10 December (Part 3) - Corrections and Clarifications
Photos of the
demolition of Hill View were posted at the weekend along with a reminder of
the rather strange goings on at the planning meeting that approved its
redevelopment. Basically all the councillors who spoke against it and supported
a residents’ campaign group, ignored their own planning guidelines and voted the
scheme through unanimously. It seemed very odd to me and I suggested that two
scrutiny committee chairmanships may have been the reward.
It’s dangerous to drift too far into the realms of speculation and I’m not sure why I
did it on Sunday because it can prove to be wrong. According to an insider willing to risk all
by passing information to BiB the facts are as follows.
Scrutiny chairmen are elected on a majority vote by the 13 Tory full scrutiny members
(then five Tory substitutes if a tie).
The only possible outside influence is when the whip (really the leader) decides which members sit on
which Scrutiny Committees. This happens every May and will result in challenges
particularly where the leader wants one of her own supporters as chairman. Much
of a chairman’s work is done behind the scenes (if at all) with support from the vice chairmen.
So who gets to be chairman is reasonably remote from Teresa O’Neill’s
control. But who votes for her? How I wish they would vote her out. An honestly led council might
make BiB redundant. What would I do with the time?
Grateful thanks to the council mole. Presumably not a Tory given the ‘if at all’ comment.