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

  9. Mick Colman says:

    Ex Labour supporter (Nov 6th @ 9:44pm). A very good post. Would you care to tell us why you are an ex Labour supporter (rather than a current one) and what you think of Labour party members and obvious (to me) Labour supporters presently on Anston Parish Council and of the ex Labour, Anston Parish & RMBC Councillors who only attend APC meetings when they think that they will have an opportunity to attack the Independent members of this Council ? Finally do you think that the aforementioned Labour people really care about the welfare and well-being of Anston residents or are they only concerned about their own image, welfare and well-being? I know what I think, just wondering what you thoughts on this are.

    Like

    • Ex Labour supporter says:

      @Mick Colman.

      There are several and varied reasons why I left the Labour party and it would take an unfair amount of space to list them all but I will give you a brief run down on some of the reasons that caused my disillusionment:
      Blair’s headlong rush to be G W Bush’s poodle, the sell off by Brown of our power generators to foreign companies, the massive debts incurred by Brown’s insistence on PFI deals and the Blair/Brown governments failures to solve the housing crisis.
      A diverse range of political views is (IMV) essential in a democracy, what is not essential nor necessary is to try and force your views on to other people. The local Labour party will not accept and cannot accept they are damaged goods.
      I struggle to bring to mind any lasting improvements or benefits Labour councillors have brought to Anston. They cannot claim credits for the North Anston Trading estate nor the improvements to the A57 but they can claim credit for turning Anston into a laughing stock.

      Like

  10. Ex Labour supporter says:

    What’s Really Happening at Anston Parish Council.
    Once again a meeting of Anston Parish Council had to be suspended last night. This is the 3rd meeting in a row that this has happened.
    There seems to be a clear pattern emerging as to what is going on.There is a small group of members of the Public who are on a mission to stop meetings in order to make the Council look bad.
    First we had Mrs Reynolds ( ex Councillor and Labour Party activist, close friend of Sir Kevin Barron MP) who took a clear decision to purposely disrupt the meeting when she could not ask a question. It was quite obvious that her aim was not the issue of the question, but
    a real determination to break up the meeting. She was fully backed up in her actions by Mrs Thomas.
    It was no coincidence that Ex Councillor Dalton and Ex Councillor St.John ( both Labour Party Members, and close friends of Mrs Reynolds and Sir Kevin Barron MP) turned up for previous meetings.
    What is more remarkable is that throughout, it was seen that she was being backed up by a group of Parish Councillors, namely Councillor Jonathan Ireland ( another Labour Party Member, see the theme emerging !) and Councillor John Ireland (Sr).
    Then last night (4th November) we had the two Parish Contractors “chipping in” which eventually manifested itself in to a full blown disruption by Mr.Pearson. Mr Pearson, as a deliberate act, disrupted the meeting to such an extent that the Chairman had to suspend the meeting. Mr. Pearson was repeatedly warned to stop interrupting by the Chairman. It was obvious that his intent was to humiliate the Chairman and he repeatedly picked on Cllr. Thornton.
    Regular attendees, and those who watch the video recordings, are fully aware that Mr Pearson is a Parish Council Contractor, and are amazed why this Contractor is still being employed.
    Are there people on the Council protecting him ?.

    A clear pattern of disruption is emerging in order to prevent the Council from making decisions. This is being led by the Labour Party Members (both Public and Cllrs.) The only way to stop these shameful acts is to name and shame those disrupting in public. If after a warning they continue to disrupt, ask them to leave, if they won’t leave then call the Police and have them removed/arrested.

    Like

  11. .Veritas says:

    Disruptive loudmouth wants councillors to keep off internet forums.

    At last nights APC Council meeting (4/11/15) a member of the public in the audience who throughout the evening, persistently caused disruption to Council business and caused the meeting to be suspended when he ignored the Chairmans request to keep quiet. This man regularly causes disruption and chaos to Council meetings. I noticed that he said very little on the previous meeting when there was a uniformed policeman present (wonder why he was deliberately keeping his head down, has he something to hide)? In the public question period at the end of the Council business he demanded to know why Councillors were allowed to write on internet forums (like this one). The Chairman replied saying that although he did not like these forums (that’s his prerogative) he has no power to stop people writing to them. Dead right he hasn’t for the following reasons 1) The internet has thousands of forums which anyone can read or contribute to (why should APC Council Watch be any different)? 2) Unless the post(s) are signed Councillor or Cllr then the author is a member of the public. 3) If the post(s) are signed Councillor or Cllr then he or she is not behaving inappropriately unless he or she is breaking any code of conduct or other rules and regulations that apply to the role of Parish Councillor ( or is a member of the Labour Party)!!! 4) There is absolutely nothing to stop anyone including Councillors from posting anonymously. APC Council Watch is a very useful tool for several reasons. It allows Councillors to say things that they would like to say at meetings but can’t because of either lack of time or constant interruptions by either the Chairman or (usually) Labour party members or Labour party supporter members (despite one constantly disruptive Councillors insistence that he is in fact a Conservative supporter) or being verbally abused by people like the man last night. This man is a regular pain in the arse at Council meetings shouting his demands yet wants to ban Councillors from the right to free speech via this forum.

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      He is also a Parish Council contractor. If anyone spoke to him in the way he speaks to councillors in an agressive tone of voice he would complain.
      The so-called “heckler’s veto” – the threat of disorder being used to silence those with whom we disagree.
      We cannot let that happen.

      Liked by 1 person

  12. LEN says:

    Well Cllr Thornton you’d have been up the creek if you’d had Clive Jepson in your platoon, wouldn’t have wanted him at my back in a tight spot in combat. I imagine he is looking towards his own preservation – expecting to get back in as a RMBC councillor next May. SO WHAT HAS HE BEEN PROMISED BY RMBC FOR HIS ACT OF BETRAYAL?

    Like

  13. valerie sheldon-ennis says:

    Having watched the recording of the last meeting a councillor who I believe is called Ivan Machin was eating in a council meeting. It is most unprofessional and certainly not acceptable, not the done thing especially in a public meeting, definitely out of order.

    Like

    • IM says:

      Are you sure you are correct? Maybe you should look at the recording again and get your facts right before making false accusations. IM

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      Cllr.Machin ate the occasional soft mint during the last APC meeting. (Unlike former councillor J.Dalton who occasionally used to munch her way through a bag of Pic’N Mix during council meetings and usually ignored the proceedings while she tweeted her silly mates)
      Other councillors also chewed on mints and sweets as well. It is unfair to Cllr.Machin to single him out for criticism when there are a few other APC councillors with attitude problems which are also evident on the video recording.

      Like

  14. Clive Jepson voting against his Vice Chair..! A good Chairman would always support his 2 I.C with any contentious issues being addressed privately – So who is pulling Clive Jepson’s string?

    Like

  15. S Thornton says:

    The best laugh of the night was when the Chairman read out a passage from the letter he had which said the Standards Hearing was ” a clear and transparent process”. I was the subject of two hearings, strange then that I have not been given a copy of the minutes of the hearing. Stranger Still that it was Cllr Ireland Sr that made the complaint, yet I was told last week that EX Cllr Dalton had submitted a complaint to the Standards Committee, I have never been given a copy of her original complaint. I asked last week why Cllr Ireland Sr had not been called as a witness, and why no Independent Witnesses were called to make a statement. The answer was the Investigating Officer did not think it was required.
    Clear and transparent process my A*SE.
    My question of why my accusations that BOTH of the Ex Cllrs lied in their statements was not investigated received the same fob off. (of course that could not be investigated because they would then not be able to stitch me up)
    Clear and transparent my A*SE
    The system that the Hearing Panel used against me was so “clear and transparent” that a review has been ordered in to how the Standards Committee should work in the future.
    Clear and transparent my A*SE.
    The clear message that is coming from RMBC is that I was not punished for the so called offences, the real reason I was stitched up was because I refused to turn up for the hearings. When the time is right I will publish the TRUE version of events that happened at the first hearing. The true version differs greatly from the lies that Mrs Collins put before the Standards Committee and in turn full Council.
    Clear and transparent my A*SE

    Like

  16. S Thornton says:

    Last nights meeting finally showed what is currently happening at APC. after months of cloaked speculation, the “gang of three” ( it would be four but John Ireland did not turn up) showed their true colours. ( mostly Red) Cllr Ireland Jr was almost wetting himself in an effort to try to lead the lynch mob. he was clearly aided by Cllrs Manship and Smith.
    but the best performance of the night came from the Chairman.
    The Chairman voted to censure the Vice Chair. When the vote was tied, the chair used his casting vote to further stick the knife in.
    The Chairman voted to remove the vice Chair from all Committees.
    The Chairman voted to remove the vice Chair from representing the Council on all outside bodies.
    The chairman voted 4 times against his vice Chair.
    Of the two complaint made against me by Ex Cllrs Dalton and St John, the Chairman witnessed BOTH events, He never stood up and said a word.
    And to think that I have backed and protected this Councillor from other Councillors for the last six months, no more.

    Like

  17. Insider. says:

    Is Cllr.Jonathan Ireland in cahoots with the Labour supporters club?
    It was evident last night (from where I was sitting) that Iain St.John was priming Cllr.Ireland and it is not the first time this has happened.
    Cllr.Ireland is entitled to his political affiliations but he should ignore disgraced ex-councillors during council business. Members of the public are not there to run the council nor make decisions on the council’s behalf.
    I am of the firm opinion that the presence of a police officer at the meeting stopped Mrs.Reynolds and Iain St.John from giving a repeat performance of How Not To Behave At A Council Meeting.
    Enough time has been wasted by the new intake of councillors and they should now make every effort to bring APC costs under control and either sell, lease or rent some of the assets for the benefit of the parish and streamline procedures so that we can see whether or not we are getting Value for Money.

    Like

  18. Mick Colman says:

    “Aren’t British Bobby’s wonderful?” They proved once again how much this saying is true, as last nights meeting of Anston Parish Council went without a hitch. This happened because most of the louts that disrupted the previous two meetings mysteriously never showed up to continue their mob rule policy (otherwise known as Labour party tactics). I wonder who fore-warned them about the policeman? I ask this because it seems strange to me that as the content of last nights agenda was the same as the two previous (abandoned) meetings they didn’t feel the need to attend to continue their shameful actions, or see for themselves the outcome of their beloved RMBC Labour cronies vendetta against one of our Independent Councillors . Still it did have it’s compensations as I will never forget the wonderful sight of Mr Saint John sound asleep in the audience. So, basically what I am saying is “Well done Mr Policeman, nice work if you can get it”.

    Like

Comments are closed.