howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#1
i would assume that most posters have read this, but for those that didn't, it was a scathing attack on our councillors at whitfield last week.
the attack came from graham tutthill, who is renowned locally for being very restrained in his comments.
he referred to cheap point scoring,inane giggling and other negative stuff.
the meeting concerned went on for 4 hours.
i have to say that i have been to 2 district council and 2 town council meetings, and his comments fitted in with my experiences.
it would be interesting to hear from our elected people on this, i doubt that this will happen though.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#2
it would appear that i have developed a stutter.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#3
Howard Ive fixed your 'stutter' ...all's well. Yes as you say Graham Tutthill is a restrained sort of guy and very experienced and I cannot see him elaborating where there is no need for it. The councillors therefore didnt come out of it in too bright a light.
"Cut the Claptrap and Behave" says Graham to the councillors
"if you want the public to become more involved"
its on page 18 of this weeks Mercury
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#4
The trouble is that it is difficult not to laugh at some of the inane comments that come from across the floor - but then I would say that wouldn't I ??
Roger
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#5
roger
i am sure it is not a one party thing, we are at a crossroads, as a town.
party politics is not important now, everyone should be working together for the common good.
sorry to be repetitive, but for the first time in 50 years things are being built rather than being knocked down or left derelict.
you can be sure that the arch, archy, arkye0, people who dig things up, will find something of great historical import before the building starts.
this will bring the tv people to the town, which will generate interest, and lure people to visit.
looking back at the article from graham, i wish he had named names.
#6
I recall a local meeting quite a while ago, plenty of allegedly important people there, addressing a genuinely important issue around the safety of our young people as well as the challenges some of them pose in Dover. It was a shambles, local representatives were self important and discourteous, residents were disrespected and nothing was achieved except that I saw little purpose in attempting to engage with these people. I don't suppose I was the only one........
Guest 648- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 258
#7
Many years ago The Mercury ran a weekly colume reporting on DDC meetings.The author would try and disguise which councillor was being referred to however some of the comments were very personal and sailed too close to the wind.The Chief Excutive had to step in and the colume disappeared.
Last weeks meeting was dreadful all parties were to blame I sometimes wonder what is being achieved.I had to answer two questions and i hope I answered in a dignified manner.
I never attack the person only the policy.
I can be very vocal when the need arises but on the whole I treat the opposition with respect you never know when the positions will be reversed.I have been in opposition and in the ruling group.The trouble with the newer members that is something they overlook.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#8
thanks for that susan, that was the answer i was looking for.
i hope that others have the same view, personalities should not become part of debate.
anyway getting back to ken for a minute!!
Guest 654- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 169
#9
I don't read the local papers anymore, so i get the idea from the postings, yes being on the inside for 25 years i been both in the Cabiney system, outside it, in the administration and in opposition, and see what went on.
In all honesty the full council which is often quoted, is, like the prime ministers question time the worst advert for politics, and its good that public don't attend, cos if they did even more would be switched off.
It Isn.t a true reflection of politicians either.
Many local politicians work closely in different committee's and in the wider communities, let me give yo a few examples;
CHANNEL TUNNEL RAIL LINK
Gwyn prosser as the Labour MP lobbied for the channel tunnel rail to come to Dover as did local labour/tory local politicians, and by working together, what looked at times like a lost cause, these politicians worked together and achieved.
LOCAL TRANSPORT
For years as chair of public transport c/ttee(unfortunatly before the tories abolished it cos they couldn't get a majority on it)
this committee worked together and got a lot o good results.
major changes to the buses, the present bus service has improved but the local Labour/tories cllrs worked together and on this c/ttee you often if you sat in as a member of public not knowing the cllrs parties, would think it was all one political party, as it was rare for disagreement as all were working for the better good for local people.
I worked closely with our sue, and many times Roger on this c/ttee for the better good of Dover/District residents.
ASYLUM
This was an issue not wanted to be touched, but under Jim Hood(labour chair at the time)he took it on and a very good meeting took place, and leading people called in and questioned and a report provided from it.
So where does it go wrong?
Well heres a few things tha go wrong and in my humble view need improving;
1; Needs to be a more gron up modern way of presenting prime ministers question time, it is not a good advert
for politics, and im not saying everyone should agree, but seeing hundreds of elected MP's acting like they were
in the playground doesn't do much to get people involved
2; Although on a national scale we don't have much control over it, any party with a big majority doesn't work
Maggie had it, and she became a control freak and stopped listening to anyone around her
Blair in the end went the same way.
a hung parlianment is probably the best for people, or a lot closer in power)(say 1 or 2 majority)
3; on the local scene whilst on the council and the debate on the new cabinet system being introduced
Labour at the time was in control of the council, and internally I warned the then leader and others that whilst
it probably suits at the time, in time(like we see today)labour could lose that majority and labour will rue the
decision to bring in such a system.
It isn't good for democracy, 10 people or so make the decisions, the 35 are realy out in the cold.
Yes theres a scrutiny committee but it has only ever been played lip service to by who ever was in control.
a county level we see 2 or 3 people running KCC and making decisions whilst 80 odd KCC members are excluded
because thats how the cabinet system works,
But the cabinet system or other such like systems were in proposed, not modernisation of the c/ttee structure
whilst the c/ttee structure was outdated, the cabinet system is not good for democracy
On an even more local level Roger and I and other politicians work together in Priory, we wont always agree, but in the main most subjects get 100% cross party support.
and we see this happening every day.
So its not all doom and gloom.
If we move away from boring people(hope i havn't) and start looking at how people can work together as politicians, as non political people, and local residents, much can be achieved.
Don't judge politicians on either prime ministers question time
or District full council meetings
it isn't always a full picture.
I'm always looking for the brighter future and live for that vision.
Guest 648- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 258
#10
Well said Keith.My point is whoever is in opposition Full Council is the only time they can really challenge.Last Full Council was the budget meeting.Any opposition member is there to challenge its when you get concensus that one achieves.I think any opposition has the right to challenge.Labour has 15 members Liberal 2 and Tories 28.Of course the opposition get frustrated.I remeber when the Tories had 13 a long time ago.
Debate should be constructive and no one has the right to say because a member is of an opposite political belief they are naturally stupid or wrong.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#11
It seems that there has been a fall in standards since the Cabinet system was introduced. Not surprising is, as Sue says, it is the only chance the Opposition has to make an impression.
That is not to say that the old system was perfect, far from it and every now and again meetings then did get bogged down in pointless to and fro. At least in the old system there were opportunities for all Councillors to get more involved in the debate and making of decisions.
I remember the Mercury column Sue mentioned - it was at times amusing but yes it went too far and became a disgrace to local journalism. I did not know that the Chief Exec stepped in, all I noticed at the time was that it suddenly ended after one particularly nasty piece. I wonder exactly what JM did to intervene?
Guest 660- Registered: 14 Mar 2008
- Posts: 3,205
#12
Ok Howard the stutter is completely over,what good responses from Sue and Keef it is surprising Roger is still trying to score political points on a good thread.
I agree with what Barry Keith and Sue have said and they have explained the situation,but there are also some good debates and some good questions and motions,so good the Tories have even taken some of them on board,some of the questions at the last meeting that i wa behind were the Dog Fouling,the Olympic Flame,and the question of the Carnival,most of these were to clarify the situation,everyone agreed that at the last Full Council there were one or two long replies and that was something that people on both sides agreed on,2 Tories told me that and one Labour (lost that one too),Sue is
right it is the only chance that we get to ask "public" questions and there are people who ask questions to either boost up one of the political friends or to promote good work.
I always like to bring a smile into the meeting,for instance I wanted the Dog mess one passed as a 'motion' not a question,but i had to get someone else to ask my Questions because I had to go to work and do my night shift.
In fact I was praising Sue for the work the Council had done on the Olympic flame something i think has not made the press of the Councils attempts to obtain the flame thru Dover,but i bet if i got up and shouted at Sue(which i wouldn't dare,as she would clip me round the ear,and i like to think we are friends)but and I am not having a go at the press but it is a good news story,and that don't sell papers.
If you knew what I know,we would both be in trouble!
Guest 648- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 258
#13
See you tomorrow John and not for a clip round the ear.
Guest 660- Registered: 14 Mar 2008
- Posts: 3,205
#14
If you knew what I know,we would both be in trouble!
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#15
i agree john, that there have been some good comments on this thread.
however, the joke that you have made was not aimed at anyone, it was just a joke.
graham was referring to point scoring and inane giggling.
do those 2 exist normally?
did they happen durig the meeting that graham referred to?
Guest 660- Registered: 14 Mar 2008
- Posts: 3,205
#16
There is always some banter Howard,and yes perhaps there is point scoring on both sides sometimes but on most things there is either agreement or disagreement,If we disagree like on the Parking we will push a point over several meetings asking the Portfolio holder if has considered this or that,and ask for a review on how it effects local businesses,what was intresting was that many of the opposion had to leave the chamber because they were involved in local buisnesses,giggling can happen,usually when something is co**ed,but at the previous Council meeting the Chairman praised both sides for their conduct at the meeting,but the only member of the press who was reading the S*n throughout left before we got to the questions and went home.......so that wasn't reported.
If you knew what I know,we would both be in trouble!
Guest 659- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 331
#17
The Olympic torch possibly coming through Dover was reported in all three local papers. If there is good news it does get reported, people don't want doom and gloom all through the paper so there needs to be optimism too, after all Dover isn't just doom and gloom without fun or good things happening and I think we need to show that too.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#18
have you thought this through kathy?
the flame has to go through tibet on it's way to beijing.
that would get much more media attention.
If you knew what I know,we would both be in trouble!