Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Newbury Today Forum _ Newbury News _ Facebook Campaign for my Allotment
Posted by: Simon Kirby Mar 27 2012, 05:04 PM
Some posts have been removed as they contravened the rules of this website - Admin
Please refer to 5C of the Newburytoday.co.uk forum rules where it states that forum members are not permitted to set up links from the forum's site to any other site.
Posted by: Vodabury Mar 27 2012, 05:22 PM
A lovely dog you have.
Posted by: NORTHENDER Mar 27 2012, 07:06 PM
Nice weather now so move into the shed and let them evict you. I am sure the papers will be interested then.
Posted by: Strafin Mar 27 2012, 09:22 PM
I have liked and shared it on my page as well. Guys, if you click to like, it only takes a second to share it as well!
Posted by: Strafin Mar 27 2012, 09:33 PM
The "Newbury Berkshire" facebook group have also put it up on their wall. You should add some cool pictures of your shed!
Posted by: x2lls Mar 27 2012, 09:39 PM
Shared and liked.
You get my support.
(See, there IS a group!!!!) 
Posted by: CharlieF Mar 28 2012, 03:15 PM
Blogged and tweeted! https://twitter.com/#!/charliefarrow1/status/185010492924903424
Posted by: NWNREADER Mar 28 2012, 07:13 PM
Old?
Posted by: Cognosco Mar 28 2012, 07:45 PM
Obviously lacking decency = OLD
Posted by: Sidney Mar 28 2012, 08:55 PM
Liked and shared ! I too have issues with NTC and you are an inspiration !
Posted by: Rosewinelover Mar 29 2012, 09:07 AM
Have just liked and wrote you a msg 
Posted by: massifheed Mar 29 2012, 09:27 AM
It never ends.
Is there a way for you to contact Facebook about it? Obviously if anyone can report a FB user for spam - and their account then gets temporarily restricted functionality - it could be an easy way for any NTC facebook user to try and disrupt your group/campaign.
I realise it's a precaution on Facebook's side, but clearly the messages you've been sending to people are not spam, but genuine (whether people choose to support the group or not doesn't make it spam).
Posted by: JeffG Mar 29 2012, 11:26 AM
I am sure you meant that in jest, but it seems quite a few people see the "one person against authority" thing as an excuse to jump on a bandwagon without knowing the person, the full facts or the other side of the argument.
Up until the time certain comments were made a while back I was fairly neutral. Now I am much less so.
Posted by: Andy Capp Mar 29 2012, 11:31 AM
Up until the time certain comments were made a while back I was fairly neutral. Now I am much less so.
We can only work with what is in front of us. I see no 'facts' that allow for any legitimate defence of the council's position, or methods. A gagging order as supplied to Simon was the last straw in my view. That was and is just wrong.
Today it might only be a 'loud mouth' allotmenteer, but tomorrow it could be someone else a councillor takes a disliking to.
Posted by: Simon Kirby Mar 29 2012, 11:52 AM
Up until the time certain comments were made a while back I was fairly neutral. Now I am much less so.
You're saying I need a flawless personality to enjoy my allotment in peace? Of course I'm flawed; I have my prejudices, sharp endges, intolerances, disrespect, arrogance, and a whole bunch of other stuff that you won't find attractive. I'm not asking you to invite me home to dinner, I just want the Council to respect my rights.
Posted by: jaycakes Mar 29 2012, 11:55 AM
Up until the time certain comments were made a while back I was fairly neutral. Now I am much less so.
There was an element of jest in it. I will admit.
I am not the first person to jump on a bandwagon here as I'm sure you are aware. (Apparently everyone on here hates me but we all know that to not be the case, off topic apologies)
I have read a lot of notes, many of which I was frankly bored to **** reading, long posts from Simon and notices from the council and from the facts I have "seen" - I think that the Council and their actions have been appalling and indefensible. A gagging order? Over a shed?
Get with it!?
Posted by: badmummajamma Mar 29 2012, 01:44 PM
It's a lovely shed.
Posted by: Cognosco Mar 29 2012, 05:24 PM
But as sheds go, it's a very nice one indeed. I would love my shed to be of that quality. I wish I even had a shed....
Yes but you are opiniated and have a mind of your own....you appear the sort that would refuse to touch your forelock when approaching a town councillor.... you appear the sort that would like to think the council are there to serve you not the other way round. You appear the sort that would let the council know if they were not carrying out their duties correctly and inform everyone just what was going on and would not abide by an illegal gagging order..... so no allotment I'm afraid ergo no shed for you!
Posted by: Jo Pepper Mar 29 2012, 09:55 PM
Best wishes on your campaign - I hope they see sense soon.
Posted by: x2lls Mar 30 2012, 01:23 PM
We know a song about that
Our shed, a very very very nice shed, with two dogs in the yard, life used to be so hard.......
Posted by: Nothing Much Mar 30 2012, 02:23 PM
Good tune.x2lls. No doubt he gets aound on Syd's bike.
I tried to do Facebook and I suddenly have 400 people wanting me to be friends so I shut down and decided to ask
my Daughter how to cope. I know about 5 personally.
The rest are people who have commented on videos on youtube.
It is like video streaming of films....You liked that do you want to watch this?
I am now inundated, because I stepped over the threshold, with unread E-Mails. In a very gracious script.
All from Iraqi Kurdistan. I feel a bit pursued, but as I have no clue what is there. I am leaving it alone.
So at the moment I am keeping off the Allotment site too. Facebook as well.
So I will try and log on next week when I find out what to do. And ' like' your campaign.
Christopher.
Posted by: Nothing Much Mar 30 2012, 04:03 PM
Hindi Princesses sounds fun. I know a nice shed to store them in.
Strangely one of the posters is someone I knew for 35 years. Got divorced and pestered
me with French Jokes, Just passed them on when she got my e-mail address. A nightmare.
Firstly I can understand a bit of franglais.But after translation they are just not funny. About 40 a day
Even I can't translate that quickly.
It turns out I was not the only person who had had ask her to desist. At least I could read the words.
Some people are a bit daft and I have a fear that I have mistakenly set foot in a minefield.
The posts that are coming through at the rate of knots is alarming . And it is a private group I clicked on.
ce
Posted by: Penelope Mar 30 2012, 04:14 PM
Strangely one of the posters is someone I knew for 35 years. Got divorced and pestered
me with French Jokes, Just passed them on when she got my e-mail address. A nightmare.
Firstly I can understand a bit of franglais.But after translation they are just not funny. About 40 a day
Even I can't translate that quickly.
It turns out I was not the only person who had had ask her to desist. At least I could read the words.
Some people are a bit daft and I have a fear that I have mistakenly set foot in a minefield.
The posts that are coming through at the rate of knots is alarming . And it is a private group I clicked on.
ce
Facebook, like Twitter, a fools toolkit.
Posted by: Nothing Much Mar 30 2012, 04:41 PM
Yes Penelope. Quite right.Like Nigerian e-mails it has been in newsprint for years.
I didn't realise it is impossible to get out of even if you don't post anything.
The poster I had known for about 10 years had embedded my videos years ago from youtube.
Suggested I try his facebook page. There is nothing untoward on this problem. I get greetings at Christmas.
It is just the linkage that caused me to have a bit of a flutter.
After all we get on well here. Don't we.
ce
Posted by: Penelope Mar 30 2012, 04:55 PM
I didn't realise it is impossible to get out of even if you don't post anything.
The poster I had known for about 10 years had embedded my videos years ago from youtube.
Suggested I try his facebook page. There is nothing untoward on this problem. I get greetings at Christmas.
It is just the linkage that caused me to have a bit of a flutter.
After all we get on well here. Don't we.
ce
Indeedeley doodeley !
Posted by: NWNREADER Mar 31 2012, 10:06 AM
Our shed, a very very very nice shed, with two dogs in the yard, life used to be so hard.......
Father wears his Sunday best
Mother's tired she needs a rest
The kids are playing up downstairs
Sister's sighing in her sleep
Brother's got a date to keep
He can't hang around
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, in the middle of our ...
Our shed it has a crowd
There's always something happening
And it's usually quite loud
Our mum she's so shed-proud
Nothing ever slows her down
And a mess is not allowed
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, in the middle of our ...
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, in the middle of our ...
Something tells you that you've got to get away from it
Father gets up late for work
Mother has to iron his shirt
Then she sends the kids to school
Sees them off with a small kiss
She's the one they're going to miss
In lots of ways
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, in the middle of our ...
I remember way back then when everything was true and when
We would have such a very good time such a fine time
Such a happy time
And I remember how we'd play simply waste the day away
Then we'd say nothing would come between us two dreamers
Father wears his Sunday best
Mother's tired she needs a rest
The kids are playing up downstairs
Sister's sighing in her sleep
Brother's got a date to keep
He can't hang around
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, in the middle of our ...
Our shed, was our castle and our keep
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, that was where we used to sleep
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed in the middle of our plot
Posted by: Cognosco Mar 31 2012, 10:37 AM
Mother's tired she needs a rest
The kids are playing up downstairs
Sister's sighing in her sleep
Brother's got a date to keep
He can't hang around
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, in the middle of our ...
Our shed it has a crowd
There's always something happening
And it's usually quite loud
Our mum she's so shed-proud
Nothing ever slows her down
And a mess is not allowed
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, in the middle of our ...
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, in the middle of our ...
Something tells you that you've got to get away from it
Father gets up late for work
Mother has to iron his shirt
Then she sends the kids to school
Sees them off with a small kiss
She's the one they're going to miss
In lots of ways
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, in the middle of our ...
I remember way back then when everything was true and when
We would have such a very good time such a fine time
Such a happy time
And I remember how we'd play simply waste the day away
Then we'd say nothing would come between us two dreamers
Father wears his Sunday best
Mother's tired she needs a rest
The kids are playing up downstairs
Sister's sighing in her sleep
Brother's got a date to keep
He can't hang around
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, in the middle of our ...
Our shed, was our castle and our keep
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed, that was where we used to sleep
Our shed, in the middle of our plot
Our shed in the middle of our plot
Sounds idyllic until NTC got involved and needed to raise some cash to subsidise their other Administration costs?
Would be even more idyllic for both allotmenteers and taxpayers if they were given the option of a vote to take on self management
It would really solve a lot of the present problems if the allotmenteers were allowed to have a free vote regarding self management? It would get Simon off their backs. I would still like to hear the councils version of the problems regarding Simon's eviction history. They can't now rely on the old excuse of confidentiality!
It may even go some way to restore the rock bottom image of the council that I believe the taxpayers have of them.
Posted by: Cognosco Mar 31 2012, 01:54 PM
Far from being lowest cost and lowest risk the council have already run up a legal bill for the tax-payer of several thousand pounds, not to mention the significant embarrassment surrounding their refusal to release the minutes of that meeting, and they still now have to apply to the court for a possession order just as before. True, it is more difficult for me because I have to use public law and human rights arguments to defeat the Notice to Quit rather than the simpler aruments about the unfairness of the tenancy agreement term and such, but all the council have succeeded in doing is digging themselves into an even bigger hole.
If what the Council claim is right, that this is a dispute over £20, then they allowed matters to get completely and utterly out of propotion. It's illuminating to understand that the town clerk wouldn't offer me the new tenancy agreement after Trading Standards made the Council revise the unfair one, and illuminating too to understand that the Council were using the threat of eviction to compel me to sign a secret no-criticism clause.
Not for the first time the Council also wheeled out is slanderous and humiliating personal slurs:
Perhaps if the Council had actually discussed the fairness of the rent review term with me rather than threatened me what would happen if I complained about it we might not have got into all this mess. What the Council need to realise is that just because my analysis of allotment rents shows theirs to be in the top 10% nationally and my analysis of their budget shows that they spend £100k on a service that could be delivered better for free, that doesn't make my saying so libelous or vexatious.
Well someone has to be at fault don't they? How can you even suggest it would be our esteemed council when have the taxpayers ever known them to be in the wrong?
If you had not stood up to the councillor who was a neighbour on your allotment site then a lot of this would not have come about. Also if the council had bothered to study the law and apply it fairly then this would have not come about.
If the council had not tried to place a disgraceful gagging contract on you this would not have gone as far as it now has. If the council had published the minutes of a meeting that they are alleged to not have published this would not have come about.
The best thing that could possibly happen now is for the council to meet with you and a representative to discuss where to go now to avoid any further embarrassment for the council and to shake hands, withdraw the eviction notice, and let the allotmenteers decide if they want self management or not by arranging a ballot. Less cost all round for the taxpayer and a saving of face for the council.
Posted by: blackdog Mar 31 2012, 04:25 PM
Syd didn't have a bike - he only borrowed it.
Posted by: NWNREADER Mar 31 2012, 06:02 PM
I am not an NTC resident, and I know no more than anyone else who has seen the threads by Simon.
I think a few NTC voters need to write to their own councillor and ask questions about the accountability issues.
Posted by: Cognosco Mar 31 2012, 07:40 PM
I think a few NTC voters need to write to their own councillor and ask questions about the accountability issues.
That has already been tried and the council reply was that they will not divulge any information that involves a dispute with an individual. It would seem that they pick and choose which rules they will apply and which they will ignore?
Any other suggestions to get them to open up with information? It would seem that the stance is we have behaved appallingly and the best way out is to say nothing unless we are forced to!
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 1 2012, 12:18 PM
Any other suggestions to get them to open up with information? It would seem that the stance is we have behaved appallingly and the best way out is to say nothing unless we are forced to!
I am not suggesting asking questions about the combat with Simon, I suggest asking questions about the matters Simon has raised, the decisions the Council has made, the policies (?) it is following.
That way they are being asked by more than one person and the matters really cannot be ignored. Either that or NTC voters will increasingly become vexatious complainers...... Which would be interesting come election time
Posted by: Newbelly Apr 1 2012, 01:20 PM
Our shed, a very very very nice shed, with two dogs in the yard, life used to be so hard.......
Does Simon have a shed in his garden as well? If so I am put in mind of a Monty Python sketch...
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 1 2012, 01:31 PM
But his name is Simon Kirby, not http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLjS3gzHetA
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 1 2012, 02:02 PM
That way they are being asked by more than one person and the matters really cannot be ignored. Either that or NTC voters will increasingly become vexatious complainers...... Which would be interesting come election time
Do you ever get a straight answer from councillors? The problem is they know they have no opposition in Newbury when it comes to election time, so really they do not care one iota what some people think of them - they rely on the bulk of the electorate who has had no dealings with them - to just cast their vote as usual for a blue rosette. The only difference this time will be the LibLiars will be out of the running so Blue councillors will have a clear run to the winning post. Unless Dave happens to get it really wrong of course or some other new party arrives on the scene to give the mainly disenfranchised majority in the country someone to vote for. Perhaps you could ask the relevant questions NWNREADER of the council for us and then post the replies for all to see as no one else can get anything sensible out of the council it would appear? Good Luck with that!
Posted by: Nothing Much Apr 1 2012, 03:55 PM
Syd didn't have a bike - he only borrowed it.
Thanks Blackdog.I am obviously a front runner for "Ace Reporter" at NWN.
I know the song . I have the LP. I have Google. I know he walked to Cambridge ,& stayed.
I just didn't check the details.....(he says grovellingly).
ce.
Posted by: blackdog Apr 1 2012, 04:48 PM
I just didn't check the details.....(he says grovellingly).
ce.
It's one of those silly songs that I can't forget - and a unique album.
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 1 2012, 05:22 PM
As I am not an NTC resident they would be perfectly entitled to ignore my questions. They are not accountable to me.
Posted by: Dodgys smarter brother. Apr 1 2012, 07:06 PM
Yes, and it had things to make it look good.
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 1 2012, 07:10 PM
There's the whole business of the rent increase: The latest court case from Southampton shows that 47% wasn't lawful when football pitches went up a few percent and bowling rent not at all. Whatever the true position on the fairness of the rent review term, the council need to revoke my eviction on these grounds alone.
There's the whole business of self-management: The Council need to discuss the possibility of saving £100k, just calling me names isn't any argument.
There's the whole business of NTC's lack of respect for fundamental rights of freedom of speach and freedom of association. Gagging clauses and calling awkward people vexatious is not on.
And then there's the whole question of the Council's accountability. The Council have chosen to behave badly and refused to be accountable for that behaviour.
I think we need the advice of a specailist solicitor for this as the council refuses to talk or explain to anybody even their own electorate? Have you consulted a Law Centre Simon? The nearest one is Swindon. As the council has, it would seem, breached you human rights then they may take up your case for you. Worth a try. Even if you have to pay you could make a public appeal for donations I am sure there are a lot of good people who would be willing to contribute towards the cost of bringing a rogue council to account.
Posted by: Nothing Much Apr 1 2012, 07:55 PM
I think Simon Kirby is setting up UDI. You will need a passport. And a complement of Pikemen.
I really think the shed is a work of art. Next years Turner Prize along with all the documents.
I have seen dross at Tate Britain for the same event.
ce
Posted by: Sherlock Apr 3 2012, 05:33 PM
This would make a great plot for an Alan Plater style TV drama series. Like the Beiderbecke Affair, but with a renegade allotment holder, bumptious councillors, supercilious magistrates, nosy neighbourhood watch types twitching their curtains, bumbling police constables and the lovely Barbara Flynn to steal our hearts.
Here are Jaycakes, Mr Kirby, Ms Flynn and James Bolan in a possible scene..jpg)
Any ideas for a title?
Posted by: Sherlock Apr 3 2012, 05:38 PM
Looking at the poses in that photo again, the chaps seem a little over excited by the proximity of Ms Flynn don't they?
Posted by: Sherlock Apr 3 2012, 05:39 PM
Perfect! Alan Plater is sadly no longer with us but perhaps Richard Adams could be persuaded to write the series and work in a few rabbits? A blend of Beiderbecke, Watership Down and Beatrix Potter should have something for everyone.
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 3 2012, 05:46 PM
If it is a Farce then NTC would fit in well then? Fully experienced!
Posted by: blackdog Apr 3 2012, 06:43 PM
A brilliant series - I went to a friend's wedding many moons ago and found myself sitting next to the headmaster - who turned out to be a much nicer chap in real life.
Posted by: On the edge Apr 3 2012, 07:20 PM
What a stroke of luck! You couldn't get him to see if Big Al would have a word with our brightest and best?
Posted by: Turin Machine Apr 3 2012, 10:12 PM
I know the chap who won S of the Y in 07. Gotta long, long way to go Simon.
Posted by: Strafin Apr 5 2012, 08:52 AM
I've also had a letter from their solicitor saying that I'll be trespassing illegally if I go on site again and that I can be removed by the police or anyone else they authorise. I'll be honest, I'm finding it too frightening and tressful now, but I love my allotment and it just can't be right that I've been evicted without a chance to argue my case in front of an independent tribunal - that is what Atricle 6 says I have a right to, and I genuinely believe that I'm right about the Unfair Terms thing and I also believe that I was right to make a stand.
Posted by: Ron Apr 5 2012, 08:56 AM
I know, being a bit picky, but how do you trespass legally?
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 5 2012, 08:59 AM
I've also had a letter from their solicitor saying that I'll be trespassing illegally if I go on site again and that I can be removed by the police or anyone else they authorise. I'll be honest, I'm finding it too frightening and tressful now, but I love my allotment and it just can't be right that I've been evicted without a chance to argue my case in front of an independent tribunal - that is what Atricle 6 says I have a right to, and I genuinely believe that I'm right about the Unfair Terms thing and I also believe that I was right to make a stand.
Let them arrest you Simon - just think of the publicity when it comes to court - the court will only take a dim view of the council anyway for wasting their valuable time over trivialities! Look at some of the sentences passed down for things like mugging and breaking and entering in Newbury a stiff telling off from the magistrate and business as usual. Don't give in to them keep up the fight!
I have written to the council but they only come back with the usual standard letter "they are unable to enter into any correspondence concerning an individual".
Why don't we try a mass trespass at your plot over the weekend and see just what happens? Have they requested you return your key yet? Are we still able to enter the allotments without breaking in?
Any other suggestions welcome?
Posted by: badmummajamma Apr 5 2012, 09:02 AM
Simon, I really do feel for you.
There's only ever so much stress and aggravation a matter of principle can stand up to.
I'm having my own battle with Reading Borough Council at the moment and trying to resolve conflicts with these local authorities is like banging your head against a shed wall.
It's a long story but RBC is essentially trying to charge me £260 for an alleged contravention of a bus lane regulation - in which the nose of my car may have entered the bus lane to enable me to perform a legal three-point turn after dropping someone off. You couldn't make it up.
Bearing in mind my offices are within said bus lane, in the town centre, I'm well aware of the restriction.
I seem to spend a worrying percentage of my free time in conflict with parasitic organisations after something for nothing.
Anyone ever see that Michael Douglas film Falling Down? It's one of those days.
Posted by: massifheed Apr 5 2012, 10:12 AM
Generally, trespass is a civil matter, and not a criminal one. The most someone can do if you are on their land is ask you to leave.
There is such a thing as criminal trespass, but I think that is for protected sites - places like the AWE, royal residences etc.
Posted by: massifheed Apr 5 2012, 10:45 AM
Ok, this looks like standard bluff and bluster. Unless there is an existing reason for it to be classed as criminal trespass (and there is none that I can see), then you are not committing a criminal offence by simply trespassing, as it's not a criminal offence.
The only way I can see the police showing up is if they have reason to believe that you have had to force entry onto the site, or if they believe that you may be there to commit a criminal act (such as burglary etc).
If you're in town I would stop by the police station and ask. They're a decent bunch.
There is some info here:
http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=47513
Posted by: massifheed Apr 5 2012, 02:28 PM
And that's probably the biggest threat of action you face. You can bet that if someone from NTC rings the police they will make out that you are someone who has been evicted and is there to cause trouble and disrupt others, even though may be just going about your own business.
Having said that, if you did go back on site and the police did turn up, providing that you give them no cause for concern as to your intentions you may find that, at most, they ask you to leave.
If they are happy that you have no criminal intent, and you choose to go back later they may well be reluctant to come out again if called, as they know that you don't pose a threat to anyone.
If NTC want you out, but refuse to deal with you amicably, then it's for the courts to sort out. Not for the police to become bailiffs for the council. I can't see TVP doing NTC's job for them.
Posted by: massifheed Apr 5 2012, 03:30 PM
Really?!?
Posted by: Penelope Apr 5 2012, 04:38 PM
If they get rough it's assault, that will read well in the press. "Allotmenteer assaulted by council workman" The police won't get involved unless there is a risk of violence. If you are willing to fight for what you love I suffer you call their bluff. Weasel faced fat ******** !
Posted by: badmummajamma Apr 5 2012, 04:43 PM
I'm concerned about what will become of the shed?!
Surely as one of the country's best sheds, it should have listed status or something?
Simon, I suggest you chain yourself to it.
We''ll all take it in turns to bring you a cup of tea occasionally.
Posted by: Nothing Much Apr 5 2012, 05:19 PM
Just a note of caution though Simon Kirby. I think your present time is stressful enough.
But best think of future interaction with financial bodies.
A record won't do much good on the form. Should you need to.
Newbury has a history of being bolshy, Greenham,Swampy.
The ladies went,and Swampy is leading a quiet life in Yorkshire I believe.
I think like "28 days later", and Guerrila Gardeners. You should have a sturdy band to remove your
shed and plonk it on St John's roundabout. Overnight. And a brick BBQ , space for the dogs to snooze
I am sure a B&Q garden trolley would do.
ce
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 5 2012, 07:18 PM
If you ask questions about Simon that is exactly the reply they will always give. If you are an NTC resident, ask questions about the matters Simon has issues with.
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 6 2012, 09:19 AM
Standard reply...."As their are legal proceedings pending regarding allotment contracts and costs we are unable to enter into any correspondance on the matter of allotments until the legal process has completed"
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 6 2012, 12:13 PM
The small amounts the Council has allowed to trickle out does not explain anything of the situation at all, in fact it creates in my mind even more confusion, why will they not explain the gagging contract and how it came about?
Why do they refuse to publish the minutes of a council meeting if they have nothing to hide? The more they insist on not publishing the more is needed to ensure they do publish.
Why, if as they believe, they have left no stone unturned to come to agreement with Simon do they not let ratepayers see the evidence?
Why does a ratepayer have to lose the use of an allotment for pointing out that the council have not issued a fair contract for costs of a plot which appears to have been backed up by Trading Standards.
Why does a ratepayer have to lose the use of an allotment for stating that Self Management would be beneficial to allotmenteers as well as ratepayers? These are the questions to which I want answers to! If all the ratepayers of NTC were classed as vexatious for calling the council bad names and more or less useless then there would be only one class.
That is without touching on questions such as why drains were installed that run uphill and why some of the allotments are used as council car parks? The list could go on and on! These are just a few of the questions that have so far been pushed aside and I and others have been refused answers to?
Posted by: Strafin Apr 6 2012, 12:59 PM
Could we (the public) force this on to an agenda for a future meeting and come along to ask questions and show support?
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 6 2012, 01:43 PM
A meeting to only discuss the councils allotment crisis is what is required. No restrictions on what questions as per usual as long as they are regarding allotments. Also not held at 10.00 am on a Monday morning so that no members of the public are able to attend due to work commitments. Publish all Minutes of council meetings, whether full council or not, one week before the meeting. Pledge to not evict Simon Kirby until at least one month after public meeting.
Start trying to adhere to openess and transparency for once.
Posted by: On the edge Apr 6 2012, 03:45 PM
Seems to me there are three avenues that could be explored:-
1. Have a formal discussion with Richard Beynon - after all the outright rejection of self management doesn't sit with 'Big Society' or indeed co-operative type ventures for services that HMG are presently promoting.
2. Contact the District Auditor - who should be able at least to check the allocation of funds and income on the allotment account to determine fairness.
3. Try the Ombudsmun process as it might also provide a route. He could at least pronounce on the fairness or otherwise of the conduct of this matter.
Must say that this coupled with other recent happenings in our local governance arrangements have reduced any lingering respect I might have had.
Albeit WBC rather than NTC - the mess over the Park Way bridge signs, then the 'dirty restaurants' issue - when we find later that Council owned school kitchens are just as bad!!
What is going on with public administration in Newbury?
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 6 2012, 04:03 PM
Interestingly enough they have used the old "excessive officer time" argument against me, but a council officer confided in me and the society secretary in a meeting in December 2009 that the individual who was actually responsible for using up excessive officer time with their frequent groundless complaints against me and the Society was someone else entirely, though funily enough they've never issued a public statement about that. If we ever get an open investigation into the failings at the council I will be pleased to see this evidence come out.
So just what are the officers there for if not to deal with the customers queries?
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 6 2012, 04:07 PM
1. Have a formal discussion with Richard Beynon - after all the outright rejection of self management doesn't sit with 'Big Society' or indeed co-operative type ventures for services that HMG are presently promoting.
2. Contact the District Auditor - who should be able at least to check the allocation of funds and income on the allotment account to determine fairness.
3. Try the Ombudsmun process as it might also provide a route. He could at least pronounce on the fairness or otherwise of the conduct of this matter.
Must say that this coupled with other recent happenings in our local governance arrangements have reduced any lingering respect I might have had.
Albeit WBC rather than NTC - the mess over the Park Way bridge signs, then the 'dirty restaurants' issue - when we find later that Council owned school kitchens are just as bad!!
What is going on with public administration in Newbury?
There is something rotten in the borough of Newbury methinks?
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 6 2012, 04:14 PM
There must be at least one councillor who is hanging their head in shame? If only that one would come forward and offer assistance to help solve this council caused problem and show that their is someone with some common sense left in our town council?
Please let us know of any assistance we can give Simon?
Posted by: Vodabury Apr 6 2012, 04:43 PM
Please let us know of any assistance we can give Simon?
I know little about local politics so cannot offer detailed assistance other than to say if Simon has been treated unfairly and NTC have behaved poorly, then he deserves all support.
Simon certainly seems to have done his homework on this matter and has written eloquently, but needs to guard against any use of words that could make him look deliberately combative or difficult.
They say a photo speaks a thousand words, so to keep people’s interest can he obtain a few more and with comments – showing the care he has put into his allotment and comparing it to surroundings and/or other bits of council–owned land?
Facebook was a good idea, as long as comments are moderate(d).
I wish Simon luck.
Posted by: Penelope Apr 6 2012, 06:12 PM
Bit of polital virgin but, wouldn't it be possible to put forward a candidate at the next round of local elections, pick a likely name and launch a campaign to get them onto the council. At the very least it would grab some attention and if we were successful we would have our own insider. Luvly.
Posted by: Vodabury Apr 6 2012, 06:14 PM
Now, that is a great allotment!
Funnily enough, I thought of your situation today upon listening to Jeremy Vine on Radio 2. They have an allotment spot on a Friday and the show does like a human interest/David and Goliath type story..?
Posted by: On the edge Apr 6 2012, 06:28 PM
As far as I can make out, the Ombudsman can't look at Parish Councils because an 'appeal' would go to the 'Local Authority' in our case - West Berkshire. They are supposed to have a 'Standards Committee' - which is empowered to deal with such things. Then, of course, if its still not resolved, the Ombudsman can get involved; because it would be with the 'Local Authority'. A bit convoluted, but seems to make legal sense! Suspect getting WBC's 'Standards Committee' to take this may be a challenge. Will check the validity of this process out next week elsewhere - then may have another door to knock so to speak!
Posted by: Simon Kirby Apr 6 2012, 06:29 PM
Thanks for that. I'm not a great gardener, I stick to the simle things, but I make an effort, and being vegetarian I really appreciate what I grow.
Posted by: Simon Kirby Apr 6 2012, 06:31 PM
I feel that involving WBC is utterly, utterly futile.
Posted by: Penelope Apr 6 2012, 06:34 PM
Leave no stone unturned. Even the ones with councillors underneath.
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 7 2012, 01:45 PM
Members are asked to peruse the following, then answer the question posed at the bottom.
Using their best skill and judgment, forum members are asked to guess just who the 'lady' referred to in 'jaycakes' post might be.
Doesn't this represent the worst kind of petulant, petty-minded behaviour?
You can therefore now understand why taxpayers are very wary of the local councillors. You can understand why Simon is reluctant to give in to such people. Unfortunatley it would seem most of the NTC Councillors are of a similar ilk.
This is one of the reasons why they must not be allowed to get away with treating someone in this manner.
We have our troops fighting in foreign countries to allow people to live in a democracy with freedom and fairness. Yet this kind of petty behaviour is going on, with no recourse to any sort of justice and no explanations and no way to get answers from the council, in one of our own small towns in England.
Posted by: On the edge Apr 7 2012, 03:24 PM
Is this the lady that needs referring to the standards committee? They don't (or should not) restrict to presently serving Councillors. This would start to open the whole thing to scrutiny.
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 7 2012, 03:43 PM
There is a complete silence from the council OTE. No answer to letters or Emails! Only reply has been as this is a dispute with an individual they will not enter into any correspondence? As there is a possibility of legal action they will not enter into any correspondence regarding allotments.
Just how do we get any scrutiny? It appears they have slammed the door shut and put up the barricades.
I can just see why Simon tended to lose his temper if they have treated him the same? It appears as if they are a law unto themselves and they have to answer to no one! It must be possible to make them accountable? The more they keep quite on this the more I am convinced they have something to hide!
Posted by: Turin Machine Apr 7 2012, 06:57 PM
I find this all very frustrating, I know Simon has a 'rep' but I also know that not responding in a right and proper manner smacks of rule under the lenin regime, I have also heard Simon being slagged off by 'people in the know' which is disturbing. If and only if fthe council has indeed acted in the manner portrayed by Mr Kirby then I find it shamefull in the extreme that these people hold any sway whatsoever in the running of the affairs of this town.
I understand that the members in question are not going to expose them selves to trial by forum over this mattter, but their total silence is an indication or the 'stick together' mentality so prevalent in local council today.
If and only if the accusations made by Simon are true then they should consider resignin 'en masse'.
my two pennorth.
Posted by: Nothing Much Apr 7 2012, 07:33 PM
Simon Kirby. You are a lone voice in the wilderness.
There is still hope. A group of disaffected Londoners banded together about various issues that affected them.
Parking,tree felling, selling off "gifted land". Older bro put his head above the parapet and joined a mixed bunch
of wealthy and not so wealthy. He has dropped out now.
( Arterial Fibrillation. Too much excitement getting the council on the run....).Still, they won. Council lost.
Look Up Richmond United Group,(RUG).
RUG is my pension provider. Thanks Lord lord lloyd W.of rabbits warren.
If there are a group of interested residents on other matters you should make an effort to hold meetings
and thrash out a way to take on the council.Ketts rebellion is still celebrated. (He would have died anyway)
Didn't want to mention the hanging.
ce
Posted by: Nothing Much Apr 7 2012, 07:42 PM
How about NUKE.... Newbury Under Kirby something....
take care GCHQ are on the ball.
ce
Posted by: Exhausted Apr 7 2012, 08:27 PM
Simon this extract from the 2010/11 NTC report does not seem to bear out your assertions about their refusal to discuss self-management. It seems, if this is to be believed, that they have never had a proposal put before them.
As has been widely reported in the press over the last year, one of the Council’s tenants has been in dispute with the Council initially over what the tenant saw as an unfair increase to the allotment rents last year, and then because the council seemingly refused to discuss self-managed allotments. This dispute escalated out of all proportion mainly through misinformation given by the tenant. This dispute has cost the Council some significant sums in legal costs and officer/Councillor time. The unfortunate thing about all this is that the Council has never refused to discuss allotment self-management on the one hand and the Council has never received a proper proposal on allotment self- management to consider.
The 2011/12 NTC report only gives you a passing reference. My question might be that if the Council were on firm ground at the outset as I’m sure they felt they were, why has it cost “significant sums in legal costs”
Last year we reported on the ongoing dispute with one of the Council’s allotment tenants. Regrettably, this dispute has still not been resolved, although we are hopeful of bringing matters to a conclusion in the next couple of months.
I suppose this is Council speak for “He’s on his way out”.
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 7 2012, 08:50 PM
What legal action is pending, or even thought to be possible? Unless there is something definite the response is surely wrong. Everything any Council does is, daily, possibly going to lead to legal action. If that was a basis for non-communication the Councils of the lans would become universally silent.
Posted by: Exhausted Apr 7 2012, 09:02 PM
Hasn't Simon taken them to court for their refusal to allow him view of the minutes of a meeting at which he was discussed.
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 7 2012, 09:05 PM
This was the reason given for why they were unable to answer questions regarding the allotments crisis!
It would appear that no matter how or what question is posed, regarding the allotments and specifically Simon's allotment problem, they are unwilling to give a reply.
I will be requesting information, especially the minutes of the said meeting, using the FOI Act.
I will request everything the council holds regarding Wash Common allotments especially. No matter how long it may take them to release it! Any suggestions as to what exactly to request?
The problem with this is that it gives them 21 days to reply. By this time it may be too late for Simon.
I have a real suspicion this is what they are hoping for and if they stay quiete it will all go away?
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 8 2012, 10:28 AM
Ask if there are vacant plots in Wash Common and how to apply. Ask for an introduction to the 'managing group'
Posted by: On the edge Apr 8 2012, 03:57 PM
Just how do we get any scrutiny? It appears they have slammed the door shut and put up the barricades.
I can just see why Simon tended to lose his temper if they have treated him the same? It appears as if they are a law unto themselves and they have to answer to no one! It must be possible to make them accountable? The more they keep quite on this the more I am convinced they have something to hide!
Agree Newbury Town Council have ceased contact. The 'Scrutiny Committee' is a West Berkshire body and appears to have some statutory relevance. They appear to have a duty to deal with 'Councillors' in their area for WBC and the lower tiers. So, simply sending in a formal request, which would it seems need to be a complaint about one or more of the Town Councillors has to be acknowledged. If it isn't then the Ombudsman does have the power to get involved - because it would then be a WBC matter; that is a failure by the standards committee. Byzantine I know, but of course, these complaint procedures are managed by the very people being complained about! Frankly, I wouldn't expect the WBC 'Standards Committee' to do anything - in this case, its simpl a matter of 'going through the motions' to get the Ombudsman involved.
Posted by: Jay Sands Apr 9 2012, 08:40 AM
If Simon's version of events is correct then surely NTC are in breach of their own code of conduct - http://www.newbury.gov.uk/code-of-conduct.php ?
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 9 2012, 09:10 AM
As I read the document, it seems to be directed at individual members of the Council, not the Council itself. Is there a Code for the body as a whole?
Posted by: Jay Sands Apr 9 2012, 11:09 AM
The Council also have to comply with the Standards for England guidelines which you can see here: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120202153716/http://www.standardsforengland.gov.uk/aboutus/
"Standards for England's main task is to ensure that standards of ethical conduct are maintained across authorities."
The Local Authority Ombudsman might be another way forward: "The Local Government Ombudsman looks at complaints about councils and some other authorities and organisations, including education admissions appeal panels and adult social care providers (such as care homes and home care providers). It is a free service. Our job is to investigate complaints in a fair and independent way - we do not take sides."
http://www.lgo.org.uk/
Posted by: Squelchy Apr 9 2012, 07:14 PM
Anyone know of a decent local newspaper that might, in the interests of it's readers, make such a request to the council?
Admin? You got any thoughts on this?
Posted by: Squelchy Apr 9 2012, 07:47 PM
Oh, I'm sure there's a few that work at the N.W.N that are also on the electoral role.
Let's be honest, they could have a go if they wanted to...
Posted by: x2lls Apr 9 2012, 09:06 PM
Let's be honest, they could have a go if they wanted to...
A couple of weeks ago, I mentioned all this to a reporter on NWN, at my local. He said he was no longer responsible for the area to which this issue belongs, but would mention it to the reporter who would cover it.
I haven't seen him since, but will ask next time i see him.
Posted by: admin Apr 10 2012, 09:24 AM
Some posts have been removed as they contravened the rules of this website - Admin
Please refer to 5C of the Newburytoday.co.uk forum rules where it states that forum members are not permitted to set up links from the forum's site to any other site.
Posted by: John C Apr 10 2012, 04:06 PM
Please refer to 5C of the Newburytoday.co.uk forum rules where it states that forum members are not permitted to set up links from the forum's site to any other site.
Surely that also means people cannot link to WBC and or NTC
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 10 2012, 04:22 PM
Please refer to 5C of the Newburytoday.co.uk forum rules where it states that forum members are not permitted to set up links from the forum's site to any other site.
Admin, 5C states:
you will not make any commercial or business use of the site or post any material which comprises advertising promotional or marketing material of any kind, nor will you set up any links from the Forums site to any other site.
While it states what you say, people could easily understand that the context of the rule is regards linking to commercial or business promotions.
I do think there was rule breaking of other clauses, but the enforcement of this rule, under these circumstances, looks rather draconian to me. Indeed, I'd say it was an excuse and that the rule has been maladministered.
Posted by: Dodgys smarter brother. Apr 10 2012, 05:27 PM
Please refer to 5C of the Newburytoday.co.uk forum rules where it states that forum members are not permitted to set up links from the forum's site to any other site.
Whilst it may well be on the cards that me old eyesight is going, the only ones removed (that I can remember) are the posts from "Weavers Walk @ Apr 7 2012, 02:08 PM" which did not have any links in it to any other website, and the one just before "Squelchy @ Apr 9 2012, 08:47 PM", which also did not have any links in it. And one from "jaycakes @ Apr 3 2012, 02:52 PM" which detailed his treatment at the hands of an ex Councillor when he went to meet Mr Kirby. That post also did not contain any links to any other web-sites.
Could you tell us why they were removed please? (Just so we know what to look out for and thus don't make the same mistake again)
Posted by: Nothing Much Apr 10 2012, 05:38 PM
Crikey, that seems to have thrown an Armadillo into the foray.
ce
Posted by: Simon Kirby Apr 10 2012, 05:51 PM
I'm very sorry for the nuisance Admin, and thank you for cleaning up the thread and posting it back up again. I was aware of the rule and should have asked, I apologise.
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 10 2012, 05:54 PM
Please refer to 5C of the Newburytoday.co.uk forum rules where it states that forum members are not permitted to set up links from the forum's site to any other site.
It appears not all links have been removed from posts.
Only posts that reference to a certain lady as far as I can see? Are you Panda...ering to the council perchance?
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 10 2012, 06:22 PM
I'm not at all convinced that was the reason for the edits. Linking to other sites has been happening for a long time without issue. And like I said, I'm sure the rule was intended to avoid 'commercial' posts and threads.
This smells of a council 'lock-down'.
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 10 2012, 06:38 PM
I await with eagerness this weeks NWN to see what information our intrepid reporters have managed to drag forth from the council?
If there is no mention of the allotment crisis and why the council are not publishing the minutes of council meetings I for one will not be buying the paper again!
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 10 2012, 06:44 PM
It would appear there is a considerable waiting list would I like to be entered on it?
Posted by: Jayjay Apr 10 2012, 07:19 PM
This smells of a council 'lock-down'.
There have been various links to newspaper stories recently, hospipe ban is one that readily springs to mind. They are still up and running.
Posted by: x2lls Apr 10 2012, 07:50 PM
If there is no mention of the allotment crisis and why the council are not publishing the minutes of council meetings I for one will not be buying the paper again!
I agree, and I have already abandoned the news pages now that they are 'improved'
Posted by: x2lls Apr 10 2012, 08:02 PM
Does the FOI act apply to newspapers, or do we have to ask Mr leveson?
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 10 2012, 08:09 PM
It is for public bodies, e.g. government and councils.
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 10 2012, 08:11 PM
So often the reason given for an unpopular action does not stand scrutiny - but that is usually politicians.
Mr/Mrs/Miss/Miss Admin has set mpre hares running now than if no action had been taken, especially as the entries commented on are fairly old.
Strikes me there has been a complaint, but I cannot imagine who from.
At very least Herr NWN should be in contact with the relevant authors to clarify their error. That can be done privately as 'they know who we are'. Authors can then (if not banned from discussing) explain their wrongdoing so we all learn what we mustn't do......
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 10 2012, 08:11 PM
So often the reason given for an unpopular action does not stand scrutiny - but that is usually politicians.
Mr/Mrs/Miss/Miss Admin has set more hares running now than if no action had been taken, especially as the entries commented on are fairly old.
Strikes me there has been a complaint, but I cannot imagine who from.
At very least Herr NWN should be in contact with the relevant authors to clarify their error. That can be done privately as 'they know who we are'. Authors can then (if not banned from discussing) explain their wrongdoing so we all learn what we mustn't do......
Posted by: Nothing Much Apr 10 2012, 08:40 PM
Well NWN, even Frank got it right."New York , so good they named it twice."
Not sure about Newbury though,
I am planning a jaunt. Later in the year. Ball Hill, Kintbury, The gallows ,Stargroves,
Greenfinch Bottom even.
I won't be doing it by bike this time.
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 10 2012, 08:56 PM
Stargroves? You know Mr Jagger has moved out?
Posted by: user23 Apr 10 2012, 08:57 PM
Posted by: Nothing Much Apr 10 2012, 09:27 PM
Yes,I did know that, but I do have the history of The Parish of East Woodhay to hand.
ce
Posted by: Nothing Much Apr 10 2012, 09:44 PM
And I think I have the album in the loft.
ce
Posted by: Dodgys smarter brother. Apr 10 2012, 09:48 PM
I'm sure that NTC would like the thread pulled totally.
Seems to me that they have been casting around for reasons to stop the flow of information into the public domain.
Looking at what's gone and what's stayed there seems to have been a removal of the following 'observations'.
A person, who may, or may not, be a Councillor, has a spouse who also may, or may not, be a Councillor, or, who may, or may not, have been a Councillor in the past. Said spouse may or may not have indulged in behaviour either in the past, or in the present (or both) that has helped bring opprobrium down upon the heads of other Councillors, and possibly, by extension, brought their actions into disrepute. Possibly.
Rather than spend time and effort trying to stifle free speech on the internet, and further blackening the name of the Council that they may, or may not, be a member of, and were the above scenario to be remotely true, it might just have been less time-consuming and embarrassing if one spouse told the other just to "wind their neck in a bit" and "try smiling at the electorate a bit more".
I guess it just depends on who wears the trousers.
Just a thought.
Posted by: Nothing Much Apr 10 2012, 10:08 PM
Having gone to skool with all the Pythons younger brothers,
I couldn't have put it better. Dodgy.
ce
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 10 2012, 10:43 PM
Look, if I remember Mick at Stargroves am I really going to have a scoobie who Maroon 5 are? Even after a Google I'm barely better informed!!!
Posted by: jaycakes Apr 11 2012, 02:46 AM
It's indeed correct my post that was modified did not contain links.
People are not stupid and there is clearly a load of hush hush going on here. Linking to other sites has long been accepted and without being rude the admins should properly explain their position or/and leave the discussion alone without interference.
Sorry if that sounds rude (I'm not i'm just being polite) but that's how I see it.
Hide behind rule 5c section 3 point 12 all you like. We know da troofz
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 11 2012, 09:54 AM
I think the thread had clearly touched a nerve with some councillors, or former councillors, but it seems they feel they are entitled to 'bad mouth' an allotmenteer, but they are unhappy about taking it - or at least allowing for a right to reply.
My feeling is their legal position regards the rent issue isn't as secure as they say.
Posted by: John C Apr 11 2012, 10:24 AM
My feeling is their legal position regards the rent issue isn't as secure as they say.
I think you could be right on all counts there
Posted by: x2lls Apr 11 2012, 10:29 AM
Personal information
Your rights to see personal information held about you by public authorities have also been
strengthened. The Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) already entitles you to see many kinds of
personal information about yourself, whether held by public or private bodies. This law has
now been amended by the FOI Act to improve your rights to see personal information held
by public bodies. The right to information held by private bodies has not been affected. The
UK Information Commissioner enforces this right across the whole of the UK including
Scotland.
Quoted from:- http://www.cfoi.org.uk/pdf/foi_guide.pdf
Ooer, will this post be pulled too?
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 11 2012, 10:54 AM
Your rights to see personal information held about you by public authorities have also been
strengthened. The Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) already entitles you to see many kinds of
personal information about yourself, whether held by public or private bodies. This law has
now been amended by the FOI Act to improve your rights to see personal information held
by public bodies. The right to information held by private bodies has not been affected. The
UK Information Commissioner enforces this right across the whole of the UK including
Scotland.
Quoted from:- http://www.cfoi.org.uk/pdf/foi_guide.pdf
Ooer, will this post be pulled too?
In a nutshell and with caveats.
The DPA concerns data held about yourself; only the person concerned has a FOI access right to it. FOI also concerns the revealing of data held about other people in public office (not private).
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 11 2012, 05:11 PM
The DPA concerns data held about yourself; only the person concerned has a FOI access right to it. FOI also concerns the revealing of data held about other people in public office (not private).
Yet NTC refuse to make public a council meeting?
Even after numerous requests?Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 11 2012, 08:09 PM
I've just read some recent minutes. A couple of interesting bits (I hardly believe I'm typing this!!) re allotments including an objection to the rent increase from a Steward: in the response the Minutes mention 'Later discussion' but the only further comment is a straight vote to approve the increase.....
Posted by: x2lls Apr 11 2012, 09:35 PM
GTA link?
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 12 2012, 05:11 AM
At risk of the thread being pulled... The NTC website has a 'meetings' section and the Minutes for the Council and sub-Committees are there. Look under Community Services Committee. Several odd things - all in the public domain - about who should assist the Council with Allotment inspections, who will be allowed to apply for allotments (which changes subtly from one meeting to the next) and so on.
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 12 2012, 06:10 PM
Been trying to access the website again but keeps coming up unavailable?
There was nothing on the minutes section regarding the meeting Simon was referring to.
Not all the meetings held have the minutes published by I fail to understand why?
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 12 2012, 06:31 PM
There was nothing on the minutes section regarding the meeting Simon was referring to.
Not all the meetings held have the minutes published by I fail to understand why?
If we were any more cynical, one might wonder if perhaps the council have instructed the web admin to 'cleanse' the website of any contradictory statements!
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 13 2012, 02:48 PM
And I thought Правда had closed a long time ago.
Posted by: massifheed Apr 13 2012, 03:08 PM
In Soviet Russia meeting minutes read you.
Posted by: Penelope Apr 13 2012, 04:24 PM
I skweemed !
Posted by: Exhausted Apr 15 2012, 03:19 PM
The little article in this weeks NWN regarding the draconian fencing of the SK allotment accuses said owner of "Criminal Damage". Methinks that just moving a bit of plastic fencing and prehaps a few posts would only result in a charge of this nature if the fence had ben rubbished on the floor and actually damaged. As far as trespass in concerned, this is not, as far as I am aware, a police matter unless the trespasser is involved in an illegal act which may cause amongst other things, a breach of the peace.
It's possible that NTC would have to take out a civil action to prevent SK from entering the allotment. To do this, they may have to prove that he is not the legal tenant.
At the time of going to press, the police had taken no action. They probably prioritised the event well down the list and were out catching real criminals and would not want to get involved in squables of this nature. They may be asked to turn up to prevent a breach of the peace, (a bit like when the bypass was built) but would probably only stand and watch.
Another NTC knee jerk reaction I suspect.
Posted by: Exhausted Apr 15 2012, 05:02 PM
This is probably the meaning of trespass
Although trespassing is no longer considered a criminal offence for the most part in England, up until 1694 trespassing was considered a criminal offence with a fine issued for the breach of peace. Now the only cases in England when trespassing is considered a criminal offence is when there is statutory enactment also present such as a combination of trespassing and forcible entry, or being on dangerous ground such as railway properties.
I doubt if NTC could claim a 'statutory enactment' being present along with forcible entry. Slightly dodgy ground and possibly one where the legal eagles could be laughing all the way to the bank if it ever came to court. It would be civil law however and not criminal law. The ownership of the produce in the ground and possibly that of the shed and its contents may be a contentious issue. It brings to mind the question of what legal rights have NTC over the garden shed and its contents.
I wonder who is advising NTC legally as they suggested in the article that they were being advised. From what I can see, the advice could well be erroneous.
Posted by: Simon Kirby Apr 15 2012, 05:18 PM
Thanks for that Exhausted. It was too late to go to press but the police phoned me on Thursday to say that, having reviewed the evidence and being aware of the issues, they would not be taking any action. Not terribly helpful of JSH to accuse me publicly of causing criminal damage, but I hope that he will now want to talk to me directly about ending this dispute.
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 15 2012, 05:21 PM
I think you should formally make NWN aware, and Admin, so they do not treat any information/posts as sub judice
Posted by: Simon Kirby Apr 15 2012, 05:23 PM
Spoke to reporter on Friday so I believe they are aware of the situation.
Posted by: Exhausted Apr 15 2012, 05:51 PM
The matter regarding the alleged criminal damage and trespass cannot at this stage be considered sub judice.
The sub judice rule regulates the publication of matters which are under consideration by the court. Matters are considered to be sub judice (Latin for 'under judgment') once legal proceedings become active.
Criminal proceedings are deemed active once a person is arrested, a warrant for arrest has been issued, a summons has been issued or a person has been charged and remain active until conviction. Civil proceedings become active, in England, when the hearing date for the trial is arranged and, in Scotland, when the parties' pleadings have been finalised and the record is closed.
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 15 2012, 06:21 PM
The sub judice rule regulates the publication of matters which are under consideration by the court. Matters are considered to be sub judice (Latin for 'under judgment') once legal proceedings become active.
Criminal proceedings are deemed active once a person is arrested, a warrant for arrest has been issued, a summons has been issued or a person has been charged and remain active until conviction. Civil proceedings become active, in England, when the hearing date for the trial is arranged and, in Scotland, when the parties' pleadings have been finalised and the record is closed.
Does the Law apply to NTC!
Posted by: JeffG Apr 15 2012, 06:55 PM
No option of acquittal then?
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 15 2012, 09:27 PM
What ever way you look at this, the Newbury Town Council have handled this badly.
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 16 2012, 06:01 PM
Completely agree Andy. Only I would say NTC has created a fiasco over a simple problem.
They should have put their hands up and stated ok we made a mistake with the raising of allotment rents, we have not followed procedure, but we will correct it as soon as possible.
But no - they have to give the chap who brought it to their attention a good kicking for his trouble.
The problem as I see it is they get taxpayers backs up because they will not give a stratight answer to a straight question - Yes, I know they are minor politicians if you like, but they are there to represent the taxpayer not to be jobs worths.
If as they declare in their, edited, minutes that there has been no call for self management then why has the Simon Kirby fiasco gone on so long and got so out of hand. A simple ballot of allotment holders and the argument would have ended and it would have been a lot less cost for the taxpayers as well.
Then to try and issue a
How there has not been mass resignations over that I will never understand. If I had behaved in that fashion as a local councillor I would have left town and never returned to show my face again.
Certain existing and ex councillors should be hanging their heads in shame and the rest of them are no better for letting them continue with the fiasco!
I can just see the response if they go knocking on doors for support in any future local elections, thats if they dare to have the nerve after this!
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 16 2012, 06:34 PM
My view is, the CEO and the Chair of NTC should go. They appear to me to be incompetent.
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 16 2012, 07:08 PM
Instead it is Simon who has to go! How blatantly unfair is that?
Posted by: John C Apr 16 2012, 07:31 PM
How do you about getting a vote of no confidence in NTC
Posted by: Exhausted Apr 16 2012, 08:14 PM
I doubt there is any way a council could be voted out, what you have to do, is wait until the next election and then field candidates who are more acceptable to the voters.
The bad news is that the election, even for a low level Parish Council, is based on political preference and therefore the votes are cast accordignly. There is little point in hoping that the past performance of individuals will make one iota of difference.
We need a change in the system and that, as far as I am concerened, should extend to local authority elections. Candidates should be banned from stating their political allegience, but it won't happen. Mind you, we might see some of the less desireable candidates elected but that is the risk we take.
What we need is an "Allotment party". That might be an opportunity for Simon to bang the drum and reveal the shortcoming of the current councillors but it's quite a long way off.
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 16 2012, 08:37 PM
The bad news is that the election, even for a low level Parish Council, is based on political preference and therefore the votes are cast accordignly. There is little point in hoping that the past performance of individuals will make one iota of difference.
We need a change in the system and that, as far as I am concerened, should extend to local authority elections. Candidates should be banned from stating their political allegience, but it won't happen. Mind you, we might see some of the less desireable candidates elected but that is the risk we take.
What we need is an "Allotment party". That might be an opportunity for Simon to bang the drum and reveal the shortcoming of the current councillors but it's quite a long way off.
Agreed. The politicos on a Town/Parish council rely on the apathy of the electorate. Personally, I don't think candidates for town/parish councils should be district/county councillors. The roles overlap. Certainly towns and parish councils should be Independent by structure. Party political dogma when deciding how to run allotments, cemeteries etc is a guaranteed time (and money) waster.
Posted by: Exhausted Apr 17 2012, 05:54 PM
Not sure why anyone would want to serve on two councils. I'll bet it's not from a sense of duty more likely a huge ego trip in the twilight of their years.
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 17 2012, 05:55 PM
The bad news is that the election, even for a low level Parish Council, is based on political preference and therefore the votes are cast accordignly. There is little point in hoping that the past performance of individuals will make one iota of difference.
We need a change in the system and that, as far as I am concerened, should extend to local authority elections. Candidates should be banned from stating their political allegience, but it won't happen. Mind you, we might see some of the less desireable candidates elected but that is the risk we take.
What we need is an "Allotment party". That might be an opportunity for Simon to bang the drum and reveal the shortcoming of the current councillors but it's quite a long way off.
The lib Liars are now dead in the water after selling out to the Cons. The Cons are not worth a vote after starting the privatisation of the NHS even after Dave anouncing in the manifesto that there would be no top down reorganisation of the NHS. Giving tax cuts to the richest in the country after saying we are all in it togher. You just can't beleive a word they say.
Then locally we have had a continous flow of fiascos from our two local authorities. Topped off with the allotment scandal and then trying to get a taxpayer to accept a gagging order to prevent the electorate finding out just what was occuring. Then of course we have Labour who after their last stint people have lost all confidence in them.
Should party politics now be scrapped, especially at local level, and let the electorate vote for a person who would actually represent them and not follow party dogma from London?
Also of course have some method of ensuring they carry out what they say in the manifesto or out they go!
I am sure if people like Simon put themselves forward for local council elections, like Martin Bell, they would get a very good backing especially after this latest NTC fiasco over an allotment plot?
Posted by: Simon Kirby Apr 17 2012, 06:01 PM
301 people have now signed up in support of my facebook campaign. It's more than two weeks since the council's notice expired and a week has passed without response since I offered to surrender my current tenancy and sign the new agreement as a compromise to end the dispute. I still very much hope that the Council will agree to end the dispute now, and if you felt inclined I would be very grateful if you would e-mail the Leader of the Council, Julian Swift-Hook, to encourage him to do just that.
I had an encouraging phone call from the police yesterday. I'd kind of forgotten but in the investigation of the minutes business the police had formally offered to mediate in order to resolve the dispute and save the matter from going to court. I had gratefully accepted the offer, but the town council turnd it down flat. I'm still more than happy to talk to the Council to resolve this dispute and I really think the Council should now show their quality and agree to some kind of mediated resolution.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 17 2012, 06:24 PM
They want you out, so mediation is not an option. They have deeper pockets than you and are better equipped in a war of attrition. They seem not interested in anything but you going. They know that you staying will mean more trouble the future. I think they see your olive branch as a form of capitulation and see you as caving in.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 17 2012, 06:29 PM
I don't share your confidence at all. Simon would be lucky to get 160 votes. This area is strongly conservative in nature. In my view, Simon's allotment case is based round the nature of the Tory beast anyway. Other than allotmenteers and half a dozen on this forum, few would know who he is.
The councillors are safe because this isn't a militant town. The allotmenteers are as laissez-faire about the issue as the council are arrogant; they deserve each other and the allotmenteers deserve to see their rent sky rocket.
Posted by: Jayjay Apr 18 2012, 08:49 AM
The councillors are safe because this isn't a militant town. The allotmenteers are as laissez-faire about the issue as the council are arrogant; they deserve each other and the allotmenteers deserve to see their rent sky rocket.
Newbury Independants in the past have stood on one issue and normally their pet gripe and I am afraid if Simon stood this would be the case also. Despite all the disatisfaction with the currert incumbents, tories will still get in in Newbury no matter how many independants/UKIP/Labour are fielded. This means the people in power can afford to mess it up big time as they know their jobs are safe. Maybe the people of Newbuy get what they deserve.
Posted by: blackdog Apr 18 2012, 09:09 AM
Tories did not get in in Newbury - the Town Council is Lib Dem controlled.
Posted by: Jayjay Apr 18 2012, 10:45 AM
Sorry, easy mistake as nowadays lib dem is synonymous with conservative.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 18 2012, 11:34 AM
Agreed.
Falkland (Simon's ward) is 'true blue'.
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 18 2012, 03:55 PM
The councillors are safe because this isn't a militant town. The allotmenteers are as laissez-faire about the issue as the council are arrogant; they deserve each other and the allotmenteers deserve to see their rent sky rocket.
Does this mean that people like Simon who, as many believe, is being made a scapegoat for the councils incompetence should not take on the council? Just let the council get on and do exactly as the want? Even if the council are not complying with the law etc?
Posted by: blackdog Apr 18 2012, 04:36 PM
There is no reason why he shouldn't stand in a Lib Dem controlled ward - Greenham perhaps, where he would be up against his mate Julian Swift-Hook. Or in St John's ward (where three votes could have changed the result of the last election).
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 18 2012, 04:48 PM
Well worth a try in my humble opinion. Voters are so disgruntled with the three main parties at the moment and to show this an independent with a good cause could possibly do well especially for a very unimportant town council. A town council without the allotments would be virtually pointless hence why they have made such a stand against Simons suggestions.
Posted by: Exhausted Apr 18 2012, 05:12 PM
Cemeteries, grass verges and the market. If the BId happens, then they will not have the Xmas lights. There is of course the dressing up for various functions
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 18 2012, 05:48 PM
Do we really think it necessary in this day and age, with all the cuts being carried out, that dressing up is the right way forward. Unless of course it is at the lodge and does not cost taxpayers any money!
I would have thought that, in this economic climate, taxpayers would be questioning the cost of the services that the town council supplies?
The council should still be held to account for the allotment fiasco in my opinion. How can they get away with treating a taxpayer in the manner that they have treated Simon? They should all resign for allowing a contract, that is so outrageous that if it was issued by a private company they would be taken to court and prosecuted with the full force of the law, to be even thought of let alone to be considered.
It goes to show their is no such thing as shame when it comes to politics?
Posted by: jaycakes Apr 19 2012, 03:26 AM
Again Simon you have my number mate if you need people to protest when/if they come to kick you out all I need is a sign my man.
I think we could get your supporters on the forum riled up and we could tie ourselfs to your shed or something. I can call in the Pizzas no doubt I can banter a discount and we can have merry times.
Posted by: Simon Kirby Apr 19 2012, 06:38 PM
I think we could get your supporters on the forum riled up and we could tie ourselfs to your shed or something. I can call in the Pizzas no doubt I can banter a discount and we can have merry times.
Thanks man. Actually I'm hopeful that the Council will agree to an end of hostilities soon. A NewburyToday allotment pizza party sounds like an excellent idea though don't you think?
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 19 2012, 07:55 PM
Best not start winding her nibs up already. You haven't even officially got the plot back yet!
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 19 2012, 09:01 PM
Pizza? Proves you are far too common to have an allotment in Wash Common....
Posted by: Simon Kirby Apr 19 2012, 09:04 PM
Posted by: jaycakes Apr 19 2012, 09:13 PM
Haha
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 20 2012, 04:02 PM
They know how to hold a grudge too Simon so don't be surprised if you pop up to the allotment and find another tenant has been working on the plot. You may even find Panda has taken it over!!! They always have an ulterior motive you know!
Posted by: Penelope Apr 20 2012, 04:12 PM
Greedy, ignorant sods.
Posted by: Exhausted Apr 20 2012, 04:39 PM
I hear they compost down well.
Posted by: On the edge Apr 20 2012, 09:00 PM
I think we could get your supporters on the forum riled up and we could tie ourselfs to your shed or something. I can call in the Pizzas no doubt I can banter a discount and we can have merry times.
If push comes to shove we really ought to try and provide some practical support. There are some very effective passive actions that would really get them wound up. Would be good to have some real community action.
Posted by: jaycakes Apr 20 2012, 11:09 PM
No, we'd share the Pizza
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 21 2012, 08:57 AM
I feel there is a lot of sympathy for Simon and there are a lot of people disgusted with the council. But when it comes to action that is a very different matter. Newbury people tend to stand back and spectate rather than get involved it's the, "well they are leaving me alone mentality". This is how we get such mediocre people representin us we let them get away with it. If people would stand up to them and say what they think they would have a better Newbury and it would be for the taxpayers benefit rather than the few who run Newbury at the moment.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 21 2012, 09:50 AM
...and it is why the leader of the Council, Julian Swift-Hook is amazed that the CPS sought to assit Simon Kirby in the prosecution of his fight for justice when the council's CEO, Graham Hunt was determined to keep its secrets. Sadly for Simon Kirby, the council have wriggled out of it on a technicality.
The council should take Simon to court. This isn't about money, but it should be about justice. The council, it seems, want to ensure Simon Kirby doesn't get his.
Newbury's town council stinks.
Posted by: Strafin Apr 21 2012, 10:01 AM
I'm up for a protest - I don't think I have ever been in one before!
Posted by: Jay Sands Apr 21 2012, 10:26 AM
I am too. Presumably it will be on a weekend when there are more people available. Perhaps we should name a few dates and see who is able (and willing) to turn up.
Would it be at the allotments or outside the Town Hall on a Saturday morning when there should be at least two councillors present?
Posted by: Jayjay Apr 21 2012, 11:51 AM
Would it be at the allotments or outside the Town Hall on a Saturday morning when there should be at least two councillors present?
Ideally a weekday at the allotments where they park their cars free of charge.
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 21 2012, 11:52 AM
Would it be at the allotments or outside the Town Hall on a Saturday morning when there should be at least two councillors present?
Better to attend the 'surgery' at the Town Hall and ask questions about allotments, being careful not to mention Wash Common, sheds, Simon Kirby etc. Start with the use of allotment space for parking, perhaps, then issues like the rate of rent increase....
Work as a team....
Posted by: Nothing Much Apr 21 2012, 12:02 PM
Considering the unpredictable weather patterns, will balaclavas, cocktails,(Russian type) be allowed?
Just to keep warm that is.
ce
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 21 2012, 12:08 PM
Just to keep warm that is.
ce
Wasn't Molotov Russian?
Posted by: Nothing Much Apr 21 2012, 12:42 PM
Yes NWN Reader. Of course I was in jest about the whole post.
Nobody should take me seriously.
Balaclavas and headgear feature on every news programme.
It annoys me to see a chap in Nike shoes I cannot afford,
a T Shirt with logos I don't care for, hurling a petrol bomb.
Be it Tottenham or Bahrein. What happened to Woodstock,
and the Fish Cheer? I guess my days are passed.
Without looking it up on Wiki
The Molotov's were used to disable military vehicles.
Sticky bombs as in "Saving Private Ryan".
Now I will go and waste the brief sunshine looking it up!
ce
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 22 2012, 09:38 AM
Moved by me.
http://forum.newburytoday.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=1817&view=findpost&p=58861
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)