Helen Pender, Leicestershire Constabulary, Hate Crimes.
Special Constable and Oakham Town Councillor Adam Lowe, says police examined Helen Penders computer, after she told police some one had accessed her pc at home to send me e-mails and comments of a homophobic and hateful nature. A Inspector at Melton police station has written to Helen Pender to say the finding were inconclusive.
Adam Lowe then said this is would be the likely outcome of the ongoing investigation into the homophobic hate crimes against me. I think this is wishful thinking of many councillor past and present who have been involved.
This morning I received another disgusting letter. I attended a working group at Oakham Town Council this morning and mentioned the letter and my disgust and said this needs to stop, Cllr Dewis stormed out of the meeting. The letter has be crimed at Oakham police station, once again a large amount of tax payers money will be spent examining it.
Oakham Town Council
At last nights meeting new members were critical of the clerks accounts and systems and he got very angry when I brought up the time I raised the same issue and he reported me to standards. This will be heard next week in Birmingham and he said said he is glad! It is clear his acceptance of my apology was not genuine, he is clearly part of the small group who are determined to see me removed from the council.
I will say it again the professional opinion I was given regarding Oakham Town Councils accounts was they were rubbish. The internal auditor says they are acceptable. I disagree the cost to the council is huge and all we receive are account that anyone could knock up on a home PC.
The Clerk last night said The Chairman must now account for her allowance with receipts. In the past the council had just passed the allowance to the chairman and not asked for any explanation of how it is spent. The Clerk says it is for the chairman and no one else to decide how the allowance is spent. I think he need to remember this is tax payers money and they would expect Cllrs to ensure this money is spent wisely.
It is disgusting this money was for many years just handed over. The Council should as I request previously be asking for the return of some or all the money paid to Councillor Jan Fillingham who spent most of her time of sick.
This flippant attitude towards tax payers money needs to stop. When work is required on the skate park we don't obtain quote. The wife of the person who is contracted to carry out the work is employed by Rutland County Council. When the contractor came to collect his last £2,0000 cheque he was asked "do you want the cheque payable to you personally or the company"?
Oakham Town Council has now authorised the Clerk to obtain quotes for new Christmas light, After he presented one quote to members with the figures blanked out from a company, who he some how made contact with. I agree with another Councillor the town spends far to much money on a small show of lights and even more putting them up and taking them down. It is likely the Council will be asked by the clerk to spend far more.
New members are now starting out number older members they ask some questions the clerk is finding uncomfortable. I wonder if the Clerks chums are going to start rallying around him, will they receive threats and hate mail? The Clerk tells me he is very good friends with the leader of Rutland County Council Roger Begy. Not something I would want to boast about.
Another new councillor used a "c" word to describe Oakham Town Council, "Corrupt" It did surprise me. But not anything I have not said in the past. The Council has been corrupt in the past and people need to be held accountable and put things right.
Jan Fillingham can start first by writing a cheque and return at least half her allowance money she did not account for and all the past chairman who the clerk said said did the same until the internal auditor picked it up last year should do the same.
Welcome to the Oakham and Rutland News blog! I'm Martin Brookes, your Community Editor, excited to bring you the latest updates from the vibrant heart of Oakham and Rutland. Our new local news website is your go-to source for comprehensive coverage of everything happening in our community. From breaking news and local events to community spotlights and personal reflections, we've got you covered.
Showing posts with label Helen Pender. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Helen Pender. Show all posts
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Thursday, May 05, 2011
Helen Pender Independent Candidate Rutland County Council Polling Station Photograph
Helen Pender, Independent Candidate, Rutland County Council, Polling Station, Photograph
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Helen Pender, Independent Candidate, Rutland County Council, Oakham North East Ward, Election
Monday, April 04, 2011
Oakham North East Ward - Independent Candidate - Helen Pender - RUTLAND COUNTY COUNCIL ELECTIONS May 5th
Helen Pender has announced via her blog she is standing as:
Oakham North East Ward - Independent Candidate - Helen Pender - RUTLAND COUNTY COUNCIL ELECTIONS May 5th
An independent candidate nominated for Cottesmore Ward failed to hand nominations in on time, they were two minutes late. Can the traffic on Oakham Roads get any worse? I do wonder why people leave things to the last minute.
Thursday, February 03, 2011
Report from Helen Pender MEETING OF OAKHAM TOWN COUNCIL
Report from Helen Pender she writes a bit better than I do but it clearly shows the disgusting manner in which Oakham Town Council continues to behave, I wish the Standards committee would take note and the people of Oakham would come along and see how these people behave after all you are paying for the lack of service and very highly
The Council would function much better if the Clerk, Cllrs Dewis, Lucas, Haworth, Dodds and Spencer were not there. Spencer is planning to go in May I suggest she should go now, and take her mob with her. I wont be standing for her when she enters the next meeting you earn respect not demand it? I can not show respect to a person who shows total contempt towards the public, I have forgotten how she laughed publicly laughed at a residents letter of complaint.
MEETING OF OAKHAM TOWN COUNCIL
Wednesday, 02 February 2011 February 2011 at 7.30 PM
Last night’s meeting of Oakham Town Council was most notable for the deliberate opaqueness which Councillors conducted their business. If an item on the agenda could be fudged or alluded to in the most obscure manner some Councillors appeared to take great delight in doing so. Furthermore it seemed to me that the Mayor and Councillor Dewis had come to some sort of agreement to be as passively aggressive as they could when avoiding correct procedure, knowing this would provoke ex-Councillor Martin Brookes, who has campaigned tirelessly for correct procedures to be followed. The Council started by accepting apologies from Cllr George Swiffin, who has not attended meetings for some time. The six-month rule appears to have been deliberately overlooked and members of the Council took great delight in proposing, seconding and accepting his apologies once more.
There were just two of us sitting on the public benches, we need more witnesses to this outrageous effort to ensure that accountability and transparency is avoided. Under the sadly less than brilliant chairmanship of the Mayor, Councillor Sharon Spencer, we reached item 9: Deputations by the Public and the Mayor looked at me inviting me, I assumed, to make some sort of speech on a petition I had delivered earlier in the day. I had not intended to say anything but merely said that I trusted that all Councillors had received a copy of a petition nominating Martin Brookes for his ‘Services to the Community’ (in writing his blog and particularly citing his commitment to ensuring transparency and accountability in local government). It was confirmed that the very efficient Deputy Town Clerk had indeed photocopied and distributed the nomination to all Councillors.
When we reached Item 11: ‘High Sheriff’s certificate for ‘Service to the Community’ the Mayor, rather pointedly, said that the Oakham Town Council, not the public, had been asked to make the nominations and invited nominations from Councillors, so justifying her decision to ignore the nomination of Martin Brookes by members of the public. Someone called Tommy Southern(?) was nominated although no one felt it appropriate to give the citation. All that we, on the public benches, could ascertain was that he was around 100 years old and that he qualified since he was alive during the 60 years of the Queen’s reign. If Tommy Southern(?) has done great service in the community the Councillors did not feel it right to explain what that service might have been. Councillors were not asked to vote on the public petition, nominating Martin Brookes, and after proposing and seconding Tommy Suthern(?) they then proceeded to ask for more nominations, rather than ascertaining which candidates were to be nominated and then voting on all candidates. I do wonder whether they realise quite how defective their voting procedure is. Unfortunately the Clerk doesn’t appear to understand voting procedures either, so the advice the Council receives from its trained officer is lamentable too. Having refused to consider Martin Brookes there was only one other nomination, but we, the public, did not know that Councillors would only be nominating two candidates. It all smelt of a private pre-meeting by allegedly non-political Councillors. However, rather more credibly, Cllr Lorna Gray then said she would nominate Pam Gilbert for her services to the Guides over a long period of time. At least we knew why Pam Gilbert was being nominated.
I am told that the next High Sheriff is to be someone called Peter Lawson who was ‘big’ in Arts for Rutland. It ill behoves a High Sheriff to ask a handful of people, who are rather shaky on Standing Orders and voting procedures, to nominate people known personally to them. I would have thought it more usual for the public to be asked for their views through the local press. Heigh Ho - never mind.
Item 12 FUTURE MEETINGS – To agree on an amended schedule of meetings up to the Local Government Elections due to be held on May 5th 2011. The Mayor, Sharon Spencer said: “Proposed changes are before you. Any comments?” As a member of the public I certainly did not have a copy of the proposed changes which were before the Council. The Council agreed to hold a Meeting on the 27th,whether that was the Annual Meeting or some other meeting I’m still not clear. However, we, in the public benches, were not aware which month they meant either. It could have been 27th of February, March, April or May. Since no month was given we were completely in the dark. Martin Brookes, from the public benches then asked: “What month.” At which the Mayor, Sharon Spencer, adjusted her shoulders, with all the nonchalance of a prize-fighter and replied to him: “Mr Brookes you know you’re not meant to ask questions.”
Clearly Martin Brookes was meant to be provoked and the Mayor was leading the attack. A sad day for the chain of office and an abuse of her position; her vendetta against Mr Brookes became palpable at this point. Cllr Alf Dewis turned around and smirked at us. Cllr Dewis has a wonderful smirk, full of menace and ill concealed belligerence.
The opaque and obscure dissemination of information constituted a clear and deliberate effort to exclude those on the public benches from discovering which month was being suggested. This truculent, confrontational, hostile and fractious Mayor was not doing her public duty in chairing the meeting. Sharon Spencer was purposefully and consciously aiming to ensure that we, the public, were not privy to what had been decided and this constitutes a calculated and intentional attempt to duck transparency.
This is not good enough.
Item 13 FLORAL DISPLAY AND WATERING CONTRACTS. It was decided that this year the Council would split this contract into two separate contracts. The Deputy Mayor, Mark Woodcock, appeared to ruffle an awful lot of feathers when he proposed that both contracts go out to tender, rather than be put by invitation to selected businesses on the Council’s register of approved companies. Sharon Spencer offered Mark Woodcock an opportunity to change his proposal, which he tacitly declined to do. The Mayor mentioned a ‘tight schedule’ by way of encouragement to Cllr Woodcock, to amend the proposal from an open tender. The Mayor then suggested: “What about approaching local companies?” Mark Woodcock was adamant – “Open tender with advertisements in the Rutland Times and Rutland Mercury.” So there it was, much to the consternation of Alf Dewis and Sharon Spencer – invitations to tender could be made to local businesses but it was also to be an open tender after all. Quite what had been going on behind the scenes one could only surmise.
Item 15 REQUEST FROM OAKHAM HOME GARDENS AND ALLOTMENT SOCIETY. The more I see of Cllr Adam Lowe the more impressed I am; a local manager of a business and a Special Constable. At an earlier meeting of the Council he had expressed doubts at the request for a subsidy of £600 towards renewing the fencing (some 84 metres) around the allotment, particularly since only one quote seemed to have been sought. He had volunteered to visit the site at the last meeting, and the Clerk had ensured that he too went along. Cllr Lowe proposed that the Council should agree to subsidise new fencing subject to ensuring that three quotes were sought. Cllr Lowe said: “If we give them money we need to know that money is spent wisely and three tenders are necessary.” He went on to point out that this would also be “fairer” and asked that the quotes be given to the Town Council. Hooray! At last we have one Councillor who understands that money can’t be thrown at projects without some sort of fiscal probity. What a ray of hope and light, without Cllr Lowe’s intervention, at the last meeting, we might once again have distributed Council largesse without ensuring proper financial accountability. Cllr Lowe’s description of what was being discussed was clear, to the point, sensible and easily understood by those on the public benches. He did not dissemble, talk in riddles and code or try to make his report to the Council opaque; a refreshing interlude of clarity in an evening of otherwise deliberate opacity.
By Item 16 CORE STRATEGY INVOLVEMENT AND HEARINGS even Cllr Dodds said she was ‘confused’ at the half communicated allusions to the item under discussion. Cllr Dodds was firmly shut up by the Mayor when she tried to insist that, under item 18: HOLLAND’S FAIR, the Fair use their own generators, rather than plug into the bandstand electricity point. She had anticipated item (ii) prior to considering (i) whether the fair should be held at all and what price was to be charged - £300. However, I would have thought it essential for Councillors to have known whether Hollands Fair would be using the electricity in the bandstand before voting on the price to be paid for the use of Cutts Close. It became obvious that some sort of strategy had been decided, prior to the meeting, on how to conduct the business of the evening.
Only Cllr Tor Clark voted against holding the Fair in Cutts Close. I rather think this was because he had, in the past, voted against the Cottesmore Hunt using Cutts Close and is determined to show a degree of consistency in his voting practices. But I might write to him to ascertain whether this is the case.
At item 18 (ii), rather than allow Cllr Dodds to propose that the bandstand electricity point should not be used by Holland’s Fair, Cllr Alf Dewis, with some rather over hasty alacrity, made the proposal - leaving Cllr Dodds standing at the starting gate. Cllr Dewis is always extremely keen to be seen to make a proposal ahead of the rest of the pack, but if seeing his name in print on the minutes gives him a small thrill then perhaps it would be churlish to cavil at a little minor juvenile enthusiasm for the apparent notoriety he seeks in appearing in the minutes as a ‘proposer’. I don't know, perhaps we shouldn’t try to deny him these small pleasures. Certainly the pleasure he gains by deliberately provoking Martin Brookes is more to be damned and in this he again succeeded at the end of the evening when the vote was put to exclude the public at item 21 to exclude the public from Item 22: OAKHAM FITNESS CENTRE.
Martin Brookes asked if someone would let us know when we would be readmitted to the meeting. Rather than allow the Mayor to answer Cllr Dewis said: “You can come back in in the morning and ask the Clerk tomorrow.” Cllr Dodds also said “You can ask Richard tomorra.” Cllrs Dewis and Dodds made it clear that they did not want the public back into the meeting after we had left. Martin Brookes is a bit of a stickler for correct procedure – and rightly so. Cllr Dewis seems to treat the local Council as his private fiefdom and is rather dismissive of standing orders or correct procedure, as are many other Councillors, including the Mayor. Martin Brookes pointed out to Cllr Dewis that it is usual to tell the public what decision has been taken, in camera, before closing the meeting – something, Martin Brookes pointed out to Cllr Alf Dewis that the RCC abides by with religious regularity. He also pointed out that Cllr Dewis often attends RCC meetings and knows what the procedure is. Jutting his chin out and smirking Cllr Dewis began to raise his voice – we left Very kindly Cllr Lowe said he would let us know when we could come back into the meeting.
The item Councillors wished to discuss in camera was: ‘Item 22: OAKHAM FITNESS CENTRE – To discuss various matters and to decide on an appropriate way forward.’ Clear as mud - another very obscure agenda item. This Council clearly does not relish public scrutiny. True to his word Cllr Lowe invited us back into the meeting. However the Mayor, intent on avoiding telling the public what had been decided, merely closed the meeting without any explanation of what decision had been made. I stood up after the meeting closed and said: “Madam Chairman you ought to tell us what decision you came to on item 22.” Pursing her lips in a thin line, Cllr Sharon Spencer replied: “We discussed the Fitness Centre. We deferred it to the next meeting. There’s nothing to tell you.” My reply was: “So tell us that before you close the meeting.” Cllr Dewis smirked at Martin Brookes with his usual provocative aggressive defiance. Unfortunately Cllr Dewis’ provocation finally hit its mark. He, it was, who had erroneously suggested that we come back in the morning to ascertain what had been discussed.
This Council needs a great deal of public scrutiny. Their resentment at following Standing Orders and allowing their actions to be understood is reprehensible. Their insistence on absolute privacy in policy decisions is not only disrespectful to the public, it smacks of a tyrannical mindset. It should be remembered that this Mayor said she was intent on attaining a ‘gold standard’ for this Parish Council. Unfortunately, with a democratically ill-educated cavalier coterie at the core of the Council, it is unlikely that even base metal could be forged into any sort of medal of democratic attainment. I would beg the Standards Committee to ensure that one of their number attends every Oakham Town Council meeting to ensure that such disrespect for the democratic process is not repeated. Unfortunately Martin Brookes was less than equable in his condemnation of Cllr Dewis’ smirking countenance after the meeting had been closed, but this meeting was nothing if not far short of the correct standards locals should expect from their Parish Councillors. Had the press been in attendance it might have made a difference. On the few occasions the press have attended the business of the evening has been better conducted. Unfortunately the press rely on regurgitated Council press releases, via the Journalism Lecturer, Cllr Tor Clark, to report the news in Oakham. You’d think Mr Clark’s journalistic grasp of correct democratic procedures might make him something of a stickler for accountability to the public. Wouldn’t you?
2,394
Wednesday, 02 February 2011 February 2011 at 7.30 PM
Last night’s meeting of Oakham Town Council was most notable for the deliberate opaqueness which Councillors conducted their business. If an item on the agenda could be fudged or alluded to in the most obscure manner some Councillors appeared to take great delight in doing so. Furthermore it seemed to me that the Mayor and Councillor Dewis had come to some sort of agreement to be as passively aggressive as they could when avoiding correct procedure, knowing this would provoke ex-Councillor Martin Brookes, who has campaigned tirelessly for correct procedures to be followed. The Council started by accepting apologies from Cllr George Swiffin, who has not attended meetings for some time. The six-month rule appears to have been deliberately overlooked and members of the Council took great delight in proposing, seconding and accepting his apologies once more.
There were just two of us sitting on the public benches, we need more witnesses to this outrageous effort to ensure that accountability and transparency is avoided. Under the sadly less than brilliant chairmanship of the Mayor, Councillor Sharon Spencer, we reached item 9: Deputations by the Public and the Mayor looked at me inviting me, I assumed, to make some sort of speech on a petition I had delivered earlier in the day. I had not intended to say anything but merely said that I trusted that all Councillors had received a copy of a petition nominating Martin Brookes for his ‘Services to the Community’ (in writing his blog and particularly citing his commitment to ensuring transparency and accountability in local government). It was confirmed that the very efficient Deputy Town Clerk had indeed photocopied and distributed the nomination to all Councillors.
When we reached Item 11: ‘High Sheriff’s certificate for ‘Service to the Community’ the Mayor, rather pointedly, said that the Oakham Town Council, not the public, had been asked to make the nominations and invited nominations from Councillors, so justifying her decision to ignore the nomination of Martin Brookes by members of the public. Someone called Tommy Southern(?) was nominated although no one felt it appropriate to give the citation. All that we, on the public benches, could ascertain was that he was around 100 years old and that he qualified since he was alive during the 60 years of the Queen’s reign. If Tommy Southern(?) has done great service in the community the Councillors did not feel it right to explain what that service might have been. Councillors were not asked to vote on the public petition, nominating Martin Brookes, and after proposing and seconding Tommy Suthern(?) they then proceeded to ask for more nominations, rather than ascertaining which candidates were to be nominated and then voting on all candidates. I do wonder whether they realise quite how defective their voting procedure is. Unfortunately the Clerk doesn’t appear to understand voting procedures either, so the advice the Council receives from its trained officer is lamentable too. Having refused to consider Martin Brookes there was only one other nomination, but we, the public, did not know that Councillors would only be nominating two candidates. It all smelt of a private pre-meeting by allegedly non-political Councillors. However, rather more credibly, Cllr Lorna Gray then said she would nominate Pam Gilbert for her services to the Guides over a long period of time. At least we knew why Pam Gilbert was being nominated.
I am told that the next High Sheriff is to be someone called Peter Lawson who was ‘big’ in Arts for Rutland. It ill behoves a High Sheriff to ask a handful of people, who are rather shaky on Standing Orders and voting procedures, to nominate people known personally to them. I would have thought it more usual for the public to be asked for their views through the local press. Heigh Ho - never mind.
Item 12 FUTURE MEETINGS – To agree on an amended schedule of meetings up to the Local Government Elections due to be held on May 5th 2011. The Mayor, Sharon Spencer said: “Proposed changes are before you. Any comments?” As a member of the public I certainly did not have a copy of the proposed changes which were before the Council. The Council agreed to hold a Meeting on the 27th,whether that was the Annual Meeting or some other meeting I’m still not clear. However, we, in the public benches, were not aware which month they meant either. It could have been 27th of February, March, April or May. Since no month was given we were completely in the dark. Martin Brookes, from the public benches then asked: “What month.” At which the Mayor, Sharon Spencer, adjusted her shoulders, with all the nonchalance of a prize-fighter and replied to him: “Mr Brookes you know you’re not meant to ask questions.”
Clearly Martin Brookes was meant to be provoked and the Mayor was leading the attack. A sad day for the chain of office and an abuse of her position; her vendetta against Mr Brookes became palpable at this point. Cllr Alf Dewis turned around and smirked at us. Cllr Dewis has a wonderful smirk, full of menace and ill concealed belligerence.
The opaque and obscure dissemination of information constituted a clear and deliberate effort to exclude those on the public benches from discovering which month was being suggested. This truculent, confrontational, hostile and fractious Mayor was not doing her public duty in chairing the meeting. Sharon Spencer was purposefully and consciously aiming to ensure that we, the public, were not privy to what had been decided and this constitutes a calculated and intentional attempt to duck transparency.
This is not good enough.
Item 13 FLORAL DISPLAY AND WATERING CONTRACTS. It was decided that this year the Council would split this contract into two separate contracts. The Deputy Mayor, Mark Woodcock, appeared to ruffle an awful lot of feathers when he proposed that both contracts go out to tender, rather than be put by invitation to selected businesses on the Council’s register of approved companies. Sharon Spencer offered Mark Woodcock an opportunity to change his proposal, which he tacitly declined to do. The Mayor mentioned a ‘tight schedule’ by way of encouragement to Cllr Woodcock, to amend the proposal from an open tender. The Mayor then suggested: “What about approaching local companies?” Mark Woodcock was adamant – “Open tender with advertisements in the Rutland Times and Rutland Mercury.” So there it was, much to the consternation of Alf Dewis and Sharon Spencer – invitations to tender could be made to local businesses but it was also to be an open tender after all. Quite what had been going on behind the scenes one could only surmise.
Item 15 REQUEST FROM OAKHAM HOME GARDENS AND ALLOTMENT SOCIETY. The more I see of Cllr Adam Lowe the more impressed I am; a local manager of a business and a Special Constable. At an earlier meeting of the Council he had expressed doubts at the request for a subsidy of £600 towards renewing the fencing (some 84 metres) around the allotment, particularly since only one quote seemed to have been sought. He had volunteered to visit the site at the last meeting, and the Clerk had ensured that he too went along. Cllr Lowe proposed that the Council should agree to subsidise new fencing subject to ensuring that three quotes were sought. Cllr Lowe said: “If we give them money we need to know that money is spent wisely and three tenders are necessary.” He went on to point out that this would also be “fairer” and asked that the quotes be given to the Town Council. Hooray! At last we have one Councillor who understands that money can’t be thrown at projects without some sort of fiscal probity. What a ray of hope and light, without Cllr Lowe’s intervention, at the last meeting, we might once again have distributed Council largesse without ensuring proper financial accountability. Cllr Lowe’s description of what was being discussed was clear, to the point, sensible and easily understood by those on the public benches. He did not dissemble, talk in riddles and code or try to make his report to the Council opaque; a refreshing interlude of clarity in an evening of otherwise deliberate opacity.
By Item 16 CORE STRATEGY INVOLVEMENT AND HEARINGS even Cllr Dodds said she was ‘confused’ at the half communicated allusions to the item under discussion. Cllr Dodds was firmly shut up by the Mayor when she tried to insist that, under item 18: HOLLAND’S FAIR, the Fair use their own generators, rather than plug into the bandstand electricity point. She had anticipated item (ii) prior to considering (i) whether the fair should be held at all and what price was to be charged - £300. However, I would have thought it essential for Councillors to have known whether Hollands Fair would be using the electricity in the bandstand before voting on the price to be paid for the use of Cutts Close. It became obvious that some sort of strategy had been decided, prior to the meeting, on how to conduct the business of the evening.
Only Cllr Tor Clark voted against holding the Fair in Cutts Close. I rather think this was because he had, in the past, voted against the Cottesmore Hunt using Cutts Close and is determined to show a degree of consistency in his voting practices. But I might write to him to ascertain whether this is the case.
At item 18 (ii), rather than allow Cllr Dodds to propose that the bandstand electricity point should not be used by Holland’s Fair, Cllr Alf Dewis, with some rather over hasty alacrity, made the proposal - leaving Cllr Dodds standing at the starting gate. Cllr Dewis is always extremely keen to be seen to make a proposal ahead of the rest of the pack, but if seeing his name in print on the minutes gives him a small thrill then perhaps it would be churlish to cavil at a little minor juvenile enthusiasm for the apparent notoriety he seeks in appearing in the minutes as a ‘proposer’. I don't know, perhaps we shouldn’t try to deny him these small pleasures. Certainly the pleasure he gains by deliberately provoking Martin Brookes is more to be damned and in this he again succeeded at the end of the evening when the vote was put to exclude the public at item 21 to exclude the public from Item 22: OAKHAM FITNESS CENTRE.
Martin Brookes asked if someone would let us know when we would be readmitted to the meeting. Rather than allow the Mayor to answer Cllr Dewis said: “You can come back in in the morning and ask the Clerk tomorrow.” Cllr Dodds also said “You can ask Richard tomorra.” Cllrs Dewis and Dodds made it clear that they did not want the public back into the meeting after we had left. Martin Brookes is a bit of a stickler for correct procedure – and rightly so. Cllr Dewis seems to treat the local Council as his private fiefdom and is rather dismissive of standing orders or correct procedure, as are many other Councillors, including the Mayor. Martin Brookes pointed out to Cllr Dewis that it is usual to tell the public what decision has been taken, in camera, before closing the meeting – something, Martin Brookes pointed out to Cllr Alf Dewis that the RCC abides by with religious regularity. He also pointed out that Cllr Dewis often attends RCC meetings and knows what the procedure is. Jutting his chin out and smirking Cllr Dewis began to raise his voice – we left Very kindly Cllr Lowe said he would let us know when we could come back into the meeting.
The item Councillors wished to discuss in camera was: ‘Item 22: OAKHAM FITNESS CENTRE – To discuss various matters and to decide on an appropriate way forward.’ Clear as mud - another very obscure agenda item. This Council clearly does not relish public scrutiny. True to his word Cllr Lowe invited us back into the meeting. However the Mayor, intent on avoiding telling the public what had been decided, merely closed the meeting without any explanation of what decision had been made. I stood up after the meeting closed and said: “Madam Chairman you ought to tell us what decision you came to on item 22.” Pursing her lips in a thin line, Cllr Sharon Spencer replied: “We discussed the Fitness Centre. We deferred it to the next meeting. There’s nothing to tell you.” My reply was: “So tell us that before you close the meeting.” Cllr Dewis smirked at Martin Brookes with his usual provocative aggressive defiance. Unfortunately Cllr Dewis’ provocation finally hit its mark. He, it was, who had erroneously suggested that we come back in the morning to ascertain what had been discussed.
This Council needs a great deal of public scrutiny. Their resentment at following Standing Orders and allowing their actions to be understood is reprehensible. Their insistence on absolute privacy in policy decisions is not only disrespectful to the public, it smacks of a tyrannical mindset. It should be remembered that this Mayor said she was intent on attaining a ‘gold standard’ for this Parish Council. Unfortunately, with a democratically ill-educated cavalier coterie at the core of the Council, it is unlikely that even base metal could be forged into any sort of medal of democratic attainment. I would beg the Standards Committee to ensure that one of their number attends every Oakham Town Council meeting to ensure that such disrespect for the democratic process is not repeated. Unfortunately Martin Brookes was less than equable in his condemnation of Cllr Dewis’ smirking countenance after the meeting had been closed, but this meeting was nothing if not far short of the correct standards locals should expect from their Parish Councillors. Had the press been in attendance it might have made a difference. On the few occasions the press have attended the business of the evening has been better conducted. Unfortunately the press rely on regurgitated Council press releases, via the Journalism Lecturer, Cllr Tor Clark, to report the news in Oakham. You’d think Mr Clark’s journalistic grasp of correct democratic procedures might make him something of a stickler for accountability to the public. Wouldn’t you?
2,394
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Rutland High Sheriff's certificate for 'Services to the Community'
Guest Post
High Sheriff's certificate for 'Services to the Community'
On the Oakham Parish Council notice board, outside Victoria Hall is an item on the agenda for next Wednesday. It seems the High Sheriff has asked for two nominations to award certificates to ordinary citizens of Oakham for 'Services to the Community.'
Unfortunately the High Sheriff appears to be relying on local Councillors to forward the names of two nominees to him, rather than accept all nominations direct. This item will come up for discussion at Wednesday's meeting - 2nd February.
If you know anyone worth nominating it might be an idea to register your interest and write to the local Council at the Victoria Hall, or even deliver a nomination in good time, prior to Wednesday's meeting. The deadline for doing so may be before the meeting.
Please nominate someone you think really deserves this certificate!
Unfortunately the High Sheriff appears to be relying on local Councillors to forward the names of two nominees to him, rather than accept all nominations direct. This item will come up for discussion at Wednesday's meeting - 2nd February.
If you know anyone worth nominating it might be an idea to register your interest and write to the local Council at the Victoria Hall, or even deliver a nomination in good time, prior to Wednesday's meeting. The deadline for doing so may be before the meeting.
Please nominate someone you think really deserves this certificate!
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Helen Penders New Year Blog Paul Beech Former Oakham Mayor
Tuesday, 18 January 2011
Antiquated Student - Happy New Year
Helen Penders Blog Click Here
A plae is being made for local people to stand in the forthcoming Council elections in May - Martin Brookes has all the information on his blog. However following that plea I thought it might, by way of a little New Year hilarity, be amusing to share a face book entry on ex-Councillor Beech's facebook page. In answer to a question about whether Paul Beech had done much external reading on his Criminology course at Leicester University Paul Beech wrote the following reply:
From - Paul Beech
Went into uni last week to collect more books but it just piles up. I haven't had time to type anything up. I'm reading my notes and listening to some seminars I recorded, and it's far too much for an old man - it's a nightmare. Carol and... me are off to a piss-up in a brewery on Friday with a few of my ex army mates, including Brian, so I don't think I'll be doing much studying over the weekend. We are driving down to Dorset on Friday with a couple of nights in a nice hotel and off to the Badger Brewery for a mates 60th birthday on Saturday. The daytime won't be sober either. It's not all bad though, I'll be pretty senceless on Monday when I have my shoulder injected to rid it of the pain, not that after the weekend it's likely to have any feeling in it anyway. When you asked about external reading, did you mean outside. It's been raining here and I thought the pages would get wet.
If antiquated students of this calibre are gaining entry to University then perhaps we are right to limit student intake.
From - Paul Beech
Went into uni last week to collect more books but it just piles up. I haven't had time to type anything up. I'm reading my notes and listening to some seminars I recorded, and it's far too much for an old man - it's a nightmare. Carol and... me are off to a piss-up in a brewery on Friday with a few of my ex army mates, including Brian, so I don't think I'll be doing much studying over the weekend. We are driving down to Dorset on Friday with a couple of nights in a nice hotel and off to the Badger Brewery for a mates 60th birthday on Saturday. The daytime won't be sober either. It's not all bad though, I'll be pretty senceless on Monday when I have my shoulder injected to rid it of the pain, not that after the weekend it's likely to have any feeling in it anyway. When you asked about external reading, did you mean outside. It's been raining here and I thought the pages would get wet.
If antiquated students of this calibre are gaining entry to University then perhaps we are right to limit student intake.
Friday, January 07, 2011
Oakham Town Council Hypocrite by Helen Pender
Helen Pender was also aware of the article written in the local paper by a Oakham Town Councillor and has requested I publish her text message.
I don't often do as Helen Pender asks, but this time agree with the sentiment of her text message.
How can a Councillor who persistently breaks the law illegally parking anywhere they please criticise others for doing the same.
Text as received from Helen Pender and her view of the Councillor.
Name: Helen
Number: +447749571341
Content:
Mad certainly. Hypocritical definitely. A corrupt vicious witch indubitably.
Helen
Time: 07/01/2011 19:18:41
Consent to publish
Name: Helen
Number: +447749571341
Content:
You can publish my text about her or tweet it.
Helen
Time: 07/01/2011 19:22:03
I don't often do as Helen Pender asks, but this time agree with the sentiment of her text message.
How can a Councillor who persistently breaks the law illegally parking anywhere they please criticise others for doing the same.
Text as received from Helen Pender and her view of the Councillor.
Name: Helen
Number: +447749571341
Content:
Mad certainly. Hypocritical definitely. A corrupt vicious witch indubitably.
Helen
Time: 07/01/2011 19:18:41
Consent to publish
Name: Helen
Number: +447749571341
Content:
You can publish my text about her or tweet it.
Helen
Time: 07/01/2011 19:22:03
Sunday, July 04, 2010
Helen Pender
Lately people have told me I should not associated with Helen Pender until this weekend I have ignored this advice.
Whilst away yesterday some strange comments appeared on my blog.
Two of them were of great concern because they attempted to out a local person and friend.
Today I contacted Helen Pender and asked if she had posted the comments after looking at the stats and seeing same ip address visiting at the time these comments were posted. I explained to her she was the only person who knew who was driving me to London.
I was very surprised and angry to receive the following text.
Name: Helen Pender
Number: +447530219328
Content:
Whoops can u chamge or deletd please? Hope you had a gt day look 4ward 2 reading yr blog
Time: 04/07/2010 14:12:34
Her behaviour is a disgrace and particularly at the last council meeting, yes! what she said at the meeting is true but she knew the trouble, she would cause and the problems this would cause between me and my friend.
1 comments:
Anonymous said...
Gosh isn't that ********* BMW?
July 04, 2010 1:56 AM
8 comments:
Anonymous said...
Your problem Martin is you are so full of tension, stress and anger. What you need is some nice warm cock.
July 03, 2010 12:30 PM
Anonymous said...
Plenty to chose from here in Soho I very happy darling......
July 03, 2010 10:54 PM
Anonymous said...
His posts are so anal
July 04, 2010 2:03 AM
Anonymous said...
Morning Martin,
Thank you for your company, most enjoyable! - especially Trees on Hampstead Heath!
July 04, 2010 5:36 AM
Anonymous said...
Very funny Nick, jealous you couldn't attend?
July 04, 2010 9:43 AM
Anonymous said...
Special thanks to ********** for giving the residents of Oakham a day and nights respite.
Thanks to Helen for keeping a few posts happening till Martin could get back to the fiction.
July 04, 2010 12:52 PM
I have asked Helen Pender not to contact me again, her constant telephoning texting and knocking on my door late at night is harassment! What a strange town we live in.
Whilst away yesterday some strange comments appeared on my blog.
Two of them were of great concern because they attempted to out a local person and friend.
Today I contacted Helen Pender and asked if she had posted the comments after looking at the stats and seeing same ip address visiting at the time these comments were posted. I explained to her she was the only person who knew who was driving me to London.
I was very surprised and angry to receive the following text.
Name: Helen Pender
Number: +447530219328
Content:
Whoops can u chamge or deletd please? Hope you had a gt day look 4ward 2 reading yr blog
Time: 04/07/2010 14:12:34
Her behaviour is a disgrace and particularly at the last council meeting, yes! what she said at the meeting is true but she knew the trouble, she would cause and the problems this would cause between me and my friend.
1 comments:
Anonymous said...
Gosh isn't that ********* BMW?
July 04, 2010 1:56 AM
8 comments:
Anonymous said...
Your problem Martin is you are so full of tension, stress and anger. What you need is some nice warm cock.
July 03, 2010 12:30 PM
Anonymous said...
Plenty to chose from here in Soho I very happy darling......
July 03, 2010 10:54 PM
Anonymous said...
His posts are so anal
July 04, 2010 2:03 AM
Anonymous said...
Morning Martin,
Thank you for your company, most enjoyable! - especially Trees on Hampstead Heath!
July 04, 2010 5:36 AM
Anonymous said...
Very funny Nick, jealous you couldn't attend?
July 04, 2010 9:43 AM
Anonymous said...
Special thanks to ********** for giving the residents of Oakham a day and nights respite.
Thanks to Helen for keeping a few posts happening till Martin could get back to the fiction.
July 04, 2010 12:52 PM
I have asked Helen Pender not to contact me again, her constant telephoning texting and knocking on my door late at night is harassment! What a strange town we live in.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Open Letter from Helen Pender Oakham Town Council
Helen Pender has commanded I place the following on my blog, happily I paste the following:
Friday, 25 June 2010
OPEN LETTER TO THE DEPUTY MAYOR
Cllr Mark Woodcock
Deputy Mayor
Victoria Hall
Oakham
By Hand – not to be posted by mail 25 June 2010.
Dear Cllr Woodcock
You asked Martin Brookes if I would write you a letter regarding what I said at the Parks and Recreation Council meeting on Wednesday of this week. I can confirm that I asked the following question:
'I have been told in the strictest confidence that Cllr Joyce Lucas told a member of the public that Cllr Brookes was a paedophile at the opening of Royce's recreation ground. I hope this is not true?'
I can also confirm that the member of the public who told me this was able to confirm her allegation to Martin Brookes.
Cllr Brookes has repeatedly complained to the police about the victimisation, homophobia and bullying he has received at the hands of Councillors, their associates and friends and ex Councillors. Absolutely nothing whatever has been done.
Indeed I complained about offensive material published using my name on a Flickr’ account – two bare men’s behinds in full colour and some rather insulting text aimed at Martin Brookes. The police chose not to let me know who had published this material because it was not offensive enough to investigate. It did seem to be someone with connections to the local Council, yet the police were unwilling to ascertain who the offender was. However, when I wrote a letter to Councillors on the back of a photocopy of this material and Martin Brookes posted my letter in a Council notice board, he was arrested for publishing offensive material. I now begin to wonder whether my confidence in the police force has been dented due to the fact that Councillors Lucas, Haworth and Dewis sit on the Police Joint Action Group and so protect those who indulge in this sort of behaviour. I enclose a copy of that material and shall not post this letter because I believe that using the Royal Mail to let you have a copy could result in my prosecution. However no one will ever be prosecuted for posting this on the internet. Do you now detect a smidgeon of double standards?
I refer you to the posting on the Rutland Chat Forum and repeated endlessly by 'Dotty':
"Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them."
Are these allegations of paedophilia designed to ensure that Martin Brookes is killed? Might that be an offence of conspiracy to kill? I rather think it might.
I would also ask what has been done about Cllr Alf Dewis’ wholly unacceptable suggestion that membership of the Police Joint Action Group is ‘by invitation only.’
The Council should further consider the following false allegations against Councillor Brookes and take immediate steps to stop this destructive and potentially dangerous campaign of misinformation. People have been killed for being suspected paedophiles and I can absolutely assure you that, having taught paedophiles, Martin Brookes shows absolutely no signs of being a potential sexual offender.
Posted on ex Councillor Jim Harrison’s blog on 7th June 2010: www.jimsteabreak.blogspot.com:
"Monday, 7 June 2010
CRB Check This Councillor
How can it be right that an Oakham Town Councillor puts on display pornographic images in an official Oakham Town Council notice board, is subsequently arrested and is then seen taking photographs at Royce Playing fields where there are children present when the new equipment was officially opened. Should a man who obviously has a penchant for displaying pornographic images on a public notice board be allowed anywhere near children? I THINK NOT! As a councillor he may be visiting other establishments where there are children present AND THAT CANNOT BE RIGHT. Perhaps he ought to undergo a CRB check before being allowed anywhere near children again. He certainly needs to be watched very closely.
Posted by Jim at 22:39 1 comments"
I enclose copies of what was published on the Rutland Chat Forum about Martin Brookes and the offensive material published in my name on Flickr’.
When Martin Brookes complained about Jim Harrison some time ago he received an apology and was persuaded to withdraw his complaint to the Standards Committee. Since then ex Cllr Harrison ’s blog has become infinitely worse and the false allegations that Martin Brookes is not fit to be around children is extremely dangerous. Martin Brookes does not take pictures of children when out photographing and he does not try to approach children in any way. However these false and criminal allegations are gaining currency.
I further refer you to boys riding past on the bicycles shouting 'paedo' at Martin Brookes - which I have witnessed. Where are these children getting their information?
I repeat my question at the Council meeting on 23rd June 2010.
'I have been told in the strictest confidence that Cllr Joyce L told a member of the public that Cllr Brookes was a paedophile at the opening of Royce's recreation ground. I hope this is not true.?’
All Councillor Lucas needs to do is to write me a letter saying she never said any such thing and condemning those who have made these allegations. I will then publish her denial on my blog.
Yours sincerely
Helen Pender
http://jimsteabreak.blogspot.com/
Sunday, 18 April 2010
A Lonely Figure (Picture of Martin Brookes and posted by Jim Harrison on his website)
Brookes cutting a lonely figure on Saturday morning (17th April 2010) as he stood outside the Victoria Halls hoping some poor unsuspecting soul would speak to him during his surgery. Didn't even see his puppet master turn up to speak to him, how sad is that.
POSTED BY JIM AT 22:09 0 COMMENTS
LABELS: ENGLAND, MARTIN BROOKES, OAKHAM, OAKHAM TOWN COUNCIL, OTC, PARANOID, RUTLAND, UK, VICTORIA HALLS
THURSDAY, 18 MARCH 2010
To all who wish to know the real reason why I resigned as an Oakham Town Councillor see the original letter sent to the Chair printed below
Dear Chair
On Wednesday 17th February 2010 a new councillor will be sitting in the Council Chamber. Allegedly, this new councillor has made repeated personal attacks on various members of this council including myself either verbally or on his web based sites. You will know about this more than any of us as you have had to put up with alleged constant harrassment from this man to the point it made you ill and threatened to ruin what should have been one of the highlights of you being an Oakham Town Councillor.
He has also allegedly attacked the credibility of the Oakham Town Council on numerous occasions and made accusations that the Oakham Town Council was conspiring against him. Similarly, he has allegedly done the same to RCC and also made personal attacks on some members of that council as well.
I fail to understand why a man who appears to hate the Oakham Town Council and some of its members so much would want to be a member of that council.
I am unable to sit around a table with this man and discuss policy matters and other matters appertaining to the town and so on a matter of principle feel that the only course of action open to me is to regrettfully resign my post as an Oakham Town Councillor.
Jim Harrison
16th February 2010
POSTED BY JIM AT 18:58 0 COMMENTS
LABELS: CONSPIRACY THEORIST, HARRASSMENT, JIM HARRISON, MARTIN BROOKES, OAKHAM, OAKHAM TOWN COUNCIL, RESIGNATION, RUTLAND, RUTLAND COUNTY COUNCIL
WELL CAN HE EXPLAIN THE FOLLOWING - COPIED FROM THE RUTLAND CHAT FORUM ON 5/6 JANUARY 2010? Jim Harrison’s resignation letter from the Council - see above. 35 posts like this posted in less than 24 hours on the Rutland Chat Forum – January 5th and 6th 2010. ‘Ruddles’ confirmed to me that ‘lardboy’ is Cllr Charles Haworth. I wonder which one Jim Harrison is? Could you be C B Jim old chum? Am told C B stands for Carpet Burns - just the sort of amoral sicko humour the Rutland Chat Forum regularly indulged in.
Copied from Chat Forum on Wednesday, 6 January, 2010 13:22
Rutland Chat forum posts on 5/6 January 2010.
Cllr ****** *******
by C.B. on Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:00 pm
I've heard that ****** ******* is to stand as an Oakham Town Councillor. Fecking hell,
Ave yer seen his post on Flickr bout hate and things. If not check this out:
LINK
and he wants to be a fecking councillor
Growing old is compulsory, Growing up is optional
C.B.
Advanced Member
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 8:49 pm
Location: Here
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by Dotty on Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:44 pm
Well that's normal. Not.
That is very disturbing, there's a lot of anger there.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them.
Dotty
Advanced Member
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Pork Pie Land
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by lardboy on Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:59 pm
What's all them initials stand for, I wonder? Is it really possible for anyone to hate so many people/organisations at once and still be the innnocent "victim"?
lardboy
Advanced Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:06 pm
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by R45PUT1N on Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:02 pm
There's an RK, an R, a R4 and an LB which are pretty obviously some of our members, but who/what the feck is KT, B and RCF???
------------------------------
Question EVERYTHING...
------------------------------
R45PUT1N
Advanced Member
Posts: 1788
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 12:46 pm
Location: Leicestercestercestercestershire
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by lardboy on Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:03 pm
I think RCF = Rutland Chat Forum, as to the others, feck knows!
lardboy
Advanced Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:06 pm
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by Dotty on Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:05 pm
Innocent victim my a*se.
I'd say RCF = Rutland Chat Forum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them.
Dotty
Advanced Member
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Pork Pie Land
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by lardboy on Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:11 pm
Now, now folks, let's not give up on RCF so easily - IT'S COMPETITION TIME for the best acronym! Ummmm, here' mine:
RANTING
CRETINOUS
F*CKWIT
lardboy
Advanced Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:06 pm
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by ruddles on Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:26 pm
Rutland's
Crap
Fotogropher
ruddles
Advanced Member
Posts: 1133
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 6:09 pm
Location: Rural Rutland
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by Dotty on Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:31 pm
Right
Crappy
Fotographer
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them.
Dotty
Advanced Member
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Pork Pie Land
Top
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by ruddles on Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:06 pm
Reclusive
Creepy
Fart
ruddles
Advanced Member
Posts: 1134
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 6:09 pm
Location: Rural Rutland
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by Dotty on Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them.
Dotty
Advanced Member
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Pork Pie Land
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by Dotty on Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:34 pm
Runt
Creeping
Forth
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them.
Dotty
Advanced Member
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Pork Pie Land
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by lardboy on Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:41 pm
Retarding
Cranial
Fragmentation
lardboy
Advanced Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:06 pm
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by Dotty on Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:50 pm
Ridiculous
Creepy
Fellow
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them.
Dotty
Advanced Member
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Pork Pie Land
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by lardboy on Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:11 pm
Ruinously
Collapsed
Finances
lardboy
Advanced Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:06 pm
Posted by Helen Pender at 15:40 0 comments
Labels: Allegations, Helen Pender, Jim Harrison, Martin Brookes, Oakham photographer, Oakham Town Council
Friday, 25 June 2010
OPEN LETTER TO THE DEPUTY MAYOR
Cllr Mark Woodcock
Deputy Mayor
Victoria Hall
Oakham
By Hand – not to be posted by mail 25 June 2010.
Dear Cllr Woodcock
You asked Martin Brookes if I would write you a letter regarding what I said at the Parks and Recreation Council meeting on Wednesday of this week. I can confirm that I asked the following question:
'I have been told in the strictest confidence that Cllr Joyce Lucas told a member of the public that Cllr Brookes was a paedophile at the opening of Royce's recreation ground. I hope this is not true?'
I can also confirm that the member of the public who told me this was able to confirm her allegation to Martin Brookes.
Cllr Brookes has repeatedly complained to the police about the victimisation, homophobia and bullying he has received at the hands of Councillors, their associates and friends and ex Councillors. Absolutely nothing whatever has been done.
Indeed I complained about offensive material published using my name on a Flickr’ account – two bare men’s behinds in full colour and some rather insulting text aimed at Martin Brookes. The police chose not to let me know who had published this material because it was not offensive enough to investigate. It did seem to be someone with connections to the local Council, yet the police were unwilling to ascertain who the offender was. However, when I wrote a letter to Councillors on the back of a photocopy of this material and Martin Brookes posted my letter in a Council notice board, he was arrested for publishing offensive material. I now begin to wonder whether my confidence in the police force has been dented due to the fact that Councillors Lucas, Haworth and Dewis sit on the Police Joint Action Group and so protect those who indulge in this sort of behaviour. I enclose a copy of that material and shall not post this letter because I believe that using the Royal Mail to let you have a copy could result in my prosecution. However no one will ever be prosecuted for posting this on the internet. Do you now detect a smidgeon of double standards?
I refer you to the posting on the Rutland Chat Forum and repeated endlessly by 'Dotty':
"Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them."
Are these allegations of paedophilia designed to ensure that Martin Brookes is killed? Might that be an offence of conspiracy to kill? I rather think it might.
I would also ask what has been done about Cllr Alf Dewis’ wholly unacceptable suggestion that membership of the Police Joint Action Group is ‘by invitation only.’
The Council should further consider the following false allegations against Councillor Brookes and take immediate steps to stop this destructive and potentially dangerous campaign of misinformation. People have been killed for being suspected paedophiles and I can absolutely assure you that, having taught paedophiles, Martin Brookes shows absolutely no signs of being a potential sexual offender.
Posted on ex Councillor Jim Harrison’s blog on 7th June 2010: www.jimsteabreak.blogspot.com:
"Monday, 7 June 2010
CRB Check This Councillor
How can it be right that an Oakham Town Councillor puts on display pornographic images in an official Oakham Town Council notice board, is subsequently arrested and is then seen taking photographs at Royce Playing fields where there are children present when the new equipment was officially opened. Should a man who obviously has a penchant for displaying pornographic images on a public notice board be allowed anywhere near children? I THINK NOT! As a councillor he may be visiting other establishments where there are children present AND THAT CANNOT BE RIGHT. Perhaps he ought to undergo a CRB check before being allowed anywhere near children again. He certainly needs to be watched very closely.
Posted by Jim at 22:39 1 comments"
I enclose copies of what was published on the Rutland Chat Forum about Martin Brookes and the offensive material published in my name on Flickr’.
When Martin Brookes complained about Jim Harrison some time ago he received an apology and was persuaded to withdraw his complaint to the Standards Committee. Since then ex Cllr Harrison ’s blog has become infinitely worse and the false allegations that Martin Brookes is not fit to be around children is extremely dangerous. Martin Brookes does not take pictures of children when out photographing and he does not try to approach children in any way. However these false and criminal allegations are gaining currency.
I further refer you to boys riding past on the bicycles shouting 'paedo' at Martin Brookes - which I have witnessed. Where are these children getting their information?
I repeat my question at the Council meeting on 23rd June 2010.
'I have been told in the strictest confidence that Cllr Joyce L told a member of the public that Cllr Brookes was a paedophile at the opening of Royce's recreation ground. I hope this is not true.?’
All Councillor Lucas needs to do is to write me a letter saying she never said any such thing and condemning those who have made these allegations. I will then publish her denial on my blog.
Yours sincerely
Helen Pender
http://jimsteabreak.blogspot.com/
Sunday, 18 April 2010
A Lonely Figure (Picture of Martin Brookes and posted by Jim Harrison on his website)
Brookes cutting a lonely figure on Saturday morning (17th April 2010) as he stood outside the Victoria Halls hoping some poor unsuspecting soul would speak to him during his surgery. Didn't even see his puppet master turn up to speak to him, how sad is that.
POSTED BY JIM AT 22:09 0 COMMENTS
LABELS: ENGLAND, MARTIN BROOKES, OAKHAM, OAKHAM TOWN COUNCIL, OTC, PARANOID, RUTLAND, UK, VICTORIA HALLS
THURSDAY, 18 MARCH 2010
To all who wish to know the real reason why I resigned as an Oakham Town Councillor see the original letter sent to the Chair printed below
Dear Chair
On Wednesday 17th February 2010 a new councillor will be sitting in the Council Chamber. Allegedly, this new councillor has made repeated personal attacks on various members of this council including myself either verbally or on his web based sites. You will know about this more than any of us as you have had to put up with alleged constant harrassment from this man to the point it made you ill and threatened to ruin what should have been one of the highlights of you being an Oakham Town Councillor.
He has also allegedly attacked the credibility of the Oakham Town Council on numerous occasions and made accusations that the Oakham Town Council was conspiring against him. Similarly, he has allegedly done the same to RCC and also made personal attacks on some members of that council as well.
I fail to understand why a man who appears to hate the Oakham Town Council and some of its members so much would want to be a member of that council.
I am unable to sit around a table with this man and discuss policy matters and other matters appertaining to the town and so on a matter of principle feel that the only course of action open to me is to regrettfully resign my post as an Oakham Town Councillor.
Jim Harrison
16th February 2010
POSTED BY JIM AT 18:58 0 COMMENTS
LABELS: CONSPIRACY THEORIST, HARRASSMENT, JIM HARRISON, MARTIN BROOKES, OAKHAM, OAKHAM TOWN COUNCIL, RESIGNATION, RUTLAND, RUTLAND COUNTY COUNCIL
WELL CAN HE EXPLAIN THE FOLLOWING - COPIED FROM THE RUTLAND CHAT FORUM ON 5/6 JANUARY 2010? Jim Harrison’s resignation letter from the Council - see above. 35 posts like this posted in less than 24 hours on the Rutland Chat Forum – January 5th and 6th 2010. ‘Ruddles’ confirmed to me that ‘lardboy’ is Cllr Charles Haworth. I wonder which one Jim Harrison is? Could you be C B Jim old chum? Am told C B stands for Carpet Burns - just the sort of amoral sicko humour the Rutland Chat Forum regularly indulged in.
Copied from Chat Forum on Wednesday, 6 January, 2010 13:22
Rutland Chat forum posts on 5/6 January 2010.
Cllr ****** *******
by C.B. on Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:00 pm
I've heard that ****** ******* is to stand as an Oakham Town Councillor. Fecking hell,
Ave yer seen his post on Flickr bout hate and things. If not check this out:
LINK
and he wants to be a fecking councillor
Growing old is compulsory, Growing up is optional
C.B.
Advanced Member
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 8:49 pm
Location: Here
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by Dotty on Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:44 pm
Well that's normal. Not.
That is very disturbing, there's a lot of anger there.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them.
Dotty
Advanced Member
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Pork Pie Land
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by lardboy on Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:59 pm
What's all them initials stand for, I wonder? Is it really possible for anyone to hate so many people/organisations at once and still be the innnocent "victim"?
lardboy
Advanced Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:06 pm
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by R45PUT1N on Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:02 pm
There's an RK, an R, a R4 and an LB which are pretty obviously some of our members, but who/what the feck is KT, B and RCF???
------------------------------
Question EVERYTHING...
------------------------------
R45PUT1N
Advanced Member
Posts: 1788
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 12:46 pm
Location: Leicestercestercestercestershire
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by lardboy on Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:03 pm
I think RCF = Rutland Chat Forum, as to the others, feck knows!
lardboy
Advanced Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:06 pm
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by Dotty on Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:05 pm
Innocent victim my a*se.
I'd say RCF = Rutland Chat Forum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them.
Dotty
Advanced Member
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Pork Pie Land
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by lardboy on Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:11 pm
Now, now folks, let's not give up on RCF so easily - IT'S COMPETITION TIME for the best acronym! Ummmm, here' mine:
RANTING
CRETINOUS
F*CKWIT
lardboy
Advanced Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:06 pm
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by ruddles on Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:26 pm
Rutland's
Crap
Fotogropher
ruddles
Advanced Member
Posts: 1133
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 6:09 pm
Location: Rural Rutland
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by Dotty on Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:31 pm
Right
Crappy
Fotographer
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them.
Dotty
Advanced Member
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Pork Pie Land
Top
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by ruddles on Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:06 pm
Reclusive
Creepy
Fart
ruddles
Advanced Member
Posts: 1134
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 6:09 pm
Location: Rural Rutland
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by Dotty on Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them.
Dotty
Advanced Member
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Pork Pie Land
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by Dotty on Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:34 pm
Runt
Creeping
Forth
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them.
Dotty
Advanced Member
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Pork Pie Land
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by lardboy on Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:41 pm
Retarding
Cranial
Fragmentation
lardboy
Advanced Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:06 pm
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by Dotty on Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:50 pm
Ridiculous
Creepy
Fellow
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them.
Dotty
Advanced Member
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Pork Pie Land
Top
________________________________________
Re: Cllr Martian Borrocks
by lardboy on Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:11 pm
Ruinously
Collapsed
Finances
lardboy
Advanced Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:06 pm
Posted by Helen Pender at 15:40 0 comments
Labels: Allegations, Helen Pender, Jim Harrison, Martin Brookes, Oakham photographer, Oakham Town Council
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Helen Pender V Cllr Joyce lucas
Helen Penders Statement for Oakham Town Council
Unfortunately my evidence is second hand and therefore inadmissable. However ******** told me last night that Cllr Mrs Joyce Lucas has to her - at Royce's Opening Day - that you were a paedophile. You had already told me that ********* had told you that Joyce Lucas had run you down to *********, but not what had been said. I then understood from ******** that she hadn't told you precisely how Joyce Lucas had run you down.
*********** - being a good friend - said she felt she did not want you to know what Cllr Joyce Lucas had actually said, presumably because it was too hurtful. She told me in confidence and asked me not to make an issue of it. I am afraid that I felt it far too dangerous and far too important to keep that confidence entirely. Whilst I didn't mention who had told me and said during the Council meeting that I had been told in confidence I realised that Cllr Joyce Lucas had guessed who told me, precisely because she must have remembered ********* telling her off for spreading malicious and untrue rumours about you time.
Cllr Joyce Lucas then told you that 'the three of them are trouble makers,' I presume she was pointing at the back row where the seats for the public are. I also presume that this was a tacit and perhaps inadvertent admission of guilt on her part. had no real evidence that what ********* had told me was true, but for Cllr Lucas to include ********* in her invective was an admission that she knew what she had said to *********. So far as I was cod this was proof positive that ********** was indeed telling the truth.
Whilst I understand ********* thinking I could not concur with her and felt that no only should you be told, so should the Council. Frankly the seriousness of this allegation is so severe that the only way to fight it was openly - so that the whole Council knew what Joyce Lucas was saying about you. How many other people she had told is a matter of conjecture, but to have told someone she didn't know - who just happened to be a friend of yours - is indicative that many more he been given this malicious and criminally slanderous information.
The ramifications for you personally could be really serious. People someties take it into their heads to fire bomb the homes of paedophiles, so in my view your life had become endangered by this false allegation and it needed to stop immediately and a full retraction and disciplinary procedures taken in order to make public her deliberate and destructive rumour mongering was scotched at source.
I would be happy to write to someone should you wish me to, but as I said the only part of the picture I can testify to is Joyce's final finger pointing at ********* when I had not mentioned *********as being my source.
Helen
My own
Unfortunately my evidence is second hand and therefore inadmissable. However ******** told me last night that Cllr Mrs Joyce Lucas has to her - at Royce's Opening Day - that you were a paedophile. You had already told me that ********* had told you that Joyce Lucas had run you down to *********, but not what had been said. I then understood from ******** that she hadn't told you precisely how Joyce Lucas had run you down.
*********** - being a good friend - said she felt she did not want you to know what Cllr Joyce Lucas had actually said, presumably because it was too hurtful. She told me in confidence and asked me not to make an issue of it. I am afraid that I felt it far too dangerous and far too important to keep that confidence entirely. Whilst I didn't mention who had told me and said during the Council meeting that I had been told in confidence I realised that Cllr Joyce Lucas had guessed who told me, precisely because she must have remembered ********* telling her off for spreading malicious and untrue rumours about you time.
Cllr Joyce Lucas then told you that 'the three of them are trouble makers,' I presume she was pointing at the back row where the seats for the public are. I also presume that this was a tacit and perhaps inadvertent admission of guilt on her part. had no real evidence that what ********* had told me was true, but for Cllr Lucas to include ********* in her invective was an admission that she knew what she had said to *********. So far as I was cod this was proof positive that ********** was indeed telling the truth.
Whilst I understand ********* thinking I could not concur with her and felt that no only should you be told, so should the Council. Frankly the seriousness of this allegation is so severe that the only way to fight it was openly - so that the whole Council knew what Joyce Lucas was saying about you. How many other people she had told is a matter of conjecture, but to have told someone she didn't know - who just happened to be a friend of yours - is indicative that many more he been given this malicious and criminally slanderous information.
The ramifications for you personally could be really serious. People someties take it into their heads to fire bomb the homes of paedophiles, so in my view your life had become endangered by this false allegation and it needed to stop immediately and a full retraction and disciplinary procedures taken in order to make public her deliberate and destructive rumour mongering was scotched at source.
I would be happy to write to someone should you wish me to, but as I said the only part of the picture I can testify to is Joyce's final finger pointing at ********* when I had not mentioned *********as being my source.
Helen
My own
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Oakham Town Council co-options - 16th June 2010
Oakham Town Council co-options - 16th June 2010
http://helenpender.blogspot.com/2010/06/oakham-town-council-co-options-16th.html
Present: Cllrs Joyce Lucas; Charles Haworth; George Swiffin; Alf Dewis; Alan Walters; Martin Brookes and Chairman and Mayor – Sharon Spencer.
Candidates in order of interview: Linda Grey; Helen Pender; Tor Clarke and Fiona Arnold.
The following Councillors cast two votes each in favour of Mrs Linda Grey and Tor Clarke: Cllrs Alf Dewis; Charles Haworth; Joyce Lucas; George Swiffin; Alan Walters.
When told of the vote by the Chairman, Sharon Spencer, she also said that Martin Brookes and she did not vote since they each knew one of the candidates. This prompted me to ask if I was sleeping with (openly gay) Cllr Brookes, since Linda Grey had admitted to me two weeks earlier that she was a friend of both Alf Dewis and Joyce Lucas. In fact I hear from Martin’s blog that she also admitted this as she was introduced at her interview. However Joyce Lucas shut her up.
Oakham is a town of 10,000 people, a very small community. It is unlikely that the five Councillors who voted did not know at least one of the candidates. What cloistered lives these five must lead.
By a happy coincidence the five Councillors, who did vote, roared in unison like unanimous lions in favour of Linda Grey and Tor Clarke.
Martin’s comment to me after the meeting was that I had not pulled my punches when telling the Council of its failings. This was the only opportunity I would get to be heard and it is important to make the most of opportunities when they arise. The Town Clerk said that everyone else was interviewed for a quarter of an hour. My interview lasted half an hour.
Cllr Dewis had to listen as I told the meeting that Plato believed that Tyranny and Anarchy replaced democracy when democracy fails. However I am not sure he is capable of understanding the depths to which he is bringing this Council by riding rough shod over Standing Orders.
The public were ejected when the five Parish Councillors voted. Martin Brookes had proposed, I am told by other members of the public, that the public be excluded for the discussion. Needless to say, since it was proposed by Cllr Martin Brookes, no one would second his proposal. A few seconds later Cllr Dewis suggested the public be excluded. No one seconded his proposal either, but it was put to the vote and carried. One shakes ones head in despair at this point. You can’t surely have a motion to exclude the public, which receives no support, and then revive exactly the same motion again, which again receives no seconder, and then put the motion to the vote.
Oh yes you can, but only on Oakham Parish Council where Standing Orders don’t apply. It seems my small opportunity to educate Cllr Dewis had fallen on deaf ears. Heigh Ho! Why can’t I learn that casting pearls before swine is always a vain exercise?
As we left the building Martin was locked out of the Council Chamber and office. It became clear that some Councillors were holding an informal discussion from which they wished to exclude Martin Brookes. Quelle suprise?
The outcome was predictable (see Martin Brookes’ blog posted before the meeting). Martin expressed great regret that he hadn’t placed a bet with William Hill as he left the Council Chamber. I couldn’t help thinking that if he had he might have been arrested and charged with fraud.
Lest we forget, at the last Council meeting Cllr Alf Dewis assured us that he, Cllr Lucas and Cllr Haworth would serve on the Police Joint Action Group, since membership of this group is in future to be ‘by invitation only.’
My congratulations go to Tor Clarke and Linda Grey along with my fervent hopes that they might bring some sanity to this Council. Chris Hilton, Martin Brookes and I raised our glasses in a toast to Oakham Town Council in the Hornblower afterwards. No doubt there will be a celebratory dinner for Lions and their spouses too in the very near future … so perhaps collective sanity on Oakham Town Council is a vain hope.
http://helenpender.blogspot.com/2010/06/oakham-town-council-co-options-16th.html
Present: Cllrs Joyce Lucas; Charles Haworth; George Swiffin; Alf Dewis; Alan Walters; Martin Brookes and Chairman and Mayor – Sharon Spencer.
Candidates in order of interview: Linda Grey; Helen Pender; Tor Clarke and Fiona Arnold.
The following Councillors cast two votes each in favour of Mrs Linda Grey and Tor Clarke: Cllrs Alf Dewis; Charles Haworth; Joyce Lucas; George Swiffin; Alan Walters.
When told of the vote by the Chairman, Sharon Spencer, she also said that Martin Brookes and she did not vote since they each knew one of the candidates. This prompted me to ask if I was sleeping with (openly gay) Cllr Brookes, since Linda Grey had admitted to me two weeks earlier that she was a friend of both Alf Dewis and Joyce Lucas. In fact I hear from Martin’s blog that she also admitted this as she was introduced at her interview. However Joyce Lucas shut her up.
Oakham is a town of 10,000 people, a very small community. It is unlikely that the five Councillors who voted did not know at least one of the candidates. What cloistered lives these five must lead.
By a happy coincidence the five Councillors, who did vote, roared in unison like unanimous lions in favour of Linda Grey and Tor Clarke.
Martin’s comment to me after the meeting was that I had not pulled my punches when telling the Council of its failings. This was the only opportunity I would get to be heard and it is important to make the most of opportunities when they arise. The Town Clerk said that everyone else was interviewed for a quarter of an hour. My interview lasted half an hour.
Cllr Dewis had to listen as I told the meeting that Plato believed that Tyranny and Anarchy replaced democracy when democracy fails. However I am not sure he is capable of understanding the depths to which he is bringing this Council by riding rough shod over Standing Orders.
The public were ejected when the five Parish Councillors voted. Martin Brookes had proposed, I am told by other members of the public, that the public be excluded for the discussion. Needless to say, since it was proposed by Cllr Martin Brookes, no one would second his proposal. A few seconds later Cllr Dewis suggested the public be excluded. No one seconded his proposal either, but it was put to the vote and carried. One shakes ones head in despair at this point. You can’t surely have a motion to exclude the public, which receives no support, and then revive exactly the same motion again, which again receives no seconder, and then put the motion to the vote.
Oh yes you can, but only on Oakham Parish Council where Standing Orders don’t apply. It seems my small opportunity to educate Cllr Dewis had fallen on deaf ears. Heigh Ho! Why can’t I learn that casting pearls before swine is always a vain exercise?
As we left the building Martin was locked out of the Council Chamber and office. It became clear that some Councillors were holding an informal discussion from which they wished to exclude Martin Brookes. Quelle suprise?
The outcome was predictable (see Martin Brookes’ blog posted before the meeting). Martin expressed great regret that he hadn’t placed a bet with William Hill as he left the Council Chamber. I couldn’t help thinking that if he had he might have been arrested and charged with fraud.
Lest we forget, at the last Council meeting Cllr Alf Dewis assured us that he, Cllr Lucas and Cllr Haworth would serve on the Police Joint Action Group, since membership of this group is in future to be ‘by invitation only.’
My congratulations go to Tor Clarke and Linda Grey along with my fervent hopes that they might bring some sanity to this Council. Chris Hilton, Martin Brookes and I raised our glasses in a toast to Oakham Town Council in the Hornblower afterwards. No doubt there will be a celebratory dinner for Lions and their spouses too in the very near future … so perhaps collective sanity on Oakham Town Council is a vain hope.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Helen Pender Ind. candidate (Nun of the above)
Helen Pender Ind. candidate (Nun of the above)
Helen Pender Independent Candidate
Oakham Town Council Election Thursday 20th May 2010
I fully support the above person and hope people will vote for Helen.
Helen will blogging during here campaign. It will certaainly be interesting and have a lot less spelling mistakes than mine.
http://helenpender.blogspot.com/
Thursday, 15 April 2010
Nun of the above
Have agreed to stand for Oakham Town Council - North East Ward - as an independent candidate. It is important that we have proper elections and bring democracy and public service back into local politics. I am a supporter of Martin Brookes and truly believe that the local parish Council should be about service to the community.
Lately some very silly behaviour has been tolerated at local parish council meetings and I have been pressured to stand. I have decided to accept the nomination primarily because I think democracy demands we have elections, not co-options of mates.
I would like to campaign for better public transport services locally. It is ridiculous that we do not have any buses out of, or into, Oakham on a Sunday and that trains only run after 12.45 pm. There are no buses after 5.40 pm from Peterborough on any day of the week either. This prevents local people, without their own transport, seeking work outside the County. If elected I will undertake to make strenuous representations on behalf of the less well off, who cannot afford their own transport, to be better served and have more employment opportunities.
I will campaign for more openess and disclosure of information to local people. The concept of accountability seems to have bypassed the Town Council. It is reprehensible that so much of the correspondence to local Councillors is marked 'Private and Confidential.'
I am concerned that restoration of the bandstand is likely to cost over £30,000. If a proper restoration job were being undertaken we would be using collyweston tiles, not cedarwood tiles which will probably rot within a relatively short space of time. I also notice that the wooden boards, protecting the bandstand site, have cost thousands of pounds and will be taken down at the end of work. Could we not have used secure and relatively cheaper wire security fencing, rather than paying outright for boarding which will be taken away at the end of the work and presumably recycled by the builders with no financial benefit accruing to local tax payers.
I will also campaign to remove the 'designated area' that the Town Council have voted to enforce on the whole of Oakham.
It was bad enough that local Councillors, some of whom have now resigned, felt able to boast of making Cutts Close a 'designated area' - yet felt no sense of hypocrisy when taking wine bottles to Cutts Close to listen to the Band during festival week. Laws, when they are brought into force, should apply to everyone equally. There does appear to have been a 'them' and 'us' mentality locally. It is about time locally elected representatives understood that they are there to represent and serve their electors and not selfishly exploit their personal positions.
I stood at the last General Election as an Independent candidate and many people suggested that I stand under the tag 'None of the above.' Rather tongue in cheek, since I lead a rather modest life and attend church regularly, I have decided instead to stand as 'Nun of the above.'
You can contact me on: penderh@yahoo.co.uk
Helen Pender Independent Candidate
Oakham Town Council Election Thursday 20th May 2010
I fully support the above person and hope people will vote for Helen.
Helen will blogging during here campaign. It will certaainly be interesting and have a lot less spelling mistakes than mine.
http://helenpender.blogspot.com/
Thursday, 15 April 2010
Nun of the above
Have agreed to stand for Oakham Town Council - North East Ward - as an independent candidate. It is important that we have proper elections and bring democracy and public service back into local politics. I am a supporter of Martin Brookes and truly believe that the local parish Council should be about service to the community.
Lately some very silly behaviour has been tolerated at local parish council meetings and I have been pressured to stand. I have decided to accept the nomination primarily because I think democracy demands we have elections, not co-options of mates.
I would like to campaign for better public transport services locally. It is ridiculous that we do not have any buses out of, or into, Oakham on a Sunday and that trains only run after 12.45 pm. There are no buses after 5.40 pm from Peterborough on any day of the week either. This prevents local people, without their own transport, seeking work outside the County. If elected I will undertake to make strenuous representations on behalf of the less well off, who cannot afford their own transport, to be better served and have more employment opportunities.
I will campaign for more openess and disclosure of information to local people. The concept of accountability seems to have bypassed the Town Council. It is reprehensible that so much of the correspondence to local Councillors is marked 'Private and Confidential.'
I am concerned that restoration of the bandstand is likely to cost over £30,000. If a proper restoration job were being undertaken we would be using collyweston tiles, not cedarwood tiles which will probably rot within a relatively short space of time. I also notice that the wooden boards, protecting the bandstand site, have cost thousands of pounds and will be taken down at the end of work. Could we not have used secure and relatively cheaper wire security fencing, rather than paying outright for boarding which will be taken away at the end of the work and presumably recycled by the builders with no financial benefit accruing to local tax payers.
I will also campaign to remove the 'designated area' that the Town Council have voted to enforce on the whole of Oakham.
It was bad enough that local Councillors, some of whom have now resigned, felt able to boast of making Cutts Close a 'designated area' - yet felt no sense of hypocrisy when taking wine bottles to Cutts Close to listen to the Band during festival week. Laws, when they are brought into force, should apply to everyone equally. There does appear to have been a 'them' and 'us' mentality locally. It is about time locally elected representatives understood that they are there to represent and serve their electors and not selfishly exploit their personal positions.
I stood at the last General Election as an Independent candidate and many people suggested that I stand under the tag 'None of the above.' Rather tongue in cheek, since I lead a rather modest life and attend church regularly, I have decided instead to stand as 'Nun of the above.'
You can contact me on: penderh@yahoo.co.uk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)