Correspondence from the above has been received where he took exception to the content and tone of a blog post entitled “The Rood End of Lord Langley”.

The original post he asserts was “defamatory and offensive.” A number of questions were posed in the original article which sort clarification. I am therefore happy to add these clarifications to the original post and they now have been. The substance of the post which will not be withdrawn, contains content relevant to the history of Rattlechain lagoon, the passing of the site waste management licence and the associated problems which it continues to cause today. This information is both informative, and previously unpublished material not widely available in the public domain.

The electoral history of the man in question was obtained using material written and published by himself which he has publicly posted for all to read. It therefore we assume is based on fact. The links to these posts were given for clarification at the bottom of the page, and we would add they have all been screenshotted. Statements concerning his wife’s tenure of employment at Albright and Wilson (she worked there “for 30 years”), were also written by himself. “Rhodia consumer Specialities limited” according to the London Gazette was one of a number of companies under the group which appointed liquidators on 5th September 2003. It is stated here that this company was a former name of “Rhodia UK Limited”- a name which appears to have been resurrected since.

“Company Number: 00182210. Name of Company: RHODIA UK LIMITED. Previous Names of Company: Albright & Wilson UK Limited, Rhodia Consumer Specialties Limited, RP Chemicals (Overseas Holdings) Limited, R.T.Z. Chemicals (Overseas Holdings) Limited, Tunnel Speciality Chemicals Limited, Hundred and Five Piccadilly Limited and Building & Insulating Material Company Limited. Nature of Business: 7499 Non-trading Company.”

data (1)

It is noted that in his declaration as a then Sandwell councillor in  May 2010 he states

“My Wife – Mrs Mary Prestidge is a pensioner of:- Rhodia Consumer Specialities Ltd “

Mr Prestidge has clarified in respect of the site licence and his serving on the committee at the time the licence was passed in correspondence-

“NO INTEREST WAS DECLARED BECAUSE NO INTEREST EXISTED. MY WIFE, MARY PRESTIDGE, COMMENCED EMPLOYMENT AT ALBRIGHT AND WILSON IN JANUARY 1980. HER DUTIES WERE PURELY SECRETARIAL AND SHE HAD NO INVOLVEMENT IN MATTERS SUCH AS PLANNING AND LICENSING APPLICATIONS OR WASTE DISPOSAL.”

Mrs Prestidge presumably then retired around  January 2010. We are happy to print his clarification here prominently to set the record straight and apologise if any suspicion of wrongdoing on his part or hers was implied at the 1977 meeting by the original post. For the record we sought clarification of the term of employment, based on the data above and that below.

We would note that the comment written on the facebook page “WE  WORKED FOR ALBRIGHT AND WILSON LTD” BY CAROL NICHOLSON AS STATED ABOVE READS-

“GIVE MY REGARDS TO MARY, WE USED TO CATCH THE BUS TOGETHER  SOMETIMES FROM ROUNDS GREEN TO WORK IN THE EARLY 70′s”

This must have referred to some other place of work that they shared, BEFORE  THEIR JOINT EMPLOYMENT AT ALBRIGHT AND WILSON LTD, WHICH MR PRESTIDGE HAS CLARIFIED COMMENCED IN JANUARY 1980. One can therefore perhaps appreciate some confusion here from a contradictory statement and why we inquired the time of his wife’s employment based on the comment above on a facebook page entitled “we worked for Albright and Wilson Ltd.”

On the wider issue of declarations of interest Mr Prestidge has advised the following

“IT IS A SERIOUS MATTER FOR A COUNCILLOR TO PARTICIPATE IN A DECISION IN WHICH HE OR SHE HAS A DIRECT PECUNIARY INTEREST, EG EMPLOYMENT (INCLUDING THAT OF A SPOUSE). I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN METICULOUS IN DECLARING ANY SUCH INTERESTS AND FREQUENTLY, IN THE INTERESTS OF TRANSPARNECY, WHEN THE SUBJECT MATTER WAS RATHER REMOTE.”

We note his comments and apologise unreservedly if the original post insinuated that he had not declared interests at meetings. For the record the post did not state that he hadn’t, it asked for clarification on a matter concerning why he had declared a non- pecuniary interest in The Accles and Pollock site.

On this he has made the following observation, which we are happy to publish here to add to his own well publicised employment record.

“SITE LICENCE SL32- ACCLES & POLLACK

THE SITE WAS OWNED BY ACCLES & POLLACK, WHERE I HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN EMPLOYED SOME TEN YEARS OR SO PREVIOUSLY. NO PECUNIARY INTEREST EXISTED.”

We would note the correct spelling of the company to be “ACCLES AND POLLOCK. We did not state that he had any pecuniary interest in this company in the blog post, this is his insertion.

We would  note the recent high profile investigation into members of the Labour party serving in Sandwell council who have clearly not declared pecuniary interests in matters concerning financial affairs and their immediate family members. We hope that Mr Prestidge given his position within the party would not condone such activity, as he has explicitly stated above that he was never involved in such activities during his time as a Labour councillor.

Mr Prestidge has made the following clarification regards the SL31 licence

“THE WEST MIDLANDS COUNTY COUNCIL WAS CONSERVATIVE CONTROLLED IN 1977 AND THE LABOUR MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE VOTED FOR A MORE LIMITED CONDITION THAN WAS GRANTED BY THE CONSERVATIVE AND LIBERAL MEMBERS.”

We would however point out that the Labour party  controlled the council from 1974–77, (during which site licensing was being formulated), with the Conservatives controlling it between 1977–81. It reverted to Labour control for the last term 1981–86. Therefore for the creation of the licence and subsequently after it had been passed, the Labour group made no changes to the conditions on the licence. This is factual and cannot be refuted.

On the matter of the committee on which he served “(Joint NEGOTIATING sub-committee (waste disposal) of personnel and administration)” Mr Prestidge has clarified-

“THE LATTER DEALT MAINLY WITH PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATION MATTERS. AT NO TIME WAS I PERSONALLY INVOLVED WITH NEGOTIATIONS WITH ANY COMPANY CONCERNING THEIR APPLICATIONS. “

We are happy to print his clarification here of what this sub committee did, and that he played no part in negotiating with any company concerning their applications.  The wording of the title of this sub committee is ambiguous  and there is still issue as to what this committee dealt with in totality  and its terms of reference  and not what it dealt “mainly with”, which is a matter of conjecture without clarification of evidence.

ON THE MATTER OF THE FOLLOWING MR PRESTIDGE CLARIFIES

“LANGLEY RESIDENTS’ ASSOCIATION

I ATTENDED MEETINGS AS ONE OF THE COUNCILLORS FOR LANGLEY FROM THE MID 1980’S ONWARDS TO REPRESNT THE INTERESTS OF LOCAL RESIDENTS. ALBRIGHT & WILSON/RHODIA/SOLVAY WAS, AND STILL IS, A MAJOR EMPLOYER IN THE AREA AND IT WAS USEFUL TO MAINTAIN CONTACT WITH THEM IN ORDER TO RESOLVE ANY PROBLEMS ARISING FROM THEIR OPERATIONS AT THE FACTORY. THERE WERE PROBLEMS FROM TIME TO TIME AND I ACTED AS AN ADVOCATE OF RESIDENT’S INTERESTS. LOCAL TRADERS AND RESIDENTS ALSO ATTENDED. MEETINGS WERE ADVERTISED LOCALLY AND ANY RESIDENT WAS WELCOMED TO ATTEND. THIS IS A NORMAL REPRESNTATIONAL ROLE AND CERTAINLY I WAS FAR FROM BEING AN APOLOGIST FOR THE COMPANY AS IT IS IMPLIED IN THE BLOG. I STILL ATTEND MEETINGS AS A LOCAL RESIDENT, LIVING AS I DO ABOUT HALF A MILE FROM THE PLANT. I DEEPLY RESENT THE IMPLICATION THAT I HAVE ACTED AS AN UNPAID PR OFFICER FOR THE COMPANY OR THAT I HAVE ACTED IMPROPERLY IN ANY WAY.”

Given that he has stated the tenure of his wife’s employment with the company (30 years) and defines his definition of pecuniary interests, and also the role in which he attended the meetings and how he meticulously recorded all declarations of interest, we hope that he did record at these meetings at which he was purporting as a councillor, a pecuniary interest in the continued success of the company- a source of income into his household from his wife’s job.

We are not stating that he did not, but there is a conflicting interest is there not in attending “a residents meeting” in capacity as a councillor yet having a spouse who works in direct unison to the man responsible for all the issues surrounding the running of the plant, including dealing with complaints- THE WORKS MANAGER. I hope he can see this, and why with scrutiny one could take a different view of his attendance at such meetings to be ones which could be seen to be a friendly, loyal and sympathetic advocate and for ones of self- interest as regards this large industrial employer. Complaints could ultimately shut down company operations leading to loss of profits and also jobs. In what capacity did his wife attend the meetings; (the works manager you would have thought would have), and given her role as secretary to the site manager, who wrote minutes of those meetings? The observation cannot be ignored, but we have given him the freedom of speech to express his view of this.

Mr Prestidge’s advocacy of Solvay is clear to see in his facebook post below.

There is also the fact that he is happy to pose in a Rhodia branded T’ shirt- a company that “he never worked for”.

He cannot possibly deny that this does not advocate the Trinity Street Company- and of course he is free to do this if he wishes. But he should also accept the freedom of others who take a very different view of the companies activities at Trinity Street based on personal experience. Whilst we accept that the use of the word “shillery” and its definitions used in the original article may be construed as implying some wrongdoing on the part of Mr Prestidge, it should be noted that his wife is a pensioner of the root company that operated at this site for many years.  We apologise to Mr Prestidge if he believes that we were asserting that he was a paid stooge for the company. We are sure that he declares at every residents meeting held at the site, as an honorary Alderman of Sandwell council, that his wife was employed at the site for 30 years and receives a company pension .

Mr Prestidge’s  promotion of Solvay, their funding of events in the Langley area and that of their predecessors should be set against their dire pollution record which is irrefutable. Mr Prestidge asserts that this is not as bad as it was, but is that not softening the fact that the area is still within a significant consultation zone which prevents certain developments? This organisation is a multi national multi billion pound company and serves as a corporate industry which has at times sought political influence from policy advisers. Questioning a former politicians motives for promoting a company and one who has had a significant pecuniary interest previously in a company making chemicals at that site is legitimate fair comment and we reserve the right to point that out.

IN CONCLUSION WE NOTE THAT ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THE LINKS AND EVIDENCE OF BIRDS BEING POISONED AT RATTLECHAIN (WHICH ARE IRREFUTABLE WITH SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE) HE MAKES NO COMMENT WHATSOEVER. NOR DOES HE MAKE ANY COMMENT CONCERNING THE TOXIC LEGACY OF THE SITE AND MANY OTHERS THAT THE WEST MIDLANDS COUNTY COUNCIL ALLOWED TO BE LICENCED TO RECEIVE WASTE, AND ARE STILL 40 YEARS LATER A BLIGHT TO THEIR COMMUNITIES.

WE WOULD ALSO NOTE FROM HIS CORRESPONDENCE THERE IS NO APOLOGY OFFERED ON HIS PART FOR BEING A MAJOR PART OF THE COUNCIL WHICH ALLOWED THIS TO HAPPEN. WE ARE TREATED TO THAT OLD CHESTNUT OFFERED BY MANY A DISILLUSIONED SOCIALIST – BLAME THE CONSERVATIVE ADMINISTRATION.

WELL THAT DOES NOT WASH IN THIS CASE- SANDWELL COUNCIL HAS BEEN LABOUR CONTROLLED FOR 40 YEARS FOR ALL BUT A VERY BRIEF PERIOD, AND THE WEST MIDLANDS COUNTY COUNCIL WAS  ALSO LABOUR CONTROLLED FOR MOST OF ITS EXISTANCE. THEY MADE NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE SITE LICENCE FOLLOWING 1977. THE MISTAKE WAS NEVER CORRECTED.

THESE ARE HOWEVER INSIGNIFICANT POINTS, AND OBSCENE WHEN COMPARED TO THE SUFFERING THAT THIS SITE HAS CAUSED WITH ITS WHITE PHOSPHORUS DUMPING.

THE SUBSTANCE OF HIS VEXATION APPEARS TO BE COMMENTS RELATING TO HIMSELF ONLY. These have been either withdrawn or clarified based on his clarifications. I’m sure he has been called far worse in his career, though I accept some people take “offence” when it suits them to.

BUT THE POST WILL NOT BE REMOVED, AND NOR WHEN IT IS FAIR AND ACCURATE, AND NOT MISLEADING WILL HIS PART IN THIS COMMITTEE’S DECISIONS BE STRUCK FROM RECORD OF PUBLIC SCRUTINY. AND THAT GOES FOR THE OTHERS THAT WERE PART OF THIS COMMITTEE AND WERE PAID TO MAKE DECISIONS. WE ARE AWARE FOR EXAMPLE THAT ONE WAS A FORMER MAYOR OF DUDLEY. IS IT NOT RIGHT THAT THE GENERATION THAT LIVES ON AFTER THEM DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO NAME AND SHAME OR CRITICISE THEIR DIRE DECISION MAKING IN PUBLIC?

HE MAY NOT LIKE THIS, BUT THAT IS JUST TOUGH- FREE SPEACH REMAINS JUST THAT, AND THERE ARE EXAMPLES WHERE HE ACCUSES MORE PUBLIC AND HIGH PROFILE POLITICAL FIGURES THAN HE ACHIEVED IN HIS POLITICAL CAREER OF SERIOUS WRONGDOINGS WHICH HE HAS PUBLICLY POSTED. THIS ALSO INCLUDES POSTS WHICH COULD BE SAID TO “RIDICULE” THEIR TARGET.

 

I THINK THAT WE ARE TO ASSUME THEN THAT “DEFAMATORY MATERIAL” TO MR PRESTIDGE ONLY COUNTS WHEN YOU ARE NOT THE ONE IN THE FRAME.  WILL HE WITHDRAW THOSE? THOUGH HE MAY DRAW OFFENCE TO BEING ASSOCIATED WITH IMAGINARY WORKS OF FICTION, I HAVE NEVER DESCRIBED ANY IDENTIFIABLE POLITICAL FIGURE OF BEING “FASCISTS” or even “THIEVES”- (UNLESS THEY HAVE BEEN CONVICTED AS BEING SUCH).

NOTE FOR HIS CLARIFICATION THE DEFINITION OF THE WORD “THIEF”

thief

NOTE FINALLY THE FOLLOWING POST WHICH MR PRESTIDGE SHARED ON HIS FACEBOOK PAGE ON 29TH JULY 2014.

 

I HAVE THE FUCKING RIGHT TO PUBLISH ANY LANGUAGE THAT I LIKE, THIS IS NOT A DICTATORSHIP YET, AND FREEDOM OF SPEACH IS NOT NOR SHOULD EVER BE CONTROLLED BY MINOR POLITICAL FIGURES.

I AM OFFENDED BY THE INJUSTICE OF A MULTI BILLION POUND CORPORATION BEING ALLOWED TO DUMP TOXIC CHEMICALS IN OLDBURY- BUT I DID NOT PLAY ANY PART IN THIS- ONLY THE EXPOSURE OF WHAT THEY DID YEARS LATER.

 

“KEEP IT REAL”- AS WITH THE FACTS.