To set the scene, Whitby Town Council has recently been critical of Scarborough Borough Council (SBC) and some of its councilors and officers. I’m not going to go into to much detail of this other than to say evidence of this is available on our website.
In my opinion, as is always the case with Scarborough Borough Council, rather than looking at the matter at hand, and dealing with it if necessary.
They instead adopt one of several approaches to shoot down anyone who dares to be critical of them :
- If they think they can get away with it, they ridicule the individual who is being critical. Casting them as the village idiot or the “looney left”, often using the Whitby Gazette to help with their quest.
- If the person is not put off by the undignified attempts to ridicule them, Scarborough Council ignore the criticism, never answer any complaints and even go as far as banning the person from ever contacting the council again via email. Tom Brodrick himself can vouch for this tactic of SBC.
- If the audience is a big one, like the 30,000 readers who read Real Whitby every month, they take the underhand approach of trying to delete the means of communication used by those being critical. Like trying to have Real Whitby deleted from the internet, and threatening its contributors, who are many and varied, with legal action and even the possibility of being arrested for criminal behaviour. All this with no actual presentation of any evidence at all.
- If the critical body is one they cant deal with using any of the methods above, they then write to those being critical, in this case Whitby Town Council, and tell them that basically they are not aloud to have such an opinion and should not be critical of Scarborough Borough Council in any way shape of form. Basically banning them from ever opposing any policy of the senior authority. In laymans terms “Shut up and go away we don’t like your attitude”
So my question would be, what is the use of a council who will not be criticised ? Scarborough Borough Council appear to spend time and money on the defense of justified criticism rather than actually acting to correct what it is they are being criticised of.
You may well ask, is the criticism of Scarborough Borough Council justified.
Well in defense of Whitby Town Council, I believe they are well and trully justified to be critical of SBC and in particular Councilor Cokerill.
I have witnessed Councilor Cockerill’s rude and unacceptable emails to Jackie Greaves of Whitby Angling Supplies.
Jackie dared to ask why Council actions had effected her business at a very busy time of the year for her. His rude, dismissive and abrupt tone of reply was unjustified.
Councillor Cockerill is supposed to be working with the people of Whitby rather than against them.
There are many more examples I could give of Councolor Cockeril’s behavior. I may save them for a later date.
So with the scene now set, here is Tom Brodricks letter to Scarborough Borough Council about Nolans Principles.
Dear Mr Kitson
Since when did SBC and the majority of SBC’s elected councillors abide by Nolan’s Principles?
The principles are how you should behave when dealing with members of the public.
In my opinion your behavior falls way short of Nolan’s Principles.
In my opinion the behavior of SBC towards WTC falls way short of Nolan’s Principles.
I’ve yet to find anyone who has received an actual reply from correspondence to your Chief Exec Jim Dillon!
Cllrs Mike Ward & Ian Havelock have yet to receive a single reply from Jim Dillon.
That’s hardly someone who abides by Nolan’s Principles.
Practice what you preach Mr Kitson.