Conservative Councillors are causing a revolt

There is something very worrying happening at Medway Council that is having a very bad effect on democracy in Medway and is turning voters against the elected council, especially the ruling Conservative party.

At every full Council there is an allotted time for Public questions to Portfolio holders. It is true that this is often used by Politicos and Party members to make a point as well as one or two people with burning issues but used to fit neatly into the time frame.

Recently though there have been more and more questions are being brought to the Full Council meetings especially about tetchy subjects like Rochester Airport and Strood Library's relocation. The peasants are restless and the council are apparently not doing anything about it.

We've had Councillor Chitty say that Consultations are merely and FYI for the Public of the Council's intent and then last night Cllr Doe said a decision had been made and there was no point in consultation.

This coupled with the very dismissive and often condescending manner with which the Conservative Councillors have dealt with questions is causing more and more discontent. Questions have been answered with diatribes that don't answer the question, dismissed or in a few cases refused as in the case I saw, Cllr Jarrett said I am not in the habit of repeating myself.

At the last meeting there was a full blown revolt with hand clapping and meeting disruption where the Mayor (who wasted public money on the creation of her Christmas cards - including the rental for a fake Snow machine!!!!) ordered the public gallery emptied before leading the Council out. Last night Police officers were on hand when the same thing happened. One member of the public [
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/medway/news/theyre-hell-bent-on-shutting-us-16333/]
stormed through the cordon to tell the Conservative cabinet what he thought and accused them of not listening to the people who voted them in.

This Conservative Cabinet have such a large majority that they don't need to listen to the opposition parties (even if we combined with Labour to do so) but they aren't listening to the voters either. It is seriously becoming a problem. What was a small campaign of people who genuinely care about Strood Library and becoming a Medway wide issue and a symbol of an elected body that is mishandling of their dealings with the public and the protesters.

They have thrown out the slight bone of "Civilian Journalists" for those hardcore politicos and generally don't have public questions as we're too busy writing or tweeting but they are still not addressing the Public or their issues. Thirty minutes isn't long enough, everyone should get the opportunity to ask one question (maybe not the supplementary if there are too many questions) and they should be handled with respect and clarity not dismissed or treated with contempt.

In one attempt to save time they have cut the verbal asking of questions and displayed them on a screen at the front of the Hall - which sadly cannot be read by anyone in the Public area. Or if you're visually impaired you will not know what the answer was in relation too.

Something has to be done and before the local elections next year... the locals are getting restless and arrogantly treating them is not the way.

UKIP are most welcome in Medway

Blue and Red will get dented by UKIP

No - I haven't defected, nor have I banged my head and gained one of those epic life changing concussions where one loses all grasp of sanity.

For once in my life there is an iota of reason in something I think...

The Medway Tories have held the Medway towns in their iron grasp for too long. They have an arrogant outlook that means they are right at all times and surely anyone who is against them is against the whole towns!?! (see my posts on Medway Knockers)

Indeed when the Liberal Democrats dared to stand against the wasteful and unwanted City of Medway proposal we were denounced as traitors. When the people of Strood stood up against the moving of their library, or the people rejected the privatisation of the specialist Dementia unit at Nelson Lodge what did the ruling council do?

Bugger all.

The Council carried on with what it wanted to do regardless as in Councillor Chitty's words: A consultation is merely the Council informing the public of its' intentions.

Their massive majority means that they can bulldoze through anything they want - be it dodgy investment in Rochester airport or perhaps voting to become a part of Austria (something I could get on board!) They are even able to keep the inept like Cllr Wickes at the helm of education two years after he should have bowed out despite a consummate amount of public pressure!

As the race for 2015 and the local elections begin the various parties begin their march. The Tories are looking to fortify their position, maybe gain some more in Watling ward and play on their (our) record in Coalition.

Cllr Maple is preparing his Labour troops for a sweeping victory in swing seats, parliamentary seats and indeed wipe the Medway Libdems from the face of the Medway political map.

We are planning on holding our seats as well as modest gains in Watling, Rainham North and Gillingham North at the cost of Cllr Cooper or Stamp following their defection from Independent group to Labour. The latter one is of particular interest as I'm in the mix for that.

So why are UKIP welcome?

Firstly - it could cost the Conservatives quite a few seats as their vote divides in places leaving the way open to another opposition party, maybe Labour, maybe us depending on the area. The Tory's massive machine could lose up to a third in the enfilading fire from the right and protest votes - big hitters like Jarrett and Chambers could find the Tory heart lands dissolving in two.

Secondly - street campaigns and statistic collecting have shown the majority of people switching to vote UKIP have come from the Conservatives but also from Labour rather than from us. This is good as where as the big two need to go out and rally their voters and try and win back hearts and minds we just need to cling to our loyal voters and sway a few soft liberals - even soft Tories who are tired of this council's arrogance or are pro-Europe and fear the knee jerk drift right that may come from Cameron's leadership post '15.

This UKIP phase may just be flash in the pan, as we were once (if you listen to our critics) and if one of my friends stated once that those who say they'll vote UKIP are less likely to vote anyway then ultimately I'm wrong and another blue tide will sweep this Tory autocracy back into Gunwharf in 2015 having learnt nothing and the peoples of Medway can look forward to another four years of darkness with only Labour and the Libdems trading a few seats here or there.

Of course if I'm right... and let's face Gentlemen and Ladies of the Medway Conservative party... you've got to be looking at the Purple peril and thinking it is a possibility.... how prepared are UKIP? What are their strengths? Can they divide you?

Of course we'll have to wait and see in 2015 and I can only hope they do grow in the Conservative heartlands like the tumorous growth they are.

My letter to the paper about Jarrett's "Hitler" comment

Here follows my unedited letter to the Medway messenger regarding Councillor Jarrett's "Hitler" comment at the last Full council meeting published on 21st February 2014:

---



Gillingham Bus station after the July 1940 air raids that rocked the town

It has been several weeks since Councillor Jarrett made his ill-judged comments about the last Labour
government's handling of the financial crisis as comparable to Hitler's efforts to bring the country to its knees and many people like me are still offended.

Although he retracted the comment at full council, the damage was already done.  
I was no fan of the last Labour government and its policies and was disappointed by their failure during thirteen years of office to keep their promises to sort out the mess left by the Thatcher/Major Conservative administrations.  

Many Gillingham residents would argue that without Libdem policies that have reduced the amount of income tax they now pay and granted them 15 free hours a week of nursery for children, they would be faring little better under Cameron than they were under Brown. 

However you cannot compare the political failings of any government to the Second World War with the bombing of British cities, the U-boat blockade and the deportation of British citizens in the Channel Islands to concentration camps. Indeed on 18th July 1940, Gillingham was bombed and people killed across the town, including Beatty Avenue at the end of my street. Many other residents lost friends and loved ones fighting the Nazis. 

I would implore Councillor Jarrett to apologise publicly for his ill thought out words in a public forum such as this newspaper.  

Chris Sams 

Peasant's revolt, Adolf Hitler and Medway Full Council

Signs left by the protestors.

Last night I made a semi conscious decision that I would go home and spend the evening with my wife and watch comedy on E4 than go to the full Council meeting. It had been a long day at work and I was pretty hacked off and just wanted to go home but follow Ed Jenning's twitter commentary.

It appears I made a massive mistake!

There are a few issues in the Medway towns that are getting up people's noses and they are pretty passionate about.

One is the on going issue of the expansion of Rochester Airport costing the Medway Tax payer £4m for arguably very little in return, except for those few who can afford to run aircraft rather than repair roads etc. which I covered after the last meeting I attended last year.

The other is the proposed closing and re-siting of Strood Library which will result in the closure of a local Community project. Passions ran quite highly with this and a petition of 5000 names was collected in support of the Library - only for a swathe of it to be discounted because not all the signatories were from the Medway towns, indeed one was from France.

A very loud group of protesters turned up apparently and were demanding that they be heard by the Conservative Council but by all accounts they were treated in the same bluff, crass way as the Airport questions were treated. (see last link).

When the allotted 30 minutes for public questions ran out there were members of the Gallery who were less than satisfied and demanded to be heard and their questions asked in front of the Public and the gathered council rather than in the usual written form and they would not accept the Mayor's judgement to be silent and began clapping loudly. Finally the Mayor made the decision to lead the Council out and adjourn the meeting!

After ten minutes they tried a restart but the same thing occurred, with the added embarrassment that the Labour group refused to stand for the Mayor when she re-entered, showing her the same disrespect that the Conservatives were showing the public.

After another adjournment certain people were ejected from the galleries.

The problem is that, yes the protesters were over zealous and possibly went about things the wrong way but when you are passionate about something and look set to lose a valuable public asset and you are met with an arrogant answer from those who have already deemed you wrong in the first place then, yes, you are bound to get cross.

The problem with the ruling Conservative body as I, a humble observer, see it is that they think they are right all the time. They have these great ideas and plough ahead with them even against Public opinion. Time and again they have ignored public fears at Consultancy meetings over things like the Outsourcing of the Elderly care homes at Nelson's court and Robert Bean Lodge, again with the Airport where local residents and indeed people like me who fear it is an awful use of Council tax payer's money and now with Strood Library. They are quick to label those who criticise and complain as Medway Knockers. When in actual fact these are members of the public who are genuinely aggrieved and angry at their blasé and frankly arrogant approach.

However the cherry on the cake was Cllr Jarrett, deputy Tory leader and portfolio holder for finance, dropped the H-bomb.

Labour government worse than Hitler?

During a too and froe with Councillor Osborne (Lab) he basically, (I'm afraid I don't know the exact word for word but am reliably informed) said that the last Labour administration brought the country to its' knees more effectively than Hitler.

Wow... just... wow...

Don't get me wrong, I have my problems with the last Labour administration and I am glad they were elected out in 2010 but brought the country to its knees? Baring in mind where I work, in our mess room right next to my head is a photograph of a Heinkel bomber (taken from another) over the London docks on a bombing run. Yes the country was brought to financial ruin in part by the last administration but compared to the Blitz, U-boat blockade, Channel guns, invading British territories and forcing evacuations of undesirables to their deaths this is nothing. What was he thinking?

I personally find it quite offensive and I'm sure that many others probably do as well.

After prompting from Vince Maple, Labour's leader, the comment was withdrawn but in all honesty it should not have been uttered in the first place. When you hold a position like that and a meeting like that you have to show that you are the grown up adult politician you claim to be and not continue to grand stand and politically score points.

It is behaviour like last night's display that is causing people to lose faith in politics and politicians. It is bad for Politics, it is bad for Democracy and above all, it is bad for Medway. Let's all grow up and treat the public, the voters and your employers as people to be listened to and not dismiss a negative opinion just because it is not in line with yours and above all show each other courtesy and dignity.

Local Tories fudge Nursery budget

Woodlands School, Gillingham

As I write this it occurs to me that there may be more to this story than meets the eye. Unfortunately I am not in the possession of all the facts but welcome any illuminating info from the other side. Until then I can only go on the information I have gained.

A few months ago the Head teacher of Woodlands Road School called a meeting of parents who attend the nursery to inform us what is going on and how Council cuts will affect the children and fees. Unfortunately I was unable to attend. My wife, who knows more about the child care and our house hold funds went and made some notes.

The Nursery has had it's budget cut by 40%

Not 4, not 20, but 40%

Further to this the Nursery will not be able to accept any children under 2 years old which will have a negative affect on mothers going back to work. This has been the case for my family and after several months of stress and viewing nurseries we've managed to get Oliver into a Private sector nursery that seems good. (it isn't Woodlands but it suits our needs at the moment.) Other parents are still looking.

There hangs a certain amount of uncertainty over the nursery as the 40% will come into being next April and will undoubtedly force prices up for those still at the nursery but there is a massive uncertainty as to by how much as it all depends on the amount of Pupil Premium money that will come into the Nursery and as yet that amount is unknown.

I have spoken with a couple of the staff who have looked after my daughter and they have told me that they have been told there is a probability of redundancies (which the Council will have to pay for) and of staff having to reapply for their jobs. This will rise unemployment and I am exceptionally sorry to say, lower quality at the nursery as I can not speak more highly of the quality of care and support that they give to the kids in their charge. Any loss will be a loss keenly felt. Further to that as Nick Clegg and the Libdems have vetoed the proposed ratio changes the Nursery will not be able to trim off as many staff leaving them possibly out of pocket.

The Nursery is also moving to sessional care (8.30-12:00 and 12:30-15:30) over wrap-around care (7:00-18:00) which restricts how many hours a secondary income earner can work and may mean that they have to give up work altogether if the nursery cannot provide a lunch time supervisor for the kids. How many employers would be happy with members of staff only working school hours? Be they retail workers, shift workers or clerical? Many parents are forced to look to the Private sector or bite the bullet and give up work altogether.

There is also the fact that any babies who have been put into the private sector through necessity, such as my son, may not come back to the nursery when they hit two years old. Although there will be some, who sadly have fallen into average nurseries through necessity, whose parents will swiftly move them when they get the first chance, there are also those who will stick with what they've got especially if they haven't seen Woodlands before. Why would you move your child if they are settled and you don't know that there is an excellent Nursery on your doorstep?

So there is more money not coming into Woodlands on top of the 40% cut and no paying parents for children under two. Whack on the fact that the School (now an Academy) cannot support the nursery financially in any way makes it even more dicey.

The Tory Council is banking on the fact that the Pupil premium and some trimming of "fat" will be enough to cover the costs and it is an exceptionally risky gamble to take with our Children's first steps into education and care as well as with the low income working families of Gillingham South ward and the hard working staff.

It really feels like Cllr Jarrett has got his sums and financial planning horribly wrong and it is the tax payer and working families etc who are going to pick up the brunt again.

I implore Councillor O'Brien, portfolio holder for education and early years, to look at this situation before it spirals out of control and leaves Woodlands either going belly up (in the long run) or forcing privatisation through the back door.


 

Failure at the top of Medway Council Cabinet

When a football manager loses vital games, no matter how well their team performed, they are

Over seeing failure - Cllr Rodney Chambers

sacked or have the decency to resign.

When a military commander is defeated heavily in battle, no matter what the odds were against them, they are replaced or have the good grace to die in battle.

When a minister screws up massively or a Party leader losses an election by a serious amount they are promoted side ways, replaced or resign.

Not so for the Medway Conservatives.

The ruling Medway Council have been in power for quite some time with quite a majority, which against the trend they increased in 2011. Yet despite this there have been some well documented clangers that have been dropped from a very high height.

The Medway Bus station over spend, the bridge to no where on the Isle or Grain, the budget that simply doesn’t add up, the Darley rail bridge enlargement, the Ofsted results, the Medway test failure, farcical consultation and privitisation of vital elderly care homes, roads in dire need of repair – the list is fairly expansive and I could go on.

Who has resigned their post as portfolio holder in this time?

Anyone?

No one.

There had been quite a substansive move by politicos and opposition parties to get Councillor Wicks to resign as portfolio holder of Children’s services after the debacle of the Medway test and the Child services that protect the most vulnerable in society were rated unsatisfactory by Ofsted showing that basic consultation and referals were up to twice that of the acceptable national average. Whether he was personally responsible or not is no longer relevant, he should have biten the bullet and resigned as public confedence in him was/is exceptionally low and that is not what you need in someone who is overseeing our children’s wellbeing. I use the past tense as last week he was rotated out and Cllr Mike O'Brien has taken his place but it took two years for this to happen and this farce should not have been allowed to continue publically for so long.

Then we turn to Councillor Jarrett the portfolio holder for finance. After this year's budget meeting with figures that did not add up, parking fees shown as incorrect, failure to come up with a financial plan to pay for Medway Tunnel other than to rob from the road repair funds he has shown that when it comes to financial wizardry he is less of a Gandalf and more of a Paul Daniels.

When you slot in the other mistakes and almost reckless spending on capital projects gone wrong like the bus station or the Hoo bridge at the expense of Sure start centres and elderly care you are forced to ask serious questions about his financial management. Yes he is doing a tough job with limited funds and I do not envy him in that respect but at the same time he is wielding the axe and purse like a drunk headsman on pay day and my daughter who is just shy of three can add up figures slightly more convincingly. Again public perception is that the Sherriff of Capstone is taxing the heart and soul out of Medway’s poorest to pay for Mayoral dinners, capital projects and regeneration when they want a more “back to basics” approach. Confidence is being lost.

Then you have the top of the structure. Councillor Chambers the Conservative and Council leader prosiding over them all. Again, he has not been personally responsible for the actions of his subordinates but he is where the buck must stop. Going back to the original examples, should a goal keeper play consistently poorly and concede goals left, right and centre it is the manager who will lose his post first. After the disasterous German invasion of Norway it was Chamberlain who stood down as Prime Minister not Carton de Wiart et.al as military officers. So why has Rodney Chambers still clung to his position? Should he not act and forcibly replace those who have failed so spectacularly as any good leader would do? Should he take the bullet himself or more likely cling to the map table to the bitter end moving phantom divisions whilst a Red (and Gold) steamroller relieve him of command at the next local election?
  No - the rumbling Conservative band wagon continues unabated here and the back slapping continues.

Medway Council cuts negatively impact children and families

Ollie & Sophie

I've been becoming more and more disillusioned with the cuts and removal of services over recent years.

What started as efficiency savings and the trimming of dead and dying wood was necessary. However as time has gone by the cuts have gone to deep and with misdirection of the banner of attacking the "benefit scroungers" they are starting to attack those who genuinely need it.

Local Labour leader Vince Maple talked about governing bodies having different priorities in his recent article for the Medway Messenger and how they choose to act. He especially criticised the ruling Conservatives locally and nationally for their choices of where the axe should fall.

For example, and this is a personal example, Medway's conservatives have changed the way money goes into Sure Start centres which equates to a severe cut to their budgets.

Many of my regular readers will know that I have two children; Sophie (2 and 11 months) and Oliver (9 months) and my wife was getting ready to go back to work around the end of July. We'd put Ollie's name down and were waiting for the green light.

Last Saturday we received a letter saying that the centre would no longer be accepting children under two years old!

There has been talk of staff numbers being cut and the current staff, all of whom are excellent, having to reapply for their posts. A meeting has been called to discuss the changes and how it will effect services.

However, the big problem is, IF we can't get Ollie into a nursery then Sam cannot go back to work and our household income is cut by a third. It would be an impossibility for the four of us to exist on my wages alone what with utilities, council tax, rail fare and even food prices all rising.

Serious choices would need to be made and we might have to pull Sophie out of nursery all together, which could be bad for her development. Further to that choices will need to be made regarding power, water even food and heating in the winter. Our already cold house may have to become devoid of all heat in the winter save for low heat on the bedroom heaters which will impact all of our health, just so that we can get by.

In this times it would be reasonable to turn to the state for help but with the new welfare reforms can we expect much assistance?

What I am struggling to understand is that the Coalition are trying to get people back into work and supporting those who aspire and work hard. However thanks to, frankly, fiscal mismanagement, the local Conservative council have put a few people out of work and effectively blocking others from returning to their jobs and possibly forcing people to look at benefits?

It is nonsensical.

My family have always worked, we've never taken anything we haven't been entitled to and we live with in our means. The very epitome of what this Government is trying to encourage and yet we're being kicked in the nuts - and not just us but also the other families who have applied and the staff at the centre which will have a knock on effect on the development of the other children.

Thanks a bunch.

Medway Council and unfair taxes

On the day the Liberal Democrats across the country are campaigning for fairer taxes we are faced with silly and unfair taxes here in Medway as this press release shows;

It was disappointing to learn from the Council, in response to my question last Thursday, that they are intent on pursuing a council tax policy which will result in an enormous waste of taxpayers money.  Charging council tax to the poorest in our community, and then pursuing those who cannot pay with the resultant magistrates court costs and officers time, may result in those who have low paid jobs, and stay put, being sent to prison, and those without jobs simply ‘disappearing’.


The Tories don’t seem to have learnt the lesson from the days of the iniquitous

 ‘Poll Tax’ when large numbers of ordinary citizens were sent to prison for short periods, thus gaining a criminal record, and councils still had the costs of trying to collect arrears which could paid off at the princely rate of 50p a week!


The councils own reports freely admit that the cost of collection will probably be more than the monies collected, so the council tax for the rest of us will have to increase to make up the deficit.  Mickey Mouse economics or what?  There are other options, such as raising tax on second homes and empty properties – this could not only increase revenue but bring back into use many of  the empty, neglected properties which blight our towns and deprive families of much needed homes.  Why can’t the council pursue this ‘win-win’ option rather than using time and resources to make the situation worse?

This was a matter raised at Full council the other week by Vivienne Parker of Rochester South and Horsted Liberal Democrats who posed a question on the night.

With the Cut from central government coming down to the local authorities many councils will have to look at raising the local taxes. According to a report in the Medway Messenger there could be as many as 14,000 households across the towns will have to cough up 25% of the new bill even though they were exempt due to low earnings in the past - 700 homes will have an extra £400 a year just to fill the void of the £4million hole.

I understand that the Council needs money but to strike the poor like this seems somewhat uncaring and ill thought out. Surely there must be another way?

Cllr Stamp (Ind) said For someone on a fixed low income it will just plunge them further into debt and they will have to make difficult decisions whether to buy food or put the heating on.

Made even more poignant when you realise the average reported (To the CAB) debt in the Medway towns is around £40k!!!!

It wouldn't seem so bad if the council weren't seen to be wasting money on vanity projects and overspends with poor planning - money just poured down the drain with the knowledge that there would come cuts one day from central government. It all seems very Victorian.

What did Conservative Councillor Jarrett portfolio holder for Finance have to say?

He began by blaming Labour's economic mess, which frankly is an over used argument considering the fact that this council has been wasteful and could have seen this cut on the horizon for years - I know I have and I'm just some bloke on the street!

Also the courts have the right to write off debts people can't pay for... Great! So we have to take people to court to find they can't pay and then let them off.
Let me get this straight... we spend money to get money out of people we already know don't have it and then write off the original debt... but still spending money on taking them to court... Brilliance!

To the concerns of rising poverty he said;
I do share some of the concerns but we are where we are. - Thanks Al.

My letter to KM- "Them and Us" politics in Medway

Chris Sams
Sturdee Avenue
Gillingham
12^th June 2012

I must say I am a little confused by Councillor Jarrett’s piece in Party People (8^th June) about justifying the Mayoral dinner as a worthy expenditure.

Firstly he seems to be comparing the celebrations to that of the Jubilee. It seems a bit of a dud comparison to me as the entire nation joined in with the celebrations with street parties, boats down the Thames and an overall outpouring of National pride and jubilation. For the Mayoral dinner it seems that only the elite of Medway’s Councillors are going to celebrate Councillor Hewitt’s election and can show civic pride.

I agree that Medway Council does have a large budget and that ultimately the amount of money, under normal circumstances, would be a trifling affair. However these are not normal circumstances. The Council have already made cuts to services, lest we forget Nelson Court dementia home, and had some really amazing over spends such as Stoke Crossing and the Bus station to name just a few. If Councillor Jarrett’s slogan “Better for less” is indeed what the Council is striving for how can they now justify another, albeit small, splash from the public purse for no one else’s benefit but their own?

Now, I’m not going to “bah-humbug” the whole idea, I agree with Cllr Hewitt that sometimes celebration is needed to lift spirits but why can only Councillors get to celebrate and we, the ones who are paying for it, get to sit outside and read about it in the press? (edited out) It merely perpetuates a “Them and Us” attitude that is unhealthy for politics and a seeming insult to voters at a time of austerity for what the average citizen will feel is a frivolous event.

Medway's mayoral farce

Mayor Hewett

This may seem like I'm jumping on the band wagon but reading Councillor Jarrett's piece in the Medway messenger infuriated me somewhat. I would also like to echo my agreement with Cllr Osborne's article.

I'm not going to comment on the selection process for the Mayor as. basically I don't know enough about it to make an informed comment and I fear that I would be lining myself up for a battle I couldn't win.

I will, however, add my voice to that of Medway Labour on disputing the celebratory Mayoral dinner which will be held in at a traditional venue with at least a three course meal with wine and will cost the Medway tax payer God knows how much. There has been a concession from the new Mayor, Cllr Vaughan Hewett (Con), that instead of wine the venue will serve Ginger beer which will be a lot cheaper.

Despite this concession Medway Labour has boycotted the Council shindig which has attracted scorn from Councillor Jarrett's article.

Here follows an abridged copy of it.

No matter how difficult times are, one of the enduring traits of this nation is our determination to maintain a strong sense of national pride.

...

In Medway we have celebrated the Diamond Jubilee in a number of ways. The council has held civic events, whilst beacons and street parties have been ways of recognising a remarkable royal reign. Medway Council remains determined to celebrate our heritage and tradition, which is why we host appropriate rather than extravagant events. Even before the nation fell on hard financial times Medway Council has always been mindful of how it spends public money.

We in the Conservative group have always supported the Mayroalty in Medway - even when the chosen mayor was not of our political persuasion. We have respected the office as well as the person.

Sadly this is not always the case with Medway's Labour group. They regularly snub mayoral events and pour unjustified criticism on the excellent fundraising and representational work done by or[sic] mayor and deputy mayor every year. Of course the mayoralty costs money but such spending is sensible and proportionate.

It is important to put such modest spending into context. Medway council has a huge budget of over £650 million, and to begrudge modest spending on special occasions really does reveal a bah-humbug mentality by some. It would be sad, dull place if we never celebrated anything.

In Medway we are proud to support our monarch, our mayoralty and our Armed forces. Some things are beyond price, although try telling that to those who seem to know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

I would agree that the position of the Mayor is important and that lots of good work is carried out by their offices for Charity and for the Medway towns in general and it is not the position that I am criticising.

It seems from the article that Cllr Jarrett is comparing the celebrating of the Queen's Jubilee as a tradition that has been upheld by the Council to the Mayoralty and its celebration.

That is pure balderdash and this is why.

Last week I went to my daughter's school's Jubilee party, watched the boats going down the Thames in celebration of the Queen and roads closed of for Street parties. This was an out pouring of public joy and thanks to the Monarch that EVERYBODY could get involved in where as this Mayoral dinner is something only Councillors can enjoy - at our expense!

Councillor Jarrett is right to state that it is a mere trifling amount spent from a massive budget but at the time when you and I are suffering from cuts from National as well as Local government - including outsourcing two care homes, getting rid of the dementia specialising Nelson's Court, rising bus fares, "More for less" spending policy and yet they get to have a grand meal based on our money to celebrate as a group. I am forced to ask - Where's my invite? If this celebratory meal is like the Jubilee and a celebration of the appointment of a Mayor then what is the rest of the Medway towns doing to celebrate it? What events are the council laying on for us the people paying for it?

It seems to me, and others, that this is merely a celebration for the elite rather than a massive out pouring of joy by and for the populous.

I also echo the words of Mr Richard Ford who wrote into the Medway messenger's letter page:

Apparently the new mayor is getting his inspiration and political direction from another source and he guided us to read Luke chapter 15 and the need to 'celebrate even i there had been a lot of problems before'!

Just remember that folks when you hear about the next round of cuts to services.

The easy criticism that I'm sure Cllr Jarrett would throw at me is that I am knocking Medway or have a "Bah-humbug" approach which is again nonsense. I recently wrote about whether the Jubilee celebrations were a good thing and concluded that at this time of need and cuts we as a Nation needed:

A party is just what the Doctor ordered to lift the spirits and to forget all the crap that flies at us on a daily basis. Is it wrong to take a day - or two - and celebrate something? There are so many dark clouds out there at the moment that a day of silver linings helps buck up morale.

I'm all for a celebration to lift spirits, to celebrate the Medway WE ALL can enjoy (especially when its our money) not just the elite.

New Economic Policy for Medway Council

NEP for Russia brought about regeneration

A few weeks ago my blog was mentioned in a Full Council meeting by Councillor Alan Jarrett, deputy leader of the Conservative group and portfolio holder for finance. This, as always, amazed me as I didn't think many people actually read this blog let alone that it had any clout what so ever.

I was thinking this morning about local politics and the Council's hilarious over spends that we (the Libdems) and other opposition groups (especially Labour) have been critical of. Maybe we're going about this the wrong way... Maybe we should make suggestions rather than continual criticisms and if Cllr Jarrett or one of his staff/researchers is reading this then please take this in the spirit it is suggested.

So Al, (can I call you Al?) please get comfy and prepare for some mind blowing Economic policy.

I don't know if you, or any readers are familiar with the episode "Empok Nor" from Star Trek Deep Space Nine?
The engineering crew of DS9 are preparing to go on an equipment gathering mission to a similar station Empok Nor. Chief O'Brian comes up with a list of equipment divided into three sections:

The Must haves

The Could do withs.

Would be nice.


Right, as a household on a limited income we are used to prioritising what we spend and we pretty much divide all expenditure for the household in this manner. We must pay our council tax and utilities, we must buy food, we must buy nappies. We could do with some new bookshelves to replace and reshuffle furniture, we could do with powerful weed killer for our back garden. It would be nice if I could buy those Hornby engines or those 1/72 scale German infantry men for painting.

You said in your article for "Party People" in Friday's Medway messenger that the Council is getting on with the job. Yes they have achieved some good things but at the same time the over spends have been crippling especially when compared to some of the cuts you have made. Tough decisions have to be made but selling off Nelson Court looks heartless when you've overspent on the bus station, Stoke Crossing, Roadworks, Woodlands School bail out, Photocopier contracts... people see the money you are wasting and the "price" that is being paid. Might I humbly suggest that you apply the O'Brian list to Council spending - and be brutal when applying them. It may be worth going through the upcoming budgets and prioritising in this manner because at the moment it looks like the Council is running a Coulda/woulda/shoulda style budgets.

OR better yet ask the populous. An information gathering exercises need not be expensive. Who needs phone polls and marketing companies, in fact you don't even need printers. Get one of the Council's many officers to draw up a table on Microsoft Word or Excel with three columns of Musts/Coulds and would be nice and then photocopy some 500 and dispatch them to the 18 local libraries and made available to users to fill out and hand back to staff.

The main drive is to live with in the Council's means. It doesn't take a Financial wizard to know that the economy is up a certain river with out a certain rowing implement and things are not going to improve greatly over the next few years. Government grants are going to get slimmer and slimmer and the day that Council taxes will be forced to rise is on its way but you will need to prove to the people that you can be trusted with their/my money.

Years ago I used to play the computer game Simcity where you build and administer your own city and generate wealth so I have a rough, simplistic idea of the current situation. Grand projects are eye catching but often the old adage spend money to make money doesn't always ring true and people will often point out great big White Elephants. It'd be an idea to get rid of all those pesky empty properties that are taking money and sitting idle and derelict - I understand there's about a hundred that could go? Housing is good so keep up the good work with the new housing in Rochester but serious steps to encourage people into the city centres to go shopping is just as good, there is a good mix of shops that are stock affordable goods its just the numbers of shoppers has dropped and is going elsewhere.

Regeneration is needed. Lets be honest, parts of the Medway Towns are run down and tired but lets not go bolting off towards big shiny things lets keep it small. What is necessary regeneration? Roads are a good start, pavements, parks, high streets, kids play areas... small jobs that paper over the cracks until real investment comes knocking or the economy pulls out of its slump. People don't care about shiny new dynamic waterfront bus facilities they want to see things they use working properly or tidy and neat. Paper over cracks as a quick fix, clean up the rubbish, licks of paint on municipal buildings, sort out the moonscape roads and paths and people will feel less down about where they live.

I'm sure you're already applying the O'Brian principles but I (and probably a great number of denizens will feel the same) not tightly enough. We know times are tough and cuts will come but you guys need to be showing that you aren't wasting the money unnecessarily (after all projects never run to time and there are always unexpected problems that require more money - may be it would be worth setting the price of a project then setting aside a further 10-15% to cover unexpected problems).

The people of Medway, and I include my self and my family in this, don't want to see the council pouring our money down the drain whilst basic services that we use all the time (roads/pavements/car parking) are not attended to. As I said - better to prioritise and explain priorities to the people than run a coulda woulda shoulda administration. It may not lead the Medway towns to economic recovery but it will certainly keep them on an even keel until the Storm passes.

City Status bid: One last epilogue

One of my favourite singers, Miss Amy Lee of Evanescence, once wrote a song with the lyrics "This is the last song I shall waste on you." In a similar vain this is the last post I'm going to waste on Councillor Jarrett's comments on City status.

Firstly I should say that the failed bid increasing Medway's status Nationwide is a good thing and I'm pleased this has had the happy bi product/

However there has been a lot of negative press generated by the Council during the procedure. Dare I bring up the Trading standards ruling (how much did that cost us again?) and the Council's rather ungracious responses to the ruling body's decision.

This line of comments also came up in Councillor Jarrett's column in Party People (Medway Messenger 13th April) in which he refers to the newly named City of St Asaph as One tiny Welsh Village - ok in the 2001 census the town had over 3000 residents but like Rochester it was stripped of its Medieval city status, and like Rochester, it deserved it back.

Councillor Jarrett, also, either doesn't understand or isn't interested in the cost argument. We weren't arguing that the bid itself was where the real waste was but in the post decision re branding that would have taken place. £13,000 on the bid itself isn't a bad amount of money, compared to other wasteful projects, but how much would it have cost us to change all the stationary at Gunwharf? How much for the signs? The literature?

Finally, and this is a personal note and what really got me angry;
How sad that at the eleventh hour Medway's Liberals chose to write to the Deputy Prime Minister urging him not to award City status to Medway. It was an incredibly spiteful act from a political party which obviously has long since put its shallow political aims before the good of the wider community.

Well... That told us... or did it?

OK, maybe the letter was late in the sending but we have always opposed this bid and we spoke to people across the Medway towns and the ones we spoke to were not interested or didn't care. That's hardly a mandate for Amazing level of support and we represented those who were being ignored as Nay sayers and who formed the majority of the people we spoke to. Is that not what Politics is about rather than dragging the population in your chosen direction and only listening to the Yes sayers?
He has berated us in the press on several occasions and in a Full Council meeting. I understand that he, like many is disappointed but its not all down to us. We stood by our Principles, and it is time that he respected that and moved on.
I felt particular wrath that it was intimated that we did this for our own shallow ends as I know that Tony Jeacock and I (and the whole exec Committee) acted on our beliefs and the opinions we were told on the doorstep and I felt it a personal swipe at my honour. Had this been the 18th Century I would demand he meet me at Rookery fields at dawn with his choice of sword for a duel. Unfortunately that time has passed so I shall stick to defending myself, the Committees actions and our principles to this blog.

It was a difficult decision to make, and one that was not taken lightly as we knew the amount of negative press and feeling it would garner us and the boon it would give the Conservative group; If we got city status we'd be mocked as Medway knockers, if we didn't get it we were to blame. How was this us trying to get gain? The Committee vote itself was exceptionally close with only a few votes in it but the decision - democratically made- was reached. I should also say that neither myself nor Tony were members of the Exec at the time and it was made by the out going Exec of 2011.

Finally he ends with Medway is a City in all but name. Really? Well in that case my House is a Fort in all but name. For Pete's sake we are a conurbation of towns and I'm afraid his comments sounds like delusions of grandeur. His whole piece sounds like back slapping and sour grapes. I cannot wait to see the letter from the Cabinet Office outlining why Medway didn't get its city status and see where the "blame" really lies.

Letters to the editor II

Here is the original wording of the letter I wrote to the Medway Messenger concerning the overspend on the Stoke Crossing and appeared on the 13th April 2012.

 Sturdee Avenue,
Gillingham
Kent

Dear Editor,

I am writing with regards the Council’s overspend of approximately £1.2m on the Stoke Crossing. (Featured in Monday’s Paper  “A Bridge to nowhere or money well (over)spent.”)

How can the Council continue to overspend on projects like this? This is yet another example (The bus station, Medway park, photocopiers, Woodlands school to name a few) of the Council being reckless with our Council taxes and what makes it worse they were warned beforehand that there would be an overspend and yet they still gave it a green light.

Who is going to take responsibility? Councillor Jarrett? One of the officers? As a tax payer I’d really like to see someone apologise and fall on their sword for these continued errors in judgement or to be called to account. After all it is our services that have been are in danger of being cut because of a lack of money but yet someone continues to be wasteful in the halls of power. How many millions of pounds have been wasted on all of the afore mentioned projects?

We wouldn’t accept it from Westminster and we shouldn’t have to accept it from Gun Wharf.

Yours Faithfully

Chris Sams

Another Glorious Overspend.

The Hoo branch line at Stoke Crossing

First we had the Bus station, then the debacle of moving gas works at Medway Park so there could be a straight entrance, Woodlands school bail out, uncancelled Photocopier fees and now £1.2 million over spend on the Stoke Crossing to the Isle of Grain.

Firstly, I don't deny the importance of the crossing. After all the Island has but one way on and off - A fact highlighted by campaigners in Grain Village over health and safety concerns linked to the proximity of the liquid Gas facility. After all if the road is blocked then no one is coming.

The Bridge itself runs parallel to the old A228 but crosses the railway line that serves Thamesport (perhaps twice a day) but it cost £14m.

What?

Yep, £14 million but it came from the national Government pot of £144m given to Medway Council for high profile regeneration projects. Think of all the things in the Medway towns that need improving or projects deserving money for regeneration. Then look at this. 
If it were me, I think £14m cold be spent much better elsewhere in Medway. We only have a train there about twice a day and you only have to wait a few minutes. Says Parish Council Chairman Chris Buckwell (con).

Can you put a price on Safety though?

As I said I'm not debating the bridge, ultimately if it saves lives or could prevent a disaster then surely it is a good thing, right?

My problem is the lack of procedure in the Procurement phase...
Ok the scheme was rushed a bit because of the deadline for spending the money was fast approaching and if it wasn't spent it would be taken back - fair enough. However in this fast tracking the project did not go through a "Procurement board." which would guarantee value for money. Officers even warned Councillors that the project would be over budget before the builders even won the contract!

So who is to blame for this over spend? Well in theory it is the Government because the rules governing Utility pipes has changed again and the Council has to pick up the tab to make sure they are protected during the building works.

But the warning that there was to be an overspend happened last year and some one still gave a green light on the project. So who is responsible? Someone must be... Is it Councillor Jarrett as the over all financial controller? Is it Robin Cooper Chief officer for regeneration? Or is it someone else?

It is time that someone took responsibility for yet another financial blunder and either fall on their swords or were punished.

Surely we cannot expect to continue like this when services are being cut and we suffer from continued bungling.

We wouldn't accept it from Westminster
We shouldn't accept it from Gun Wharf


A bridge to nowhere or money well (over) spent?- Dan Bloom, Medway Messenger 8-4-12, P.2

Osborne and Vince have knuckles rapped.

Medway Council's investigation of Councillor Tristan Osbourne and Councillor Vince Maple has come to a swift close with a slapped wrist from Legal officer Perry Holmes and the issue of a Statement of retraction. According to an article in the Medway Messenger (19th March) the member of the Council who complained was none other than Councillor Jarrett - Deputy leader of the Conservative Group:

I held the view that they had acted improperly and I think the decision has borne that out.

In defence Councillor Maple said; We were clearly criticising the council in their ability to manage fraud.
Councillor Osborne stated; Councillor Jarrett should be concentrating on sorting outstanding Council tax, rather than chasing an opposition which is legitimately holding his financial mismanagement to account.

Well... I agree with Councillor Jarrett on this occasion. I know, pigs have just been flying around the Naval memorial on the Great lines but there it is.

The original post title was worded along the lines of Medway Council one of the most Fraudulent in the UK.

As the article unfolded it did, as Councillor Maple says, explain that it was the area and failure of the administration to deal with Council tax fraud and invasion. - Fair enough.

BUT Any first year Media studies student or even any commuter will tell you the thing most people take away from an article is the headline, often not getting past the first paragraph. I can say from leafing through the papers on the train in the morning that I read the headline/title then move on if it doesn't interest me but it may stick in my mind. What would I have taken away from the Labour articles?
Medway Council was fraudulent.

How many people, who are still reading at this point, thought that this was an article about George Osborne and Vince Cable?

If I had a title called Tracey Crouch; The MP and the Football coach. How many people would read it and jump to the wrong conclusion of a seedy affair rather than a biopic piece about how she balances being an MP and Coach to the Under 14's Meridian Girls football team?

The point they were making in their leaflets and blogpost is valid and it is up to the opposition to publish the facts and call the Conservative administration to account using factual and substantiated claims. However the wording of the original title and again the sentence that described the council as Fraudulent was not thought out properly. It sounds like aspersions of a different nature are being thrown around by Medway Labour, aspersions that are not true.

The blogosphere is watched as a media outlet and those who write have a responsibility to be as honest and straight forward as we can. As I stated before;
At best it was a poor choice of wording, at worst it was a deliberate term to plant seeds in the minds of people who wouldn't then read the whole article but blissfully walk away thinking the Council committed Fraud

There may be better things to spend Tax payers money on but Standards are Standards and if the Independent board upheld the complaint and felt that action was needed clearly Cllrs Maple and Osborne were in the wrong. I hope that this is the end of it though and lessons have been learnt.

Medway Libdems Press release on City status

Here follows the official press release from Medway Libdems concerning the failed City Status bid by the Medway towns. It's late and I've been out all day so I'll write a commentary to it tomorrow with response to the inevitable News reports in tomorrows Medway Messenger.

PRESS RELEASE 14/03/2012

Already, Medway Conservative Councillors are blaming the LibDems for having snookered their bid for Medway City-Status. But with all the time; money; re-branding and propaganda the Conservative Council have invested in their efforts, and all the hours of involving highly paid council employees, it is difficult to believe that one brief letter from Medway LibDems to the DPM was responsible for the decision taken in awarding the status to Chelmsford and not Medway.

LibDems now wonder what the cost to the Medway council tax payers will be in removing the City-Status branding and signage that the Council so arrogantly adopted many months ago.

Medway Conservative Council has previously bid unsuccessfully twice for Medway City Status. It seems that on this occasion they were completely sucked into their own propaganda. However, they will not take responsibility for their own folly, but instead would have it that (“a couple of Lib Dem activists” – Cllr. Jarrett’s words) have such significant influence over the DPM as to be able to successfully torpedo the Tory Council’s unwarranted aspirations.

We found during last year’s local election campaign that City Status for Medway was not popular with the electorate and had the Conservative Council researched the issue properly, and perhaps consulted more widely, they would have realised this and not pursued their quest any further.

We LibDems have said constantly that Medway was not yet ready for city status, with the regeneration of the towns nowhere near completed and the shopping centres still leaving much to be desired.

Tony Jeacock
(Chairman)
Medway Liberal Democrats
(.. for and on behalf of)

Councillor Jarrett's Waterloo

The Bus station is Jarrett's Waterloo

During last month's preamble and budget Statement Councillor Alan Jarrett, deputy leader of the Conservative group and the portfolio holder for Finance within the council stated that he was lied to about the costs involved in Medway's "Dynamic Water front Bus facility" by Medway Renaissance and that he was unaware, until it was too late, that the Council would have to pour more money into the project to complete it.

This move has been welcomed by some members of the Council who have said that it is about time that officers face the music as well as portfolio holders. The example of Cllr Wicks and the failed "Medway Test" fiasco in which he bore the brunt of the blame even though an equal if not greater share could have been passed down to his lead officer who had a significant part in the organising of the test.

However, for blame one must look to the top. After the fateful day in 1815, who was considered to have lost the Battle of Waterloo? Was it Marshall Ney for squandering the cavalry on a ridiculous charge against Maitland's infantry formations? Was it Marshall Grouchy for failing to march his 30,000 men to the sound of the guns and appearing on Wellington's flank? No... the blame fell squarely upon Napoleon Bonaparte himself and so must it fall upon Councillor Jarrett.

If he was not informed he is to blame for not finding out. He IS the head of finance in the council, should he not have taken a greater look, paid more of an interest in this project?
In fact, some of Medway Renaissance (which conveniently no longer exists) argued that he did know and was kept informed by regular meetings and emails.

I must apologise for this, regular readers will know that I normally site my sources of information but this time I am forced to use an anonymous source and ask my readers to trust me on the reliability of it. I cannot name my source but I trust them implicitly and they have no reason to lie so please - trust me as I trust them.

I have been reliably informed by a source that those on the planning committee  for the Bus station (including Councillor Jarrett) were informed that the glass sections would go from floor to ceiling and that each enclosed passenger area would have automatic doors. They were also told that it was going to go over budget.

Indeed, Brian Weddell former head of Medway Renaissance has argued that Medway Renaissance did a lot of  good work and was monitored by elected members quite closely and indeed;

The Question is, against this background, why would anyone on the Medway Renaissance team lie? It is worth noting that the team was disbanded in March 2011. It seems odd that questions over the building programme have come to light one year later as the accounts should have been settled by the end of the summer 2011.
(sited in the Letters page from Medway Messenger 9-3-12)

This is a very good question. Councillor Jarrett has said that he is considering legal action against the group but it has taken a year for this to come to light - why not when the bus station so spectacularly failed to launch?

Other problems with his recent budget is the claims that they are having to deal with the cuts from central Government that have occurred over the past two years. My question is;

Why has the council not seen this coming? After all we knew in 2009 that there was going to be a financial storm approaching and that money was going to be short. This was confirmed when the Coalition was formed in May 2010 and the "No more Money" note was found.
Surely the time to start making savings and looking at the future was then.

No, Medway Council, like the proverbial cricket failed to put anything away for the winter and carried on spending money hand over fist and have suddenly found themselves without the money to maintain services as they should be. In fact, with poor planning they have cost the Medway tax payer more money with the cockups over photocopiers, Woodlands School rebuild, contested fines over the dubious practises of the CCTV car, the list goes on.

This lack of foresight has cost us, the Medway residents and we should see something for it.

Councillor Jarrett may have done a fantastic job in the past but he has failed spectacularly over the bus station, spending and forecasting and like Napoleon he should be forced to stand down.

Council has failed those in need at Nelson Court

 A great dis-service has been done to those in need by the ruling Conservative group in Medway council.

Nelson Court

The on going saga of Medway's elderly care homes is drawing to a close but not in the way campaigners, including myself, had hoped.

Now I know that in politics as in warfare, you cannot win every battle and as much as you believe you are correct and your opponents are wrong there are occasions when it works out the other way.
Sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few - other times the state or majority are shown to be oppressing the few and the decision is reversed.
All you can hope for is that the process and consultation is just and fair, all get to speak and that the deliberations are carried out in a balanced manner.

This has not been the case for the care homes.

It is true, that in these times of austerity tough decisions will have to be made, services are going to suffer one way or the other - for good or bad we're in this together and unfortunately the innocent will suffer with the guilty - well apparently.

For the moment the Balfour centre has a temporary reprieve - the two general care homes (Robert Bean Lodge in Rochester and Platters farm Lodge) are to be outsourced but ultimately they will remain under the control of the Council and available to the public and as the staff should have their contracts taken over by the new owner. Touch wood they will remain the same and continue under the same high standards at no extra cost.

Nelson's lodge, the specialist dementia care home, is to be sold of to a Private provider. I must admit that I have been unable to get to the scrutiny meetings or indeed the council meetings due to life and work getting in the way but, Maureen Ruparel, the organiser of the Save Nelson Court group has kept up updates on the Facebook group and, as a Liberal Democrat has sent regular reports to the Executive Committee meetings so I will use those from henceforth.

According to Maureen's posts the consultation has been a "Charade" and to quote her directly (from the 15th February - sited on the Facebook group)

As we suspected, the Conservatives haven't listened to the people. the cabinet has decided to go ahead with the sell off in spite of all the feeling against it. What a farce this consultation business is - the money would be better spent on services instead of all the paper, postage and officer time needed for a bit of theatre that is absolutely meaningless.

Indeed, Cllr Osborne (lab) had suggested that the Consultation was a forgone conclusion with the Cllr Jarrett having already pre-budgeted for the sale before the Consultation had even started. If this claim is true it would mean that however the Consultation went it didn't matter. It was always going to be their aim. There were also suggestions that the meetings were not taken seriously by those on the committee.

Cllr Juby

Another meeting was called by the Labour group on Thursday evening to discuss Co-oping them. The problem with this meeting is that our councillors (Dianna Smith, Shelia Kearney and Geoff Juby) were told that they were not allowed to speak, nor were the public. Maureen had this to say on Facebook;

I have just walked out of the scrutiny meeting held this evening as my blood pressure couldn't take any more of the crass attitude of the Tories. In spite of a request put by the Labour Party they still refused to allow any members of the public to speak, and on top of this they even refused to allow other elected councillors to address the committee!!! This is not democracy, it is total dictatorship and after completely ignoring the results of the so called public consultation they are determined to press ahead with the sell off of one of the council's prize assets. Labour and Liberal Democrats have only asked that the council look at other ways of saving the money, and at least let the management and staff put forward ideas for making savings, but the Conservatives are hell bent on getting rid of Nelson Court, and the other two facilities, at the earliest opportunity with no concept of how this will affect staff, residents and relatives. In the beginning of this campaign we tried to keep politics out of it, and hoped that the voices of those most concerned with the well being of our many frail elderly with special care needs would be heard. Unfortunately the intransigence of the ruling group and their refusal to listen to the public forced political action.

Geoff Juby, leader of the Libdem Council group had this to say as well;

To not only refuse to allow members of the public to speak or ask questions, but to also refuse to allow another democratically elected councillor to address the committee, is dictatorship of the worst kind.  We are quick to criticise other regimes elsewhere for refusing to listen to the public, but the ruling Tory group have totally ignored the overwhelming public consultation on the matter of our care homes, have gagged their staff and are now gagging other councillors and those members of the public who have come to the meeting.

This is a desperate situation and a lot of people are really concerned, in fact there may be current patients who are unable to use the services under private care providers. Maureen's husband, who uses Nelson court was unable to find a Private provider to take him as he needs are so specific as are his cultural needs. This is akin to shutting them for good to those users.

As the Council's bandwagon rattles on and wastes money, like the money thrown away on the bus station or on Jubilee mugs, or on lapsed photocopier contracts... the list of waste and mismanagement has been fairly lengthy but who is being forced to suffer? What could Nelson Court have done with the money that has been wasted and will be wasted on other vanity projects, including City status?

I don't normally wave the banner and shout but this, in my opinion has been a miscarriage of justice and procedure and those in serious need are being cast aside to get by as best they can. Personally I feel it is wrong.

Jarrett slates Libdems in Council over Clegg letter

Councillor Jarrett

Medway Council is tonight announcing their budget for the following year and the cuts that look to be levied upon the citizenry, the raised charges as well as confirming the sale of Nelson Court and the Outsourcing of the other Care homes. These are all really important to the people of Medway and believe me I am going to come to those at some point in the near future.

I didn't make it to the Council meeting tonight as it is my wife's birthday and I wanted to spend the night in with her, though I have been following it on Twitter and now that she is engrossed in Ebay and her new DS game I can write with freedom.

During his speech tonight Councilor Jarrett, deputy leader of the Conservative Group & Council as well as portfolio holder for finance made an attack on the "Clegg Letter" on city status. 

In case you've never read by blog this is a big deal for me. Medway Council are running a third bid for City status... you know what this link will explain it all.

So what did Councillor Jarrett say?

[The Libdems] didn’t have the courage unless their group leader was out of the country.

*sigh*

Alright, personal bias aside, let’s examine the validity of the claim.

After much debate over the last year or so about City status and campaigning against it during the Local election in May the issue came to a head at the AGM where a vote to decide whether or not to write to Nick came about. The vote was cast and the decision taken.

Where was Geoff Juby the Council group leader? Surely Geoff would not agree to this course of action?

Geoff was present at the AGM. I only know which way I voted (Yes) but all of us acknowledged that the majority had spoken and that a course of action was decided.

Then, yes Geoff went away for about six weeks to the Philippines and Hong Kong to see family.

However, although Geoff is leader of the Council group and a well respected councillor and guy he is not the leader of the Medway Liberal Democrat group – that is in fact Tony Jeacock who was elected at the same AGM for 2012. As the letter was drafted it was passed to the chair a number of times before it was presented to the Group on the 16^th January for approval.

The letter was sent out with the signatures of the Group Chairman and Secretary the following week and yes Geoff was still on holiday, however if Geoff had been present I’m sure he would have been supportive and critical in the right places. After all, the group had democratically voted for this.

The Group took this very difficult decision and acted. It was not a Palace coup initiated by a couple of cowardly or ambitious Group members whilst our brave and heroic leader wasn’t even on the same continent as Councillor Jarrett’s words may suggest. This was democracy in action, something that the Party is based on.

I apologise if this has been a bit of a rant, this project has been a personal one for me and I do get defensive, especially with all of the flak that has circulated in the Media and online. I also understand that the Conservatives have fought hard for City Status and can understand they are angry with our perceived “betrayal” of their project but I wanted to set the record straight on Councillor Jarrett’s words.

Response to criticism to Lib dem stance against City Status

At the end of January the Medway Liberal Democrats wrote to Nick Clegg regarding Medway Council’s application for City status – the Letter is (here) and the Press statement (here) and other articles on the subject (here)

Councillor Jarrett was quite scathing in Dan Bloom’s article that appeared in the Medway Messenger stating the following;

Cllr. Alan Jarrett (Con) said there was support from most parties and residents claiming, the letter was by “a couple of local activists” who “want to do Medway down.”

After reading the comments in the article, editorial comment and the odd letter in the KM’s letter page I decided to write a response to defend one of the accusations. Tony Jeacock, our Group Chair wrote to defend the accusation that this was a “couple of activists” two weeks prior to that and I've attached that after mine.

Just a quick note on the letter itself. Italicised text was edited out and Bold text was added or reworded text by the Messenger – I’ve left in the original text for comparison.

I am writing in response to Cllr Jarrett’s comments regarding the Liberal Democrat’s letter to Nick Clegg regarding City Status. (Article appeared 27^th January.) FOR MEDWAY

Councillor Jarrett says that the Liberal Democrats are “doing Medway down”  I can assure the Councillor that considering my family’s (edited to MY FAMILY HAS A STRONG) involvement with the towns; My great-great Grandfather is commemorated on the Boer War memorial, my Grandfather built defences here and my Great Uncle worked in the dockyards. I am proud to be from Gillingham and the thought of “doing Medway down” has never entered my mind.

Unlike Councillor Brake’s account, times have changed and in this time of austerity and cuts, including the possibility of Care homes and other front line services facing severe cuts, how can we justify the cost for “potential gains”?

The brass tacks of the matter is that the Council will lose it’s Central Government grant for 2013/4, Council tax may have to rise and there will be a deficit and shortfall resulting in service cuts and pay freezes but they will need to pay out hefty sums for rebranding road signs, uniforms, stationary, this really can’t be another Council overspend.

As a father with a mortgage and Council tax to pay I’d like “Value for my money”. When I see services being cut and my taxes going up and money being wasted I, and many residents don’t see it.  Local Government must do what they have to do before they can do what they want to do and City status is a want rather than a have when spending from the Public purse.

Edited to Read as:

As a father with a mortgage and Council tax to pay, I’d like value for my money. Local councils must do what they have to do before they can do what  they want to do and City status is a want rather than a must-have when spending from the public purse.

(I should state that the letter was not written with the knowledge of the Executive Committee, neither was this article so all criticism should be directed to me alone.)

Tony's response;

Councillor Jarrett, in his response to the Lib Dems opposition to the city-status bid, couldn’t be further from the truth when he suggests the letter was by “a couple of local activists” who “want to do Medway down”. On the contrary, we hold the people of the Medway Towns very much at heart. The decision to take such a stance and submit the said letter to the DPM was as a result of a democratic vote taken by the whole of the Medway Lib Dem executive committee and ordinary voting members in attendance, which whilst not unanimous was nonetheless decisive.

Councillor Jarrett says we have no evidence to support our claims. The fact is, the issue of city-status featured prominently in our local government election campaign on the doorstep last May, further evidenced within our campaign literature. On the doorstep in each of the wards in which we campaigned, we found lamentably little support at all for city status and such that we did find was rather less than robust. The negatives far outweighed the positives, but an even greater majority expressed their total disinterest, which is hardly an endorsement for the local council to proceed when there are far more urgent needs to address.

And where is the evidence that the Tory council secured an overwhelming level of support from the local populace for city status? I would suggest they have become blinded by their own propaganda.

Finally, as a group, we have not said that we should not ever again consider city-status in some form. We simply do not believe it to be appropriate at this time when there are far more important issues at stake, such as saving our residential care homes and day centres caring for our elderly who are no longer able to safely look after themselves, instead of selling them off to the private sector where their future cannot be assured. To refer to our democratically elected course of action as “cynical” is a bit rich coming from a group that goes through the motions of conducting a so-called “consultation” on the proposed closure or sell-off of these establishments, knowing full-well in advance that their decision has already been established.

Tony Jeacock (Chairman) Medway Liberal Democrats