PROSECUTED FOR DISPLAYING BANNERS

Derby City Council is prosecuting two residents for displaying banners on their homes protesting against the authority's £35.6m Connecting Derby road scheme. Richard Butler, of Kedleston Road, and Trevor Lloyd-Davies, of Friargate, claim the council is victimising them because they are a "thorn in the side" of the council's efforts to complete the city's inner ring road.

Both men displayed banners on their homes for a number of weeks as part of a campaign urging Derby residents to lobby against the plans. Part of Mr Butler's front garden will be swallowed if road-widening in the Five Lamps area goes ahead, while Mr Lloyd-Davies claims plans to widen Ford Street will damage his Grade-II* listed home, which is only feet from the road.

Both are charged with breaching advertising regulations under the Town and Country Planning Act. The decision to prosecute appears to go against local authority guidelines relating to illegal advertisements, which state: "Unless an offence is especially flagrant or repeated, the planning authority may not initially consider it necessary to prosecute for an advertisement offence."

It goes on to say that offenders should instead be invited to apply for retrospective planning permission. However, Mr Butler was told at the outset in a letter from council enforcement officer Neil Jackson that he "could not invite an application for the advertisement, as it would almost certainly be refused".

Mr Butler eventually complied with the council's request to remove his banner but, when he sought retrospective planning permission, the council's principal planner, John Stewart, refused to accept the application because he had already taken the banner down.

He claimed he and Mr Lloyd-Davies had been singled out because of their connection with residents' action group Derby Heart, which opposes the Connecting Derby scheme. "Derby Heart and myself are a thorn in the side of their beloved road scheme," he claimed.

The pair argue that the council ignores much larger breaches of advertising rules, including numerous pub banners and the banners on the Cockpit car park which have been advertising "Sunday Opening" of the Eagle Centre for more than two years. Lucy Care, city council cabinet member for planning, transportation and environment, denied that the Eagle Centre had enjoyed any special treatment.

She said the Eagle Centre owners had since been written to and a planning application form for the banners had been included in the envelope. Mrs Care said, "The council has a responsibility to encourage people to comply with the law, otherwise it would be a free-for-all." But she could give no example of anyone else being prosecuted for illegal advertising in the past.

Derby City Council may well be within its rights to prosecute two people for their display of banners on their homes. But are councillors and officers aware of how their decision will be perceived? Councillor Lucy Care concedes that she knows of nobody else in the city to have been pursued under this piece of Town and Country Planning legislation.

And what was the subject of the offending banners in this case? Criticism of the council's controversial Connecting Derby road scheme. If this was a transgression, because planning permission had not been sought, then how many football or rugby union fans have done all the necessary paperwork before displaying their messages of support for England on their homes?

"Sunday Opening" banners were festooned across the Eagle Centre for two years. Why was so much latitude given over that without a prosecution being started? How about billboards which pop up by the roadside advertising forthcoming sports fixtures, or the council's own events, such as concerts in Darley Park?

Can we have a categoric assurance that each and every one of those has obeyed the letter of the planning law? People can walk through the centre of Derby displaying a banner calling for the murder of Jews, and avoid prosecution. Two men put up banners protesting at a road scheme, and they are taken to court.

The council said they both need full planning permission to have a banner on their homes. The Derby Heart group said this is the first time the council has taken anyone to court on the issue, despite several pubs in the city sporting several banners. (Source: Derby Evening Telegraph)

Why does the council feel the need to prosecute residents of Derby for merely daring to speak their democratic minds about the destruction of an area of the city. Both men have been charged with breaching advertising regulations. Could the council please let us know what they are advertising because I can't see any adverts on the banners?

Why are we wasting council money bringing these citizens of Derby to court for voicing opinions by hanging banners? Does the council now intend to prosecute people holding fund-raising events, who advertise by placing banners on walls?

Is this just a case of the council saying that they're going to get this road scheme through and, if anyone dares to argue, they'll take tough action? Councillors should not forget that we voted you in to represent our opinions, don't ignore us or we will vote you out. Mr S. Bullimore

Next >>>