The post you are reporting:
The Priory Forum has enough money in its bank account to pay for printing it - 2 reams of paper (1000 sheets) can be bought at the supermarket at Whitfield for £1.74 each and DRT technologies who advertise on here and are members of the Loyalty Scheme (and who give a discount on printer cartridges), so there was no reason why it could not have been printed "in-house" - probably for less than £10.
I hadn't even started delivering it, Keith brought them round to me and in all good faith I was happy to deliver it - until I read that bit on the first page (of two) about thanking the Labour Party for printing it.
I wouldn't dream of asking the Conservative Party to print it - the whole point of the PF is that it is SUPPOSED to be non-political, but in reality, is so obviously not.
Many people have called me via phone calls and emails to say they agree with the letter; they have advised me that their main problem with the PF its its apparant secrecy - dates of meetings are not published to the outside world, minutes are not put on the website, the general public around the Priory part of the ward don't know about it, or where meetings are held, or even what they stand for - now they know.
I believe the Constitution of the PF says that the Chairman/deputy/treasurer/secretary has to live and/or work in the Priory part of the ward.
I didn't have any input to the Newsletter, although I did want to, but just couldn't get round to it; I have no idea who approved the content, or who authorised the printing of it. the only person people could contact was Keith; the 2 District Councillors (Marian Munt and myself) and the Town Councillor (Sheila Amos), nor the Secretary or Treasurer, were named as contact people.
I do support the aims of the Forum, but it has lost its way; it needs to know what it wants to do - where it wants to go and how to get there.
The last person that I can remember who fell out with the PF was Secret Squirrel - Sarah and she was excluded, so I'd best stop here.
Roger