It would be nice if the council tax vote could be streamed live and shared as far and wide as possible on social media.
How much audience participation will we get away with as the vote for the rise takes place ?
Quote from: Land Phil on February 15, 2016, 10: AM
How much audience participation will we get away with as the vote for the rise takes place ?
Not much. The decision to increase council tax by 3.9% has already been taken in effect.
What people will see on Thursday is a fake debate. Labour are already under instructions and the Tories will have already agreed to support it. Wells will talk about '
reluctance' but concentrate his main efforts bitching about Riddle and Thompson and say something about those councillors not attending day-time meetings.
Wells doesn't work, of course, although he tells everyone who asks that he is a
property developer. I would describe him more as a
consultant, really; that's the nicest way I can describe it.
Riddle will question why there is a need to raise council tax at all with so much waste going on and in a relatively short space of time the bottoms on the labour side will start shuffling as they realise how much drinking time they are losing.
Quotesay something about those councillors not attending day-time meetings
I was at one on Friday gone at 9.15am. There were no Conservative councillors there, all 3 had put in their apologies.
::)
I have been told that the Finance and Policy Committee are meeting this afternoon at 2.30
The CT is on the agenda
Quote from: steveL on February 15, 2016, 12: PM
Quote from: Land Phil on February 15, 2016, 10: AM
How much audience participation will we get away with as the vote for the rise takes place ?
Not much. The decision to increase council tax by 3.9% has already been taken in effect.
What people will see on Thursday is a fake debate. Labour are already under instructions and the Tories will have already agreed to support it. Wells will talk about 'reluctance' but concentrate his main efforts bitching about Riddle and Thompson and say something about those councillors not attending day-time meetings.
Wells doesn't work, of course, although he tells everyone who asks that he is a property developer. I would describe him more as a consultant, really; that's the nicest way I can describe it.
Riddle will question why there is a need to raise council tax at all with so much waste going on and in a relatively short space of time the bottoms on the labour side will start shuffling as they realise how much drinking time they are losing.
Just to add... Public will show support and applaud the points that Riddle. Thompson and Brash make. A few Labour Councillors will look uncomfortable but the majority will look at the public like they are a pile of dog cr@p they have stepped in. There are a couple of female Labour Councillors who particular enjoy throwing a few 'daggers' at the public. I wonder when they will ever wake up and smell the coffee.
I will be very interested to hear the LabCons justification for raising council tax and their responses to the points made about wasting millions of pounds of council funds on literally nothing. I suspect there are council officers furiously creating hundreds of statements as we speak to cover all eventualities. We all know its not safe to let the Labour lot 'debate'. They may end up hitting a 'rare' nerve.
Should we take bets on which Councillor makes the first snide personal comment (which they won't be pulled up on of course). My money is on SAB but if he has been gagged then it has to be Carl. I'm not sure I've ever heard him speak without throwing a snide comment in, usually about attendance.
The article has been moved from the front page of the online version of The Mail, it's still there but you have to scroll down. It would be interesting to know who posts under the name Usual Suspect, Riddle hater, never has a good word to say about him.
One thing is for certain The Man In The Threadbare suit won't ever mention his attendace..... at work that is, he has lived off public money for years like a few of the others.... they wouldn't work in a iron lung
Quote from: seaton on February 15, 2016, 02: PM
It would be interesting to know who posts under the name Usual Suspect, Riddle hater, never has a good word to say about him.
The bulk of the Riddle-hating posts come from the mad cyclist and his rugby chum.
I think we will be waiting forever for the mad cyclist to give us the answer to the universe and everything assuming everything in the universe isn't wrong.
He verbally battered a lot of good people in Hartleool because they were not a member of MENSA, shame they got the same treatment as the rotten mob.
The 'genie in the bottle' Labour are keen to keep a lid on is the actual amount of council tax (in pounds) the 3.9% rise will add to the council's coffers.
It's not a secret in that the figure is available, but nor is it a figure Labour have happily bandied around in the local media.
People who use this site know already about the wastage (there's too much to mention here) and when you look at the estimated figure regarding wasted money and the actual figure the rise will bring in, that's when it becomes blatantly obvious the problem isn't being caused by the Tories.
I can think of the payroll system of just ONE local (now defunct) residents association which saw more money pass through it than would have been needed to avoid having to raise the council tax.
That's just one waste of funding.... of which there are many.
The bald cyclist isn't a member of MENSA and neither is his Spennymoor friend or the hobo lookalike Riddle.
Ged Hall once had membership of MENSA on his register of interests and I think SAB is still an active member of the Chipper Club - actually, he's the only one left. No one has the balls to tell him that it was wound up years ago in case he throws another wobbler.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/tees/hi/people_and_places/history/newsid_8976000/8976858.stm
It is quite embarrassing to think that the once mayor of Hartlepool is known for throwing tantrums and wobblers.
I do hope all that go to the pre-rehearsed Panto on Thursday night get an eyeful and hope that the joint Labour/conservative Party members continue with the hissy fits.
Quote from: Ste P on February 16, 2016, 12: PM
It is quite embarrassing to think that the once mayor of Hartlepool is known for throwing tantrums and wobblers.
Anyone have his school record?
What schools did SAB attend in Hartlepool?
To be totally honest with you, the trolls who go for me have always mildly amused me. Some members of my family consciously don't read the comments in The Mail (or on here) because of the personal attacks I seem to attract.
The bizarre thing is most of the comments come from people who have (a) never met me (b) never spoken with me and (c ) never made any attempt to contact me directly (apart from one who rang me some years ago).
If anything the trolling doesn't deter me, it just motivates me to keep doing what I'm doing.
It's almost as if 'there's a voice that keeps on calling me', the trolls know I'm 'down the road, that's where I'll always be'. And even though there are trolls who obviously hate me, because I try hard to help the residents, when I get a bus around the town and talk to people 'every stop I make, I make a new friend'. We have a chat, talk about a issue that's important to them, and they appreciate I 'can't stay for long, just turn around and I'm gone again'.
I suppose now that I have my little boy, 'Maybe tomorrow, I'll want to settle down', and pack in all this politics stuff, but then I guess 'until tomorrow, I'll just keep moving on' and trying to make a difference.
It is a tough gig though, it's like going 'down this road that never seems to end', but on the positive side, politics is an environment 'where new adventure lies just around the bend'.
'So if you want to join me for a while', have a look on the Putting Hartlepool First website or come to a meeting. It's good to be involved. All I'd say to the trolls if anyone of them actually had the courage to talk to me face to face, would be get involved, put you coat and shoes on and do some canvassing, talk to people around the town. It's not complicated. My final piece of advice though would be 'Just grab your hat, we'll travel light...........that's hobo style'.
Trolls ?
I have two categories: .... there's the bitter, simmering back bedroom based keyboard thumper, ' the world must agree with me' dictator, who believes 'there is no view other than mine' .
Then there's the category who bear all the qualities above, but carry the additional stigma of doing it to support their party policies...they don't even think, they just respond to the puppeteers strings.
Both groups are timid little people in the shadows in real life.
Here's an e-mail from Keith Fisher to the Chief Executive about CAB's claim that:
""It is much fairer and more accurate to compare what people actually pay and when you do this Hartlepool is the 55th lowest out of 326 councils in the country"
From the two letters, it's pretty clear that the contortions that are going on to avoid admitting that everyone from those living in a Band A property to Band H are paying the 9th highest level of council tax for that band in the country are reaching extreme levels. They are still trying to peddle the lie that this only applies to Band D.
Alexander manages to confirm Band D to be the 9th highest but stubbornly refuses to admit that Bands A,B,C,E,F,G,H are also the 9th highest.
Why?
Because like CAB, she knows that the majority of people in Hartlepool live in lower Band properties and so wants to convince them that the high Band D rate doesn't affect them.
Dear Chief Executive
I would here refer to recent statement / releases through The HARTLEPOOL Mail regarding our local Council Tax
The first recent statement was publish as direct quotations from the current council Leader including direct references from HBC officials
The even more recent statements are direct from a current Councillor member of a.n.other political party and contains direct quotations from National records / documents
Without going into the details the clear fact is that the two statements are so clearly differing in content that one of them must be incorrect in fact or at least misleading in content
With respect -- It is my considered opinion that as a council tax paying resident of HARTLEPOOL I am entitled to a specific official statement which would confirm the actual "league position" of our council tax in comparison to the rest of this country
I recognise that our position in such a "league table" may or may not be important
BUT
I am very concerned that two of our senior councillors consider it important enough to be brought to my attention and therefore I turn to you to ensure that any statement from HBC is absolutely correct IN FACT and not subject to any political spin whatsoever
I put it to you that as Chief Executive it simply must be your duty and responsibility to ensure that when statements are seemingly researched and produced by HBC officials that they are correct
Therefore I would be obliged if YOU / YOUR DEPARTMENT could release a clear and simple statement to clarify the matter forthwith
Thank you
Rely from Gill Alexander
Dear Mr Fisher,
In response to your enquiry regarding recent statements by Councillors regarding Council Tax comparisons I can confirm that both statements were factually correct and were based on information published by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG).
DCLG publish two sets of comparative Council Tax information:
· Band D Council Tax comparisons; and
· Average council tax per dwelling comparisons.
The DCLG publication states that:
· Band D council tax is the usual standard measure of council tax and reflects the council tax base expressed as the number of band D equivalent properties;
· Average council tax per dwelling figures are based on the number of chargeable dwellings which reflects the number of properties in the 8 different Council Tax bands, the impact of the number of people eligible for a 25% Single Person Discount and number of households in receipt of Local Council Tax Support. The DCLG also state that average council tax per dwelling is a useful measure for comparing the amount of council tax paid by the average taxpayer in each local authority area;
· Council tax paid by a dwelling may be made up of several elements. Depending on location council tax may consist of precepts for some or all of the following district council, county council, unitary council, fire and rescue authority, police and crime commissioner and parish council.
As Hartlepool has only a small proportion of properties in Council Tax Band D (around 7%, which is less than twice the national average) and the majority of properties in Council Tax Bands A and B, the Council has argued for many years that the 'average council tax per dwelling' provides a more relevant basis for comparing Council Tax. This was the basis for the recent Press Release.
I can confirm that on the basis of the DCLG published information Hartlepool has the following league table rankings:
· Band D ranking 9th highest our of 326 authorities
· Average Council Tax per dwelling ranking 271th lowest out of 326 authorities
I trust this information is helpful and explains the complexity of Council Tax comparisons.
Regards
Gill
Gill Alexander
Chief Executive
(
Quote from: steveL on February 18, 2016, 12: PM
· Band D ranking 9th highest our of 326 authorities
· Average Council Tax per dwelling ranking 271th lowest out of 326 authorities
How to bamboozle the populace (or more likely oneself) by misuse of the English language.
Is not "271st. lowest out of 326 authorities" the equivalent of 55th. Highest ? Not quite on a par with Band D at 9th. highest, but far enough up the table to be of concern.
I believe that I understand what Ms. Alexander means, but what she says and what she means are poles apart. Nothing new there then.
Quoteboth statements were factually correct
The thing is, it's very easy for something to be "factually correct" whist at the same time very misleading.
It's so very easily done...
The statement:
""It is much fairer and more accurate to compare what people actually pay and when you do this Hartlepool is the 55th lowest out of 326 councils in the country"
is not factually correct.
This is not a case of semantics or interpretation. This is a dishonest statement deliberately intended to mislead and as such it breaches every code of conduct applying to behaviour in public life. It's also made worse by forming part of a Press Release put together by council officers and now apparently endorsed by a council Chief Executive.
They can wriggle away as much as they like. This is a dishonest statement and they've been caught out.
I suspect the wriggling will reach epic proportions this evening ::)
The question for me is will they be even bother to justify wasting millions on their 'visions' or just totally ignore the issue and say its not relevant? I'm pretty sure it will be the latter.
I think what Gill means is that Hartlepool is deprived and as a result house prices are very low and the council are making the most of the depravation by using it to their advantage by comparing it to more affluent towns where councils are not so rubbish.
What Hartlepool Council has done over many years is to abolish Bands A and B and then re-designated Band C as the new Band A.
That's why Band C houses elsewhere are paying the same money as our Band A properties.
I suggest that to the actual Council Tax payer the only figure that matters is the amount demanded by the Council. Therefore we have the 9th highest Council Tax in England.
Disingenuous of her to suggest that the various precepts affect the Council's figures as these are added on once the Council's rate has been fixed..
The Council Tax Support scheme further muddies the waters as, in Hartlepool, recipients only pay 12% of the band and is applied to mainly Band A householders (work that out - you may be surprised at the difference). Thus bringing down the average.
IF YOU ARE SERIOUSLY INTERESTED AS TO WHAT THE COUNCILLORS DO THEN GET INVOLVED STARTING BY GOING TO TONIGHT'S MEETING.
Would dearly like to be there tonight, but working out of the country. Thank goodness for HPost to ensure that everyone can get an honest and unbiased version of the event. I look forward to tomorrow's forensic and clinical posts.
BTW.....can someone post the time/place of the meeting for the Putting Hartlepool First group which I believe is this weekend. I'm not into all the local political rivalries, and have no affiliation to any one particular party, but I'd be happy to turn up to the meeting to see if the title of this lot lives up to their actual description. I.e. PH1st!!! ( 'cos if you don't, who else will? - leave it the hands of the Belcher's clan? The Cranney Inc. Conglomerate? The R M Wells Invisible Support machine? The HBC Officials 3 Monkeys Syndrome (hear, see, speak no evil........just let it ride and say bye-bye to your honour and your principles)
Predictable as ever tonight. CAB's lies continue. I think in the end half of his own party just wanted him to admit the press release was b****cks.
Highlight of the evening was Rob Cook not knowing what day of the week it was, let alone what he was voting for.... "Against".... "For"....."What are we voting for again??" ::)
My first time tonight.
All that space in the room could be the answer to all the care homes closing.
Nobody would notice a few extra sleeping pensioners.
Will we find out next meeting how the Tory Government is responsible for the Mill House financial mess. Maybe it will be making a profit in 5 years time.
P.S. Where do we buy those noses from?
A shambles of a meeting from start to finish as always.
An 'unexpected' amendment from the 3 who still insist they belong to the Tory party. Followed by a series of scripted answers all of which referenced the Tory amendment directly.
It was almost as if Labour knew it was coming ::)
20 minutes of pantomime in which labour fooled no one in their attempt to play the part of the 'good guys'.
The usual level of partial chairmanship from Mary.
Insisting Paul and I wrap up the second we hit 4 minutes yet allowing Barclay to ramble on for a good ten minutes muttering incoherently.
Even Alan Clarkes 'wrapping up' was longer than my entire speech.
Same old same old.
What planet was Alan Clark on ?
Who cares if he is passionate about the steel workers and Chinese imports in the context of a council tax rise.
He might as well have been going on about his neighbours dog barking.
Barclay's ramblings made me lose the will to live so half way through Clark's speech I was barely conscious. Zzzzz
I suppose we should all be grateful that Springer kept his mouth shut.
On the subject of pantomime... what was that little outburst at the beginning all about? Since when are people threatened with being thrown out of the meeting for not standing when the mayor enters the chamber? Anyone would think the person in question was targeted. Surely not.
That was a mistake. One which I suspect will come back to bite whoever came up with the idea to do it.
You can't impose respect on people. People will decide who to respect and for what reasons.
Also the request, and it is a request it's not an order, is PLEASE stand.
Please is an adverb in a request.
There's no obligation to do it and no one as far as I'm concerned has the right to eject a member of the public for refusing to do it.
Quote from: Foggy on February 18, 2016, 11: PM
Since when are people threatened with being thrown out of the meeting for not standing when the mayor enters the chamber? Anyone would think the person in question was targeted. Surely not.
Who exactly would 'throw' people out of the building? The security guard? One of the Mob? If anyone so much as touches you, then I believe that is assault . If the mob called in the police, would the police arrest you for not standing? That'd look good on the arrest report!
What the bloody hell is Clark going on about, he has lobbied for the Steel Industry/Caparo on several occasions now, what is the purpose of his posturing on the matter, what is he hoping to achieve, the facts are clear, they have closed & won't be coming back........ a bit like the hospital, that his fellow LabTor clowncillors did the square root of FA about keeping open.
We have a Council that is incapable of balancing the books, they have wasted £6 million on nonsensical, non appearing Visions & are going to increase the council tax by 3.9% & yet Clark appears to think that self same bunch on incompetents could have any influence on the closure of SSI & Caparo.
To be honest I don't think the words 'thrown out of the meeting' were used. It was more like 'you stand up or you leave'. I can't remember the exact wording though.
Strangely it didn't come from any of the Mob (well not directly anyway) it was the bloke who carries the mace in. Apologies but I don't know his name or his official title. Strange that he didn't seem too concerned when the majority of the public refused to stand for the last nightmayor.
I was hoping to get an accurate description on tonight's meeting from you posters.
But looking at the inputs so far, (and given that my perspective is from afar...Basel in Switzerland) and that I'm even more reliant on you local guys to share with us all the meat of the evening.
All I can see so far is the criticism of various councillors for being either asleep or incoherent, or lying.
Good to know, but what was the essence of the meeting tonight? What was discussed.....what was decided? What direction and routes are our fine leaders trying to take us down?
And Mr Riddle, I guess you are still PHF! Can you respond to my request about the info as to :- when /where/ what/ is the meeting of PHF this weekend? I'd love to join you.
PS to the SCABS, I don't begrudge and you your bi-monthly jaunts/ honeymoons / whatever you want to call them, But instead of quaffing Beringer and molesting drugged-up felines in exotic locations......maybe you should come to a city such as Basel and just 'soak-up' what it's like to have a town that is fit for purpose.
The fantastic urban tram system, the roads without potholes, free-parking, a Metro system that's so efficient that the town traffic is negligable . Council tax that's minimal and considered by all to be great value for money. Clean streets. Minimal council tax, ( all resulting in happy / smiley faces in the town)
Come out and have a look Chris. Bring your carer with you.
Talk to your oppos in Basel who preside over a healthy town. One that works!!!!
See what you can learn. Or will you just continue with ...same old, same old.........' It's better to get our really cool vizogs on Facebook than making a difference"
(Mind you Cwissee, I hope that leopard wasn't as tight as this stripey one.)
Don't know the name of the guy who wouldn't stand up but here's an extract from the Gill Alexander article:
"Her first 10 months have been dominated, in public anyway, by a tsunami of deceit which she has done nothing to correct. She appeared to be far more vexed and animated by the public's refusal to stand for The Mace as it entered the Council Chamber during Stephen Akers-Belcher's tenure of the council Chairmanship than she was by the torrent of lies for which he had been responsible."
QuoteI was hoping to get an accurate description on tonight's meeting from you posters.
In my experience, it always takes a while for people to fully absorb what they have just witnessed.
It was particularly difficult tonight because the full range of behaviour was on display but, in essence, your council tax will be going up by around 4.5% next year by the time you add the Police and Fire Authority precepts and the people responsible are, in no particular order:
- David Cameron
- TATA Steel
- EDF Energy
- George Osborne
- Clydesdale Forge
- That Polish woman who plays the accordion very badly at the bottom of the Shopping Centre ramp
- Mill House Baths
Christopher's advice to anyone feeling the pinch was to downsize to a Band A property, make yourself unemployed and claim council tax benefit as well as help from the 12.5% council tax assistance scheme (or the Sky Sports TV subsidy scheme as it is known locally). In this way, claimed Christopher, you could indeed find yourself paying the 55
th lowest council tax in the country; though come to think of it, this is the ONLY way.
I can't sleep . . . Does anyone have the video of Barclays speech?
Hubris, all the info you've asked for is here http://www.puttinghartlepoolfirst.co.uk :)
Quote from: Foggy on February 18, 2016, 11: PM
To be honest I don't think the words 'thrown out of the meeting' were used. It was more like 'you stand up or you leave'. I can't remember the exact wording though.
Strangely it didn't come from any of the Mob (well not directly anyway) it was the bloke who carries the mace in. Apologies but I don't know his name or his official title. Strange that he didn't seem too concerned when the majority of the public refused to stand for the last nightmayor.
The "Respect & Behaviour" question was brought to the attention of the CEO & Borough Solicitor in October of 2015, by a number of people present at the full council meeting that month.
The following is an extract of an email sent to the B/S cc`d to the CEO regarding the issue.
I would like to raise several points that occurred to me during last night's meeting, Ms Alexander made several valid points surrounding "respect & behaviour", she went to some lengths to inform those present of the respect & behaviour that should be shown to the Ceremonial Mayor & the Civic Mace on entry to the chamber
I believe in the traditional values of respect, integrity & civic pride, & have always behaved in a proper manner during the vast majority of council meetings I have attended over the years; however I have to admit that during the latter part of the former mayor's term in office, I did resort to not standing when he entered the chamber.
I found myself in a position of having to protest in the only way possible for a member of the public, against a man for whom I have no respect, in my opinion, he, by a number of his actions brought the name of Hartlepool into some disrepute.
The term "respect has to be earned, not given" is, from the publics point of view an extremely valid expression when attending council meetings, there have been times when certain councillors have been disrespectful to members of the public & "economical with the actualité" I feel sure that you could bring to mind a number of examples of such, so I won`t list those that spring to my mind. Ms Alexanders point about behaviour was in part aimed at the public attending council meetings, what appears to have been forgotten is that when members of the public are not accorded the respect they should be given, it is a natural reaction to protest, that fact was the root cause of the unrest at a number of council meetings. I have no idea of the possible sanctions that may be under discusion against any future "protest or protesters" refusing to stand in certain circumstances on the entry of the Mayor & The Mace,
but as we witnessed only last week the New Leader of the Labour Party felt the need to protest by not singing the National Anthem. The following is an extract of the response to my email.
There are two distinct approaches here, one is to ensure reciprocal respect for the Mayor/Mace by elected Members and the public and the second matter, is members adopting a non statutory sanctions system for breaches of the Code of Conduct. You will recall that 'sanctions' were abolished under the Localism Act, 2011 and I will draft a report for members to consider on the above theme.Nothing has changed, members of the public have still been subject to disrepectful behaviour by some councillors, the atmosphere at times during council meetings reflects the obvious contempt in which the public are held in by those councillors.
I suppose the public could wait outside the chamber until the Mace & Mayor have entered, or as an alternative..... all members of the public remain seated & see what the big fella with the Mace does then..... if he saw fit to have everyone removed that could well make the Nationals.
There really is something broken within HBC, when people are sanctioned for remaing seated whilst a Blatant Liar dressed in Civic Robes enters the chamber & no action is taken against a councillor having to be physically restrained by 2 council officers from getting at another councillor during a meeting.
Only In Hartlepool & Only Under The LabTor Mob
Quote from: Hubris on February 19, 2016, 12: AM
I was hoping to get an accurate description on tonight's meeting from you posters.
But looking at the inputs so far, (and given that my perspective is from afar...Basel in Switzerland) and that I'm even more reliant on you local guys to share with us all the meat of the evening.
All I can see so far is the criticism of various councillors for being either asleep or incoherent, or lying.
Good to know, but what was the essence of the meeting tonight? What was discussed.....what was decided? What direction and routes are our fine leaders trying to take us down?
To be honest it's very difficult to explain as there were a lot of figures thrown around which I really can't remember and a lot of the speeches were unnecessarily long. It is also difficult to hear sometimes so forgive me if any of this is wrong.
In a nutshell, CAB outlined the reasons for the 3.9% council tax increase in his presentation. RMW suggested an amendment (I think it was about scrapping the council tax subsidy) which was clearly planned as the Labour lot had prepared statements in response to it. Various labour councillors spoke in favour of the rises and blamed everything listed in SteveL's post. Thompson and Riddle spoke against the rise and Thompson read a statement from Brash who couldn't attend the meeting. The majority voted against the amendment (24-7 I think) and the majority voted for the 3.9% rise (21-10 i think).
There were a few public questions regarding the infamous press release being disingenous/lies but, despite pressure to admit it shouldn't have been released, CAB refused to back down and just tried to throw more misleading statistics in there.
I'm sure the video will appear here at some point today and will give a more accurate account of what the public had to endure last night:
https://www.hartlepool.gov.uk/info/20004/council_and_democracy/495/full_council_meetings_-_recorded_footage (https://www.hartlepool.gov.uk/info/20004/council_and_democracy/495/full_council_meetings_-_recorded_footage)
Anyone notice how Riddle and Thompson were cut off in their prime at 4 mins last night while Barclay and Clarke were allowed to go on ad infinitum?
Alexander eventually gave Mary Fleet a nudge probably after realising that if Clarke went on much longer she was at risk of missing her own retirement do. Mary then asked Clarke to wind up which he acknowledged and then continued unfettered until he reached the end of his pages. Barclay spoke for 9 minutes, unhindered by rules on timing, before finally running out of alcohol in his blood supply; I didn't time Clark, I was too depressed listening to him to bother.
Clark is quickly turning into a one-tune whistler. The subject matter of the meeting seems to be an irrelevance to him with every meeting an opportunity to lament the passing of uneconomic steel production. He must be a real hoot down the pub!
I think another interesting 'tell' from last nights meeting was not so much who spoke.... but who didn't speak. There seems to be two camps within the Labour group at present. Those who are firmly behind CAB and those who are biding their time, sitting back, watching the carnage and incompetence unfold, presumably with a view to stepping in somewhere down the line.
In terms of Cllr Ainslie calling for 'unity' in the council last night, I personally (and I only speak for me, not PHF) have no intention of forming a relationship with people (some of whom) I consider to be morally corrupt.
If the proper socialists within the Labour group have the balls to 'lance the boils' and 'cut out the cancer' from within, then the council can go forward. Until then... I don't see unity as a viable or morally appropriate course of action.
ah yes, Jim Ainslie, the guy who wanted to cut a few holes in a shipping container, plonk it on top of one of the lighthouse buildings and then as Heritage Champion call it a 'welcome development.'
Carpetbaggers are Carpetbaggers; even when they come with a sugar coating.
I think last nights meeting also included a hint of foreshadowing regarding the likely future of the 'café in the crem'.
It was pointed out that the 'place in the park' was losing money, then, once in private hands it now makes a profit.
Personally I have no problem with that. The drive to attract customers and become financially viable has raised standards and meant the owners have had to cut their cloth accordingly.
That's called capitalism and free market economics (on a small scale).
Then there's the alternative, use tax payers money to build the café, prop up it's losses with more tax payers money and eventually realise it was a bad idea like everyone told you it was in the first place.
That's called state directed economics (again albeit on a small scale).
Finally there's the third way of doing things. Use tax payers money to build the café, watch it haemorrhage money for a few years then flog it at a loss to the private sector, charge them a peppercorn rent and call it a triumph.
That's called 'governance' under Hartlepool's Labour Party.
I have just heard Victoria Ward Councillors have just given a big chunk of their ward budgets to Hartlepool Hawks to help the club compete in a national competition.
All very well but I have friends in the heat or eat situation which makes this look like an extravagant luxury.
It is definitely not caring for the frail and vulnerable in our society.
These "Individual Ward Budgets" are an immoral use of public money, there has been a pre-election "Spend" by some members of the LabTor Mob since they were introduced.
Even though these "community contributions" are outwith the Purdah Period, they really need to be dispensed with altogether, there is something decidedly undemocratic about the Ward Budget system....
The flip side of the rediculous council tax rise, combined with everything else that has happened over the last year must make some fantastic material for election leaflets this year.
Never mind a leaflet, it could be a book about the mob.
Sick note, Liar Liar, Granny Magnet, Slow Flipper, Degeneratinon Misdirector.
Family and Friends employment scheme, Ferris Wheel visions, Vicar training scheme, town scam, sorry lack of plan, cafe Crem, £180K they couldn't spend in Seaton Carew, renting out Wind farm land, all sponsored by Niramax.
Didn't Marj save up her ward budget until she was due for re-election and then she went on a spending spree?
Just going back to the issue of partial chairmanship for a minute, a concerned member of the public sent me to following statistics.
Cllr Barclay spoke for 5 minutes and 15 seconds (from his first spoken word to his last). There was no audible request for him to wrap up.
This surprised me because it felt like an hour.
But anyway, the issue here is members are supposed to be allowed 4 minutes to speak with some discretion from the chair to wrap up.
Paul Thompson, having spent 3 minutes 2 seconds reading out a statement from Councillor Brash, then spoke himself.
He started his own personal contribution at 51 minutes 25 seconds into the video recording. He was asked by the chair to wrap up 2 minutes and 26 seconds later. He then stopped speaking at 54 minutes 40 seconds.
Meaning (if you discount the fact he read out another councillors statement) he spoke for 3 minutes and 15 seconds, having been asked to wrap up after just 2 minutes and 26 seconds.
I started my contribution at 54 minutes and 48 seconds into the recording. After 4 minutes and 16 seconds I was asked to wrap up and managed to speak for another 1 minute 9 seconds before stopping. 5 minutes 25 seconds in total.
I actually spoke for 10 seconds more than Barclay (unbelievable I know but true), who was NOT asked to wrap up at all.
Then there was councillor Clarke. He spoke for 4 minutes and 42 seconds before the CEO nudged the chair into asking him to wrap up. He then spoke for another 1 minute and 34 seconds, giving him a total of 6 minutes and 16 seconds (mainly talking about steel).
So, to summarise, two Labour councillors spoke for a combined length of 11 minutes and 31 seconds with one request to wrap up between them.
Two independent councillors spoke (in their own personal capacity) for a combined length of 8 minutes and 40 seconds yet were both told to wrap up, one after just 2 minutes and 26 of his personal contribution to the debate.
Yep.... The Cat Cuddler & his pussies are giving Mayor Fleet a right good using..... i suspect she has no ideal how long any councillors speak, she just gets the nod from Cwissy the Cat or The CEO......
For a £140,000 a year you might expect her to be able to tell the time though.
...maybe Angie Wilcox could buy her a Rolex to help on that front.
How come Akers Belcher had a break down of the council reserves fund to hand ?
Because I can't ask an officer what brand the coffee is in the members lounge without Akers-Belcher knowing about it.
Anything myself, Paul or Brash request (in terms of figures, information etc) is vetted by certain people. Either we're given a reason why we CAN'T have the information we require, or we're given it but various other people are made aware of the information we've been given.
Take for example the council tax meeting. I'd requested information regarding funding allocated to a community group over recent years.
I wasn't allowed to have it through the proper channels but acquired the information via other means.
I suppose certain people didn't want me reminding the public that the council tax rise of 1.9% was worth £621,000 and the community group I'd enquired about had received funding to the tune of over £1 million.
Quote from: DRiddle on February 21, 2016, 07: PM
Because I can't ask an officer what brand the coffee is in the members lounge without Akers-Belcher knowing about it.
If it were me I would be asking 'questions' about several things and not just about subjects I would raise in meetings. That way they have to keep a 'book' of ready replies to hand and for sure they will bugger it up by reading the wrong 'prepared' answer!
I thought as much, thanks for answering.
Quote from: Land Phil on February 21, 2016, 07: PM
How come Akers Belcher had a break down of the council reserves fund to hand ?
Yes I wondered that too - hardly the kind of info you keep in your head. He was obviously tipped off by a council officer but I would bet real money that there is a general edict in place that the queries of any opposition councillors are reported back to the Cabal -
or else.
I realise it would be peeing into the wind but an official complaint to the CEO, BS & Local Government Ombudsman, by opposition councillors as to what is going on wouldn`t go amiss, if nothing else it would be another point of reference in any inquiry into HBC by a higher authority.