top of page
Search

Resignation of councillor and decisions in the dark again

lindaderrick6

Follow me @LindaDerrick1

Facebook Linda Derrick for Ridgeway East

2 July 2023


Resignation

Jill Armshaw resigned from Hughenden Parish Council on 29 June. She joined the Council in March 2022 and represented Hughenden Valley. There is now only one councillor representing Hughenden Valley, Cllr Simon Kearey, and there are three vacancies for the ward.


This also means the meeting of HPC’s Human Resources Committee on Tuesday will be inquorate.

Election of HPC’s Chair

I wanted to provide an explanation about the voting for the Chair of HPC at its Annual Council meeting in May. I mentioned in my blog of 21 May 2023 that a member of the public sat with the Council during this vote and I believe he took part in the vote for the Chair. I raised this with the Clerk after the meeting as I didn’t know whether this made the election of the Chair unsafe.


The locum Clerk has provided an explanation to councillors. She also provided this explanation to the two other members of the public who attended the meeting. However, she has declined to give me permission to copy the explanation to anyone else, saying she doesn’t think her explanation need go any further.


So I am afraid I can’t provide any explanation.


Council meeting on 20 June

My last blog covered the Annual Governance Statement and the Accounting Statements for 2022/3 discussed at the meeting on 20 June. These were discussed again at an Extraordinary meeting on 26 June. I have been trying to clarify some of that discussion before blogging about it again.


This blog covers the rest of the agenda for the 20 June meeting.


Restrictions on what I can tell you

As I said in my last blog, papers for the meeting have not been put on HPC’s website. They were circulated to councillors saying we were strictly forbidden to share any part of them so I cannot disclose their content.



Community Engagement, Communications and Requests for Information

Council agreed to have a “Community Engagement & Communication Action Plan”. It referred the preparation of this Plan to its Communication Working Group which it re-established.


There were some interesting background papers but I am strictly forbidden to share them with you.


Council also resolved to comply with guidance published by the Information Commissioner’s Office on freedom of information.

Council agreed a simplified version of this guidance for its website. I am strictly forbidden to share this with you.


But in this case, as I wrote the simple version, I am claiming copyright (or something).

The version begins:-


Hughenden Parish Council welcomes requests for information about the Council from members of the public. We welcome the public taking an interest in who we are and what we do.


We are required by the law to provide information. However, we believe that providing information to the public – and answering questions - is not just about complying with the law; it is also about engaging with residents and encouraging them to participate and help us with our business.


We are committed to acting and taking decisions in an open and transparent manner. This is one of the principles of public life. These principles are the basis of the ethical standards expected of public office holders.


We are also committed to being accountable to the public for our decisions and actions, another principle of public life. So, if you ask us to explain ourselves, we need to give you an explanation.”


I’ll leave you to ponder the irony. On the one hand, Council approves this statement and agrees to have a Community Engagement and Communication Action Plan. On the other hand, it restricts the public’s access to its papers and restricts councillors’ abilities to inform their constituents about the Council’s activities.

Council appointed Cllrs Kearey, Armshaw and myself to carry out internal reviews if and when people requesting information were not satisfied with the answer they get.


I know I said I would not undertake such work as I have been censured by the Council but I was strongly pressed to take on this role. I am happy to do this; as you might have guessed I believe very strongly in openness and transparency. (I am also an expert in using the Freedom of Information Act to get information from HPC.)


Great Kingshill issues

There were three items relevant to Great Kingshill.


One was a request from Great Kingshill Cricket Club to install nets. I understand that the Cricket Club will also need to seek planning permission. Council approved the request but that’s all I can tell you as councillors were strictly forbidden not to share the background papers showing where the nets would go and what they would look like.


Council approved a grant application from the Cricket Club but I can’t tell you what it was for nor how much as councillors were strictly forbidden not to share the background papers. Nor can I tell you why I voted against as I would need to disclose information in the application.


Finally, Council voted not to approve a grant application from Great Kingshill Village Hall, on the recommendation of the Finance Committee. The reasons for the Finance Committee’s recommendation not to approve the grant are in the draft minutes of the last Finance Committee. However - perhaps you have guessed by now - I am strictly forbidden to share the papers.


So I can’t tell you what the application was for or why the Finance recommended Council to turn it down.


Primrose Hill allotments and amenity site

I proposed a motion about this site for the meeting. The motion is not on the agenda but in the supporting papers so I am strictly forbidden to share it. However, I am going to claim copyright again (or whatever).


The motion was in four parts: -

a) Council published a draft Management Plan for the Primrose Hill allotment site and amenity field on its website in January for consultation. This included proposals to plant more trees at the site. Comments have been positive and I proposed that Council approve the Plan.


No-one seconded the motion and the draft plan was referred to the Environment and Services Committee.


This Committee meets next in August. The Committee then plans to recommend to Council which of the many sites in the parish are priorities. It will then, if I understand it, work with a consultant to prepare a brief for these priority sites to go out to tender to ask consultants for the preparation of draft management plans.


So it looks as though no trees will be planted at the Primrose Hill site for quite a time.


b) I had prepared a report explaining why the Council had failed to deliver mini-allotments at Primrose Hill and proposed lessons to be learnt. I asked Council to note the report and accept the lessons learnt.


No-one seconded the motion. The issue of mini-allotments was referred to the E&S Committee.


c) An allotment holder had now stepped in and leased a plot so residents who cannot cope with a full plot, for example children and those with limited mobility, could cultivate a small area. I asked Council to welcome this initiative and proposed that Council, exceptionally, should waive the annual charge for the allotment.


No-one seconded the motion.


d) Community Payback (part of the Probation Service) had offered to help with the site, including helping allotment holders who might be struggling with their plots. I proposed that Council should explore that offer.


No-one seconded the motion.


I just find it sad that Council did not have the generosity of spirit to welcome an allotment holder who stepped in when Council failed to deliver.

Finance

Council had copies of the financial monitoring report for this year but I can’t tell you how we are doing because …. well, I think you know why by now.


I asked Council to record a formal vote of thanks to Cllr Main who has worked hard to move Council to a new financial system which should make the financial monitoring a lot easier and better (if not more open). Council approved this vote of thanks.


Other things

Council approved an Interim Data Protection Policy. No, I can’t tell you what’s in it because… well you know.


Council considered whether it needed to set up further Committees or working groups. It recognised that it was important to set up a Planning Committee but no-one volunteered to be on it. A number of councillors suggested I could be on the Planning Committee as I had previous experience. I pointed out it would be inappropriate for me to represent the Council on a Committee as I had been censured. (Besides which it made no sense for me to be on a Committee all by myself). So, no Planning Committee.


I think Council set up an Allotments Working Group reporting to the Environment and Service Committee. We were leaping about the agenda a bit and I got a bit lost at this point.


Council also considered a Heads of Terms for Widmer End Kiosk Substation. This is a proposal for HPC to lease land at Windmill Lane Allotment site to an electricity company for a Sub-station (which has been there for years). HPC leases the land from Hughenden Community Support Trust.

I pointed out that the proposed commencement date of the lease with the electricity company (1st January 2015) was wrong. The scheme that purports to transfer the title of the land from HPC to the Official Custodian was dated 7 October 2015.

I can’t tell you anymore because….. need I say.



Finally, there was a good report on burials prepared by Cllr Armshaw. This was discussed in a confidential session. On reflection, I have no idea why.


So there you have it – or as much as I can tell you.

Let’s hope Council doesn’t decide to turn off the streetlights again and not tell anyone.

158 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comentarios


Post: Blog2_Post

Subscribe Form

Thanks for submitting!

01494718400

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

©2021 by Bucks Politics. Proudly created with Wix.com

bottom of page