I'm not sure that's strictly accurate, from what I understand, he resigned precisely because they wouldn't answer his questions. Agree with his reasons or not, he's also been very public with what he's done; quite the opposite of underhand in fact. for once we have a local politician who actually meant and did what he said.

Ok, so what were the questions that were not answered? I think it was another councillor who said that colleagues complained about Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera behaviour but as he resigned, the complaints cannot be followed up.

But the problem is that this "Error" has cost the precept payers serious money and the fact that it has taken so long, because of the fact they have tried to hide it from precept payers as usual, to come to the public's notice.
Taken with all the other shall we call them "Errors" the total loss and cost to precept payers is really mounting now. That and the way the council hates any queries or criticism and the vindictive way they treat anyone who dares to challenge their little club then I see not reason why they should all not resign?

Obviously there is more to RUP's resignation than we are at present aware of and no doubt it will eventually trickle out.....unless the council pull out all the stops and exceed themselves this time and mange to gag him!

Yes, this error, presumably by an individual, has cost in terms of cash-flow, but at least one councillor boasts that the council will win in a court case, should it go to court. Although one has to wonder what is holding our little pack of political rottweilers back!

Ummm. so if this 'court case' is so cut and dried, what are we waiting for? How many years have we been waiting? I know the legal profession is slow but really? Not sure I'd trust the information we e been fed.

Frankly, nor do I, but if waiting improves success and 'value', that's reasonable I think. West Berkshire Council seem to have have done jack to help.

And I still don't see what it has to do with WBC. I don't doubt that there are intrigues between the two councils, but in this matter I see the town council to be entirely responsible for the snafu. I believe that we have been lied to about the nature of the damage to the park, and that if there was any damage at all that it was talked up hugely by the council.

Repairing the bowling greens for example: the council got a quote of £20k to repair what they allege to be subsidence damage. I simply don't believe that the dewatering in a coffer dam could have caused this kind of subsidence. I guess it's conceivable that the dewatering might have drawn the water table down a bit and could possibly have been responsible for the relatively shallow well running dry, but at worst that would have just let the grass die and wouldn't have caused subsidence, but it was an exceptionally hot and dry summer in 2010 and at best the council might conceivably win a proportion of the cost of re-seeding the bowling greens - maybe a few grand? But what the Council did was instruct the bowling club to stop all maintenance on the greens so that they would look in as poor a condition as possible, and then they conflated the £20k quotation to relay the greens with the £45k cost of removing some overly-big conifers that have grown up around the greens and are sucking up the moisture and shading out the light. So the Council talk up the marginal damage to the grass of the greens which is as likely caused by hot dry summer and lack of winter maintenance, and they conflate the minimal cost of putting that right with the cost of putting right their own chronic mismanagement of the park, and they hide the hydrogeological and engineer's reports from us so that we can't see what they're up to. That kind of nonsense might convince the casual reader of the NWN, but it's hardly going to convince Costain to part with their readies, and stuck between the options of admitting they made it all up or litigating in the certain knowledge that they'll lose their shirt, the council do what they do best - nothing!

Isn't the Park WBC's property? Isn't WBC responsible for local developments and the effects on the environment? Wouldn't you expect WBC to hold all the data that is currently being argued over? Even Richard Beyon jumped in a few years back and said he would do all he could to help with a resolution. Currently that appears to be roughly nothing.



The obvious question is prove it? Personally I think it is a figment of your imagination inspired by a desire to see the council brought down.

There's no disputing that the Council told the bowling club to stop maintaining the greens several years ago as it's in the council's minutes (and I can't be asked to find it, but it's there if you want to look). As for proving their motivation, there is of course no proving that, you have to make up your own mind.

It is one thing stating fact (stop watering the green) but it is a political trick to weave one's prejudiced into the reasons why. I have no doubt you have good reason to feel aggrieved, but that shouldn't get in the way of the truth.

You're accusing me of lying, that's hardly fair. There is no "truth" when it comes to deciding on the council's motivation, there is only perception, and mine is evidence-based. Other perceptions may be valid, and if you have evidence to support some other point of view then put it forward, but it's hardly fair to dispute my take of the evidence when you're not aware of what was said and done.

Firstly, I didn't accuse you of lying; I just see an embittered person who only sees things from one angle.

While your view may be possible, I don't buy it, although I believe the council have managed the dispute poorly and have shown themselves as being incompetent in that regard; however, if the evidence for support of the council's position is weak, why don't the owners of the data release it, what have they to hide?

While I remember the council tucking you up on a technicality, I suspect that in this case the reverse has happened, viz, the council's case is sound, but they have crucial but inadmissible evidence.

Personally, I cannot see why the data cannot be released. It seems preposterous. It is just data.

If the Council's case is so sound why are we waiting for settlement? The Courts are open every day! If you had an accident in your car which was clearly not your fault I somehow doubt you would wait so long for compensation. What does a delay bring?

As for WBC, are they really culpable? After all they may own the land, but its doubtless a full repairing lease NTC were given. In any event, don't you think the lawyers both sides have clearly employed might well have spotted this, which could have brought some relief to both sides?

Even if NTC secure a payout, it will be a pyrrhic victory.

Sometimes being right doesn't grantee success; we have all seen examples of that.

"While I remember the council tucking you up on a technicality, I suspect that in this case the reverse has happened, viz, the council's case is sound, but they have crucial but inadmissible evidence."


I didn't say they were culpable; only that despite being their property they have appeared not to lift a finger to help. If it is because the evidence is weak, let them say so, or perhaps it is because they have been negligent too? They are responsible for overseeing developments and their impact on the environment.


That may well be the case; like I said, I think NTC have handled this issue badly.

Andy Capp,

I am more than happy to answer my accusers, but in a public forum where the process is open and transparent. I do not participate in 'Kangaroo Courts'.

Let us get back to the actual issue though.

I 'blew the whistle' on the potential mismanagement of public funds by Officers and Members of Newbury Town Council in not submitting a legal costs insurance claim, which was then covered up for four years.

Four people (one has not been associated with NTC since 2011) were directly involved in knowing of this 'error', which even I would agree was more than likely a mistake, but then a silence was maintained by both Officers and at least one Member, which was and is unethical. The public has a Right to know about the mistakes made.

Following my exposé and a demand for an independent investigation by qualified auditors, two grievances were submitted by Officers. Strangely the grievances (from two of the four involved) seemed to be more important to the Leader of the Council, than the tens of thousands of pounds of public money that was needlessly spent, and against 'good practice' the latter complaints were investigated in favour of the loss of money, and the subsequent cover up.

One specific person who was involved back in 2010 in this 'error', has chosen to use their authority and position to stage manage the subsequent potential cover up, and personally commissioned and wrote the terms of reference for the 'Independent Investigation' (which I am not aware that anyone has seen), which was only commenced after I had stated that I would not participate in the 'sham' grievance procedure which clearly breach natural justice, and refused to acknowledge or otherwise accept the potential reasons for the complaints.

Facing this level of opposition to revealing the 'error', which included 'stitching me up', and the subsequent 'cover up' and ostracisation by not all, but a significant number of fellow Councillors, what else would you have had me do?

As for other Councillor's resigning in disgust, well most of them have naively bought into the negative propaganda against me that has emanated from the leadership of Newbury Town Council, and the mantra that legal advice was taken, which is also very questionable.

Personally I believe that the people of Newbury deserve better representation and behaviour from their elected representatives than they are currently receiving, hence I believe that the current leadership should establish a truly independent investigation and lay on the table the documentation that exists and clearly supports my concerns.

Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
Former Councillor

Have you not, by resigning, maximised the potential for the council to succeed in keeping a lid on things? It would also had been most helpful if when we had a half page spread in the local paper to have been fuller with your explanation for the resignation.

RUP you have confirmed from the inside what a lot of us knew from the outside that there was underhand dealings at the NTC. Not only are they not transparent and open but have serious problems with honesty.
It has long been known that the NTC is run as a small elite club and to buck the membership meant serious trouble for the person or persons who were trying to make them accountable!
I think it is an open secret that any "so called" investigation carried out by NTC would only be carried out if the outcome was already known and the correct and wanted result returned.
There are several local people who have been victimised by NTC for daring to question ethics etc. and I think that is why there is no demand for change? As soon as you put your head above the parapet then the full force of NTC Councillors and Officers are brought to bear and the person is ensured to be discredited by any means at their disposal.

I hope you will understand now why you did not get many offers when you requested people to join in from the inside with you? I do feel sorry for you and respect what you have tried to do by being open and honest but I'm afraid no one will succeed with this rabble and they will only force others to follow the clubs rules or else? The club has been running for years now and they are not going to be got rid of any time soon unless the precept payers take their heads from the sand and get more vociferous.

I also know very well that you will not get an independent audit investigation they will ensure that. Just look at how Simon has been victimised for asking pertinent questions over the years for this alone they should have been held to account. Let alone others who have suffered in rather more silence.
When you think of all the funds both local authorities are cutting from the most vulnerable of our society and how much has been wasted by NTC alone then I am really baffled why the precept payers are accepting this?

Well-said Cognosco.

Wholeheartedly agree Cognosco

Cognosco,

I respect your opinion, but disagree with not standing up, challenging matters or otherwise not doing something.

If NTC is "run as a small elite club" then this must change, and there are a number of ways of doing this, but not getting involved is not the answer.

We you and others genuinely wish there to be change at NTC and at the District Council then there is a need to spread the word that change is required and for the reasons to be heard.

This misbehaviour within local politics only exists because we, the electorate vote in some people who are susceptible to abusing their positions.

Join me in calling for an independent inquiry into this fiasco, and the other potential cases where Officers and Members may have abused their power. The alternative is that come the 2015 Election the very same people, or similar minded people will be elected and our money will cant to be abused.

As the saying goes "there is more than one way to skin a cat."

Remember there are good people within the Council on both sides of the Chamber who genuinely care, but alas they are currently disempowered by those who desire power for the sake of power alone. We the public need to give our support where and when it is deserved and when necessary to hold people to account when they have abused our trust.

With regard to the local press, I have to say that I am deeply disappointed in their obvious desire to not expose their friends who have and are misbehaving in Newbury Town Council.

Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
Former Councillor