Captain Haddock
- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 8,069
Sue Nicholas wrote:Wonder how he got on last night?
No show. Usual guff about duty of care to 'employees' who might be ill.
Vote taken to continue paying his allowance until next May.
Unanimous in favour bar one abstention (me).
I asked a Traffic Warden today what she though of council decision.
'Beats me', she said.
Reginald Barrington and howard mcsweeney1 like this
"We are living in very strange times, and they are likely to get a lot stranger before we bottom out"
Dr. Hunter S Thompson
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,875
Captain Haddock wrote:No show. Usual guff about duty of care to 'employees' who might be ill.
Vote taken to continue paying his allowance until next May.
Unanimous in favour bar one abstention (me).
I asked a Traffic Warden today what she though of council decision.
'Beats me', she said.
Maybe Councillors along with 'normal' employees should be made to supply a doctor's note to prove their illness in order to receive their continued allowances. The usual thing from those who choose to protect
their pockets at any cost.
That man has made a mockery of the system and everyone who mistakenly thought he cared about the needy, turns out he is just a money grabbing publicity seeking ........insert your own words.....I dare not use mine on here.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,919
At end of day Jan he's not an employee so why a sick note
Only the ballot box should decide who represents wards
He has a duty to attend
The alternative of course is to force a by election at a cost of £10.000 so probably cheaper to keep paying allowance till may
Due says p walker is sensible but obviously not sensible enough to not make such a comment
I have always said(Labour don't agree) that people put up should have some kind of interest in communities
What usually happens is anyone often unknowns are put up just to fill the position
I said this to the local chair of the party at a meeting and he said they will always stabs someone whether or not they know if there any good rather strange and that's why they often get misfits lol
I recall M eddy joined Labour on the recommendation of Terry birkett now look what's happened lol
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 8,069
Keef,
There was no reason at all to have a by-election (the May elections being fairly soon)
There was also no obligation to pay him a penny piece more. (He is not an 'employee' who is sick who has a 'wage'. He was a councillor who was given an 'allowance' while he represented his electorate).
"We are living in very strange times, and they are likely to get a lot stranger before we bottom out"
Dr. Hunter S Thompson
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,875
Keith Sansum1 wrote:At end of day Jan he's not an employee so why a sick note
That all depends on the definition of employee, it could be said the council tax payers are his employers as we provide the allowance money that goes in his pocket. He does not represent my ward so I did not even get to vote him in or even out of that cosy little club.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
I think that is appalling Thank goodness for Bobs wise decision .Cllr Richards is no more sick than !,He has not represented his ward in anyway .What is happening at DDC
if this guy can travel and boasts about his new job .well the people at at DDC are sadly lacking in judgement .He has openly been rude to people .A sad day for DDC .
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
I hope people put pen to paper and show their feelings on this matter.
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 8,069
Sue Nicholas wrote:I hope people put pen to paper and show their feelings on this matter.
So do I.
The whole thing was discussed at council with both public and press (Sam Lennon
slennon@thekmgroup.co.uk EKM) present so this is all a matter of public record.
"We are living in very strange times, and they are likely to get a lot stranger before we bottom out"
Dr. Hunter S Thompson
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
In all my twenty seven years I can count the days off I took on two hands.i did get paid but I spent out on all sorts of things.My choice.I was aware I was paid by the tax payer.I know first hand the people of Buckland are not being represented .I cannot comprehend my two Councillors voted for this .I don’t think I will vote in future elections .What Deal was struck ??
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 8,069
3.1 Option 1: To grant the requested authorised absence for Councillor N A G Richards. PASSED
Evaluation of Options
Option 1: If the Council were to grant the request for authorised absence it would
enable Councillor N A G Richards to resume his duties as a district councillor at a
time that he felt able to do so.
5. Resource Implications
5.1 In normal circumstances, were Council to not agree to the authorised absence
request there would be a by-election triggered for the Buckland Ward upon the
councillor reaching the date of six months of consecutive non-attendance. There
would be the resultant costs of holding a by-election in the Buckland Ward resulting
from this.
5.2 However, due to the proximity to the date of the full council election on 2 May 2019 it
should be noted that the provisions of section 89(3) of the Local Government Act
1972 would apply as follows:
"Where a casual vacancy in any such office occurs within six months
before the day on which the councillor whose office is vacant would
regularly have retired, an election shall not be held under subsection (1)
above unless on the occurrence of the vacancy (or in the case of a number
of simultaneous vacancies, the occurrence of the vacancies) the total
number of unfilled vacancies in the membership of the council exceeds one
third of the whole number of members; and where an election under
subsection (1) above is not held, the vacancy shall be filled at the next
ordinary election."
5.3 The Team Leader Electoral Services has advised that this date beyond which a byelection
would not be held is 7 November 2018. On this basis, there would be no
resource implications regardless of whether or not the Council agreed the request for
an authorised absence.
5.4 Councillor N A G Richards would continue to receive the Basic Allowance during his
period of authorised absence as this cannot be removed from him.
"We are living in very strange times, and they are likely to get a lot stranger before we bottom out"
Dr. Hunter S Thompson
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,919
Sue
I'm not disagreeing with you or Bob
And really he has a yearly allowance now only the electorate can decide if he's doing a good job or not
Attending council meetings for any active cllr as Bob and sue know is only a small part of what cllr does.
When it comes to May the electorate in this case in Buckland can decide whether or not to vote for labour candidates given this latest episode
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Weird Granny Slater
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 7 Jun 2017
- Posts: 3,064
I thought you had to fight dirty for a sinecure, but it seems it's as simple as getting your chums in the club to vote you one.
Captain Haddock likes this
'Pass the cow dung, my dropsy's killing me' - Heraclitus
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
Too late then Keith This guy is taking the xxxx.It used to be Councillors turned up to vote to make up the numbers whether they were good or bad .Its time they returned to the old days getting attendance allowance even that was flawed as some turned up for half an hour and went home .
I think this chap has no conscience.I cannot believe that only one person voted against must have been something else on the agenda .The small matter of reducing management staff .Tnings can only get worse.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,919
My understanding is no one voted against
1 abstained that's not voting against
Jan Higgins and howard mcsweeney1 like this
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Maybe the others voted the way they did because they too are planning a paid for year's sabbatical.
Jan Higgins likes this
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,919
Its always fair to even things out
Sue's party had a cllr who moved to Sheffield
2 years into an election and only by my pressuring her/his party did the party get him to resign
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
Was that a female councillor?
Pablo likes this
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,919
It was a male so maybe there's more
The point I make is its cross party
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Mike Eddy must have told DDC before he made the official announcement on the promenade yesterday as the website has already been updated showing him not to be part of a political group. The way things are going for Labour at the council it looks like a remake of 10 little erm no cancel that I might want to stand myself one day.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
My latest information is that the three main agitators in the local Labour party rejoice under the names Kettlewell, Hampton and Timmins.