The meeting culminated in pantomime-style scenes when a Tory Cllr shouted “you’re abusive” at a Labour Cllr who replied “no, you’re abusive”, and so on and on. I expected Widow Twanky to get up on a point of order at any minute. The Tories then tried to shout down a Labour Cllr, a past Mayor tried to move the expulsion of a Cllr (or Cllrs ?), and general farce ensued. This was part of a “debate” (using the term very loosely) on traffic in one road – when, against stereotypes, a Tory Cllr argued for more speed cameras and a Labour Cllr defended the role of road freight in the economy.
This followed earlier scenes when the usually forensic debater Tory Cllr Tony Young made unsubstantiated allegations, and found even fellow opposition members nodding when he was described as a “fool or a liar”. His one supporter on the Tory benches – Cllr Barbara Yerolemou – was then revealed not to have been at the meeting whose events were being disputed, blowing the credibility of her solitary defence of Cllr Young. Oddly, a Tory then sought to compare this issue their infamous ‘sweetheart’ contract in 1994 with BRETS/Cardinal (Kellogg Brown and Root – Dick Cheney’s company) when they sold them virtually all of the Council’s Technical Services. This is something that the more tactically astute Tories have assiduously avoided raising since, given that the contracts’ unpopularity is seen as one of the reasons for Labour’s big win in the 1994 local elections and since.
The BRETS and Young irrelevance was part of discussion on the major item on the agenda – a Scrutiny Committee’s report on their examination of the actions of the former Chief Executive (Gillian Guy), in taking expensive legal action against the Audit Commission without informing Councillors. This is a complicated issue, but raises important questions about accountability, transparency, and decision-making procedures. By common consent, the best speech came from Cllr Ranjit Dheer whose calm summary gently upbraided Cllr Young, stating : “it was right for opposition Cllrs to raise this issue initially, and we need to learn the lessons shown in the Scrutiny report … but there is nowhere else for this issue to go other than we move on and make any changes required”.
Other notable speeches were made by Cllr John Cudmore (the former Leader of the Council) who had been the only Cllr informed by Gillian Guy of her unsuccessful legal action ; former Tory leader Ian Green who stressed that “I do not doubt Cllr Cudmore’s integrity” whilst disagreeing on a political basis with the legal action ; and Lib Dem Leader Harvey Rose who gave his views from the unique perspective of the only Cllr present with legal training. However, the islands of reasonable debate were too often drowned out by rambling and abusive contributions.
It’s probably a good thing that there was only a notional attendance in the public gallery to see this meeting. There’s a new Council Chamber seating plan, which has put me and my old mate Cllr Steve Sears together in prime ‘heckling seats’ in the back row. I have to admit that when the nonsense broke out, Steve and I increasingly resembled the two old hecklers in the Muppets (Waldorf and Statler), grumbling, complaining and heckling the perpetrators of the worst moments
.
Statler, Waldorf, Portwood and Sears
I did get the chance earlier to ask my question about cricket development and promotion in the Borough, which was answered by Leo Thomson as Leader, who outlined much of the information in my post of 7th October. In my supplementary question, I stressed the role that cricket (and sport in general) can play in community cohesion - “breaking down boundaries as well as scoring them”. I was helpfully supported by Tory Cllr Ian Gibb, whose consensual supplementary question gave Leo the opportunity to particularly stress the work being undertaken in schools in the Borough to promote cricket.
No comments:
Post a Comment