Barnsley Council (BMBC) Want our Land
The showground recreational area is precious to Penistone people but Barnsley council has little regard for local feelings. Encroachment attrition is an incremental process. An expensive, though much needed, skateboard park was built in one corner using 'Heritage' money. A proposed new supermarket will take another chunk and Barnsley council want to extend the cemetery into another corner, even though it already owns enough adjacent land. More than a decade ago, BMBC drew up detailed street plans for a housing estate on the Showground, although this has been quietly dropped for the time being.
Now there is an on-off plan to build a nursery on another corner of our green space. Penistone people have strongly objected to this but deals are done behind closed doors, without proper public scrutiny or accountability. By further encroaching on the recreation area, the door opens wider to yet more building and another 'patch of grass' slowly disappears. Unusually, there has been a very strong opposition to the building of the nursery and, in recent election campaigns, most of the candidates have referred to the matter. It is obvious that they all see it as a key issue.
Here's a neat trick. In 2005, an open forum was publicised on a small noticeboard. Few heard about it and only fourteen people turned up. But at an earlier and better publicised forum meeting, a strong PAGE delegation turned up and caught them by surprise. They ended up having to discuss the matter. You can reasonably draw the conclusion that they did want a repeat confrontation with an increasingly hostile public (a.k.a. 'the electorate') and controlled the numbers by controlling the publicity.
The PAGE Protest, March 2004
A flyer went to hundreds of homes, explaining the consequences of building on our popular recreation ground ('rec'). It claimed possible damage to local events such as Bonfire Night, Penistone Parade and Gala, Penistone Show, football matches, gymkhanas, funfairs, PFR races, etc. This fear looked exaggerated at first but, in fact, Barnsley council had previously shown that it was their intention to build houses on our showground. They had in fact already drawn up street plans and there is still the possibility that they might want to develop the showground area. By gradually allowing corners of the area to be encroached upon, it would be increasingly easy to build yet more. The thin end of the wedge, so to speak.
Nobody was against a nursery in principle but they did (do) not want it on the recreational land. It would not be near to the new housing developments where you might expect young families to live and the proposed new supermarket would be rather too close, with much more dangerous traffic passing by than there is now.
In fact, many local people agree that there is a desperate need for more nursery provision. The 'Busy Bees' have accrued a large amount of money from various sources and are in a strong position to find an alternative and more suitable building plot in the area. If you consider all the house building of recent years, finding somewhere to build does not appear to be a problem.
P.A.G.E. - Penistone Against Green-space Encroachment is a group of concerned Penistone householders which enjoys popular support in the area. Their protest was widely seen on regional tv news and a petition was presented to Parliament via local Labour Party MP Michael Clapham. Condemnatory letters in Barnsley Chronicle showed the strength of feeling but opponents of PAGE repeated the deliberate untruth that they were set up to prevent any increased nursery provision in the Penistone area. This line was also used by BMBC to divide other interested parties, some of whom had raised funds for Busy Bees. Divide and conquer, they say.
To try to halt encroachment, PAGE tried to have the land designated as a 'village green', although some self-interested councillors did what they can to block this. The Show committee dithered, with the concern that such a designation could make entrance fees for Penistone Show illegal and to effectively kill it off. However, it appears that the law does allow for precedent ('customary use and tradition') and this should not have been a concern. If, on the other hand, the showground were to be built on, then Penistone Show would definitely have had to find a new location in the area, such as the park near the viaduct.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The PAGE group had a stall on Market Street with petitions, maps and information about users of this public land. The group also had a stand at Penistone Parade gala, not far from the nursery group's.
Petition Reached Parliament
Local MP Michael Clapham (Labour), presented the petitions to the House of Commons on 21st July 2004. This was recorded in Hansard:
From Hansard:
Mr. Michael Clapham (Barnsley, West and Penistone) (Lab):
"I present the petition of the Penistone Against Greenspace Encroachment campaign and others. It declares that the Petitioners object to Planning Application B/03/2171/PU which allows "Busy Bees" to build on Penistone Recreation Ground. The Petitioners further declare that the loss of the playground and re-positioning of other facilities on the Recreation Ground will be detrimental to the community as well as to the traditional events held there, including Penistone Agricultural Show. The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Deputy Prime Minister to call in "Busy Bees" Planning Application B/03/2171/PU for his own assessment. And the Petitioners remain, etc."
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmhansrd/vo040721/debtext/40721-40.htm
Then BMBC revealed that they had decided to allow the nursery to go ahead on the recreation ground and possibly circumvented the proper and normal planning procedures in the process. There were heated arguments in the local council chamber but it was not clear whether personal interests had been properly disclosed, as one of the leading lights had a family connection with the proposed nursery.
A 'Local Forum' meeting in March, attended by the BMBC leader, met with a strong delegation from PAGE. This matter was not on the agenda (why?) but questions were allowed and concessions made (as reported in Barnsley Chronicle). It was reported that the forum people were rather unsettled by the public scrutiny of their positions.
May - June 2005
Then it was announced that a site in Cubley had been found for the nursery, possibly to take the heat out of the situation. It then returned to the original 'rec' plan and Cubley proved to be the red herring that PAGE insiders had warned it to be. It had been alleged that Busy Bees had had enough confidence in the original 'rec' plan to order curtains, fittings and furnishings to specific sizes, while the Cubley site was supposed to be on-going.
March - July 2006
PAGE has not gone away and Penistone people are still aware of the threat to public recreational spaces. Local election leaflets mentioned it as a continuing problem. A. M. Cotterill attended a planning meeting held by Barnsley council to consider a village green application from Mr Simon Hirst. The application was to try to protect our recreation ground by granting village green status.
In a Barnsley Chronicle letter (24/3/06), he reported that six people voted against it. He said that, by voting against the application, local Cllrs George Punt, Debbie Toon and Alex Rowley were not acting in accordance with the wishes of community. Not all local councillors were like that, as Cllr Brenda Hinchliffe acted in the public interest and was the only local councillor to vote in favour of the application.
PAGE needs money to support legal proceedings and request people who care about Penistone to contribute towards the fighting fund and I have donated £50. Cheques can be left at Bridge End car spares shop or at any local bank, made payable to 'PAGE'.
