A little bird told me....

There is something out there called Facebook. On this website the date and time of when you do certain things is recorded. In the case of Mandy Jayne Thomas the date was 3rd November 2010. On this night there was a Council meeting at 7.00pm

As ever Mandy Thomas was  absent. What my little bird told me was that Mandy was doing something else. At 7.01 pm Mandy was on Facebook creating a Group.

So rather than be at a boring Council meeting (which she is paid to attend) Mandy has started a one person campaign against the Coalition tuition fees. Nothing wrong is opposing your governments policy but should you be at a Council Meeting you are paid to attend?


I know being a District Councillor is a mixture of a part-time job and a volunteer. District Councillors with daytime and evening meetings may not make the odd meeting but missing 10 is an awful amount to be absent from. 


With the elections in May fast approaching, Mandy should do the decent thing and resign here seat so others may represent the people of Eaton Socon in her place!

The Conservatives and Eynesbury Hardwicke

In another spat with Cllr Paul Ursell a leaflet came to light sent out by the Conservatives at the last election in the area which was formerly part of Eynesbury Hardwicke and has been annexed by HDC to St Neots Town Council. The leaflet in question can be found here.

There is no Conservative banner so how do I know it is a Conservative leaflet?

At the bottom of the page there is an imprint. In really tiny font size it says:

This Conservative leaflet doesn't really want you to know it is from the Conservatives.

The banner at the top of the leaflets simply says:

Nothing to indicate it is from the Conservatives.

So what does the leaflet have to say and what doesn't it say?

The first paragraph:

Nothing in this paragraph indicates the Conservatives were the ones who moved the residents from Eynesbury Hardwicke to St Neots fully knowing that these residents would have to pay higher council tax. On 21/11/2007 then Councillor Andrew Gilbert drew attention to this change:

So the Conservative knew fully the annexed residents would have to pay more. The Conservative run HDC had decided to move these residents to St Neots. There is no mention of this fact in the Conservatives leaflet.

The second paragraph goes on:

Of course the small reduction in the Council Tax for the majority of St Neots Council taxpayers is for existing council taxpayers. But it is also for the annexed residents who don't have to pay so much under the Conservative prosposals.

The third paragraph says:

Whilst it is a valid point that the Liberal Democrats have upped the Town Tax and the increase is being funded by the annexed residents, nothing is said about the Conservatives moving these residents in the first place and therefore making them liable for these higher taxes.

The fourth paragraph goes onto say:

This argument would be good if the Conservatives hadn't moved these residents to St Neots Town Council. The consequence of such a move is the annexed residents would pay more. The Conservatives knew this when they took this decision.

The fifth paragraph is the most interesting: 

But what of the old Eynesbury Hardwicke Parish Council? If they had built and provided facilities then St Neots Town Council would have to take them over and run them. EHPC didn't provide any facilities. Affected EHPC residents enjoyed much lower parish/town tax than the rest of St Neots.

The minority Conservative group did put forward ill thought out proposals. But creating a specific fund does one thing. It would put up the Council Tax for all residents in St Neots. This is something the Conservatives are quiet about. 

Why should residents get a specific fund for their area? This must be new Conservative policy for Eynesbury. Under a Conservative run Town Council will this discrimination be put into effect or will we all be in this together.

Also why should neighbours pay different taxes. The boundary was there before Parklands and Eynesbury Manor were built. Some residents on one side of a street paid St Neots rate of Council Tax and on the other side they paid the much lower EHPC. 

Oh and HDC did actually tax, many years ago, the residents of Eynesbury Hardwicke at the St Neots Town Council rate until it was pointed out Eynesbury Hardwicke was a different parish.

The use of Eatons Community Centre is a strange choice. As Councillor Ursell (Conservative) who is on HDC, SNTC and was on EHPC put it:

“This much needed community centre will be a tremendous asset for the residents of the Eaton Ford and Eaton Socon communities who will undoubtedly make full use of its facilities.”

In Eaton Ford this is a tremendous asset. In the annex area this is a financial burden. Two different messages, one St Neots Conservatives. Depends where you live the Town.

In conclusion, this is a shameful leaflet and I understand it was from the Conservatives and this was hidden away at the bottom of the page. It sets out some valid points but misses the main reason why the annexed residents had to pay higher Council Tax and that is simply because the Conservatives decided to change the boundary and move these residents into St Neots.  

Far easier for the St Neots Conservatives to blame the Liberal Democrats than admit your own decisions!

How odd - found another letter from Mandy Thomas

What is the difference between these two letters from Cllr Mandy Thomas?

The answer is the one on the left was sent into the News and Crier and printed in their 28/10/10 edition. The one on the right (blue) was printed in the Hunts Post edition of ...... wait for it ...... 5th March 2008. The reason I looked this up is because the Conservatives are denying it was them who sent it in. Except the letter in the Hunts Post is from Mandy Thomas.

Why did I investigate? There was a rumour that something was amiss with the letter posted on 28th October 2010. Re-reading the letter I saw some clues. Mandy stood and beat Derek Giles in May 2008. The Liberal Democrats had won the Town Council in May 2007. This letter made sense if it was written in March 2008. I therefore looked on the Hunts Post website and found this letter.

The first question is: Who sent this in? The answer is either a diabolical plan by the Liberal Democrats who re-wrote this letter and sent it in or it is a Conservative muck up and they sent this letter in by mistake.

The Liberal Democrats are worth looking at because, as a party, they have form for doing a Woolas. The Liberal Democrats are not pure in this respect. The second option is the Conservative muck up option and they sent the wrong letter into the News and Crier. This is very credible and is the probable answer.

On the balance of probabilities I feel the answer is the Conservative muck up option. They sent the wrong letter into the News and Crier. Having found out it was the wrong letter they decided to make the News and Crier apologise for the printing the Conservatives mistake. This is wrong!


We all make mistakes and some of us can take the blame and apologise when we are wrong. But to blame the News and Crier for printing a letter the Conservatives sent in is wrong and not worthy of the St Neots Conservatives. Maybe the St Neots Conservatives are taking lessons from their HDC who blame the previous Government/new Coalition for all their woes.

Local websites updates

And there have been a couple of changes. For all the media talk about this being a blogger or twitter election, the local parties don't seem to agree.

They have had a slight clear up of their website. Dakers has been finally removed from this site months after he resigned from HDC. Catherine Hutton has finally been added to the list 9 months after being elected. The site is still promoted by Peter Brown who resigned as Agents in August 2009. Far into 2010 the diary is still in 2009 mode.

This site has yet to change. So much for the St Neots Conservative Councillors Group who don't seem to be able update their own website.

Whilst the Fenstanton by-election win makes the headlines there hasn't been anything since. The St. Neots page is still looking way back at the 2008.

Nothing happening here.

Nor here.

There is no actual website. 

The site hasn't changed.

OSC refers car park charges decision back to cabinet.

The problems with the St Neots Conservative Councillors rumbles on. The decision by the Cabinet to impose these charges at the Riverside Car Park has been called in by an Overview and Scrutiny Committee (OSC). This toothless body has sent this decision back to the Cabinet for reconsideration. 

The Cabinet has also received a report from Officers setting out what the changes the OSC is proposing including the loss of income of £37,000. This gives the Cabinet food for thought in taking the decision as the loss of income will mean the Cabinet would need to look for cuts elsewhere.

I feel this should be something the OSC should have taken into account when taking there decision. Instead of just sending back the decision, the OSC should have come up with ways to pay for this loss of income.

More on Car Parking!

Following on from a previous article on our secret council I received an e-mail from a Conservative District Councillor pointing to more information on the Huntingdonshire DC website. This information was contained within the Agenda/Minutes for the OSC Environmental Well-being on 10th November 2010.

This OSC meeting reviewed a report from the secret (because the public is currently denied the reports/minutes) Car Parking Working Party. I note with interest that Cllr Harty was  at this OSC meeting and obviously agreed with what the Car Parking WP proposed.
This is at odds with what Cllr Farrer asserted that he and Cllr Harty weren't consulted on the proposed car park charging. Cllr Harty was at the meeting. Indeed as District Councillors both have the right to access these agendas, reports and minutes. To say neither was consulted is rather lame.

Annex A to the report has the membership of the Working Party. From St Neots was Conservative Cllr Mandy Thomas. So did Mandy Thomas actually agree with this policy? I think we should be told!

The Liberal Democrat representative was Cllr Priestman. It was alleged that Cllr Priestman didn't turn up to either meeting of this Working Party. Whilst this allegation has been made, there is no way of checking this information as HDC has deemed the minutes of this meeting are secret.

Annex C is about the proposed charges for Riverside and Cambridge Street. These start at 20 pence per hour and free on Sunday. So all this fuss is being made for 20 pence an hour! Hardly seems worth it.

So when I hear the term "St Neots Conservative Councillors" are fighting hard to stop charging I find they aren't. I take it that Cllr Mandy Thomas agreed to the recommendations of the working party. On 10th November 2009 Cllr Harty agreed to the decision of the working party. All this came before the Council at its meeting on 2nd December 2009. So all St Neots District Councillors know about this. But the minutes show they did nothing.

I also point out I cannot find anything from the Liberal Democrats about this at District Council. Even with Cllr Thorpe, as Deputy Leader of the Liberal Democrat group, should be raising the issue of car parking charges at every opportunity!

The main problem with this sort of campaign is it is one sided. The call is to stop car parking charges. The income projection is within the HDC budget. None of the protagonists have identified what would have to be cut to replace the lost income.

Who are the "St Neots Conservative Councillors"?

In the campaigns over Car Parking and Love's Farm Community Centre, a new group has arisen. They are the St Neots Conservative Councillors. On the St Neots Community Forum I asked Cllr Ursell to inform me who are the members of this group. His reply was:

"Both Barry Chapman and I have used the term "St Neots Conservative Councillors". That can mean all or some."

This is a movable feast of a group. Who are the potential members?

County Councillors

Catherine Hutton (also a Parish Councillor on Eynesbury Hardwicke PC)

Ken Churchill (also District Councillor for Little Paxton) (District Cabinet member for Housing and Public Health)

County and District Councillor

Bob Farrer

County, District and Town Councillor

David Harty (County Cabinet member for Learning)

District Councillor

Andrew Gilbert (Conservative Parliamentary Candidate for Birkenhead)

Mandy Thomas

Andrew Hansard (District Cabinet member for Resources and Policy)

District and Town Councillor

Paul Ursell (also on Eynesbury Hardwicke Parish Council)

Town Councillors

Brenda Arnold

Jennifer Bird

Barry Chapman

There are 11 Conservative Councillors representing St Neots. Of these 1 is in charge of education at County. 2 are on the District Council Cabinet.

So who are the leaders of this group? Cllrs Chapman and Ursell keep talking on behalf about St Neots Conservative Councillors. Are either these leaders of this group? I doubt it.

I will say when the term "St Neots Conservative Councillors" is used without the qualification of who this includes or excludes I will take this to mean ALL of the above named Councillors.

They even have a website. But it hasn't been updated since 4th June 2009.

Letter in the News and Crier 25/2/10

My comments on Letters to the Editor pages in the ever excellent News and Crier.

Your views on St Neots Riverside Car Park - is a series of 6 letters on this issue. I'll comment on 4 of them here. 


Any charges are unacceptable - Steve van de Kerkhove has to start thinking ahead for when he gets into power.  This decision would be his. The problem is a car park cost money to run. 


Concession does not go far enough - Is Cllr Barry Chapman the leader of the St Neots Conservative Councillors? He is certainly writing as though he is. As the St Neots Conservatives are "leading" the campaign against their Conservative colleagues at HDC. As for his St Ivo comparison this falls down as they are not comparable. St Ivo is about 600 metres from the edge of St Ives Town Centre. The better comparison is either the Riverside CP and the Godmanchester CP both which charge at 20 pence per hour.
The trouble with Cllr Chapman's letter is he misses the point. Car Park charges are revenue. If he doesn't want these charges he either needs to find replacement revenue or make cuts.


Budget mess needs a proper strategy - David Gadenne writes a very good letter about the need for HDC to have a strategy.


HDC doesn't car about local business - Jon Mountfort gets towards the point but misses it. The old HDC building had to go because it was falling down. As for free parking in Fenland District Council this is true. But as with all free provision someone has to pay. In this case free car parks cost the Fenland Council Taxpayer £410,560 or £13.34 each. In Huntingdonshire car park charges contribute to the budget £526,000 or £8.98 per Council Taxpayer. 


As for his idea of making all the car parks free we will end up in the position of Fenland were their Car parks cost. Effectively this would mean a loss in income of £526k + additional costs of £410k makes a total of £936k. This would mean an extra £15.98 per council taxpayer.
--------
On a different note:


Where are all the politically correct jobs - Ric Euteneuer of Huntingdonshire Unison makes a good point about what are backroom jobs and frontline jobs. When talking about this our local politicians need to define what are frontline jobs.

More Community Centres!

So Cllrs Bob Farrer, David Harty and Barry Chapman have joined together to bring forward a plan to build a community centre in Love's Farm. Good for them if they are going to build and run a community centre themselves.

On the other hand if they are going down the route of building this themselves and then expecting the Town Council to own, run and pay for the facility then they are wrong.

There is a whole load more development due to the east of St Neots. So why is there a need for a community centre on this site? At this rate the new developments could have three separate community centres. More than the rest of St Neots put together!

There is roughly £350,000 and a piece of land for a community centre to be built on. £350,000 won't go that far. The Conservatives need more money to make a fist of this. But don't get too carried away with all this hype. Cllrs Chapman and Harty were on the Committee and/or Working Party building the Eatons Community Centre. At least they have the experience of how it can all go so wrong.

This isn't how Town Councils should work. The whole reason for having officers and professional support is they do the work. With Councillors seemingly going off at tangents I have gained the impression there is a power vacuum in the Town Council. This is not the staffs fault and must be laid at those Councillors currently in charge and mainly at those who were in charge (Cllr Giles and Thorpe).

Local Party websites - update

Another month of nothing happening in St Neots according to zero updates on the local party websites aimed at St Neots. There has been a bit of movement on the www.huntslibdems.org.uk website which has had 5 new articles placed on it from the Liberal Democrat candidate Martin Land.

The 5 posts contain articles on: The selection of Martin Land; Congratulating Julian Huppert; Taking the P out of Djanogly; Campaign to stop charging at Riverside CP and, finally, LD schools policy.
My view is whilst the Liberal Democrats have started to update their site it is still slow and scarce. It is better than all the other sites.

Cllr Barry Chapman is wrong over public conveniences

In a letter to the ever excellent News and Crier 7/1/10 Cllr Barry Chapman informs the residents the public conveniences are not the responsibility of the either the District or Town Councils. True. This is a power given by Parliament to both Councils to provide this service. The District Council owns the buildings and surrounding land these toilets are situated on. Both Tebbutts Road and Riverside Park Toilets are provided by HDC. It is HDC that is closing the service. It is essentially a Conservative Stealth Tax on St Neots.

What about South Street Toilets? If you read up on HDC minutes you'll find they want to demolish this building. More here. HDC has been talking about selling South Street Toilets for the last few years.

The basic problem is Cllr Barry Chapman wants to up the St Neots Council Tax. This will help out his Conservative colleagues on HDC out. The £100,000 windfall turns out to be £85,000. It is untrue to say much of this money will  be spent on consultants and solicitors. It will be spent on sorting out the mess of the budget that the Giles and Thorpe regime left this Liberal Democrat Town Council run in.

Local Party Political Websites Update!

Well not so much an update. Rather just saying NOTHING has changed since I last reported on these websites. I have found one more website to be added to the list which is the UKIP site.