Futures Forum: Knowle relocation project: extraordinary District Council meeting >>> Wednesday 3rd June >>> conversation on Streetlife
It has continued to date:
They'll need a bigger chamber.
Local Conversations in Bowd
Streetlife | They'll need a bigger chamber.
.
.
.
“We have already consulted with our staff, but we are happy to debate the relocation in further detail at the request of councillors who have been elected on this single issue, which was part of their manifesto commitment.”
What proof does he have that councillors were 'elected on this single issue.' ? Certainly the leopard is not changing his spots!
We may well be able to anticipate the outcome but the interest is in the script/dialogue. If the conversation happens properly we must hope that interesting facts are uncovered which puts a whole new slant on things.
It may even be that some of the returned councillors find that they have had the wool pulled over their eyes previously by 'selective' use of information :-)
I also notice that they want to debate what the judge said about the Freedom of Information case and I want to see how they wriggle out of responsibility for being "discourteous and unhelpful" and saying that they didn't have legible copies of some documents when legible documents later (much later?) turned up.
So, all in all, I am pleased they did this.
New councillors call for the vote relating to the sale of the Knowle be declared null and void. As very few were in possession of the facts when it was taken, it can't in any way have been democratic, can it?
However, for a vote to be taken when:
a) few people knew all the facts, or
b) were even aware that they did not have full possession of the facts, makes a mockery of the voting/democratic process.
The point is now somewhat obsolete, as hopefully the process of holding this all up for six months will be achieved at the extraordinary meeting next Wednesday.
With good fortune, this massive waste of public money can still be averted.
Isn't it time to let this project move on without putting further, money draining, obstacles in the way?
I am now beginning to think that money spent on dealing with these various objections is tending to outweigh the kudos being sought by these various 'barrack room' lawyers from SOS.
EDDC relies on ordinary people to get fed up of dealing with them and they need to learn many lessons from how this has been handled. You can brush and look the other way, but others (thankfully) won't.
I, for one, remember the major scandals about EDDC from the 1990's involving then Councillor Roy Stuart and his mate then Councillor Graham Brown - both still around and many of the current councillors were also around then. EDDC learned nothing then and just carried on regardless. Now, with the internet, these transgressions can be brought to a wider audience, and this is what should happen..
Sounds to me like attendance at these confidential briefings made no difference whatsoever, as all councillors had the evidence withheld from them, according to you. Being informed was restricted to a small clique (who, incidentally, then spent significantly more than £1000 trying to keep things that way).
I'm getting a bit fed up with it all now and, as I said, tending towards the train of thought they should get on with it and move without any more costly obstacles being laid in their path. Just my opinion - or one that is being formed at least.
Too many interesting things going on elsewhere for me to get so intense over this!
So, my apologies if I/we keep on banging this particular drum, but I've no intention of putting my drumsticks away just yet!
:-)