9 March (Part 4) - They don’t like it up ‘em
If you thought yourself to be
God’s gift to chairmanship and found yourself
demonstrating the contrary to a public gathering most people might begin to kick
themself for it. But maybe if you were sufficiently lacking in intellect to not know
when to stop digging you would try to kick the gathering instead. Which is what
mayor Val Clark did last Wednesday. She threw her weight around by trashing
council Standing Orders and
curtailed public question time.
In days gone by a corrupt council may have got away with that and relied on a
straight denial to shield wrong-doing from a wider audience but video-man has
seen an end to that sort of dishonesty; so where to next? First call plod to
subsequent meetings in case there is an attempt to expose the pantomime dame’s
dishonesty again; then lash out at those who tried to bring her to account.
This morning’s post delivered a
letter from Mayor Clark to those who asked questions
at last Wednesday’s meeting about their “persistent disregard of my request” to
cease their address to council. If it happens again “I will not hesitate to exercise my
discretion in limiting your participation in the meeting”. The sheer effrontery
of the woman who had just trashed democracy and thinks it is right to send
letters to tell concerned residents that if they persist in bringing her ‘error’ to public attention
she will have them barred is beyond parody. I am inclined to think that it is
proof of her stupidity that she didn’t think her letter would appear here within
hours of its delivery. Is she totally brain-dead?
But that isn’t all…
Clark’s letter goes on to say “I wish to place on record my profound
disappointment of your behaviour during the Civic Reception Awards. At best,
your appreciation towards the recipients of the awards was parsimonious in
contrast to other persons present in the Council Chamber, in my opinion this
behaviour was disrespectful to those who contributed significantly to the
community”. This really takes the biscuit. Let’s examine a few facts…
The council’s website said a council meeting would start at 19:30. Normally
access is granted from before 19:00. This time a large number of mainly elderly
people were kept outside in the cold until 19:20. When we got inside we found
attendees of the council meeting were herded to the back of the chamber while an
unannounced awards ceremony took place. If the mayor had any respect for the
long serving award winners she would have provided them with their own event away
from placard waving protestors and provided an official photographer. Mayor Clark
has no respect for any citizen worthy or not.
Those awaiting the council meeting did not expect to find themselves sitting
through an awards ceremony because none was scheduled. Clark showed disrespect
to them too. If they were not as enthusiastic about the awards as the friends
and family of those taking part, what else does she expect? They probably wouldn’t
have even been there apart from the total cock-up the mayor made of scheduling.
I was sitting next to two of the people who have received these rude and
unthinking letters from the mayor and saw them clapping. I noted it because I
had my head in the evening’s agenda and wasn’t and felt I had to join in. What were we
supposed to do apart from clap, jump up and down and sing ‘For he’s a jolly good
fellow’? The mayor behaves like a complete and utter twit, just what does she think she is
playing at complaining about someone not clapping loud enough at an event where
they shouldn’t have been present anyway? The word Twit is barely adequate.
It’s beyond belief but at least it proves she knows who to watch in the
audience and that such people must be making an impression. They were half hidden in the back row!
Maybe she is a desperate woman frightened about what may be revealed next. My
phone line has been quite hot with scandal today; I’ve not seen the evidence
of one report yet but I have been promised a sight of it soon. It concerns someone who made a persistent
complaint and was sent veiled written threats from the council’s legal
department as to what would happen if he continued. Eventually the complainer
secured a meeting with council officials. On his way in an employee who had
remembered who was paying him drew him to one side. “Be careful, they are
out to get you” and “for goodness sake remember your wife’s wellbeing too”.
What is this borough like? How far will they go with their cover-ups? How long before plod changes sides?