Jump to content

brian

Gold Members
  • Posts

    16
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral

Profile Information

  • My Team
    Other
  1. You never warned the Italians. You spooke with scottish lady at the club. She never worked with the Italians, only against, and don't passed the message. Firs time that they was involved with you was reading the daily record...
  2. From livi staff under massone. They was perfect. The best employs was out at the start of the adminstrator farce. Italians and scottish....
  3. Massone payed 100% of the wages. The maximum late was 2 days. I worked for him. He payed all repayment plan with the hmrc. He payed two years rent to wlc. The account showed simply the true.... Open Your mind if want the well of the scottish football. Melville want organise the same fraud using cva...
  4. Charles this is the WLC mentality that You know really well...say hello to your friend Peter J. You are not a Livi supporters but a little politician corrupt! Councillor: 'I'll bring down this council if you block my client's £8m development' heraldscotland staff Share 0 comments 20 Dec 2008 INVESTIGATION: By Paul Hutcheon A senior councillor reported to police over his role in a £8 million planning application was working as a consultant on the same deal while sitting on the local authority's development committee. A dossier obtained by the Sunday Herald shows how Gordon Beurskens, an independent who props up the SNP administration in West Lothian, warned council officials who objected to his client's plans for a housing development. He even suggested the Nationalist council could be brought down in "two minutes" after becoming frustrated by delays with the application. Documents also show that council leader Peter Johnston was copied into intemperate emails sent to staff, as well as correspondence from Beurskens as a consultant. Council chief executive Alex Linkston has reported Beurskens to the police over his role in a planning application for a mixed development scheme at Whitrigg, Whitburn. The £8m plan was rejected by planning officials but pushed through by councillors last month with the casting vote of SNP committee chairman Jim Dickson, who has stood down from his post pending an independent review. Although Beurskens's register of interest states that he has a "ceased" interest in the Whitrigg land, a raft of internal council emails shows the councillor was doubling up as a consultant for the firm driving the project, Aftondale Ltd. Councillors on the development control committee, a quasi-judicial body, must show impartiality on planning applications, but the files reveal Beurskens had a financial interest in the plan being approved. The councillor, who along with his colleagues in the Action To Save St John's party keeps the SNP in power in West Lothian, also received a campaign donation from Land 4 Leisure, a firm that has Aftondale's owner Peter McMahon as a director. The internal emails show that Beurskens, a former bankrupt who sits on the development committee, regularly contacted planning officials in his capacity as a consultant. A email sent from Beurskens on October 17 to a planning official - sent from the email account of his firm, ABW Consultants (Scotland) Ltd - said of the Whitrigg plan: "The suggestion yesterday that the Council may indeed change it's sic opinion in relation to the previously supported elements of the application, would be a serious breach of trust, which, if actionable will be hauled through the courts and the complaints system. I have to say words fail me in expressing my deep discomfort and anger at this apparent shift." An email to planners from the previous day, again from Beurskens's ABW account, said of objections to the application by local firm Wiseman Dairies: "I will give you this warning. I have sufficient personal shares to establish challenge; I have a personal fortune higher than the aroagnt sic b*****ds involved representing Wisemans Dairies, and, if challenged, I will take those unworthy, arrogant idiots to the courts they prswsume sic to threathen sic us with." An email in November to a development official, also copied to McMahon, said of the department's scepticism about the application: "We would like to move forward as quickly as possible with the requirments of the Committee Report. My understanding is that we require to provide a TIA Transport Impact Analyses, FRA Flood Risk Assessment and Contaminated Land Report prior to the issue of consent. In that case, we would require to know specifically what is required in the FRA and CLR from the Council's point of view." He added: "Could you advise any officers who are to be involved to use my contact details here, and not my Council routes, and that Peter McMahon is copied in." Other emails shows how council officials raised doubts about the planning application being initially referred to the development committee by Beurskens, who had a financial interest in the project. One official noted: "The citing of his name on the report is at odds with his declared interest and him not partaking in its determination. I need legal advice on how to proceed here." The emails also show how Beurskens issuing warnings when problems were flagged up with the application. In an email to the director of the development department, Beurskens hit out at the delays his client was facing when trying to get guidance on the application: "I understand Economic Development have lodged an objection to Peter's proposals. The why is a spurious affront, the who I don't yet know. What I do know is I will be looking for answers tomorrow morning I don't know what it was like under the previous administration, but I know exactly how it is not going to be under this one." On March 10, a Beurskens email to the director and council leader Peter Johnson warned of the consequences of delay: "This is neither appropriate or smart. I gave a clear warning that I would not tolerate this kind of nonsense outside the council or inside the council. It would take me all of two minutes to change the complexion of a Council, far less to give clear guidance to a planning applicant. I trust I need say no more on the subject." An email between planning officials, this time in September, gave a summary of a conversation with Beurskens: "He suggested that if I looked to the report being withdrawn, then I and/or the council would be the recipient of counter legal action and a complaint made against me. "If the decision was taken to hear the report, and a planning permission was challenged in the courts and quashed, then he would be suing the council." Another email to officials and SNP councillors from Beurskens stated: "I understand from speaking to Peter Macmahon this morning that his meeting with Craig a development official was rather negative. Given my previous involvement with this site, you will understand my sensitivity I assure you gentlemen, that will only be the start of what could be a very painful scrutiny process. Perhaps a meeting might be in order - quickly." Correspondence between council officials makes clear they were working in an atmosphere of intimidation. After one of Beurskens's emails, a senior employee noted: "I simply cannot carry out my professional duties against this kind of background." Another stated: "If either party speak to staff in this manner there are clear guidelines in the Personal Safety at Work Policy and Guide and the Whistleblowing policy on what to do. No member of staff - or management - should be put under this pressure no matter whether there is political desire to hush it up. If an FOI Freedom of Information request were lodged this would be produced therefore we should treat it as public information." Apart from the police inquiry, sources close to the council say Beurskens could be reported to the Standards Commissioner, the watchdog that investigates complaints against councillors. The code of conduct for councillors explicitly states: "You must never seek to pressure planning officers to provide a particular recommendation on any planning application, planning agreement or taking enforcement action." It adds: "You must not act on behalf of, or as an agent for, an applicant for planning permission with the Council other than in the course of your professional role which you have registered." The documents also show that Peter Johnston, the SNP council leader, was copied into a number of the intimidating emails to staff, as well as correspondence from Beurskens in his capacity as a consultant. When approached by the Sunday Herald, Johnston initially said yesterday: "I think Gordon Beurskens will be fully exonerated." After reading out the Beurskens emails that he had been copied into, the council leader said: "That sort of language is not something I condone. When he was sending those emails, they were as a consultant. "Had he sent them as a councillor he could be accused of breaching the code of conduct. I am disppointed in the use of language in the emails." Despite council officials' reservations, the planning application was eventually approved following a tied vote on the development committee last month Although Beurskens absented himself from the debate, a "substitute" vote was given to his fellow Save St John's councillor, Ellen Glass. The tie resulted in the chairman of the committee, Jim Dickson, issuing his casting vote in favour of the development. Linkston, the council chief executive, then reported Beurskens to the police following complaints by opposition councillors. Dickson has also stood down as committee chairman while the council launches an independent review of its procedures in planning applications. Asked what his connection was to Aftondale and the planning application, Beurskens told the Sunday Herald yesterday: "I was a consultant. I have worked in conjunction with my colleague who owns Aftondale on several projects over the years. The consultancy company has been in existence for around 10 years." A West Lothian ouncil spokesman said of the probe: "Given the nature of the allegations we have asked police to investigate. As this is now an on-going inquiry it is not appropriate to comment further."
  5. Charles i have a song for You, Dave, Peter, Ged, Gordon, Neil and WLC: money, money, money, money, money, money, money, money, money, money money, money, money, money, money, money, money, money, money. You are a pathetic impostor and all people know this. Ciao little muppet see you soon.
  6. Mcl you can investigate about this. Tesco will relocate the stadium. The council canceled the debt to the new consortium ( Neil Rankine.................). Private money to the council people???? Easy. The CVA was a big fraud against the creditors. They decided to put the club in administration for private reasons. WLC refused money from Massone. Why???? Scottish Mafia ????? The new consortium decided to play in 3 division. Do You Know wHY? Because they wanted show to the people that aldomvale is too big for Livi. Is better to sell to Tesco..... Neil at the public meeting said : Aldomvale is a big elefant!!!!!! Ciao ragazzi aprite gli occhi. Il calcio deve essere prima di tutto un divertimento. Questa gente uccide i sogni della gente per ragioni private. Il Livi era pronto per vincere la 1 division. Hanno creato tutta una serie di problemi per realizzare i loro interessi. Sveglia amici. A presto....
×
×
  • Create New...