in it for the cash, isnt that right Councillor?

[Tommy]

Would you like to "INCREASE" your weekly income?

Would you like to "CHOOSE" the hours you work?

Would you like to receive "FREE" travel to anywhere in the country, holiday, pleasure, private business, that break away from the local taxpayers,  or even treating a loved one or family member?

Would you like to receive "FREE" stays in hotels around the Country and World?

Would you like the "POWER" to grant an income, job or contract to your family, friends, colleges and other like minded Politically driven people you know?

Would you like a free fully produced "PRESS" in the regional news paper and on the radio that makes you sound like a true Town Savior?

Would you like the full backing of our legal team, should you need it, and "YES" at the tax payers expense and not costing you a Penny?

Would you like to "DINE and DRINK" for "FREE" at as many events and as many times you can?

These are just a few of the benefits you will be able to accumulate once the town "SAPS" vote for "YOU"

Interested?

[one direction]

Sounds like a great deal to me! Only one question? Do you have to be gay? 

[Tommy]

one direction, I am lead to believe it may help, as with everything these days.

there is lots of other perks that come with the position, just couldn't fit them all on.

[one direction]

Ah, sadly for me I'm definitely 100 per cent straight. I'm also honest, think I have a fairly high level of personal integrity and lack the ability to look people in the eye and tell them bare faced lies, three more traits that probably disqualify me from a lucrative career as a councillor in Hartlepool. Indeed they probably disqualify me from being any sort of elected official from parish councillor to Prime Minister or EuroMP!

[mk1]

Ah, sadly for me I'm definitely 100 per cent straight. I'm also honest, think I have a fairly high level of personal integrity and lack the ability to look people in the eye and tell them bare faced lies, three more traits that probably disqualify me from a lucrative career as a councillor in Hartlepool. Indeed they probably disqualify me from being any sort of elected official from parish councillor to Prime Minister or EuroMP!

Johnson was talking about Burke here but it sums it all up:

"In private  he ----[substitute name]----is a very honest gentleman; but I will not allow him to be so in publick life. People may be honest, though they are doing wrong; that is between their Maker and them. But we, who are suffering by their pernicious conduct, are to destroy them. We are sure that ------ [insert name]---- acts from interest. We know what his genuine principles were. They who allow their passions to confound the distinctions between right and wrong, are criminal. They may be convinced; but they have not come honestly by their conviction."

[PostItNote]

I think you will find that folk of the town do not vote for the person to take on the job description very clearly outlined by Tommy.

Maybe the time has come that Councillors should declare that they are disinterested in the perks, power and money outlined by Tommy.  If they show through their greed and dodgy dealing that even from one day in, they have lied to the voters and are interested in that which Tommy cleverly points out as wrong, then they should be named and shamed then shut out of every council and political arena in the country.

After all, politics is for the people and every Leader says they would not stand for shoddy work or shady dealings, right?

[Ted Bass]

The councillors in hartlepool seem to be split into three categories:

A) The 'Brown envelope' cronies with suspicious links to the companies often mentioned in this forum.

B) The 'quiet ones' who are never heard of if you need them unless theres an urgent vote in the Kremlin.

C) The decent ones which I am struggling to think of.

[one direction]

Once again far too deep for me? Not sure why a quote from me is a necessary preface to a post by MK1 of a quote from Johson about Burke?

Ah, sadly for me I'm definitely 100 per cent straight. I'm also honest, think I have a fairly high level of personal integrity and lack the ability to look people in the eye and tell them bare faced lies, three more traits that probably disqualify me from a lucrative career as a councillor in Hartlepool. Indeed they probably disqualify me from being any sort of elected official from parish councillor to Prime Minister or EuroMP!

Johnson was talking about Burke here but it sums it all up:

"In private  he ----[substitute name]----is a very honest gentleman; but I will not allow him to be so in publick life. People may be honest, though they are doing wrong; that is between their Maker and them. But we, who are suffering by their pernicious conduct, are to destroy them. We are sure that ------ [insert name]---- acts from interest. We know what his genuine principles were. They who allow their passions to confound the distinctions between right and wrong, are criminal. They may be convinced; but they have not come honestly by their conviction."

I never know wether MK1 is agreeing with me or having a go at me? I suppose I'm like Tony Blair "just a fairly straightforward guy" 

[DRiddle]

I think people need to make a clear distinction between 'councillors in Hartlepool' and 'SOME councillors in Hartlepool.

This quote for example within the debate above:

a lucrative career as a councillor in Hartlepool

.

I'm happy to clarify that the last monthly allowance payment I received was £291 (as it's taxed at 40% if you have a proper job along side being a councillor).

That's about £73 a week.

Job seekers allowance is currently £72.40 a week.

So if ALL a person was doing was 'being a councillor' in it's truest sense, it makes more financial sense to be on JSA.

And this is where the problem starts in my opinion. Too many councillors now have it firmly established in their heads that being a councillor is 'a job'... it isn't.

They have it established in their heads that it therefore should be numerated as if it were 'a job'... it shouldn't.

Thus, we end up with a situation where certain councillors seem to be capable of creating additional 'job's' to sit alongside their councillor 'job' which are then significantly well paid.

In most authorities the situation we've seen develop over the years on this forum would have been nipped in the bud way back.

However, in Hartlepool it's been allowed to get way out of hand and go virtually unchecked, until we've arrived at the situation we've seen lately.

Is there another authority in the country where two councillors could start a company and be awarded the thick end of a million quid so overly, so shamelessly, by other councillors from within their own party? 

I doubt it.

In my view certain councillors have totally tainted the very word 'councillor', so much so that the electorate spit the word 'councillor' out of their mouths like venom these days.

I don't disagree that the very word 'Councillor' leaves a bad taste in the mouth within Hartlepool.

It's just a shame all councillors are tarred with the same brush.

[The Great Dictator]

Its more to do with how councillors earn their OTHER money, would you agree that it is inappropriate


for Councillors to tender for contracts and have a second income from the council money pot ?

[DRiddle]

Absolutely.

[fred c]

I think people need to make a clear distinction between 'councillors in Hartlepool' and 'SOME councillors in Hartlepool.

This quote for example within the debate above:

a lucrative career as a councillor in Hartlepool

.

I'm happy to clarify that the last monthly allowance payment I received was £291 (as it's taxed at 40% if you have a proper job along side being a councillor).

That's about £73 a week.

Job seekers allowance is currently £72.40 a week.

So if ALL a person was doing was 'being a councillor' in it's truest sense, it makes more financial sense to be on JSA.

And this is where the problem starts in my opinion. Too many councillors now have it firmly established in their heads that being a councillor is 'a job'... it isn't.

They have it established in their heads that it therefore should be numerated as if it were 'a job'... it shouldn't.

Thus, we end up with a situation where certain councillors seem to be capable of creating additional 'job's' to sit alongside their councillor 'job' which are then significantly well paid.

In most authorities the situation we've seen develop over the years on this forum would have been nipped in the bud way back.

However, in Hartlepool it's been allowed to get way out of hand and go virtually unchecked, until we've arrived at the situation we've seen lately.

Is there another authority in the country where two councillors could start a company and be awarded the thick end of a million quid so overly, so shamelessly, by other councillors from within their own party? 

I doubt it.

In my view certain councillors have totally tainted the very word 'councillor', so much so that the electorate spit the word 'councillor' out of their mouths like venom these days.

I don't disagree that the very word 'Councillor' leaves a bad taste in the mouth within Hartlepool.

It's just a shame all councillors are tarred with the same brush.

A slight adjustment to the italicised txt above........ On the say so of 1 councillor.

I have offered the opinion on numerous occasions including to Mr Tom Mitchells public inquiry, No Council Tax Payers monies should be awarded to "Any Organisation" were a councilor earns as much as 1 red cent from it....... It opens up all sorts of conflicts of Interest, as has been proven by the numerous examples.

Phoenix Centre

Manor Residents Asc

Who cares N/E

etc etc etc.

Some councilors have made a career out of being "Councilors"......... Councilors used to look towards "giving something back" to the town by standing for public offfice, but in Hartlepool the no goods have spent years filling their boots

Unfortunately the town has a number of councilors who, through their greed & self serving attitude have demeaned the office of Councilor & by doing so they have tarred every councilor with the same brush.

The hard working genuine elected representatives job has been made even more difficult by the attitude of "The TorLab Mob" both the ego maniacs & the compliant sheep that go along with decisions they know are wrong because they are told how to vote.

[The Great Dictator]

David, i think its now time for PHF to publicly announce that you object to it and
wish to block any standing councillor from tendering for contracts or even being
an accountant or director of a company that does.


Imagine how much good publicity you would generate for PHF for next Mays elections.

[DRiddle]

TGD, PHF have been banging that drum for years. As far as I'm aware there isn't a PHF councillor who has benefitted by way of a single penny from a council related contract, let alone made a decent living out of it.

Don't forget the situation that got me caught up in all of this... questioning contract procurement.

http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/complaint-against-councillor-1-5478570

My initial interest in HBC had nothing to do with campaigning about the gypsy site.

[steveL]

I think TGD is right. It's endemic in local government and needs to be stopped. Remember McLuckie and his 'consultancy' work? - it's everywhere, man.