The debate around the mosque development has been bedevilled by misinformation and half truth as exemplified in the question that was put to council from Cllr Craig on October 28th. The question is attached unedited, together with the response from Cllr McAuley. It is taken from the council papers which will be available on the Newham website,
Question A3 – From Councillor Alan Craig to the Mayor
Mega-mosque site at West Ham
“The trustees of the site of the proposed Tablighi Jamaat mega-mosque at West Ham have:-
• erected buildings on site without planning permission and in breach of building control, despite serious and clear warnings from Council officers;
• almost entirely failed to fulfil the terms of the five-year Memorandum of Agreement entered into with the Council;
• until forced by my Freedom of Information request of July 2007, failed to publish or warn the public about their March 2007 Waterman Environmental contamination survey which alarmingly indicated the environmental risk of the site as “medium/high”, and the risk to current site users from the contaminated soils as “potentially significant”.
• continued to use the site on a daily basis despite the expiration twelve months ago of their temporary planning permission.
In view of this track record of irresponsibility and illegality, does the Mayor agree that the trustees have demonstrated that they are not fit to build and manage a large landmark mosque or indeed any other building?
Further, does he agree that the Council, in conjunction with the ODA, the LDA and the LTGDC as appropriate, should now become directly involved with the future of this key 18 acre site by immediately preparing a masterplan for the site as a community leisure facility that will be a lasting legacy of the 2012 Olympics along the lines of Atlanta’s 21 acre Olympic Park & Fountain of Rings, and/or for residential, recreational and retail purposes, with a view to the site being compulsorily purchased as soon as possible?
This was the answer from Cllr McAuley
As ever Cllr Craig’s question start from a false premise and seeks to lead members up the garden path..
The term Mega Mosque is one used by Cllr Craig. He does not of course define what constitutes a Mega Mosque.
Cllr Craig’s question also fails to properly acknowledge that a temporary planning permission was granted retrospectively for the buildings currently on the site.
Cllr Craig’s question fails to acknowledge that the Waterman Report to which he refers concluded that the site in its current form did not present a health hazard to existing users or visitors provided certain on site measures were undertaken.
The site has been regularly inspected and monitored by Newham’s Environmental Health officers since the start of this year, and they are satisfied that the recommendations of the report have been carried out. The site does not present a health hazard in the way it is currently used.
Cllr Craig’s question also fails to acknowledge that he personally supported the trustees in their original application for a (presumably non “mega”) mosque on this site.
His change of stance now is significant. He now seeks to grab the site from its current owners and is suggesting that the Council join with the LDA the ODA and the LTGDC in developing of an Olympic Park & Fountain of Rings.
Cllr Craig fails to explain why London’s Council Tax payers should fork out for a second Olympic Park, when the real Olympic Park is being developed around the Olympic venues north of Stratford High Street.
As ever he seeks to promote division rather than a genuine way forward.
There remain a number of complex issues surrounding the use of this site and the Council will continue to act on the planning, environmental health and legal advice it receives.
Our intentions for the site remain the same. We want the site developed so it is of benefit to the community. We remain committed to working with all the necessary stakeholders to achieve this aim, and this must include, of course, the current owners of the site. We do not object to a faith element to any development.