21 August 2021
Follow me @Linda Derrick1
Facebook Linda Derrick for Ridgeway East
I had my very first complaint about me as a councillor this week. Or rather, out of the blue, I had an e-mail from a Bucks Council official informing me about the outcome of a complaint made against me.
The official apologised for not letting me know about the complaint sooner and informed me that “the actions complained of are not sufficient to accept as a complaint and therefore no further action will be taken.”
Well it was nice to know that something I didn’t know about, and had no opportunity to comment on, had turned out so well.
The e-mail was headed “Confidential” but I have no idea why. I can’t disclose the name of the person who complained about me because I wasn’t told their name. Whoever they are, they complained about a blog on my old blogsite which was read by thousands of people. So the actions complained about can’t be confidential.
The blog in question is at My front page - lindaderrick.simplesite.com dated 9 May 2021.
The odd thing is that I wasn’t a councillor on 9 May when I posted the blog. So I wouldn’t have thought this action could be the subject of a complaint. Nevertheless, the official considered the complaint because the blog “remained once I was a councillor”.
Does anyone else have a complaint about them as a councillor for actions they took before they became a councillor? If not, I claim the record.
I’ve been thinking about this. Does this mean that all the tweets, Facebook posts and blogs written by residents before they became councillors can become the subject of a complaint as long as the tweets, Facebook post etc “remain.”
What about e-mails or leaflets or letters, or interviews or quotes to the press? Are all of these to be the subject of a complaint even though they were written before someone became a councillor as long as they “remain”?
For that matter, what on earth does “remain” mean?
And how can anyone make all their previous communications cease to exist, on the off-chance they might become a subject of a complaint?
Anyway, here are the complaints and my responses.
1. Complaint - it was “blatantly untrue” for me to say in my blog that I had recently been elected as a parish councillor; I had “walked in without being democratically selected by the residents I should be representing. Surely Parish Councillors, like MPs and County Councillors, should either be elected or co-opted”.
Response - Actually I said I was “elected uncontested” which is legally correct and is how Bucks Council described my election. It also describes the situation for the many other candidates who were elected uncontested because the number of seats was more than the number of candidates.
I would be delighted if more residents stood for their parish councils and residents had a choice of councillor rather than candidates being elected without a contest.
I didn’t know when I applied to be a parish councillor that there would be no contest and I must be one of the few parish councillors who put out a manifesto, printed leaflets and put them through the letterboxes of thousands of voters. It was hard work.
2. Complaint - I should not refer to residents who didn’t vote for me as “dumb”.
Response - Actually I didn't call anyone dumb; I explained in the blog that I was reproducing a pie chart sent to me by one of my sons. As he is a consultant nephrologist looking after COVID patients, perhaps his sense of humour is a bit dark.
Still, lots of people loved the chart, even those who didn't vote for me.
3. Complaint – I should take my Simple Site blogsite down; it is still running so I now have “two platforms for purveying my views”.
Response - Simple Site told me they were going to delete my blogsite immediately but they haven't and there is nothing I can do about it. Amazingly, a lot of people still read it but I can’t help that either.
And is there some sort of limit on the number of communication channels councillors can use?
4. Complaint - I should be supporting Hughenden Parish Council publicly and, if I have criticisms, deal with them through the appropriate channels.
Response - So, I should say one thing in public and another in private?
In the circumstances, I think I am very restrained. This is the Council where the Clerk defrauded the Council of twenty thousand pounds and councillors didn't notice. This is also the Council which co-opted councillors unlawfully for over 4 years; councillors won’t listen when they were warned “through the appropriate channels”.
My views in my blogs are carefully researched, backed by evidence and largely factual.
I will continue to express my views honestly and openly. It is what I promised when I was elected (albeit uncontested) and I keep my promises whenever I can.
Commentaires