A Nightingdale Sings in Barclay's Head

[mk1]

When I started reading the letter I thought it was an attack on the fa*tty Belchers and a defence of Pammy and Johny...............

IT is refreshing to see that there are elected representative(s) of Hartlepool sticking up for their residents by taking the lead (Mail 4 April) in fighting against  the establishment to be heard  through the publics right to ask questions and in demanding a full explanation.................

[steveL]

Strewth . . . 

This reads like one of those English 'O' Level exam questions were you are presented with a long paragraph of unpuctuated text and asked to restructure it, complete with punctuation.

[Lucy Lass-Tick]

Or maybe he's just a bit of a duffer at taking dictation ... 

[fred c]

Seriously, who edits the letters page, not only is it an incoherent ramble, but it lacks any structure or punctuation...... so even if it wasn`t a load of Gibberish, it would be impossible to decypher.

Another case of Mr Stupid strikes again, extolling the virtues of the Manor Residents Manager who is fighting the good fight against a Long Standing Democratic Right to ask Public Questions of an elected councillor. (Amongst Other Things She Is Fighting)

These particularly "Garbled" pieces are rather odd.

"IT is refreshing to see that there are elected representative(s) of Hartlepool sticking up for their residents by taking the lead (Mail 4 April) in fighting against  the establishment to be heard  through the publics right to ask questions and in demanding a full explanation as to the  draconian measures forced upon them and the constant witch-hunt made against  them"!

Like mk1 i thought it was a letter of suport for the 2 Labour Councillors who backed the retention of Public Questions & are the subject of a witchhunt by members of their own party.

Does he not realise in Hartlepool, "The Mob are the Establishment"

"The process by which this decision comes from is truly biased, prejudicial and unfair and is extremely flawed  with systematic failures and deserves action now and certainly those that are affected  by it are deserving of a full explanation as to why this has come to pass"!

What action does he propose & about what

[steveL]

I think we should all be congratulating Barclay on his letter.

Rarely has the case for literacy in our schools to be given greater emphasis been made with such perfection.

[marky]

Quote: "IT is refreshing to see that there are elected representative(s) of Hartlepool sticking up for their residents by taking the lead (Mail 4 April) in fighting against  the establishment to be heard  through the publics right to ask questions and in demanding a full explanation as to the  draconian measures forced upon them and the constant witch-hunt made against  them"!

"The process by which this decision comes from is truly biased, prejudicial and unfair and is extremely flawed  with systematic failures and deserves action now and certainly those that are affected  by it are deserving of a full explanation as to why this has come to pass"

It doesn't matter how many times I read this - it still comes out as absolute gibberish. Was he drunk?

[mk1]

Looks like Barclay's at it again in The Mail tonight. A very predictable letter about Geoff Lilley taking the SRA for secondary group leader.

At least this time it's possible to actually read it once and understand it.

Presumably he wrote it before 11am.

He is at it again tonight. Seems like he is desperate to get noticed and reclaim his (he believes) rightful place  on the council. Note how he slips in a little dig at Pam.

[ Pathetic Defence

     COUNCILLOR Paul Thompson is right to criticise Councillor Geof Lilley, leader of Putting Hartlepool First, for tabling a motion to raise the Special Responsibility Allowance (SRA) for the minority group leader from the recommended £1,730 to £3,461. But he should not be surprised by Coun Lilley's actions. I also criticised Coun Lilley (Mail, April 16) in reference to an article (Mail, April 3), suggesting that he has less responsibility than  other party leaders who have more members and committee roles. Coun Lilley's only and, quite frankly pathetic defence, was that the Independent Remuneration Panel (IRP) gave no reasoning as to how they came about their decision. But surely it was obvious that, after all submissions and evidence, that this decision was based on, the IRP did not believe that the minority leader deserved any more than £1,730. No other leader claimed foul even though they lost all of their SRA. I think, though, we are both wasting our time criticising him because he has thick skin, which can be demonstrated by looking at Coun Lilley's track record as far as expenses are concerned, published on the Hartlepool Borough Council website. In the year 2010-11 he claimed £438.24 for general travel and 3242.64 in telephone expenses. If you look at the other councillors' expenses you will see that on travel alone  he had taken up more than a  third of all travel claimed by all 47 councillors. He also comes top of all the councillors for his telephone expenses, just putting independent councillor Hargreaves (£228.18) into second place. It is also well worth noting that the majority of Tory and Labour councillors did not claim anything other than their basic allowances for that same period. Based on the evidence available I have to agree with Paul Thompson's assertion that this is shocking and distasteful from the leader of a party that claims to be "putting Hartlepool first". Perhaps Geoff can salvage something out of this, do the honourable thing and resign because, after this, whatever he says or does will not be credible as he has made himself and his party a laughing stock. ,
Allan Barclay,
Leyburn Street,
Hartlepool. 



There is a bug in the new forum. Putting anything in italics changes it to red text. .

[craig finton]

For any labour person to be moaning about this when they have Wilcox and Cranney in their ranks is just nonsensical.

[fred c]

I wonder who`s turn it was this time to write his letter

[Lucy Lass-Tick]

I wonder who`s turn it was this time to write his letter

Doesn't it depend on who is this week's crayon monitor? 

[fred c]

Whichever way the decision goes that will probbaly prompt another ramble from Barclay.

In fairness to him................ He is Extremely good at it

[steveL]

We've kind of kept out of this to allow due process to take place but, if it doesn't, then Ged Hall is fair game as far as we're concerned.