Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
#1
Public question time was ravaged by Chairman Nicholas.
Not many public venture to mask questions of our Council and tonights meeting confirms why !!!!!!
The public are allowed only 3 minutes to put their question and background to their question.
Chairman interrupted the public question after two paragraphs (20 seconds ) and insisted the question be put.
The Public were not allowed the permitted 3 minutes.
Another change in proceedings being the Chairman calling a 10 minute adjournment ( Buffet Bar ? ) during which time a dozen Cllrs voiced their disgust with the public question time being denied.
Serious implications for Cllr Nicholas as it is observed that people of a certain personality have a change happen to them when the Gold Chain is put over their head !!!!!
Cllr Nicholas Hat collection will no longer fit.
In the interest of Public Question time returning to normal this matter will be taken further.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
#2
FYI.
Question not permitted.
The cost and benefits of cutting excessive,unnecessary Bureaucracy.
The cost of redundancies of management teams....is a one off payment cost.....gone forever......
The benefits......No more the burden of the excessive salary bill year after year...................
Every where organisations,councils..even those without the benefit of merging with other councils..busnesses,police,health trusts.BBC are merging,intergrating.
There is a correlation between the BBC and DDC and East Kent.
Chris Pattern recently became Chairman of the BBC Realisim demanded that two thirds of the management were not required bringing an end to waste,inefficencies,self indulgences
Managers are the lest productive part of any organisation.............they sit between the cutting edge of production......and the bean counters
Their generous terms of contract means less can be made available to provide the communities with required services.
Not all data was available under the Freedom of information request so the following figures are light.........................DDC FOI service is excellent.
The cost of running the administration of the four district councils of East Kent........DDC £14 million............Thanet £18 million.............Canterbury £19 million...............Shepway £11 million.
The management element being approx fifty percent of this expenditure .......................£30 million......Money which can be ploughed back into Community services or lower Council Tax or both.
An East Kent council with one management team,keeping the productive staff in each four areas with a small team of bean counters would provide enormous economies of scale.
The cost and benefits of cutting excessive,unecessary Buearacracy.
The cost of redundancies of management teams....is a one off payment cost.....gone forever......inperpertuity
The benefits......No more the burden of the excessive salary bill year after year...................inperpertuity
Every where organisations,councils..even those without the benefit of merging with other councils..busnesses,police,haelth trusts.BBC etc are merging,intergrating.
There is a correlation between the BBC and DDC and East Kent.
Chris Pattern recently became Chairman of the BBC realisim demanded that two thirds of the management were not required bringing an end to waste,inefficencies,self indulgences etc
Managers are the lest productive part of any organisation...they sit between the cutting edge of production...and the bean counters.
Their generous terms of contract means less can be made available to provide the communies with services.
Not all data was available under the Freedom of information request so the following figures are light.DDC foi service is excellent.
The cost of running the administration of the four district councils of East Kent........DDC £14 million....Thanet £18 million....Canterbury £19 million.......Shepway £11 million.
The management element being approx fifty percent.
An East Kent council with one management team,keeping the productive staff in each four areas with a small bean counter would provide enormous economies of scale.
The opportunity is available to make a marked difference to local Government finances
We do need to continue with the shared services which you have successfully installed....Congratulations it must have been a frustrating journey.....but we must progress to the Full Monty.
Q...What policies are planned during this term of office of this administration to reduce Council Tax whilst maintaining/improving community services to the residents of Dover District?
Possible Supplementries.
It would be easy tocarry on as we are but all other councils are making cuts that are hurting.
The option of the four councils merging has an initial outlay but year on year we have massive savings which can benefit the Public/Council tax payers
This administration can begin in earnest to that end.The four councils should be encouraged to start proceedings with a Can do attitude .....It is not going to be easy but the Tax Payers/communities deserve the effort to be made.
Change is never welcomed........Change is part of life...........Change will happen............Change is progress.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#3
If reg speaks the truth then sues view on democracy and freedom of speech is seriously flawed.
If reg is correct all sue needed to do was to hear out the 3 minutes, give an answer and move on.
There are some serious implications in this i hope that sue as an active forum can clarify/explain her actions or give an account of events
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
#4
I can assure you I sort legal advice .Mr Hansell was afforded three minutes to sort out a question.A full statement was being made .Members had a diferrent worded question in their Coucil Agenda which I asked Mr Hansell to put before the Council.
Keith when I took up office I stated after two hours I would adjourn the meeting which i did last night .The adjournment took place one item before questions from members.
The agenda was long and important issuies were to follow .It allows members time for a comfort break,cigarrete ,to stretch their legs or have a coffee.
After two hours you can see that members are finding it difficult to consentrate .It should stop members going in and out of the Council Chamber at will therefore missing important debate .
Forum Members The Chairman is surrounded by Legal Officers and the Chief Excutive sits next to me .
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#5
I for one have absolutely no doubt at all that you would follow the Standing Orders correctly Sue and act properly.
You are also right that 2 hours is long enough for a meeting. Good decisions are not made if they go on longer. If it cannot be avoided then a decent break is essential.
Keep up the good work Sue.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#6
so it was reg that was cut short in his prime.
i agree about the length of meetings, so many are interminable for no particular reason.
decisions can get reached just as a way of going home at a reasonable time.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
#7
All that question in 3 minutes ??!!
Been nice knowing you :)
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#8
I lost interest half way through.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#9
i can explain here.
a) reg has typed most of what he said twice.
b) reg speaks a lot faster then he types, so 3 minutes would have been ample.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#10
one idea to sort this out is to split it in to 1 hour sesions with a 30 minute q&a sessionin the middle or at the end.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#11
I am fully confident that Sue would have acted correctly, legally and professionally as Chairman of the Council.
The question from the public has to be a direct question, not a long rambling statement; as I wasn't at the Council meeting, I can't say which it was.
Roger
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#12
I think Reg's question would have been legitimate, providing Sue had put the clock back half an hour, or paid overtime to all the members sitting in council.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#13
On average you can read out one A4 page double spaced in one minute so ample time to get through those questions plus some background and the 'direct question' preferred by DDC officers.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
#14
I understand the need for due process etc etc etc. but officials so often fail to understand how that presents itself to the public. I know of meetings with council officials that have ridden roughshod over people with genuine grievances and legitimate fears because the person concerned did not say it in the approved format. It is an ideal way to alienate people and foster bad relationships. This has to be a factor in considering public meetings. However, I am not commenting on this incident as I do not feel qualified to do so.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#15
Reg has had a bit of trouble posting again ... so I am doing the necessary for him until its sorted.
****************************************************************
Democracy postponed at ddc tonight.
``Howard......Two minutes Forty two seconds.
Cllr Nicholas is a very novice Chairman.
No legal department officer was in attendance
My question was a subject DDC wish would go away,it will not.
My 20 seconds I was permitted to speak indicated this!!!
Chairman was being advised by the Manager of Democratic Services?? with whom I,among many ,have a troubled history.
The postings so far on this subject have been from close friends of the Chairman and as usual comment without the facts as they did not the attend the meeting.!!
In the interest of free speech at DDC Public question time this matter is being dealt with elsewhere.``
ends,
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
#16
Twenty four years a Councillor ,Three years Chairman of Scrutiny,Planning committe Chairman,and Cabinet member six years .I was being advised by the Director of Governance who deals with council proceedure .Chief Excutive and as stated by the Demorcratic Manager .
Councillors know the rules .Question has to be put forward as question not a preamble .
Public speaking at Full councilis different to speaking at planning when you do make statements .
It was not the three minutes which was being questioned the fact that there was too much preanble .
We did sit and wait for the member of public to get a question together .
Time ran out .
A former councillor who know the rules .Not a novice .I do know the difference
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#17
Before I was a Councillor, I asked a question as a member of the public. I'd never done it before and it was on council-housing.
A simple question, then an answer, then a supplementary; no long preamble eventualy leading to a question and sometimes no question at all.
It can be done sensibly, even by a novice and Reg is not a novice.
Roger
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#18
Surely the point of allocating three minutes is to allow the speaker to provide some background points to the question and explain the reason for it. I realise it does take a bit more attention than simply reading the question on the agenda then glancing ahead until the speaker has finished. This is all too easily done when there is a long agenda and the councillors are waiting for the item they are more specifically interested in but when a member of the public has asked to speak they deserve the attention of the council and should be listened to. Whatever officers think, the agenda is only a point of reference while it is the speakers that are important.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
#19
Spot on Chris.
#16 Novis?......my attempt to be tackful........Not up to speed.......Perhaps!
Director of Governance when dealing with anything legal takes a solicitor with him.Chief executive I did not see say a word.Manager of Democratic services?? see#15
#17 Simple questions are simple.My question was not simple.My supplementary was not to be simple.
My question will be heard.Freedom of speech for the public must prevail at Dover District Council.
This matter will not go away.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#20
"The postings so far on this subject have been from close friends of the Chairman......"
I am not a close friend and have only met the lady very briefly once just to say hello when she came in the shop, so I resent the above remark.
I have tried to read post#2 every time I read this thread and have not managed it once because it rambles on too much and I loose interest.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------