The Middlewich failure

Published: Sunday, 26 May 2019

I AM writing to say that Alan Davis is not alone with a decision notice being issued in his favour, writes Freddy Brown.

Here are the first four paragraphs of a decision notice issued 22 May pursuant of my enquiries relating to the Middlewich Breach.

Middlewich Breach

1. The complainant has requested information relating to a breach that occurred between the Wardle Lock and Stanthorne Lock, in Middlewich on 15 March 2018.

2. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Canal & River Trust has failed to provide a response to the complainant’s request within 20 working days of receipt and has therefore breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR.

3. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.

4. Respond to the complainant’s request in accordance with the EIR. The public authority must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.

Failed to carry our remedial work

One would have hoped that by now CaRT would have acknowledged the fact that they failed to carry out remedial works which would have prevented or, at the very least, delayed the breach.

Instead, we seem to be having a falling out between directors. Mr Deards, in attempting to justify the withholding of information says 'The damage caused by paddles being left open is evidence in itself of just what can happen from an accidental act.' However, his boss, Richard Parry, is on record as labelling the 'accidental act' as an act of vandalism.