Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
Just two comments to make on this -
1 - "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.!!" - so if you think only comments from people who attended the meeting are valid then why post on here?
2 - Agreeing with Jan, if he spoke in the same rambling and disjointed way that he writes it was a good bit of chairing to ask him to get on with it and ask the question.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
RAY/SUE
I underrstand where your coming from although from the postings so far Ihave seen so far I think this to be a slippery slope if we allow it to go on on.
Chris precious has grasped clearly the content, now whilst we may feel uncomfatable with the subject being discussed, thats no reason to try to stop the question and attempt to make it more difficult for anyone putting a question in the future.
We should also bear in mind not every member of the public is up to speed with the procedures of the council, and surely this should be about members of the public being encouraged to participate in the 3 minute question time?
My understanding was that it was the only question being asked on the night so it wasnt as though there was a large time taken up by the question time part of the evening.
Of course here we again being told OFFICERS SAID!!! always a concern!!!! .
I just hope this is a tip of the ice berg and we are not to see even more obstacles being put in place to make it harder for members of the public to fit an officers agenda.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
I too was only commenting based on the question that Reg was bringing over at the meeting, as presented on the thread, and from a neutrtal point of view.
My point of view is that the complex elements that Reg is bringing over require quite some time to be understood, and would have to be presented on paper so that the Council members could read through them carefully and several times. Obviously 3 minutes are not enough, which justifies Mrs. Nicholas' decision.
Reg has brought up the subject of a unitary various times, including a letter in a local newspaper, and rightly deserves an answer to his proposals from the competent authorities.
I'd suggest Reg presents his proposals in script to the Council.
Another alternative would be to formulate the question as follows: "would it be better to have an East Kent unitary council service?", without necessarily attempting to explain in 3 minutes what a unitary is, as the destinataries of the question most probably already know.
At this point, however, if the answer is no, then it is no. It's pointless trying to make a publicity case out of it.
Reg's proposals imply the axing of many Council administrative posts, probably at Distirict and County level, which brings the whole topic into a constitutional dimension, and quite clearly Reg needs to be patient and realise that his views cannot be fully grasped in three minutes.
The reference to the BBC, health trusts, the Police and businesses in Reg's question further complicates the matter, and in my view bears no correlation to how Councils are run, and again justifies the chairman's decision, as the question, with all possible preambles, backgrounds and supplementaries, goes beyond the meeting's legal capacity.
I reckon Reg should call it a day with his complaint, and possibly write an e-book on the topic of an East Kent unitary.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Alexander;
whilst i have some sympathy with your last post, this is wider than just reg making a question to full council, and more about the participation of the general public in council meetings which hopefully we all wish to encourage.
With regard to the complex question, all these details are submitted 7 days before the council meeting to give that time for answers to be found, and if all else fails the council could just reply we will look into this or similar such words.
It would probably have taken up far less time to hear the 3 minutes question, then a short answer prob 3 minutes a supplementary, then move on
I come down on chris precious view on this one, i'm for encouraging people to take part, even if it be subjects we may not like or agree with
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
As you know Keith, the question asked by the member of public (in this case Reg.) is printed in the agenda and that is supposed to be the question asked on the night.
You know that and Reg. knows that. Irrespective of the subject matter, it is not in order for a preamble or different question to be put.
The supplementrary question is to be a follow-on question, not a statement. The same format for a member of the public as it is for a Councillor.
There's no death of democracy, just follow the rules and it works O.K.
Roger
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,707
I would make the following observations to the question that was somewhere in Reg's post
1. I suspect you know the answer to the question of rolling unitisation the same as I do
2. Turkeys are never likely to vote for Xmas
3. No-one, particularly public officials, like having their noses rubbed in it
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Missing the point, people. It is the skill of the council reps to get the best out of their audience, and as Chris P rightly says, if a member of the public has asked to speak s/he should damn well be heard. It may be irritating, it may be transparently manipulative, but my experience (vicariously) has been that council reps are process driven and miss the point of the exercise, which should be to hear what their voters are saying, and importantly, respond.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
BERN;
Like chris p
im 100% agreement with you
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Reg, I have read your posts several times and I cannot find a question anywhere. What exactly was the question you were not allowed to ask?
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
A good point well made........
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Apologies to Jan..........Should have read the two close friends.
The email sent out some how repeated some paragraphs ( I am new to computers as PaulB will confirm,apologies again )
The correct version is worth a read as it could, if adopted in the future reduce everyones Council tax or increase our services or both.
£30 million could be made available...........But remember this is,at present ,about freedom of speech at Dover District Council.
Members/Cllrs should be given advice by the officers not led by officers.Unfortunately the Chairman is being led by the Democratic services Manager.Bad news.!!!Officers have to much control in all levels of Government.``Pease Sir``is not fiction.
The Question not permitted by the Chairman.( It takes 2 minutes 42 seconds to present )
```The cost and benefits of cutting excessive,unnecessary Bureaucracy.
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...................
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.........................
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 bean counter team would 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?
Change is never welcomed........Change is part of life...........Change will happen............Change is progress.```
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
Peter,
"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?"
That seems to me to be a simple and relevant question not requiring any preamble in order to be understood and answered.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
Roger, I have to disagree with you. Members do not come armed with reams of notes from the officers and the advantages of a history of supporting paperwork, discussions etc.. They also do not have the advantage that councillors have of asking more questions through the chairman and of the officers. When a member of the public speaks they only have those three minutes to explain the question that, as you say, the councillors have printed on their agenda's.
Any councillor that says they have never ignored an item while reading ahead on the agenda to the items that interest is deluding themselves. We have all done it. This is not so bad when it is a council item that has been around the houses but is inexcusable when a member of the public has taken the trouble to present a case.
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
I couldn't agree more, Chris.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
If Reg's question was part of the agenda, then he was supposed to ask his question in order to receive a reply.
Presumably the people to whom he addressed his question had consulted the agenda and given thought to all Reg's background presentation.
It seems that Reg wants the Council to accept his idea by presenting it time and again, but as this seems to be the case, then his case against the chairman loses any consideration.
In fact, Reg has been given the possibility to express his idea by presenting it, and it seems to have been part of the agenda. He was supposed to ask the known question and receive a reply.
Democracy has been respected.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i see references here about reg being a member of the public, maybe at present this is true.
as a local political legend he would know how to couch a question to get utmost effect, the rambling monologue that was posted here was guaranteed to provoke irritation among the council members.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
#36 Point is the Cllrs were not allowed to hear my so called boring monologue nor was it in their agenda.Unless they click into Dover Forum they are unaware of the case I wished to put to them.A member of the public has been denied the right to speak to his Council.Surely Freedom of speech must be respected?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#36 rambling monologue if you don't mind.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Reg, if I want to ask questions of councillors I do it face to face or send them emails. Unless it's something specifically relating to an agenda item I wouldn't waste everyone's time by speaking at a council meeting, unless I was just grandstanding of course.....
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
