There’s a new Political Party on the block.


As an apolitical group, we will never subscribe to any political party or favour one over another. The fact that the leader of this Party, The Foundation Party, is headquartered in a neighbouring District and has one of our very own District Councillors, Mary Lawes (formerly Independent), as a founding member, gives us good reason to bring this to your attention.

Here’s what Councillor Mary Lawes had to say about being a member of The Foundation Party:

“Our communities are the back bone of this country and the Foundation Party will be the party for local communities. Our policy of devolving major powers to local authorities will give people greater choice on how they would like to see their communities evolve”.

With Local elections coming up next May, will this new party throw the cat among the pigeons and break the stranglehold of Conservatives, or will it dilute the vote against the Conservatives?

We will be looking into the policies surrounding local issues, as we do with all political parties, and bringing you news updates on policies surrounding issues affecting us all.

To find out more please click on:

Other Parties are available.


Remembering the fallen – Lest we forget.


God of our fathers, known of old,
Lord of our far-flung battle-line,
Beneath whose awful Hand we hold
Dominion over palm and pine—
Lord God of Hosts, be with us yet,
Lest we forget—lest we forget!

The tumult and the shouting dies;
The Captains and the Kings depart:
Still stands Thine ancient sacrifice,
An humble and a contrite heart.
Lord God of Hosts, be with us yet,
Lest we forget—lest we forget!

Far-called, our navies melt away;
On dune and headland sinks the fire:
Lo, all our pomp of yesterday
Is one with Nineveh and Tyre!
Judge of the Nations, spare us yet,
Lest we forget—lest we forget!

If, drunk with sight of power, we loose
Wild tongues that have not Thee in awe,
Such boastings as the Gentiles use,
Or lesser breeds without the Law—
Lord God of Hosts, be with us yet,
Lest we forget—lest we forget!

For heathen heart that puts her trust
In reeking tube and iron shard,
All valiant dust that builds on dust,
And guarding, calls not Thee to guard,
For frantic boast and foolish word—
Thy mercy on Thy People, Lord!


Our previous post set out how our beloved Council and their Otterpool developers/consultants organised a presentation, in Ashford, on the unearthing of a Roman Villa and other archaeological finds throughout the whole of the Otterpool area. Why was the presentation held away from the District with no notification that it was even taking place? Set out below is an email thread between David Plumstead and Kate Clover which demonstrates the fact that FHDC and their development partners have no interest in revealing anything of significance to local residents that would delay or halt the building of a Commuter Town on our doorstep. Our aim is to enlighten local residents of the archaeological importance of the area by securing a LOCAL venue where the same meeting could be replicated before the FHDC Planning application is presented to an independent Planning Inspector in late November/early December.

As time is of the essence, we would urge you all to take the time to read all three emails.

17th October 2018

Dear Kate Clover,

Following our brief conversation on Monday evening I have provisionally secured three alternative dates for you to repeat your archaeological presentation at Lympne Castle, these are Mon. 29th Oct – Mon. 12th Nov. or Tues. 13th Nov. 

There is great local interest from Lympne, Westenhanger, Sellindge, Stanford and West Hythe.  The same applies to Hythe town itself but that would require separatel provision.

It would be helpful if you could let me have your response in principle asap as the Castle is a popular venue for a wide range of events.  It can seat over 100, there is ample provision for projection screen equipment etc. and the evening would be professionally staffed with a well stocked bar.

If you are comfortable with the idea I will see if any of my archaeological and professional historical contacts are available to support the event.

In the meantime we have a number of thoughtful Network supporters who would be happy to lend a practical hand with future work on the site and you will probably have spoken to Vernon Morris who lives at Upper Otterpool and is keen to be involved, not least as it is his patch that is being dug.

SECN would handle the publicity and I would be very surprised if we didn’t get a full house.         

Yours sincerely,

David Plumstead

Shepway Environment and Community Network (SECN)


23rd October 2018

Dear David

It was good to talk to you last Monday evening. Thank-you for your email and  for the offer of organising a venue for a talk in Lympne. I am happy in principle to come to Lympne at some point in the future and to give a talk. However, as I said, it is not really my decision and I can’t commit to anything without client approval. I have since discussed it with the client and project team and we would prefer to defer any future talks until we have the full results from the  fieldwork to share with people, rather than simply doing a repeat of my talk from the week before last. I would not be able to come until next year I’m afraid so please could you put plans on hold for the moment.

Sorry not to be able to oblige at this time. We will be in touch regarding a talk in the near future.

 Many thanks again

Kind Regards



24th October 2018.

Dear Kate Clover,

Thankyou for responding to my email.

Nonetheless we are extremely disappointed and very concerned to learn that while affecting to be willing in principle to present the archaeological findings extant at Otterpool to the residents of Lympne in Lympne and for which a date early next month has been arranged with Lympne Castle, you and your client, presumably Cozumel Estates, have decided not to do so until next year. That places the many hundreds of residents living in the area of the proposed Otterpool ‘Park’ development and the thousands living in the development’s wider catchment area in Shepway District who oppose it at a distinct disadvantage in that we have been given to understand that the Council’s relevant planning application could be lodged as early as this December.

To that is added the effect of the transparently biased ploy adopted by Shepway Council and your client arising from holding your presentation in Ashford in a difficult-to-access and cramped venue leaving the unavoidable impression that collectively you were making access to the all important archaeological and historical evidence as unattractive and awkward as possible.

It is completely unsatisfactory and unacceptable that an issue of such importance to local people is being circumscribed by insufficient time and a deficiency of information available to those residents wishing to prepare objections to the Otterpool development, the majority of whom were unable, for whatever reason, to attend your Ashford presentation.  The time table you and your client is proposing undermines the democratic process and we reject it. 

There are two seminal matters arising from that situation that have yet to be addressed if the democratic process and the interests of the community are to be properly served, namely the provision of reasonable time for those wishing to make representations against the Otterpool ‘Park’ development in which to consider all the archaeological and social historical evidence extant and that potentially significant yet to be discovered as clearly suggested by the finds to date and emphasised by you in your commentary accompanying your maps and diagrams viz:  ‘….I would like to investigate the fields under crop at the moment as given the finds already uncovered the likelihood of finding more etc etc ‘

The matter of the proposed Otterpool ‘Park’ development is far too important to our community for it not to be considered pari passu with the inevitable loss of unique historic artefacts and sites, social history and the environmental conditions that underpin the quality of life on which our community places great value.

You and your principals would be advised to reflect on the counterproductive effect the manner in which these issues are being handled is having on our community at the receiving end.  Each failure on their part to act impartially, transparently and honestly alienates us further and further away from their central objective.

Yours sincerely,

David Plumstead

Shepway Environment and Community Network

If you are as disgusted, as we are, with the situation and feel that you would like an answer as to why we are all being ‘kept in the dark’, here are 3 email addresses for you to contact.

FHDC Leader:

FHDC Deputy Leader and cabinet Member for Communities.,

Rebecca Kearney. Associate Director at Arcadis.


Last Monday evening (15.10.18), the Quaker Meeting Rooms, Ashford held a presentation where Kate Clover, Senior Archaeological Consultant to Arcadis/Proposed Otterpool New Town set out her findings across the Lympne, Newingreen, Westenhanger and Sellindge sites. Unfortunately, just a handful of Shepway residents were in attendance: more on that later.

Apart from the amazing Roman Villa being unearthed at Newingreen, here’s what Kate had to say about the whole area:

Kate Clover
Kate Clover, Arcadis.

“We’ve identified buildings, historic monuments and landscape features that make this area of Shepway distinctive, including churches, farms, military sites, parks, archaeological sites and cottages.

41 Listed Buildings have been identified within 1km of the development site, while the Kent Historic Environment Record (HER) identifies 17 monuments from the prehistoric period (30 000 BC to 600 BC) in the area – most are spots where artefacts such as pottery or tools have been found. Ongoing exploration could lead to more findings which will give us some clues to human activity in the area over 100,000 years ago”

From the slide presentation, we were surprised to discover that the whole of the proposed Otterpool site offered up significant archaeological importance. With a number of areas still being farmed, we are expecting even more discoveries as and when the land becomes open to archaeologist’s.

Not so interesting but baffling is the reason why Kate’s presentation was held in Ashford at a relatively small venue when the presentation would have been of more interest to Shepway residents? How did S&DRA hear about it – purely by chance through a friend of a friend. So what are our local beloved Council up to?

We have now become accustomed to the shenanigans of Leader David Monk in his attempt to push Otterpool Town through against any democratic process involving local residents. This event wasn’t advertised or memo’s sent to Parish Councils, and why didn’t Deputy Leader Hollingsbee and Cllr. Susan Carey (we are wonderful) mention it in the Sellindge propaganda Newsletter? This was another message to the Planning Inspector to say that protocol has been followed and another box ticked along the democratic process.

Our Association will be looking to organise the same presentation on home ground as soon as we can. We, unlike Shepway (F&H) Council will be advertising the event on this website, our friends, associate’s and Social Media.

This isn’t the first time that we have stated that democracy is dead in Shepway (F&H). LOCAL ELECTIONS ARE BEING HELD NEXT MAY. This will be your chance to rid the Civic Centre of Leader Monk and his lackeys.

We would, as always, love to hear your views. on any of our posts.


OUT ON A LYMPNE – Lease or no lease.

On the night of 17th September residents from in and around the Parish of Lympne met at Lympne Village Hall to discuss the  offer, made recently by Homes England (HE) to the Parish Council, of the opportunity to lease out part of Lympne Airfield.

For those of you who don’t know the back story, HE, a Government quango set up with the express purpose of promoting house building within the UK, purchased the airfield in collusion with Folkestone and Hythe District Council (F&HDC), for £9 million of taxpayers’ money from former owners, Phides Estates (headquartered in Jersey).  The purchase was conducted in stealth – not even Lympne Parish Council was aware that a purchase was in view until the deal was completed.

The Airfield is a site of national historic significance, both for its role during WWs 1 and 2, as well as its place in aviation history more generally.  Several planning applications for the site have already been rejected, with one of those judgements being upheld in the High Court.  Nevertheless, there are proposals for housing development on the site within the district’s Local Plan and it is also included within the area of search for the proposed Otterpool New Town, a development of 12,000 homes (or is it 8,000 or 5,500? – the plans are becoming increasingly vague!)

HE clearly want someone else to carry the cost of maintaining the Airfield while they decide what to do with it in the longer term.  Tenancy of the site had already been offered to a local farmer, but HE have offered to lease a subsection of the land to Lympne residents in response to a request from the Parish Council that villagers might continue to have access to the field as they had done for many years whilst the airfield was under the ownership of Phides.  However, whilst offered for a peppercorn rent, the cost of upkeep of the land would pass to the Parish and the length of the lease is only 3 years.  Ominously, the parcel of land on offer almost exactly replicates the piece of the Airfield identified as the green “buffer zone” in F&HDC’s Otterpool proposals, an area laughably supposed to help Lympne retain its distinct village identity while urban sprawl is inexorably imposed on it at every other possible point.

The meeting in the village hall was, unsurprisingly, packed.  Initially it seemed villagers had a straight choice between two options:

  • Accept the lease (although everyone agreed that the term of 3 years was a derisory offer and the lease could only be accepted if the Parish Council were able to negotiate a term nearer to 20 years) and its ongoing maintenance costs, and thereby retain access to the Airfield.

  • Let the local farmer tenant the entire site, and carry the costs of farming it, but lose any access.

The picture became rather more confused however, as there was conflicting information about the possibility of the farmer actually allowing villagers access around the borders of the entire site were he to take possession of all of it.  Clarity on that point was needed to enable residents to finally make up their minds about their preferred option.

Perhaps inevitably, discussion of the needs and preferences of the local canine population, who regularly frequent the Airfield with their owners, took up some time, but the focused contribution of a few speakers encouraged  those present to grasp  the bull by the horns, rather than the dog by the lead, and to consider the strategic implications of either accepting, or rejecting, the lease in the wider context Otterpool New Town.  Whilst willing to consider some development within Lympne, the overwhelming majority, if not all, of the villagers present at the meeting utterly opposed the overwhelming scale of the proposals for Otterpool and deplored the threat the development posed to the history and heritage of the village by the further destruction of the Airfield.  Ultimately, what residents wanted conveyed HE (and F&HDC) was that they:

  • did not condone the arbitrary division of the Airfield and wanted access to as much of it as they could possibly have, ideally by the Parish Council negotiating with HE for the tenancy of the entire site, although it seemed very unlikely HE would agree to this.

  • would prefer to come to an agreement with the tenant farmer for continued access around the borders of the entire site, than accept a lease that enabled HE to pass off the cost of maintaining part of the land on to the village until they were ready (presumably) to build on it.

  • did not want a part in any dealings that could be misinterpreted as condoning HE’s stealth acquisition of the site, or being willing to accept “sweeteners” to help overcome their antipathy to the Otterpool proposals.

There will be further communications between villagers and Parish Council once the view of the local farmer has been accurately established, before a final decision is taken.  The Council is due to meet again with HE in 2 weeks time.

Watch this space.


As the OTTERPOOL NEW TOWN junk sails along into the dystopian distance, another twist has raised an issue that we should all be extremely concerned about.

Following the purchase of The Lympne Airfield by Homes England from an offshore company, thereby saying goodbye to another wedge of taxpayer’s hard earned money to an offshore tax haven, an offer has been set out to the Residents of Lympne that, some would say, sticks the boot in even further. Even if you’re not a Lympne Resident, this concerns each and everyone of us in the Shepway area.

Lympne airfield

With the threat of 30,000 people moving into the area, in addition to the homes in the local plan (34,000 people), the crumbling infrastructure, including the NHS, will not be able to cope. It is vital that we all make the effort to attend this meeting.

Your communities, your future. Come along and have your say. Lympne village hall – 17th September at 7.30pm




A new page has been added to our website which is encouraging residents to nominate their District Councillor to the Wall of Shame or the Hall of Fame. Just click on the link to view:

This page has a distance to run yet, so get those thinking caps on (as if you’d have to think too hard) and contact us here: with your very own nomination(s).



If we were betting people, would we have put a tenner on the application of Princes Parade being turned down, even at a 1000/1 ? Of course not. Why? Because we have familiarised ourselves with the self serving individuals that fill the halls of the Civic Centre, being out of touch with the majority of Folkestone and Hythe Residents, and probably not giving a jot.

Most of you would now be aware that the application went through, 5 For , 4 Against. For those of you that didn’t attend the Civic Centre last Thursday evening or have viewed the media stream, here’s a a brief summary of the evenings events:

Nine Voting Committee members were in attendance: Clive Goddard (Chair,Con) Roger Wilkins (Con) Dick Pascoe (Con) Philip Martin (Con) Michael Lyons (Con) David Owen (Con). It should be noted at this juncture that David Owen abstained and the remainder voted ‘For’ the application.

The remaining members were: Damon Robinson (UKIP), Len Laws (UKIP) Paul Peacock (Con) Susie Govett (Ind). Needless to say, all 4 voted against the application.

The session lasted a little over 1 hour 50 minutes with comments from all nine members ranging from if you don’t approve this, you’re more than likely to get a Margate style fun fair, travellers or some other monstrosity. After the gallery stopped laughing at Councillor Lyons, we heard from Dick Pascoe who entered the debate with sarcasm, stating that he had emails that opposed the application – at least ten. With a paucity of intelligent comment, the public gallery were dismayed by the contemptible and arrogant position of a so-called peoples representative. Philip Martin was espousing the apparatchik tribal mantra of Pascoe and Lyons, so no change there then. David Owen was concerned about the engineering problem that may ensue, and needed more research to be carried out, so he abstained. Roger Wilkins said nothing (thank goodness) but, once again took the easy, mindless route to vote ‘For’. Goddard, always a banker for a dependable vote with the herd, voted ‘For’.

Susie Govett was the star of the show, citing how Hythe was the posher end of the district and so why would you want even more posher homes, affording a sea view and a top premium attached. It was obvious that the proposed houses built with a sea view, deemed to be ‘affordable’ wouldn’t be affordable at all. There is no such thing as ‘affordable’.

Paul Peacock was damning about the safety surrounding the road re-routing, next to the canal with Damon Robinson and Len Laws questioning the viability and location of the Leisure Centre. All four agreed that if sited at Martello Lakes it would better serve the communities of the Marsh.

The vote was a disappointment but was expected. Where the ‘Save Princes Parade’ group go with this now is up to them. Either way, our Association will, as always, give our full support.

Just to recap: These are the Councillors that wish to build 150 premium priced houses and a Leisure Centre on Princes Parade against the wishes of the majority of the electorate: Goddard, Wilkins, Pascoe, Martin and Lyons.


And these are the Councillors who support the views and wishes of the majority:

Govett, Peacock, Laws and Robinson.


Next May, you may well being voting, in a DISTRICT election for one of these Councillors in your ward. Taking off your silly, general election tribal hat, who would you vote for?

Have a good week.





































































































































Princes Parade showdown.

Featured above are the two biggest supporters of turning Princes Parade into an unwanted, unneeded urbanisation: David “Dog toilet” Monk and Jenny Nine homes Hollingsbee; Leader and Deputy Leader respectively. Not only is the proposed development not required, but these two individuals are also not required. Please read on to ensure that this becomes a reality next May.

The application to build 150 houses and a leisure centre on Princes Parade is going before the FHDC Planning Committee, Civic Centre, Castle Hill Avenue, Folkestone, on the 16th August.

With a demonstration beginning at 6.15pm and the Council meeting at 7pm, be sure to allow good time for parking.

The application has the approval of the FHDC Planning department, but this could be overturned by the committee, which would be entirely in order, given that those councillors have been put into public office by Folkestone & Hythe residents, who incidentally, share the view that Princes Parade should be left as an open vista for all to enjoy whilst taking the sea air during their daily or weekly pounding of the promenade

Princes Parade
Princes Parade and Royal Military Canal, aerial view

We are all aware that certain members of the Planning Committee would like to see Princes Parade as another urbanisation, swelling the coffers of developers and others, but do we really need more housing with well over 14,000 houses already in the local plan; houses that will be way out of reach, price-wise, for local people on a local salary? Here are the committee members who will be voting on whether our land is turned into an unwanted, upmarket housing estate:


Contact information

Support officer: Kate Clark.

Phone: 01303 853267


Web site:

Perhaps you would like to email them (just click on their name to reveal contact details) and ask them their position on misrepresenting the wishes of the majority of residents who wish to enjoy Princes Parade ‘au naturel‘.

If you can’t get along on the 16th August, you can view the whole event via live streaming:

Our priority will be to see which committee member(s) will be voting against the wishes of the local population so we can take the appropriate action next May at the District Elections ballot box. We hope you will too.

So our initial message to all of those members is this: We’re watching you very, very closely. Our second message is: We’re all looking forward to seeing you all on Thursday, 16th August.

Until then,



No, we’re not targeting you for the latest box set collection of Love Island or The Jeremy Kyle show. If you’re watching such mind numbing diatribe tripe, our prayers this evening will be for you.

We’ve all read about the deforestation of the South American rain forests and how trees and vegetation remove harmful pollutants in our atmosphere. Well, here’s your chance to find out how much pollution is removed in your area simply by sticking in your postcode here:

With the onset of over 14,000 homes planned for the Shepway region, via the Local (democratic) Plan, spread throughout our towns and villages, the idea of importing an unwanted and unneeded 12,000 dwelling new town at Otterpool, at the behest of Council Leader David Monk and his close associates is disproportionate to the needs of local people.

You wouldn’t have to be an Environmental guru to realise that the more housing and traffic assembled in just one area would, ultimately, bring more pollution, which is why our Association, along with other groups and Parish Councils are vehemently opposed to the destruction of our countryside, giving way to greedy developers and injudicious actions by our so-called representatives.

Hollingsbee laughing48fb5-image-765230Slide1

Deputy Leader Hollingsbee (con), Councillor Carey (con), and Leader Monk, supporting the proposed development being tagged as Otterpool Park.

In a 2016 NHS report it states “Air pollution is contributing to about 40,000 early deaths a year in the UK,”

Moreover, the number of vehicles on England’s roads has risen by 2.5 million in the last five years, while road space has only increased by 0.6%. The Local Government Association (LGA) warned that this disparity not only increases congestion and air pollution, but also affects local economies.

Would you support a massive development that would compromise your loved one’s health and even contribute to their early demise?

We have said it before and make no apologies for repeating it: just because you live outside of the proposed New Town area; Sellindge, Lympne, Newingreen, Westenhanger, and Court at Street and think you will not be affected by an additional 30,000 people using the NHS, drinking and bathing in our limited water resources and using local roads, think again.

Please support our campaign by passing on our ‘subscribe’ link to friends, family and neighbours:

Many thanks,