CHAIRMAN Clr Donald Firth claims Kirklees officers ‘threatened’ councillors before key Lindley Moor vote.

SimonC: “Melodramatic, much? Threatened? No. The committee were provided with the facts to allow them to make an informed decision.

“As a council taxpayer, I’d be disappointed if planning committees weren’t informed that the council could end up wasting thousands in legal fees unless they can come up with proper reasons to reject an application.”

rogerb: “Sounds like those making the decisions (councillors) need some degree of training so they can understand the planning laws and not make decisions based on opinion or personal prejudices which will clearly lead to appeals and expensive defence of what could have been a wrong decision?”

RichardP: “We, the council taxpayers, are the reason that officers get their salaries – they are employed to give the elected members full information so the members can make an informed choice.

“Maybe if an elected member feels he is being threatened he should consider if local government politics is the place to be.”

anneb: “What I would like to know is how do you push a team of councillors? Is this not a form of bullying/intimidation?

Who was in charge of this meeting? Why hasn’t anyone else who was there aired any concerns about how they were treated?

Or did it really happen? It didn’t happen four weeks earlier, did it?”

markmyword49: “The reasons for these types of decisions are not unique to Huddersfield. There’s an excellent column in the Guardian today by George Monbiot with similar examples from all over England and Wales. The Daily Torygraph (of all papers) is actively campaigning against both the current and proposed systems.

“Who would have believed that a change like this could unite such disparate members of the Fourth Estate?”

Magdale: “Councillors concerned about costs?

Don’t make me laugh.”