Author Topic: Ex-town Cllr investigated for trivial alleged breach of the code of conduct  (Read 15439 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Damnit

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
  • Hugs: 3
  • Be nice to newbies :)
Re: Ex-town Cllr investigated for trivial alleged breach of the code of conduct
« Reply #15 on: September 27, 2019, 11:06:23 AM »
 [app]

Offline DORIAN

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 340
  • Hugs: 6
  • Gender: Male
  • in a hundred yeras time it will not matter
Re: Ex-town Cllr investigated for trivial alleged breach of the code of conduct
« Reply #16 on: September 27, 2019, 17:12:04 PM »
i have only just read your insulting remarks to dirty washing calling it nonsense and other  ignorant remarks, rather like your disdain of the the remain who you call vulgarity contemptible, i know not word for word, but in precise  form you know exactly what was meant.
you would never make a politician as your crude rhetoric to all those who do  not agree with you, will be demonised.
As for your so called disciplinary action against you,, so what, if innocent you will be found out to be so, as for your other comments about remoaners and the awful language used, against them, maybe listen with your two ears before opening your verbal venom
No problems just Solutions

Offline Bob DeBilda

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3307
  • Hugs: 53
  • Gender: Male
  • Hobby
Re: Ex-town Cllr investigated for trivial alleged breach of the code of conduct
« Reply #17 on: September 27, 2019, 19:04:27 PM »



 You seem to have forgotten that it is fundamentally about false allegations claiming a breach of the code of conduct for councillors made about a current elected councillor, albeit relating to a role held on another council from which I resigned over a year ago.



Correct me if i'm wrong but until proven false, allegations are just allegations. Because you say they are false it doesn't mean they are?

Protect Local wildlife, Keep your cat indoors!

Offline baldy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4140
  • Hugs: 82
  • Gender: Male
  • Westbury needs a cleanup -smear campaigners first!
    • Info about internet "Trolls"
Re: Ex-town Cllr investigated for trivial alleged breach of the code of conduct
« Reply #18 on: September 27, 2019, 19:51:03 PM »

 You seem to have forgotten that it is fundamentally about false allegations claiming a breach of the code of conduct for councillors made about a current elected councillor, albeit relating to a role held on another council from which I resigned over a year ago.


Correct me if i'm wrong but until proven false, allegations are just allegations. Because you say they are false it doesn't mean they are?


Correct. You could have said until proven allegations are just allegations. The trouble with the current council code of conduct system is that there is no proper easy -access and free judicial appeal court (like there was between 2002-2012) to make the hearing committees (I call them Kangaroo Courts) behave fairly and follow correct law not least because most councillors cannot afford to take councils to the High Court for a Judicial Review on a point of Law.

When I say that something is false I am simply saying it as it is. If it had been proven false or dismissed by a proper legal hearing, I would say "proven" etc.   But there is no proper hearing system at all now. It's just a council standards sub-committee meeting of 3 councillors who were put on the committee by their political masters / group leaders to basically nail other councillors especially their opponents ...

When an investigator says that an allegation was not a breach, that is his opinion. If the monitoring officer dismisses the matter by deciding "no further action" and assuming a Kangaroo Court of Councillors does not try to overturn the monitoring officer's advice (if the complainant request a review), then that is effectively the same as "case thrown out" or "no case worth answering".
« Last Edit: September 27, 2019, 20:12:45 PM by baldy »
I'm here in my private capacity as a local resident only (unless stated otherwise).
Click to see:    Twitter  
NB. Alternative name: Lord High Commander Dr. Baldy

Offline baldy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4140
  • Hugs: 82
  • Gender: Male
  • Westbury needs a cleanup -smear campaigners first!
    • Info about internet "Trolls"
Re: Ex-town Cllr investigated for trivial alleged breach of the code of conduct
« Reply #19 on: September 29, 2019, 03:19:36 AM »







you would never make a politician ...






UPDATED AGAIN - 29/9/19


Erm ...  I have been an elected politician for 17.5 years and have held office on all three levels of local government that existed during that time and, I have an entirely clean record at both the district council (2003-2009) and Wiltshire Council (2009- intend to stand down in 2021) despite dozens of allegations about me and more than 500 pages of so-called written evidence by mad, muddled smear campaigners who are worse than you.

If you meant that I would never be an MP, I agree but that's because I have no plans to climb the greasy pole in a party and then campaign to be one. My record is certainly clean enough to qualify.

Just to spell this out for you, I have never been found in breach of the code at either West Wiltshire District Council (which closed when the County Council absorbed its functions and became a unitary council called Wiltshire Council) or at Wiltshire Council despite many attempts by spiteful smear campaigners to throw all sorts of nonsense at me.

At the town council, I was found in breach once for not being respectful to a former councillor by saying publicly a perfectly truthful description of how he ruined the project to refurbish The Laverton when he was appointed to lead the processs of finding and obtaining grant money and then failed to obtain any money at all and then he actually blamed the project. I have signed statements by THREE (at the time recent) former mayors which confirm that they attended the relevant meetings and saw what happened and which confirm the truth of the matter. I have another signed statement from an expert in grant funding who led the later advice for and a string of wholly successful grant applications for the re-started project (several years later) which confirms that my original advice was correct (ie. focus on heritage) and that the person who had failed to obtain grants had gone about it all in an incorrect way not least because the project I recommended would have qualified for substantial Heritage Lottery funding if it had been applied for in the way I had explained in the adopted 2006 business plan that I wrote. That business plan included a reference to a letter from the Heritage Lottery folk sent to the council in response to a preliminary application made by me confirming the criteria to be followed by the project and welcoming a full application.

What Ian Taylor did instead was to dismiss the business plan and say that the Heritage Lottery Fund was the wrong way to go and he proceeded to take a year to apply to the Big Lottery Fund as if the project was a new venue or public facility rather than improvements to an existing community project with many heritage merits. The Big Lottery refused his application and pointed out that the application was wrongly filled in in several ways and anyway it could not qualify for any Big Lottery grant which should be aimed at new facilities rather than old existing ones or maintenance to existing facilities. Instead of apologising for his horrendously bad advice and wasted time (and for trashing my business plan), he proceeded to blame the project and say that he had applied to the Heritage Lottery Fund and it had been refused, which was a blatant lie. All he did to try to cover his tracks was to hurriedly send in a second preliminary application by fax (I had already properly done one, as mentioned in the 2006 adopted business plan) which described the project in a way that did not focus enough or properly on the heritage merits and also mentioned the need for maintenance expenses (which did not qualify). He also bizarrely sent a copy of the 2006 business plan which was never intended to be a document to be used for any specific grant application as it included all sorts of points that would not qualify for grants, so obviously the faxed reply to him from the Heritage Lottery Fund was a clear rejection. What a bone head! In effect, Ian Taylor lied repeatedly and stitched the result up and was wholly negligent in failing to apply for the correct grant with a full application and in a correct or reasonably professional way and then again said that the Heritage Lottery Fund was not the correct grant to apply for for reasons based on his own errors and fraudulent manipulations. In separate correspondence between me and various people involved in the project, I made it clear that Ian Taylor was a fraud when he put himself forward as suitable for handling substantial grant applications for a fairly complex major community project which required proper expertise not a pretentious know-all who actually knew nothing of any use about refurbishing heritage buildings and how to correctly apply for heritage-related grants. He had been recommended at the time in 2006 by the then Mayor, Pam Cox-Maidment who promptly did a disappearing act from the council at the May 2007 elections. I have never forgiven her for getting Ian Taylor involved in the project and allowing him to trash all the hard work done by me and others. It took years to overcome the damage he caused and to restart the project with a substantially new team under a new and competent chairman, Stephen Andrews, and with a highly competent project adviser whom I had recommended to the working group.

The reality of the matter is that by the time the investigation resulted in a report which dismissed allegations of bullying but found a breach for disrespect, the whole statutory standards system had been dissolved in Summer 2012 by the Localism Act. The Act closed down the judicial appeal system which meant that I was investigated under an old system and then attended a hearing under a new system which had no proper appeal available so that the hearing was just a Kangaroo Court of clowns who failed to understand the details or who just wanted to put a minor mark on my record whilst dismissing all really serious allegations made.

The stark truth is that I was entitled to say all that I said and there are plenty of case decisions that show that other councillors would have been cleared in the same circumstances mainly because a proper appeal system to a proper court was available before 2012. Now, it's just a Kangaroo Court of councillors who mostly want to get a black mark on their political opponents.

I have officially put my two fingers up to the standards system as corrupt and I have made it clear that the ex-councillor who made the allegation against me was lying, not least because I have hard written proof that what he claimed in his allegations was untrue and what I said about him ruining the project (he even got the Laverton Hall closed to the public and the refurb project suspended) was perfectly true. What I said was not disrespectful. It was plainly true and relevant.

I shall never forget the front page article in the Western Daily Press once in 2006 which had a photo of me and falsely said that I had been given a police caution. This was a totally untrue story given by Bill Braid as part of his very long smear campaign against me involving three separate bundles of allegations. In reality, I was cleared of every single allegation he made and I was never given a police caution (which means that a crime has been admitted in writing after being arrested and charged and is on the police record as a shortcut to avoid court for a first offender or similar). Indeed, I have never been arrested and have a completely clean police record.

So, you might understand that when some people make yet more allegations that lead to an investigation, I tend to publish what is happening .... especially as most complainants tend to spin endlessly to the folks that they know with false versions of the truth.
 


N.B. I am commenting here in my capacity as a local resident and a former town councillor (I resigned over a year ago) who was there at the relevant times and knows what happened.
Any reference here to my other councillor roles (whether current or past) is simply a point of information rather than the role I am undertaking here.
This subject in this post is simply about a town council project and former town councillors and is in response to other posts about the overall discussion about complaints that relate only to the town council.

I.E. The town council code of conduct does not apply to me now, as I left that council over a year ago. No other code of conduct applies as I am not acting in any other relevant role here.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2019, 21:32:58 PM by baldy »
I'm here in my private capacity as a local resident only (unless stated otherwise).
Click to see:    Twitter  
NB. Alternative name: Lord High Commander Dr. Baldy

Offline baldy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4140
  • Hugs: 82
  • Gender: Male
  • Westbury needs a cleanup -smear campaigners first!
    • Info about internet "Trolls"
The final report for the first case has been issued.

The decision by the Monitoring Officer at WC is "no further action".

The report makes it clear that in the opinion of the investigator there was no breach of the town council code of conduct by me and that this is a finely-balanced view ... which I regard as nonsense for reasons explained in my previous post.

The complainant can request a review which would take more time to look at the issues again.

Given the determined and vicious nature of the complaint, with all sorts of muddled claims thrown into the mix, including the idea that I should have been suspended as a Wiltshire Councillor pending the result of this investigation (which no-one has the power to carry out), I imagine that the complainant will try to keep this all going ....

If this all goes to a review hearing, my legal adviser will really enjoy telling the investigator and relevant lawyers involved what the correct law is.


Well, well, well ....  the incompetence and nonsense just goes on and on  ..........

The really vile silly bitch complainant (she has made a long string of false claims that I breached the code when actually she's effectively been told she is wrong on every count by the investigation report - ie. I've done nothing wrong according to law) did ask for a review and I've only just been told along with a date set for another review committee (this case has already been through 2 nonsense reviews about whether to proceed to investigation originally - both of which were bungled with incorrect law and procedures) to meet to decide whether to accept the Monitoring Oficer's decision (NB. He is Wiltshire Council's chief lawyer / Director of the Legal Dept) or to effectively ignore the official legal advice and go to a hearing ....  which would be odd as the Monitoring Officer would have to be there to advise on the law and the councillors sitting on the Kangaroo Court, ahem, hearing panel, are supposed to follow the legal advice given ...

The basis of the reasons given for the review by the complainant is that freedom of expression as set out in statute and a long series of court cases including some involving town councillors should be ignored because there was no mention of freedom of expression overriding the code of conduct in the town council code of conduct and because town councillors are not involved in politics so are not politicians who can benefit from the freedom of expression rights enshrined in law or the enhanced protections that apply to politicians.

It's all so nuts .... largely because the complainant keeps making up her own version of the law as if she knows something new when actually she's just trying to find new interpretations that don't exist because actually its all been covered in case law that does still give the enhanced protection to town councillors for freedom of expression.

My legal adviser has not yet had a go at setting out all of the correct and relevant law in this matter because when the official investigation report draft basically cleared me - albeit with nonsense about a balanced decision etc and criticising me for almost going up to the limits of freedom of expression - I did not ask him to spend any time on it because he was focusing then on the second case which definitely does need unpicking with a proper dose of correct law applied to it (I've not yet received the final report of the second case).

The final report of the first case was issued with almost no changes from the first draft and the Monitoring Officer decided that "no further action" would occur and he also stated that he is sure that the investigation report was properly done and that he agrees with the recommendation of no breach.

I am pretty sure that my legal adviser will now want to actually set out the correct law and the main mistakes made so far by all sorts of officials in this first case including those made by the original council lawyer who originally fouled up the relevant law - he even claimed that a councillor calling for another councillor to resign is a breach of the code when actually it certainly is not and never has been  (the investigator has made this clear) though making up false claims about a councillor is a breach (the investigator felt the need to say this in his report) ........

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm ....... the irony of that last simple point, given the string of false claims about me breaching the code by this truly awful woman co-opted councillor!
« Last Edit: January 05, 2020, 11:32:39 AM by baldy »
I'm here in my private capacity as a local resident only (unless stated otherwise).
Click to see:    Twitter  
NB. Alternative name: Lord High Commander Dr. Baldy

Offline DORIAN

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 340
  • Hugs: 6
  • Gender: Male
  • in a hundred yeras time it will not matter
i have noted all your posts relevant to your situation, and i note not one person has replied in sympathy
or otherwise, it appears you wish to vent your anger but in essence, due to to non response. no one is really interested in this tired drawn oot facade




No problems just Solutions

Offline baldy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4140
  • Hugs: 82
  • Gender: Male
  • Westbury needs a cleanup -smear campaigners first!
    • Info about internet "Trolls"
i have noted all your posts relevant to your situation, and i note not one person has replied in sympathy
or otherwise, it appears you wish to vent your anger but in essence, due to to non response. no one is really interested in this tired drawn oot facade


You mean farce not facade.    ::)

I know that you are really rather dim and do not understand anything very well unless it is very simple indeed, but I feel the need to correct another of your mistakes. I am not angry. I am disgusted at the sheer nonsense, incompetence and disgrace of the whole process which is utterly unfit for purpose and which allows liars and smear campaigners to go on and on making up new claims based on utter nonsense including ridiculous interpretations of law that only utterly incompetent lawyers or just spiteful smear-campaigners would dream up.

If I was angry, I would have done something really strong about the matter already such as use my heavy duty laser printer and pile of large toner cartridges and foolishly large piles of A4 paper left over from the last elections to print and distribute leaflets all over the place making clear what a revolting creature the un-elected  co-opted disgrace this horrible councillor is ....   (sticking easily to the truth).

All I am doing here is creating a sort of public blog recording key events and thoughts along the way. I don't require any response especially from anyone with nothing worth saying like you, though I know any forum member can add their comments. Remember: hundreds of people read this thread including local councillors and journalists.

I am confident that some folk will eventually be interested to see how long this all goes on for and the utter nonsense and corruption or illegal unfairness in the system that occurs along the whole journey caused by spiteful people.

One of the reasons for going through the process carefully is to ensure that if the final result is manifestly wrong, the option would be open to me to take the council to judicial review in a way that does not cost me much at all. I am not the only person who has resigned off a local council in Wiltshire and then had to put up with a load of nonsense caused by false allegations about a code breach and incompetent lawyers and a long investigation and who in the end is cleared of all allegations (I accept that I have not yet been finally cleared because the end has not yet occurred but I am sure of the end result after all legal processes have finished ...).  The whole story would then be very clear indeed, especially to bright people such as anyone who is employed as a journalist or who is a director or higher in any principal authority.

I think a judicial review case in the High Court called Former Town Cllr Hawker v Wiltshire Council (or similar) has a certain ring about it that would stop the utter nonsense from going on and on and affecting all sorts of councillors across Wiltshire.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2020, 11:00:47 AM by baldy »
I'm here in my private capacity as a local resident only (unless stated otherwise).
Click to see:    Twitter  
NB. Alternative name: Lord High Commander Dr. Baldy

Offline DORIAN

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 340
  • Hugs: 6
  • Gender: Male
  • in a hundred yeras time it will not matter
so eloquent as ever and bombastic rudeness to boot
No problems just Solutions

Offline baldy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4140
  • Hugs: 82
  • Gender: Male
  • Westbury needs a cleanup -smear campaigners first!
    • Info about internet "Trolls"
Today, the Standards Review Sub-committee of Wiltshire Council considered the request for a review of the monitoring officer's decision in the first case (which threw out all the allegations and confirmed no further action) and decided to uphold the Monitoring Officer's decision.

So, the Result of the First Case about a long list of false allegations about breaches of the code of conduct of Westbury Town Council made by Cllr Sheila Kimmins (a co-opted town councillor and current deputy mayor) against me, is that all of her allegations have been thrown out.

I now await the final investigation report and decision by the monitoring officer on the second case.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2020, 17:11:38 PM by baldy »
I'm here in my private capacity as a local resident only (unless stated otherwise).
Click to see:    Twitter  
NB. Alternative name: Lord High Commander Dr. Baldy

Offline baldy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4140
  • Hugs: 82
  • Gender: Male
  • Westbury needs a cleanup -smear campaigners first!
    • Info about internet "Trolls"
Here is my speech today:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FACT: All of Cllr Kimmins claims are wrong and based on junk – wrong guidance and wrong analysis of the law.

FACT:  We are gathered here today because the Wiltshire Council standards system for councillors fails to properly explain what the code really means and because the procedural system to deal with allegations of any breach is deeply flawed with unfairness occurring almost all the time at almost every stage except when lawyers manage to correctly advise the relevant councillors on what to do.

FACT: The Wiltshire Council standards system is deeply confused about how to interpret any code of conduct. The council has even adopted a piece of nonsense that it refers to as guidance. This was an illogical attempt by the then leader of the council to put “respect” back into the post-2012 code of conduct. The problem is that this guidance cannot change what is already written in an adopted code and it cannot change the meaning of words that are there in the code and it cannot put words in that are certainly not there in the first place..

FACT: Her Majesty’s new government has a massive mandate based on its manifesto which clearly said that it will champion freedom of expression and tolerance.

FACT: When I was a district councillor for 6 years, I – like Cllr Carbin – benefited from regular seminars put on by a competent monitoring officer and standards committee – about the meaning of the then statutory code of conduct. There were also various guides circulated by the then standards board which made it clear that freedom of expression was a powerful right which applied to councillors at the higher level to enable robust political debate.

FACT: Various High Court cases – referred to in the papers before you – make clear that Councillors are required to have thick skins. Trying to be both a snowflake and a politician is a recipe for all sorts of nonsense and false claims to a code of conduct system which fails to explain what conduct is allowed in the first place.

FACT:  All of the relevant legal argument for my defence is set out in the papers before you.

FACT: I am entitled to expect that the law of the land will be applied correctly.  Whether you choose to end these false allegations now or allow them to proceed, I assure you that the correct law will be applied by the end of this matter.

FACT: The Westbury Town Council code of conduct, like the Wiltshire one, does not contain the requirement for respect.

FACT: I have no case to answer.

FACT: The Wiltshire Council code of conduct system needs to look at itself and correct its many flaws and actually start to explain it all properly to councillors and the public.  Good luck.
I'm here in my private capacity as a local resident only (unless stated otherwise).
Click to see:    Twitter  
NB. Alternative name: Lord High Commander Dr. Baldy