Catch the Rabbit

[fred c]

"The Mob" both those on the floor of the council chamber & those in the public seats have tried the "Bully Boy" tactics on numerous occasions & on numerous members of the public, they have at times been vitriolic in their treatment of members of the public.

This behaviour is in part because The Standards Board, like the Register of Interests is a completely toothless entity, that situation enables some councillors to say things to people in council meetings that would not be tolerated outside of the civic.

Any councillor who does not support wholeheartedly & unequivically an Inquiry into the goings on within HBC should seriously question their reasons for standing for public office............ More importantly the ratepayers of Hartlepool should question the motives of any councillor that doesn`t hold those views.

[steveL]

...and there, in a nutshell, is the absurdity of the present situation. We have a cultural problem here with some councillors seeing no need whatsoever to be open and transparent about their connections. To use that well used phrase 'they just don't get it.'

The entries by the two ABs display a dismissive attitude to the whole process and as for Angie - she surely is taking the p**s.

[mk1]

as for Angie - she surely is taking the p**s.

...and everything else not nailed down.
The Wilcox brood, a plague of locusts.

Good to see the f**ty Belchers back  posturing in the Mail over the weekend.
Someone donates to charity and the 2 chubbies  are there to claim all the credit.
If they really cared about 'charidee' why not just  give one of their (many) allowances away?
Or better still a small donation from the wedge one got because someone was nasty to him work.

[fred c]

Unless the staffing list of Manor Residents is out of date, there are 3 other Harrimans that appear to be working there.

It makes a mockery out of the present Register of Interests system, it doesn`t actually mean anything to anyone & obviously has no legal standing.

An Independent Inquiry is an absolute necessity, but it must be an Inquiry based on the original proposal, & not the smoke & mirrors amendement made by "The Mob"

[rabbit]

The Localism Bill 2011 is worth a look over, regarding Council`s Code of Standards

http://www.hartlepoolpost.co.uk/files/localism act.pdf

[steveL]

". . . it will become a criminal offence for councillors to deliberately withhold or misrepresent a financial interest.This means that councils will not have to spend time and money investigating trivial complaints, while councillors involved in corruption and misconduct will face appropriately serious sanctions"

In our own case, and not for the first time, Labour appear to have come up with 'the Third Way' in that any suggestions that councillors have deliberately withheld or misrepresented a financial interest are regarded as trivial.

Well I suppose it's a sort of compromise ..... 

[marky]

Looks like there will be some councillor vacancies soon on this basis. 

[steveL]

I'm not sure if the 'deliberate' ploy would work because the declared interests are signed off. So even if the councillor can claim ignorance, whoever monitors and signs off the forms cannot. It would be an interesting situation if a councillor tries to dump responsibility onto the officer - though it wouldn't be the first time. Remember those lost letters to the Hospital Trust?

[fred c]

Register of Interests or TAT.............. reading through the post once i put it on, i think it would be more relevant on this thread..... Apologies for that.


Indeed, the localism act of 2011 states specifically "It is a criminal offence for Councillors to deliberately withhold or misrepresent a financial interest". It also states that "Councillors involved in corruption and misconduct will face appropriately serious sanctions". It may well be the case this was not deliberate and was in fact a genuine mistake made by Councillor ****. However, it appears a very serious oversight whichever way one looks at it.

On the face of it, it woud appear that the powers that be within HBC aren`t aware of the legal responsibility required by the Localism Bill with regard to the Register of Interests.

It also appears that some councillors are a tad reticent about having a full in-depth Inquiry into the Peer Groups report, an Inquiry that could lift the shadow that hangs over all councillors & will continue to do so, until a suitable Inquiry reports on the concerns of the Peer Group

In the meantime....Maybe someone should call the Police & let them decide what is deliberate & what isn`t

[steveL]

Wasn't that your last year's resolution as well? 

[steveL]

Whichever way you look at it, the most obvious thing is that the current procedure for handling declared interests, as well as the monitoring process, are both a complete shambles. To stand up and oppose any sort of review of the whole process inevitably creates even more suspicion. This is one area of council operation that you would expect to be laid down in blood.

I find myself questioning the level of pro-activeness of council officers over this matter. We seem to have gotten ourselves into a situation where councillors themselves have historically decided what should be declared and what should not and if there's anyone out there who doesn't see the problem in that then you probably also still believe in Santa Claus.

[marky]

It looks to me like councillors don't see the completion of this form as being of any real importance and that when they do, they have a fair degree of flexibility in how they complete it. No one seems to be monitoring what they put.

I would expect to see a question whereby councillors are asked to list all connections to organisations which have received funding from HBC during the last five years and whether they or their families/spouse have benefited either financially or materially through having a connection to any such organisations. All Directorships/ Management positions or employment should be declared and detailed as either paid or unpaid.

In a lot of cases, I think it would highlight that there are plenty of councillors doing such work for no gain whatsoever and in a way it's only fair that this should be properly recognised.