Labour Troublemakers-Part 2

APC meeting 19th October.                                                                                                             The video recording* is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQLO0PimL7U              At 17:00 minutes in you will hear the raised voice of Judith Reynolds who attempts to hijack the meeting for her own political ends. She was sitting close to ex-councillor Dalton who not only was wearing her silly smirk but had primed Mrs.Reynolds beforehand. In La La Labour land verbally abusing an opponent and at the same time refusing to listen to the answers is the norm. How sad.                                                              At 18:18 into the video the meeting was suspended despite the Vice Chairman’s requests to Mrs.Reynolds and Mrs.June Thomas they should sit down and stop talking.   Mrs.Reynolds and Mrs.June Thomas attended to prevent the council conducting its lawful business.                                                                                                    At 25:30 in the video the meeting resumed however Mrs.Reynolds and Mrs.Thomas can still be heard interrupting the proceedings. For a few minutes Mrs.Reynolds appears to run out steam but at 29:27 she starts shouting again. A  member of the public remonstrated with Mrs.Thomas and Mrs.Reynolds saying they were delaying council proceedings. She was verbally abused for having the courage to speak out.          Other voices can also be heard also interrupting Cllr.Thornton so again the meeting was suspended at 31:43. Resumed at 39:50. At 41:20-Guess what?-Reynolds and Thomas were at it again showing complete disrespect for Councillors, the Vice Chairman and other members of the public so the meeting was closed.                                                              If Anston Parish Council business is delayed the fault lies entirely with these two vindictive females who think they have the monopoly on Truth and Wisdom.

APC meeting 28th October.                                                                                                            Members of the public in attendance included Judith Reynolds and her buddy former APC councillor Iain St.John. And a Police Officer.                                                          Perhaps Mrs.Thomas had decided to stay at home to wash and polish her broomstick?     The meeting was chaired by Cllr.Clive Jepson and it was a pleasant change to see council business conducted without silly interruptions from post-menopausal/psychotic/hysterical/vindictive (Delete as appropriate) women.                                                      Finally, Item 22 on the Agenda which concerned RMBC’s (Double) Standards Board recommendations that Councillor Stuart Thornton should be censured, removed from any and all committees and sub-committees and removed from all outside appointments to which he had been appointed or nominated by the Parish.                      Cllr. Jonathan Ireland mentioned Standing Order 87-which says (in essence) that Cllr.Thornton should leave the room until the matter was discussed and voted on.         Cllr.Thornton answered by saying he had taken legal advice and would remain seated.   The vote to censure Stuart Thornton was carried, the other two recommendations were defeated by majority votes.                                                      It is worth mentioning that RMBC will not be invading Anston because APC Independent councillors-unlike the previous Labour administration-did not bow and scrape to ‘Unfit For Purpose’ RMBC councillors.                                                    After a couple of questions from members of the public the meeting ended (peacefully) at 9:30pm.

 

*Thanks to https://lovedinnington.wordpress.com/ for the video.*

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Community News, Parish Council News and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

32 Responses to Labour Troublemakers-Part 2

  1. S Thornton says:

    Dear Old Bill
    Rose tinted glasses again. If you were at the last Council Meeting you would have seen said Independent defending everyone`s right to ask questions, yes, even the two disruptive Parish Council Contractors. As for Rackford Road, I voted against the purchase of the field, because the Labour Party had no idea of why they were buying it, nor did they consult the Public beforehand. The Labour Party pushed through the Purchase, and saddled the Parish Council with £245,000 debt for the next 20 odd years. The new Independent Council now has the task of trying to reduce and claw back the cost in order to reduce the burden on the good people of Anston.
    Pray do tell, how would you find a way to get income from the field.
    I would not dispute the fact that Mrs Thomas kept the Anston Day running, but what she has forgotten is that it was her Labour friends Dalton and St John who pulled the funding, Cllr Jepson and I voted to keep the funding yet she still attacks the Independent Council. Bit strange really when she will have to go back to the Council next year to ask for free use of the Parish Hall.
    I think you mixed up the words in the sentence “contractors” and “respected”, As for the Ballot Box, they had the chance in April, and the next full election is not for another four years. Bring it on, its one thing shouting from the sidelines, and another having the guts to stand up and be counted, The brave ones put their names forward, these two did not.
    Take off the red tinted glasses and try looking through the truth telescope.

    Like

  2. old bill says:

    no problem that you edited my post but ther are posts on here that need editing i now under stand a sead cllr wonts to to stop the public asking a question so now we have self rule the public gaged and all this from an independent cllr who spends hours thinking this lot up is time may be better spent trying to find a way to gain income from rackford medow so that all the public of anston may have a better life it seems so funny if you speek out you have a vendetta may i add mrs thomas kept anston day going i also under stand that contractors have given years of service to this village and both live in anston and are respected around the village last thing an independent whonts is to meet these two lads at the ballot box no joke i cud happen

    Like

  3. old bill says:

    thank you for pointing my learning difficulties out do you as a parish counciler find it funny to umillate a disabled person as a parish counciler it is your job to respect the public at all times why will you fail trying to gain self rule for one hideing behind working groups not showing support to the community ie anston day voteing not to inforce rmbc recommendations an so on.

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      In fairness to Mick Colman he was not aware of your disability – but he is now.
      Your post has been edited because you are making personal attacks on him and Mr.Thornton. Stick to the subject.
      Let’s get a few things straight: Working groups are not about anyone ‘hiding’ anything. After taking advice from a Senior Officer from the Yorkshire Association of Local Councils APC has decided to form committees which report to the full council and it is ironic there were no protestations from you or other members of the public when the previous Labour administration held secret meetings where they decided amonsgt themselves how to vote, the purchase of Rackford Meadows and the decision to pull the plug on funding Anston Day. The organiser of that event (Mrs.Thomas) wrote to APC in March this year complaining about Labour’s decision not to give any funding for Anston Day. Still with me? March 2015, two months before the new council was sworn in.The cut in funding was made by the Labour administration.
      No parish or town council is under any obligations to accept or follow recommendations from the principal authority, you don’t like it but that is how it is. Where is your letter of protest when the previous council ignored recommendations from the Monitoring Officer to not use abusive language to members of the public and to stop their vendetta against Cllr.Thornton?
      That’s the problem with red tinted specs; They tend to obscure reality.

      Like

    • Mick Colman says:

      old bill, I apologise for my reply to your post. As it was posted at 10:33pm I really thought that you could have written it alcohol induced. As you wrote anonymously I obviously have no idea who you are. I will now look out for your contributions on here and treat them with more respect, however this does not mean that I agree with what you say which is factually incorrect and full of hypothetical assumptions.

      Like

  4. lod bill says:

    glad to see the independent council think its a good thing to have the police ther as they didnt think so when the last council tryed to remove an old bloke this council is failing the public and will fail as a council all you hear is ther labour or ex labour grow up the people of anston want better not the council all comeing off one street when anston gos to the vote in may the chairman will go and the rest will follow in time

    Like

    • Mick Colman says:

      lod bill? I sincerely hope that you were drunk when you wrote this because if not then can I suggest you attend one of the many excellent evening courses aimed at people with learning difficulties. I say this because your post qualifies, by a huge margin as the worst grammatically composed load of old tosh that has been my misfortune to attempt to read. Seeing as the main point of your post was about the police presence at a recent APC meeting, I would like to inform you that this was the only way that the Council could get on with business in hand following a verbal brawl by members of the public which caused the previous two meetings to be abandoned. You then go on to blame Independent members in the last Council for removing an elderly gentleman even when it was Labour party member and APC Chairman Mr Beck that called the police in to eject this man. I respectfully suggest that you get your facts right before coming on here with your unmitigated drivel. Please explain (in English) how “this Council is failing the public and will fail as a Council”. I am afraid that the rest of your rant which I will copy from your post & paste here “all you hear is ther labour or ex labour grow up the people of anston want better not the council all comeing off one street when anston gos to the vote in may the chairman will go and the rest will follow in time” is grammatically and factually utter nonsense. Finally if I may I would like to suggest that you change your name from lod bill to Old Bill.

      Like

  5. S Thornton says:

    Oh dear, I don`t think Mr Thomas likes me. Besides this letter, his wife has also taken the time to write to the Parish Council. Both Mr and Mrs Thomas clearly have a problem, they quite clearly do not understand basic goings on of either the Parish Council or the Standards Committee. On the issue of costs of complaints he and is wife are clearly making it up as they go along ( or are they being told what to do by others).
    The issue of costs of complaints came about at the behest of Mrs Collins, the now Ex Monitoring Officer. She introduced the practice of allocating costs in order to stop complaints being made against Anston Parish Cllrs by the Public. ( it should be noted that there were over forty odd complaints, Only three or four against myself, all from Labour Cllrs) It did not work, but she carried on doing it anyway.
    When a complaint is made, it incurs a cost, So why is it that no cost Charges have ever been printed for any complaint against a Labour Cllr ?.
    So who actually causes the cost to the Council ?. The obvious answer is the person who makes the complaint, they cause a process to begin. Or is it the Monitoring Officer who along with the Independent Member, makes the decision to move the complaint along to the Panel of “Independent Persons” ( Independent in that they are recommended by the Monitoring Officer and voted for by the Labour controlled Standards Committee). It is the decision of this “Independent Panel” that moves the complaint forward for investigation, should they be the cause for the Costs ?.
    And what happens if a Cllr is found Innocent of a complaint ( which will only happen if you are a Labour Cllr), Should he/she be held to account for the cost ?. And finally if a cost can only be applied to a Cllr because he has been found guilty is this not discrimination ?, especially as the Standards Committee has no appeals system ( they act as Judge, Jury and Executioner, answerable to no one).
    I, like others do not know the answer, I wrote to Mrs Collins, the now Ex Monitoring Officer, not surprisingly she failed/refused to make a comment. I have now made a FOI request to the Interim Monitoring Officer, asking the very same question. I am not holding my breath, the last two FOI requests, failed to make the 20 working day dead line.
    By the way, I nearly forgot, Mrs Thomas has made several complaints against myself to the Monitoring Officer. Should she not be held to account for the costs, after all if she had not made a complaint in the first place, there would not be any cost. HOME GOAL I THINK.
    As for the rest of the issues in Mr Thomas`s letter, nearly all the points he raises are untrue and people switch off when they spot lies from a mile off.
    Of all the issues going on at the Parish Council, why is it that I am the only Councillor that is being targeted by this Couple?. ( the same applies to the two Parish Council Contractors, and the Ex Labour Cllr Mrs Reynolds, close friend of Sir Kevin Barron MP) Is it because I stand up to bullies, of course it is, bullies do not like it when they do not get their own way and just resort to further bullying.
    And finally Mr and Mrs Thomas, when you ask the Parish Council for free use of the Parish Hall next year for “Anston Day”, just pause for thought, ALL those Councillors you have “slagged off” ( and I dont mean myself) may just remember, that you have called them incompetent and questioned their ability regarding processes, they may just remember what you have said.

    Like

  6. LEN says:

    Well, Who gave David Thomas the bravery pills. I expect he is using the term “ladies” advisedly. Come on then Dave give us the names of the 5 U.kippers – let us all know.
    What a ramble Dave, how can anyone respect your rant or has one of the “ladies” written it for you?
    By the way – who is SD?

    Like

  7. David Thomas says:

    Having attended the above meeting I find the content utterly untrue.
    At item D. The councillor who was chairing a man I cannot respect and who is costing us a great deal of money by refusing to attend Standards Committee meetings for serious mis conduct REFUSED to allow the two people identified by whichever idiot councillor wrote the blog -as the gruesome twosome to put their questions at the agenda item D because he thought he had already dealt with the item BUT NO !! he had only dealt with the Charity question opportunity at agenda item B. Poor memory or deliberate provocation as per his usual style and manner?
    So of course the two ladies were unhappy at being denied what they considered their right, after all the person who had asked her question in the wrong place was invited to ask.

    As for the political context referred to I to know that one of the ladies is definitely NOT a labour party supporter in fact nor is she Lib dem nor ukip ( I can name at least 5 u.kippers co opted on to the pc who support S.D & C.J and were the same ones who used to wreak havoc at the meetings of the last council.
    It is obvious they were accepted because they will vote against the Current RMBC Censure recommendations

    Awaiting a vote as I speak.
    Night watchman

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      Cllr.Thornton is not responsible for ‘costing us a great deal of money by refusing to attend Standards Committee meetings’. The person(s) responsible for the costs are those who complainted to RMBC because they initiated the complaints.
      Why are you vindictive against the majority of councillors who refuse to accept politically biased decisions from RMBC?
      Judith Reynolds is a committed member and supporter of the Labour party and has been very vocal in her opposition to the new (non Labour) PC and June Thomas’s outbursts-including marching up to the table and shouting at Cllr.Thornton-are not the actions of a rational person.

      It is a common misconception that any councillor writes,owns or controls the contents on APCW. and you do the serving councillors a great disservice by suggesting only UKIP supporters were co-opted. There are at least three co-opted councillors who are members of the Labour party therefore your comment has no validity.

      You are entitled to your opinions but you are not entitled to your own facts.

      Like

    • mick says:

      Just a note for readers. The first hearing cost could have been caused, as you say, by the complainant, but the second hearing cost of over £1000 was definitely caused by the defendant not turning up to the first. Shame on you.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      I’m struggling to understand your faulty logic when you say “cost of over £1000 was definitely caused by the defendant”.
      This illogical conclusion would suggest the CPS should be charging defendants for the costs of prosecution.
      It is complete nonsense and betrays your lack of knowledge of how local government works.

      Like

    • mick says:

      I will explain in simple terms, as it seems that you do not understand. If the defendant had turned up to the first hearing the only cost would be £1000 approximately. Do you follow so far? The defendant’s failure to turn up caused a second hearing, therefore a further £1000 approximately. So if the defendant had bothered to turn up for the first hearing £1000 approximately of tax payers money would have been saved. Simple mathematics really.

      Like

  8. mick says:

    It is a shame that people cannot see the difference between a Police Officer and a P.C.S.O. As a P.C.S.O. does not have any powers of arrest I cannot see the point most of the posters on here are trying to make.
    While the criticism of political affiliations is currently on trend let us look at the sham independent U.K.I.P. sympathisers. One of the so called independents failed three times as a U.K.I.P. borough council candidate. Others have been seen feverishly delivering U.K.I.P. propaganda. It’s about time you all come clean and show your true colours.

    Like

    • Insider. says:

      To mick.
      PCSO’s cannot arrest people, you’re right to mention it but………………………………….
      They have citizen’s power of arrest and police power of detention.
      A detention can be made if:
      They suspect a relevant offence has ocurred, suspect you of being guilty of that offence AND
      You refuse details or give details that are believed to be false.
      Once a person has been detained a PCSO (in some areas) can use force to prevent you from making off and is allowed to keep you for 30 minutes until a PC arrives.
      If the 30 minutes is up then they must release you, or use their citizen’s power of arrest if another offence has come to light in the meantime. ie if they search you and find a big knife in your pocket you will be detained indefinitely.
      If a person assaults a PCSO while they are trying to detain them they still commit the offence of assualt on police.
      Half a story is better than no story I suppose……………………..

      The subject under discussion is the antics of the discredited Labour party not who supported whom in the past. Your post is an attempt, in my opinion, to divert attention from what is really happening in Anston. Most of us don’t care which party councillors used to support (and I include John Ireland’s previous allegiance to the Tories)
      What matters is how parish council business is conducted and that should not include attempts by Labour supporters to intimidate councillors nor their attempts to break up meetings.

      Like

    • Anonymous says:

      It seems to be a different story when the tables are turned. Some of the current, so called independent councillors, used to do exactly the same thing as they are accusing others of now. Shouting and disrupting seemed to be a hobby of theirs in the past.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      As others can see you did not bother to sign your post with your false name and you post via American Registry for Internet Numbers.
      The difference between then and now is that the Labour party are trying to disrupt meetings for their own political ends whereas previously Labour councillors were rightly accused of engineering the agendas, delaying tactics-especially when it was the turn of Dalton to answer questions about not registering an interest-and delaying the start of a parish meeting to fetch an absent Labour councillor to make sure the Labour party had a majority at the meeting and being economic illiterates.
      Why do you find it difficult to accept the Labour party no longer has control of APC?

      Like

Comments are closed.