IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

7 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Cllr Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera Resigns, Time for a clear-out at the town-hall?
Do you have confidence in the Town Counci?
Do you think the Town Council is upholding the values of public service?
Yes, pretty much. [ 2 ] ** [10.53%]
Well, more or less. [ 0 ] ** [0.00%]
No, not really [ 17 ] ** [89.47%]
Do you think the Town Council are open and accountable?
Yes, we get to know the truth. [ 2 ] ** [10.53%]
Well, we find out more or less. [ 0 ] ** [0.00%]
No, we don't know the half of it. [ 17 ] ** [89.47%]
Business as usual then?
Yes, let's carry on as we are. [ 2 ] ** [10.53%]
Well, what's to be done? [ 4 ] ** [21.05%]
No, heads must roll. [ 13 ] ** [68.42%]
Doing a valuable job?
Yes, virtually everything they do is indespensible. [ 2 ] ** [10.53%]
Well, they're mostly harmless. [ 1 ] ** [5.26%]
No, they're essentially self-serving and unaccountable [ 10 ] ** [52.63%]
The Town Council? What do they do again? [ 6 ] ** [31.58%]
Total Votes: 19
Guests cannot vote 
Simon Kirby
post Dec 4 2014, 10:43 PM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

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



In the Newbury Weekly today is the news that Cllr Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera has resigned from the Town Council for what he says is the failure of the Council to serve the public.

RUP was reported to have queried why the Council had not claimed on £50k worth of legal expenses insurance, and I think there are some questions to be asked about how that legitimate query precipitated his being elbowed out of the deputy-leader role, and now out of the council altogether.

Do you still have confidence that the Town Council are serving the public?


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
motormad
post Dec 5 2014, 12:23 PM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,964
Joined: 29-December 09
From: Dogging in a car park somewhere
Member No.: 592



oh dear.


--------------------
:p
Grammar: the difference between knowing your poop and knowing you're poop.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Dec 5 2014, 12:29 PM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,345
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



What I am not clear about is that given someone at the council made a mistake, what have the council have done or not done that has caused the kick-up?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Dec 5 2014, 03:37 PM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,345
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



The loss of some fifty grand by failing to claim on the insurance as far ax I can see. Some 'clerical error'! Just wish my boss was so nice.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Turin Machine
post Dec 5 2014, 03:50 PM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,932
Joined: 23-September 10
From: In the lower 40
Member No.: 1,104



Not too much staying power then, unlike the rest of them. Velcro local government.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Dec 5 2014, 04:01 PM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,345
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



I'm not so sure, agree with him or not, RUP's resignation was principled. Given the state of the Council we should have seen rather more.

So come 2015, will we really be asking the ruling group Councillors why they have drifted so far from their party's stated values?


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Dec 5 2014, 04:07 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,417
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (On the edge @ Dec 5 2014, 04:01 PM) *
I'm not so sure, agree with him or not, RUP's resignation was principled. Given the state of the Council we should have seen rather more.

So come 2015, will we really be asking the ruling group Councillors why they have drifted so far from their party's stated values?


There is a world of difference between stated values and actual values though isn't there! Especially with this self serving egotistical non transparent rabble. angry.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Dec 5 2014, 05:29 PM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,923
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



I think it's a great shame that Ruwan has resigned - if he had stayed he could have become a focus for more new reforming councillors. Of course he could have been deselected by the Lib-Dems at the next election (he wouldn't be the first) - which would stir up local politics a bit more (always good fun). By resigning he has surrendered to the status quo - it's the best result for the ruling clique.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Dec 5 2014, 05:55 PM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,417
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (blackdog @ Dec 5 2014, 05:29 PM) *
I think it's a great shame that Ruwan has resigned - if he had stayed he could have become a focus for more new reforming councillors. Of course he could have been deselected by the Lib-Dems at the next election (he wouldn't be the first) - which would stir up local politics a bit more (always good fun). By resigning he has surrendered to the status quo - it's the best result for the ruling clique.


I think this is the problem with parties in local politics. The party, usually a couple or even one person, having all the say on who should or should not be allowed to stand for election. As for representing constituents there is very little hope in this system.

I expect he was declared as vexatious and sent to Coventry rolleyes.gif
So much for the suggesting of "joining and making changes from within" then? rolleyes.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post Dec 5 2014, 06:36 PM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



QUOTE (blackdog @ Dec 5 2014, 06:29 PM) *
I think it's a great shame that Ruwan has resigned - if he had stayed he could have become a focus for more new reforming councillors. Of course he could have been deselected by the Lib-Dems at the next election (he wouldn't be the first) - which would stir up local politics a bit more (always good fun). By resigning he has surrendered to the status quo - it's the best result for the ruling clique.


Has he resigned as a Councillor, or from the Limp-Dems?

Maybe the former and will seek re-election as an Independent?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Dec 5 2014, 06:41 PM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,345
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (On the edge @ Dec 5 2014, 03:37 PM) *
The loss of some fifty grand by failing to claim on the insurance as far ax I can see. Some 'clerical error'! Just wish my boss was so nice.

Just a second, so the council should resign because an individual made a mistake? I could understand if the council were advised to make a claim but failed as a collective to do so. Like I said, what have the council done, not an individual, that should cause a mass resignation.

Oh for some decent journalism to ask the bleedin obvious questions. rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Dec 5 2014, 06:41 PM
Post #12


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,345
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (blackdog @ Dec 5 2014, 05:29 PM) *
I think it's a great shame that Ruwan has resigned - if he had stayed he could have become a focus for more new reforming councillors. Of course he could have been deselected by the Lib-Dems at the next election (he wouldn't be the first) - which would stir up local politics a bit more (always good fun). By resigning he has surrendered to the status quo - it's the best result for the ruling clique.


...new reforming Councillors. Nice one Blakdog! rolleyes.gif


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Dec 5 2014, 07:09 PM
Post #13


Advanced Member
***

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



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Dec 5 2014, 06:41 PM) *
Just a second, so the council should resign because an individual made a mistake? I could understand if the council were advised to make a claim but failed as a collective to do so. Like I said, what have the council done, not an individual, that should cause a mass resignation.

Oh for some decent journalism to ask the bleedin obvious questions. rolleyes.gif

This is the problem as I see it. The Council say there was an independent report into whether or not someone did or didn't claim on the legal expenses insurance, and that the investigation ruled that it was "human error, nothing more" - but why can't we see that investigation?

The Council are telling us there's "nothing to see, move along now", but they also told us that they couldn't publish the hydrogeological reports because of a "confidentiality agreement", so my experience tells me not to take on trust anything the Council says but always to seek independent confirmation.

So let's see that independent investigation.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Dec 6 2014, 11:10 AM
Post #14


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,345
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



I wonder if this is connected with the Chief Executive resigning a couple of months back. While I think their handling of the Crackgate has been inept (but not as inept as the WBC) I don't see why the big kick-up. If Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera has evidence the council are covering something up they aught not, then I think he should explain.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Dec 6 2014, 01:14 PM
Post #15


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,345
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



I think he has, trouble is when no one, your party, the opposition or the secretariat is willing to give or fight for acceptable answers, there is not much else to do. Yes, he could just sit it out, but having some experience of knowing just what it's like commercially sitting in meetings where everyone else is 'against' , as he's not paid, why would he want that?



--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Dec 6 2014, 02:17 PM
Post #16


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,417
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Dec 5 2014, 07:09 PM) *
This is the problem as I see it. The Council say there was an independent report into whether or not someone did or didn't claim on the legal expenses insurance, and that the investigation ruled that it was "human error, nothing more" - but why can't we see that investigation?

The Council are telling us there's "nothing to see, move along now", but they also told us that they couldn't publish the hydrogeological reports because of a "confidentiality agreement", so my experience tells me not to take on trust anything the Council says but always to seek independent confirmation.

So let's see that independent investigation.


Yes but it would be nice to know just who made the human error and why Councillors or officers did not notice this error a darn sight sooner? angry.gif
A statement such as it was "Human Error" informs the public of absolutely nothing and fails to give confidence, especially with the trail of gaffs this rabble have made in recent past history, that there are practices in place to prevent this happening continuously.
Name the person, or persons more likely, who made the error and state why there was no checks and balances to catch errors such as one person being responsible. What responsibility are the rest of the council going to take for this "Human Error"?
Why does everything this council gets involved with have to be carried out with a cloak of secrecy draped over it? Have they never heard the word transparency only vexatious? rolleyes.gif

When asked if the investigation could be made public the Councillor replied "no no no yes"
Talk about a farcical organisation the sooner we get rid of the lot of them the better! rolleyes.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ruwan Uduwerage-...
post Dec 6 2014, 04:29 PM
Post #17


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 390
Joined: 26-August 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 303



Dear Forum Members,

"Human Error" possibly, but a four year cover up is not a mere error in my opinion, how about yours?

Further questions need to be asked of those running the Newbury Town Council.

Yours

Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
Former Councillor

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Dec 6 2014, 05:55 PM
Post #18


Advanced Member
***

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



QUOTE (Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera @ Dec 6 2014, 04:29 PM) *
Dear Forum Members,

"Human Error" possibly, but a four year cover up is not a mere error in my opinion, how about yours?

Further questions need to be asked of those running the Newbury Town Council.

Yours

Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
Former Councillor

I quite agree, and I find it intolerable that the Town Council can't be made to cough-up those answers, and there is no holding them to account.

For asking awkward questions I was publicly humiliated with a designation as a Vexatious Complainant, and for asserting my consumer rights I was victimised and evicted from my allotment, and now I am not allowed to have one again.

I'd like to ask difficult questions about Parkgate and I feel that it's important to maintain the freedom to criticise the state or else we drift into a totalitarian dictatorship, but this is the gagging agreement that I'd have to sign if I was ever to have a Town Council allotment again - just how can a Lib Dem administration demand this? It's repugnant:

QUOTE
Simon Kirby agrees to:
Cease to make postings and pronouncements in public places (including in particular notice boards and e-forums) that are critical of or negative towards Newbury Town Council, its Members, Employees, Contractors, Customers, Tenants, and other associates, without prior discussion with the Chief Executive Officer of Newbury Town Council.

Not to cause nuisance to Newbury Town Council, its Members, Employees, Contractors, Customers, Tenant and other associates and in particular not to take action that entails inordinate amount of time to be spent by Newbury Town Council Members and Officers for no real benefit.

Newbury Town Council and Simon Kirby agree to keep the terms of this Agreement strictly confidential and agree not to disclose, communicate or otherwise make public the same to anyone (save professional advisers), or for the enforcement of the terms of this Agreement and otherwise as may be required to be disclosed by law.


I'm currently helping a friend with a Freedom of Information appeal for the hydrogeological reports, and under the terms of the gagging clause I'd be evicted from my allotment for that owing to the "inordinate amount of time" it would take the Council to oppose the request.

Digging out incriminating information and asking challenging questions is a start, but the Town Council just shrug it off. I really do think this level of unaccountability in local government is very dangerous. Parkgate has so far cost the tax-payer around £100k, but that's nothing really as they spend several times that amount every year on self-serving busywork. I've been screwed over, but unless you're actually me that's probably not a serious concern for the citizen of Newbury, though others have been screwed over too, and it might be you one day.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Dec 6 2014, 06:37 PM
Post #19


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,417
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Dec 6 2014, 05:55 PM) *
I quite agree, and I find it intolerable that the Town Council can't be made to cough-up those answers, and there is no holding them to account.

For asking awkward questions I was publicly humiliated with a designation as a Vexatious Complainant, and for asserting my consumer rights I was victimised and evicted from my allotment, and now I am not allowed to have one again.

I'd like to ask difficult questions about Parkgate and I feel that it's important to maintain the freedom to criticise the state or else we drift into a totalitarian dictatorship, but this is the gagging agreement that I'd have to sign if I was ever to have a Town Council allotment again - just how can a Lib Dem administration demand this? It's repugnant:



I'm currently helping a friend with a Freedom of Information appeal for the hydrogeological reports, and under the terms of the gagging clause I'd be evicted from my allotment for that owing to the "inordinate amount of time" it would take the Council to oppose the request.

Digging out incriminating information and asking challenging questions is a start, but the Town Council just shrug it off. I really do think this level of unaccountability in local government is very dangerous. Parkgate has so far cost the tax-payer around £100k, but that's nothing really as they spend several times that amount every year on self-serving busywork. I've been screwed over, but unless you're actually me that's probably not a serious concern for the citizen of Newbury, though others have been screwed over too, and it might be you one day.


For a stranger to Newbury reading this they would probably assume it was originated in the dark recesses of a building fronting on the Red Square in Moscow rather than a very small market town in WB! angry.gif

How any of the rabble are able to walk through Newbury without hanging their head in shame beggars belief. To just add insult they blithely declare the loss of £80000 as just human error! Yes human error that was then covered up in the usual NTC way for a very long time. When will these fiasco's all end? Why is there no public outcry? Is it because people have tried to complain in the past and have been treated in the same manner as Simon and others? It really requires a proper independent investigation as to what is actually going on with this rabble now and we need answers to all the outstanding issues that have been accumulating such as Parkway, Parkgate etc. angry.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Dec 6 2014, 06:55 PM
Post #20


Advanced Member
***

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



QUOTE (Cognosco @ Dec 6 2014, 06:37 PM) *
For a stranger to Newbury reading this they would probably assume it was originated in the dark recesses of a building fronting on the Red Square in Moscow rather than a very small market town in WB! angry.gif

How any of the rabble are able to walk through Newbury without hanging their head in shame beggars belief. To just add insult they blithely declare the loss of £80000 as just human error! Yes human error that was then covered up in the usual NTC way for a very long time. When will these fiasco's all end? Why is there no public outcry? Is it because people have tried to complain in the past and have been treated in the same manner as Simon and others? It really requires a proper independent investigation as to what is actually going on with this rabble now and we need answers to all the outstanding issues that have been accumulating such as Parkway, Parkgate etc. angry.gif

I agree, matters are serious, and the council so bunkered and unaccountable, that an independent enquiry is necessary. The Council itself will obviously not consent to this, so someone with standing needs to get involved and demand one. That doesn't imply any guilt or fault, but there are enough questions now needing answers with the Town Council clearly unwilling to engage with any of those questions, that an independent inquiry has to be called. And more than that, of the individuals in West Berkshire with the standing to demand an independent inquiry, those who remain silent condone the abuse and are as much part of the problem as the Council itself.



--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

7 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: 21st November 2017 - 03:59 PM