Police commissioner

[steveL]

We are talking about the committee system which was disbanded in 1999 you silly girl.

. . . and that included the Scrutiny system did it?

Labour had every intention of not simply retaining the Scrutiny system introduced at the same time as the elected Mayoral system but of expanding it. After the Peer Review findings criticised ' an overly powerful Scrutiny', Labour have since changed tac as it looks like the word 'scrutiny' has become poisonous but any notion that all councillors will have an equal say under Labour is just fantasy.

As we found out last February over the budget farce, even Labour councillors can find themselves being threatened by the Cabal.

Labour have had three attempts to persuade the public to give them an elected Mayor and give their man the reins - each time the public said no. Now they have resorted to Plan B.

I'm afraid your obvious hatred of Drummond is clouding your judgement.

Oh and by the way, can we skip the 'silly girl' insults - I suggest you remove it unless you want to add misogyny to that pile of chips currently on your shoulder.

[Julie noted]

testicles states we have had the previous system for 150 years.
No, we haven't.
We have had the system for something like (40?) years, and then Cllrs started to get paid for serving the people of the town and quickly realised how they could line their own pockets. 

Prior to that, people put themselves forward for altruistic reasons. 
These days the majority see the trough and can't wait to bury their snouts in it. That goes for local and national politics.
However, I am aware their are still some genuine people in politics but even most of those 'keep their heads down' when in reality they ought to be exposing wrong-doing. (A bit like the BBC and the jimmy saville affair).

Contributors to HTH have known about the kremlin goings-on for years......
it's the raison d'etre for HTH in the first place!
But just look how quickly the Peer Review Group saw through the money-grubbing charade infesting the kremlin. 
I can't wait for the final report......hopefully it will make the national press!! 

[The Great Dictator]

Julie, if you have such disregard to people who get paid £78 a week after tax for being a councillor then why are you threatening to vote for the monkey.
The committee system was in force in 1999, do your homework.
Steve, i don't dislike drummond i hate unnecessary bureaucracy whereas you hate individuals like Wilcox and Wells and you're very smallminded.
You're not happy unless you are complaining.

[Julie noted]

T: I don't have a disregard for Cllrs on £78 a week.

I have an intense hatred for those topping up their £78 a week by circuitous methods. 
And I'll leave it at that.

Let the Peer Review do the talking. 

[The Great Dictator]

Do you have proof ?

[no6bus]

I'm a bus driver does that count, ps I am not a councillor   

[The Great Dictator]

Hardly any of them declare their interests..

[SRMoore]

And Ken Lupton will be there on Saturday from 10:30 onwards.
I'd encourage people to go meet both candidates in person.

[steveL]

Hardly any of them declare their interests..

The Peer Group said that the system of declaring interests wasn't 'robust enough'; Peter Devlin said at the last council meeting that it 'meets the requirements'

. . . sounds a bit like 'within the rules' such as we had with the MPs expenses. In other words, you declare the bare minimum that you can get away with.

The forms appear to have changed recently - they used to ask councillors to declare interests that came with a 'taxable' income (not the income itself) but no longer apparently.

[fred c]

Councillors should be compelled to give the information on how exactly much the receive from HBC funded Organisations...... " No ifs, No buts ".

If they have Family members employed by the Organisations they manage that are funded by HBC......... those figures should also be in the public domain...... No ifs, No buts.

My rates should go towards running Hartlepool................... Not to provide a comfortable lifestyle for Councillors & there Families.



Just looked at the whole thread................ i may have wondered off the original topic, but as the thread has become blurred it seems to fit in.

[The Great Dictator]

Julie noted doesnt like councillors topping up their £78 a week but likes Drummond adding £29000 to his salary..

[George]

Sultan Alam, he had to retire due to I'll health so was clearly unable to take up any position for which he was qualified in the police, I mean a man of high integrity like he professes surely would not retire on these grounds if he was not capable of working?

So best look at the other candidates than employ someone who is ill.

Ken Lupton would be a good choice in my humble opinion.

[SRMoore]

Ken is a very nice guy George and is fully committed to the role.
He'll be at the ramp on Saturday from 10:30 if you would like to come down and meet him in person to ask questions.

Obviously I am biased but I do agree with a comment that was made earlier about Allam. He obviously has a massive axe to grind and I fear that personal vendettas are worse that politics.

Barry Coppinger was previously on the Cleveland Police Authority and held a position on it until he resigned stating his health hindered his ability to fulfil the role. Why would that be any different now?

[not4me]

Didn't I read on here that Mr Lupton was part of the North Tees and Hartlepool Hospital Trust at one stage? In fact wasn't he Chairman at the time of Darzi?

[SRMoore]

Ken is a serving Councillor in Stockton and he was/is a govenor on the NT&H NHS Trust, yes.
Did Ken stand up for the area he represented when the Darzi report was thrown out? Probably. But in my opinion that's what he was elected to do, it isn't his fault if our elected members didn't stand up for Hartlepool and sold us out.

If anything it shows he's prepared to stand up and defend the people he was elected to represent. We could do with a few Ken Luptons' here in Hartlepool.