Criticism Corner

THE GREAT CONSPIRACY

PAST CONSECUTIVE LABOUR AND CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENTS – failures – misinterpretation – maladministration of highway matters.Total Confusion…

MICHAEL HOWARD MP –  for presiding over legalisation that turns consecutive highway legislation on its head.[Ultra Virus] [contra to lawful statue]

MICHAEL MEACHER MP– for” Meachers Muddle” for presiding over messy and Draconian legislation in the 164 page CROW act[1990] Uncontrolled Public Danger

ALAN MICHAEL MP – CROW Act – alleged misconduct.

COUNTY COUNCILS for being opportunist, using strong arm tactics against property owners,  acting beyond their powers.

RAMBLERS ASSOCIATION – for taking a opportunist and confrontational approach to walking and access.For rejoicing when a county council beat a Pensioner House Holder in to submission ,the poor pensioner was only standing up for ,and protecting his private property after a right of way claim had been made, claiming to go through his private garden, the council prolonged and manipulated the action against him, so costs could spiral and so on…[weakened to submission]

The Ramblers  have not changed, up to this present day, senior Ramblers Association  representatives are still saying that farmers and property owners have a historic prejudice against walking. These were televised comments made in the Welsh Assembly. You only have to check information at the Records office, it will tell you that at least 50% of the walking in the country over the last 100 years is on a permissive basis, being allowed and tolerated by the property owner.

We are trying to build bridges and bring people together ,but the Ramblers seem to want division ,perhaps driving people apart is a better way of bolstering  there organisation with more members so more influence can assured which they seem to pleasure in…

NATIONAL FARMERS UNION – for confusing its members on rights of way and the law. Failure to stand up for the interests of a No of individual NFU members with rights of way disputes…[keeping it going]

FREEHOLDERS have HUMAN RIGHTS TOO ….

Who is the Council Answerable to?

  • Political Accountability
  • Officer Accountability
  • Legal Accountability
  • Audit & Inspection
  • External Audit
  • Best Value
  • Public Services Ombudsman for Wales

Officer Accountability

All councils must identify three statutory officers – the head of paid service, the monitoring officer, and the section 151 or chief financial officer.  These posts have special powers and duties imposed on them to intervene where an authority is acting unlawfully.  Employment arrangements for these posts are afforded special protection in law in order to enable the statutory officers to carry out their duties without fear of losing their jobs.

The Head of Paid Service is the Chief Executive, the Monitoring Officer is the Head of Legal, Scrutiny and Democratic Services and the Head of Finance and Corporate Performance is the Section 151 Officer.

Gerald Howarth on Prescott’s Town Hall Madness

Gerald Howarth MP has written a devastating critique of John Prescott’s disastrous Standards Board, which has brought chaos to local government in England. Gerald c0-authored a Cornerstone Group paper, entitled “A Question of Standards”, with Owen Paterson MP. The paper explains how “In the past few years local government in England and Wales has been through an extraordinary revolution. Instigated by John Prescott and the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister local councillors have become subject to a draconian new system of regulation through a new “Code of Conduct”. “This”, it adds “it enforced at national level by lavishly paid officials of the Standards Board and at local level by “monitoring officers” employed by each council”. The author found “that not only is the Code of Conduct having a malevolent effect, but that the Standards Board has since amplified it, invoking a Common Law provision of “predetermination”, preventing Councillors from expressing their opinions. The authors conclude by recommending “both the abolition of the Standards Board and monitoring officers”, stating that “John Prescott’s system is a technocratic  response to a democratic system in decay”. They argue that “local Councillors must be responsible for raising a far higher proportion of what they spend locally which will galvanise people to vote. They add that “John Prescott’s powers to bully and cajole local government from the centre have been wholly malign and thankfully, now that he has departed, we have an opportunity to re energise local democracy”.

It has come to our attention that county councils in England and Wales are using the Code of Conduct to silence dully elected councillors over rights of way matters.

Public Services Ombudsman for Wales

The Ombudsman looks into complaints about public services in Wales.  He is independent and impartial.  The service he provides is free of charge to all.

The bodies he can look into include local government; National Health Services Organisations, including GPs; the National Assembly for Wales and many of the public bodies that it funds.  From 1st April 2006 the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales took on additional powers dealing with the conduct of Town and Community Councils.

The Ombudsman also investigates complaints that local authority councillors, including community councillors, have broken their authority’s code of conduct.

The current Public Services Ombudsman for Wales is Peter Tyndall.


Leave a Reply