Post by local resident Mrs. J Gay.

Post by local resident Mrs. J. Gay.

We have received an Email from Mrs. J Gay of Hull, asking that we post her query to Keith Gilby, we are pleased to do so, the text of her comment is reproduced below.

I have tried to put a comment on HU12 but it doesn’t seem to have appeared so I’ll try here.

My query is for Keith Gilby, I may have misinterpreted his comment so I’m asking for clarification if possible. Are you saying the council sought outside advice as to whether or not the parish council should talk to one of its residents? If he is a registered elector, resident and taxpayer of the parish the council should have spoken with him without question from anyone, it is part of the ‘Framework for accountability, openness and transparency’ that all Town and Parish Councils are required to follow as “Governance and Accountability for Local Councils”. There is a whole raft of legal guidance that requires the same standard from Local Councils.

If the council has discussed the residents issues and put forward a credible explanation to the resident, I would on the face of it question the residents comments.

On the other hand if the Parish Council have not spoken to the resident on any of the issues, which appears to be the case from the various posts and contributions from knowledgeable people such as Mr. Gilby (HU12 Online), there is a very serious question mark over the Parish Council in that they are failing their electorate. Especially if the resident in question has approached the parish council seeking to resolve any difficulties only to be met with rejection without comment or reason.

Mr. Gilby also mentions a ‘vote’ being taken in council to not engage with the resident. If the council had not spoken to the resident how can such a vote be justified, was this vote taken in open session and on what legal grounds was such a vote proposed, it is beginning to look like a personal issue on the councils part and that amounts to discrimination and victimisation against a parishioner.

The council leadership must address the issue with some alacrity to prevent further damage to not only Preston’s reputation but also for the reputation of the wider community and other local councils.

If this is allowed to continue and the council leadership are unwilling or unable to take that step individual councillors must in my opinion speak out and force the issue to a conclusion. This is a classic case of “Public Interest” and no councillor can be punished for such action, they are protected by legislation.

This is now beyond the issues this resident raises, it is fast becoming a question of how our local councils in the area operate and how they respond to and treat their electorate. If we are not careful there may be long standing damage to local government in our whole area.