Jane Kenyon, North Yorkshire Police Authority, In My View By Nigel Ward.

Whitby --> Featured --> Jane Kenyon, North Yorkshire Police Authority, In My View By Nigel Ward.

Jane Kenyon, North Yorkshire Police Authority, In My View By Nigel Ward.

“KOPZ & ROBBAZ” – In My View By Nigel Ward

Perhaps the most enduringly popular theme of books and films over the past century has been that of law enforcement versus criminality – cops and robbers – the guys in the white hats and the guys in the black ones – the ‘goodies’ and the ‘baddies’.

I suspect that much of the appeal lies in the fact that there is an underlying ambivalence in the way in which we relate to what have now become hackneyed stereotypes. Of course, we all aspire to living in a safe and just society, under the protection of law and order. But we resent abuse of authority and we often admire that daring individual, the ‘baddie’ who ‘bucks the system’. Many of the robbers of literature and cinema manifest something of the ‘Robin Hood’ charisma.

Why is it, though, that when ‘goodies’ turn bad, they evoke little sympathy from the general public?

Since my article “MAXWELL’S SILVER” a couple of weeks ago, in which I wrote about the astonishing arrogance and greed of the out-going North Yorkshire Police Chief Constable Grahame Maxwell and his already ‘retired’ number two, Deputy Chief Constable Adam Briggs, I have given much thought to a question that has been asked at least since Roman times:

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Who will guard the guards?

The question is especially timely, because the present system is about to undergo a sweeping reform. But before the changes are rung, I think we would all benefit from a brief look at the some of the shortcomings of the system that has so dismally failed the people of North Yorkshire – the North Yorkshire Police Authority (NYPA), under the Chairmanship (since 2002) of Councillor Jane Kenyon, who is also a leading Conservative Councillor with SBC and NYCC, and sits on an astonishing number of other bodies.

So let us begin by establishing how the NYPA sees its role in the community. I quote from the home-page of their web-site:

The Authority’s Primary Responsibilities are:

  • To secure an efficient and effective police service on behalf of the local community
  • To hold the Chief Constable to account for police performance, on behalf of local people
  • To ensure that there is continuous improvement in the delivery of the police service in our area

By those criteria, failing to audit over eighty-one thousand pounds of ‘personal development funding’ for the two top cops is a truly wretched performance.

By those criteria, failing to respond to allegations of corruption in the North Yorkshire Police made in Parliament by Lord Maginnis of Drumglass, and publicly by Chartered Accountant Timothy Hicks FCA concerning the Hofschröer fraud alleged to have been committed by Police officers, or to instruct CC Grahame Maxwell, his new Deputy CC Tim Madgwick (soon to be temporary CC himself) or Head of the Public Standards Directorate Steve Read to deny, or even to respond to, those allegations is utterly incomprehensible – and inexcusable. Nor, I am told, has any member of the NYPA responded to any correspondence from Mr Hicks concerning the grave allegations of misconduct he has made over the Chief Officers’ expenses scandal, which no-one has denied and which everyone is apparently afraid to address.

So what sorts of people have been administrating ‘the Authority’s Primary Responsibilities’?

Let us take a look.

Supporting the Chair, the aforementioned Councillor Jane Kenyon, we have:

Mr Bill Baugh – Vice Chair – also sits on the North Yorkshire Probation Board.

Mr Jeremy Holderness – Chief Executive Officer (the man who described Independent Police Complaints Commissioner Nicholas Long’s condemnation of the ‘personal development funding’ fiasco as “disproportionate”).

Ms Joanna Carter – Chief Financial Officer of North Yorkshire Police and until recently the Treasurer of the NYPA, a CIPFA qualified accountant.

Councillor Polly English (LibDem), NYCC – also Cllr for Craven District Council, and Skipton Town Council.

Councillor Jason Fitzgerald-Smith – Malton Town Council (Deputy Mayor).

Councillor Fiona Fitzpatrick (Lab) City of York Council.

Councillor David Ireton (Con) NYCC – also Cllr for Craven District Council.

County Councillor Janet Jefferson (Ind) NYCC – also Cllr for Scarborough Borough Council.

Councillor Carl Les (Con) – Cllr for Hambleton District Council, also Aiskew & Leeming Bar Parish Council.

Councillor Brian Marshall (Lab) NYCC – also Cllr for Selby District Council, and Barlby & Osgodby Parish Council

Councillor Keith Orrell (LibDem) – Councillor for City of York Council, and Huntington Parish Council.

Mrs Rajinder Richards – Solicitor.

Councillor Helen Swiers JP (Con) NYCC – Chair of Scalby Branch, Whitby and Scarborough Conservative Association.

Mrs Erica Taylor – Justice of the Peace.

Mr Tony Hargreaves – Justice of the Peace.

The first thing to note is that every one of them has a wide ambit of experience; these are by no means beginners in the world of administration. They are old hands. Experts.

So how could they conceivably have handed out £81K in so-called ‘personal development funds’ (on top of handsome salaries, perks and pensions – and, in Maxwell’s case, a £250K ‘golden-handshake) free of all accountability?

How can it be acceptable for the accountant that is entrusted with exercising financial control over the NYP (Ms Joanna Carter) to also be the accountant responsible for preparing those accounts; why did Ms Carter agree that the Chief Police Officers allowances should be free of Audit – and did she withhold this information from the auditors?

It is difficult, in any circumstances, to conceive of a more profligate attitude to the tax-payers’ money. How could these widely experienced stalwarts of public service possibly prove so extraordinarily careless and inept?

I wonder if it is not a matter of ineptitude at all. I wonder if they have taken such a dissolute attitude to those ‘personal development funds’ out of a sense of embarrassment over the NYPA’s own claims of £400K in ‘allowances’ over the past two years alone?

Who else is receiving this ‘personal development funding’?

On 13th April 2012, I lodged an FOIA request with NYPA (acknowledged the same day). Do the Police Authority’s Prime Responsibilities not include monitoring the legal requirements of its own FOIA department?

Here is the information that I requested:

1) A complete and comprehensive list, including names, ranks and numbers of officers of the NYP, including the Public Standards Directorate (or department), and including the NYP Authority itself, who are, or have within the past five years have been, in receipt of ‘personal development’ funding.

2) a complete accounting, officer by officer, of how that funding has been spent.

I would contend that if the NYPA has been fulfilling its own remit, then this information must be on file and readily available to their scrutiny – and ours. But no doubt I will have to wait until the very last day upon which a response MUST be provided – 14th May 2012. Then, and only then, it will most probably be deemed ‘vexatious’.

And speaking of access to information, I am puzzled, too, about why it seems to be so difficult to access information about the business interests of some of the NYPA members – Councillor Jane Kenyon, in particular.
It can be done, though – and traced back over the decades. Only the most relentless investigators have been down that long and winding road, fenced on both sides. It winds through much of rural Yorkshire, on its way to Companies House.

Very recently, Ms Carole Dunn (NYCC Assistant Chief Executive and Head of Legal) refused to process a complaint regarding Councillor Kenyon’s interests, on the grounds that she had received a complaint some time before in respect of “an interest in a company with a similar name”.

Excuse me?

How can this be in accordance with NYCC’s commitment to openness and accountability – publicly endorsed by the Labour, Conservative and LibDem parties, whose policies NYPA members represent, and upon which they were elected?

But Councillor Jane Kenyon steps down from the NYPA from November this year, when the whole system is scheduled to be revamped. With NYCC elections due next May (2013), and many of her other interests dissolved, I rather expect to see her take a step back from public life and enjoy a comfortable retirement in a sumptuous villa in Sharm al-Siyalehta.

‘Progress’ manifests itself in strange ways. As in most aspects of modern life, perpetrators of crime have refined their techniques to elude justice – just as the law enforcers have refined theirs.

Both sides have now reached such rarefied levels of sophistication that it is becoming increasingly difficult to tell the cops from the robbers.

Let me conclude by returning, for a moment, to the Romans – source of so many pearls of wisdom down the years.

 “Caveat emptor”.

“Let the buyer beware” – meaning that the responsibility rests with he/she who buys to take good care that he/she receives full value for his/her investment of money.

I offer an addendum to that advice:

“Caveat elector”.

“Let the voter beware” – meaning that the responsibility rests with he/she who votes to take good care that he/she receives full value for his/her investment of trust.

I hope that in November we shall have the opportunity to vote for and elect an honourable Police & Crime Commissioner in whom we may with confidence invest our trust.

Perhaps he or she will even police the Police.


More From Nigel

Related reading:

About the Author:

Website Admin for the Real Whitby Website. All authors of the Real Whitby Website have access to publish on the website. Individual authors will usually sign off their articles with their own names.

29 Comments

  1. Impartial Observer May 2, 2012 at 8:46 am - Reply

    One wonders of Ms Kenyon will take a fence?

    • spw May 8, 2012 at 2:27 am - Reply

      bhs lawyers station parade remain silent upon dr geddes nyypct mallicious claims and fraudulent acout me.hempsons ignore the law and human rights and are aware abuse of process!the signatures are there and sent to lincoln police where jeremy clough is.alleged criminals in the nhs keep it in the family all linked.

  2. F L C May 2, 2012 at 10:16 am - Reply

    Once more we have a group of elite ‘leaders’ who have surrounded themselves with what seems to be colleagues who are just as corrupt.
    The most amusing thing is that the only other people we can turn to (as the last post suggests) are the corrupt MP’s.
    Although, as in the olden days, when a good lynch mob kept the corruption and withces to a minimum, it could be said that the argument exists for the public to be forming a posse and having a word or two.
    I read recently that a study has concluded that power is as addictive as cocaine. If thats how it is, then these people should check themselves into a clinic as soon as possible.
    For some of them though, an asylum might be a better idea. But that’s just an opinion.

  3. SJ Chapman May 2, 2012 at 5:53 pm - Reply

    Nigel,

    I’ve been trying to post a comment in response to your “Sirius Attempt” column at http://www.real-whitby.co.uk/york-potash-a-sirius-attempt but for some reason, the comments are closed.

    • admin May 2, 2012 at 7:15 pm - Reply

      Hi There, comments arent closed. If you look at the bottom of the article you will see a facebook comment section. Due to the large number of trolls posting under pseudonyms we took this option to ensure people post under their own names. All future Sirius articles will be dealt with this way. Also please dont post off topic like this again as we shall have to delete them.

  4. Vanda Inman May 3, 2012 at 8:07 am - Reply

    Dear Mrs Wilkinson,

    REGISTER OF INTERESTS – COUNCILLOR JANE KENYON

    Thank you for meeting with me today at 2.00 pm to show me the Register of Interests as declared by Councillor Jane Kenyon in May 2011. I have been able to access all other Councillor’s Register of Interests via SBC’s Website, and I did wonder why Ms Jane Kenyon’s Register of Interests was not on the Borough Council’s website.

    Of particular Interest I am wondering why Jane Margaret Kenyon’s Directorship of Whitby Regatta Ltd was not declared. I understand, from Companies House that Whitby Regatta Ltd, Co No 07693284 is Registered at 5 Bobbies Bank Whitby, YO21 1EF and has 7 Directors including Jane Margaret Kenyon. This Company was incorporated on 5th July 2011 with a year-end 31/07.

    I was very surprised this had not been included on the Register of Interests, especially when you confirmed that the Interest declared in May 2011 of Whitby Regatta was of a Charity Status. Indeed you did also confirm that if Ms Jane Kenyon had a Directorship of a Ltd Co then this should have been declared also. As should any property owned and let out by Ms Jane Kenyon.

    In fact you also confirmed that amendments to the Register of Interest had to be made within 28 days. Since this undeclared Interest in Whitby Regatta Ltd has exceeded the 28 day time limit I am therefore requesting that this matter be reported to the Standards Committee and a full investigation into the affairs and relationship between Jane Kenyon and of Whitby Regatta and Whitby Regatta Ltd are undertaken.

    I would also respectfully request that the business carried out at 5 Bobbies Bank, Whitby, YO21 1EF be affirmed and also an investigation to ascertain if Ms Jane Kenyon has any other properties registered in her name, especially for business purposes, that she has not declared.

    Most of all I am concerned that Whitby Regatta, a traditional annual event, run by many volunteers and residents of Whitby seems to have become incorporated and therefore an ‘ownership’ seems to have been claimed.

    Please acknowledge this Complaint and forward me your earliest response and action taken as a result of this complaint. If it would be more convenient then please email me.
    Yours faithfully

    Vanda Inman

    Cc NYCC

    • Jane Swales May 5, 2012 at 6:09 pm - Reply

      @ Vanda Inman

      Just a suggestion, but what about putting this directly to the Police Authority.

      Your comment “Does the Law choose its enforcers or do the enforcers choose the Law?” is very pertinent.

      It would be interesting to see if the Police Authority has any interest to declare in policing its own leading lady.

    • Richard Ineson June 11, 2012 at 7:32 am - Reply

      Have you had any response to your enquiries re Miss Kenyon’s Declaration of Interests?

      • Vanda L June 12, 2012 at 6:57 pm - Reply

        Yes – Under Decision – “The committee looked at Cllr Kenyon’s register of interests and noted that she had in fact registered that she was a director and President of Whitby Regatta but that this had been placed in the box for charities when at that time it was not a charity. However the committee noted that Cllr Kenyon had stated that the application for Charitable status was pending. Technically there may have been a very minor breach but this did not warrant any further action ….”

        needless to say given that the Declaration was signed in May and the Company formed in July this does not make for a logical decision – I will pursue…

  5. Vanda Inman May 3, 2012 at 8:14 am - Reply

    So, I may as well have put that complaint in the bin then, after reading Nigel’s article. Though Gill Wilkinson said – “its a criminal offence” one wonders if that means anything in this Authority. Does the Law choose its enforcers or do the enforcers choose the Law?

  6. Richard Ineson May 7, 2012 at 11:03 am - Reply

    The North Yorkshire Police Authority is soon to be abolished, during recent years we have seen mismanagement of public money by this body and dishonourable conduct from senior police officers.
    The people of North Yorkshire have undoubtedly been badly served by both the members of the North Yorkshire Police Authority, the members of which are : –
    :- Chair Cllr. Jane Kenyon, Mr. Bill Baugh, Cllr. Carl Les, Mr.Tony Hargreaves J.P., Cllr. Keith Orrell, Cllr. Helen Swiers, Cllr. Polly English, Cllr. Fiona Fitzpatrick, Cllr. David Ireton, Cllr. Janet Jefferson, Cllr. Brian Marshall, Mr. Jason Fitzgerald – Smith, Mrs. Erica Taylor J.P., Mrs. Rajinda Richards, Dr. Craig Shaw, and Mr. Ian Whittaker J.P.
    and also the North Yorkshire Police Authority Management Board, the members of which are
    : -Chair Cllr. Jane Kenyon, Vice Chair Mr. Bill Baugh, Mr. Tony Hargreaves J.P, Cllr. Carl Les and Cllr. Keith Orrell.
    The Management Board has delegated powers to enable it to ensure, that amongst many other things,
    The Authority (NYPA) operates in an open and transparent manner
    The Authority (NYPA) has a high profile and standing
    It monitors expenditure, (which presumably includes salaries and allowances paid to the employees of the Authority, including its Chief Officers) against the Authority’s budget.
    The actions of the NYPA have been criticised by the Independent Police Complaints Commission, who said that, ‘the Authority’s lack of control was unacceptable’ and also by Hugh Bayley M.P. former M.P Phil Willis and Julian Smith M.P.
    But strangely, only eight out of seventy two Councillors supported a motion criticising Grahame Maxwell for wasting tax payers’ money.
    The most notable/outrageous/scandalous/disgraceful events in the recent past, which I can recall are:-
    The squandering of £500,000 on providing Volvo V70 and Range Rover vehicles for senior police officers who were not qualified to drive these vehicles on police business.
    The £28,000 shower installed in the office of Chief Constable Della Canning.
    Then there is the matter of Peta Ackerley the wife of former Police Superintendent (in charge of NYPA police force training) who received £400,000 from the force in payments to her training companies, companies which, according to an audit report, ‘often got work without going through proper procurement procedures’.
    Superintendent Ackerley escaped disciplinary action after his application to retire , after thirty years service, was accepted by Chief Constable Grahame Maxwell; on this point, officers have the right to retire after thirty years, but where disciplinary charges are outstanding this right can be waived until the charges have been heard, in this case this was not done.
    Phil Willis, M.P. For Harrogate and Knaresborough at the time said, “Hopefully, this brings to an end a period when NY Police had a cavalier attitude to accountability for public money”. High hopes indeed.
    Then there are the circumstances surrounding the early retirement of Assistant Chief Constable, David Collins in July 2009,who earned a £100,000 salary, and who went off on the sick in November 2008, claiming stress, and was still off work in June 2009, on half his salary.
    On June 4 he attended a University of York conference and handed out flyers to delegates to promote his life coaching consultancy service.
    But, unfortunately for Mr Collins, one of the conference delegates was his former boss, North Yorkshire’s ex-Chief Constable Della Cannings, who promptly reported him to North Yorkshire Police Authority.
    They investigated and discovered Mr Collins was also offering mentoring services via the internet.
    The 49-year-old was allowed to back up his business qualifications with training while he worked as a policeman, but he did not have permission to seek customers for his business.
    Shortly after being discovered by Ms Cannings, Mr Collins went on holiday. When he returned he discovered that the police authority wanted to relieve him of his post. Instead Mr Collins, of Monk Fryston near Selby, successfully applied for retirement. Because of this he will still receive a six-figure sum for his 30 years of service.
    Jeremy Holderness, the chief executive of North Yorkshire Police Authority, said: “Although the authority considered all options with regard to the conduct of Mr Collins in the circumstances, it was not possible to instigate formal disciplinary action against him as he was no longer a serving police officer.
    There are other considerations here of course – if Mr.Collins was too sick to work, he was presumably claiming sickness/incapacity benefit, under the terms of which, the claimant is not allowed to do any work of any kind, perhaps the Dept. of Work and Pensions might have an interest in reclaiming any benefits which might have been paid in this case.
    The nepotism cases which resulted in the resignation/early retirement of Adam Briggs and Graham MaxwellIt has previously been revealed that the Independent Police Complaints Commission spent £100,000 investigating claims that Mr Maxwell and his deputy, Adam Briggs, unfairly helped relatives during a recruitment exercise for new police officers last year.
    Two counts of misconduct were upheld against Mr Briggs in December and he retired from the force earlier this year. But the main focus of the investigation and subsequent disciplinary action was Mr Maxwell, with tens of thousands of pounds mounting up in legal costs after the Chief Constable initially challenged the charge of gross misconduct.
    He only admitted the charge last month and was given a final written warning. The full police authority costs for bringing the cases against Mr Maxwell and Mr Briggs were £218,456. Around £19,000 was spent on inquiries involving both officers – but the bulk was spent solely on the Chief Constable’s case.
    If Mr Maxwell had admitted gross misconduct last October, most of the £200,000 costs could have been avoided. It is understood it may still have cost around £20,000 to carry out the formalities of a hearing.
    Skipton and Ripon Tory MP Julian Smith, who previously described Mr Maxwell’s position as “untenable”, said:
    “Taken with the one hundred thousand pounds spent by the Independent Police Complaints Commission, the amount of money this investigation has cost so far is over a quarter of a million pounds. In addition, this is not necessarily the end of the money spent as these figures do not include any money spent by the force itself.
    “Had the Chief Constable admitted his guilt late last year, instead of at the very last minute, hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money could have been saved on legal costs. It is deeply regrettable that during challenging financial times, the actions of the county’s leading police officer should have cost the Police Authority so much.
    “Whether it’s been the communities of North Yorkshire or police officers themselves, the people I’ve spoken to have been very clear. They have been shocked by this situation and I think they will be even more surprised by these costs.”
    York Labour MP Hugh Bayley, who previously suggested the Chief Constable should consider his position, said:
    “With the police budget being so squeezed by the Government, it’s tragic that so much money has been spent on this. Money is desperately needed for front-line policing.”
    The police authority said it had nothing to add to a statement made last month which said Mr Maxwell “could have avoided organisational and personal turmoil and unnecessary cost to the council tax payer” if he had admitted his guilt late last year.
    Responding to a freedom of information request, the North Yorkshire Force last night said it had spent £1,171.00 on advice from legal counsel in relation to the inquiries into Mr Maxwell and Mr Briggs and also £1,763.88 on a public relations agency.
    Mr Maxwell declined to comment.
    The enquiry/hearing was held in secret, at a secret location, strange then that the North Yorkshire Police Authority Management Board proclaims that one of its aims is to ensure that NYPA operates in an ‘open and transparent manner’.
    Then of course, the revelations about enormous sums of money spent on ‘personal development’ by Adam Briggs and Graham Maxwell.
    NYPA chief executive Jeremy Holderness said the allowances were designed to ensure its Chief Constable and their deputy could “perform at the top of their game” and “develop into more senior roles”.
    He said: “Such allowances are not unfamiliar in policing, or indeed many other avenues of business, and they are seen to be quite reasonable in the circumstances of employment of senior professionals.”
    He said such allowances were generally beneficial, and called the IPCC response “disproportionate”, but said: “We agree that, in this instance, sadly the arrangements might not have operated as we would have wished and we have learned lessons for the future.”

    NYPA RIP

  7. Jon Risdon May 7, 2012 at 11:23 am - Reply

    Well done Richard Ineson, supporting Nigel’s hard work, with your exhaustive research; whilst I feel greatly assured that there are such conscientious members of the public who are willing to undertake essential voluntary work in the public interest, at the same time I am appalled that it would appear to be impossible to rely on ‘the authorities’ to promote or preserve integrity within their ranks, and thoroughly & effectively root out criminal transgressors, all of whom squander money which is apparently in such short supply, and should be put to more effective use.

    • Richard Ineson May 7, 2012 at 2:51 pm - Reply

      Jon,
      I agree, the most shameful part of this catalogue this flagrant misuse/abuse of the pursey is that this money could have been better used to provide sweeties and toys for deprived children or facilities for the elderly, to improve their lives. Just what was the Police Authority thinking about?

      • Richard Ineson May 7, 2012 at 3:13 pm - Reply

        Jon,

        Stanley Unwin seems to have had a hand in my last reply. This is what I meant to say – I agree, the most shameful part of this flagrant abuse/misuse of the public purse is that this money, could have been better spent on providing sweeties and toys for deprived children and facilities for the elderly, to improve their lives. Just what was the Police Authority thinking of? I think that we should be told.

        • Nigel Ward May 8, 2012 at 9:35 pm - Reply

          My learned friend has just directed me to the following document:

          http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/police/new-landscape-policing?view=Binary

          Its closing paragraph makes salutary reading:

          “The Government strongly agrees with the Committee that Sir Robert Peel’s principles should continue to inform the reform of policing in the 21st century. We have given the police one mission – to cut crime. We will support them in doing so by replacing bureaucratic interference with democratic accountability and ensure a better national grip in the fight against serious crime.”

          That ‘democratic accountability’ is coming – ready or not.

        • Jon Risdon May 12, 2012 at 12:02 pm - Reply

          Horribold!

  8. spw May 7, 2012 at 10:55 pm - Reply

    the pct also deprived the children with muscular dystrophy of services,lord walton did a report.appalling ,the blind services cut.the sha wasting money nice dinners ,flash cars.while patients!denied treatment !all linked to corruption!look private eye!

  9. david clark May 10, 2012 at 9:52 am - Reply

    the chief constable of north yorkshire police grahame maxwell will leave the position during the month of may.mr.maxwell was appointed to the position in may 2007.north yorkshire police authority management board are responsible for senior appointments to north yorkshire police,chairman of the management board at the time of the chief constables appointment was cnty cllr kenyon. between the dates 05th october 2006 and 31st july 2007 cnty cllr kenyon had an undeclared interest in a company dales timber ltd co no 05467739 of whitby road pickering. the company had a business trading relationship with three public authorities also undeclared. these errors would appear to put cnty cllr kenyon in breach of the members code of conduct of several public authorities while participating in the process of appointing the chief constable.cnty cllr kenyon is listed as secretary, cfo,director,and agent for service of process, of a california corporation namely: co no999400 belvedere computers inc. 851 hinckley road, burlingame ca 94010. the corporation was suspended august 2nd 1982. by order of the franchise tax board sacramento ca. as of april 27th 2012 the corporation was still suspended,the corporation as of that date had not been dissolved.”how can it be that an officer of a suspended california corporation can be chairman of a british police authority”? i asked the question at a recent police authority meeting, i never got an answer.

    • spw May 12, 2012 at 2:40 pm - Reply

      a national audit is required into nyypct.the sha-york districts spending,i also draw to the attention dr geddes moving me round practices every 7days allocations 3months,to show we hate complainants 4years how much administration is that?what about nyp litigation bill?false arrests,bujying claims?

  10. Nigel Ward May 10, 2012 at 10:38 am - Reply

    @ david clark:

    David, a detailed study of the business dealings and Register of Interests history of both Ms Kenyon and her consort is presently under way. Ms Gill Wilkinson of Scarborough Borough Council Legal & Support Services has confirmed that failure to declare interests is a criminal matter. Quite rightly. I would advise passing the entirety of your research to Lord Maginnis’s investigator, Mr Timothy Hicks FCA.

  11. david clark May 10, 2012 at 1:54 pm - Reply

    nigel cnty cllr kenyon is cabinet member sbc for finance, procurement,and legal. how is that!!suspended corporation in california and all.

  12. Captain Crook , Federation of the Undeclared Enterprize May 10, 2012 at 3:24 pm - Reply

    At the Urban Area Forum’s “An Elected Police and Crime Commissioner for North Yorkshire” on 9th May at Scarborough Library, it was of little interest to know who would be on the Independent Members Selection Panel. (there will be 10 District Authority members plus TWO independent Members who will support and scrutinize the Police and Crime Commissioner once elected in November). The applications to join the panel have to be in by 1st June 2012. Just in case anyone was looking for an enterprising side line, Jane Kenyon received circa £ 25 k for 2011 and £ 24 k for 2010. But such a sad loss to the NYPA of such a talented Chair is slightly diminished by the great news that she is on the selection panel, phew! As per the NYPA’s website. And so, if anyone is at all interested, is Jane Kenyon’s Register of Interests ; http://www.nypa.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=2922&p=0. No declarations there then. Please note that like the local Police Authority you should not have a criminal record or have a declaration of Bankruptcy. Though a few wound up companies with bad debts may get over looked. Talented unscrupulous entrepreneurs with ‘no distinguishing features’ can join our Federation of Undeclared Enterprise at anytime at no cost. (other than to the public purse).

    • Richard Ineson June 10, 2012 at 8:17 am - Reply

      The contents of the Register of Interests pertaining to Miss Kenyon vary from Authority to Authority in which she plays a part NYPA,NYCC, SBC. The SBC list is the most sparse and, to my mind, is very misleading, in that, each entry for each interest contains the word ‘none’ and then, right at the end, in small print is stated ‘Cllr. Kenyon’s Register of Interests can be seen by application to Gill Wilkinson.’ Incidentally I have applied to see these interests twice with no response.
      The NYCC and the NYPA Registers are a bit more forthcoming, but are we being told the full story?

      I can think of a few items that perhaps should be listed but do not seem appear in the Register, why is this so? I think that we should be told.

  13. Nigel Ward May 15, 2012 at 7:38 am - Reply

    My attention has been drawn to a letter in the Whitby Gazette recently, entitled:

    POLICE AUTHORITY FUNDING IN QUESTION

    A very interesting read. Here it is:

    http://www.whitbygazette.co.uk/news/letters/police-authority-funding-in-question-1-4459381

    The underlying theme is the usual one –

    “Where’s the money?”

  14. Nigel Ward June 6, 2012 at 4:51 pm - Reply

    Yorkshire Post – Published on Friday 1 June 2012

    http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/at-a-glance/main-section/senior-tory-drops-out-of-police-job-race-1-4605232

    “The taxpayer isn’t going to be paying £70,000 a year for a commissioner who is then going to be spending a third or more of their time as a councillor.”

    “There has to be a divorce between the two.”
    ___________________________________________________

    Of course, it was alright when it was the mere £25K p.a. ‘expenses’ Jane has been claiming.

  15. Dave Heselton June 7, 2012 at 8:09 am - Reply

    Whatever happens, we will have someone in charge of our police force who is officialy a representetive of the Conservative Party who backs Conservative policies and ideology, someone who believes that cutting the forces budget by one quarter will have no effect on the ability to fight crime. Police Commissioners will politicise our police forces up and down the country and put too much power in the hands of one person. Last night I saw a G24 prison van parked next to a police car in Whitby, the slogan on the side of the prison van stated “supporting your local police”, has NYP decided to go along with Lincolnshire Police in partialy privatizing jobs normaly done by the local cops. ?

  16. Richard Ineson June 9, 2012 at 7:53 pm - Reply

    Never has the maxim, ‘The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is that good men should do nothing’ more fittingly been demonstrated, than by the facts surrounding this astounding, blatant and indefensible abuse of the pubic purse coupled with the prostitution of the integrity of the police force.

    No doubt there are some honest Councillors, and no doubt that there are some honest members of the North Yorkshire Police Authority and the North Yorkshire Police Authority Management Board, I do not believe that they are all snivelling sycophants and posturing windbags but, what the members of the North Yorkshire Police Authority and its Management Board all have in common is, that they are spineless.

    Even the most supine and guileless amongst them must have been aware of the shameless squandering of the public purse on expensive cars,to the tune of £500,000, which the police officers for whom they were intended, were not qualified to drive.

    These same people stood by whilst over £28,000 was spent on a shower.

    They stood by whilst thousands were squandered on so called ‘development courses’.

    They allowed patently culpable police officers to retire to avoid investigation.

    Then the appalling and shameless behaviour, in the nepotism cases, of the most senior police officers in our employ, resulting in extensive enquiries and a hearing which cost hundreds of thousands of pounds all compounded by the failure of Maxwell to admit his guilt at an early stage and mitigate the cost of the investigation.

    Where were these people whilst all this was going on?

    Cllr. Kenyon must accept most of the responsibility for these disgraceful episodes, as Chair of both of the controlling bodies, the NYPA and the NYPA Management Board, she has betrayed the trust of the people who elected her to office.

    But none of the members of either of these bodies are blameless, and none of them should be allowed to be considered for any position, in any capacity, connected with the North Yorkshire Police, or indeed public service of any kind, in the future.

    Let us hope that they themselves, realise that they are not of the substance and quality required to serve the public and have the good sense to retire, along with Cllr. Kenyon, from public life gracefully and permanently.

    In the name of God, go.

  17. lift boobs naturally April 2, 2013 at 10:39 am - Reply

    I don’t make it a habit to make comments on a lot of articles, yet this one deserves
    attention. I agree with the information you’ve written so eloquently here. Thanks.

  18. […] to my article on Councillor Jane Margaret Kenyon recently – and I am much heartened by the unprecedented public […]

Leave A Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

This Is A Custom Widget

This Sliding Bar can be switched on or off in theme options, and can take any widget you throw at it or even fill it with your custom HTML Code. Its perfect for grabbing the attention of your viewers. Choose between 1, 2, 3 or 4 columns, set the background color, widget divider color, activate transparency, a top border or fully disable it on desktop and mobile.

This Is A Custom Widget

This Sliding Bar can be switched on or off in theme options, and can take any widget you throw at it or even fill it with your custom HTML Code. Its perfect for grabbing the attention of your viewers. Choose between 1, 2, 3 or 4 columns, set the background color, widget divider color, activate transparency, a top border or fully disable it on desktop and mobile.