• Ledbury Blog
  • Stuff
  • Who?
  • Let's Talk
  • Here nor There
    • Nature Corner
  • Contact
  • Ledbury Blog
  • Stuff
  • Who?
  • Let's Talk
  • Here nor There
    • Nature Corner
  • Contact
RICH HADLEY

Thinking around.

What about you?

Why the number 7 matters. 

30/4/2015

0 Comments

 
PictureBrick wall
How many times have I been told: ‘Leave it alone Rich. Seven grand – it’s such a trivial amount of money to be making such a fuss over’? 


Call me old fashioned, but when it comes to public money, I’d be making a fuss over £7 if I thought it wasn’t being properly spent.  

To the cynics in Ledbury Town Council who make light of such things, I’d remind them that an elected councillor’s prime responsibility is accountability: ‘holders of public office are accountable to the public for their decisions and actions and must submit themselves to the scrutiny necessary to ensure this.’ (See Lord Nolan’s 7 Principles of Public Life). 

Once you start being relaxed about payment authorisations, about contractual obligations with third party suppliers, not keeping on top of financial regulations and budgets, once you start providing false information to auditors and in council meetings, or you refuse to account for your actions and prevaricate when legitimate questions about your decisions and behaviour are asked, the door is open to all kinds of wrong-doing. No ifs or buts: the rules are the rules. 

Even if you are the Mayor or the Town Clerk, perhaps especially because you hold these offices, you must be open and transparent to a fault, troublesome though it may be. 

In Ledbury Town Council there is a disturbing tendency to regard questions about the way things are done, or money is spent, as a personal affront. Even more worrying is the overriding sense of collective rectitude that pervades all its goings-on: we know what we’re doing, it’s all been decided, we’ve been doing it this way for years - so butt out. This dangerous behaviour is blatantly obvious in so many of Ledbury Town Council’s dealings, both trivial and profound. See my piece: Why Agreeing Is Not Always The Best Policy: The Dangers of Groupthink. 

Trust

So what’s all the fuss about?  In short, our Neighbourhood Plan consultants – the Foxley Tagg Partnership - stung us with a £7 thousand invoice for a piece of work that everyone thought was being done as part of their existing £24k contract.  

Foxley Tagg informed the Town Clerk in October that the consultation work they’d done in the summer fell outside of their existing contract and would be charged extra, seven grand extra, 25% of their contract.  

Normal professional practice would be to bring such a matter to a relevant Council committees for consideration by elected councillors. However during two months and six long Council meetings, this didn’t happen. The Clerk and the Mayor kept it quiet. Why? 

When the invoice duly arrived on 23 December it was paid as an 'emergency payment' under 'delegated powers', on – wait for it – the 23 December. Why did the Clerk or Mayor think that such a payment request should not be sanctioned by Council? Why was it paid in such haste two days before Christmas? These are worrying questions. 

The first anyone heard of it was in early January at Planning Committee when several councillors (including me) expressed shock and concern. True to form, the Clerk and the Mayor, backing each other up, batted off questions with the mantra that they were allowed to do it that way under ‘delegated powers’. As it happens they were not, for a variety of reasons, but even if they were, they could at least engage in the pretence of a dialogue.  

Not a bit of it. Despite repeated questioning over four months now, the Mayor and Clerk have consistently failed to provide adequate or accurate information to account for themselves. Even more scandalous is that the auditor, finally brought in to investigate, was given false information to provide cover. Told by the Clerk and backed up by the Mayor, the auditor was assured that committee authorisation had been obtained back in November. As a matter of fact, no discussion ever took place in that committee on the £7 grand, a fact that the Clerk has now belatedly conceded. 

Misleading                

The falsehood was repeated in a Full Council meeting by the Mayor, and was corroborated by a number of councillors present, including Martin Eager. That’s quite a serious infraction for a public official. 

All in all, what we have seen is a series of shortcomings which have progressed from unfortunate, through incompetent into the quicksand of deception and misrepresentation. 

It is unfortunate that we find ourselves working with consultants who have been less than straightforward in their dealings with LTC by not being upfront about their charges.  

It now looks like the Mayor and Clerk’s project management of those NP consultants is at best sloppy and uncritical. 

The Town Council bureaucracy has shown itself to be impervious to the demands for openness and transparency.  

Most seriously, we have witnessed false information being given to Council, press and the auditor allied with persistent stonewalling by senior officers and elected members of LTC.


Where next? Who knows? One thing is for sure, the matter will not lie – as town councillors might - until the mistakes of this sorry affair have been learned.



For a full explanation of the Foxley Tagg Seven Thousand click on file:

foxley_tagg_£7k_briefing.docx
File Size: 37 kb
File Type: docx
Download File

Picture
0 Comments

Reason didn't prevail. They got frit. 

28/4/2015

0 Comments

 
I won't say common sense and reason prevailed at Ledbury Town Council last week. 

More to the point most of the town councillors who were baying and jeering at me the previous week, realised they would become the objects of national scorn and outrage if they took legal action, with tax payers' money, against a member of the public exercising their right to speak. 


Let's face it, It wouldn't have looked great ten days before an election would it?
Picture
0 Comments

Bob Barnes: Truth or Lies?

26/4/2015

0 Comments

 
Picture
Here is the offensive email about me that Ledbury's Mayor, Cllr Bob Barnes claims he did not send to fellow councillors as reported in the Ledbury Reporter on 24 April 2015. It was this event that triggered the dramatic adjournment of Ledbury Town Council's meeting on 16 April.

In the news report, Barnes is quoted as saying: 'The email was sent to him only and I'm still waiting for a reply, although he did circulate his response to all other councillors. I didn't circulate it, he did'.

If you read the email trail above, it is quite clear that this statement is a blatant untruth. Was he horribly misquoted by the Ledbury Reporter, did he have a spectacular memory lapse, or was this a great big, fat porkie pie? 

Picture
0 Comments

Nature Corner: Toads

26/4/2015

0 Comments

 
Picture
Are toads the most misunderstood and maligned of creatures?

Between frogs and toads, there is a fine taxonomic division. Amphibians both, they breed in water and can breathe through their damp skin, creatures of a demi-monde between land and pond. But frogs are smooth while toads are rough textured. Frogspawn is laid in untidy clumps and mounds whereas the toad’s spawn is strung out in elegant chains, like ghostly pearl necklaces.

Across roads and car-parks, phalanxes of brave, strong toads march resolutely to their watery breeding places, undaunted by hazard.  No heroic migration attends the unruly frog, which lurks year round in the murky depths. Emerging from the mud when the weather seems clement, they set to their violent copulations in great frenzies of aqautic sex, three or four males clamped to a single hapless female.

The toad seems an altogether more evolved, resourceful little beast, happy and thriving on land or in water. It can also deliver a toxic kick to any creature foolish enough to attack: those little textured bumps on its back are full of venom, sufficient to stop any predator in its tracks. Never squeeze a toad therefore.

With beautiful eyes the colour of amber and a calm, docile temperament, it is strange and somehow tragic that gentle Bufo Bufo is forever linked with evil and moral ugliness in the popular imagination, a by-word for deceit and low cunning.

Feel sorrow and pity for the lying toad. 

0 Comments

The Tale of the Delicate, Deadly Spinning Spider

21/4/2015

0 Comments

 
Picture
As we have observed before, nature is clever; species have evolved remarkable ways to outwit their predators and prosper.

Take the daddy long legs spider (Pholcus phalangiodes), bane of house-husbands throughout Herefordshire. Flimsy-legged, with a diminutive body, they spin prolific webs in corners and around beams. Looking hardly big enough to bother a fly, their venom packs a lethal punch. By winter's end, there won't be a single insect or spider remaining in their domain. All will have been consumed.

The thing about the delicate Pholcus spider is its remarkable ability to tackle prey much larger than its size would seemingly allow. With elongated front legs and the ability to throw the stickiest of silk threads from a distance, they can snare a comparatively massive house spider or a raging wasp with considerable facility. 

When alarmed, the Pholcus also has a clever trick up its sleeve. Dangling from a thread, the spider throws itself into a dervish spin and becomes an invisible blur. Confusion and deception is its friend. 

Yes, politicians and wrongdoers down the ages have emulated the crafty pholcus, surviving many a close shave.  But like every other living creature finally, they too will be returned to dust.  

0 Comments

Was it something I said?

20/4/2015

0 Comments

 
Silence!
Apparently Ledbury Town Council's Mayor Bob Barnes couldn't bear that I was going to speak publicly about:

a. A defamatory email he'd circulated designed to discredit me concerning a fictitious incident that had been cooked up by him and a couple of his cronies; 
b. Because I'd unearthed the fact that all rules of financial probity had been discarded in the payment of £7 grand to an external consultant;
c. Which led on to misleading information being given to the internal auditor claiming the £7k had been authorised at a committee meeting when in fact it had never been mentioned. 


My offence at Ledbury Town Council on Thursday 16 April, in attempting to read out my resignation statement which cited the above as reasons, was not to sit down when the Mayor interrupted me about one minute into my speech. I refused to be silenced, despite the unseemly baying and screeching from various town councillors, including the exceptionally unpleasant Jayne Roberts, and read out my statement. Being a singer, I have a loud voice and was happy to speak effortlessly over them all and carry on until I was finished. 

The vote to have me removed for 'disorderly conduct' was carried and the police were called. There followed a lull of 45 minutes in the adjournment during which something of party atmosphere developed. Someone called out for music, 'so we can have a dance'. There was lots of merry networking. So much for procedural outrage. 

When it became clear that the cops were never going to arrive, Barnes suspended the meeting until a later date.

The main point to make is that LTC objected to my breaking the rules of conduct in meetings and so wanted me to be arrested. In fact, it was Barnes who first broke its rules by interrupting a member of the public without any grounds to do so. Was it 'offensive or improper' to mention the bald facts of his behaviour (together with a town council clerical officer) in widely circulating a malicious piece of gossip about me? Or the fact that a great wad of money had been waved through for payment without ever having been authorised by fellow councillors? Or that the auditor had been given misleading information?

I applaud the Town Council's high standards in upholding its rules and traditions in the pomp and convention of its meetings. It is just a pity that the Council doesn't apply those same standards to the way it handles large sums of money, consultant contracts, to the way it behaves fairly and honestly in its dealings, and to the manner in which it treats its elected councillors.

Here is a transcript of my statement: 
 
Ladies and Gentlemen, I’m speaking to you from the cheap seats tonight – as a member of the public.

As you probably know, I’ve resigned from the Town Council.

There is little point in my remaining part of the Council until 7 May - and so giving my implied approval to this administration which I find in so many ways disturbing and reprehensible.

There are too many instances of arrogant and perverse behaviour by longstanding councillors to list here. All I can say is this stale culture stifles progress and snuffs out precious energy and enthusiasm. A small tragedy perhaps. 

However, it is the behaviour in particular of this Mayor, and of a junior clerical officer of Ledbury Town Council, in widely circulating a malicious and defamatory allegation about me, quite without substance, that I have found so contemptible.

That these two people – a salaried officer and an elected member, the town mayor no less - appear to have colluded, in an effort to discredit me, is appalling. To quote Bob Barnes himself: It is a stain on his tenure as Mayor.

Connected with this is the matter of the ‘additional’ payment of £7 thousand to the Foxley Tagg Partnership which has been the subject of so much concern of late. People have shrugged it off as a small matter – it is not.

This was an unauthorised payment, outside of financial regulations, and paid retrospectively. I have asked repeatedly for clarification firstly from the Mayor and chairman of the Neighbourhood Plan, and received none, and then from the Clerk, and received none. In all, this period of stonewalling and prevarication occupied about six weeks, an untold waste of time and energy.

In trying to extricate themselves from blame, it appears that persons involved, have made misleading statements to Council and to the Council’s independent auditor, claiming that authorisation had been granted at a committee meeting – when in fact no such discussion nor authorisation had taken place.

So, what started as a relatively minor, albeit legitimate issue of scrutiny, looks to have developed into a conspiracy, involving concealment of the facts and the propagation of falsehoods in efforts to deflect attention from the difficult situation of those in error.  These shortcomings are as serious as it gets for a town council like ours.

I have tried, as you well know, to work through the proper channels to have these and other serious concerns investigated and resolved but I have failed.

In short, I believe that some elected members of Ledbury Town Council have behaved in an irresponsible, incompetent, and dishonourable manner. I do not wish my name to be associated with them.

With the coming election I hope that a strong light might be shone on their antics, so that voters can make a positive choice for the kind of council they wish to see in our town.

This affair is not about me – but about you, about Ledbury Town Council.


If you cherish honesty, fair play and decency you might also wish to register your feelings about this wretched state of affairs, and join me in turning your back on this Council too.
 


0 Comments

Councillor Rob Yeoman is Development Company's Agent

11/4/2015

1 Comment

 
Picture
What you see above is a copy of the official agenda for Herefordshire Council Planning Committee on 11 February 2015 showing that Ledbury's Deputy Mayor and town councillor Rob Yeoman spoke in support of the application to build houses on Ledbury cricket pitch as the 'developer's agent' (acting for the Silverwood Partnership).


Rob Yeoman had not mentioned this role to any of his colleagues on the Neighbourhood Plan Working Group over successive meetings, nor that he had a pecuniary interest, as reported in the accompanying papers, related to his work with the development company. I am as a fellow town councillor unaware that he declared this role to Ledbury Town Council during various planning-related discussions, such as the Town Council's response to Herefordshire's Core Strategy.  


See the blog post below for further information. 

1 Comment

Politicians Have Feelings Too.

10/4/2015

0 Comments

 
Picture




Judging by JK Rowlings’ latest fictional creation, parish council politics is often a murky business what with petty vendettas, incomers versus born ‘n’ breds, power crazed old duffers up to no good and old fashioned class war clashes in postcard-perfect streets. Yes, Ledbury is a goldmine of source material for her next book. In fact I might write my own even more salacious, even more true-to-life tragi-comedy on the subject. It will be called Casual Disregard.  (Be sure to sign up below if you want an advance copy). 


One interesting pattern I’ve noticed is how town councillors joyfully and mercilessly stick the boot in to their political or social rivals, but squeal like stuck pigs if they get so much of a hint of rough stuff in return. Reactions range from pained affront (‘this is like character assassination’), through ‘how very dare you’ up to the nuclear sanction of being reported to the Monitoring Officer at the county council (gulp[1]). The whispering campaigns and malicious emails are a given. Even so I was surprised to get a poison pen letter recently: I know who wrote it as he had carelessly hand-written the envelope, a dead giveaway given his characteristic looping script. Not so clever after all. 

Hurt
It seems Ledbury’s deputy mayor Rob Yeoman is very upset with me at the moment. Apparently, I’ve hurt his feelings and damaged both his, and the town council’s reputation by making a few astringent remarks concerning his undeclared business interests on Facebook a few weeks back. So before I go any further let me apologise to Mr Yeoman if I’ve caused him even a moment’s discomfiture. Let’s be friends. But first, in living up to his own high moral principles, perhaps he might answer a few practical questions. 


What so offended him was my asking whether it was right that the town’s deputy mayor and member of the Neighbourhood Plan group should not have mentioned to his colleagues that he was also acting as an agent for a building development company.

People may recall that when the planning application to build on the cricket pitch came before Ledbury Town Council, Mr Yeoman, as chairman of Ledbury Cricket Club, promptly declared a non-pecuniary interest and absented himself from discussion. So far so good.

What he didn’t reveal to the Council was his role as ‘developers agent’ on behalf of the Silverwood Partnership, the company seeking planning permission. 

This only came to light at the Planning Committee hearing of Herefordshire Council on 11 February when it emerged that his original ‘non-pecuniary’ interest (as cricket club chairman) had evolved over the preceding months into a ‘pecuniary interest’ (as agent for the housing developers).  A pecuniary interest is when a person has an interest in a matter because of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of financial gain (or loss) to the person. It usually means you or your family stand to make a few quid if something goes through.

‘Not in Keeping With Council Values’
Surprised by the revelations at Hereford Planning Committee, Ledbury’s very polite Ward Councillor Terry Widdows wrote to Rob Yeoman to find out more about his ‘pecuniary interest’ as developer’s agent and why he had not previously declared this to Ledbury Town Council or any of its sub-committees.

Flashing the steel, this was Rob’s reply: “I do not know who you think you are or what your role in this is, but I am not accountable to you in this way. Your previous email contains many incorrect facts and supposition and I feel it is written in a menacing and demanding tone not in keeping with council values.” As you can see, Mr Yeoman does not appear amenable to reasonable or polite discussion on the matter.

When I asked him similar questions, I received no response at all, which is perhaps a mercy, since deep down I’m quite a sensitive soul myself.

What is very disturbing is that during successive meetings of the Neighbourhood Plan Working Party, a sub-committee of Ledbury Town Council’s Planning and Economic Development Committee, Rob failed to declare any interest in matters bearing on housing development. Rather he participated vigorously in critical discussion of Herefordshire Council’s Core Strategy, on site evaluation for housing development, on sports field provision, as well as seeking to shape the manner and timing of community consultation for all of these.

It didn’t go unnoticed: group members muttered uneasily about his conflicted interests as a planning policy- and decision-maker and also a key player in the Cricket Club relocation which necessitated the old Ledbury cricket pitch being redeveloped for housing, a highly controversial move, implacably opposed by the majority of the town council and the local community. Coincidentally, this week in the Ledbury Reporter, a local resident Mr Gareth Williams has written and complained on this topic.

At the news that he was acting directly for the Silverwood Partnership Neighbourhood Plan group members are now aghast. Says Silverwood's director Kevin Bird, “we are specialists in achieving valuable planning consents via detailed consultations with stakeholders prior to and during planning applications”. 

First Cuckoo of Spring?
So during many sensitive discussions of the Neighbourhood Plan Working Group about housing, recreation and open space land supply it turns out there was a developer’s agent in its midst. Presumably, all of the conversations that were had about development options could have been relayed back to the planners and lawyers at the development company. Ouch.

Not only did Rob fail to declare this pecuniary interest to the Neighbourhood Plan sub-committee but it seems that he might have failed to update his involvement with the  Silverwood Partnership on the register of member’s interests. If this is the case, the penalties, rightly, are severe. (See here). It must be admitted however that Herefordshire Council is woefully in error at the present time by not having kept the Register up to date, particularly at this time of heightened political sensitivity. So let's give Rob Yeoman the benefit of the doubt on that one.

Once again, I unreservedly apologise if I have hurt Mr Yeoman’s feelings by drawing attention to these facts and if I have got anything wrong.

Now, in return may I ask that he gives the electorate a clear and unambiguous statement of his interests and why he did not feel it necessary to tell town council and community colleagues at the appropriate moments that he was acting on behalf of a housing developer?

The voters of Ledbury South ward, in which is situated the doomed cricket pitch, will be keen to understand all the reasons why he worked so hard to have a precious and beautiful open space consigned to the bulldozer.

Putting aside hurt feelings for a moment, I ask: did deputy mayor Rob Yeoman act impeccably in his involvement in gaining planning permission for housing on the cricket pitch at the back of the Full Pitcher pub?

Voters might think about that question when they put their crosses in the box on 7 May.

 



[1] Don’t panic: Mr Eric Pickles, the Secretary of State has effectively removed any teeth from the standards process. The worst that can happen is you get a polite wrap over the wrist. Phew.



0 Comments

    Categories

    All
    Annette Crowe
    Appreciation
    Bill Wiggin
    Car-parking
    Democracy
    Dodgy Minutes
    Economy
    Elaine Fieldhouse
    Freemasons
    HALC
    Heritage
    Importance
    Judicial Review
    Ledbury
    Ledbury Places
    Ledbury Town Council
    Lynda Wilcox
    Mayoral News
    Media Coverage
    Nationalism
    Nature Corner
    Neighbourhood Plan
    Planning
    Poetry
    Positive Values
    Post Truth
    Psychology
    Supermarkets
    Town Centre
    Transport
    Waste Of Money
    Xenophobia

    Archives

    November 2018
    October 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    October 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014

    Rich Hadley

    @RichPossibility 

    RSS Feed

    RSS Feed

Site Visitors to www.richhadley.net
Proudly powered by Weebly