IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

5 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Purdah
Simon Kirby
post Apr 28 2015, 09:55 PM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



Story here.

"The council has been awarded a £5.07m grant from the Department for Transport on the basis that it agreed to fund the remaining 30 per cent Ė or £2.17m."

As I understand it our government, national and local, are supposed to respect this period of purdah and not publish this kind of news. If this really is WBC putting this news out there then it really is very poor form.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Apr 28 2015, 11:55 PM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,894
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



That's dirty Tories for you! wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Apr 29 2015, 03:29 PM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



Have you still not realised that out two present local Authorities are laws unto themselves? rolleyes.gif

But, providing our local electorate remembers all the past few years gaffs etc., not for much longer! wink.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Apr 29 2015, 04:30 PM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



I would guess a local paper reporting what happened at a meeting of a council’s executive is within the rules.

You've been banging on about openness and transparency for ages, as soon as you stand for political office it's a different story. wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Apr 29 2015, 04:57 PM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (user23 @ Apr 29 2015, 05:30 PM) *
I would guess a local paper reporting what happened at a meeting of a councilís executive is within the rules.

You've been banging on about openness and transparency for ages, as soon as you stand for political office it's a different story. wink.gif

Are the press allowed in executive meetings?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Apr 29 2015, 05:29 PM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (user23 @ Apr 29 2015, 05:30 PM) *
I would guess a local paper reporting what happened at a meeting of a councilís executive is within the rules.

You've been banging on about openness and transparency for ages, as soon as you stand for political office it's a different story. wink.gif

You (wilfully) misunderstand purdah. There is no restriction on what a local paper can publish, the rules apply to the council, and I stand by my comment, it is poor form for the council to put this information out there in the week before polling.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Apr 29 2015, 05:53 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



Incredible and another demonstration of today's marketed politics. No ideas, just solutions to non existent problems.

Swapping out the existing street lighting units for led ones might look pretty but doesn't actually contribute over much to the energy consumption, so the costs and electricity use won't change much...but the voter will think it looks nice! Sadly, if the investment was properly focussed against a real business case, then we'd achieve some real and sustainable difference.

If you think about it, it's games like this that demonstrate the contempt that our mainstream politicians have for their electorate, who do they think we are?


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Petra
post Apr 29 2015, 06:16 PM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 114
Joined: 16-March 15
Member No.: 10,567



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 28 2015, 11:55 PM) *
That's dirty Tories for you! wink.gif


Dear Mr Capp,

Donít be naÔve, it is election time, so anything that helps the Tories get votes must be justifiable. After all, other parties would do the same if they were in the same position. There is no love in a war of the ballot boxes.

Yours,
Petra
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Apr 29 2015, 06:36 PM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (Petra @ Apr 29 2015, 07:16 PM) *
Dear Mr Capp,

Donít be naÔve, it is election time, so anything that helps the Tories get votes must be justifiable. After all, other parties would do the same if they were in the same position. There is no love in a war of the ballot boxes.

Yours,
Petra


Yeah give them lies, lies and more lies.
That's just what one must expect from the true blues, must keep the plebs in their place or heavens know what will happen to our ordered way of life otherwise eh? rolleyes.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Apr 29 2015, 07:21 PM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (blackdog @ Apr 29 2015, 05:57 PM) *
Are the press allowed in executive meetings?
Not sure. I guess they'll allowed to read the agenda and minutes though.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Apr 29 2015, 07:28 PM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Apr 29 2015, 06:29 PM) *
You (wilfully) misunderstand purdah. There is no restriction on what a local paper can publish, the rules apply to the council, and I stand by my comment, it is poor form for the council to put this information out there in the week before polling.
I thought you just successfully fought to get a one council to publish a report, now you're complaining another shouldn't be publishing information about its meetings

You simply can't please some people. It's like they're just being contrary for the sake of it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Apr 29 2015, 07:33 PM
Post #12


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,036
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (On the edge @ Apr 29 2015, 06:53 PM) *
Swapping out the existing street lighting units for led ones might look pretty but doesn't actually contribute over much to the energy consumption, so the costs and electricity use won't change much...but the voter will think it looks nice!

I disagree OTE.
Not going by what it says on the packets of domestic LED's anyway.
I can now buy an LED lamp that, for 3W consumption, gives out the same lumen as an incandescent of 60W.
Or have I got it wrong somewhere? unsure.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Apr 29 2015, 08:07 PM
Post #13


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,894
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (user23 @ Apr 29 2015, 08:28 PM) *
I thought you just successfully fought to get a one council to publish a report, now you're complaining another shouldn't be publishing information about its meetings

You simply can't please some people. It's like they're just being contrary for the sake of it.

And you're being obtuse. You know the difference in principles here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Apr 29 2015, 08:16 PM
Post #14


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 29 2015, 09:07 PM) *
And you're being obtuse. You know the difference in principles here.
From what I can see, he's saying that a newspaper shouldn't publish something because he thinks it might affect a decision making process.

Wasn't this the reason the Town Council gave at one time for not publishing their hydrological report?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Apr 29 2015, 09:31 PM
Post #15


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Apr 29 2015, 08:33 PM) *
I disagree OTE.
Not going by what it says on the packets of domestic LED's anyway.
I can now buy an LED lamp that, for 3W consumption, gives out the same lumen as an incandescent of 60W.
Or have I got it wrong somewhere? unsure.gif


Generally the existing street lights aren't incandesant, rather discharge (like fluorescent) which also have a lowish running wattage. So it's a bit like swapping out your 'energy saving bulbs' for new LED ones. I think there is presently some move to provide both consumption wattage and light output in lumens numbers for bulbs which might help our comparisons in the future.



--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MontyPython
post Apr 29 2015, 09:41 PM
Post #16


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 926
Joined: 16-June 12
Member No.: 8,755



QUOTE (Petra @ Apr 29 2015, 07:16 PM) *
Dear Mr Capp,

Donít be naÔve, it is election time, so anything that helps the Tories get votes must be justifiable. After all, other parties would do the same if they were in the same position. There is no love in a war of the ballot boxes.

Yours,
Petra



That's the Petra for you, the best thing to get both Labour & UKIP extra votes - a mad women bigging up the tories laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Apr 29 2015, 10:10 PM
Post #17


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,894
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



OK, perhps you don't... wink.gif

QUOTE (user23 @ Apr 29 2015, 09:16 PM) *
From what I can see, he's saying that a newspaper shouldn't publish something because he thinks it might affect a decision making process.

No that is not true. He is complaining about an apparent breach of protocol in the run-up to an election. A breach of protocol that might be seen as a party seeking to gain an unfair advantage in a democratic process.

QUOTE (user23 @ Apr 29 2015, 09:16 PM) *
Wasn't this the reason the Town Council gave at one time for not publishing their hydrological report?

It might have been, but the reason the council gave came after the complaint was made; however, Simon was complaining that the council was unreasonably withholding information and a tribunal agreed.

In both accounts, Simon was 'eager' to see due process.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Apr 29 2015, 10:15 PM
Post #18


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (user23 @ Apr 29 2015, 09:16 PM) *
From what I can see, he's saying that a newspaper shouldn't publish something because he thinks it might affect a decision making process.

Wasn't this the reason the Town Council gave at one time for not publishing their hydrological report?

No, like I said, newspapers can publish what they like, it's local and national government administrations that need to respect purdah as I understand it. I believe that the restriction is to prevent politicians using the apparatus of public administration for their own political advantage and gaining a credibility advantage by speaking as the administration rather themselves.

More about it here.

I stand by my criticism and I don't believe it was appropriate for WBC to announce the grant funding in purdah.

Another questionable press-release is this one from NTC in which JSH defends the Council's actions. Council publication should in any case be neutral and even-handed and this missive fails to represent the contempt which which the tribunal demolished the council's argument, calling it "bizarre and self-contradictory" at one point.

JSH says: "The Council had sought to keep the documents confidential to avoid jeopardising its hardfought legal case, but we are of course doing what is now required of us, and we are doing it without delay."

If it is true, as JSH says, that the Council sought to keep the documents confidential to avoid jeopardising its legal case (which it has conspicuously failed to start) then I suggest the Council rather profoundly lied all the time it was telling us that the "confidentiality agreement" was the reason it couldn't disclose the reports, and JSH might usefully have summarised the Tribunal's judgment where it ruled that, not only did the Council utterly fail to support their unfounded assertion that disclosure would jeopardise their case, but that the public interest was in any case so strong in favour of disclosure that, even were the reports subject to legal privilege, the Council should still have published them. It is utterly depressing that JSH's Liberal Democrat administration has so completely failed to grasp how wrong-minded they were ever to try and keep this vital piece of information from the tax-paying parishioners.

And in point of fact JSH's statement is not true. What was required of the council was that they publish both the hydrogeological reports, and their closed submission made to the Tribunal. The council has indeed disclosed the reports, but not only has it failed so far to disclose the closed submissions which it clearly expects to be embarrassed by, it has submitted further argument to question the sense of the Tribunal's order and clarification on the need to publish - JSH says nothing about that, and that in no way is "doing what is now required of us, and ... doing it without delay".

NTC 24 April: "We would seek to query whether this is correct and the Tribunal DOES require the council to disclose the Closed Annexe. We would be surprised if our client is required to disclose the Closed Annexe as well as the reports as this would appear to defeat the whole purpose of the Annexe being closed."

Tribunal 27 April: "It remains closed unless and until the Tribunal rules otherwise. It is normally closed because it contains material that is only disclosable if the disputed information is to be disclosed. Once the Tribunal rules that that information must be disclosed, there is normally no justification for withholding the contents of the closed annex. The appellant and the public generally are entitled to see what arguments NTC advanced under the cloak of confidentiality. Litigation is conducted openly unless there is a powerful justification for secrecy. For That is the position here. Indeed the case for disclosure is still clearer in this case since this annex contained material that should never have been submitted in a closed annex anyway.

If the content of such an annex remained confidential regardless of the result of the appeal, a public authority could include within it any argument, however unfounded, in the safe knowledge that the requester would never see it, whatever the outcome."

JSH is entitled to defend his and his administration's management of CrackGate, but I don't agree that he should be doing it in this pre-election period in an NTC press-release.

Of course I may be mistaken, but that is my understanding of the purdah convention.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Apr 29 2015, 10:32 PM
Post #19


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 29 2015, 11:10 PM) *
In both accounts, Simon was 'eager' to see due process.

Indeed. It's really this that the Council didn't like. They call it "trouble making", and I think of it as asserting rights - rights to information, rights to notice of rent increase - I don't believe it's healthy that the state should capriciously deny you your rights - that never ends well.

If there simply wasn't a convention of purdah it might not occur to me to complain about the political co-option of public administration - it wouldn't be right and fair, but if it was traditional for the incumbent to take advantage of their position to subvert the public administration for their own political ends I might find it hard to get any traction with a complaint of unfairness. But while we have the convention of purdah I think it's a good one.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Apr 30 2015, 06:55 AM
Post #20


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



Sorry Simon, I can't be bothered to read all that political waffle.

My advice would be, if a member of the public has exposed a uturn on your policy, come clean about it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th February 2020 - 11:03 PM