Well I've had my leaflet for the parish council members trading as Keep Misterton a Village. What a lot of vitriol being spouted. I thought parish council election were about residents wanting to do their bit for the village not a political statement, that to me appears to be levelled at one person.
Is it this party 'machines' at it again by the back door, just like last time, when they thought they might get beaten in the last District Council elections. According to what I'm told a campaign of intimidation was started aimed at smearing an individual, aided by two of the current councillors who seem to be at it again. You can only take this form of vitriol so far and then people begin to question your motives. Massaging the truth, isn't that more what you get in Parliament not in a village election. I suspect that this might be a a mighty bollock dropped as it smacks of sheer spite and as a Conservative voter it has left a nasty taste in my mouth.
Interesting bit about the higher peak in council tax in 2006 of £65,580 and the whopping lie that the current parish council brought it down from that amount. Wasn't that to do with a one off increase for one year only and reduced by £15,000 the following year, used to cover any legal fees for the Packet Inn site. An excellent investment for residents, that resulted in over £105,000 into the parish council's bank account. As I remember at the time, it was fully documented in the parish newsletter. Well worth the money in my view but of course they have to put a negative spin on it for their own benefit, which really does call into question their judgement.
What about the other little snippet, legal fees paid by the council; where we get back to the intimidation on the parish council, aided by two current parish council members who submitted numerous Code of Conduct complaints against a lady, resulting in an arse smacking from the Standards Board for England for unethical conduct. I wonder how much that little enterprise cost the District Council. Oh what a tangled web! A Parish Council that stands by its chairman should be applauded, doubt this one would get the same level of support.
Oh and the anon letters, which they hate to hear about for some unknown reason, until it suits them. £10,000 spent by the district council, they had to spend it, an investigation into leaks from their own confidential Standards Committee. Wouldn't you be up in arms if someone accused you of pilfering from the village till. You would certainly want to know who, (although I understand two parties have been identified). That false accusation has been put to bed well and truly.
Picnic tables yet again! Are they so bloody minded that they don't recognise the truth or do they just want to stretch it for their own convenience. Quite honestly I have never come across such appalling behaviour from so called elected representatives of this parish. Maybe this is why we are not a Quality Council?
Funny how they have never mentioned the garden of poor taste in our lovely village and the awful amount of money spent, courtesy of course on the £105,000 plus money received from the Packet Inn, which they continue to spend with largesse. Of course they have also never mentioned the numerous achievements by the previous administration in their leaflet of poor taste and judgement.
They did make clear one thing though, we are allowed 13 votes but don't have to use them all. I know which residents I'm voting for and it certainly doesn't include the likes of non residents muscling in where they are not wanted.
The most dubious election manifesto I've ever seen. I could go on at length, but will just make three comments in order not to bore readers.
ReplyDelete1. The statement that Bassetlaw District Council asked Cllr. Brand to resign from the Standards Committee is seriously untrue. Cllr. Brand has every right to sue for libel.
2. The implied claim that the current administration reduced the precept by over £14,000 is another whopper. The reduction from £65,580 to £49,750 in 2010/11 was achieved by the former administration, following resolution of the Station Road common land legal dispute and sale of the village hall (expenses incurred in administering the village hall were reclaimed by the Parish Council on sale).
3. The £10,450 spent by Bassetlaw on the anonymous letters investigation was its own investigation into the leak of confidential information from its Standards Committee and its misuse in the anonymous letters. The cost to Misterton council tax payers came to pennies, as the cost was met throughout Bassetlaw.
However, the suggestion that the cost is somehow the fault of the victims is pathetic. People who have had defamatory material circulated about them, suggesting they are corrupt, have every right to seek justice. The current Parish Council administration has throughout refused to discuss the matter with the victims. If, however, there's a change of control on the Parish Council following the election, things could change.
David Wright