Widgetized Section
Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
Cornwall News
That Fearless Ballsy Website From Up North
Real Whitby
The Real Whitby Motto - Dont Feed The Moose.
County Elections: What sort of a County Councillor?
County Elections: What sort of a County Councillor?
– an ‘In My View’ article by Nigel Ward.
- With North Yorkshire County Council elections set to take place on Thursday 2nd May, what sort of a candidate do you hope to see elected in your ward?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The four-yearly vote to elect County Councillors will take place in around seven weeks time, and even though the ink is still wet on the nomination papers, some candidates are already out on the campaign trail.
As Real Whitby has reported, some of the present County Councillors have shown themselves in a very poor light throughout the past term, attracting local and national press criticism regarding a variety of corruption issues, so now is as good a time as any to consider some of the qualities that make for a candidate who is actually worthy of election.
We could do worse than to begin with the Lord Nolan’s Seven Principles of Public Life, reproduced here with their respective FreeDictionary definitions:
- Selflessness – having, exhibiting, or motivated by no concern for oneself; unselfish.
- Integrity – steadfast adherence to a strict moral or ethical code.
- Honesty – the quality or condition of being honest; truthfulness; sincerity.
- Openness – characterized by an attitude of ready accessibility; without concealment; not secretive.
- Accountability – responsibility to someone or for some activity.
- Objectivity – the state or quality of being objective.
- Leadership – the capacity or ability to lead.
Human nature being as it is, strict adherence to these Seven Nolan Principles may be hard enough to find in any one human being; they set a high standard – as they should. Nevertheless, as electors, we have every right to expect that those chosen to represent us in the administration of the public purse over the coming four years should at least be able to make a good fist of most of them. They must honour the public trust.
It is a lamentable fact that some of the present County Councillors can lay no credible claim to achieving anything approaching such standards.
Of the present 72 County Councillors, 37 (or 75%) of the 49 who also sit on ‘second-tier’ District or Borough Councils (as well as the City of York Council) have knowingly accepted Broadband Allowances from both the County Council and their respective for a single Broadband connection – ‘double-dipping’.
(From Scarborough Borough Council, only County Councillor Herbert TINDALL emerges with credit, having accepted only one Broadband Allowance. Regrettably, the word on the Conservative grapevine is that he has declared his intention not to stand again).
In doing so, these ‘double-dippers’ have actually been selfish, unethical, dishonest, secretive, unaccountable, biased and presented a very poor example – the diametric opposite of the standards defined by the Seven Nolan Principles.
Moving on . . .
What can you say about a County Councillor who wrote a deeply insulting and illiterate tirade to a member of the public? Lord Nolan would have been utterly appalled, but (quite incredibly) the NYCC Chief Exec Richard FLINTON and his Monitoring Officer Carole DUNN say that it is none of their concern.
And what can one say about County Councillors who, with the benefit of restricted information – acquired solely through the privilege of their positions – have tipped off friends, colleagues or family members (by blood and/or by marriage) to such profiteering opportunities as the infamous Extended Schools “Me Too!” Voucher Scheme, in which selected beneficiaries were able to profit from the sloppy design of the system and attempt large scale plunder of the public purse?
The Freedom of Information request responses that will support numerous allegations of gross abuse by some County Councillors in respect of the mileage claims they have submitted – Car Allowances – have yet to materialise. That is another example of Officers bending the rules to defend County Councillors’ wrong-doings, compounding their clear determination to conceal the identities of the culprits until after they have been safely re-elected.
And what about the car-sharing – where a single petrol bill can be claimed three or four times over, according to the number of people in the vehicle? Clearly, some of the present incumbents have entered public life not to serve the public; rather, to serve their own pockets.
And what of those County Councillors who, according to County Councillor Mike JORDAN, have falsely manipulated their attendance records (thereby wilfully misrepresenting the extent of their devotion to duty) by signing-in for Full Council Meetings (a full day’s commitment), then slipping away quietly (after a free lunch), and not bothering to attend the afternoon sessions.
One Councillor takes his wife to Northallerton to shop, signs in for Council, then leaves Council mid-morning when she texts to tell him she is ready to be picked up – thus saving the public purse the price of his free lunch. His attendance record, however, does not reflect his clear contempt for the duty he owes to the electorate who rely on him to represent their interests. He is an impostor.
But those who cause me the greatest concern are the Councillors who have engaged in blatant forgery of documents, including bank loan and company fraud, using the perceived power and influence of their positions to quite literally ‘con’ both institution and some of the more vulnerable members of the public – the same public whom they were elected to represent.
All of the above examples share one common denominator – total betrayal of the public trust.
Only the abject failure of malleable (or corrupt) Monitoring and Legal Officers to diligently apply the standards regulations – and, in some cases, to actively collude in cover-ups – has thus far prevented their prosecution.
In particular, NYCC Monitoring Officer, Ms Carole DUNN has accepted or confabulated the most implausible excuses and has been pilloried in Private Eye for her bizarre predetermination that Councillors are “entitled” to be reimbursed for the same expenditure twice!
It is a matter of the gravest concern that some of these County Councillors may be considering standing for re-election on the 2nd May – with many allegations remaining unresolved, since they have not been subject to anything remotely approaching a normal level of scrutiny, having been ‘investigated’ by Officers who have ignored and manipulated the requirements of the Standards legislation to secure Members’ exculpation. In a commercial organisation or any other Council in Europe, they would have been removed – and very likely prosecuted.
In a week’s time, we shall find out which of the incumbent Councillors have decided not to seek re-election, some of whom have been the subject of much speculation – County Councillor Jane KENYON in particular.
Those who choose to stand again without providing a full explanation of their conduct may confidently anticipate CORRUPTION emerging as the principal issue in this election.
What sort of a County Councillor do you want to represent your interests at the County Council?
The opening paragraphs of this article may serve to remind readers of the standards we have a right to expect.
We must thank Lord Nolan for his efforts, whilst recognizing that, thus far, his Seven Principles of Public Life read less like a benchmark and more like a wish list to the Tooth Fairy.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
23 Responses to County Elections: What sort of a County Councillor?
Leave a Reply
Say No To Joe
Suggested Reading
Stakesby Legs
March 14, 2013 at 5:55 pm
Well said, Mr Ward. But isn’t this what the Council Leaders should be saying?
Carole Gerada
March 14, 2013 at 6:25 pm
Well said, Nigel. I hope that people will realise that these are very local elections and electors need to choose someone with their best interests at heart.
There is an Application Hearing at Scarborough County Court on 19 April to consider the current County Councillor for Eastfield and Osgodby’s discrimination and breach of the Human Rights of a fellow Councillor.
I live in the hope that justice will out as it has once before.
Carole Gerada
Arthur
March 15, 2013 at 8:59 am
The policing of expenses/allowances etc is the responsibility of the officers – and the police. The very fact that ordinary members of the public have been able to expose wrong-doers is a clear indication that the system is either ineffectual or corrupt. Either way, Miss Dunn and her colleagues have a great deal to answer for, but there is obviously no will at the top to sort this out. That would mean attributing blame, and the local authorities are a “No Blame Zone” in our society. No blame = no accountability. That is a licence to carry on cheating. It’s time it was stopped.
Carole Gerada
March 15, 2013 at 11:31 am
Hear, hear, Arthur. There does appear to be a case of protecting ones own and a closing of ranks amongst those paid a salary out of the Tax payers purse. Not all employees but those in positions of power who need to protect each other. Personally I think it is criminal to knowingly allow colleagues to continue in their misdemeanors and not put a stop to it.
Nigel Ward
March 15, 2013 at 11:45 am
You are quite correct, Carole. It IS criminal.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/l_to_o/misconduct_in_public_office/#a04
MISCONDUCT IN PUBLIC OFFICE
Definition of the offence
The elements of the offence are summarised in Attorney General’s Reference No 3 of 2003 [2004] EWCA Crim 868. The offence is committed when:
- a public officer acting as such
- wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconducts himself
- to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder
- without reasonable excuse or justification
Hopefully Richard FLINTON (CEO at NYCC) will intervene to prevent matters progressing so far.
“Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law triable only on indictment. It carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. It is an offence confined to those who are public office holders and is committed when the office holder acts (or fails to act) in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office.”
sarraceniac
March 15, 2013 at 11:55 am
It is bad enough that the elected Councillors are indulging wholesale in ripping off the elecorate but when the senior officers are not only turning a blind eye and covering for them then one can only fell very sad about the future of our so-called democracy. A Borough and County Councillor had a formal complaint against him rejected by Richard Flinton because the complainer wanted to remain anonymous so I formally complained about the same Councillor on the same grounds. The reply I got from Herr Flinton was extremely rude and basically that I should shut up, and if I didn’t like it then go to the Local Government Ombudsman, well known for being toothless, ineffective and about as useful as a chocolate teapot. I am sure the complaint that I have against Flinton and his dictatorial attitude will now be dragging on for months or years by which time the County’s top civil servant (I use the term loosely) will be retired or I will be kicking up the daisies. This is just another way that the system protects itself. The boys in the band.
Carole Gerada
March 15, 2013 at 12:32 pm
Does the Law apply to elected Councillors as well? Or is it true that councillors are only accountable at election time every 4 years when people vote? This statement was made at a recent NALC conference by an existing County Councillor and noone, apart from me, disputed it.
Jon Risdon
March 15, 2013 at 12:34 pm
Apologies to the honest, well-intentioned & trustworthy public servants out there [of whom there are undoubtedly at least a few] but I have no faith in this system: it is broken and corrupt, from the bottom at local level, all the way to the top.
No, that’s wrong; it’s not broken: it was designed that way. Try to disabuse me of this belief by all means, but the evidence unequivocally supports my assertion.
Frank Chalmers
March 15, 2013 at 6:58 pm
When we have public servants who are blatantly covering for those elected members who are ripping off the public purse it suggests we should be handing these people a P45. It’s time we had elected public officials. Then we can at least be assured that we’d only get one term with bad public servants.
A law should be introduced stating that for every £1 stolen from the public purse, by “double-dippers” or elected members/public servant colleagues stealing by claiming extra mileage, then public servants should lose 10% of their salary. We’d soon see a huge reduction in theft from the public purse.
Just my two cents.
Carole Gerada
March 15, 2013 at 8:13 pm
I would like to see Councils operate on a business model where they employ qualified staff to run their departments and not buy in expensive experts to write their reports which then take meetings to deliberate over them and then they pay for expensive consultation only after various closed door meetings with elected councillors.
Councillors should be aware of what residents in their communities want and need from all the previous expensive public consultations.
There is no adherence to codes of conduct or ethics because nobody is accountable until the next election, which makes it a very long 4 years…
There is no one in control and therefore noone accountable. There is no Ombudsman. Autocracy rules and local government call it democracy because it is up to voters to vote. Shocking.
Ian Detute
March 15, 2013 at 8:16 pm
Well written Nigel.Its time the lot of them fell on their swords.
Tim Thorne
March 15, 2013 at 10:49 pm
Most are not honourable people so they won’t do that. We’ll have to do it the hard way. Sunday seems as good a day as any to start.
kathleen parker
March 15, 2013 at 10:21 pm
One things for certain Mr “honest and open” Joe Plant won’t be getting my vote.
Jane Swales
March 16, 2013 at 8:56 am
Every voter in the county of North Yorkshire should read this article. I expect we are going to see a considerable number of self-serving councillors ‘outed’ over the coming weeks. I will be sharing all of this material with everyone in my address book. If the authorities will not take action against these cheats, then the voters must. We all know the names of the ring-leaders. And the weak followers, Kathleen.
demon
March 16, 2013 at 7:35 pm
I am so relieved that at last all this corruption is out!
Carole Gerada
March 16, 2013 at 10:42 am
Well written, Kathleen. Unless the majority of voters are actually happy with the way things are and it is just us who aren’t?
people do need to vote otherwise things won’t change.
Tom Brodrick
March 16, 2013 at 7:54 pm
It is such a shame that Council Leader of the Labour Group for Scarborough, Whitby & Filey, Cllr Broadbent does not lead by example.
I never thought I’d ever rip up my membership due to the actions of a Council Leader of a Labour Group.
Even Conservative Cllr Herbert Tindall had the decency to do the right thing and realise that having a single broadband connection in one’s home but being paid for it twice – by both Scarborough Borough Council and North Yorkshire County Council – was not the done thing and Cllr Tindall I believe wrote to the Council declining to accept it.
Cllr Broadbent £765 ! ! !
That’s an annual heating bill for one of Cllr Broadbents constituents.
Let’s have Labour Cllr Collin Challen as the Leader of the Labour Group?
Labour SBC Cllr Challen seems to have a better grasp on codes of conduct and Nolan’s Seven Principals, the Seven Principles of Public Service which underpin the integrity of public officials.
Tom Brodrick
Nigel Ward
March 18, 2013 at 12:55 pm
Have you been offered the courtesy of a response – or even an acknowledgement – from Councillor Eric BROADBENT yet, Tom?
Or a statement for publication from the Scarborough & Whitby branch of the Labour Party?
Or are they all hoping to lie doggo until after the County election?
I went to Scarborough one day nearly a year ago, specifically to apprise Councillors Eric BROADBENTm David BILLINGS and Steve BAIRSTOW of the mounting evidence of corruption in the Borough. Vanda took me to David BILLINS’ house, at his invitation, but Eric BROADBENT (Leader of the Labour Group) declined to discuss the matter, forbidding his two colleagues to do so, either.
At that time, I had no knowledge of Councillor Eric BROADBAND’s history of double-dipping. But I did wondered why evidence of corruption was taboo as far as the Labour Group Leaderrship was concerned . . .
Vanda Inman
March 25, 2013 at 12:58 pm
I can understand why you ripped up your membership card, though I do hope you are still a Labour Party Member – you can have more influence as a Member than a non member. And, that said it is also for the Tories to sort their own out.
Cliff Street
March 25, 2013 at 12:10 pm
Leveson – exemplary damages!
Something I read in the FT
“Under one clause in the bill, any website that generates news material and has an editorial structure would be liable for exemplary damages if they were found guilty of libel. At present only a small number of publishers, such as student publications and scientific journals, would be excluded from this.”
admin
March 25, 2013 at 12:31 pm
Cant take what we don’t have. Couple of hundred pounds worth of stuff in my rented flat and not a right lot in the bank. I dont even think Nigel has a TV. Guess they will have to jail us all. Free The Whitby 5.
Vanda Inman
March 25, 2013 at 1:06 pm
I thought this was a scientific journal? Researched, tried and testing! lol.
Carole Gerada
March 25, 2013 at 5:16 pm
I am yet to find any of this publication to be unfactual to date. On the other hand, I am yet to read anywhere where questions asked on this site has been provided with answers other than those published by this site through its researchers from published material in the public domain.
Nothing published on this site can therefore be classified as libel.