PRESTON PARISH MEETING 20 MAY 2015.

THE PARISH MEETING 20 MAY 2015.

What can I say, an unmitigated disaster, again! This has happened every year for at least the last decade!!  And each time the council regurgitate the usual excuse of ‘it was on the Notice Board so there’s nothing more we can do”.

I was unable to attend due to illness but I am reliably informed there was just 1 resident who attended, 2 councillors and parish clerk. The Parish Council won’t bat an eye at that or give it a second thought. The fact is this was the Annual Parish Meeting for residents and it’s the legal duty of the council to ensure it takes place within a specified period. I would have thought the council also had a responsibility to ensure its success but it would appear the council takes every possible step to ensure the meeting takes place in name only and beyond that it is totally ineffective!

The facts are that I pushed for the Parish Meeting to be planned for 6 months ahead of the date of the meeting and I was arguing that case from May 2014. I had 2 other councillors who were willing to join me in forming a committee with some residents and planning for the meeting and making arrangements to engage with residents to try and make the meeting a success. We had plans for Posters, leaflet drops and suggested agenda items, we planned to have hot and cold refreshments available, we were even prepared to cover the cost of promoting the meeting out of our own pockets, that’s how important we believed it to be.

 The council did as far as I recall agree to put plans in place to make the meeting a success, as is often the case the matter was never mentioned again and nothing was actioned, even though the whole council agreed to take it forward, following the meeting someone decided to bin it and as usual that was the end of it, its happened time after time!

There are some very important matters and issues not least of all financial issues that residents need to be aware of and need to have the opportunity to discuss and debate in public because the issues potentially effect every household in the village. It does appear the council or those few people controlling the council have no wish for residents to be aware of these issues and will take almost any steps to prevent engagement with residents.

There are lots of local issues that I would imagine are of interest to residents and issues they would like to see discussed at an official level and in cases action taken, they include, Cemetery, Play Park, Foot Paths, Traffic and Parking, Dog Fowling, Preston Playing Fields, Jubilee Trees, Emergency Plan, allotments etc. etc., the list just goes on.

It really is time residents had their say, there are just a couple of people who are denying all other residents the opportunity to have their say, that needs to change!

2ND RESPONSE TO KEITH G, HULL.

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.

HELLO AGAIN KEITH AND THANK YOU ONCE AGAIN FOR YOUR COMMENT.

Posted by Kenneth Lyons.

For me to do what I’m doing is really very easy because I’m telling the truth and that’s never a difficult thing to do and, it’s probably why there has been no challenge to what I say, the whole Council of May 2011, know it to be the truth. I would dearly love the Council or any Councillor to write and challenge what I say and enter into a debate.

If what I say is untrue and unfounded, don’t you think there would have been absolute fury from the council? It would have been covered everywhere possible, there would probably have been notices over the whole village, in the Council Notice Board, in the local press, announcements on HU12 Online and the local Facebook groups, it would have been everywhere!

Some Councillors have already implied that I lied to the Monitoring Officer and then they ran and hid behind the barricades of the Parish Council in their Flak Jackets for protection. Smugly citing they are Councillors and therefore unable to comment on such matters….total bloody hogwash!,

None of the Councillors I refer to have ever uttered a single word in public, it has always been behind the protection of the closed doors of the Council. If their statements are honest and truthful let them say so in public and say my statement was untruthful! By doing so it will allow me to defend myself and it will also unlock the full statements held by the Standards Committee at East Riding Council.

I can tell you, the council did discuss the matter ‘In-camera’ on 14^th November 2012 and, from the minutes of that meeting, I quote…

“………The Council was also made aware that letters from three Councillors had been sent to the Monitoring Officer at East Riding Council regarding SCAC/181/Bell/Preston. The Chairman advised that although a very serious matter it was not for this council to discuss as it was something that could only be dealt with by the Monitoring Officer”.

I would like to note that the Chairman didn’t say “serious allegation’ she said “serious matter”, the underlying implication in my opinion is that she is aware of the truth relating to the incident bearing in mind her witness statement to the Standards Committee.

Minutes confirm my assertion that 3 Councillors wrote to the Monitoring officer following the Standards Committee deliberation to protest at the flawed outcome. It is also my opinion that the statement is incomplete. It is my understanding that if the monitoring officer was to refer this matter to the Standards Committee and the deliberation went against the Councillors in question it would warrant a very serious sanction indeed. Maybe to the extent that those Councillors, if found guilty, may be found to be unfit to hold public office, if that were the case it is my understanding the matter would have to be referred to the High Court for a final ruling on their possible disqualification from holding public office and an election would then need to be called to fill the resulting vacancies. That would take it out of the hands of the Monitoring Officer.

For a Council to hold a meeting ‘In-camera’ it’s a privately held meeting that excludes any members of the public or press, it is there to be legitimately used to enable the Council to discuss issues in private. There are 3 categories that would justify such a meeting under the Public Bodies (Admission to meetings) Act 1960.

Holding a private meeting to enable the Council to have secret discussions away from the press and public and on matters that are in the public interest so as to allow Councillors to express their points of view secretly and probably to intimidate those Councillors who disagree with them to avoid public criticism or legal challenge is not one of them.

In my opinion the Parish Council has grossly abused the legal provisions, which enable ‘In-camera’ meetings, for the sole purpose of protecting a small number of Councillors.

Just so we understand and there is no confusion, something that affects the Parish Council and the residents who it represents, the Council have no legal right to discuss? Doesn’t make a great deal of sense does it?

Could it possibly be that the Parish Council doesn’t want to discuss the issue in public because that would not be in the interests of certain members of the Council.

According to the published Minutes, the Council were given “various options” by their external advisors ERNLLCA, the Council collectively chose to take the option that meant the Council didn’t have to comment and could therefore keep quiet about the whole incident and blame it on the Monitoring Officer, not entirely democratic!

If as the Council insists, only the Monitoring Officer is in a position to deal with the matter, the Council as a Corporate Body should contact the Monitoring Officer and demand that the issue is thoroughly investigated and resolved in order to prevent further damage to the Councils reputation. If the Monitoring Officer still refuses to investigate the matter the Council is able to appeal to the Local Government Ombudsman that should get a result.

My understanding is that the council has a legal right to discuss the issue in a public forum with participation from members of the public. What I can tell you is that there is certainly no legal provision that prevents the council form discussing this subject in public. In fact I will go so far as to say there is a legal provision that encourages a Local Authority to discuss this very subject in public and with public participation described as ‘Council Debate’ and ‘Public Utterances’ as a defence and rebuttal to allegations a Local Authority considers libellous. This defence is listed in an earlier Defamation Act, which the 2013 Act has not repealed.

A local Authority has no other means of defending itself against libel, for the Parish Council to suggest that has somehow been taken away from them is misleading. If they have received external advice as they claim surely one of the ‘various options’ was a listed defence against Defamation, the only one available to the Council?

I suspect the Parish Council is fully aware of that because it recently attempted to take some form of action against this Blog in order to prevent further posts, they found they are powerless, the only way the Parish Council can close this Blog is by resolving this issue. 

In my opinion it would appear the council is prepared to go to great lengths to keep this issue under wraps while at the same time making every effort to ensure that I do not have the opportunity to defend myself.

Just as a matter of fact, it seems the council gets most if not all of its external advice from ERNLLCA and according to the ERNLLCA Administrations Officer, Cllr. Clappison (who had been Chairman of the Parish Council up to the point of the incident) was elected Chairman of the Holderness District of ERNLLCA on 29^th June 2010. I am certainly not suggesting that would necessarily influence any advice given by ERNLLCA but it does raise an eyebrow or two.

Surely Cllr. Clappison should list that as an interest that should be declared in certain matters, this issue in my opinion being one of them. See how the names just keep on popping up in key places? It would appear we just can’t escape coming across one of those 4 names whichever avenue we take.

In your last point you mention the damage to the council and the need for it to be resolved, I am in total agreement with you. I contacted the Council Chairman privately quite some time ago seeking to find a resolution, I was at that time prepared to accept from the Council an assurance that such behaviour will never be repeated and neither I nor any other resident would be subjected to such behaviour. There has never been any acknowledgement or response to that letter. I remain willing to discuss the matter with the Council Chairman at any time. My willingness to meet the Council Chairman to try and resolve the issue has not changed for almost 3 years.

I do hope this answers you comment Keith, my apologies if in parts I sound passionate.

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.

Council achievements 1997 - 2011.

Council achievements 1997-2011.

Written for the Blog by a Preston resident.

If I could, as promised, give an update to my response to AT yesterday.

I wrote to the Parish Council on 12^th November 2010 asking the council to outline all the things they had achieved for Preston in the 13 years they had been in charge. I had also suggested that many good business and professional people in Preston don’t put themselves up for election to the council because they are unable to work with existing councillors.

Three months later (08/02/11) the Preston Parish Council Chairman responded, informing me that the council considered that some of the best business and professional people in Preston were already on the council, themselves! In taking 3 months to respond they had ample time to build a portfolio of their achievements for Preston and it’s residents but they could only come up with a couple of items, they had planted some bulbs in the grass verges near Preston signs, planted some trees (numbers not specified, so it will be very few) and in recent years they had acquired and developed a plot of land into an amenity area at the junction of Pinfold Court.

This plot of land was the public toilet that had to be demolished because of drug taking, I understand, it was then grassed over.

What on earth were these people doing for 13 years!!

Below I reproduce a sizable extract of my response to those achievements, I obviously wasn't happy,

‘I agree there has in the past been an insufficient number of candidates for the returning officer to call an election. I am however aware of good people who have joined Preston Parish Council and left soon after because existing councillors are seen as inept and difficult to work alongside. The current Preston Parish Council is the major cause of lack of progress in Preston and nothing will be achieved whilst the current council sits. The ineptitude of the current council is well established in the village and my contact with neighbouring parish councils confirms there is no good opinion of Preston Parish Council, you may consider that it is only me who holds those views, you are wrong but far too insular to be aware of any outside views!

In your letter you say ‘one may ask why have the many talented business and professional people in our immediate community not put themselves forward for election when the opportunity has arisen’ (I refer you to the above Para.), you then state ‘some members of the council would say they did’.  We have in my judgement already established that the current council suffer from a collective delusion of grandeur and I think that statement may well be another symptom of that condition.

If I might take you back to the 2007 election when 8 councillors stood for election. Preston has a parish council of 13 members, where were the other 5 councillors and more to the point, who where they (this information is easily available). I suggest they stood down before the election to ensure the remainder were ‘elected’, a number of them may well have then been co-opted back onto the council.

I also note councillor **********’ comment on her nomination form, which was, ‘Committed to improving the local community’. Of all the council meetings I have been to I have never seen or heard councillor ********** propose any measure that may have the benefit of improving the local community, although I have seen her nod her head in the right places and at the right time in approval of whatever the council leadership propose on many occasions. You have a number of other councillors who I have never heard utter a single word during any council meetings and my question must be ‘what are these people doing on the council, they have nothing to contribute so why are they on the council?....I can only suggest they are not there for the good of Preston, so they must by definition be on the council for their own purposes, although they do invariably cast their vote in favour of the council leadership, it may be that’s their worth?, other members rarely turn up and are therefore irrelevant to this discussion.

This position effectively gives us a parish council consisting of approximately 3 active members who are prepared to collude in order to achieve a minority decision which they know the majority of councillors will go along with simply for a quite life and with that those few councillors have created havoc, distrust, animosity and suspicion among the population it is meant to serve and do good works for. If you would like a definition of failure, you have just been given it!

In your last Para. of page 1 you proudly boast that you have planted some bulbs in verges near Preston signs and planted some trees and in recent years you have developed a small plot of land as an amenity area at the junction of Pinfold Court, this I presume is the small plot of land that has not been kept in a reasonable condition and is therefore of no use as an amenity area. Other parish councils have a Register of Assets, Preston Council it would seem may well have a Register of Dereliction as all sites that have this councils name on it are all in a state of dereliction and disrepair!  (this referred to the village hall, Preston playing fields pavilion and the hall in South Preston which was also virtually derelict  at the time)

Let me try to put your poultry achievements into prospective. There are 13 councillors who sit for a term of 4 years, this gives us a period of 52 man years and in that time you can only point to a few daffodil bulbs, a couple of trees and a derelict plot of land the size of a postage stamp! Every last one of you should hang your heads in shame and step aside in favour of people who are capable of actually getting things done. If we take this argument a step further you as a council have had an unopposed 4 terms of office which amounts to 208 man years, do you not think its time you accepted your inability to achieve anything and step down with just a little dignity rather than be sacked by the electors of Preston!

In response to Para. 1 Page 2, as I have said previously, I shall take whatever action I feel appropriate in my own time and at a time of my choosing. This will not be before May 5^th when I would hope to see a council installed worthy of its name.

Page 2, Para. 2, members of the public attending council meetings have been repeatedly told over many months that due to legal restrictions under charity law you are unable to use part of the hall as council office accommodation. Now that has been proven to be a lie you suddenly change to it being the churches fault due to restrictions in the lease. You currently ‘sub-let’ part of the hall to the allotment group because you charge them rent, I also understand you pay no or very little rates because you are a charity, yet you allow commercial activity within the hall which breaches the concession on rates. Let us not pretend you are all upstanding citizens who follow the law to the letter and spirit, you as a council bend and interpret the law as it best suites your purpose and I sincerely hope those breaches will come to light in the very near future and when that happens you may well be called to account. I take the view that the first action of any future council must be to carryout a full, thorough and independent audit of all areas of council activity over the last number of years and make people accountable at last! I would be quite happy to write and carry out such an audit and report accordingly’.

After such a long time in control of Preston Parish Council they had very little (well, nothing actually) to show for their time in office, these councillors have never been interested in Preston or it’s residents. Their time and interest was spent wasting precept money which amounted to many thousands of pounds on getting a new Community Hall which was clearly way beyond their abilities and as it turned out that was fortunate because it would have put Preston into debt for years to come. It would be worthwhile to point out that in connection with the New Community Hall that had been actively pushed forward by these people for at least 7 years, including applying for planning permission, yet there is not one single document or email that gives any mention to anything connected to that same project!

The big question is, what did the council do for at least 13 years, there’s no evidence they ever did anything! They certainly didn’t work hard on behalf of residents or Preston because if they had there would surely be more to show for their efforts?

The new council since May 2011 have simply continued in the same vein following the advice or instructions of the old crew. After 2 years of no progress it is beginning to look as though we shall reach the end of their term with very little, if anything to show for their time in office. If that becomes the case they will have let Preston down and they will have let residents down.

The major Problem in Preston is the longer serving councillors who had done so little in 13 years still want to continue that tradition and run the council for their own benefit and no-one is doing anything about it.

With regard to being told by the Chairman that there were legal restrictions preventing the council giving information  about the New Community Hall to residents or members of the public I requested information relating to those legal restrictions (Oct. 2010) they have never responded to that request, I include the request below (Item 1).

Preston Parish Council                                                                                               

                                                                                                14/10/2010

Freedom of Information Request

Dear ************

Could you please make the following information available to me.

1. During the Parish Council Meeting of 13/10/2010 ****** ********* repeatedly asserted that he could not discuss the Community Hall due to legal restrictions. Could you forward information of the legislation that ******* ********* was referring to? Could you also supply information regarding any legislation that inhibits the ability of elected council officials to discuss council business with residents.
   
   
2. Could I have relevant information relating to the cost of obtaining the lease on the village hall. Also all relevant information as to why the cost was so much higher than originally anticipated. How many times was paperwork issued to the council by the churches solicitors for completion.
   
   
3. Could you forward all information relating to the obtaining of plans for the new village hall, including all associated costs for architects drawings and taking the plans through planning permission.
   
   
   

There may be costs associated with the above that I am not aware of therefore could you please include all relevant costs.

Yours sincerely

*** *****

The ‘core group of councillors’ that I frequently refer to, in their time in office have taken Preston from a busy community with an active and occupied Sports Pavilion, to a village almost full of derelict sites and a community that has given up on trying to make any difference because of bullying tactics by the council.

Those councillors only interest is in their own agenda, which has nothing at all to do with helping Preston or it’s residents.

Why would they allow such dereliction to develop in Preston, we shall cover that in a later post.

The question I can’t answer is ‘Why on earth have new councillors allowed it to continue?’

Council Intransigence

COUNCIL INTRANSIGENCE

Written for the Blog by a Preston resident

I was recently asked in a comment why I hadn’t resolved my issues with the parish council before now.

I have approached the council on a number of occasions looking for a resolution to the issues, the more notable are, on 14/10/10 very near the start of these difficulties, I wrote to the council,

‘The entire difficulty surrounds the lack of consultation and the withholding of information. This position in my humble opinion is due to the activities of a few councillors who are operating their own agenda from within the council chamber. A bullying tactic is being employed to silence requests for information that as a parish resident I am fully entitled to request and have access to…….’

‘Should the council continue to withhold information and resist disclosure there will be a prolonged period of friction and distrust between residents and the Parish Council, this is certainly not in the best interests of our Parish…….’

It was very clear to me that without some sort of discussion and resolution between council and residents the situation could only deteriorate and create bitterness and ongoing conflict. In my opinion all efforts from both sides should have been applied to end the difference in views and reach a consensus that was acceptable to both parties.

Because one of the main stumbling blocks to agreement was the lack of consultation on the project of a new community hall, I offered to conduct a village wide consultation (obviously without charge) to gain verifiable and documented views and opinions on the subject.  Although I was promised that the proposition would be put before council for consideration and a decision, that was never done and we heard no more about it.

The council was very clearly unwilling to engage and work with residents to resolve the issues and have a documented account of the views of residents relating to the community hall despite concerns relating to potential cost and long term debt to the village, which would have affected all residents of Preston probably for a couple of generations. These very legitimate concerns were clearly of no interest to the council and the opportunity of hearing the views of residents on the subject was dismissed out of hand, it wasn’t even worthy of consideration by the council.

Due to the intransigence of the council the situation did indeed deteriorate and to this date there has been no dialog or resolution.

We did have great expectations of the new administration following the Local Elections of May 2011. I wrote to the Parish council on 12/05/11 following the inaugural council meeting of the new term. In my opinion this was an ideal opportunity to take a fresh look at the issues, resolve them and finally put and end to them. In my letter I wrote, after suitably congratulating new councillors on their election success and the new chairman on her success I wrote,

‘I would very much like to put the difficulties of the past few months behind us and support the new council in moving forward. In order to do that there are a couple of outstanding issues which in my view need to be addressed, these are;’

I listed the outstanding items, the main one of which was the withholding of information on which I would have been happy to accept the councils assurance that measures would be put into place that ensured such a position would not reoccur in the future, I wrote,

‘I do hope the above issues can be resolved in a business like manner, leaving the road ahead clear and void of unpleasant issues’

The response from the council was one of continuing the policy of the previous administration and continuing the conflict. They had clearly discussed the matter with the old councillor’s and agreed to simply continue their position of dismissing our concerns out of hand without balancing that opinion with those of residents, our positions had once again been set by the council.

There has been two occasions where I have seriously considered taking legal action against the council and legal advice was sought. I eventually came to the conclusion that it would not be overly productive of me to spend money on taking the council to task along a legal route.

I further wrote to the Parish Council on 27/06/2011, ‘I had sincerely hoped that the conflict with the out-going administration would end when a new and more open administration was installed, further, I have no wish to be involved in an on-going dispute with the Parish Council’

The council did offer to meet and try to resolve the issues if possible, due to a family bereavement I was not able to respond speedily as other personal items had priority at that time.

On beginning to recover from that sad event I wrote to the Vice Chairman and asked if I could accept the offer and gave a short list, I believe of three items that I was particularly looking forward to resolving and the whole thing could then be ended.

The council’s response was that the offer had been unilaterally removed from the table by the council, without any notification and would not discuss any issues, we were back to square one with the council continuing their attempts at bullying and intimidation.

I have tried to resolve the issues from the very beginning but the council simply continue to employ a tactic of intimidation and bullying to silence any descent, I simply will not bow to such tactics and so we are still in the same position that we were in October of 2010, I find that to be sad and unhelpful.

So why do I continue to pressure the council on the same old subjects?

The previous administration was controlled and run by three or four councillors who dictated policy through assisted by the co-option of councillors that were openly willing to support their actions without question in return for being left to do ‘their own thing’, this arrangement worked very well for at least 13 years. Though it never worked very well for the interests of Preston residents.

It is well documented that the council has literally wasted many, many thousands of pounds of residents money with absolutely no return or benefit to the residents of Preston.

The controlling councillors from the previous administration are still in place and at some point will once again take the reigns, this is a worrying prospect and should be of concern to all Preston residents.

Not only was a great deal of money wasted but those same councillors display no regard for the laws that govern our local councils and to this day continue with that attitude.

How long will I continue to oppose them? For as long as it takes to get a fair and equitable resolution.

Although some residents have given up, quite understandably in my opinion, I shall not!

Someone has to oppose them. 

I meant to include an extract from a letter sent to a senior council member on 29/06/2012, from which there has never been a response, the member involved will recognise it I'm sure.

'Finally, if at any time you wish to explore the grounds for ending this impasse in confidence I will give you my absolute assurance of confidentiality' 

Illegal Councillor

ILLEGAL COUNCILLOR

Written for the Blog by a Preston Resident.

ILLEGAL COUNCILLOR

We've just had a comment from a person who lives in Preston saying he/she has heard the council have an illegal councillor sitting with them, I said I would post this reply as a Blog.

We believe they have, the councillor was co-opted during the October 2012 meeting, the council didn't give the required legal minimum of 3 clear days notice, they only gave 2 days notice.

We know this because we are aware that the council posts the notice for the coming council meeting, normally on a Saturday morning between about 0830am to 10am, because of the legal definition of the 'clear 3 days notice' the day the notice is posted (Saturday), Sunday and the day of the meeting (Wednesday) cannot be counted when calculating 3 clear days, that only leaves Monday and Tuesday, 2 clear days notice. Can we prove it, yes I think we can with photographic evidence, we have been watching them post their notices for a while. We weren't prepared to rely on their honesty, it's a shameful situation I agree.

If a council meeting with less than the required minimum notice is illegal you can't conduct any council business and therefore a person co-opted at such a meeting is not actually legally appointed and is therefore not a councillor.

If there is anyone out there who is qualified to confirm or contradict this please contact us, we will be pleased to hear from you.

Although we have informed the council of this they simply steam ahead without any comment, possibly they know we are unlikely to take legal action because of the cost so they are safe, thats our democracy I guess.

Hope that answers you Preston resident and thank you for viewing.

Comment Reply

Comment Reply

Written for the Blog by a Preston resident.

Hi Steve,

Hedon.

Thanks for your comment, as I said in my quick reply to your comment, they have done that and I can’t see how they wouldn’t know those minutes existed, after all they are the council and they write the minutes and approve them during council meetings. To have these planning applications at the cost they were you would imagine the council would remember it because it’s an event in every twenty years or more so quite memorable and some of our councillors have been there since before 1999, we need replacements.

I have written to the council and outlined that I was informed there were no minutes in existence for the two matters also where, when and by whom I was told on more than one occasion, the council has never corrected that. On the information I had and what I considered to be ‘safe’ and credible information, direct from the council, I proceeded as I did telling the council that I believed given that information someone had made that decision in their front room and acted illegally.

My question is this, why on earth didn’t the council just say ‘sorry there’s been a mix up the minutes do exist so we can clear this matter up quickly’, for them to continue it for 2 years  and belittle me because I’m writing to them is unforgivable, will I get an apology?..Mmmm…….don’t hold your breath! It may be it was good fodder to use in justifying my isolation by the council to prevent me challenging them…but I don’t want to get paranoid.

This is one of the items listed as ‘contents of a residents continuing letters’ that the council have had quite a lot of ‘In camera’ meetings to discuss. I find it almost impossible to believe they did all that so many times, knowing their actions to be wrong.

I have in the past proposed to the new councillors that they may be getting misled by longer standing councillors who are clearly not happy with the intrusion they are having to suffer (New Councillors), someone isn’t telling them the truth or each and every councillor is in on the deception, they can’t have it both ways. I’m afraid I simply do not trust any of them anymore and will not until someone gets a grip of them and gets to the bottom of it!

I didn’t know those minutes existed until a few days ago (10/01/2013) when I received them from the council.

I was at the point of considering a complaint to the Audit Commission on the information that I had and the fact that it was impossible to resolve the issue because of the councils intransigence. Fortunately I chose to confirm their non-existence as a final check before making a decision, so that I had the information in writing, good job I did!

Can we believe anything the council tell us when they are prepared to go to these lengths just to put a resident in his place and shut him up, I don’t think I can at the moment.

Unfortunately you can’t sack Parish Councillors, they can be disqualified from office for certain reasons but the final step to achieving that would most likely be a Court Order.

Basically were stuck until 2015.

Hope this answers you Steve, sorry its long but I can’t cover this in 3 or 4 words.

PPCP

My Identitiy

MY IDENTITY

Written for the blog by aresident of Preston.

Today I was asked if I had set up this blog by a person from a certain group, no I did not set up this Blog, other people are part of the effort, I do not have overall control, though I have stipulated that nothing can be attributed to me without my express permission. I am simply a contributor and was asked to do so before the Blog came about. I am more than happy to contribute for obvious reasons, I am not happy with Preston Parish Council, along with many other people (for different reasons) in Preston but it appears that I am currently alone in so far as I am the only person prepared to put my head above the parapet, this I would hope may change in the future as the effort grows and widens. That will be measured against aims and objectives that have already been set, leading up to 2015.

There is one circumstance where I have full and absolute control. My agreement specifically states that ‘Should I as the main contributor and whilst that position remains, withdraw from contributing to the Blog, this Blog shall cease and all trace must be removed from the web to my satisfaction.’  This will leave a group of people to decide whether or not to continue, ‘should they chose to do so, they must open another Blog not using the same name as this one nor using previous contributions posted in this Blog by me’. I have also agreed circumstances which would justify my withdrawing support with immediate effect and that has been agreed by all parties.

Anyone who knows my history with Preston Parish Council, particularly on two issues will have absolutely no doubt of my identity because I contribute in the ‘first person’, had I wished to conceal my identity I would have written in the ‘third person’, though its practicality in this circumstance is questionable. People who would not be able to identify me from my contributions are people who are probably not from Preston, not on Preston Parish Council and not related to or friends of Preston Parish Councillors, or friends of friends etc.

To date I have not named any person or councillor out of respect for their privacy (I have no personal axe to grind) and whilst I accord you that privacy I shall give that same privacy to myself. As I write this posting I do not have any intentions of putting names to any future contributions, though I am prepared to reconsider that position under certain circumstances which have been pre-determined and possibly on an ‘item by item’ basis.

I am reasonably aware of a local authorities restricted legal ability to defend itself against libel or defamation though that is not a leverage I would personally feel comfortable using in a public arena, it’s a question of consideration and fairness and an individuals own sense of honour. Notwithstanding that, without a resolution with the council on the issue of dishonest councillors, I shall review that position when on the subject of dishonest councillors, who I believe should be named and shamed even though I would find it a difficult step to take on a personal level. I shall also vigorously pursue that matter until there is a resolution.

I can give an absolute assurance to any reader of my contributions that I shall not submit any contribution that I do not believe to be truthful and accurate. I will never embellish any article to make any situation or person look worse or better than it is, including myself. As mentioned in a previous posting I have committed to publishing letters that I sent to the council during 2010, if I misrepresent them to my benefit I’m sure the council will soon correct me. 

I attach only one caveat, I make every effort to be well informed on council procedure and laws that govern Local Authority Administration, that does not make me an expert and I am not a Parish Clerk so I’m sure there will be times when my interpretation is inaccurate. Where this occurs I shall endeavour to make every effort to correct it as soon as possible.

I have also been asked why I have taken this step and not settled my differences with the Parish Council before now? I shall hopefully answer that question in the next few days.

Letter to Ward Councillors

LETTER TO WARD COUNCILLORS.

 

Written for the blog by a Preston resident

I have recently sent a letter to two of our Ward Councillors (30/12/12) so that I can be sure they are aware of the current situation with Preston Parish Council.

I reproduce the text here, as I am sure there is bound to be some people who comment on its content inaccurately. I have redacted the document to remove personal identity, this may change in the future depending on Legal advice, which is currently being sought.

When referring to the incident, which I shall cover in much greater detail in the near future, I am I believe, understandably angry that no less than four Preston Parish Councillors are prepared to lie ‘in concert’ in order to simply avoid a colleague from having to give a minor apology to a resident.

In my correspondence to Ward Councillors I refer to a letter sent to Preston Parish Council on 25^th September following the Standards Committee hearing into my complaint, because it has been referred to I also include that letter in this posting. The letter incidentally has never been acknowledged or replied to as far as I can recall, not unusual at all.

My letters to Ward Councillors have both been answered.

Ward Councillors                                                                                                                

South West Holderness                                                                                                                          

East Riding of Yorkshire Council                                                  

30/12/12

Dear Councillor

Re: Preston Parish Council.

I do not profess to be an authority on Local Government Administration. Though I have had some dealings with Preston Parish Council over the last three years, my relationship with the council has always been acrimonious, that experience has shaped my impression and opinion of how our Local Government operates. Needles to say, in line with the vast majority of the public, my opinions of local government and democracy are not very high.

I am sure Preston Parish Council will tell you that I am a rude trouble maker who habitually writes letters of complaint, that smokescreen seems to serve them well and appears to prevent outside people from looking further into the dispute between us.

My current anger centers around an investigation by the Standards Committee into a complaint I made against Cllr. ****of Preston Parish Council, that was concluded on 25^th September 2012. During that investigation four Preston Councillors, ****. ******, ******and ******knowingly submitted false witness statements intended to mislead the Standards Committee, their statements were accepted without much scrutiny despite rather lengthy protestations from myself. If longstanding Parish Councillors have no respect for an official investigation by the Standards Committee they cannot have any respect for other democratic processes or laws governing our local democracy and if East Riding Council so readily accept such dishonesty from Parish Councillors, the Standards Committee is defunct and it shapes the publics perception of local politics as corrupt.

The statements given by the above councillors are all so precisely similar in content and yet so far removed from reality, the chances of them being truthful is miniscule. Statistically, the only possible way for those statements to all have the same components and elements yet diverge so far from reality, by people who were the instigators of the incident and involved directly, can only be achieved by careful consideration and collusion by the above councillors. All the published statements are so far from the truth of the event that not one accurate element is contained within any of them.

I am aware that a number of councillors who were concerned at this level of dishonesty within Preston Parish Council wrote to the Monitoring Officer who remains adamant the he will not look into the allegations further. The councillors who wrote to Mr. ******* include, Cllr. *****, *******and *******.

Those dishonest councillors are now emboldened to progress their bullying and intimidation of members of the public. I always occupy the same seat during council meetings near to the front table because I have a hearing problem and that seating position gives me the best chance of hearing what transpires. As far as I am aware I have only informed East Riding Council of my level of hearing loss and offered to forward relevant Audiograms, if as stated East Riding Council are to take no further action there is no necessity to forward that personal medical information to an outside third party. I did specifically request that East Riding should not give my personal medical information to any third party.

Unfortunately it would appear that East Riding have given that personal information to Preston Parish Council because Cllr. ****and ******* now take up their seating positions as they were on 11^th May 2011, alongside where I normally sit, giving very audible comments such as ‘you’ll have to speak up, I’m as deaf as a post’. I know from their looks that those comments are entirely for my benefit and amount to intimidation of a member of the public. It also serves the purpose of letting other councillors know that it would be unwise to act against them or pursue alternative views to theirs because they are now untouchable and enjoy the backing of East Riding Council.

Following the Standards Committee decision on 25^th September 2012, I wrote to the Parish Council and began the letter by saying ‘I would imagine that at this point councillors are congratulating themselves and patting each other on the back on achieving the outcome they have. It is however, a worthwhile exercise to examine how that was achieved and the methods used’, we now have Cllr. ******* pointedly patting ***self on the back clearly to let me know that they are untouchable and neither I nor anyone else can do anything about it, again its intimidation, and they now enjoy the approval and support of East Riding Council and that gives then a certain level of impunity.

Preston Parish Council pay scant regard to the laws that govern our Local Authorities, as if they are somehow exempt from such ties and inconveniences, an example is,

Preston Parish Council often give just 2 clear days notice of council meetings when the legal requirement is a minimum of 3 clear days notice, without that notice the Parish Council has no legal authority to convene a council meeting or to conduct any business on behalf of the council or parish. During a Council Meeting (October 2012) where the council had failed to give a minimum notice of 3 clear days the council co-opted a new member with no legal authority to do so.

Consequently we now effectively have a member of the public sitting in council, taking part in council discussions and voting on items of agenda that affects the Parish and its residents, which could make all subsequent council meetings challengeable! How can members of the public be expected to have confidence in local government if this is the standard of behaviour? Procedural control during council meetings is almost non-existent with the Parish Clerk often running meetings and advising councillors how best to vote, it is almost becoming a matter of course that Councillors spouses contribute to council discussions and that must affect the outcomes! It would appear the whole Parish Council process is becoming laughable.

Preston Parish Council have in recent years wasted many, many thousands of pounds of tax payers money, that wastage is well documented and easily verified and the council seems to consider that to be of no importance but I’m sure residents of Preston will not agree with them when they have the relevant information.

Preston Parish Council is in my view poorly managed, lacking in transparency, failing to engage with residents, manage public funds in a cavalier manner and disregard legal requirements when it suites them. These are all symptoms of a failing council with little to show in the way of leadership and the situation will only worsen with the passing of time. The Parish Council have now resorted to barring me from being able to contact them by email, I can only contact them by letter apparently, my reading is that this comes under the heading of discrimination against an individual member of the public by a Local Authority, all because they find it difficult to answer questions that are put to them.

On the good side, for the first time since the mid 1990’s Preston has had the benefit of residents being involved in a village project, namely the management of our Community Hall and their achievements have been exemplary with an outstanding improvement and refurbishment of the Hall, which is a credit to all who have been involved. This result surely demonstrates that residents are the power behind such projects not councils or councillors who merely act as ‘facilitators’ by handing the project to residents, councils cannot achieve such results on their own.

Finally, I have taken this step of writing to you so that at some point in the future I can say with confidence ‘I did inform Ward Councillors’ when asked, as I do not intend to let matters rest here.

Yours sincerely

*** *****

Preston Parish Council                                                                                                ***********

1 Grassam Close                                                                                                            ***********

Preston                                                                                                                        Preston

HU12 8XF                                                                                                            HU12 ***

                                                                                                                        25/09/12

Dear Councillor

Re. ************************.

I would imagine that at this point councillors are congratulating themselves and patting each other on the back on achieving the outcome they have. It is however, a worthwhile exercise to examine how that was achieved and the methods used.

All councillors were at the inaugural council meeting on May 11^th 2011 and are fully aware of what transpired during that meeting and the incident to which my complaint related. I would also suggest that before councillors congratulate themselves too much, you should examine your consciences and, ask if you have done anything honourable or right in relation to this matter, I would strongly suggest you have not.

At the time of the incident as you are all aware, I was responding to the Chairman’s comment on the Audit Report recently carried out on the council, at no time did I make any comment towards Cllr. **** before his outburst, my only comments toward Cllr. **** were in my defence during his outburst.

Three councillors, ***********, *******and *******did respond with honest recollections and were impartial in their statements, I would not ask for more, thank you for your honesty.

Quotes from 3 witness statements submitted to and reproduced to me by the Standards Committee from Cllrs. *******, *******and *******, whose statements were unsurprisingly all in line with each other and clearly demonstrate how the outcome was achieved, some of those comments were as follows;

 

It is not Cllr. ***** nature to be forceful or aggressive’ (Cllr. *******)

 

‘ Mr ***** made derogatory and aggressive comments to Cllr. **** who was sat with his back to Mr *****. 

 

‘Cllr. **** did not turn to face Mr **** but spoke to him quietly over his shoulder’,

 

Councillor ******* went so far as to deny having to calm Cllr. **** down and stated that ‘I did not get the impression that Councillor **** was aggressive in any way’ This statement is disgraceful because Cllr. *******, as you all know, did calm Cllr. **** down and whilst gently turning him back towards the table said ‘its not worth it *****

Every last one of those statements is a travesty of the truth, the authors are fully aware of that fact as is the whole council, there is more from these councillor’s but I shall restrict myself to the above four quotes, they are sufficient to shame the council.

I am particularly appalled at Cllr. ******* who was sat next to Councillor **** so she knows exactly what happened and how the incident played out. She appears to be the ‘chief witness’ to the incident and for her to display this level of dishonesty is truly reprehensible and difficult to comprehend, especially to the Standards Committee investigating officer, councillors clearly have no respect for any of our democratic institutions?

Suffice it to say, witnesses stated that I was the aggressive instigator who is frequently abusive and disruptive during council meetings, you should all hang your heads in shame, councillors are supposed to be trustworthy, honest and upstanding citizens of a community. That is clearly not the case with Preston Parish Councillor’s but we have known that for a number of years and it was naive of me to expect an honest response from Councillors.

Cllr. ***** statement of course denied ever saying anything untoward and in fact he denied ever turning round to face me, he dealt with my alleged abusive and aggressive comments towards him quite calmly, softly and over his shoulder. Anyone who was there will recognise this to be pure fantasy, Councillor **** is clearly incapable of taking responsibility for his actions.

Cllr. *** did however state that he was responding to my letter to the council of January 2011 when I accused the council of Lying to the public gallery (on a particular issue). He had ample opportunity to challenge me in the intervening four months prior to his outburst, not only during council meetings but also on the streets of Preston, during that period of time he and I had been stood alongside each other in Johnsons Hardware Store but there was no challenge from Cllr. ****, so why choose that particular meeting four months after the event?

I would suggest these councillors statements have confirmed my judgement of January 2011 to be absolutely accurate and correct, these councillors are dishonest and have unequivocally proven the point with their dishonest responses to the Standards Committee. They have clearly shown themselves not to be trustworthy or honest members of our community and they clearly cannot be trusted to represent residents of Preston. The Council Chairman and Vice Chairman’s views which supported my complaint was of no consequence in the face of such orchestrated dishonesty.

This level of dishonesty and deception from councillors has been a mainstay of my and other residents lack of faith in and opposition to our elected officials for some time and, that is why we would wish to make the council more open and accountable, this result spurs me on with renewed vigour and determination. Councillor’s dishonesty in their recollections demonstrates their utter contempt for our democratic institutions, they consider themselves to be above the law and immune from sanction.

An equal number of councillors chose not to respond to the Standards Committee, in doing so those councillors in my view, approve of and support those dishonest statements, they should be ashamed at their lack of response and should ask themselves if they are in fact suitable to be councillors. It is the lack of response from those councillors and their unwillingness to give an honest account of the incident that allowed 4 dishonest councillors to prevail.

There is something very rotten within Preston Parish Council and it appears that new councillors are either incapable or unwilling to deal with it and therefore have now become part of the problem.

The council through their actions on this matter have nothing to celebrate and certainly have nothing to be proud of, on the contrary, the council, as a corporate body should be ashamed to be associated with and to be supporting such dishonesty in public office.

I do not consider ERYC to have been impartial, fair or equitable in their deliberations or conclusions and have clearly failed to adequately and diligently investigate the incident. Consequently ERYC have not, in my opinion, discharged their obligations under statutory provisions in an appropriate manner, I shall now be seeking redress from the Local Government Ombudsman with regard to ERYC and this matter. Unfortunately I may have to go through ERYC complaints procedure as a first step and that has already been actioned.

Yours sincerely

*** *****

CC. All councillors