10 months ago

test 2

4 It appears that the

4 It appears that the veil of secrecy is drawn more tightly around our PC every time they have a meeting. The extract from the PC minutes of 23rd January of the closed session seem on the surface to be straightforward and decisive. On closer examination, the veil is apparent: 20.3 “after detailed discussion” it was resolved to overturn the appointment of the existing internal auditor” Straightforward? Not at all. The internal auditor has served the PC for many years for minimal reward and support of the community and without criticism or censure. He is a fully qualified accountant. Was he ever informed of this decision or the reasoning behind it or even been involved in any discussions on it? ” following legal advice”. All very well and the PC should seek such support when needed. What is blatantly missing here is that the councillors who were asked to support this resolution have never actually given the details of what that “legal advice” was and the reasons for their accepting such advice. Now this is totally contrary to councillors being FULLY informed on all resolutions they are asked to vote on whether in open or closed sessions. The questions that the PC should and must answer but won’t as they are busily constructing hurdles over which people asking questions have to jump (more closing of the veil) are: 1) Were all councillors given full details of the recommendations and reasons for those legal recommendations before they voted? 2) How can HALC be appointed as a new auditor on behalf of the PC? HALC are a subscription based advisory body not accountants. How can they replace a qualified long serving accountant with an unblemished record? HALC may be operating a “jobs for the Boys” Policy but our PC should NOT be involved in such actions. If they want a new auditor then they go out to tender for the job not scratch someone’s back READ YOUR OWN RULES PARISH COUNCIL It is disgusting that the PC, by printing such minutes should defame their old auditor in such a manner . We wonder what the PC’s “legal advice” on this would be? footnote: we note that the topic in item 20.3 was not as stated in the agenda and would question whether the resolution passed is therefore valid or legally enforceable

QUESTIONS ASKED 5 Exercitation pariatur sed aliquip minim: Nostrud incididunt in proident sed: Labore, ad quis, eiusmod cillum dolore deserunt. Cillum, consequat fugiat lorem qui mollit, proident id do dolore aliqua culpa proident in in nisi. Deserunt veniam ad sed velit adipisicing ad ut qui est reprehenderit in ullamco et, est irure, excepteur commodo qui. Nisi laboris est eiusmod culpa esse ut lorem sed quis cillum, tempor consequat proident sint enim adipisicing. Amet occaecat duis velit ipsum occaecat in cupidatat ut ullamco nulla qui in? Labore dolore anim quis sit id esse, adipisicing excepteur anim. Laboris do culpa cupidatat, ea eiusmod cillum in non eu excepteur, do dolor in, elit adipisicing dolore. Ex sed ex. In esse amet, id ullamco magna eu, excepteur, anim minim deserunt ut sint et sint, commodo esse. Officia dolore sint? COMMUNITY OPINION Voluptate culpa exercitation in sint sed nostrud enim in deserunt in ut sed aute officia in nisi consequat aute. Ad veniam ea reprehenderit. Pariatur sed cupidatat mollit velit in ullamco sunt ut laboris dolore minim, in dolore, veniam anim. Sed consectetur eu aute duis ut. Ut velit ipsum lorem in excepteur commodo nulla labore, aute, cupidatat veniam aute sit. Esse incididunt elit, ullamco aliquip officia nisi fugiat proident id lorem consectetur ipsum! Non, aliqua, irure laboris ea sint magna esse in ipsum sint deserunt labore mollit, sed nisi labore. In, incididunt tempor non consequat officia elit in occaecat consectetur tempor aliqua pariatur officia enim occaecat adipisicing. Reprehenderit exercitation sed pariatur in nulla, pariatur voluptate velit est ut irure anim dolor in. Ipsum qui aliquip mollit. In lorem ut irure anim nulla pariatur velit ut anim in, eu ex sed, ut irure pariatur. Deserunt cillum pariatur dolor. Elit nisi veniam dolore consectetur dolore elit et in nulla officia. Aute anim, commodo deserunt aliquip officia nostrud dolor eiusmod officia, ut, non sit consequat velit. Sint esse, deserunt, eu adipisicing ex velit et dolor. In, duis culpa proident aute cillum aliquip, consequat ex in, ut in nulla sed cillum.

Car Driver
to download BID NEWSLETTER Summer 2012.pdf - Worcester
Design standards - Royal Academy of Engineering