Are we heading towards a
Police and ‘Criminals’ Commissioner

a five minute read that is well worth the time:

On July 18^th 2019 voters across Tyne and Wear and Northumberland, will go to the polls to elect a replacement for the Northumbria Police and Crime Commissioner Vera Baird who has taken a post to become the nations Victims Commissioner. The candidates are an interesting bunch, they are
Georgina Hill                        Independent
Kim McGuinness                 Labour Party

Robbie Moore                       Conservative Party
Jonathon Wallace               Liberal Democrats

Robbie Moore the Conservative candidate was publically shown up on social media and was reported to the Councils Standards Board when he voted to remove Northumberland County Council’s planning core strategy from inspection by Government at that time he was employed by an Estate Agent from Alnwick, George F White, who published this statement on his web site immediately after the vote

Interesting in the fact that two of them don’t have clean hands when it comes to politics in the Northumbria Police Area.

Robbie Moore the Conservative candidate was publically shown up on social media and was reported to the Councils Standards Board when he voted to remove Northumberland County Council’s planning core strategy from inspection by Government at that time he was employed by an Estate Agent from Alnwick, George F White, who published this statement on his web site immediately after the vote

  As a highly regarded associate of George F. White it seems inconceivable that Councillor Moore was not aware that his decision to vote on the removal of the core strategy would be likely to benefit the company and as such weaken the decision-making process of the council. The final sentence of Mr Moore’s own pen pic on the George F. White website is telling “Robert understands the need to take advantage of opportunities when they present themselves.”

He should have declared an interest and left the meeting, Should he represent you as your PCC?

The ‘Independent’ candidate Georgina Hill is even more interesting. She was a Tory who was employed by Anne-Marie Trevelyan MP.

She had to leave that post after being found guilty of being a bully by the Councils Standards Board.

Her bullying qualities have been used by the Tories since May 2017, they placed her into the position of Chair of Audit, normally a position of trust, where she has ran a series of attacks against the Councils Company ARCH, made statements regarding criminal activities at that company which Northumbria Police dispelled and found no criminality at all.

She outrageously openly questioned the Chief Constable at a videoed Council meeting about collusion between Council members and the outgoing PCC that she suggested could have coloured the outcome of the investigation. The Chief Constable calmly disillusioned her.

The outcome of her standards board is a public document and has been reproduced below:
Northumberland County Council

Standards Committee

Decision Notice

Dated: 21^st August 2015


Member Complaint Reference:       NCC 05/14, NCC 06/14, NCC 07/14

Subject Member:                              Cllr G Hill of Berwick upon Tweed Town Council

Subject Member’s                             Mr D Bawn, Partner, Gibson & Co. Solicitors
Representative:

Complainants:                                   Mr G Jones
Ms S Finch

Chairman of Standards                    Mr J Jackson, Independent Chairman
Committee:

Members of Committee in               Cllr D Parker (Parish Council representative), Cllr A
attendance:                                        Tebbutt, Cllr C Homer, Cllr E Armstrong, Cllr C Rawlings (Parish Council representative), Cllr D Buckle
(Parish Council representative), Cllr P Kelly, Cllr L Pidcock, Cllr E Burt

Other persons present:                   Mrs J Common, Independent Person

Monitoring Officer:                           Mr L Henry, Legal Services Manager, Northumberland County Council

Investigating Officer:                        Ms C Burrows, Governance Solicitor, Durham County Council

Committee Clerk:                              Mrs L Bennett

Date of hearing:                                18^th and 19^th August 2015

Place of hearing:                               Committee Room 1, County Hall, Morpeth, Northumberland


 

1. Hearing

On 18^th and 19^th August 2015, the Standards Committee (‘the Committee’) of this authority considered complaints from Mr G Jones and Ms S Finch, former Town Clerk of Berwick upon Tweed Town Council concerning the alleged conduct of Councillor Georgina Hill, a member of Berwick upon Tweed Town Council.
 

2. Summary of complaints

It was alleged:-

 

1. That Councillor Hill disclosed confidential information at a meeting of the Town Council on 23^rd September 2013 by disclosing details associated with a “Press and Public Excluded” section of the Council’s Finance and Resources Committee meeting of 16^th September 2013. It was further alleged that a misleading report was given to a national newspaper about this confidential item. 

 

2. That Councillor Hill was aware that she had disclosed something that she should not

have as, during the Finance and Resources Committee on 18^th November 2013, the Finance and Resources Committee on 16^th December 2013 and the Town Council meeting on 20^th January 2014, Councillor Hill attempted to get the minutes of the Finance and Resources Committee meeting of 16^th September 2013 changed.  It was further alleged that Councillor Hill was pressuring other Councillors to change the minutes of the Finance and Resources Committee meeting of 16^th September 2013 to cover up her conduct.

 

3. That when trying to get the minutes changed, Councillor Hill had both a personal and

a prejudicial interest in the confidential matter from 4^th October 2013, if not prior to that date, on the basis that Councillor Hill’s half sibling Andrew Marshall corresponded with Mr Lord of Arch on 4^th October 2013 and offered his services to the Town Council and to Arch.

 

4. That Councillor Hill may have bombarded officers with correspondence relating to

allegations, investigations and formal proceedings some of which was disrespectful, unnecessary and in places appeared to defame the Town Clerk.  The Complainant alleged that the amount of correspondence initiated by Councillor Hill may have breached the Code of Conduct in relation to resources being used in accordance with requirements given how much resource appears to have been devoted to Councillor Hill’s campaign.  Further, it was alleged that an e-mail sent to the Town Clerk was copied to all councillors on 27^th September 2013 by Councillor Hill which referred to a grievance and it was alleged that this should have been treated as a confidential staffing matter between Councillor Hill, the Town Clerk and the Staffing Committee.  It was alleged that Councillor Hill’s repetitive, relentless allegations, requests for investigations, threats if proceedings and campaign against the Town Clerk has exhibited conduct unbefitting of office.

 

5. That Councillor Hill had carried out a sustained attack of the Town Clerk, the Town

Council and a number of Town Councillors on Facebook on 29^th May 2014.  It was alleged that this was an attempt by Councillor Hill to disrupt the Town Council’s credibility and the Town Council’s capability of fulfilling its obligations to the people of Berwick.

 

6. That Councillor Hill obtained information from a Town Council Staffing Committee

Meeting which she knew to be confidential and placed this information on Social Media.

 

7. That Councillor Hill, at the Events Committee meeting of the Council on 8^th July 2013,

declared a personal and prejudicial interest in item 12 (applications for financial assistance, Tweedmouth Feast Crowning and Carnival Committee).  It was alleged that Councillor Hill’s Register of Interests stated that she has an Appendix B interest but does not show that she had a discloseable pecuniary interest (“DPI”) and therefore having stated that she had a DPI Councillor Hill should have registered this new interest with the Monitoring Officer within 28 days of becoming aware of it and she has not done so.

 

8. That Councillor Hill dealt with a matter in which she had an interest by liaising with

the Council’s Finance Officer in relation to the grant for financial assistance for the Tweedmouth Feast agreed by the Council to the Crowning and Carnival Committee of which she is a member. 

 

9. That Councillor Hill had demonstrated in public at Council meetings and on social

media that she had no respect for the democratic process or Code of Conduct. 

 

10. That Councillor Hill had shown that she had no respect for the Council’s Protocol on

Bullying and Harassment, or the Council’s Protocol on Member/Officer Relations.

 

11. That Councillor Hill had shown no respect for the Protocol on Communications

because articles to the press contain inaccurate and malicious material and she had failed to state that her views are personal and not those of the Council.

 

12. That Councillor Hill had no respect for the Disciplinary and Grievance Procedure

having disclosed confidential details to the press and on social media.

 

13. That Councillor Hill showed a lack of respect to her fellow Councillors by a publication

on her Facebook page on 27^th May 2014.

 

14. That Councillor Hill had exhibited bullying behaviour towards the Town Clerk in public

at meetings, in correspondence direct with the Clerk and with other members which has amounted to harassment, in the national press and on social media.  It was alleged that this bullying behaviour had been demonstrated by Councillor Hill who had:-

 

1. Questioned the validity and status of decisions relating to delegated powers suggesting it had not been properly made.
2. Announced publicly at least two meetings that she had approached other Town Councils for advice and information on how they run their Council.
3. Maintained that the Town Clerk’s notes of the Strategy and Policy Working Group meeting on 4^th September 2013 were inaccurate.
4. Sent 207 e-mails to the Town Clerk between May to November 2013 inclusive, 27 of which related to the confidential item in the Finance and Resources Committee meeting of 16^th September 2013.

 

15. That Councillor Hill had disclosed private information regarding disciplinary and

grievance matters being considered by the Town Council and personal and confidential information about the Town Clerk’s sick leave.
     
 

16. That Councillor Hill posted on her Facebook page on 18^th June 2014, details from

reports by independent investigator Norman Dunn which included an erroneous statement “that a case to answer has been established and that it is sufficiently serious and should progress to a formal disciplinary investigation” when in fact Norman Dunn stated in his report “it is believed there is a possible case to answer”.  It was alleged that Mr Dunn sent an e-mail on 30^th January 2014 stating “this report is to remain confidential throughout the process and I suggest it remains confidential after the process is complete,” that he stated within his conclusion that the report should be issued confidentially and that every page within the report is marked “confidential”.




 

3. Relevant paragraph(s) of Berwick upon Tweed Town Council’s Code of Conduct

The following is an extract from the relevant provisions of the Code of Conduct:

Preamble - the Code applies whenever you (a) conduct the business of the Council (including the business of your office as an elected Councillor or co-opted member) or (b) act, claim to act or give the impression you are acting as a representative of the Council.

Paragraph 1 - He/ she shall behave in such a way that a reasonable person would regard as respectful.

Paragraph 2 - He/ she shall not act in a way which a reasonable person would regard as bullying or intimidatory.

Paragraph 3 – He/ she shall not behave in a manner which a reasonable person would regard as likely to bring the Council, or his/ her office as a member of the Council, into disrepute.

Paragraph 5 – He/ she shall use the resources of the Council in accordance with its requirements.

Paragraph 6 – He/ she shall not disclose information which is confidential or where disclosure is prohibited by law.

Paragraph 9 – A member shall register with the Monitoring Offer any change to interest or new interests in Appendices A and B within 28 days of becoming aware of it.

Paragraph 15 – Where a matter arises at a meeting which relates to a financial interest of a friend, relative or close associate (other than an interest in Appendix A), the member:
 

1. shall disclose the nature of the interest
2. may speak on the matter only if members of the public are also allowed to speak at the meeting
3. shall not vote on the matter.

If it is a ‘sensitive interest’ the member shall declare the interest but not the nature of the interest.

Paragraph 16 – If a Council function can be discharged by the member acting alone, and he/ she is aware that they have an interest in Appendices A or B, he/ she shall not deal with that matter except to enable the matter to be dealt with by someone else.

 

4. Summary of evidence considered by the Committee

Evidence was considered from the following sources:-

 

1. Investigating Officer’s Report dated 13^th March 2015
2. Bundle of documents supplementary to Investigating Officer’s Report
3. Witness statements of:

• Cllr G Hill
• Mr B Darling
• Cllr T Forrester
• Cllr C Seymour
• Mr A Marshall
• Mr D SpencerBarclay
• Cllr K Graham
• Mr N Dunn

 

4. Witness summaries of:

• Ms S Finch
• Mr G Jones

5. Verbal evidence of:

• Ms S Finch
• Mr G Jones
• Cllr C Seymour
• Mr B Darling
• Cllr K Graham
• Mr A Marshall
• Cllr T Forrester
• Mr D SpencerBarclay
• Cllr G Hill

In addition to the evidence considered by the Committee oral representations were made by both Councillor Hill’s representative and the Investigating Officer 

 

5. Committee’s principal findings of fact including the reasons for them

 

1. In respect of the publications by Councillor Hill on Facebook contained in screen

dumps dated 29^th May 2014 and 18^th June 2014, the Committee finds that Councillor Hill did allude to the Town Clerk’s grievance, the Town Clerk’s sick leave, provided extracts of the confidential report of Mr Dunn’s investigation into Councillor Hill’s complaint, gave details relating to disciplinary and grievance matters being considered by the Council relating to the Town Clerk and raised issues regarding the Town Clerk’s performance and that the information contained in those postings had been obtained by Councillor Hill in confidence in connection with her duties as a Town Councillor.

 

2. Again in respect of publications by Councillor Hill on Facebook, the Committee finds

that Councillor Hill likened the Council to North Korea in her comments on 27^th March 2014 and referred to fellow councillors as “rogue” and “manipulated” in her comments on 29^th May 2014.

 

3. That Councillor Hill commented in the Independent on Sunday on 5^th January 2014

alluding to corruption within the Council by stating “What is quite often happening in town councils is a town clerk and a civil servant making decisions without the necessary checks and balances that you used to have. There is some extreme low-level corruption going on and people getting away with making decisions behind closed doors that you would never get away with in Parliament.”

 

4. That Councillor Hill was not responsible for the comment on the Berwick Town

Council Public Voice Facebook page on 28^th May 2014 saying “What would the public think if the police and the fraud squad made a visit to our Town Council” accepting her evidence in this regard that she was not responsible for, or in control of, that particular Facebook page.

 

5. That there was insufficient evidence to definitively determine that there was collusion

between other Town Councillors and/or Ms Finch or behaviour which might be considered to constitute bullying of Councillor Hill from those same Town Councillors and/or Ms Finch designed to suppress the actions of Councillor Hill in carrying out her duties as a Town Councillor. There may have been differences of opinion, forcibly expressed at times perhaps in what may have been a difficult environment for the Subject Member, but nothing that would suggest collusion and/or bullying.   


 

6. That there was insufficient evidence to definitively determine that Ms Finch’s conduct

or behaviour and performance in carrying out her duties as Town Clerk was of a nature that could be considered to be unacceptable to a reasonable employer.

 

7. That the reports commissioned by the Town Council from Mr N Dunn and Mr P

Cameron were of an independent and objective nature and raised no issues of bias.

 

8. The Committee were invited by the Investigating Officer to make a finding of fact as

to whether Ms Finch gave an apology to Mr A Marshall with regard to a remark she made in a meeting with him but the Committee concluded that there was no conclusive evidence either way on this issue and determined that they would not make any finding regarding the issue which, in any event, they did not consider to be of any direct significant relevance to their consideration of the totality of the complaints.    

 

6. Committee’s findings as to whether the Subject Member failed to follow the Code including reasons for that finding

 

1. The Committee finds that the Subject Member has failed to comply with the following paragraphs of Berwick upon Tweed Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct:-

 

1. Paragraph 1
2. Paragraph 2
3. Paragraph 3
4. Paragraph 6

 

2. The Committee finds that the Subject Member has not failed to comply with the following paragraphs of Berwick upon Tweed Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct:-

 

1. Paragraph 5
2. Paragraph 9
3. Paragraph 15
4. Paragraph 16

The detail and reasons for those findings are as follows:-

 

1. That at all relevant times during the course of events referred to in the summary of allegations above, the Subject Member had been acting in her official capacity including when she gave the interview to the Independent on Sunday newspaper when she ought reasonably have known that it was likely that a member of public reading the newspaper article would have considered that she was acting in her capacity as a Councillor. As a consequence her authority’s Code of Conduct had applied to her at those times.

 

2. That the Subject Member failed to treat the former Town Clerk, Ms Finch, with respect contrary to paragraph 1 of the Berwick upon Tweed Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct in relation to her publications on Facebook evidenced in the screen dumps dated 29th May 2014 and 18th June 2014 and her comments in the Independent on Sunday on 5th January 2014 as detailed in the Committee’s findings of fact.

The Committee agreed with the reasoning in this regard provided by the Investigating
Officer in paragraph 6.4 of her report and, while concluding that there had perhaps been something of a delay on the part of the Town Council in dealing with the Subject Member’s concerns, the Committee felt that the authority had nonetheless commissioned the reports from Mr Dunn and Mr Cameron and they considered it unnecessary and unreasonable on the part of the Subject Member to take the actions that she took before those reports could be fully considered by the Town Council.  

With regard to the interview given by the Subject Member to the Independent on Sunday newspaper, the Committee considered that the Subject Member’s comments
as reported could reasonably have been interpreted as implying that the former
Town Clerk was corrupt, an allegation which had, the Subject Member conceded in evidence to the Committee, no foundation. The Committee agreed with the Investigating Officer that this was an attack on the former Town Clerk’s integrity. While the Committee did accept that the Subject Member might have meant to refer to another local council in the context of these comments they considered that she should have appreciated that it was likely that, given her position, they would be interpreted as referring also to the situation at Berwick. 

 

3. That the Subject Member bullied the former Town Clerk, Ms Finch, contrary to paragraph 2 of the Berwick upon Tweed Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct in relation to her behaviour towards Ms Finch which included publications on Facebook evidenced in the screen dumps dated 29^th May 2014 and 18^th June 2014 forming a pattern of public criticism which constitutes bullying and harassment.

The Committee again agreed with the reasoning as outlined by the Investigating Officer in her report at paragraph 6.5 in this regard and also felt that the postings were designed to undermine the former Town Clerk’s position and would have put her in fear of what further postings regarding her might follow, all of which were sufficient to enable the Committee to conclude that the former Town Clerk had been bullied by the Subject Member.

Having made a finding of fact that that there was insufficient evidence to definitively  determine behaviour on the part of other Town Councillors and/or Ms Finch which might be considered to constitute bullying of the Subject Member by those persons the Committee could, it felt, not find otherwise.

 

4. That the Subject Member conducted herself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing her Office and her authority into disrepute contrary to paragraph 3 of the Berwick upon Tweed Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct by virtue of the Facebook posts made on 27^th March 2014 likening the Town Council to North Korea and on the 29^th May 2014 with regards to “rogue” Councillors, and her comments as reported in the Independent on Sunday on 5^th January 2014.

The reasoning of the Investigating Officer in her report at paragraph 6.6 was again accepted by the Committee in this regard with the exception of the Facebook comment made on the 28^th May 2014 which the Committee accepts was not proven as being made by the Subject Member.

While the Committee accept that Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 does give a high level of protection to comments that are genuinely made in the course of political debate, they felt that the comments made by the Subject Member, and particularly those in the Independent on Sunday, were entirely inappropriate and a slur on the reputation of the Town Council and an unjustified attack on the integrity of those persons directly associated with the authority including members and officers.        

 

5. That the Subject Member disclosed confidential information which was exempt information as defined by Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 contrary to paragraph 6 of the Berwick Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct. 

The Committee finds that Councillor Hill’s disclosures on Facebook evidenced in the screen dumps dated 29^th May 2014 and 18^th June 2014, details of which are given in the Committee’s findings of fact, were not of sufficient public interest that disclosure of the information outweighed the public interest in maintaining the exemption.

The Subject Member had conceded in evidence to the Committee that she had disclosed this information in the manner described and that it was of a confidential nature but that she was justified in doing so as she was afforded the protection of the Whistleblowing Policy adopted by the Town Council. The Committee took her arguments, and those advanced on her behalf by her representative into account in reaching their decision but concluded, nonetheless, that she could not legitimately claim protection under the Policy as they did not believe that the disclosures were reasonable in all the circumstances. The information disclosed was extensive and little or no thought appeared to have been given as to what the consequences of such disclosures would be, particularly in relation to the personal information relating to the former Town Clerk which the Committee considered to be of most importance given that person’s status as an employee of the Town Council.

In any event the Committee did not consider that any of the three pre-conditions in order to seek protection under the Policy had been met for the Policy to be applicable.

In this latter regard, the Committee did not consider that the Subject Member’s perception that she would be victimised if she raised the matter internally was a realistic one given their finding of fact in relation to the allegation from the Subject Member of collusion and bullying on the part of the other Town Councillors and/or the former Town Clerk. With regard to the other two pre-conditions there was a process with an independent input underway which, while delayed, had not been concluded which appeared to counter any suggestion that there was a reasonable belief on the part of the Subject Member that a cover up was likely or that she had already conclusively raised the matter internally.

 

6. That the Subject Member did not use Council resources beyond its requirements contrary to paragraph 5 of the Berwick upon Tweed Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct as a result of responding to the matters raised by her.

The Committee fully accept the reasoning of the Investigating Officer at paragraph 6.7 of her report in this regard.

 

7. That the Subject Member did not fail to register with the Monitoring Officer any change of interests or new interests in Appendices A and B within 28 days of becoming aware of this contrary to paragraph 9 of the Berwick upon Tweed Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct in respect of her alleged failure to register her role as a committee member of Tweedmouth Feast and Crowning Carnival Committee as a discloseable personal interest.

The Committee fully accept the reasoning of the Investigating Officer at paragraph 6.9 of her report in this regard.

 

8. That the Subject Member did not fail to comply with the provisions of paragraph 15 of the Berwick Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct in relation to her participation in a matter relating to her half-brother, Mr A Marshall.

The Committee fully accept the reasoning of the Investigating Officer at paragraph 6.10 of her report in this regard.

 

1. That the Subject Member did not deal with a matter in which she was aware that she had an interest as outlined in Appendices A and B of the Code when liaising with the Council’s Finance Officer in relation to the grant for financial assistance for the Tweed Mouth Feast contrary to paragraph 16 of the Berwick Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct.

The Committee fully accept the reasoning of the Investigating Officer at paragraph 6.11 of her report in this regard.

 

7. Action to be taken/ sanctions to be imposed

The Committee, having heard from the Subject Member’s representative, the Investigating Officer and the Independent Person on the issue resolved to impose the following sanctions:-

 

1. That it be recommended to Berwick upon Tweed Town Council that the Subject Member be issued with a formal censure by that authority.

 

2. That it be recommended to Berwick upon Tweed Town Council that the Subject Member be removed, and remain removed, from any position she currently holds as Chair or Vice Chair of all Committees and Sub Committees of that authority for a period of twelve months from the date of that authority agreeing any such sanction.

 

3. That it be recommended to Berwick upon Tweed Town Council that training be arranged for the Subject Member which shall include training in relation to the Members’ Code of Conduct and Bullying and Harassment.

 

4. That the findings of the Committee be referred to Berwick upon Tweed Town Council for their information.

Recommendations to the Subject Member’s Authority

The Committee, having heard from the Independent Person on the issue, resolved to make the following recommendation:-

 

1. That it be recommended to Berwick upon Tweed Town Council that training be arranged for all members of the authority in relation to the Members’ Code of Conduct and Bullying and Harassment.

Right of Appeal

There is no right of appeal from this decision which is final. 

Mr J Jackson 
Chairman
21^st August 2015


We now believe it’s a two horse race, unless Jonathon is also hiding his past?


 

How do we all get a share of the sweeties?

With the commercial world finding the rules of politics and in particular those surrounding local government reporting procedures during purdah difficult to observe, local politicians of the independent variety have simply taken to helping commerce through a doorstep whispering campaign.

Unfortunately for the administration at old County Hall in Morpeth the whispers regarding the buying in at great expense, with public money, shops in Bedlington and a cinema in Ashington are so noisy they have alerted people to think about what’s happening across the County and why Northumberland Tories are supporting some independents and bulling up their Leaders costly promise to Ashington, with short term gain from the public purse that carries a very dodgy future indeed.

The more vocal and questioning Tories and their local branch members from the North and West of the County are questioning the policy of spend, spend, spend on holding some independent votes until 2021 and not losing ground to a very challenging Labour MP who is forcing the Tories hand while their own high streets wallow in emptiness and suffer from a massive lack of investment, with neither the Tory administration in County Hall or its investment arm ADVANCE Northumberland listening to their plights at all. Its also widely rumoured that the bullying within the administration at County Hall is why your Tory Councillor remains silent while the Leader and  and the Independents get all the sweeties available.

The conceited way the Bedlington and Ashington investment packages have been cobbled together exposes where the additional income from the growth in new housing is being spent. The building of shop units and a cinema along with the gifting of their use to commercial retailers to ensure it looks like the administration is working for the people is so wrong in so many ways. The Tories own supporters are asking where’s the help for them even if their Councillors aren’t..

Sitting within their much weakened position is Berwick and Alnwick both with empty commercial premises and very little hope of growth in the short term, Hexham  which appears to be gaining ghost town status, Blyth being fed rhetoric from ADVANCE Northumberland even after its local Council pours in huge monetary sums to bolster the County Councils service delivery across South East Northumberland with its cash, their shops numbers remain static and without the necessary investment support from the Council.
Prudhoe is a different story with the battle of where will shops be best placed, on the High Street or at Low Prudhoe to catch the Gateshead Borough trade who could shop without the anguish of its own self generated traffic.

Whatever the answers, all towns need long term investment and that means ending the short term fix for some; and coming up with a detailed plan that probably includes the enticement of on-line companies to take up empty retail premises on our high streets by stopping home trading over a yet to be ascertained sum.

Unprincipled Daniel Dodges Public Scrutiny?

NALC Needs to Encourage Compliance and Transparency.

The airwaves have been hot recently regarding the Parish Councillor Daniel Carr, a Tory from the Town of Blyth in Northumberland.

Members of the public have been asking questions regarding his ability to hold office on Blyth Town Council, whether he fulfils the eligibility criteria to the letter or whether like one of his County Councillor colleagues, has a prime address outside of the eligible circle.

In the opposite end of the County of Northumberland, a very vocal war has erupted between the Northern Tories and the public ever since the Tory Councillor from Norham and the Islelandshire division, situated up against the Border with Scotland ‘disappeared, https://www.northumberlandgazette.co.uk/news/councillor-where-have-they-gone-1-9490581 .

On 11th May 2017 just after his election into office he decided to use County Hall, Morpeth as his eligible address,
 

Lawrie, Roderick Malcolm Gordon - Northumberland County Council

committee.northumberland.gov.uk/Councillor.aspx?cllrID=254
11 May 2017 - Councillor Roderick Malcolm Gordon Lawrie; Address: C/O County Hall, Morpeth, Northumberland, NE61 2EF


His declaration of interest form list him as a gun dealer, wine consultant and Director of a tobacco company, maybe the former is why he likes to hide his identity a bit? He’s a resident of the Isle of Man and told the top Blog site ‘Voice of the North’ in February this year that he would have to resign http://www.voiceofthenorth.net/riddle-roderick-lawrie-part-3/ In true Northumberland Conservative style, he hasn’t bothered.

But back to Daniel Carr of South Ward in Blyth, although we have not seen his declaration of interest form, were moderately sure he doesn’t deal in arms and his social media doesn’t seem to indicate he’s anything but an opportunist, so why hide one’s address?
 

The eligibility to be accepted as a Parish Councillor is as follows:

Eligibility criteria

Candidates must be qualified to stand for election. The Local Government Act 1972, Section 79, sets out the qualifications for standing as a candidate and the grounds for disqualification of a candidate.
On the day of nomination and the day of poll, you must:
 

• be at least 18 years old
• be a British citizen, an eligible Commonwealth citizen or a citizen of any other member state of the European Union, and
• meet at least one of the following four qualifications:

a) Your name must appear on the register of local government electors for the parish/community at the time of your nomination and throughout your term of office should you be elected.
b) You have occupied any land or other premises as owner or tenant in the parish/community during 12 months before the day of your nomination and the day of election.
c) Your main or only place of work during the 12 months prior to the day of your nomination and the day of election has been in the parish/community area. You do not have to have paid employment to qualify, as long as your main or only place of work is in the parish/community area. For example, Councillors who’s main or only job is being a councillor would be able to use this qualification, if their council office is within the parish/community.
d) You have lived in the parish/community area or within three miles of it during 12 months before the day of your nomination and the day of election.
You may be disqualified as a candidate if:
 

• You are employed by the parish/community council or hold a paid office under the parish/community council (including joint boards or committees).
• You have been declared bankrupt in the last five years and has not repaid your debts.
• You have been convicted of a criminal offence and sentenced to at least three months imprisonment (including any suspended sentence) within the previous five years.
• You are disqualified due to corrupt practices under the Representation of the People Act 1983 or the Audit Commission Act.

As Laypeople we have no idea why Daniel Carr hides his eligibility criteria from the residents of his area or under what element of the criteria he qualified under in May 2017.
Does he house share with Roderick Lawrie? Or jet in from the Isle of Man for his meetings in Blyth?
In order that people and residents can gain an understanding why a Councillor for one of Britain’s safest wards hides or feels the necessity to hide his identity the Local Secretariat of the National Association of Parish Councillors needs to make Parish Councillors declarations of interest forms available for all to see on their web-site to ensure the public can self scrutinise those who represent them, and with Blyth Town Council harvesting one of the highest precepts in Britain its essential they do.





 

Higher Costs Drive Fear into Northumberland Residents

The political policies adopted by the Tories both locally and nationally are beginning to financially crush communities and individuals.

• Work undertaken recently by the Trade Unions, GMB and UNISON along with a research survey from SAGA and members views from Age UK show that residents fear the rises in everyday costs and despise the increase in bills brought on through politically motivated Conservative Councils increased costs to the public supposedly designed to offset austerity that are seriously damaging their ability to feel they can ‘pay their way’ in society.
  

Daily bills such as higher Council taxes, the increasing costs of care, public transport costs, phone contract increases, dental charges and now the ‘never ending need to self fund TV licences’ however old and frail or socially isolated you become are felt to be unaffordable by 2021.

Combining all of the reports together, almost three quarters of working age employees in the public sector and four fifths of OAP’s believe they will struggle to cope if the cost of living continues to rise at its current rate following eight years of public sector pay restraint and the triple lock although helping pensioners, is not keeping inflationary pressures at bay for the elderly.

The worry factor that is dividing Britain and creating a huge ‘underclass’ is fuelled by the rapid rise in costs of supermarket food shopping, higher utility bills and massively rising housing costs not helped by Councils who have driven up charges and slashed benefits on a myriad of items particularly over the last two years, and when coupled with the huge cost of hospital parking charges or the public transport costs of rationalised care changes through once locally organised care becoming ever more regionalised. The loss of local maternity units and the lack of Community Midwives being cited as a huge fincial burden on young families.

SAGA who in their report explained rising insurance costs were an additional fear factor with the over 50’s twice as concerned as younger people on that issue but they also explained that more than half of those surveyed believe their incomes will not keep pace with rising prices over the next three years with the same proportion being forced to change their shopping habits due to crippling price hikes.

Another one third of people believe they will have to change the way they shop and will struggle greatly if prices rise further.

Industries such as entertainment and catering are already feeling the heat with GMB stating their members find their social lives curtailed through the hike in household costs.

In Northumberland its Conservative Council forced up Council Tax, cut housing benefit, increased the cost of care, slashed grant aid to the voluntary and charitable sector, have missed out on starting decent homes two for its Council tenants.

Commentators have pointed towards the stoppage of huge domestic housing schemes including a Garden Village that would have brought in regular annual revenue, the spend of massive amounts of cash to protect its members and top officers from litigation and the weaknesses of the link with the NHS and its Clinical Commissioning Group which through poor management and lack of risk appraisal from the Tories forced through the necessity for a tax rise. The Council has no plans to offset the cuts and ensure further tax rises are not required and are losing legal claims on a regular and ongoing basis. This all adds up as a driver or catalyst for the exacerbation of many families’ financial problems in the County.

The dreadful uncertainty regarding price rises means even those who have the capability to plan and budget for their household costs are finding it harder and harder as the huge variation in particularly food prices mean that in seeking the offers available from various shops, that the savings are offset in travel costs to harvest those savings. Many now believe its an ever decreasing circle that only Councils and a Government who embrace price fixing can resolve. The various reports do show however that people living near thriving markets don’t feel as pressured as those who’s markets have failed.

But in a nation where the top seven per cent of earners have made an additional £60Bn pound in the last eight months ordinary people feel left out and alone also through the Tories introduction of Universal Credit, without a welfare state to pick up the pieces.
 

Its now Jamie’s Job To Locate

 Northumberland’s Largest Town

People have said why have a Mayor for the North of Tyne and what benefit will he bring to the County of Northumberland?

The answers are quite simple, the Government insisted that any devolution deal for the North of Tyne region must include a Mayor and in the case of this region the Mayor must seek consensus from the Constituent Councils in delivering its regional plans.

Labour’s Jamie Driscoll won the race to hold that post. The other role the new Mayor has in his remit is to engage the region on transport issue’s.

The BIG ISSUE for people from the Town of Blyth and its Town Council, which is by far and away Northumberland’s largest Town, is how will our new Transport champion help us become a destination, from a backwater?

Blyth has the population to carry a much better retail and business offer than it currently does, it also houses a thriving port, a wonderful theatre and a well historically publicised football team that brings away supporters to the Town no one can find.

So in order to assist the Mayor we have looked at how, without stepping outside of his zone of control he can begin to at least inform his region that Blyth, a town with better beaches than the Costas is worth visiting and that for businesses they can share in whatever new found wealth is created by telling people Blyth exists by opening up a branch of their business in the County’s largest Town.

Jamie will get some help by insisting that the Ashington, Blyth and Tyne Line remains with that name and drops the local Tories insistence on calling it the Newcastle-Northumberland Line. But in helping Jamie we need to give some pointers to where the road signs at least should begin to direct people to what can be his ‘First’ destination project.

Due to the growth and long term future of the River Blyth Energy Central project Jamie can begin his signposting at the Scottish Border, adding Blyth signs as people enter the County via the A1, the A69 destination Boards also need to include Blyth and at the northern exit at the Tyne Tunnel a sign for Blyth as a destination alongside Morpeth, Berwick and Edinburgh, with Blyth joining Ashington and Cramlington repeater signs along its route in Northumberland on the A19.

Jamie help a town that is suffering through the lack of destination signage and bring Blyth in line with the rest of the UK, where Counties Largest Towns are well signposted.
 

Northumberland County Council is to Two-Tier its Workforce

A recent report issued to the press from Northumberland County Council regarding staff sickness hasn’t only highlighted the increase in ill health being suffered by the workforce in this a Council where bullying is rife and has been reported in the mainstream press on a number of occasions, but has opened the door on the thinking of Northumberland Conservatives in developing a two tier workforce to lower costs and develop an extra fear factor that people are waiting in the wings to take your job.

When speaking to the Northumberland Gazette this week, Kelly Angus  the head of HR  “said staff absence can also have an impact on the use of agency workers and overtime, which is another area of focus for the council’s HR team, with the total overtime costs for 2018-19 exceeding £7.5million”.

“Work is taking place on creating an internal staff bank which will offer employees the opportunity to register for work at any department/area within the council (dependent upon their skills and experience) and ‘this will ensure we have a more flexible workforce and reduce existing costs”.

Following changes recently announced to the Local Government Pension Scheme, (LGPS) a staff bank in the local government sense is not the same as a staff bank in the NHS which have been a feature of the health service for almost 50yrs. In the National Health Service, bank staff are members of the NHS pension scheme and accrue benefits each time they work in the flexible environment.

In Local Government the employers body has agreed that new employees and temporary employees can be excluded from the pension scheme. Hence over a period of time any staff bank in local government that is also used as a ‘detrimental to full time staff recruitment tool’ will severely alter the retirement income of Counties like Northumberland where employers pensions form the basis of the additional costs it takes to dwell in the Countryside where everything costs a whole lot more.

The Trade Unions who have experience of two tier workforce problems are challenging the changes but will be unable to halt the fear factor and bullying element of working for Northumberland County Council.

 

‘Market Forces’ will destroy new retail development in Bedlington Town Centre

Since the exposure of the web of deceit surrounding ARCH from Northumberland Tories and the setting aside of £1M in Northumberland County Councils budget to pay future compensation and protect the Tories pinnacle group from litigation, leaves an associated sub-group of Councillors and Council Officers, unprotected and in danger of replacement at the next election either by the electorate or any future administration.

The Tories spin doctors and advisers have decided that they must now try to legitimise the ARCH replacement, Advance Northumberland by bringing in new Directors from the Bedlington Independent group and the Labour Party to share any future blame.

The Tories are aware that their undivided need to support efforts to reopen the AB&T rail line and its subsequent additional phases linking Morpeth Station into this new route along with the creation of a bought in development by Advance Northumberland in Bedlington is a vote winner. That vote winner,  as people see progression towards physical change along the lines route in timely fashion for the 2021 election could quickly come crashing down around the ears of those who are involved with the decisions Advance Northumberland need to make over the next few months. The Tories of course will use the skill they gained in destroying the credibility of the LibDems nationally in the spin they put out when the ball rolls out of their court to lay the blame at Labour and the Bedlington Independents doors.

Labour who also support their Mayor and the reopening of the AB&T Line had decided to future-proof their planned redevelopment of West Bedlington’s shopping experience, not by buying in retailers for the short term as the Tories now have to do, but by re-invigorating the very shopping experience that has been paramount in closing trade in Bedlington through competition for years. Labour decided to expand the number of outlets at the Council owned Manor Walks shopping centre in Cramlington and raise its footfall from 11,000,000 through the doors to 13,000,000 but to get your foot in the door of this amazing cash cow as a retailer seeking this brilliant opportunity, you had to commit to taking a shop on a very very long lease in the new ARCH development at Pipers Place, Bedlington.

Why you may ask?, well the rail line when coupled with the massive build scheme and future employment hub in and around the Port of Blyth at the ARCH now Advance project Energy Central, will allow the commercial market to expand beyond belief the retail experience in Bedlington East surrounding what will be a very busy station on the AB&T line indeed, weakening the position of retailers at Bedlington West a town centre that has had its commercial troubled for 40yrs plus and without retailers locked in will quickly face further downturn.

The Tories in Northumberland still reeling from the fact that their deceit has been exposed both in Court and by Northumbria Police are content to now spend immense amounts of public money to buy in retailers at huge expense to fill their flagship development and of Course blame Labour and the Bedlington Independents when ‘market forces’ expand the competition elsewhere.