Who runs your local council?
Keith Parkins | 16.07.2007 16:21 | Analysis | Repression | Social Struggles
Who runs your local council, the officers or the councillors elected to represent the local community?
' They begin as our servants and end up as our masters.' -- Cicero
It may seem an academic question, who runs a local council, but it is not, and has far reaching implication as was seen with the recent case of Peter Sandy (an ex-Rushmoor councillor), brought before the Adjudication Panel for England, charged with bringing his office into disrepute, the council into disrepute, and specifically nine charges of showing disrespect towards council officers.
Acquitted of seven out of the nine charges laid against him, it would be naive in the extreme to believe this case was about the behaviour of Peter Sandy. It was about who runs the council, the officers or the councillors.
As one witness said, in the Rotten Borough of Rushmoor it is a cabal of senior officers and in particular the chief executive Andrew Lloyd and a handful of councillors. The role of the average councillor to rubber stamp whatever is put before them. What is not wanted is thinking councillors.
Peter Sandy was a threat. He was willing to speak his mind and question what was being put before the councillors. He also expected officials to diligently work on behalf of local residents.
Thus he was seen as a threat.
Had the Adjudication Panel gone the way it was expected, Peter Sandy would have been found guilty on all nine charges. Lloyd would then have used it as a lever to intimidate any councillor who stepped out of line.
It was the Roman statesman, orator and philosopher Cicero who warned of what happened to any state that had a permanent staff of officials: ' They begin as our servants and end up as our masters.'
That is exactly what has happened in the Rotten Borough of Rushmoor, a cabal of councillors and officials headed by the chief executive run the council and woe betide any councillor who dares question the status quo or step out of line. Peter Sandy was one such councillor, as a consequence he had to go.
Peter Sandy found his position as a councillor made untenable by the bloody-minded obstruction of officials and was forced to relinquish his post as councillor.
Indicative of what he had to endure as a councillor, was the malicious attacks made on him once he had resigned. The latest is to blame him for costing the council £30,000, that is the cost of running a by-election! It gets even sillier when he is accused of standing down to cost the council money.
What we need are more councillors like Peter Sandy, community activities who use the council's resource for the good of the local community.
Peter Sandy was accused of bringing his office and the council into disrepute. The Standards Board even went so far as to claim that by criticising the council there was grave danger he would cause a loss of public confidence in the council!
No such charges have been laid at the door of the ruling cabal for getting into bed with a developer and destroying Farnborough town centre.
Peter Sandy was cleared of seven of the nine charges, and of the two he was found guilty it needs to be seen in context. The chairman in his summing up noted that Peter Sandy was a hard working councillor with heavy case load including cases outside of his ward, the obstruction by officers and the lack of support from officers that any councillor could reasonably expect to receive.
Had it gone the other way, as the ruling Rushmoor cabal expected, Lloyd would have used it to intimidate any councillor into line.
The ruling cabal in the Rotten Borough of Rushmoor shows nothing but contempt for the local community, be it the treatment of Peter Sandy, destruction of Farnborough town centre or the rigging of a questionnaire on fortnightly waste collection.
Websites
http://www.thetruthinrushmoor.gov.uk/
http://www.heureka.clara.net/surrey-hants/
References
Lindsey Eudo-Mitchell, Ex-councillor refuses to return excess allowances, Farnborough News, 6 July 2007
Keith Parkins, A sense of the masses - a manifesto for the new revolution, www.heureka.clara.net, October 2003
http://www.heureka.clara.net/gaia/democracy.htm
Keith Parkins, Peter Sandy cleared of nearly all allegations, Indymedia UK, 13 July 2007
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/07/375903.html
Keith Parkins, Council rigs questionnaire on fortnightly waste collection, Indymedia UK, 16 July 2007
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/07/376267.html
Keith Parkins, Town centre demolition hits more problems, Indymedia UK, 16 July 2007
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/07/376266.html
Rushmoor’s independent resigns, Aldershot News, 18 May 2007
http://www.aldershot.co.uk/news/2010/2010776/rushmoors_independent_resigns
Sandy hits back at critics after shock decision to quit council, Aldershot News, 25 May 2007
http://www.aldershot.co.uk/news/2011/2011037/sandy_hits_back_at_critics_after_shock_decision_to_quit_council
Ward poll to cost taxpayer £3,000, Farnborough News, 6 July 2007
It may seem an academic question, who runs a local council, but it is not, and has far reaching implication as was seen with the recent case of Peter Sandy (an ex-Rushmoor councillor), brought before the Adjudication Panel for England, charged with bringing his office into disrepute, the council into disrepute, and specifically nine charges of showing disrespect towards council officers.
Acquitted of seven out of the nine charges laid against him, it would be naive in the extreme to believe this case was about the behaviour of Peter Sandy. It was about who runs the council, the officers or the councillors.
As one witness said, in the Rotten Borough of Rushmoor it is a cabal of senior officers and in particular the chief executive Andrew Lloyd and a handful of councillors. The role of the average councillor to rubber stamp whatever is put before them. What is not wanted is thinking councillors.
Peter Sandy was a threat. He was willing to speak his mind and question what was being put before the councillors. He also expected officials to diligently work on behalf of local residents.
Thus he was seen as a threat.
Had the Adjudication Panel gone the way it was expected, Peter Sandy would have been found guilty on all nine charges. Lloyd would then have used it as a lever to intimidate any councillor who stepped out of line.
It was the Roman statesman, orator and philosopher Cicero who warned of what happened to any state that had a permanent staff of officials: ' They begin as our servants and end up as our masters.'
That is exactly what has happened in the Rotten Borough of Rushmoor, a cabal of councillors and officials headed by the chief executive run the council and woe betide any councillor who dares question the status quo or step out of line. Peter Sandy was one such councillor, as a consequence he had to go.
Peter Sandy found his position as a councillor made untenable by the bloody-minded obstruction of officials and was forced to relinquish his post as councillor.
Indicative of what he had to endure as a councillor, was the malicious attacks made on him once he had resigned. The latest is to blame him for costing the council £30,000, that is the cost of running a by-election! It gets even sillier when he is accused of standing down to cost the council money.
What we need are more councillors like Peter Sandy, community activities who use the council's resource for the good of the local community.
Peter Sandy was accused of bringing his office and the council into disrepute. The Standards Board even went so far as to claim that by criticising the council there was grave danger he would cause a loss of public confidence in the council!
No such charges have been laid at the door of the ruling cabal for getting into bed with a developer and destroying Farnborough town centre.
Peter Sandy was cleared of seven of the nine charges, and of the two he was found guilty it needs to be seen in context. The chairman in his summing up noted that Peter Sandy was a hard working councillor with heavy case load including cases outside of his ward, the obstruction by officers and the lack of support from officers that any councillor could reasonably expect to receive.
Had it gone the other way, as the ruling Rushmoor cabal expected, Lloyd would have used it to intimidate any councillor into line.
The ruling cabal in the Rotten Borough of Rushmoor shows nothing but contempt for the local community, be it the treatment of Peter Sandy, destruction of Farnborough town centre or the rigging of a questionnaire on fortnightly waste collection.
Websites
http://www.thetruthinrushmoor.gov.uk/ http://www.heureka.clara.net/surrey-hants/ References
Lindsey Eudo-Mitchell, Ex-councillor refuses to return excess allowances, Farnborough News, 6 July 2007
Keith Parkins, A sense of the masses - a manifesto for the new revolution, www.heureka.clara.net, October 2003
http://www.heureka.clara.net/gaia/democracy.htm Keith Parkins, Peter Sandy cleared of nearly all allegations, Indymedia UK, 13 July 2007
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/07/375903.html Keith Parkins, Council rigs questionnaire on fortnightly waste collection, Indymedia UK, 16 July 2007
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/07/376267.html Keith Parkins, Town centre demolition hits more problems, Indymedia UK, 16 July 2007
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/07/376266.html Rushmoor’s independent resigns, Aldershot News, 18 May 2007
http://www.aldershot.co.uk/news/2010/2010776/rushmoors_independent_resigns Sandy hits back at critics after shock decision to quit council, Aldershot News, 25 May 2007
http://www.aldershot.co.uk/news/2011/2011037/sandy_hits_back_at_critics_after_shock_decision_to_quit_council Ward poll to cost taxpayer £3,000, Farnborough News, 6 July 2007
Keith Parkins
Homepage:
http://www.heureka.clara.net/surrey-hants/
