I went to the public consultation in Panshanger in the week and spoke to the planning & implementation manager about Panshangers' history and the pieces of important historical details left out of the historic appraisal and it is just something we agree to disagree on as it was put to me that the person who carried out the assessment but having spoke to that person, he supplied all the information, and it just was not all used; in my consultation objection on the history, i can supply that information as evidence. I also spoke to the chief planning officer and pointed out that in the draft infrastructure delivery plan, on the subject of utilities found in utilities 13:27, the recommendation to attach a direct connection to the southern outfall at rye meads waste water treatment works aka sewerage; the southern outfall does not exist and the direct connection put to me by email from the water company in 2013 simply put, 'there is no southern outfall at the plant and there is no intention to add a direct connection to it'. Armed with this alarming evidence I pointed this out to the cpo and also have a newer email this month 2015 which states that they do have a south eastern outfall which ends in the river lee (that's moving away from wgc, not towards) and i put it to the cpo that without a southern facing outfall at rye meads, No development of Panshanger can take place.