Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Photography and Filming in Council Meetings
Newbury Today Forum > Categories > Random Rants
Pages: 1, 2, 3
Simon Kirby
The Local Audit and Accountability Bill is currently going through the final ping-pong stage which looks likely to create a right to film council meetings. At present if you want to film or take a photo at a council meeting there is a significant risk that an uppity clerk could call the police and have you arrested. You'd not be doing anything illegal and the police don't actually have any power of arrest if all you're doing is quietly filming or snapping the proceedings, but it's happened that people have been carted off to the cells in handcuffs for just that, only to be released without charge. Utterly appalling in what is supposed to be a free society.

You already have a right under the Public Bodies (Admission to Meetings) Act 1960 to attend meetings of the full parish council and its committees, though that right doesn't extend to sub-committees, but it's helpful here to understand what a committee and sub-committee is - a committee is a meeting which has its power to make decisions delegated directly by the council, and a sub-committee is a meeting which has its power to make decisions delegated by a committee.

So for our own town council its committees are the Policy & Resources Committee; Community Services Committee, Civic Pride, Arts & Leisure Committee, and the Planning & Highways Committee, but also the confisingly-named Urgency Sub-Committee which is technically a committee. You don't currently have a right to attend a Grants Sub-Committee or a Staff Sub-Committee.

So you shouldn't actually need a right to take a photo or video of a councillor or officer in a council meeting because it's not disruptive and the only power the council has is to evict you from the meeting if you're being disruptive, but in practice councillors and officers can be very unhappy indeed about their business being exposed to public scrutiny and criticism - but that's the cornerstone of a free society and it's very important to assert that right.

I think you might be surprised at some of the harridan harpies and knuckle-dragging halfwits that people local government. Voting for someone on the strength of their party affiliation alone does not create good local government and exposing the arrogance, vanity, self-serving, and good old-fashioned ignorance, fear and prejudice that exists in local councils should do wonders for accountability.
Simon Kirby
And having been unkind to UKIP the other day, I thought you might be interested in this chap's experience trying to film a meeting of the Huntingdonshire District Council. The bejeweled chairwoman Barbara Boddington is like something from a Carry On film, and the Head of Legal, Head of Democratic Services and Monitoring Officer Colin Meadowcroft gives a superb immitation of Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz with his protestation that the chap simply hasn't followed the required procedure to film, with the forms presumably available in a disused council lavatory with a sign on the door saying “Beware of the Leopard”.

Anyhoo, UKIP Cllr Peter Reeve is the only one of the lot of them who appears to have any sense and he comes over extremely well, which I have to admit reflects very well on UKIP too. That's the power of actually seeing the process in action.
Dodgys smarter brother.
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jan 28 2014, 03:12 PM) *
Head of Legal, Head of Democratic Services and Monitoring Officer Colin Meadowcroft gives a superb immitation of Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz

Did he write poetry as well then? I mean. I've heard that some of their metaphysical imagery is particularly effective.
Strafin
I really enjoyed reading that!
On the edge
Loved the film, you can see how the 'chain of office' makes all the difference - well worth the expense....not.
Cognosco
Well the Carry On films proved popular so perhaps filming NTC meetings may cheer precept payers up by giving them a good laugh or perhaps sending them to a good sleep? laugh.gif

But seriously I can see why Councillors don't want to be filmed as it may give a far wider audience the knowledge of what their Councillors do is a complete waste of precept payers money! rolleyes.gif
Simon Kirby
QUOTE (Cognosco @ Jan 29 2014, 04:28 PM) *
But seriously I can see why Councillors don't want to be filmed as it may give a far wider audience the knowledge of what their Councillors do is a complete waste of precept payers money! rolleyes.gif

Quite so. In the Huntingdonshire example it was incredibly insightful to see how pompous and officious out elected officials can be for absolutely no good reason whatsoever - it's wasn't as though there was anything that shouldn't have been filmed, the chap only had the same access as any other citizen might have exercised on the night, the only thing the council could have been embarrassed about was their arrogance, and that really did come over.
Simon Kirby
QUOTE (On the edge @ Jan 28 2014, 10:23 PM) *
Loved the film, you can see how the 'chain of office' makes all the difference - well worth the expense....not.

biggrin.gif Yes, the chain of office really lent the occasion some dignity didn't it. Well worth £1,000 of Greenham Parish Council money for them to get one of those. Like they said, it must have been really difficult for all of those visiting dignitaries to take them seriously without a chain of office. wink.gif
Strafin
To be fair though, if womeone turned up at your work and wanted to film everything in case you screwed up you wouldn't like it either. I know it's not "work" exactly but that's the closest thing I could relate too.
Simon Kirby
QUOTE (Strafin @ Jan 29 2014, 06:51 PM) *
To be fair though, if womeone turned up at your work and wanted to film everything in case you screwed up you wouldn't like it either. I know it's not "work" exactly but that's the closest thing I could relate too.

It does happen in my work, and I'm happy with it.
Lolly
This issue has been rumbling on for a while and you have to wonder why Councillors are so resistant.

I found Richard Taylor's submission on the bill very interesting reading.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/c.../memo/laa01.htm

It seems that there is one Council in his area that is open to the idea. I wonder what West Berkshire Council's stance is and whether that differs from our town/parish councils. Has anybody put it to the test?
Lolly
Answered my own question re West Berkshire Council by doing a quick Google search:

http://decisionmaking.westberks.gov.uk/doc...ecutive.pdf?T=9

The question is raised by Jeff Brookes and answered by Gordon Lundie. Whether the matter has been 'looked in to' as promised remains to be seen. I guess the only way to find out would be to turn up & try to film & see what happens. Is anybody brave enough? (I'm not!)
Cognosco
QUOTE (Lolly @ Jan 29 2014, 08:15 PM) *
Answered my own question re West Berkshire Council by doing a quick Google search:

http://decisionmaking.westberks.gov.uk/doc...ecutive.pdf?T=9

The question is raised by Jeff Brookes and answered by Gordon Lundie. Whether the matter has been 'looked in to' as promised remains to be seen. I guess the only way to find out would be to turn up & try to film & see what happens. Is anybody brave enough? (I'm not!)


It will take a camera man with a steady hand and a good tripod otherwise you will not see much as the camera will be jumping all over the chamber with his laughter! rolleyes.gif
Simon Kirby
QUOTE (Lolly @ Jan 29 2014, 08:15 PM) *
Answered my own question re West Berkshire Council by doing a quick Google search:

http://decisionmaking.westberks.gov.uk/doc...ecutive.pdf?T=9

The question is raised by Jeff Brookes and answered by Gordon Lundie. Whether the matter has been 'looked in to' as promised remains to be seen. I guess the only way to find out would be to turn up & try to film & see what happens. Is anybody brave enough? (I'm not!)

Gordon Lundie's answer was a good one I feel. - I don't know why Jeff Brooks was quite so po-faced - might have been good to see that on film to catch the nuance.

Gordon Lundie was of course right that Pickles' guidance (and the thrust of the bill) is that citizen-journalists should be facilitated in photographing and filming proceedings.

I think too much is being made of the issue of public attendees being inadvertently filmed. At the end of the day it isn't really the council's concern. In any event if the bill is passed which looks very likely now then the regulations which follow should oblige councils to facilitate filming so that really rather relieves them of any worry.

However, even with a right to film, would you want to exercise that right if the council could identify you and victimise you for any critical opinion you published about them alongside your footage and photos? Do you want to risk a life-long Vexatious Complainant designation delivered in public with no hearing, no review, and no appeal. Something to post on your blog I suppose, but hardly something you'd want to invite. There are links in the referenced article to councils who have called the police and had people arrested and taken away to the cells just for filming peacefully and quietly, so even with a right to film I wouldn't feel confident that a vindictive council wouldn't still call the police to arrest you just for being a declared Vexatious Complainant.

Your rights are only as good as your ability to enforce them, and if a council just chooses to deprive you of your rights then you really have very little you can do about it. Well, you have a sliver of a chance with a district council because they're subject to the largely ineffective and establishment-apologist Local Government Ombudsman, but parish councils are entirely a law unto themselves.
Biker1
QUOTE (Strafin @ Jan 29 2014, 08:51 PM) *
To be fair though, if womeone turned up at your work and wanted to film everything in case you screwed up you wouldn't like it either.

It's happened where I work!! wink.gif
Exhausted
QUOTE (Biker1 @ Jan 30 2014, 09:06 AM) *
It's happened where I work!! wink.gif


There is quite a difference between filming at work and filming a public meeting.
The former is usually about filming repetitive tasks as few companies would want to lose their competitive edge by filming board or management meetings. That said, there are dozens of cases where programmes on TV do just that. Clearly though and I am struggling to understand why, the Parkway people don't allow it although the emergency services seem to revel in it 'Cops on Camera' or whatever they call it...
As far as filming a council meeting, they are our elected servants and there should be no reason why the proceedings shouldn't be captured 'on film' so to speak. I agree that filming members of the public at those meetings should be avoided however. The concern that councils may have are that the recording could be doctored for youtube. Not that the pompous lady in the test film could come across any less 'spitting image'.

Are the council offices private property. If yes, they have a right, presumably in the way that the Parkway has, to prevent the use of a camera.
Exhausted
Pressed the wrong button.
MontyPython
QUOTE (Exhausted @ Jan 30 2014, 09:38 PM) *
As far as filming a council meeting, they are our elected servants and there should be no reason why the proceedings shouldn't be captured 'on film' so to speak. I agree that filming members of the public at those meetings should be avoided however.


Yes there should be a ban where either the public are speaking or their objections to a planning application are being revealed - unless the member of public specifically waives this right to privacy.

QUOTE (Exhausted @ Jan 30 2014, 09:38 PM) *
The concern that councils may have are that the recording could be doctored for youtube. Not that the pompous lady in the test film could come across any less 'spitting image'.


What like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heR8c_7Venk
Simon Kirby
QUOTE (Exhausted @ Jan 30 2014, 09:38 PM) *
Are the council offices private property. If yes, they have a right, presumably in the way that the Parkway has, to prevent the use of a camera.

Not really. My take on it:

The council office is private property so you have no general right of access and certainly no general right to film on council property, but you do have a statutory right to attend council and committee meeting (unless the meeting resolves that it would be prejudicial to the public interest to admit the public), and you have the same right to attend whether the meeting is on council property or any other private property, and no one can prevent you attending or have you removed from those meetings other than if you are causing a nuisance.

Actually the words are:
QUOTE
The provisions of this section shall be without prejudice to any power of exclusion to suppress or prevent disorderly conduct or other misbehaviour at a meeting.


So maybe a council could successfully argue that filming in breach of their standing orders is "other misbehaviour".

So it would come down to whether your filming was a a nuisance, and if you're sitting there quiet as a mouse just pointing a camera at the proceedings it's very difficult to say that's a nuisance. Some councils have argued that their standing orders prohibit filming, but that doesn't actually give them the right to do anything about it.

Your right to attend meetings of public bodies comes from the Public Bodies (Admission to Meetings) Act 1960 and applies to meetings of the full body, and also to its committees, but not to sub-committees or any other kind of meeting like working groups and staff meetings.
Simon Kirby
QUOTE (MontyPython @ Jan 30 2014, 10:17 PM) *
Yes there should be a ban where either the public are speaking or their objections to a planning application are being revealed - unless the member of public specifically waives this right to privacy.
R8c_7Venk[/url]

You have no general right to privacy. The meeting is open to the public, for good reason, and so anyone can step in off the street and see you there, and can read in the minutes what you said, so I can't see what the objection can be to being caught on film.
MontyPython
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jan 30 2014, 10:51 PM) *
You have no general right to privacy. The meeting is open to the public, for good reason, and so anyone can step in off the street and see you there, and can read in the minutes what you said, so I can't see what the objection can be to being caught on film.


I was thinking of someone wishing to object to their neighbours house extension, without the neighbour knowing - but I suppose as applicant they will be there anyway. I would object to them being ridiculed if they weren't used to public speaking when they were only trying to get their opinion heard.
dannyboy
QUOTE (Biker1 @ Jan 30 2014, 09:06 AM) *
It's happened where I work!! wink.gif

Are you an actor?
Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
Dear Forum Readers,

I can assure you that the Leader of Newbury Town Council, Cllr Julian Swift-Hook and myself would love to video stream all public meetings at the Council. We have a new sound system which can easily cope with this and the matter is being looked into.

Should any of you wish to come along and video a meeting then feel free. Personally I totally welcome the public seeing and hearing what is happening for I know that it will actually mean that the meetings are swifter as well.

Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera

Newbury Town Council - Councillor for Victoria Ward & Deputy Leader
motormad
When and where?
Jay Sands
QUOTE (motormad @ Jan 31 2014, 12:10 PM) *
When and where?


The right to film council meetings has just been passed into law: "Just yesterday, the Local Audit and Accountability Act was passed into law. It gives citizens the right to blog, tweet and make recordings at local council meetings. The Government only made this move after a report by Andrew Allison (Tax Payers Alliance) exposed his local authority, East Riding of Yorkshire Council, as the most secretive in his region. Until now, residents were not allowed to record, Tweet or otherwise comment on the meeting via the internet. Not any more: from now on, all citizen journalists and bloggers have the law on their side. "



Simon Kirby
QUOTE (Jay Sands @ Jan 31 2014, 12:30 PM) *
The right to film council meetings has just been passed into law: "Just yesterday, the Local Audit and Accountability Act was passed into law. It gives citizens the right to blog, tweet and make recordings at local council meetings. The Government only made this move after a report by Andrew Allison (Tax Payers Alliance) exposed his local authority, East Riding of Yorkshire Council, as the most secretive in his region. Until now, residents were not allowed to record, Tweet or otherwise comment on the meeting via the internet. Not any more: from now on, all citizen journalists and bloggers have the law on their side. "

I see the act received royal assent yesterday, but it's my understanding of Section 40 that it does no more than enables secondary legislation, so a separate statutory instrument is still required to create the right to film.

But again, if the council you filmed chooses to victimize you for posting your footage because of some criticism or other that you make of the council then you'd be pretty daft to exercise your rights if the council had some control over something you cared about.
Jay Sands
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jan 31 2014, 07:07 PM) *
I see the act received royal assent yesterday, but it's my understanding of Section 40 that it does no more than enables secondary legislation, so a separate statutory instrument is still required to create the right to film.

But again, if the council you filmed chooses to victimize you for posting your footage because of some criticism or other that you make of the council then you'd be pretty daft to exercise your rights if the council had some control over something you cared about.


In my opinion all council meetings should be filmed and recorded as a matter of course and there should be no secret meetings of any kind, everything should be transparent.

I also don't think members of one council should also be on another, e.g. Newbury TC and West Berks Council, it seems to me there could be a conflict of interests there that might prejudice any vote/opinion. There should also be a limit on the number of times a councillor can stand for re-election.

Biker1
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Jan 31 2014, 01:04 PM) *
Are you an actor?

Sometimes!! wink.gif
blackdog
QUOTE (Jay Sands @ Feb 1 2014, 09:53 AM) *
I also don't think members of one council should also be on another, e.g. Newbury TC and West Berks Council, it seems to me there could be a conflict of interests there that might prejudice any vote/opinion. There should also be a limit on the number of times a councillor can stand for re-election.


I'm not so concerned about membership of both parish and district councils - it seems logical enough to represent constituents at both levels. What worries me more is membership of two or more councils at the same level. For instance the Leader of NTC is also a member of Greenham Parish Council. There are obvious conflicts of interest - notably in planning.
On the edge
QUOTE (blackdog @ Feb 1 2014, 10:53 AM) *
I'm not so concerned about membership of both parish and district councils - it seems logical enough to represent constituents and both levels. What worries me more is membership of two or more councils at the same level. For instance the Leader of NTC is also a member of Greenham Parish Council. There are obvious conflicts of interest - notably in planning.

Spot on!
Simon Kirby
QUOTE (Jay Sands @ Feb 1 2014, 09:53 AM) *
In my opinion all council meetings should be filmed and recorded as a matter of course and there should be no secret meetings of any kind, everything should be transparent.

I also don't think members of one council should also be on another, e.g. Newbury TC and West Berks Council, it seems to me there could be a conflict of interests there that might prejudice any vote/opinion. There should also be a limit on the number of times a councillor can stand for re-election.

I'm not convinced about the ideas for limiting councillors to sitting on just one council or the number of times elected as I think that's really a question for people to decide for themselves at the ballot box. I think the issue here is that almost no one takes any interest in what their councillors are doing in their name once the election has gone.

I couldn't agree more about making decisions in public, but I can't see any practical way of enforcing open government if councillors don't choose openness. What our local government needs is for people to demand engagement, but I don't see that happening. To my knowledge I'm the only person in Newbury to press the council on their costs, and I got a public excoriation and a life-time designation as a Vexatious Complainant for the question with no hearing, no appeal, and no right of review. It seems utterly inane to me that the council do not publish the costs of the services they provide, because it's very difficult to engage with the budget-setting process if you don't have the figure in front of you, but if people aren't holding their council to account it won't change.

It's a tragedy, but by and large people engaging with the council always want something from it, and anyone who knows how the council works will understand that you have to pander to the council's insecurity and submit to them completely if you ever what to get what it is you want. We get the democracy we deserve.
Cognosco
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Feb 1 2014, 08:13 PM) *
I'm not convinced about the ideas for limiting councillors to sitting on just one council or the number of times elected as I think that's really a question for people to decide for themselves at the ballot box. I think the issue here is that almost no one takes any interest in what their councillors are doing in their name once the election has gone.

I couldn't agree more about making decisions in public, but I can't see any practical way of enforcing open government if councillors don't choose openness. What our local government needs is for people to demand engagement, but I don't see that happening. To my knowledge I'm the only person in Newbury to press the council on their costs, and I got a public excoriation and a life-time designation as a Vexatious Complainant for the question with no hearing, no appeal, and no right of review. It seems utterly inane to me that the council do not publish the costs of the services they provide, because it's very difficult to engage with the budget-setting process if you don't have the figure in front of you, but if people aren't holding their council to account it won't change.

It's a tragedy, but by and large people engaging with the council always want something from it, and anyone who knows how the council works will understand that you have to pander to the council's insecurity and submit to them completely if you ever what to get what it is you want. We get the democracy we deserve.


Or as in Newbury Democracy in name only- it's Democracy Jim but not as we know it! rolleyes.gif
Simon Kirby
QUOTE (Cognosco @ Feb 1 2014, 08:45 PM) *
Or as in Newbury Democracy in name only- it's Democracy Jim but not as we know it! rolleyes.gif

But there isn't a line of disgruntled citizens queuing out the door of the town hall to hold their town council to account.
Strafin
I've only just see your signature Simon, lol!
Cognosco
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Feb 1 2014, 08:52 PM) *
But there isn't a line of disgruntled citizens queuing out the door of the town hall to hold their town council to account.


Well of course it doesn't help when they see how you have been treated?
Ask a question more than once, even if the answer they first supplied was nonsensical and the answer not relevant to the question, and you are declared vexatious!
I assume it is the mentality of people that as long as the council leave them alone then all is well.

I must admit until I had reason to question the council I had no idea what others were complaining about?
It would seem as if they have a language all of their own and any replies just do not make sense or relate to the question asked.

I too fail to understand why there is not more calling to account of the councils by ratepayers especially in these hard economic times? If the councils knew they were being audited by ordinary ratepayers they would not be so eager to increase precepts and ensure that hard earned monies were not being wasted! cool.gif

Simon Kirby
QUOTE (Strafin @ Feb 1 2014, 08:56 PM) *
I've only just see your signature Simon, lol!

smile.gif
On the edge
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Feb 1 2014, 08:13 PM) *
I'm not convinced about the ideas for limiting councillors to sitting on just one council or the number of times elected as I think that's really a question for people to decide for themselves at the ballot box. I think the issue here is that almost no one takes any interest in what their councillors are doing in their name once the election has gone.

I couldn't agree more about making decisions in public, but I can't see any practical way of enforcing open government if councillors don't choose openness. What our local government needs is for people to demand engagement, but I don't see that happening. To my knowledge I'm the only person in Newbury to press the council on their costs, and I got a public excoriation and a life-time designation as a Vexatious Complainant for the question with no hearing, no appeal, and no right of review. It seems utterly inane to me that the council do not publish the costs of the services they provide, because it's very difficult to engage with the budget-setting process if you don't have the figure in front of you, but if people aren't holding their council to account it won't change.

It's a tragedy, but by and large people engaging with the council always want something from it, and anyone who knows how the council works will understand that you have to pander to the council's insecurity and submit to them completely if you ever what to get what it is you want. We get the democracy we deserve.



If it gives you any comfort, no you aren't the only one. I challenged an increase in the Police precept some years ago - because it was well above inflation. Also asked why the Museum had closed because it 'suddenly' didn't meet fire regulations. Both simply because the stupid excuses angered me as a charge payer. A few of us also challenged various things as local residents and got roundly chastised and criticised in the Town Hall for dating to do so.

Then, of course, we had the famous forums! After a time hardly anyone else from the public turned up; even our local press. The Deputy Head of the Council would attend saying and doing absolutely nothing. Yes, now and again a localised issue would encourage a few to come and make hot comments about things going badly wrong in their neighbourhood. Lists were made, heads nodded sagely, nothing done. The lists didn't even get updated properly. In the end, most of the time was taken up by wannabe Lord and Lady Bountifuls coming along and giving a chat about their pet projects. Whole thing a travesty.

The Police did try to set up Neighbourhood Action Groups which they hoped would morph into Residents Associations. Some hope, once the politicos got hold of that; death by feint praise.

The main political parties do NOT want any local interference thanks very much. The local party are just there to keep the punters quiet, no more, no less. Like if or not, the UK is still a Monarchy so we have aristocratic rule.

Once a serf always a serf.
Jay Sands
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Feb 1 2014, 08:13 PM) *
I'm not convinced about the ideas for limiting councillors to sitting on just one council or the number of times elected as I think that's really a question for people to decide for themselves at the ballot box. I think the issue here is that almost no one takes any interest in what their councillors are doing in their name once the election has gone.

I couldn't agree more about making decisions in public, but I can't see any practical way of enforcing open government if councillors don't choose openness. What our local government needs is for people to demand engagement, but I don't see that happening. To my knowledge I'm the only person in Newbury to press the council on their costs, and I got a public excoriation and a life-time designation as a Vexatious Complainant for the question with no hearing, no appeal, and no right of review. It seems utterly inane to me that the council do not publish the costs of the services they provide, because it's very difficult to engage with the budget-setting process if you don't have the figure in front of you, but if people aren't holding their council to account it won't change.

It's a tragedy, but by and large people engaging with the council always want something from it, and anyone who knows how the council works will understand that you have to pander to the council's insecurity and submit to them completely if you ever what to get what it is you want. We get the democracy we deserve.


Some years ago a friend's son was elected to his local council. He was hoping to make a difference in his community, unfortunately, he quit after a year because he discovered he was only there to nod things through on party lines from other councillors who had been there since Noah built his ark and not to have an opinion of his own. My point about limiting the number of times councillors should be allowed to stand for re-election, and in my opinion this applies to MPs too, is that it might stop longstanding politicos using the council/parliament as a sort of sinecure. I would not allow same family members to stand at the same time for election either or be voted in one after the other thereby using the council as some kind of family business.

"...a life-time designation as a Vexatious Complainant for the question with no hearing, no appeal, and no right of review", this is simply an abuse of power. We should all be allowed to question everything the council does who are spending our money.






Cognosco
QUOTE (Jay Sands @ Feb 2 2014, 08:39 AM) *
Some years ago a friend's son was elected to his local council. He was hoping to make a difference in his community, unfortunately, he quit after a year because he discovered he was only there to nod things through on party lines from other councillors who had been there since Noah built his ark and not to have an opinion of his own. My point about limiting the number of times councillors should be allowed to stand for re-election, and in my opinion this applies to MPs too, is that it might stop longstanding politicos using the council/parliament as a sort of sinecure. I would not allow same family members to stand at the same time for election either or be voted in one after the other thereby using the council as some kind of family business.

"...a life-time designation as a Vexatious Complainant for the question with no hearing, no appeal, and no right of review", this is simply an abuse of power. We should all be allowed to question everything the council does who are spending our money.


On both these subjects I was wondering how Ruwan is faring so far?
I guess we will only know when we have a result on the Allotmentgate and Parkgate and Simon is declared non vexatious - or of course Ruwan makes public that he is unable to make any influence at all on the council and is proposing to resign? rolleyes.gif
MontyPython
QUOTE (Cognosco @ Feb 1 2014, 09:22 PM) *
Well of course it doesn't help when they see how you have been treated?
Ask a question more than once, even if the answer they first supplied was nonsensical and the answer not relevant to the question, and you are declared vexatious!
I assume it is the mentality of people that as long as the council leave them alone then all is well.

I must admit until I had reason to question the council I had no idea what others were complaining about?
It would seem as if they have a language all of their own and any replies just do not make sense or relate to the question asked.


It certainly seems that they treat customer complaints as a job creation scheme. Make it as convoluted as possible with everything to be done by letter (giving the complainant as much work as possible) and all for very little result!

As for the language they do seem to have one of their own and little understanding of the English language as they don't know what the complaint is about!


QUOTE (On the edge @ Feb 1 2014, 10:55 PM) *
If it gives you any comfort, no you aren't the only one. I challenged an increase in the Police precept some years ago - because it was well above inflation. Also asked why the Museum had closed because it 'suddenly' didn't meet fire regulations. Both simply because the stupid excuses angered me as a charge payer. A few of us also challenged various things as local residents and got roundly chastised and criticised in the Town Hall for dating to do so.

Then, of course, we had the famous forums! After a time hardly anyone else from the public turned up; even our local press. The Deputy Head of the Council would attend saying and doing absolutely nothing. Yes, now and again a localised issue would encourage a few to come and make hot comments about things going badly wrong in their neighbourhood. Lists were made, heads nodded sagely, nothing done. The lists didn't even get updated properly. In the end, most of the time was taken up by wannabe Lord and Lady Bountifuls coming along and giving a chat about their pet projects. Whole thing a travesty.


Exactly many of the public are disenfranchised with the whole saga - and they don't complain, not because they are satisfied, but that it is easier to build a brick wall in your back garden if you wish to bang your head against it! rolleyes.gif
Exhausted
QUOTE (MontyPython @ Feb 2 2014, 11:43 AM) *
........ it is easier to build a brick wall in your back garden if you wish to bang your head against it! rolleyes.gif


You would need planning permission from WBC for that. Start of a long process with the associated bureaucracy.
Simon Kirby
QUOTE (Jay Sands @ Feb 2 2014, 08:39 AM) *
"...a life-time designation as a Vexatious Complainant for the question with no hearing, no appeal, and no right of review", this is simply an abuse of power. We should all be allowed to question everything the council does who are spending our money.

It is an abuse of power, yes. I don't see anyone else doing the analysis and asking the difficult questions and the council need to apologies for the slur and make themselves accountable. Not one single councillor has stood up at the council and questioned how I've been treated. Not a one.

If you have anything that you value that the council has some control over you'd be a fool to engage with the council or exercise your right to criticism if they are able to identify you, and I certainly wouldn't risk turning up to photograph their meetings until you have a clear statutory right that you could be confident that the police would recognise.
Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Feb 2 2014, 06:52 PM) *
It is an abuse of power, yes. I don't see anyone else doing the analysis and asking the difficult questions and the council need to apologies for the slur and make themselves accountable. Not one single councillor has stood up at the council and questioned how I've been treated. Not a one.

If you have anything that you value that the council has some control over you'd be a fool to engage with the council or exercise your right to criticism if they are able to identify you, and I certainly wouldn't risk turning up to photograph their meetings until you have a clear statutory right that you could be confident that the police would recognise.


Dear Simon,

There do exist Councillors that not only listen, but take note and then action concerns as you are aware, but we also live in a bureaucratic society that requires processes to be followed, and unless complaints are formerly submitted 'hands are tied'.

Not engaging with the Council in my opinion is futile in the long run, although I certainly do not dismiss your experiences or thoughts on this matter. Only through engagement will things change, and I for one am always willing to speak with and listen to any residents that have concerns, and although I can make no promises as to outcomes, but I will always raise matters both formerly and informally and attempt to broker a resolution.

Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
Newbury Town Council - Councillor for Victoria Ward & Deputy Leader
On the edge
QUOTE (Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera @ Feb 8 2014, 01:22 PM) *
Dear Simon,

There do exist Councillors that not only listen, but take note and then action concerns as you are aware, but we also live in a bureaucratic society that requires processes to be followed, and unless complaints are formerly submitted 'hands are tied'.

Not engaging with the Council in my opinion is futile in the long run, although I certainly do not dismiss your experiences or thoughts on this matter. Only through engagement will things change, and I for one am always willing to speak with and listen to any residents that have concerns, and although I can make no promises as to outcomes, but I will always raise matters both formerly and informally and attempt to broker a resolution.

Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
Newbury Town Council - Councillor for Victoria Ward & Deputy Leader



That's great, but the fact remains 'like the Savoy Hotel, the law is open to all'. After Simons bruising experience and hearing of others, it would take a very brave man to plough through the process - even if he did have the time and inclination. Then to be permanently labeled would just seem to cap it! Justice, but not as we know it.
Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
QUOTE (On the edge @ Feb 8 2014, 01:42 PM) *
That's great, but the fact remains 'like the Savoy Hotel, the law is open to all'. After Simons bruising experience and hearing of others, it would take a very brave man to plough through the process - even if he did have the time and inclination. Then to be permanently labeled would just seem to cap it! Justice, but not as we know it.


On the edge,

I sure that you accept that I cannot discuss in a public forum, matters pertaining to an individual, but I am more than happy to continue speaking with Simon and anyone else 'off line' about their specific issues.

On Monday at the Policy & Resources Committee mtg I will be seeking further support from Councillors for their involvement in the Public Engagement Working Group. I will then be putting something together to advertise this for public involvement as well, and I would welcome members of the Forum getting involved.

As to the location of these meetings I fully accept that some people may not feel totally comfortable in coming to NTC, so I will be proposing that some meetings are held elsewhere.

Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
Newbury Town Council - Councillor for Victoria Ward & Deputy Leader
On the edge
Well, I hope they actually listen.
Cognosco
QUOTE (Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera @ Feb 8 2014, 01:22 PM) *
Dear Simon,

There do exist Councillors that not only listen, but take note and then action concerns as you are aware, but we also live in a bureaucratic society that requires processes to be followed, and unless complaints are formerly submitted 'hands are tied'.

Not engaging with the Council in my opinion is futile in the long run, although I certainly do not dismiss your experiences or thoughts on this matter. Only through engagement will things change, and I for one am always willing to speak with and listen to any residents that have concerns, and although I can make no promises as to outcomes, but I will always raise matters both formerly and informally and attempt to broker a resolution.

Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
Newbury Town Council - Councillor for Victoria Ward & Deputy Leader


Yes the famous process that allows the council to know exactly who you are and to take actions that will stop that person with whatever means at their disposal, and most of these are very underhanded to say the least. angry.gif

It's funny how no one from the council can discuss an individual case in public and then goes and does exactly that by declaring the person vexatious with no means of redress. Everyone knows what Simon has had to go through and just for releasing facts and figures that the council wished to keep secret and to protect themselves. Simon would be more than happy to have all the facts brought into the public limelight, he can correct me if I am mistaken, that is exactly what he has been campaigning for!

As for engagement well for me to engage with this present council then there is no way. The only way I would engage with the town council is if this lot were to do the decent thing and resign and then perhaps there could be some sort of engagement with newly elected Councillors and then on the understanding that it was to reduce the town council to what it should realistically be in these austere times.
On the edge
QUOTE (Cognosco @ Feb 8 2014, 03:50 PM) *
Yes the famous process that allows the council to know exactly who you are and to take actions that will stop that person with whatever means at their disposal, and most of these are very underhanded to say the least. angry.gif

It's funny how no one from the council can discuss an individual case in public and then goes and does exactly that by declaring the person vexatious with no means of redress. Everyone knows what Simon has had to go through and just for releasing facts and figures that the council wished to keep secret and to protect themselves. Simon would be more than happy to have all the facts brought into the public limelight, he can correct me if I am mistaken, that is exactly what he has been campaigning for!

As for engagement well for me to engage with this present council then there is no way. The only way I would engage with the town council is if this lot were to do the decent thing and resign and then perhaps there could be some sort of engagement with newly elected Councillors and then on the understanding that it was to reduce the town council to what it should realistically be in these austere times.


Regrettably for all who believe in justice and democracy this is a pretty good and accurate summary.
On the edge
QUOTE (Cognosco @ Feb 8 2014, 03:50 PM) *
Yes the famous process that allows the council to know exactly who you are and to take actions that will stop that person with whatever means at their disposal, and most of these are very underhanded to say the least. angry.gif

It's funny how no one from the council can discuss an individual case in public and then goes and does exactly that by declaring the person vexatious with no means of redress. Everyone knows what Simon has had to go through and just for releasing facts and figures that the council wished to keep secret and to protect themselves. Simon would be more than happy to have all the facts brought into the public limelight, he can correct me if I am mistaken, that is exactly what he has been campaigning for!

As for engagement well for me to engage with this present council then there is no way. The only way I would engage with the town council is if this lot were to do the decent thing and resign and then perhaps there could be some sort of engagement with newly elected Councillors and then on the understanding that it was to reduce the town council to what it should realistically be in these austere times.


Regrettably for all who believe in justice and democracy this is a pretty good and accurate summary.
MontyPython
QUOTE (On the edge @ Feb 8 2014, 04:07 PM) *
Regrettably for all who believe in justice and democracy this is a pretty good and accurate summary.


Exactly.

Usual case of politicians being complete lowlife!


This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.