"Proper Channels"

We would just like remind readers, this blog is not run by any one person, it has a number of residents as members and we work as a team, no single member has full control on what appears. If you wish to comment on anything on this blog please comment through the normal channel or email us direct, If you would like to join our group please email us we would be pleased to hear from you, thank you.

5. Proper Channels.

During the council meeting on 16/08/13 there was a comment from one council member who stated the issues raised here should be directed through the ‘proper channels’ or government bodies that deal with the issues, for that member’s clarification we will outline the steps we have taken.

The parish council has been approached as the “proper channel” in the first instance on all issues listed on this blog without exception, we have invariably had those approaches ignored by the council or simply being told “the matter is closed”. There comes a point when you have to accept that it’s futile trying to be reasonable with people who brush you aside so readily.

After a number of snubs from the council and its refusal to even consider the issue, one of our members made two complaints to the Standards Committee, which is a ‘proper channel’, both complaints related to the honesty of parish councillors. The first one was considered on its merits and the Standards Committee found that a breach of the Code of Conduct for Councillors had not taken place. Our member didn’t agree with the deliberation but the Standards Committee made their decision having considered all the facts relevant to the complaint and therefore our member accepted that decision, which was the end of the matter.

The second complaint was determined on false statements submitted by Preston Parish Councillors and therefore the final decision of the Standards Committee was fundamentally flawed, the Committee had been deliberately misled by those parish councillors.

By submitting false statements those councillors are suggesting that the complainant simply thought up the complaint from the imagination of his own mind and made the complaint maliciously. That strongly suggests that the complainant was lying in order to have unwarranted disciplinary action taken against an innocent councillor.

That being the case the complainant, should the need arise, will never again be able to submit a genuine complaint without being tarnished with the suggestion of that alleged dishonesty. In addition to that, the Chairman and vice chairman of the parish council at the time must have had the same aberration independently of the complainant as they also submitted statements which confirmed the complainants view and other council members agreed the incident did in fact take place much as described in the complaint and submitted statements to that effect.

Following a request that ERYC review their deliberation on the grounds of dishonest statements (another ‘proper channel’) that was rejected out of hand. At this point we have pretty well come to the end of the road as far as “proper channels” are concerned but we will continue to push the issue until someone higher up the ladder looks into the matter or it is resolved by the parish council in discussion with the complainant.

Following the decision of the Standards Committee an additional number of councillors wrote to the Monitoring Officer of ERYC confirming the flawed decision and requested it be looked at again and investigated (yet another ‘proper channel’), their requests were also refused.

Parish Council’s are not covered by the “Local Government Ombudsman” (a review of the legislation is currently being considered, if Parish Councils are transferred to the jurisdiction of the Local Government Ombudsman we will immediately submit a case to them) so we are unable to take that step, we are pretty well at the end of the line as far as “proper channels” are concerned.

With regard to the councils refusal to make available public information on many occasions we have to-date not followed that up with a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO). We now intend to correct that and should the council again fail to comply with the Freedom of Information Act, all failures will be referred to the ICO at the earliest appropriate opportunity. Any deliberations the ICO may make will be posted on this site at the relevant time.

It would therefore appear to be the case that if you have a complaint against a parish council or an innocent query you can be constantly ignored and in the end you will get tired of trying and you will go away leaving the parish council in peace to repeat the process time after time on any other unsuspecting resident who complains in the future or, puts forward an innocent query. The parish council have operated in this way for many years, we want that to stop right here so we will not be going away any time soon.

In saying we should go through the appropriate ‘government channels’ that member can only be suggesting that we take a complaint regarding the unlawful use of public funds to the Audit Commission or District Auditor. That member has clearly learned nothing about the previous Audit but is fully aware of the consequences of such action, and the potential financial cost to the parish, is that member not concerned about the financial cost? Does the member think the parish is so cash rich we have nothing better to spend it on except even more unnecessary Audits, effectively transferring residents money into the profit account of a private accounting firm?

What should happen and what any responsible parish council would do is,

1. On becoming aware of such an issue the council would take proactive steps to address it.

2. Discuss the reasons for the residents concern and give a full explanation why the resident is mistaken in his/her suspicion, if that is the case.

3. Cover the details and outcome publically during the next available council meeting.

4. Document the details in council minutes as a permanent record of their actions.

The council will then have taken all reasonable steps to address the issue and can be shown to have displayed ‘due diligence’ in protecting the assets of the parish and its residents. If the resident then went ahead in forwarding a complaint to the audit commission it would arguably be beyond the councils control and therefore could be argued that any loss is down to a malicious complaint by a disgruntled resident.

What a council should never do is refuse to discuss such issues with residents and ignore any requests for the relevant information as that demonstrates a council’s lack of engagement, openness and transparency and can only propagate further mistrust and suspicion.

Since it has been over two and a half years since such an audit it is almost certain that an audit would be ordered by the District Auditor because of the seriousness of the allegation, any audit will represent a financial loss to the parish of up to circa. £10,000. To suggest we take our complaint to the Audit Commission is being reckless in the extreme with resident’s money when the parish council has the information to resolve the issue quickly and without any additional cost to the parish or residents.

For a parish council to not respond for 3 years to a resident’s belief that public funds have been spent illegally and then simply tell those residents to complain to the District Auditor is appallingly bad management of public funds. 

We are currently making contact with the Audit Commission to clarify the position on Auditors looking into a specific incident as an isolated item (a "proper channel"), when that information is received and we have had time to digest it we will reconsider our options, we have not yet ruled out a complaint to the Audit Commission.

If the parish council refuse to make public documents available which would easily and quickly resolve this matter it should put out a public statement to that effect and if the view of the parish council is that we should take the matter to the Audit Commission knowing the potential cost to public funds they should include such advice clearly in a public statement, we will then reconsider our position.

There is just a couple of parish council failures we must remember’

1. The parish council has never uttered a single word in denial or explanation for the omission.

2. The council has the ability to clear the matter up with the issue of one agenda and one set of minutes which should take no more than 30 Mins, to date it has refused to do so.

3. The parish council has never responded to the enquiring resident to explain why the resident is wrong in his belief, if that is the case.

The fault lies with the parish council and not with residents.

If there are any residents with similar experience of the council do please contact us by comment or email. If you wish we will post on your experience without your identity being released, or not post anything if you simply want to share your experience it’s entirely up to you. We would love to hear your story, your not alone, there are a number of us, let us compare notes and grow as a group.

4. Petition proposed by Preston Parish Council.

We would just like to remind readers, this blog is not run by any one person, it has a number of residents as members and we work as a team, no single member has full control on what appears. If you wish to comment on anything on this blog you should either comment through the normal channel or email us direct. If you would like to join our group please email us, thank you.

Today (21/08/13) the poster proposed and approved unanimously by Preston Parish Council appeared in the Parish Notice Board, it is as described by the Chairman at the time of the meeting and contains information to residents who may wish to have the issues listed in this blog addressed. This information that quite rightly but very briefly explains resident’s legal rights should have been released by the council many years ago and, not as a reaction to this blog but it has now been released. For our part we will consider the poster one of our successes because without our persistence this information would never have been released and it is important information that residents should be aware of.

If we put the poster into context it has no value for us at all, we are already fully aware of the points and the legal references the poster contains, we have also considered them all some time ago and we have taken all those steps that the poster says we should as residents.

There is just one step we haven’t taken, that is to complain to the District Auditor, this we believe will be extremely expensive for the Parish and cannot be justified when there is a viable alternative which costs nothing and virtually no time, the council should produce the agenda and minutes which records council approval of the expenditure or give a full explanation to the resident who requested it, the council has that residents name, address, phone number and email contact on file so if the council is serious they should be able to do that pretty well instantly. 

The final paragraph says the council can’t have got anything wrong so it must be a resident who has ‘misunderstood’ or ‘misconstrued’ the council in some way, lets not be silly, getting the same response from the council time after time is not a mistake on our part! This is not a resident fault it is quite definitely a council fault!

If the council now wish to resolve these issues they should talk to the residents involved and not hide behind a poster. That is in the council’s hands, they have all the relevant information.

The council has a responsibility to deal with the issues raised, not abdicate when the going gets tight and pass them over to residents to deal with by way of a poster. We prepared the post below before we had sight of the poster, at this time we see no reason to alter the post.

4. Petition proposed by Parish Council

Because this is not yet an approved motion by the council we are addressing it off the top of our heads so please forgive any minor errors, we do not see the value in rereading the relevant legislation until there is a firm and approved motion by the council. In that event we shall look at it again in detail and respond appropriately. Also, we do not know what form any petition would take so we have covered a number of options in order of importance.

There was an option voiced that the council could start a petition and put it on their web site to see if,

1^st.  Residents wish to leave the council as it is,

2^nd. Merge it with another council or,

3^rd. Abolish Preston Parish Council.

Sounds suspiciously like a Governance review we put forward on this blog some time ago but at least they got the order right. We don’t know who came up with that suggestion but it sounds half baked to us, unclear and not thought out before being proposed. Would we want to leave such an important decision as this in the hands of our current Parish Council, probably not we’d most likely end up being merged with ‘Royston Vasey’, but at least most councillors would feel at home! This is not a step the council could take on their own by using their web site.

How effective could this strategy be?

1^st. If the outcome was to leave the council as it is, that could be used as a vote of confidence by the council, all the council would have to do is intimidate residents into fearing the unknown and a majority will most likely vote to stay as we are, even those who don’t agree with the council will probably vote that way in the hope that things may change in the future. That result wouldn’t affect us so we wouldn’t be going anywhere until we get answers.

2^nd. Merge Preston Parish council with some other parish council, which could be effective if Preston council were to be downsized and the right councillors left, we would be prepared to leave them in peace giving them the benefit of the doubt. We have no problem with the majority of Parish Councillors, if the influence of a few councillors were to be removed the remaining councillors would most likely be free to work in the best interests of residents and probably do a good job.

3^rd. If the council was abolished and transferred to the control of East Riding, that would be fully effective because the people who have caused this chaos would no longer be there because all councillor positions would have to be abolished as part of the process so they would be making sure everybody else went down with them, but that seems to be ok as far as they are concerned just so long as they don’t have to answer the questions!

Not quite the caring bunch of folks we are lead to believe they are, it could be disastrous for the Village but the councils opinion seems to be….what the hell, as long as we don’t have to answer to residents!

So if your using this option as a weapon to defeat this blog, the only way you can win is to eliminate yourself, doesn’t make any sense at all, but that’s precisely why it has the parish council written all over it. They think it’s a good plan even though its ill conceived, not thought through and self-defeating.

Governance Review.

For the size of population Preston has, any petition to the East Riding Council for such a review would require a minimum of 250 signatures (Governance Review requirement) from registered electors of the parish, considering attendance at council meetings and general interest in council affairs the chances of getting that many residents to sign up for it are slim to zero, at least not without very active campaigning.

The positive impact (for the council) would be that the council would be able to say we have a process taking place and we can’t answer any questions yet, we must wait for the outcome, that would probably ensure they survive until any election and would be able to step down without answering anything, tactically it could work, morally it’s a travesty.

The serious part is that the council is prepared to go to all that trouble, spend boat loads of our money on the process and risk so much of residents wellbeing and Preston’s identity just to avoid answering a few basic questions from a resident, something’s definitely not right, red flags should be raised in all our minds! What the hell are these people trying to hide! Everything points to the fact that there is something we are not meant to know and the council will keep it to themselves at any cost, even if it costs Preston it’s identity or destroys the Village. If there is nothing to hide or fear, answer the questions! The alternative is that the council has a personal vendetta against an individual resident and are discriminating against that resident!

Even though the council used the word “Petition” we have so far interpreted this as a ‘Governance Review’ because of the councils range of options (abolition of a Parish Council requires a legal process to take place and the end position needs to be resolved) and the fact that the council would be required to submit to East Riding a valid “petition” from residents to trigger a review. If the council were to petition for a review East Riding would be required to carry out the review, once it’s in the hands of ER it should take about 6 months.

If this is the councils intention they need to obtain credible and accurate advice because we believe (again, we haven’t read the legislation for a long time) the review is under the jurisdiction of the “Boundaries Commission” and if the council make mistakes in the preparation and detail it could go disastrously wrong for Preston as a village, very easily.

If a governance review is petitioned for we would push very hard for Preston South boundary to be included and possibly transferred to Hedon.

Parish Petition.

If the council is referring to a simple “petition’ of residents, this can be done quite easily and simply, all you need is (if our memories serve us well) 10 signatures from registered electors of the parish and your away, any group of residents can request a petition of the parish, it doesn’t need to be connected to the parish council in any way but the council we believe will be responsible for picking up the tab, that’s why we haven’t done it but, that position is due for review in the near future.

This route is also not entirely without its pitfalls, at the time the petition is submitted it is required to have the question(s) on the petition and from that point it is taken out of the “petitioners” hands and is conducted by East Riding Council but the results of the petition are not legally binding on either East Riding or the Parish Council, any outcome that wasn’t overwhelming could be another total waste of our money.

The point in favour of a simple Parish Petition is that it would need one simple question, “Should Preston Parish Council be required to answer questions posed by ‘Mrs A Resident”, with a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer.

An overwhelmingly positive response would place the council in an impossible position and although there is no legal requirement for the council to comply with the outcome any parish council who chose to ignore such heavy opinion from their electorate would be foolish in the extreme.

We would be happy if the council decided to follow this route, we have already discussed the option at length some months ago and had one of our team prepare an action plan to campaign for a positive outcome so our team is ready and waiting to go at short notice!

Private Petition.

However, if the council are thinking of their own private little number independently of East Riding and putting it on their own web site (as they state) we would then seriously have to reconsider our own position and most likely petition east riding to conduct the process.

Until the questions of dishonesty are fully satisfied there can be no confidence in Preston Parish Council conducting such a poll in an unbiased and honest manner!

There is a 4^th alternative, which the parish council don’t appear to have considered but we have and we are prepared to start that process depending on the parish councils actions.

The councils poster is unclear and confusing to residents who are understandably unfamiliar with Local Government Administration. Instead of mentioning only the most complicated type of ‘petition’ the council should have taken the time to explain the ‘range’ of petitions available to residents in a much more ‘user friendly’ manner, it is much easier for residents to organise a ‘Parish Petition’, a relatively simple and more controllable solution to residents disenchantment with the parish council then to get involved in the complexities of a ‘Governance Review’.

In our view the council poster has given a ‘knee jerk’ reaction to the situation that hasn’t been thought through and that demonstrates the councils lack of commitment to residents.

If there are any residents with similar experience of the council do please contact us by comment or email. If you wish to remain anonymous please use our email facility, if you wish we will post on your experience without your identity being released, or not post anything if you simply want to share your experience it’s entirely up to you. We would love to hear your story, your not alone, there are a number of us, let us compare notes and grow as a group.

Parish Council Poster.

We would just like to repeat, this blog is not run by any one person, it has a number of residents as members and we work as a team, no single member has full control on what appears. If you wish to comment on anything on this blog you should either comment through the normal channel or email us direct, If you would like to join our group please email us, thank you.

3. Parish Council Poster.

The council poster has now appeared (21/08/13) and it starts off by saying “The following information is to help residents of Preston address the concerns raised in the anonymous poster, circulating in the parish, claiming dishonesty amongst parish councillors and that this should be addressed.” The parish council it would appear has abandoned any and all responsibility for dealing with anything and passed it all to residents, it lists all the steps (bar one) that have already been taken, the parish council is fully aware of that and are therefore intentionally trying to side step having to answer any of the issues raised.

We see no reason to alter the post below, which was prepared before the poster appeared.

During the Council Meeting (16/08/13) the council agreed to publish a prepared poster, because it hasn’t appeared yet its difficult to comment on it, but the Council Chairman did outline its content. It is to let people know that the council is there for them and they’re a caring bunch of folks who are approachable, if any residents have any concerns, complaints or queries they should contact the council who will deal with them in a caring manner. That’s essentially what the Chairman of the council said during the meeting, but it may change so we wait to see the final product.

Let us comment on what we understand at this point, the council is to let all residents (or as many as possible) know that they can take any query to the council and the council will respond efficiently, fully and in a caring manner. Presumably this actually excludes any difficult questions relating to issues on this blog? It also excludes any person suspected of being associated with this blog. There are many residents who over the years have written to the council and never received an acknowledgement or response, so presumably it also excludes those residents too. It would seem the target audience of the council’s poster is rapidly diminishing in this small community so it isn’t after all meant for all residents.

The council are there to represent all residents equally without favour or prejudice and they are legally required to not discriminate against any gender, sexual persuasion, ethnic group, political opinion or individual who may not necessarily agree with them. They are also required to be open and transparent, is that about to undergo a miraculous transformation too?

The council may use the ploy of stating that they are not required to answer questions that are from an anonymous source. All the questions on this blog have been asked by at least one resident. The council has those requests on file along with the address, phone number, email contact etc. If the council is turning over a new leaf and want to convince us all that it has changed, start by answering the questions from that resident.

If the council would like to respond to this blog we would be pleased to hear from them and their comments will be published in full unless they request anonymity or are abusive of course!

Conclusion, the poster is really quite worthless and is designed to enable the council to side step the issues and avoid any difficult questions, that makes no difference to us what so ever, we continue!

What we find appalling about the poster is that the council are basically saying “now’t to do wi’ us guv, must be them residents who’re responsible …let them do the answering!”

If there are any residents with similar experience of the council do please contact us by comment or email. If you wish to remain anonymous please use our email facility, if you wish we will post on your experience without your identity being released, or not post anything if you simply want to share your experience it’s entirely up to you. We would love to hear your story, your not alone, there are a number of us, let us compare notes and grow as a group.

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. 

Response to Preston Parish Council 2.

We would just like to repeat, this blog is not run by any one person, it has a number of residents as members and we work as a team, no single member has full control on what appears. If you wish to comment on anything on this blog you should either comment through the normal channel or email us direct, If you would like to join our group please email us, thank you.

2. Non Response of Preston Parish Council.

We had a postcard sized notice in the local post office advertising our blog so people could read it if they wished, it was half concealed among many others between the shopping shelves where relatively few people would have seen it. In their wisdom the council decided to demand the notice be removed, for whatever reason. Actually the poster is still in its original position so the council failed in their first objective, not a good start!

The council wanted to remove the poster because it allegedly had “untruths” in it. The alleged untruth was “There are calls for a petition to be presented to ERYC to settle the issue of dishonest Councillors”. There is absolutely nothing untruthful in that. If the phrase is so offensive to the council it should petition the Westminster Government to remove the same phrase from their web site (http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/52966) first and, stop bullying and intimidating a hardworking shopkeeper who is trying to earn an honest living simply to cover up their own misdeeds.

We’re sure such action would invite questions from the Government which the council cannot respond to without perjuring themselves, so the council certainly won’t take that step.

The action the parish council should take is join us in our call for an independent investigation and clear the matter up once and for all.

The council then post our details on the World Wide Web for the whole planet to read, along with local residents and our wider local community, thereby increasing the readers of our blog. Is anyone able to explain the logic in this because we fail to see any logic at all?

So far the council have,

1.Harrased a local business without good legal cause,

2. Demanded the removal of an inoffensive advert lawfully displayed,

3. Abdicated from dealing with the allegations themselves by putting a poster out that tells   residents how they should deal with the allegations and,

 4. advertised the people making the allegations on the internet.

In effect the council haven’t changed it's original policy of ignoring the allegations, they have abdicated from their responsibility and passed it to residents. While at the same time they have increased the number of people reading the allegations, which is the very outcome they apparently most wanted to avoid, the council should very seriously begin to question the validity and value of the advice they are being given.

The best advise the council could have been given would have been to talk to their detractors (whoever they may be) and come to some mutual agreement, thereby ending open hostility and protecting the council reputation, the poorest advise the council could be given would be, ignore your detractors for as long as possible and if that doesn’t work promote and advertise your detractors cause for them. Who gave them that advice?

The council’s overriding achievement by their action has been to fail in every objective that may have been set (if they had a devised strategy, we strongly suspect not) and promote the very thing they are so adamantly against and didn’t want people to read!

Could we suggest to the council that if they wish to make this blog disappear they are approaching it entirely the wrong way?

Have the council managed to ‘respond’ to this blog…    absolutely not!

Next Post. Parish Council Poster.

If there are any residents with similar experience of the council do please contact us by comment or email. If you wish we will post on your experience without your identity being released, or not post anything if you simply want to share your experience it’s entirely up to you. We would love to hear your story, your not alone, there are a number of us, let us compare notes and grow as a group.

Response to Keith Gilbys' Comment on HU12 Online.

We would just like to remind readers, this blog is not run by any one person, it has a number of residents as members and we work as a team, no single member has full control on what appears. If you wish to comment on anything on this blog you should either comment through the normal channel or email us direct, If you would like to join our group please email us, thank you.

Response to Keith Gilby’s Comment on HU12 Online.

Thank you so much for making your comment Keith, the reasons for our delight will be self evident but we would like to respond to some of the points Keith has mentioned.

There is welcome confirmation that our member has tried many times over the last couple of years to resolve the issues with the council. The council did offer to meet with our member we believe (without locating the letter from file) subject to ‘advice’. Our member was unable to respond to that offer in a speedy fashion due to a family bereavement and contacted the Council Vice Chairman to explain those reasons, the Vice Chairman asked for a letter detailing what the resident would settle for to end all issues. Our member at a time of some distress confirmed in writing he would end all enquiries with agreement on 3 minor issues that he was clearly open to giving ground on to end all issues with the council.

Our member received a reply from the council stating simply “the offer has been removed from the table”, it appeared to our member that the council was punishing and taking advantage of him at a time when he was considerably vulnerable, he decided then to fight back and push for settlement on all issues, which is where we are today.

We believe the majority in the council is controlled by a few councillors who are responsible for the mess we find ourselves in to today, they continue to control the council and nothing will change until ‘good’ councillors speak out and start to do what they were elected to do, that is change the attitude of the council and its method of operating making the council more accountable, open and transparent to residents.

If the council is acting in the manner it is due to ‘advice’ we strongly feel that advice should be seriously questioned and probed in order to establish if any current council members are connected to its advisors and influencing the quality of advice being given to the parish council.

Keith is quite right, there are important issues that need to be investigated and an open and inclusive council would not fear the outcome, they would indeed be working in the best interests of residents.

We do hope Keith is right and the new councillor is able to make a difference and bring some of the long overdue improvements to Preston. As for that councillor having tried to hold the Parish Council to account it is not at present our place to comment but maybe the new councillor might like to comment on this response.

If there are any residents with similar experience of the council do please contact us by comment or email. If you wish we will post on your experience without your identity being released, or not post anything if you simply want to share your experience it’s entirely up to you. We would love to hear your story, your not alone, there are a number of us, let us compare notes and grow as a group.

Recent Ex-Preston Parish Councillor Speaks Out.

We would just like to remind readers, this blog is not run by any one person, it has a number of residents as members and we work as a team, no single member has full control on what appears. If you wish to comment on anything on this blog you should either comment through the normal channel or email us direct. If you would like to join our group please email us, thank you.

Recent ex-parish councillor speaks out.

There has been a comment on HU12 Online from a recent ex-councillor (Keith Gilby) who knows the facts regarding the issues this blog tries to bring to the attention of residents.

We are extremely thankful to Keith for making his views known publically and hope other current councillors are able to show similar courage to Keith and speak out in the interests of Preston and a better future.

We have reproduced Keith’s comment here for our readers. If readers would like to locate his comment on HU12 Online please click the date along side his name and that will take you to it.

Keith Gilby  August 21, 2013 at 9:28 pm

I was a Parish Councillor for PPC for a year but had to resign because I work down south Monday to Friday so can’t attend PPC meetings. This resident has tried many times to resolve his issues with PPC over a period of over 2 years now. Whilst I was a councillor there was a minority of councillors who were willing to meet with this resident to try and resolve his issues but after seeking ‘advice’ rather than take the bolder step and confront his issues the majority chose by vote not to meet with him. A mistake as this festering sore is just going to grow bigger as I believe this resident will not go away. The more entrenched as a council they ignore him and hope he goes away, the more entrenched he will become as he ratchets up his campaign to be, well, just listened to.

I believe there are important issues that need to be investigated and an open an inclusive council would not nor should not fear the opportunity to have these issues looked into as at the very least the council would be shown as acting in the interests of its parishioners. However as a consequence of this wall of silence, we have a voice that shouts ever louder from a variety platforms including this board, his blog, twitter, an e-petition, posters in the Post Office, leaflets through doors – you get the idea. These reactions are not the consequence of well planned strategy to ‘deal’ with the problem are they?

Perhaps with the election of new Parish Councillor – somebody that had previously tried to hold PPC to account at a significant cost to the parish – there may be more of a willingness to move forward instead of being tied to the past of head in the sand. I hope so, but don’t hold your breath.

If there are any residents with similar experience of the council do please contact us by comment or email. If you wish to remain anonymous please use our email facility, if you wish we will post on your experience without your identity being released, or not post anything if you simply want to share your experience it’s entirely up to you. We would love to hear your story, your not alone, there are a number of us, let us compare notes and grow as a group.

1. Our response to Preston Parish Council.

We would just like to remind readers, this blog is not run by any one person, it has a number of residents as members and we work as a team, no single member has full control on what appears. If you wish to comment on anything on this blog please comment through the normal channel or email us direct, If you would like to join our group please email us we would be pleased to hear from you, thank you.

1. Our response to Preston Parish Council.

We have now received detailed information on what transpired during the council meeting held on Friday 16^th August 2013. This response is now complete so we will post it in full, however there are a few points to cover so we are posting it in sections, they are,

1.     Our response to Preston Parish Council.

2.     Non-Response of Preston Parish Council to this blog.

3.     Proposed Council Poster.

4.     Petition Proposed by Preston Parish Council.

5.     The 'Proper Channels'.

6.     Council Rage and Fury at This Blog.

7.     Our Offer To The Parish Council to Remove This Blog

Let us just reflect for a moment to gather our senses because there is no sense at all in the council’s actions over this blog, at least not if their objective is to make us go away. As part of their meeting on 16^th August the council was to consider a response to “Anonymous Allegations” on this blog. It turned out to be a bit of a damp squid but at least it’s from the council so we now have something to get our teeth into.

They’re agreed response was to not respond to us at all. The council is instead trying to exorcise us just as a priest would a house but someone appears to have advised them they can do it without visiting the house or using a holy man, holy water or bible! Who on earth is giving such appallingly bad advice to the parish council, the council blindly follow advice that damages their own position and supports our cause and increases our members and readers. For us to achieve that it would cost us a lot of money, thankfully we’re not paying for it the parish council are paying, sorry! residents are paying for it! Looks like another waste of public funds to us! Is there someone on the council who is closely connected to their external advisors?....we suspect so!

If the council makes such appallingly poor judgements over such a simple task as responding to a blog how are we expected to have faith in their judgment when it comes to looking after our money? Or taking any decision on our behalf for that matter, as a village we’re doomed to stumbling from cock-up to cock-up while the council is run by these so called  “community Leaders”, we are inclined to call the whole episode a joke, unfortunately the sheer incompetence of this council has cost residents far too much money for it to be a laughing matter!!

So what have they done? Well, at first they did their usual party trick by ignoring us for 6 or 7 months pretending we didn’t exist probably because they couldn’t figure out what to do about the blog, anyway we may have gone away under our own steam, that would save the council from having to make any decisions.

Eventually after 6 months or so of inaction the council reach the conclusion they must do something after all and set out to ‘respond’ to the blog. We don’t quite know what that phrase means to others but to us it means you will reply or interact in some way with your adversary, not to the council. They apparently want to interact with anyone except their adversary, this blog?

Next post:   Non-Response of Preston Parish Council to this blog.

If there are any residents with similar experience of the council do please contact us by comment or email. If you wish we will post on your experience without your identity been released, or not post anything if you simply want to share your experience it’s entirely up to you. We would love to hear your story, your not alone, there are a number of us, let us compare notes and grow as a group.