Putting the cons into Coneygre#2 The dodgy recycling venture


The Coneygre story and Mintworth’s involvement with the site in this second post is commenced with this letter from the Black Country Development Corporation to a Lindley Avenue resident in June 1992.

It is noted that Clive Dutton of BCDC states more in hope than in any certainty that Mintworth had by now been given planning permission at the Duport’s Tip/Sewage works site to import the grossly over tipped piles at Coneygre- reference BCS 1813. Of course, this belies the fact that in playing off these residents with this statement, the export of the foundry sand pile at Coneygre would knowingly lead to the pain of those living in streets on the Temple Way estate who had to suffer the misery” imports next to their homes from this.


“Misery” at Temple Way

After some hiatus of activities at the Coneygre site where they appeared to have abandoned it, a sudden planning application on their remaining undeveloped land- (the one with the huge mound built on top of the limestone unremediated limestone workings) was submitted to the horror of local residents. This was BCS 3553 PROPOSED RECYCLING & WASTE TRANSFER STATION OFF CONEYGREE ROAD TIPTON.

Part of The Mintworth mound viewed from the canal. Lindley Avenue lies to the immediate right of this greened over pile.


SMBC’s building regulations officer notes the “numerous problems” associated with this site. It states that the OVE ARUP report found that the abandoned limestone mine directly beneath the site was in a different position to historic plans, as are the risks of collapse. Landfill gas was also identified on the site. The author identifies numerous issues that would be required to even contemplate any end use.

News of these plans went down like a lead balloon on the Lindley Avenue estate, as well as the new one at Newcomen Drive that were separated by the abandoned Mintworth heaps on top of abandoned old holes. They suspected “sneak tactics” at getting the plans through on the part of BCDC, which were quite justified as it turns out following their clandestine meetings with Mintworth and their agents as a “steering group” at the Duport’s tip/sewage works sites which never involved any local residents.

Express and Star article August 13th 1996


A campaign by local residents was mobilised, even before the BCDC had garnered what it was Mintworth were supposedly going to be importing onto the site. A letter from Keith Brooke to Mintworth’s solicitors asked some probing questions as well as taking into account the guidance issued by the building consultant.

It is perhaps quite telling that there was no response to these points for over five months. When it came, the response was vague and uncertain. You can see this in that it repeats the questions that Brooke asks to pad out the letter! It is noted that it had “taken some time to ascertain the information requested”.

  • 2000 tonnes per day of soils, concrete, brick, demolition materials, foundry sand stone, metals, wood, paper, cardboard, plastic and glass. (Of course it should be noted that this matches the description of wastes buried in the Duport’s tip- so was it their plan to simply keep decanting stuff from site to site in the hope that the BCDC and all others were really that bloody stupid?)
  • No specification of plant to be used
  • 6 meter stockpiles allegedly screened from local residents by bunds. (these bunds of course were the very problem the residents were complaining about in that it was allowing trespassers to look into their homes.)
  • the bizarre statement that the water coming off the described materials would not be contaminated! (how would these types of waste NOT be contaminated with heavy and phytotoxic metals etc?)
  • Garbage about security fencing, when throughout their time on site evidence of no security at all was evidenced.
  • Talk of bringing materials in by the adjacent railway line- (right next to Lindley Avenue), though no scheme at this time was proposed.
  • Absolutely no intention of submitting any plans to deal with the current issue of the limestone workings, but this would be submitted “later”.
  • This letter appears to have been written by an amateur.

Local businesses as well as Centro and railtrack were not in favour of this scheme.

A petition and letters of objection scheme was started by the residents. A spirited campaign was also put together in the form of  “stop the waste transfer station”. It is notable that one of the campaign spokespeople wrote a letter to a Councillor Turner on behalf of over 1000 people, yet they had not bothered to respond.

The following is the summary of this campaign and attachments, which in themselves shed much light on Mintworth and their operations at this site, as well as what residents had expected when they bought homes on the former Coneygre foundry site- certainly not a waste tip in all but name!

“There is a significant and extensive opposition to this proposal from local people. Over 500 letters have been sent either to Sandwell MBC of the BCDC to register grievances. In addition, petitions containing in excess of 800 signatures have been collected and forwarded to the decision makers. Support for the campaign has been received from the Governing bodies of local schools, health care professionals, businesses, and people active in local politics. Three articles have appeared in the local press outlining the extent and strength of opposition in the local community. “


…a return to the dreadful clouds of black dust that blighted the lives of residents for over a two year period from 1992 onwards.”

“Mintworth’s have attracted adverse publicity in the past from their use of this location. The growth of the dust mound around the site created terrible problems for local people. Clouds of black dust constantly emanated from the site for a period of two years. This dust settled on garden plants and ponds, cars, interior windowsills and furniture.”



Mintworth’s smelly and dusty mound prompted these Express and Star articles. SMBC stated that it was “breaking the law” and that the mound was being removed to another site- i.e the Duport’s tip blighting the lives of residents there at the same time. FFS!



Some of the comments made in the newspaper articles in relation to this campaign by elected representatives are laughable. A Councillor Geddes is quoted as saying “but it is not the contractors that I blame. They are forced to dump this waste because there is no where else to take it.”

WHAT ABSOLUTE BOLLOCKS! Mintworth were not “forced” to dump this waste, they did it as their polluting business, creating nothing but “misery” at these two sites. Why should their activities supplant the quality of life for local residents? The comment by the SMBC representative is also telling in that there would be “room for the waste at rattlechain” and that activities would be “more closely monitored in future.” There was a fucking waste management licence at this site just like that at their other site that they were regularly breaching- where were the regulators and why did they not enforce the law and these licence conditions? Of course the problems only stopped when Mintworth abandoned the site without complying with any remediation of the waste mound they had left behind on top of an abandoned limestone mine!

The following letter from a local resident notes the vague responses to the detail that their application did not submit.

Another article against the proposal by local residents.


The following letter from Keith Brooke to Roger Lancaster of Mintworth’s solicitors notes that the BCDC role as planning regulators would be coming to an end at the stroke of midnight on 24th March 1998. He did not wish to leave the application left over for Sandwell council, and so it would be marked as “undetermined.”

It is worth once again pointing out the utter failures of this quango in how they had given so much to Mintworth and got so little but dithering, procrastination and outright taking the piss throughout the ten years that they had been around. The legacy of the BCDC was to leave behind two enormous mounds of foundry sand on two sites, that blighted the lives of residents living there. The recycling venture was nothing more than a con job to restart the whole process. Thank God it failed!

The Black Country Development Corporation Board, circa 1990

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Putting the cons into Coneygre#2 The dodgy recycling venture

Putting the “cons” into Coneygre #1 The dodgy foundations

The former Coneygre foundry site off Coneygree Road, Tipton and land to the North of this has some inextricable links with the former Duport’s Tip area and the former Tividale sewage works area (now a housing estate), adjacent to Rattlechain lagoon. It is linked through the same operators- namely “Mintworth” and also their vast amounts of dumped foundry sand- much of it coming from the former foundry when it was operational.

Former Coneygre Foundry from 1935, showing canal basins and largely flat land at the Birmingham Old mainline canal side.

This site, like that of the former Duport’s Tip is one of the sites identified in the ludicrous so called “Dudley Port Garden City” prospectus promoted by Sandwell council. There have been many twists and turns with this site, which are still currently evolving, and it will be interesting to see how they play out from a planning point of view. People should read this for information purposes to perhaps make their own conclusions.

This first post of three looks at Mintworth’s legacy at this site; the abysmal over tipping of foundry sand whilst making a “mint” out of part of a site and leaving a shit tip behind that they didn’t want, and which would prove too costly for them to remediate- just like their other site less than a mile away.

We start the story with a description by Frank Pomlett– a director of Mintworth at the time, and his claimed history of the Coneygre Foundry site, at this point in time owned by Birmid Qualcast Limited.  I cannot verify any of the statements made within his, though note that it is Mintworth’s position of the matter when they applied for a planning permission in 1985.

Pomlett claimed that 37 mine shafts were spread over the 22 acre site, with in addition limestone workings that had a depth of 200 metres. That is an awful lot of sand and material required to fill such holes and to stabilise in order to ever achieve any prospect of built development!

He estimates that 1 million tonnes of foundry waste  arose from the Coneygre site, taking 200,000 return journeys to dump it.

Most interestingly he professes knowledge of the site in the 1960’s. We know at this time of course, that Mintworth did not exist, but Pomlett and fellow director John S Hurst’s former company “Birlee industrial limited” did.

An old advert advertising the services of this waste tipper appeared in The Birmingham Daily post in  1977.

“Unlimited quantities”

Pomlett’s enthusiasm for scrap metal recovery belies that fact that he and Hurst  were basically just metal tatters from the foundry waste. The other side line industry that the sandmen used was the process of dumping the sand in the “construction industry,” He claims some 17,000 return journeys were made since 1965 shifting 200,000 tons of foundry sand.

This forms the background to Mintworth’s first foray into something bigger at this waste tip site when they submitted a planning application entitled

DA/18345 | Infilling of site to plans R/C/BQ/1 & 2. | Coneygre Foundry Site Coneygre Road Tipton.

This was submitted in 1984 under the guise of “land restoration”- now where have they used that term before. 🙄

Under Pomlett’s signature as “managing director”, a letter dated 15th November 1984 describes a five year plan to import 750,000 cubic metres of fill to restore the site. One may ask why they exported it in the first place given his earlier boasts? We get the first nonsense of Mintworth’s “associate companies “Mintworth Transport Limited” and “Recommet” . They were of course all the same company with the same directors!

We learn that they have operated on a site at Bustleholme Quarry  (as Birlee Industrial Limited  in whose name the licence was approved), which is coming to the end of its life.  This was site licence SL88 which was approved on 15/2/1977 and the last input of waste (at least officially 😉 ) 1/4/1985 . Basically the Coneygre site appears to be in use as a profitable commercial toilet for Birlee/Mintworth and the industrial foundry polluters they served.

In the report to the then West Midlands County Council deciding the plans it is noted

“The site has been extensively tipped with foundry  waste and there are four disused canal basins along the Northern boundary which have not been properly filled. The cumulative effect of all these factors is that the site is so extensively damaged that it is virtually undevelopable without huge capital expenditure.”

It is clear from these ludicrous plans that Mintworth have no intention of covering any of this cost- I.E the treatment of the undevelopable conditions of the shafts and limestone workings. (Some 38 years on nothing has changed there, as the constraints in the SWOT analysis for the DPGC prospectus confirm!).

It is estimated that 80 vehicles per day were to visit the site to shift the 750,000 cubic metres of material.

The site is adjacent to Lindley Avenue and Coneygree Road properties, as well as this point in time, a sports ground owned by Tipton Sports and Social club.

The planning application was granted on Valentines day 1985 with 22 conditions. This made clear the types of material allowed on site and to be used or stored. It also noted dust suppression and noise nuisance measures were added to supposedly stop problems for local residents.


All of this operation of course required another waste disposal licence from those useless tossers at WMCC to pass, which would later be taken over by Sandwell council. Site Licence SL487 was granted on 28th March 1985. I have looked at this licence and its conditions HERE.

Entrance to the mothballed site in 2019.

It also appears that Mintworth had set their sites on something else at this site, namely coal deposits from dumped pit waste. Pomlett estimated that 100,000 tonnes would be treated which would take a year to progress. As always with Mintworth, a door opening leads to more requests, and presumption of further activities, which in their opinion never need any further clarification, even from the regulators or experts. It was exactly the same at Duport’s Tip. It is stated that “we have had metal screening plants ” on the site for over 20 years and the equipment is portable and not fixed. He also argues on the point of the coal not being coal but “chattel” . I would doubt however that they sold it as such once recovered.

Of course the WMCC accepted these arguments and rolled over as they always did.

Local residents had noted Mintworth’s activities on site, and in particular the enormous mound formed as a result of the granting of the planning permission in 1985.

Once being granted permission for soiling the land, it would not take Mintworth long to adopt the next phase of planning at this site.

BCS0315 Residential development, landscaping and woodland planting and relocated and improved football pitch and clubroom.


This was an outline application , approved on 7th October 1988, by Mintworth’s best friends the now established Black Country Development Corporation. Condition 6 of the 22 in this permission underlined the issues of potential collapse of the limestone workings. There were concerns about the contamination and stability of the site from Sandwell council.

A cost to the public purse- “this application are the subject of a city grant application to the development corporation for assistance in reclamation.”

The reserved matters application was granted the following year on 19th June 1989.

Around this time, The Sandwell Evening Mail reported on the dangers of scrap metal collecting at this site.

Published: Wednesday 22 March 1989 Newspaper: Sandwell Evening Mail

BCS0585 Residential development, landscaping and woodland planting and relocated and improved football pitch and clubroom.


Sandwell council had earlier appointed Ove Arup to investigate the limestone workings, who found that the mine is “open” and the cavities were water filled. The existence of these workings precluded built development. The  mound of foundry sand covered over this hidden mine. It is revealed in the consultation report that the forestry commission would be paying for the planting of trees.

“To fully treat all located shafts on the site would be prohibitively expensive. For this reason the forestry planted area will be fenced off and will not be available for public access.”



BCS 0827 Former Coneygre foundry General industrial and associated open storage/car parking



Mintworth submitted two identical planning applications in respect of the open woodland from the BCS 0585 application. They attempted with these applications to basically remove much of it and instead use it for their own purposes of storing their own waste materials. As always with this company, and as already stated, as soon as they were given any planning permission, this foot in the door approach would be followed up with another application to remove constraining conditions and instead insert some other scheme, which would further play to their advantage. Having secured housing development, they then used this to suggest that a buffer zone would be needed to screen the new residents from the proposed industrial use of these two joint applications.

The loss of land proved not acceptable to Sandwell council, but the decision was not determined.

BCS 0851 Proposed erection of sixty four private residential dwellings and associated roads and footpaths at Former Coneygre Foundry, Coneygree Road Tipton.


This application followed BCS315 and BCS 585, and was an amendment to the latter reserved matters application. It was submitted just 5 months after BCS585. It was approved on 28th February 1990.

Mintworth’s developer for this site would be “Tarmac Homes”. The proposed scheme is highlighted in a report to support the application.

We learn that Mintworth acquired this site as freehold owners in 1987. The undeveloped land title for this area is now known as “Land to the North West of Coneygree Road Tipton. “

There is also further information about Mintworth themselves, and all the usual peacock strutting crap written by their consultants Parkman.

  • 25 years of operation
  • removing “the problems left by past uses of the site”- that is of course except their own 😆
  • Their “success” is due to the “tight control of the economics of land reclamation, particularly the processing of foundry sand waste to recover metal content.”- i.e they are scrap metal tatters.  😛 

  • A claimed 400 acres of land being improved- though this of course would be under “Birlee Industrial Limited”
  • I would not describe anything connected with Mintworth to be “quality of activity”
  • The ominous statement about them acquiring more sites in need of reclamation- hence The former Duport’s tip and Tividale sewage works.

“Tarmac Homes”  have left behind something a legacy themselves in the form of a convoluted trail of home builders. In transferring to other names such as “Mclean Homes” and  under the titles of “JIM (insert a number of your choice) limited”- a housing estate in Walsall was for many years suspected of being built on contaminated land.

The houses  in the application off Coneygree Road were built on the former foundry site itself. This map shows an overlay of where they are situated, now known as Newcomen Drive, Barney Close, and Calley Close. A further extension of this estate on top of the sports field would take place at a later date.



Former Coneygre Foundry site in bottom left from 1935, including three canal basins off the Old mainline Canal. The immaculately managed Coneygre Sports ground on the right, with Randalls bridge on far right crossing the cut.

At a later point, we see where the links to the Duport site fit in with Mintworth’s activities at Coneygre.

It was clear from correspondence to the BCDC and Sandwell council that residents in Lindley Avenue and Davis Avenue were having their properties blighted by Mintworth’s foundry sand piling. This was also creating noise nuisance as well as trespass.

Clive Dutton and others at the BCDC were thus aware of two sets of residents affected by Mintworth’s activities- activities which they as a corporate entity had sanctioned- yet apparently unable or unwilling to enforce the multiple failures on the part of the sand haulers. Here is the evidence of how residents contacted the BCDC about the blight from Mintworth’s “dust creation scheme” .

There is clear evidence here that Mintworth were breaching their licence conditions, as they were at the Duport’s Tip/Sewage works.

“Residents have informed both the council and myself that Biffa and Leigh Environmental Services have been seen tipping on the site.”

  • Household waste tipped on site
  • Residents privacy lost
  • Mounds of soil high and increasing in height.

A memo of note around this time to Tony Rice of SMBC from Clive Dutton of BCDC  is interesting in terms of both of Mintworth’s sites. Again the lack of security is noted, as are Mintworth going “flat out”. It is noted that Dutton states that “this should trigger our enforcement strategy for Coneygree. I noticed yesterday that the mound is enormous and that plant is currently operating on its summit. ” He is unsure as to whether this was freshly tipped material or that supposedly going to “rattlechain”.

It is of course worth pointing out again that the BCDC were fully complicit in creating this farce. But why the lack of enforcement procedure , or even stripping the polluters of the licence altogether? Alexander Gibb were contracted by BCDC to monitor activities at the Duport’s tip/sewage works site, yet despite reporting multiple concerns, the BCDC only ever appeared to want to request meetings with Mintworth about these breaches.

A further summary of activities on both sites is relayed to a resident by Malcolm Hinks of SMBC in the letter below of 15th February 1994. It is a useful letter in that it provides many of the unsubstantiated claims made by Frank Pomlett from his 1984 application at the site- in fact it plagiarises it almost word for word if you compare this. The planning regime on both sites is also set out up to this point.

“For reasons unknown to me Mintworth handed back the site licence (SL487) that allowed them to import foundry sand into Coneygree last year and ceased all work on site. A subsequent telephone conversation with a representative of Mintworth elicited that they had not abandoned the site and that they intend to recommence the completion of the landscape mound or submit an application for some other use similar to that proposed in the undetermined application for open storage. “

This is of course the mound with the unfixed and substantially liable limestone workings underneath it. It is worth noting that “Mintworth Limited” was dissolved in late 1993, in addition to  the ludicrous “M Throwtin Limited” in September of the same year. It is also noted that a “Coneygre Properties Limited” and “The Ounsdale Estate Limited” appeared to go into voluntary liquidation at the same time, registered at the same Castle Street Tipton address as Mintworth, with the same individuals taking responsibility.

mintworth 3

One wonders what the BCDC were actually looking at at this time. Perhaps they had sand in their eyes as to the con artistry taking shape on two large black country mounds.

What a bloody nightmare!

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Putting the “cons” into Coneygre #1 The dodgy foundations

The Gower Tip planning permission disgrace

And so to another bent planning matter!

In November, I revealed how this site was being lined up for a phoney “remediation” scheme in the same way as rattlechain lagoon was back in 2013. The prelude to this dodgy application has a long history, not least when the company responsible for dumping the waste there appear to have selective amnesia as to what was actually dumped there!  😡

I had exposed the pre spin show bigging up and expected planning application, which for some unknown reason arrived a month later. Several documents were uploaded to the SMBC planning portal, with site notices also posted under the following application.

DC/21/66208 | Proposed remediation works including re-profiling of site, installing cap above underlying waste material to uplift site by 1.4m, with new sub-surface cut off boundary wall along eastern boundary and landscaping. | Land Adjacent Former Sportsground (The Gower Tip) Lower City Road Tividale Oldbury.

It is important to note here the documents that were posted on the council website in October of 2021, and also the timeline events as to when it was claimed that the matter would be decided. HERE ARE THE SCREENSHOTS TAKEN FROM SANDWELL COUNCIL’S PLANNING PORTAL. 

There were 23 documents put up by 27th October 2021, and yet it has taken another 5 months to put up the last two, one of them, the decision notice which was delegated.


5 months to determine this bent application


I know that the target date for this application was changed having looked at the status repeatedly, yet it is now coming up with fabled date of 9th March. THIS APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN CHANGED FOR REASONS UNSPECIFIED.

I had dissected the bullshit lies of Rhodia/Solvay and their agents in this post going over the documents and also asking many unanswered questions. I also pointed this out to the planning officer, CARL MERCER in objection, as well as emailing him, as well as sending the same email to the contaminated land officer for Sandwell, and an individual at The Environment Agency who deals with sites such as The Gower Tip. NONE OF THEM BOTHERED TO REPLY OR ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. 

This has been the standard fair for matters involving this company, their activities and their none existent “regulated” sites over many years, and the silence of the so called public sector  “regulators”, largely I believe due to their local and national political connections, as well as to the buried military secrets of a Government/industrial complex that is the enemy of its own people. In particular, planning officers have been the most absolutely ignorant of the bunch, and I have had to chase individuals and make complaints when they have failed to answer standard issues. I was for example told that Alison Bishop , who dealt with some matters regards Rattlechain and the ludicrous extra CCTV  application had left the authority according to a senior councillor, but it now appears that this was a crock of shit, as she is the current “development planning manager” according to several recent planning reports. WTF?

The starting point of this waste burying cover up fraud was when officers  decided that no environmental impact assessment would be needed to proceed starting excavations on this site. This post looks at Bishop’s replies to my concerns, and they are bullshit. 

“I was satisfied following a walk over the site that these works do not constitute commencement of restoration works but are merely to inform the planning application.  I am informed that the planning application will be submitted early next year following analysis of the test results and full design being prepared.”

Substantial earthworks had occurred moving over a metre from the border with George Wood Avenue- houses which should never have been built, except as a consequence of another bent planning application, which was in fact decided by the idiots at Bristol after the council had actually grown a set of balls and objected.

The latter two documents , the officers report and the decision notice I will look at below, and they both raise substantial questions.

Firstly the decision notice which was passed on 9th March, except that for the planning meeting which took place on this night, the application was not even on the delegated list that had been presented to the committee!

Applications Determined Under Delegated Powers



The application was approved, (not by the councillors),  with 8 conditions.

Aside from the usual standards about not inconveniencing local residents, LOL , there are two which are of note.

You will note that on the list of submitted documents on the public council website, the comments of the CRT WERE NOT ON THERE. This raises the question as to what the Canal and Rivers Trust had objected to about the application, and therefore why at this point the application was not referred by Carl Mercer to the committee?

Obviously there appears to have been some horse trading going on behind the scenes between Rhodia/Solvay’s agents and the CRT, but why should SMBC and its officers allow this to continue out of the pubic gaze when they have a job to do? THEIR JOB IS NOT TO SECURE PLANNING PERMISSION FOR PRIVATE COMPANIES BY THE BACK DOOR. 


The reason given for this condition is also elaborated on, together with the policy ENV4 CANALS from the dire BCCS.

Obviously, the CRT believed that “harm” could or would be caused to this fake remediation scheme in the manner in which Rhodia/Solvay were intending, which is the application that had been submitted back in October. The policy is also set out for clarity.

The plans for this site do not include any opportunity regards canal improvements. They also do not take into account the buried canal basins- likely filled with toxic waste. (I will raise this point again further on.)

The second document , the officers report is below.


It is claimed that TWO objections were received, and the reasons stated are below.


So this does suggest that the CRT DID have objections, and yet a period of haggling outside of public scrutiny appears to have overcome this obstacle. THIS IS IMPORTANT, AS THREE OBJECTIONS, AND ONE FROM A STATUTORY CONSULTEE WOULD HAVE MEANT THIS APPLICATION WOULD HAVE GONE TO COMMITTEE AND NOT BEEN DELEGATED BY ONE PERSON. 

On this basis, and with the timescale appearing to have suited Rhodia/Solvay, this planning matter is corrupt, and it shows how the whole planning process is corrupt when large companies can change their comments from the original ones and sweet talk objectors with further information out of the public eye.

As for the CRT, I have long had misgivings about this  organisation as a charity, and why they should remain powerful in this regard concerning planning matters.  They do appear to care more about angling and the advancement of polluting floating diesel snails than wildlife and the effects on the damage that these two activities cause which keeps its “charity” afloat. As “British Waterways” , they were even worse and were complicit with the applicants in the dumping of toxic wastes into rattlechain, this site- The Gower tip, as well as a stack of others of their own along the BCN network. It is a joke of a policy on which they now comment as statutory consultee when the biggest polluters to the canal system were their predecessor public funded organisation. THEY TOO ARE NO DOUBT HAPPY TO BURY THEIR PART IN THIS DISGUSTING TOXIC WASTE DUMPING EVIL AND THE LEGACY THEY HAVE MADE. 

  • The “relevant professionals” is a misnomer in itself regarding this site.

The statement that the River Tame runs a “safe distance from the site” shows how retarded they are in that they appear to not know that there is a direct pathway via the frequently polluted Brades Brook. We have seen pollution through Sheepwash Nature Reserve on a number of occasions, and the EA are fully aware of incidents when they have sent out Severn Trent to deal with them via the STW owned asset. Curiously, there is no mention of this serial polluters comments in the officers report, who are also a statutory consultee.

The rest of these relevant objections are brushed over without any debate- it was apparent that no mention of the waste history that I gave was even mentioned, because it would obviously raise difficult questions for these dick heads to answer.

  • I have no idea as to who the other objector was, but here is the objection I made on behalf of The Friends of Sheepwash Nature Reserve.- In November when the matter should have been decided and not kicked into extra time to subvert the process.


This report almost reads as though it were written by the applicants themselves, and one wonders whether it was!

Obviously when I saw this crap on the council website I immediately raised concerns via a local councillor and have also brought it to the attention of the Chair of planning in the hope that such delegated decisions on contentious sites like this are not air brushed in the way that this application has been.

Sandwell council are on a very big radar at present, with planning matters historically along with parks being one hell of a giant bogey stain on democracy and legitimate governance.

This was the crap response I received, which raises more questions about the process. There is no name attached as to who responded from the council.

“About your concerns about the handling of the planning application ref: DC/21/66208 – Proposed remediation works including re-profiling of site, installing cap above underlying waste material to uplift site by 1.4m, with new sub-surface cut off boundary wall along eastern boundary and landscaping, I would respond as follows:-

Our neighbour notification letter states that we are unable to confirm receipt of representations, however the officer’s report clearly reference the objections received and considers these as part of the decision.

The council wrote to 29 residents in total and received two objections.  The Council’s delegation’s agreement states that officers have delegated powers when less than three objections from members of the public have been received.  As this was the case the decision was made by the planning officer under delegated powers.

Relevant statutory consultees were also consulted, for example Public Health (contaminated land), Environment Agency and Canals and River Trust.  In their final response, the Canals and River Trust raised no objection and requested appropriate conditions to be attached to the decision notice, which were actioned.

Subject to compliance with data protection (GDPR) I shall also arrange for the comments made by the Canals and River Trust to be made public in the interests of transparency.” 

  • If two objections were received , were these from the 29 residents written to, or does it include the FOS one which I made in addition, which would make the magic 3 number?
  • Note that “in their final response” the CRT made no objections, so again this appears to suggest that they DID have objections originally and that at this time this application should have been referred to the planning committee, and not delegated by one person.
  • The response states that the missing comments would be uploaded, “in the interests of transparency”. I would question why they were not in the first instance, given that this appears to have extended the application beyond its original target determination date? 

On returning to the website, it appears that six new previously missing documents have thus appeared, including the communications between The CRT and Rhodia/Solvay’s agents- and do note the dates of these.

I will look at these in turn, firstly a noise comments response from SMBC officers which is fairly pointless. We all know that this will inconvenience local residents with many vehicles entering the site on a daily basis for most of the day. This will be however the least of their problems compared to dusts and chemicals emitted from the site! These are silent killers which will not give off alarms or pap their horns, but SMBC et al do not give a shit about such matters, or even want the matter debated in the interests of “public health”.


The environment agency response can be read below, and is their usual vague green light.



They appear to love these cosy little meetings where the public are excluded and have no say or can ask questions. As for the “manage and reduce the possible impacts to all receptors from their closed landfill beneath” , has that ship not fucking sailed after 30 years of failure to ensure that there were no  possible impacts to all receptors when the imbeciles at Sandwell council allowed the licence to be surrendered?

The EA claim that a risk assessment was carried out in 2015 concerning potential off site receptors, again “modelled” and not a real picture. When conditions are changed in this real world however the EA will not be there to monitor them as the impotent waste of space that they are.

This response is written by a planner and does not consider the chemistry of the site or even address “the wastes materials”  as they call them. How convenient for all concerned who want the knowledge of these buried forever.

As for the nitty gritty of this matter regards the CRT, it becomes apparent that although the correspondence put up by the council is titled “initial comments”, that the dated letter of  22nd January 2022 is in fact no such thing, and that the CRT had obviously written on this subject and application prior to this, so much for the transparency there eh?


In fact the letter shows that Carl Mercer had provided them with “additional information”, but his correspondence and theirs is not shown on the planning documents.

 It is clear that the trust HAD OBJECTIONS- BECAUSE OF “INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION”, even it appears with Mercer’s help. They also state that they would like more information, but at this late stage how long should an application be kept open, and why should a public servant be the umpire between a private sector company and a “charity”, always it seems on the side of presumed development unless there is a compelling reason to refuse? In this case there was because the CRT were not happy about the application as supplied. Why should it not have been determined on this basis, when already known to Mercer that there were already two objections? I wonder if this information had also been passed on to the applicants BEFORE the close of the determination date? 

The trust had concerns about the proximity to the canal and the proposed new structures- obviously as a pathway could be created that was not there previously. They are also concerned about the integrity of the canal border with the site. It is noted that the EA did not even consider this matter, as evidence by their pathetic response above.

The following passage is also clear evidence that some form of dialogue had been ongoing BEFORE this letter and these were not their “initial comments.”

“We would also reiterate our previous comments…..which do not appear to have been addressed.


We do see what these were, thanks to the CRT.  🙂

They specifically mention that there is no evidence that the canal basins are clay lined.

On February 16th 2022, ERM respond to these CRT objections- let’s call “insufficient information ” that because that is what they have stated. If they had no objections to start with then Mercer could have closed the application down by delegated powers by this date.

It appears that the CRT comments were passed on, and that a telephone conversation also took place between the planning officer and the agents of Rhodia/Solvay. This type of running commentary on objections and ways of overcoming them I find totally perverse and an abuse of the planning system. Remember, I had also contacted this officer about specific information about this site, not least that the agents had lied about the site history in the declaration, and yet none of my valid questions or concerns were put forward or answered by these lying bastards.


  • ERM state that there is  waste material near to the canal which is to be excavated. They do not state what this material is or whether it has been analysed for specific chemicals. If it poses no current risk then what is the point of capping it so long after licence surrender?
  • There is total vagueness about the condition of the canal boundary, but leave it till the contractor is on site after the application has been approved.
  • ERM provide several diagrams which look good on paper. They did the same with rattlechain and lied about the composition of barrelled waste in the sediment and its close proximity to the surface, and not at the bottom of it as they drew.
  • There is no way on earth that ERM can claim that waste tipping operations of Albright and Wilson et al including the British Waterways Board did not extend to infilling the canal basins. They claim that the basins are outside of current site, but this was the same fraud used concerning rattlechain where the current Autobase site included a large section of land where tipping would have taken place that was once within the site before licensing.
  • The two so called “attenuation ponds” used in sites such as The Eagle River Flats for dealing with phosphorus wastes are to be 3.16metres and 2.80 metres deep. that appears to be a hell of a lot of surface water to me!


The CRT replied briefly to these comments on 3rd March 2022. No sooner then had the green light been given to removing their objection, the officer report appears to have been written and the matter avoiding being submitted to the next planning committee just 6 days later. 

No questions asked about the materials allowed to be tipped and which lie beneath the Gower Tip awaiting to be disturbed on a site where houses now border and where capping may produce more issues. NO OFFICER OF ANY ORGANISATION WILL ANSWER REASONABLE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS HISTORIC BURIED LEGACY, AND LIKE THE APPLICANTS AND THEIR AGENTS THEY ARE YELLOW FUCKING COWARDS IN THIS REGARD. 

So there it is, and once again the waste dumpers dodge answering any difficult questions about historic waste. It is becoming a national standard facilitated by officers of multiple Governmental  quangos and local Government officers. THEY ARE A TOTAL DISGRACE AND THEY DO NOT SERVE THE PUBLIC OR THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION THAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO.  


Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on The Gower Tip planning permission disgrace

Albright’s toxic archives #36 p4 fire x2 burns 1




This post proves two things. One, that Albright and Wilson as a company were totally incompetent at handling and storing this destructive chemical weapon, particularly it seems under the management in the 80’s and early 1990’s of the abysmal Peter Bloore. Two, that its workforce were liable to be seriously injured as a result of this corporate negligence, so what hope for the wider community’s safety, when at this time the bespectacled snake and his PR team was actively attempting to paint such a wonderful picture of this “benevolent” and  historic Oldbury company?

I have previously looked at why white phosphorus burns, and another incident where a worker was burnt in the 1970’s. 

The article comes from The Sandwell Evening Mail of 17th June 1986. 

I am aware of who the identity of this person was, and they appear to have featured in a corporate AW video about safety– implying that it was the workers fault he got burnt, which I do not believe to be the case.  


I did a feature on this video nasty hypocrisy, which you can read HERE, after which the video posted on youtube mysteriously disappeared, or did it  😛  😆  😆

I would question the claims of Bloore against the actual picture FFS!

As always, the circumstances about these incidents are not very well drawn in the report, and it states that the worker , who I know had worked for this company for over 30 years at this point, came into contact with spilt P4. You would therefore believe that he knew what he was doing and would have been wearing necessary PPE?

As ever, the serial liar Bloore attempts to play down the issue by stating that the shoulder burns were “slight”, but the head burns “thermal”. In other words, they were fucking serious! Also remember that P4 does not just go out when alight, it continues to burn the flesh to the bone, and this workman would have been at serious risk of systemic poisoning, as well as phossy jaw, which AW historically attempted to also play down by monitoring its workforce.

We do not know of what happened to Albright and Wilson’s infamous firemen shams on this occasion, but I have dealt with them in this same year just a few months earlier in another toxic archive HERE.

The professionals at Oldbury were back at the scene just six hours later to attend to the same issue at the same equipment, indicating that it had not been dealt with properly first time, or was faulty to start with?

There would of course be other later incidents involving white phosphorus spillages and fires at the same site, and under the same incompetent stewardship.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Albright’s toxic archives #36 p4 fire x2 burns 1

The Oldbury Smell- Resurrection

The “cat” that truly appears to have nine lives has returned to the area of Langley!

videos board GIF

Local reporters and social media users have recently noted that the smell of Tom Cat piss is wafting over the area, and dispersing on the wind in multiple directions. The area around Langley green train station in particular  and Western Road would appear to be at the epicentre of the foul moggie, and has left people feline not very happy.  😥

In the style of my hero, the journalist  Jack Macgee , I decided to take to the area using the highly scientific “sniff test”; indeed I consider myself to be a man with “a very particular set of smells”.

Hannibal Lecter GIF

I even put on a white coat and self titled myself “Dr”, whilst preparing the necessary mathematical equations known as ” Hannibal’s constant.”

On stepping off the train, the doors opened abruptly, and I was instantly hit with the pussy bouquet. There were also the odours of bonfires and curry munching going on a little further which added to the palate.

By chance I bumped into a Sandwell council environmental officer there on an unconnected matter, and he told me that the council were investigating the matter. He also told me that he was from the Langley area and back in the 1960’s remembered the vile odours coming out of the Trinity Street cat flap.

Another canal local also recalled the odour, and stated that it had “gone away” and relocated to Whitehaven at some point. He was unsure if it had returned.

An almost deserted carpark, but is puss hiding in the boot of one of them?

A couple of local suspects caught my eye, but they were quickly eliminated from my enquiries.

Onward I sniffed around Park Lane, and noted the demolition wastes lying around former AW buildings. Had one of these deconstructions accidently dug up a long forgotten sleepless malice hidden in the piles? Have the council considered this- they approved the works after all?  😡

Where are you hiding Mr pussy cat?

Oh and look what else I spied with my little eye, something beginning with P- a white phosphorus unloading event from two tanks.

This is where they keep the really nasty chemicals.

Toxic, flammable and a hazard to the environment, but dump it in “small amounts” under water in the open air a few hundred metres away- no problem.

But still I didn’t see Tom.

Green mist began to gather around Trinity Street as the air was filled with the pungent odour. Darkness was falling and so was all hope. I was getting desperate by now, so decided to try to invoke the gatekeeper at Park Lane by choosing a destructor in traveller form; something which just popped in there, something harmless from childhood that might tempt out the sinister four legged terror- the God awful leftie poetaster and former Tom herself- The Angelou bird.

But the sentinel chicken caged bird didn’t work and ran off down Tat Bank Road with its tail between its legs.  😥

I only had one hope left, it was time to bring out The Big GUNN, quite literally.

Ouija Board Halloween GIF by GIPHY Studios Originals


I assembled my apparatus and prepared for the exorcism of the Langley Tom. I made a picture of the legend Mrs Gunn who had originally slayed the beast back in the 1950’s using her withered bush.

I was not privy to the shrubs from this lady’s garden, but took a couple of twigs from the nearby greenery where I hid and made a symbolic crucifix adorned with her image. Watching all those Ray Mears programmes had obviously been worth it.








A faint rumbling ensued, followed by more green mist, and then the smell was slain. I had finally vanquished the Oldbury Smell…. or so I thought…. as a new demonic off site release rose out from the ground in a puff of garlic laced white smoke….

See the source image



Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on The Oldbury Smell- Resurrection

The Dudley BUGgers- A council’s Black Country Plan fix


It has recently been announced that this useless document which sets out proposals for building yet more houses over the next several years to 2039 attracted thousands of comments- most I would imagine in objection. It was also revealed that most of these came from within the borough of Dudley itself!

This is perhaps not a surprise when this council itself was responsible for the publication and processing of said useless plan. It is clear to me that the fact that they put out a flyer to every household in their borough, whereas at least with Sandwell, this council did not, that the councillors in Dudley were intent on ensuring maximum vocal opposition to proposals so that they could then turn round at a later date to remove “controversial” proposals from within their own back yard. It is playing to the gallery, and there were no shortage of moments throughout the process where Dudley councillors were whipping up public opinion to make this happen.

Indeed, the latest stop press headline sees this council removing two such sites from the plan, before this even happens. I would imagine that this was the plan all along, conveniently timed just two months before local elections, where they can claim to have “listened to the people” etc.  😡

The plan is therefore to not build houses in Dudley, and fuck the rest of the Black Country and West Midlands; they can have them there.

I have looked before at the statistics regards land areas in the four black country boroughs and populations from the last census in 2011, and I doubt that these will have changed much when the 2021 census becomes available in terms of the dire population density compared with other areas in the West Midlands and the country.

Source: office of national statistics

Source: office of national statistics

2011 census figures

Sandwell has the highest density of population living in any of the Black country boroughs and the highest density per hectare. This is demonstrated by the 2011 census figures – Sandwell has 36 people per hectare compared with the West Midlands and National figure of just 4. Nature conservation it seems is also shrinking as more so called “brownfield land” , that has re-wilded is usurped for this purpose.

The Birmingham and Black Country Wildlife Trust did an excellent response to this nonsense, and I will be looking more at this, including their objections to land around rattlechain in another post.

Draft Black County Plan Full Consultation Response – WTBBC_6 (1)

Sandwell council appears intent on destroying green space and building houses, such as the bent deal at Friar park with the former Severn Stench land. They want more council tax as they hike up the bill by 4.99% per household, and the crumbs from Government, (sorry our tax payers money) , only becomes music to their ears when getting hand outs from Tonka’s combined authority for so called “clean up”.

I have taken one aspect of Street’s hand outs to The Information commissioner regards land at Shidas Lane, where a proxy appears to have facilitated money being given by grant for land owned by a Jersey Registered company which was formerly the Accles and Pollock waste lagoon.  This is deeply suspicious and goes against Mayor Street’s own claims about not approving of tax avoidance schemes. We shall see if his office are forced to reveal how much was paid out, but be in no doubt, I will take this all the way to reveal what has gone on here, and also ask questions as to why Walsall council appear to have a stake in the land in Sandwell.

Come the summer when the next stage of this “plan” comes out, it is your duty if you do not live in Dudley to ensure that your voice is heard. Bone idleness and leave it to someone else is not an option here in Sandwell. The councillors are not on your side, they are on their own side and will not speak out for you. Prove me wrong, but we shall see…..


Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on The Dudley BUGgers- A council’s Black Country Plan fix

The life of Arthur Albright- Liberal truths are none at all

Thou was a complete tosser…


There is nothing more perverse to me than the Liberal mindset. It is a thinking based on some noble large intention, but the problem for the Liberal is that it is completely unobtainable and doomed to failure in the real world. The Liberal however cannot and will not see that, blindly believing that their big idea trumps all others and that by persuasion, (or brainwashing), a tiny few can sway the opinion of the many, particularly if they have the money to do so.

They are also fond of unions, the EU being a prime example, but like all unions they are grossly unequal and based on a pyramidal system of hierarchy, where the Liberal elite can make the most money from their place at the summit. The wealth does not cascade down at all to those at the bottom, but they bizarrely actually believe that they are doing “good” in the world through “philanthropy” and helping the poor by attempting to change their behaviour . It becomes even more misplaced when they also attach some religious benevolence to it in “doing God’s work” through secret societies.

To a Liberal when they look in the mirror, they truly believe they are seeing the face of God. A free press, individualism and non conformity that they preach is a smokescreen for “do it my way or it’s the highway for you.” Modern day pricks like Justin Trudeau show how when you scratch a Liberal, what you find is a hypocritical despotic Fascist.

#BlackfaceHitler Liberal twat-A theme we shall return to at the end of this post with these warped thinkers…

And so to Arthur Albright (b 1811), one of many of the fake religion of Quakers, (they are not, just a society of Liberal business friends), who I have alluded to before were about family capitalist monopolies. This post is based on a very difficult to find book written after his death in 1900 entitled “notes on his life”. It is a year by year summary of his dealings and is compiled by his family. The rough page edging in the 162 numbered  volume shows that it appears to have been handmade and guillotined and cut to fit. Bizarrely, it often calls Albright “Our Father”, as though he has somehow been elevated to deity status.

Some of this was shortened into the company history of Albright and Wilson some 50 years later, but this primary source is more interesting and complete. It contains anecdotes and some of the writings of “AA” himself, punctuated with “thees” and “thous” throughout, as the weirdos spoke in this way.

Albright was born in Oxfordshire, one of ten children to William and Rachael Albright.

After an apprenticeship in his uncles shop, Albright pottered about before joining his brother in law Edmund Sturge in Birmingham as a manufacturing chemist. In 1844 he decided to produce the ghastly phosphorus, then used for matches. This was started in Selly Oak in the City using imported bone ash from South America. At this time he was already “friendly” with other dark side Quakers like the Lloyds and the Cadbury’s.

One of the relations of the Lloyds was his future wife Rachael Stacey whom he married in 1848. They banged out 8 kids between 1849 and 1861, including the revolting blood sport enthusiast George (girls name) Albright. Indeed, both the families appear to have revelled in this elite savagery, as I have outlined HERE.

Quaker star crossed lovers



They lived at addresses in the posh part of Birmingham, including the pretentiously named “Mariemont” in Edgbaston. This would have been a very different set of digs to the shithole smog abodes of Oldbury where their workforce toiled.

Production switched here largely based on the canal shipment lines, and it is claimed that Albright himself perused the BCN. Railway lines were also to prove advantageous, and this family and that of his partner in grime would be strongly associated with the GWR lines.

Arthur’s big USP was red phosphorus, which he learned of after meeting an Austrian professor. This amorphous phosphorus was not as poisonous as yellow(white phosphorus) and did not spontaneously combust in air at room temperature. Says the book;

“This branch of the business was pursued not only with the hope of profit, but because , in our father’s opinion, it would benefit mankind by securing a match both better and safer than the ordinary one. “ Yeah sure.  😡

The exhibition of this material coincided with the move to Oldbury in 1851. Though the partnership with his uncle ended in 1855, his new one with John Wilson did not in fact begin in 1851 as claimed. Wilson also married Rachael Albright’s sister, and so we can see here as to how these people operated in family circles, as well as inter cousin marrying.

Albright travelled extensively around the world on business; supposedly so his family claim, they packed him off when he became depressed in that he could not change and mould the world into his thinking.

Claims are made about his man of peace and his heroics as well as his involvement with ending slavery and campaigning for those who were supposedly “freed men” after The American Civil War. I have looked at this however in context, as the Liberal in him would have seen economic opportunity.

The real mask about his altruism and that of his family fanbase is however laid bare towards the end of his life when the cult gathered to celebrate his and Rachael’s Golden Wedding Anniversary. A bizarre ritual pantomime is described complete with verse and theatrics. The sickness sees his grandchild Colin Scott-Moncrieff Jnr dress up, and I have no doubt blacked up as “an African negro.”

Furthermore other seed of his children dress up as “gardening” and “hospitality”. So in this regard, the whole continent of Africa and its people are accessories and plaything pastimes comparable in value to his and his wife’s interests.

To allow a child to act out such a fantasy shows the type of “moral” calibre of this Liberal cult. It is further evidence of how this political sickness champions its own “white saviour complex” , where Arthur Albright is seen as saving a whole continent based on letters he had written to other white men, and played out as a role play part by his own white grandchild.

It is not in letters that Arthur Albright and his endeavours should be defined, but in actions like this. In creating a vile polluting factory in Oldbury and elsewhere that was used in war purposes, he gave nothing to the areas in life and in death.

As to his legacy, what is extraordinary is the fate of two of these grandchildren of his in later life. The son of revolting George , Martin (Toby), was killed in fighting in Palestine in 1917. I very much doubt that his Grandfather would have approved, and yet such martyrdom would see him declared a “hero” by the Liberal class, even though he was little more than a 20th Century Crusader in such lands under the guise of The British Empire’s Egyptian Expeditionary Force.

The fate of young Colin, the Caucasian “African Negro”, is even more poetic. Initially his death in Egypt in 1908, just 10 years after his blacking up performance in Edgbaston, was wrongly attributed to be his father, who was involved for many years under British Empire guise to be a civil engineer.

Colin the younger appears to have got a cushy job, all through his father’s connections and “friends” of course, but appears to have fallen foul of African indigenous peoples at the hands of the dervishes.  😆 The Kinross-shire Advertiser of 9th May 1908 details what was then known.

This Oxford man it appears had travelled to  “Afric’s sunny fountains” in order to keep the locals in line- particularly the Islamic Mahdi. So much for campaigning against slavery and oppression like his Grandfather eh,  😆  😆  😆 How dare the natives of a country occupied by British invasion have a belief system that was frowned upon by such Liberal thinking men.  😆 (GET MY POINT ABOUT “LIBERALS”?)

Of course , the “savages” under the command of Sheikh Abdel Kader (yes that appears to have really been his name) are portrayed as such whilst the white knight from England was engaging in “peace”. The romancing of his death is told by his own father in another article from the  16th June 1908 Civil & Military Gazette (Lahore). Obviously this also served as a propaganda exercise, as all war stories do about “gallant” and noble deaths.

I think it is quite extraordinary that one cult should say of another “crush them instantly before they attain any size”. It perhaps once again underlines my point about how these people really think of others in terms of interventionist foreign policy and the hypocrisy that went with it. 

“crush them instantly before they attain any size”

The contrast of the man of peace compared to the elected “prophet” is bullshit. Scott-Moncrieff took a pen to a sword fight and got it up him, and he probably didn’t like it up him.  😆  😆  😆

This is what you get Arthur Albright et al for believing in your interventionist Liberal shite and trying to coerce people into your way of thinking. Leave them alone to get on with their lives FFS!

The problem with characters like this is that they become defined by other liberal writers and historians who erase their darker side from history. “Whiter than white” is perhaps the best epitaph for them. They were never “gallant” and they were never “heroes”. Theirs is a his-story eulogy and they are always Liberal with the truth. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on The life of Arthur Albright- Liberal truths are none at all

Arthur Albright’s election disaster

“Get Thee to a Nunnery”

His partnership with John Wilson spawned the chemical vile polluter of his name, and like most of his peers in business, he also had political aims for furthering his business links via the philanthropist Liberal fakery.

In 1874, the pompous do-gooder manufacturer of white phosphorus Arthur Albright stood for Parliament at the age of  63.  Two seats were up for grabs that year, and AA stood as a Liberal candidate, though it seems he was not even wanted by this bunch of self righteous tossers.  😆 and styled himself as an “Independent Liberal”.

It appears from the result that dozy Arthur split the Lib vote, and if he had stood down, the other Liberal candidate would have took the seat. As it was, Two Conservative MP’s were elected, with the phosphorus maker gaining only 18.9% of the vote in second to last place.    .

Vote details via wikipedia


The Worcestershire Chronicle of  21st February 1874 laid into Mr Albright in big style.

“The election in East Worcestershire was a disaster, in which we take it  Mr Arthur Albright , with his one idea are responsible.” 



So what was Arthur’s big bright  “one idea” for the people of his constituency? Some clues come from an election advertisement from 5th February 1874 Birmingham Daily Post.


It appears that Mr Albright was keen on prostitutes.  😛 Specifically he championed the repeal of The Contagious Diseases Acts, which were designed to put those suspected of prostitution in “Lock Hospitals”. Venereal disease was widespread in Victorian society, and the Act attempted to stop the spread to sailors and soldiers around military establishments. Perhaps he didn’t want the soldiers to be able to fight?

How strange that a Liberal would oppose lockdowns of those infected to “stop the spread” and requiring some form of pass test to get out- it’s not something you see the likes of The Independent championing today.  😆

Obviously the love of whores in East Worcestershire was not that great, well at least of a  platonic nature.  😆

I’m not sure if this English Valjean gave any such women a job in his factory to get them out of a life of Vice? I’d suggest he would not have wanted them anywhere near his own male workforce or their retorts.

To top it all, “poor” Arthur even got successfully sued by a hotel owner for not paying his bill for use of rooms etc.  😆

Thursday 5th February 1874 Newspaper: Birmingham Daily Post

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Arthur Albright’s election disaster

Barnett’s brickworks- The Barnett family child slave labour shame


All is not what it seemed……

Samuel Barnett was quite clearly a local rogue in the Tipton area, and with the involvement of his sons into the brickmaking empire things don’t appear to have got any better, even after his accidental bizarre death.

The canal breach of 1899 was just one incident where his activities at Rattlechain were called into question. I have also previously outlined how workers at Samuel Barnett‘s dangerous Rattlechain brickworks site had died but had received little in the way of public attention. Another had seriously broken his leg leaving him unable to work. 

In these cases, they attempted to put blame on their own employees rather than their dangerous practices, in a time when health and safety at work did not exist.

I have found another story however which puts into context the exploitation of this local wealthy man and his sons of his workforce, who as local councillors ,Barnett Senior and then his son William would have been well placed in civic circles. Did this raise any eyebrows however amongst the other band of elite industrialists who bought their way into pompous local legislature? I somewhat doubt it as they were no doubt all onto the same crack. Nepotism, cronyism and crookedness have never left the town of Oldbury to this day.

The story from the  4th April 1903 Worcestershire Chronicle details how Barnett and sons were fined £6 2 shillings for employing a boy under the age of 18. The age is not given but the term “boy” implies to me that he would have been barely a teenager, if that.

Even worse Harry Ball had once worked a shift of 30 hours! Can you even imagine working beyond a whole day into the next without stopping and the consequences that could have occurred through physical exhaustion!

It is even stated that the company based in Dudley Port had been previously fined, no doubt for the exact same offence.

suffer the little children


The piece from which the picture at the top of this post is taken dates 9 years later, and I believe that the son in the picture is William- there was never any “Julius”.

Like his father before him, he also became a councillor, and this absolute sycophantic letter to the Dudley Chronicle from 22nd March 1919 from a Labour rimmer from Dudley Road singing his praises should be put in context with the facts of the case above.

stomach churning puke

“The working man’s children” of the area had a playing field to play in – after their 30 hour shift at the chain no doubt, FFS! More than ever, this article is evidence for me of why these industrialist wannabe “socialist” politicians should never be feted as being community stalwarts or remembered as somehow giving something to the community. Perhaps Willy Barnett was a communist “in spirit” as they do seem to like child slavery in such countries where it unfortunately exists. The Barnett family were child exploitation criminals, and their brickmaking empire moulded in dodgy practices.

No doubt some other pompous political arsehole who followed them was responsible for getting a street in Tipton named after these crooked shiesters; so shame on them too.

The brickmaking industry in this area, as shown by their pollution in 1938 was notable then as it is now. A coal strike in 1912 appears to show how the Barnett’s two brickworks at Rattlechain and Stour Valley were shut down as a result of a lack of fuel, and thus how dependent they were on environment soiling coal and the pollution that went with it.

Saturday 9th March 1912 Newspaper: Bromsgrove & Droitwich Messenger

At least this would have temporarily stopped the Barnett’s from exploiting and abusing children at their wretched brick works. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Barnett’s brickworks- The Barnett family child slave labour shame

White phosphorus match ban- The Berne Convention falsity

As evidenced in the last post, matches containing white phosphorus were deadly for consumers, but even more so for the poor unfortunates who made them, particularly for scumbag Quaker companies like Bryant and May.

The toxicity of these matches had been known by their makers, politicians and everyone else to be deadly poisonous for decades, yet still their manufacture with The Devil’s element  continued into the new Century.

In 1906, the political class, does what it always has done in making some pompous declaration, as it does today about “climate change” issues, and came up with the title “The International Convention respecting the Prohibition of the Use of White (Yellow) Phosphorus in the Manufacture of Matches.”

The treaty forbade the use of P4 in matches, and also banned the sale and import of said matches, yet it did not come into force for several years, and Britain was not an immediate signatory either.

The scale of import of matches into Britain is shown in the article below from the time, which suggests that instead of poisoning British workers as they had been for decades, the scum match makers were now using cheap foreign expendable labour instead. Around 4 million estimated boxes of white phosphorus matches were thought to be being imported in 1907. 

9th December 1908 Newspaper: Daily Telegraph & Courier (London)

I came across a copy of the treaty, and set it out below; it is written in both French and English, given the place where it was negotiated.

The treaty as signed on 26/9/06 was only brought forward by Britain two years later on 28/12/08.

The small print of this is that Britain only banned the use in the United Kingdom, and not its “empire”, sorry (countries invaded in the name of royalty). I would therefore wager that companies making these matches sprung up in India and other such countries, where labour rights would have been non existent.

There is a long list of pompousness about those involved as heads of state, and one can see from this that these wankers would be very prevalent in just 8 years after the signing of the 8 article point treaty for engaging in the deadliest war the world had ever seen – INCLUDING THE USE OF WHITE PHOSPHORUS IN WEAPONS OF WAR TO KILL PEOPLE. 

Albright and Wilson of course would benefit by producing said chemical for this purpose for Britain in the run up to and during The Second World War, as well as for France. 

The procrastination of Britain’s new law would then be kicked out in hoarded stocks for even longer after the date of “ban”, as evidenced by the article below from the time.

4th January 1909 Newspaper: London Daily News

The shallowness of such conventions continues to this day, in the use of this chemical weapons being classified as “smoke screening” by Governments and militaries across the globe.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on White phosphorus match ban- The Berne Convention falsity