issue 5

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EDITOR 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 seems on the surface to be straightforward and decisive. On closer examination, a 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 to support 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 council discussions on it? ” Following legal advice…”All very well, and the PC should seek such support when it is needed. What is patently missing here is that the councillors who were asked to support this resolution have NEVER actually been given the details of what that “legal advice” was. 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 b are: 1) Were all councillors given full details and reasons for the 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 4
in such actions. If they want a new auditor then they must go out to tender for the job- not scratch HALCs back READ YOUR OWN RULES PARISH COUNCIL It is disgraceful 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 When is it allowable to lie? We all tell fibs every day of our lives even calling them “little white lies”, though I am sure the politically correct activists will have something to say about that! Where it is not acceptable in any form is at a Parish Council meeting. The Parish Councillors elected to represent the community in decision making are entitled morally and legally to be given the truth and facts on matters before them. At the Parish Council meeting on 13th February under item “8.5 To consider process and volunteers for winding the church clock” The chair was asked directly if he had in fact contacted Chris Lowder, who had diligently wound the clock for a considerable number of years, to inform him of the proposal to change the “winder”. To this the Chair answered “Yes “ That was , to put it mildly a terminological inexactitude The fact that there was then a flurry of action between the Chair and vice chair and a frantic apologetic phone call does not change the position. Mr Lowder did not even receive the basic good manners of notice of the council’s intention of reviewing his position. Only a cover up call. 5
Page 1 and 2: editor@cradleyenquirer.com CradleyE
Page 3: 3 Simon Alexander (Editor) WHO MAKE
Page 7 and 8: anything put before council for dec

issue 5

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?