Thursday, 20 December 2012


I want to make it very clear that Cllr Driver is ABSOLUTELY WRONG in his assumption that I/we have in any way tried to have his group remove him as the Chair of Scrutiny.

Indeed, understanding the recent stresses within their group, in any conversation I have had recently with his Thanet Independent Group colleagues I have urged them to do all they can to to try to keep Cllr Driver in their group and as the Chair of Scrutiny.

This statement is absolutely factual - please feel free to check these facts with Cllr Driver's two group colleagues.

Cllr Clive Hart - Labour Leader of TDC


  1. Yes Clive, you may well have urged the other two TIG's to try and keep Ian with them, whilst your group are plotting to remove him as chair of scrutiny? Wasn't he described as the 'current' chair of scrutiny recently.

    1. Ian always puts his ward and other before his own needs - but the question is, does anyone actually want him to resign?. I think not

    2. To: AnonymousThursday, 20 December 2012 21:42:00 GMT

      He described himself as the 'current' chair of scrutiny recently, so don't be such a disingenuous councillor!

  2. So it is a fact and, if you want to verify it, those two champions of honesty, Worrow and Cohen, will provide the corroboration. Well I guess that's all OK then and Cllr Driver was just imagining a plot to oust him.

    1. I think there must have been a major super big plot against Cllr Driver, he can't be imaging it because he doesnt like drama and publicity.

      I just can't understand why the naughty councillors need to plot in order to oust him - if they really wanted to get rid of him they could sign the relevant forms in minutes?

    2. Would Ian be required to apologise to his new colleagues for calling them homophobic, as seen on Meridian before joining them, and are they going to stop Live Exports from Ramsgate?

  3. Ian Driver is natural a team player, who spends most of his time working hard for the people in his Northwood Ward. He puts his ward residents first and tries to avoid publicity as much as possible.
    He always thinks things through before acting - but selfish people tend let him down by not seeing things his way. He is an excellent public speaker, who always gets his facts right. He is a man of his word and a champion of animal welfare. I think we can all agree that he is doing a great job!

  4. I don't blame Ian for wanting to leave the TIG group, the other two are a waste of space. As Ian has shown, he can work with the Conservatives on common issues, and so he should.

    1. Yeah good point he should join the conservatives, none of them are a waste of space, they only allow honest, decent and safe members to join them, such as Sandy Ezekiel, Ted Watt-Ruffell, Ken Gregory and Shirley tomlinson..

    2. Breaking the law like Gregory and Tomlinson did is not as bad as resigning from a party like Driver and Worrow did. One should always put the party before principles!

    3. Let's hope as with Pleasurama there's an investigation into the MOD Firestation and Thor pollution too.

    4. Since when did the MOD Fire School, or Thor for that matter, come under the control of TDC? Bet 10:31 is the same clueless personage who keeps wanting police called in yet who cannot bother to pick up the phone himself. Total twit but probably a TDC plant.

    5. TDC have the remit for monitoring pollution and coordinating with the Environment Agency, Southern Water etc eg Thor, Manston aquifer and monitors, MODFire, pollution into Pegwell etc. Why so keen to downplay pollution in your own backyard?

    6. Not down playing pollution, but yet to see any evidence that the MOD Fire School actually pollutes anything. As for the Thor site, do you have proof that TDC did not check the place when vacated. Yes, Southern Water have polluted the sea, but steps are now being taken to deal with that in future. Whatever will you whinge about then,16:42.

    7. 18:54 you're twisting and turning on pollution. You said it wasn't TDC's remit. Now you accept it is.

      What proof would satisfy you on any of these points - or shall we all pretend like you there is no pollution and Thor etc is perfectly safe?

      Thor was banned in 1988 - you tell me on the TDC site visits since it remained open with a fire in 2007. TDC will give you FOI details won't they? It's been debated at council and minuted?

      MODFire lights fires on the aquifer and douses them with chemicals - safe?

      Infratil as we know removed the Manston monitors with TDC in 2006 - so how they've been monitoring it since then is perhaps one for you to explain?

      Southern Water polluted the sea several times before the latest disaster - printing some beach closure signs ready for the next spillage doesn't really improve things does it?

      Your arguments are simply contrary nonsense - why so keen to downplay pollution in your own backyard?

      Maybe you should explain the pollution levels to us if you think it's all so safe? How does the Manston aquifer compare to say the rest of the South East?

    8. The only pollution I definitely know of is that by Southern Water. The rest, as far as I am concerned, is fears expressed by you but not proven. It is your allegation on all this pollution so you prove it. It is not down to the rest of us to disprove.

      As have so many before with you, I am disengaging from this exchange until such time as you produce something to support your argument. Have a good Christmas and avoid water in your whisky.

    9. Not so fast 10:19. You're saying that there is no pollution from Manston, Thor - or even Southern Water before the 20 tons of sewage this Summer? Prove it. TDC will have pollution reports etc.

      The same with the Manston monitors being removed.

      You seem to be sat on your backside, being contrary, expecting everyone else to prove the water your children and grandchildren drink is safe.

      I don't know why your refer to yourself in the third person or claim to speak for anyone else, except an inflated sense of your own opinion.

      I've detailed very specific points and yet again you have no detail to support your random opinion. Speak up as to why Thor or Manston or MODFire is safe. Any fact at all.

    10. You have not produced one scrap of evidence to proof your claims so why should you expect others to disprove them. For goodness sake, man, if you have a case make it otherwise please shut up. Anon 10:19 is far from alone in finding your repetitive claims a bit boring.

    11. I am with you on this, Tom. Could there be anyone more boring than 19:38, but at least we do not have to live with him. Just pity the poor folk who do.

    12. Anon 19:38

      What specific points have you detailed. You have alleged that MOD and Thor have caused contamination, but that is all it is, an allegation. What kind of pollution, chemical, radioactive or maybe bacterial? Do you know? Can you actually tell us, say on the MOD Fire Establishment, how you feel they contaminate anything and, if so, what? What proof do you have to back your claims?

      Give me some facts and I might even join your campaign but, for the moment, you are an unsubstantiated voice in the wilderness.

    13. Ren, the MOD Firebase is on the aquifer so it's contaminated with the chemicals they use to put out their training fires. Several thousand litres.

      The Environment Agency has details of the Thor mercury pollution in and around the factory and to the aquifer.

      No HSE explanation as to why the factory never closed in 1988.

      The separate Sericol contamination was again several thousand litres pumped out from memory.

      Ask any of them and TDC for FOI details. TDC though doesn't have a good track record with the Manston monitoring.

      Blog commenting won't clean the sites up so you'll need to put some effort in - or like Tom/Allan randomly make up excuses to do nothing and pretend everything's fine.

    14. That is not proof but assumption on your part that the fire exstinguuishing chemicals they use, mainly foam or dry powder, are contaminating. As for the Manston monitoring, surely that was for noise, not pollution and don't they now use a mobile monitor?

      You are right that blog commenting will not clean up the sites so what else are you doing about it?

    15. Ren, we we had high hopes of you on the contamination. What do you suggest you can do?

      The contamination of MOD chemicals is well-documented as its the removal of the noise monitors at Manston by Infratil and TDC and almost zero air monitoring by TDC - except to declare pollution zones under the flightpath.

      You don't have to be Einstein to work out the effect on cancer rates.

      What will you do was the question not what will I do. You've merely bounced it back to me.

    16. Where exactly, 13:38, is your well documented evidence of contaminating MOD chemicals. They use no more in training than the average town fire station. Guess it is your usual hot air largely extracted from your own over active imagination. Accept it, you just hate Manston and everything else is invented to fit your case.

  5. Childish bickering - let's have the Pleasurama details out in the open for public scrutiny rather than whitewash. And another year wasted on Dreamland.

  6. Thor nuclear chemist murdered

    Thor and action brought by Zulus re mercury contaminations

    My FOI application about Thor Margate was answered by Environment Agency. There is a previously secret remediation project at site as Thor contaminated aquifer with mercury and mixed solvent.

    My FOI application re Sericol was answered by Environment Agency. Massive contamination by cyclohexonone had occurred for 30 years before its 1993 discovery. A previously secret remediation project had recovered 470 tonnes of cyclohexonone at Poorhole Lane from chalk layers beneath the site. The contamination will be an aquifer problem for the foreseeable future. The FOI response was published by Michael Child and ECR.

    I am not the anon contributor who raises Manston issues.

    As I understand it in 1993 an anonymous letter reached a TDC labour cllr saying that solvent spillage had stained the chalk red. The EA response to my FOI application 15 years later was that red staining is an effect of the remediation process.

    My information is that the Labour cllr was lied to in 1993 that the red staining had immediately alerted Sericol to the problem and action had been taken before there was any damage to aquifer.

    Perhaps the Labour cllr concerned would care to verify this. He was blatantly lied to.

    This was at a time police were investigating TDC ? So were they told about the Planning Cttee (wasn't it them under inquiry ?) allegedly lying to Labour cllrs. was Sericol engineer george maison a tory cllr on the Planning Cttee ? What was the cause of his alleged assault on Cllr Margaret Mortlock (aged 80)at a planning cttee meeting ? was Cllr Hayton on withdrawal at the time of the allaged assault ? Did Hayton perjure in High Court evidence 1998 ?

    Did investigating police find out that Maison was cautioned for running a mail intercept at TDC ?

    Was this the time TV produced their documentary about Thor Margate and former Thanet workers developing Parkinson like illness ?

  7. Allan Mallinson and Tom Clarke "Are we to understand that Thor Margate was subject of a broadcast documentary in the 90s herrumph"

    You got it lads.


Please note comments that may be libellous, comments that may be construed as offensive and anonymous derogatory comments about real people will be deleted. Also note the facility to leave anonymous comment will be turned of during periods when I am unable to monitor comment, this will not affect people commenting who are signed on to their blogger accounts.

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.