Council Tax Meeting 3.9%

[Foggy]

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.

[DRiddle]

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.

[Johnny Bongo]

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!

[fred c]

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.

[Foggy]

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.

[Hubris]

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.)

[steveL]

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."

[steveL]

I 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.

[DRiddle]

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 

[fred c]

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

[Foggy]

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

[steveL]

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!

[DRiddle]

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.

[steveL]

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.

[DRiddle]

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.