howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
15 January 2010
23:0637811i have heard of that john, seems a reasonable option, getting back to the papers from ddc to the express, why would ddc release internal paperwork to a local paper.
i hasten to add that is no reflection on the noble journalists that grace our local organs.
Guest 660- Registered: 14 Mar 2008
- Posts: 3,205
15 January 2010
23:0837815The newspapers get all Council papers as far as I am aware,they always get Full Council and cabinet papers
If you knew what I know,we would both be in trouble!
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
15 January 2010
23:1337818what do you mean by papers john????
agendas?
minutes?
miscellaneous?
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
16 January 2010
08:5637839They are all sent to the local media, agenda's minutes, only the confidential stuff isn't
clearly this never reached the cabinet Mr Collor decided for whatever reason to close them so early, the officers are clearly saying OUR NIGEL made this decision.
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
16 January 2010
10:2737847Here is another little gem to put in the pot .Im sure this will be stated at the Scrutiny Committee.Officers have operational powers .They have set budgets approved by Cabinet and Council .Through out the year they may have to re adjust these to operate efficiently .
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
16 January 2010
10:5937854keith
do you think that you could manage a post without having nigels name in it?
with respect it is becoming a bit obsessive.
Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
16 January 2010
11:1437857Like this post.
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
Guest 693- Registered: 12 Nov 2009
- Posts: 1,266
16 January 2010
11:2437859Howard
You make a fair point, Cllr Collor is becoming obsessively blamed for this, but I think he doesn't help himself by keeping quiet over the matter. That may be party orders, though.......were it not for Sue Nicholas trying to be transparently open over the whole thing, the toilets issue would seem to be the Tories closing ranks in order to protect one of their own, even though he may actually be at fault.
I don't share Bern's dislike of those single booth toilets, they look quite presentable to me, and similar facilities are to be seen all over Europe. I dislike the price, though - £1.00 for a pee seems excessive, even in rip-off Britain.
The argument over this seems set to run and run, and still no sign on the horizon of any decency at Whitfield. Why doesn't someone up there just say 'Okay, we made an error of judgement here - let's get the toilets reopened pending resolution of the situation with the Town Council?' Public pressure seems to dictate that these facilities are hugely important to the Townspeople, and it wouldn't take one working day to install turnstiles that operate by putting in a 20p coin; it seems common sense to make a start by getting the toilets open, even a gesture of goodwill, whilst the wrangling of ownership unfolds, and I implore DDC to forget political posturing and realise the social importance of keeping public toilets open.
As an aside, perhaps we could make new signage? This one in Copenhagen would seem to fit the bill:
True friends stab you in the front.
16 January 2010
11:3337861Bernie
no one could be more frustrated by the rules and regulations we must now abide by. I run a business and make decisions like this daily involving millions on much less information. Unfortunately the law is made by government ( not political) not by us . Read Deals audit report on their website to see how Government imposes rules on us. We must by law work this way. drives me mad but we can't take short cuts. i .personally would love to solve all these items immediately. Its certainly screwing up my business schedule for me to spend so much time on this but it must be done.
Sue
Please dont keep stating facts as such which are wrong! it is messing the true debate. In your last post there are 4 errors in the first 4 paragraphs. I am happy to answer any reasonable question on wednesday but i am not going to enter debate on some of these items at present. I regret the huge amount of speculation and misinformation abounds but I am part of a team and do work within the rules of that team. We shall see after Wednesday what more needs to be said or if we have written queries then we must deal with them individually - how much time that will take I can't say.
D
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
16 January 2010
11:5937868You can lead a horse to the water but you cant make it drink .
Councillors are servants of the public .I dont have to work but i can tell you my family life and housework suffers .
There have been very important issuies discussed on this forum of recent events .
We should all be working to get a resolution .
Over the weekend I intend to read the Constitution of the Council.Its too complicated to remember every word .
It matters not who is to blame .No wonder there are wars when two councils cannot sit down and talk .
God help us all
16 January 2010
12:1137870Sue
please stop this - I have said we ARE talking. You are just stirring up issues and it doesnt help anybody. Go get your facts and info from DDC for whom you are a representative. I am working very hard to get a resolution and resent your implications.
D
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
16 January 2010
12:3837873You are correct Im a district councillor and therefore shall not attend the meeting of DTC .There is no need to take it personally David .I have known you a long time and i can assure you I have requested information from DDC .I have alsio read the DTC minutes as a member of the public .Im not privy to any conversations that may have been said at constructed meetings or social gatherings .I deal only with written facts .
Hearsay is not to be relied on .
When councillors serve on more than one council there will always be divided loyalities the reason I ceased to be a parish councilor after ten years .
I have never blamed DTC or DDC only stated the facts
Im sure you are working on this issuie and I say roll on Wednesday either way someone will pay for the cleaning of toilets .
Guest 644- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 1,214
16 January 2010
12:4637876Does it really matter now who signed what and when? What's done is done.
Having read most of this thread, it is sad to see that certain posters are desperately trying to capitalise on the issue for political purposes. I am therefore worried that the DTC meeting will be hi-jacked by those seeking to turn it into a political-point scoring match in a similar manner. I have absolutely no doubt that DTC are trying to negotiate and resolve this and that DDC would not have closed the toilets unless they absolutely had no choice due to the dire financial situation they have been left with. The point is, the why's and wherefore's of DDC's actions are in the past and should not form the core of the public meeting.
Please just don't let the political mouths at the meeting ruin any forward progression - hopefully constructive suggestions will emerge to solve the problem and ultimately have the toilets re-opened if finances can be found from somewhere.
16 January 2010
12:5137877thank you Phil. I agree. and if I can help keep them open and open the again i will - dont care about the politcs. But it will be a decision of the people.
D
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
16 January 2010
13:1337885Just to show I want to get to the truth and this is not about 1 person It would be nice to know a few things to see how the land lies in reality.
1; We have to now accept that NIGEL has made the decision and is not going to
defend that decision so move on we must.
2; This issue realy is not just about the decision to close the toilets, but its about
decision making in general at DDC.
3; I have on another thread thrown out a challenge to the leader of the council
(to take the heat off of nigel) and will support the leader in this aim.
4; The labour group on DTC increased the precept 2 years ago by 27% and this
year had a nil per cent increase, 2 years ago this increase was opposed
by David.
5; The District from what has been said so far are not going to budge to
re open the toilets, and im sure will try to blame DTC
6; -WE should all be pleased that the 2 councils continue to meet, and I hope
they get a result.
7; I do worry that at the moment the only way out is for DTC to increase its
precept, but i understand they have already set it for this year, and DTC
cant pay for all items suggested by D Hannant, although i do understand
where hes coming from.
8; Im no financial whiz kid but would like to know costings of many of the
projects D Hannant referred to.
No matter how you look at it, this was badly handled, and people are now trying
to pick up the pieces of others mistakes.
This did take me by surprize as (wont mention the name)always said how open and transparent he wanted to be
I do wish DTC good luck in any talks
ps; it would be useful to have costings for Wed of projects to get a feel for things
16 January 2010
14:4237911Keith
I regret that you are again politicing this by saying who voted for what increase in the precept at DTC. I am certainly not going to comment on history. I stand on my record and am very willing to defend past decisions but that can be left to next year when some people will be seeking re-election ( not me!). Once a vote is taken it is a Corporate Decision not a party thing. Anyway it was 29%!
As to the rest of your queries they are very valid so by wednesday DTC will give everyone there the latest info they have which is daily being updated - that is why its 20th jan not 20th december!! - You will of course understand that we are talking about decisions on all the devolution matters that involve a committment by DTC of many millions of pounds and that is why it isnt being taken lightly - or over a cup of tea! If and when DTC take on further functions they wont likely go back again and thus have to be considered as being a long term project and amortised as such.
D
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
16 January 2010
20:0237948It gets a bit tiresome when you keep having to say the same thing over and over again.
Nigel DID NOT make the decision to close the toilets on his own; it was a Cabinet/Executive decision, but because he is Portfolio Holder for Access and PROPERTY Management, it was his name that went forward a being responsible.
I can't/won't answer for Nigel as to why he's not posted on here and won't speculate either.
As far as I'm aware, there's no Tory conspiracy - if there is, I'm not included in it.
I'm not making comments to defend or accuse; I'm being honest. I don't know about (DDC) paperwork regarding toilet closures.
I also understand that contracts given out by DDC to companies like English Lansdscapes for the parks and gardens, SITA for waste and Connaught for toilet cleaning etc. are usually for 3 years or more, they don't just go from April to the following March.
As with any business, you make a budget for the ensuing year, but again as with any business, you see things are changing for the worse - less money coming in from various sources, you have to make changes; it would be wrong if you knew things were going down the tubes, but there were several months to go before the next round of budgeting and you did nothing about it.
Roger
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
16 January 2010
20:1237951ROGER
Sue who is a member of your party has clearly said this has not gone to cabinet, and was made by Nigel alone.
So i presume she has the correct information?
Roger I feel whilst talks are ongoing the toilets could have remained open.
but lets see how we can improve democracy
at the moment its seriously lacking
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
17 January 2010
07:3537987I believe Sue said there weren't any cabinet papers about it, but Executive/Cabinet decisions can/are still made.
If it transpires that I'm wrong, it is not a case of lying, but of being mistaken - different things.
Roger
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
17 January 2010
09:4937999ROGER
SUE is saying your are MISTAKEN
