At that meeting, Councillor Michael Jones, head of Cheshire East Council elect, promised in the clearest possible terms to thoroughly investigate any links between Broadway Malyan and developers owning Green Belt land in Wilmslow. He said he would confirm what conflict checks were undertaken as part of the appointment process. We provided him with the evidence below, and asked whether these potential conflicts were fully and properly disclosed to Cheshire East at the time of Broadway Malyan's appointment. Unfortunately, almost four weeks on, we have had no answer to this question. In fact, we have stopped receiving responses from the Council altogether, so until we get anything more constructive from them, please see the information below for yourselves and decide whether you believe there is a conflict of interest here or not.
Below we will provide links which demonstrate that Broadway Malyan ("BM") has previously acted for Taylor Wimpey (which owns land in both of sites Ba and Bb) and Jones Homes (which owns land in site Ba).
Broadway Malyan has acted for Taylor Wimpey
Taylor Wimpey owns significant areas of land in both of sites Ba and Bb, and is lobbying for their development. Here is a link which clearly demonstrates that Taylor Wimpey has been a client of BM:
BM acted on behalf of Taylor Wimpey in relation to Basingstoke's Issues and Options paper. This is far from an isolated case, as a quick Google search of Broadway Malyan Taylor Wimpey shows.
Broadway Malyan has acted for Jones Homes
Jones Homes owns significant areas of land in site Bc. Yet BM acted for Jones Homes (in conjunction with Muller Property Group) in pushing for a housing development near Nantwich, which caused uproar with local residents due to the way in which the local community felt ambushed by Broadway Malyan's "consultation". See the links below.
The similarities between BM's Nantwich document and their Wilmslow Vision are very striking! One of the key differences though is that whilst the Nantwich document is overtly branded as being on behalf of a developer, the Wilmslow Vision document was stamped as being a Cheshire East document!
Broadway Malyan already have a published position against development of Cheshire East's Green Belt
On behalf of Muller Property Group, BM submitted a response to the Cheshire East Issues and Options Paper. This is contained in the document Broadway Malyan on behalf of Muller Property 17 12 2010.pdf which is found on Cheshire East's own website: http://cheshireeast-consult.limehouse.co.uk/common/search/advanced_search.jsp?id=459630&sortMode=response_date&lookingFor=representations&tab=list
On page 12, BM clearly states that of the four Spatial Options considered in Cheshire East's draft Issues and Options Consultation paper (2010), they say that "Option 1 is the only strategy which would be able to deliver the level of growth which Cheshire East have signed up to and are seeking to achieve. This option focuses on Crewe allowing it to become the main driver for growth... ". As already set out by Friends of Dean Row, Option 1 would mean a maximum of 640 new houses for Wilmslow. So why on earth did BM inform the people of Wilmslow that they needed to propose sites for 1,500 houses?
BM goes on to say: "The release of Green Belt Land should be the last resort and only be considered as a viable proposal where there are no other viable alternative options available. In this case the release of Green Belt land is unjustified given that there are other more sustainable alternatives... The release of Green Belt Land around the smaller towns and villages and key service centres in the north of the borough is likely to have an adverse impact on the established character of these more rural parts of the borough."
For once, we completely agree with Broadway Malyan! It just makes it even more difficult to understand why every site (except one) that was proposed for development in the Wilmslow Vision is Green Belt.
Conclusion
We should not be surprised that BM has acted for housing developers in the past, and we are not suggesting that anything illegal is taking place. However, the following questions remain unanswered:
- Was best practice followed by Cheshire East when appointing Broadway Malyan?
- Were proper conflict checks undertaken?
- Were the relationships with Taylor Wimpey, Jones Homes, and others, properly disclosed as part of their appointment?
- As a condition of being appointed on the Wilmslow Vision, has Broadway Malyan contractually agreed not to work for any property developer in relation to any housing developments in Cheshire East over the period which the Local Plan will be in place (ie until 2030)?
Given that clear potential conflicts of interest appear to exist, is it clear who is really running the Wilmslow Vision process? Is it Cheshire East? Or is it Broadway Malyan? Read this account of the process from one member of the Advisory Stakeholder Group, and come to your own conclusions! www.wilmslow.co.uk/news/article/6315/wilmslow-vision-process-thoughts-of-a-stakeholder
The residents of Wilmslow demand answers to these questions from their Councillors.
Not only did Councillor Jones say at the first Dean Row public meeting that he would thoroughly investigate any possible conflicts of interest, he said that if BM had not declared any interest prior to accepting the assignment, he would take formal action to recover the fee paid to BM, ie that its consulting fee would be repaid to Cheshire East. This needs folowing up also.
ReplyDeleteHas anyone yet had a view from The Rt Hon.George Osborne on the process; the quality of work/analysis; the conflict of interests; the effect on the countryside; the sustainability of the "options"; and on the "vision" itself and if so what is it?
ReplyDelete