servant ahead of the go-ahead – and, if not, whether this breached the ministerial code.


* Explain why he did not recuse himself from any decision-making in the application process, given his relationship with the developer?

* State what contact he, or his officials, had with the developer or his representatives regarding the £30-50 million saving?

MPs have been told that Christopher Pincher, the junior housing minister, will answer questions in Mr Jenrick’s place – with no explanation given.

Ministers have repeatedly insisted there has been no wrong-doing, without explaining how that squares with his admission that his decision broke the law.

After the council mounted a High Court challenge, he accepted it had been “unlawful by reason of apparent bias” and agreed he would take no further part in decisions about the application.

Mr Jenrick’s department declined to answer questions about Mr Desmond’s donation, referring queries to the Conservative party, and Northern & Shell did not respond to requests for a comment.

A Tory party spokesperson said: “Government policy is in no way influenced by party donations – they are entirely separate.

“Donations to the Conservative party are properly and transparently declared to the Electoral Commission, published by them, and comply fully with the law.”