What must Cambourne Parish Council publish on their website?

There are quite a few documents CPC must be publishing on its website but doesn't. The Information Commissioner says that a Parish Council must publish its Publication Scheme.

Of course CPC hasn't published one. The Publication Scheme it does rely on is dated 4 November 2008. Except all those dated before 1st January 2009 are void.

Therefore CPC has no valid Publication Scheme.

As I have already shown the Parish Council hasn't published its Councillors' Register of Interests as require by law.

Two other documents that must be published on its website are:

Councillors Code of Conduct.
Complaints Procedure.

Ron says: The Council doesn't have an up to date Publication Scheme. Nor the required Register of Interests, Code of Conduct or Complaints Procedure. Maybe that is the answer. No register of interests, complaints or code of conduct our parish council just doesn't want residents to know what is going on. Happy Days for the Parish Council!

Complaining to the Monitoring Officer about Parish Councillors

The Monitoring Officer is an Officer on SCDC.

The Monitoring Officer has the specific duty to ensure that the Council, its Officers, and its Elected Councillors, maintain the highest standards of conduct in all they do. The main duties of the Monitoring Officer are set out below. The Monitoring Officers' legal basis is found in Section 5 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989, as amended by Schedule 5 paragraph 24 of the Local Government Act 2000.

The Monitoring Officer has three main roles:

To report on matters he/she believes are, or are likely to be, illegal or amount to maladministration.
To be responsible for Matters relating to the conduct of Councillors and Officers.
To be responsible for the operation of the Council's Constitution.

In order to ensure separation of roles, the Monitoring Officer may not also fulfil the duties of the Chief Finance Officer or the Head of Paid Service.

On the SCDC website it says the following:

Therefore to make a complaint against a Parish Councillor I should write to the Monitoring Officer. Right? The answer is wrong. Because elsewhere on the website it says:

Please note that if your complaint relates to a Town or Parish Councillor, then you should make a complaint to the relevant Town or Parish Council in the first instance. 

I made complaints against 5 Cambourne Parish Councillors over their Register of Interests. Having read two ways to make my complaints I did both. I emailed my complaints to the Monitoring Officer and to the Parish Clerk. I received the following from John Vickery, The Parish Clerk, regarding my complaint about Ruth Betson:

Ron
Thank you for your email I will look into the matter.
With the regard to your request for a copy of the Code of Conduct in our Publication scheme the supply of the document is by hard copy at the cost of 10p per sheet  and there are 6 pages. If you could arrange the payment and supply an address for it to be delivered to I will be happy to provide the document. It will be on the web site in the future once the site has been updated a page is being created and populated with the Councils policy documents. The register of interest is part of this work.
John Vickery

Of course nothing about the other 4 complaints.

The response from the Monitoring Officer was as follows:

Dear Mr Swanson,

I’m afraid I have not heard anything from Cambourne Parish Council regarding your complaints, which you copied to me, but I wouldn’t have expected to be contacted by them.  The procedure we follow in South Cambridgeshire is that complaints about parish councillors should be made in the first instance to the relevant parish council and dealt with through the parish’s own complaints procedures, which you have done. It is only if the parish council asks SCDC to handle a complaint due to a conflict of interest or if the complainant feels the parish council has not acted reasonably in handling their complaint that we would look at a parish council complaint.  I attach the SCDC Code of Conduct Complaints Procedure for your information.

I am copying Mr Vickery into this response and trust that he will respond directly to you advising you on the progress of your complaint.

Kind Regards

Fiona McMillan

Therefore the first part is wrong and the second part is what the Monitoring Officer is using.

With the whitewash that was the report into my complaints I sent an email to the Monitoring Officer detailing my assertion that Cambourne Parish Council had acted unreasonably. I wrote:

Dear Fiona McMillan,

I read from the Cambourne Parish Council minutes of the meeting of 3rd November 2015 the said Council has taken a decision to basically absolve those councillors I complained against. As it says in your e-mail: 

It is only if the parish council asks SCDC to handle a complaint due to a conflict of interest or if the complainant feels the parish council has not acted reasonably in handling their complaint that we would look at a parish council complaint

I feel Cambourne Parish Council has not acted reasonably in the handling of these complaints. 

The reasons why I feel this to be so are:

1. The report from the Parish Clerk (item 22 M143 - 03/11/2015) was resolved by all those attending. This means the outcome was voted for by Cllrs Crocker, Betson, Masters and Patel. They therefore voted for a conclusion to my complaints that they had an interest in.

2. It is held that "ignornace of the law is no excuse". When a councillor signs their declaration of interests they are warned they need to update their Declation of Interests within 28 days. This was no done. The way I read the outcome is the "ignorance of the law is the excuse".

3. Cllr Simon Crocker is a paid Parish Clerk at Caldecote Parish Council. He is also a member of the Society of Local Council Clerks. John Vickery, The Parish Clerk at Cambourne Parish Council. who wrote the report is also a member of the Society of Local Council Clerks. Therefore there is a conflcit of interest here.

4. There has been no communication between John Vickery and myself unless I prompted the correspondence. I only found out the complaint was coming before the meeting after the meeting had taken place. The report itself is not objective nor transparent and I feel this is a whitewash to protect Cllr Simon Crocker because he didn't update his Declaration of Interests for nearly 2.5 years. 

In conclusion I feel my complaints have been mishandled. 4 of those I complained against not only acted as the Jury, by voting for the report, but were also the Judges. There are conflicts of interest between the Clerk, John Vickery, and Simon Crocker, also a Parish Clerk (Caldecote Parish Council) and Chairman of Cambourne Parish Council.

Regards

Ron Swanson

Two weeks later I wrote again to the Monitoring Officer.

Dear Fiona McMillan

I wrote to you two weeks ago about my complaints about 5 Parish Councillors on Cambourne Parish Council and how I feel my complaints have been unreasonably handled by the Parish Council. I haven't heard anything from you one way or another. Please can you let me know what is happening.

Regards

Ron

I received the following reply from the Monitoring Officer on 11th December 2015:

Mr Swanson

I am sorry I have not been able to update you on progress.  I emailed the parish council clerk to ask for their comments on the issue you have raised and have not yet received a response from them.  I will send a chaser email today and let you know once I have heard from them.

Kind Regards

Fiona McMillan

Nothing since. The Parish Clerk can't be bothered to reply to the Monitoring Officer and the Monitoring Officer is not pursing the matter.

District Council Electoral Review

There is an electoral review under way for South Cambridgeshire District Council. The result is a the Local Government Boundary Commission England (LGBCE) is minded to review the boundaries for the wards for a total of 45 Councillors.

What does this mean for Cambourne? Good news we will have 3 Councillors for Cambourne. Whilst the number of electors per Councillor should average 2895 +/- 10% with 3 Councillors the average is 8685. Therefore the 10 +/- spread means the top limit is 9553 electors and the lower limit is 7817 electors.

Cambourne is predicted to have 7760 electors in 2021. This is slightly below the lower limit. Unless another Parish, like Knapwell is added, it is very likely that Cambourne will be electing three councillors of its own in 2018.

The question I ask is: Why can't we have 3 separate wards for Cambourne? One Councillor each for Great, Lower and Upper Cambourne. Each of the 3 parts of Cambourne have distinctive boundaries. Indeed I've called for the warding of Cambourne Parish before and do so again.

Please do get involved by making a submission to the LGBCE website. The link is here or here

Parish Councillor George Cooper and AEA Ltd

Whilst I was trawling through the Registers of Interest I found this snippet on Parish Councillor George Cooper. On his Register of Interests he works for the London Borough of Haringey and is a director of AEA Ltd. Whilst the former is good info, the latter rather opaque. What is AEA Ltd? I Googled and found The Association of Electoral Administrators Ltd. I don't understand the need to be so opaque in this matter.

Though he has since resigned.

George is past president and can talk about Parish Polls.

Cambourne Parish Council is acting illegally!

One of the recommendations approved by the Parish Council as a result of my complaint was:

3. The Parish Council web site will be updated to show a link to member’s register of interest.

I hope this is going to be published on their own website because the Localism Act 2011 Chapter 7 Section 29 (7) states:

(7) A parish council must, if it has a website, secure that its register is published on its website.

Therefore Cambourne Parish Council must publish the register of interests for its Parish Councillors on its own website. Of course, at the date of publishing, this hasn't happened. Cambourne Parish Council has been acting illegally in this respect for many years as the Register of Interests must have already been published!

My complaint against Simon Crocker

I made a complaint against 5 Parish Councillors for not keeping their Register of Interests up to date. The law requires that each Councillor informs the Monitoring Officer of any changes within 28 days. On the top of the form it says:

I, (insert name), a Parish Councillor, give notice that I have set out below under the appropriate headings my interests, which are required to be declared under section 29 of the Localism Act 2011. Within 28 days of becoming aware of any change to the interests specified in this notice, I will provide written notification to the authority's Monitoring Officer of this change.

How this complaint started was a Conservative Leaflet that came through my door. It stated that Simon Crocker is a Parish Clerk at Caldecote Parish Council. I looked on the Parish Council website because by law the Register of Interests must be published and found nothing.

(Localism Act 2011 Chapter 7 Section 29 (7) A parish council must, if it has a website, secure that its register is published on its website.)

I looked on the SCDC website and found the Parish Council register of interests.

As can be seen from the entry copied from the website, Simon Crocker was unemployed. I looked on the Caldecote Parish Council website and found that Simon was employed from 7/3/2013. Some 2 years and 5 months he had been employed yet hadn't updated his Register of Interests.

Simon is a Parish Clerk of Caldecote Parish Council; Chairman of Cambourne Parish Council; is a member of the Society of Local Council Clerks and holds the Certificate in Local Council Administration (Cilca). Having all these positions and qualifications he still did not know he needed to keep up to date his Register of Interests. This seems rather doubtful.

I see that Simon Crocker has updated his Register of Interests, well over 2 years too late.

My complaint against Ghazala Mehboob

I made a complaint against 5 Parish Councillors for not keeping their Register of Interests up to date. The law requires that each Councillor informs the Monitoring Officer of any changes within 28 days. On the top of the form it says:

I, (insert name), a Parish Councillor, give notice that I have set out below under the appropriate headings my interests, which are required to be declared under section 29 of the Localism Act 2011. Within 28 days of becoming aware of any change to the interests specified in this notice, I will provide written notification to the authority's Monitoring Officer of this change.

How this complaint started was having looked at Simon Crocker Register of Interests whether other had done the same. I looked on the Cambourne Parish Council website and found nothing.

(Localism Act 2011 Chapter 7 Section 29 (7) A parish council must, if it has a website, secure that its register is published on its website.)

I looked on the SCDC website and found the Parish Council register of interests. Ghazala has a Register of Interests. A simple search on Google found more information than was declared.

Ghazala was a Director of Meglina Care Service Limited from 24th September 2014 to 19th May 2015. This company was voluntarily dissolved. On 3rd February 2015 Ghazala became a Director of Innate Financial Consultants Ltd.

Both of these should have been on the declared on Ghazala's Register of Interests. They were not and at the time of writing they still haven't.

My complaint against Ruth Betson

I made a complaint against 5 Parish Councillors for not keeping their Register of Interests up to date. The law requires that each Councillor informs the Monitoring Officer of any changes within 28 days.

How this complaint started was having looked at Simon Crocker Register of Interests whether other had done the same. I looked on the Cambourne Parish Council website and found nothing.

(Localism Act 2011 Chapter 7 Section 29 (7) A parish council must, if it has a website, secure that its register is published on its website.)

I looked on the SCDC website and found the Parish Council register of interests.

But there is no Register of Interests for Ruth Betson. Why the reticence at filling in a Register of Interests? Even at the time of writing there is no Regsiter of Interests published on the Cambourne PC website or on the SCDC website.

But Ruth does have a twitter feed and a LinkedIn profile. Ruth must therefore have work or business and these should be included in her Register of Interests.

How they are connected!
Also Ruth signed the nomination form for Simon Crocker at the Bourne by-election in September 2015.

My complaint against Jeyur Patel

I made a complaint against 5 Parish Councillors for not keeping their Register of Interests up to date. The law requires that each Councillor informs the Monitoring Officer of any changes within 28 days.

How this complaint started was having looked at Simon Crocker Register of Interests whether other had done the same. I looked on the Cambourne Parish Council website and found nothing.

(Localism Act 2011 Chapter 7 Section 29 (7) A parish council must, if it has a website, secure that its register is published on its website.)

I looked on the SCDC website and found the Parish Council register of interests.

But there is no Register of Interests for Jeyur Patel. Though on LinkedIn he is very free with his profile. He is a Project manager at ARM. He also states he is a Councillor on Cambourne Parish Council.

Why the reticence at filling in a Register of Interests? Even at the time of writing there is no Regsiter of Interests published on the Cambourne PC website or on the SCDC website.

My complaint against Sean Masters

I made a complaint against 5 Parish Councillors for not keeping their Register of Interests up to date. The law requires that each Councillor informs the Monitoring Officer of any changes within 28 days. On the top of the form it says:

I, (insert name), a Parish Councillor, give notice that I have set out below under the appropriate headings my interests, which are required to be declared under section 29 of the Localism Act 2011. Within 28 days of becoming aware of any change to the interests specified in this notice, I will provide written notification to the authority's Monitoring Officer of this change.

How this complaint started was having looked at Simon Crocker Register of Interests whether other had done the same. I looked on the Cambourne Parish Council website and found nothing.

(Localism Act 2011 Chapter 7 Section 29 (7) A parish council must, if it has a website, secure that its register is published on its website.)

I looked on the SCDC website and found the Parish Council register of interests.

This showed that Sean Masters owns Luxury Watch Hire (which was Luxury Watch Hire Ltd but was compulsory dissolved on 6/10/2015). Looking on Duedil I found that Sean Masters was a director of 2 companies when he was co-opted on the Parish Council on 20th May 2014. These were Auto Consultants Ltd (compulsory dissolved on 21/10/2014) and Motorbid Ltd (compulsory dissolved on 21/10/2014). The last two companies were not entered on his Register of Interests and should have been.

From the looks of it Sean starts up limited companies for them only to be compulsory dissolved. No annual returns or accounts submitted. Whilst compulsory dissolving of companies and the non-filing of documents is a matter for Companies House the only bearing is Sean should have declared these on his Register of Interests and once dissolved removed them.

Cambourne Parish Council whitewashes my complaints

Having put in complaints about 5 Parish Councillors on Cambourne Parish Council I wasn't amazed at the outcome. A complete whitewash.

This is the text of the report: (My Comments)

The Parish received a complaint against five councillors stating that they  had not updated their declarations of interest to show changes of circumstance or missed information that should have been added.

It is the Councillors responsibility to ensure that their Register of Interest is current and up to date.

After careful consideration of the details of the complaint, that there was some lack of understanding and the necessity to keep their Register of Interests up to date was not made clear (It couldn't be clearer. Obviously ignorance of the law IS an excuse) the Parish Clerk would suggest the following actions taken to resolve the issues raised.

1. To ensure all Councillors Register of Interest are up to date copies have been circulated so we can ensure all are up to date. The Parish Office will check to ensure all forms are returned and will be checked to see if the relevant information has been updated. (so far only Simon Crocker has updated his RoI)

2. The template of the agenda for full Council and Committee meetings is to be changed so that there is a note reminding Councillors that it is there responsibility to keep their register of interest up to date in line with the code of conduct. (Hasn't happened yet)

3. The Parish Council web site will be updated to show a link to member’s register of interest. (The law requires it is published on the Parish Council website)

4. When new councillors attend the Parish Office for their induction meeting the Parish Clerk will ensure the importance of ensuring the register of interest is kept up to date in line with the Councils
Code of Conduct. (Should be happening already)

5. After every ordinary election year Councillor Training will be arranged with one of the items being the importance of recording and maintaining the Register of Interests. (5 is covered by 4 so this is just filler)

RECOMMENDATIONS:
That the Council confirms the actions listed be implemented.

Further to this. I'm being informed that Simon Crocker, Parish Chairman and a Parish Clerk with Cilca qualification: "that there was some lack of understanding and the necessity to keep their Register of Interests up to date was not made clear". Obviously this lack of basic knowledge for a Parish Clerk is worrying for Caldecote Parish Council and as Chairman of Cambourne Parish Council. What else does he not understand? Obviously the 6 months rule to start with.

That is not all. Who voted for this whitewash? Of the 10 members attending 2 had just been co-opted (Cllr Mrs J Sawford and Cllr G Thompson) 4 were not complained against (Cllr J O’Dwyer, Cllr G Cooper, Cllr Mrs R Poulton and Cllr T Hudson) and 4 were complained against (Cllr S Crocker (Chairman), Cllr Ms R Betson, Cllr J Patel and Cllr S Masters).

John Vickery, the Parish Clerk, wrote the report. He is also a member of the Society of Local Council Clerks as is Simon Crocker who is also a Parish Clerk at Caldecote. And 4 of those complained against voted for the outcome. Why were they allowed to do so? Because Simon Crocker was Chairman.

Ron says: I do not know whether the outcome would be different if an Independent person had looked at these complaints. What I do know is this is riddled with conflicts of interests. I doesn't look good when the accused are also part of the jury who decide the fate of the accused.

Stand for Council! Why would you?

Whilst having a go at Councillors could be the way this blog goes, it is worth having an idea of what a councillor does and what they get paid.

The basic allowance for a councillor depends on which authority or council they sit on. At Parish this is zero. District is £4,720. County is £7,700. For District and County there are special allowances for certain jobs extra to the basic councillor job.

As an individual this doesn't seem much for a part-time job.

What does a councillor need to do? The 6 month rule means a councillor must attend one meeting in any 6 month period. If they don't a councillor is disqualified and a notice of vacancy must be issued.

A good councillor will do more than just the basic. Below is taken from the LGA website.

The councillor’s role and responsibilities include:

• representing the ward for which they are elected
• decision-making
• developing and reviewing council policy
• scrutinising decisions taken by the councillors on the executive or cabinet
• regulatory, quasi-judicial and statutory duties
• community leadership and engagement.

Most councillors hold regular drop-in surgeries each month. Surgeries are a chance for residents to meet you and discuss their problems or concerns. You may also need to spend time visiting constituents in their homes. On top of this you will be dealing with letters, emails and phone calls from constituents. When dealing with casework or council business you may need to meet with council staff. These meetings, and any visits to council offices, may need to take place during the working day.

Then there are council and scrutiny meetings. Scrutiny is the crucial process of looking at the work and decisions of the executive. As well as the close examination of councillors, it can also involve the community and interested parties.

Handled well, scrutiny procedures can stimulate real local involvement in how the council manages and delivers its business.

Councillors may also sit on quasi-judicial committees, for example the planning committee, which takes non-political decisions on planning applications. The number and length of these meetings varies from council to council. If you are a member of a political party you will also be expected to attend political group meetings, party training and other events.

All the above sounds good. Lots of reading. Just not attending meetings but preparing for meetings is part of the job. With most District and County Council meetings taking place during the daytime and a few in the evening this makes doing this job hard to do whilst in full time employment.

Also these jobs are elected which takes time, effort and money to achieve, if it can be achieved.

Same goes for Parish Council. Whilst their meetings are in the evening from 7pm onwards this is for the few not the many. My job doesn't allow me to be there on a Tuesday evening when the Parish Council normally meets.

Whilst I may have a go at Councillors about their decisions, motives and political ethos I do so from the idea that they should be praised for being elected and putting time and effort into being a councillor.

Laura Selway "resigns" and another one goes too!

Laura Selway has "resigned". Though Laura was disqualified after not attending for 6 months and therefore could not serve. The Parish Council endeavoured to cover their mistakes in allowing Laura to become disqualified and allow her to "resign". Mrs Elizabeth Doidge has also resigned.

If no election is called then these positions will be co-opted and this will mean out of 13 parish councillors 5 are elected and 8 are appointed.

Laura Selway is disqualified!

Laura Selway was a Parish Councillor on Cambourne Parish Council. Elected at a by-election held on 6/12/2012 Laura has not been attending meetings for the last 6 months. According to the 1972 LGA:

85 Vacation of office by failure to attend meetings.

(1)Subject to subsections (2) and (3) below, if a member of a local authority fails throughout a period of six consecutive months from the date of his last attendance to attend any meeting of the authority, he shall, unless the failure was due to some reason approved by the authority before the expiry of that period, cease to be a member of the authority

Therefore Laura Selway is disqualified.

You would feel that is so simple. I wrote to John Vickery, the Parish Clerk, asking whether Mrs Selway was still a Parish Councillor? John Vickery replied:

Mrs L Selway is still a Councillor for Cambourne as she has been giving valid reasons for her apologies, that have been approved by the Council prior to the expiry of the six month period. Mrs L Selway last gave valid reasons for her apologies on the 7th July 2015 therefore under the legislation it is from this date that the clock starts for the six month period.

This is wrong and I wrote back to John Vickery informing him he is wrong. I then received this email:

Thank you for your email I await guidance from the monitoring officer on the situation.

I therefore wrote to the Monitoring Officer to confirm that Laura Selway was disqualified.

I received the following email from Graham Watts, Deputy Monitoring Officer:

I have been asked to provide you with a response to your below email on behalf of the Monitoring Officer.

The law expressly provides that where a Council Member fails throughout a period of six consecutive months from the date of their last attendance to attend any meeting of the authority then, subject to certain exceptions, they cease to be a member of the authority unless the failure was due to some reason approved before the expiry of that period.

In this case it is my understanding that, even though apologies for absence were received and accepted, no approval or dispensation has been granted by the Council for Mrs Selway's absence before expiration of the six consecutive month period.  Unfortunately apologies for absence do not count as the Council granting approval or a dispensation for this purpose and a specific decision to this affect has to be taken before expiration of the six months.

I spoke to the clerk earlier today regarding this issue and advised that the Council would have to take a specific decision to grant approval or a dispensation and that this, along with a reason, would have to be recorded in the minutes, but that the reason did not have to be explicit by way of protecting any sensitive or personal information.  If the six months has already passed with no approval or dispensation having been made, which I now understand as being the case, then unfortunately Mrs L Selway must indeed be disqualified as a Member of the Parish Council.

Therefore Laura Selway is disqualified.

The guidance that John Vickery, the Parish Clerk, obtained from the Deputy Monitoring Officer would be the same as above.

Of course I heard nothing back form John Vickery. The silence is deafening. I then posted about this disqualification on the Cambourne Forum and the thread was deleted.

Simon Crocker (Chairman of Cambourne Parish Council) waded in with this message to me:

Laura Selway is going through an extremely traumatic time. There is an excellent reason why her apologies have been approved, and your posts are thoughtless in the extreme. Have a little compassion for gods sake! She reads these boards! I wouldn't wish what you are doing to her on my worst enemy!

She will be resigning as a Cllr soon so just drop it.

I wrote back the following:

Laura Selway hasn't attended a meeting for 6 months. Rather than say put this on the board straight away I emailed the Clerk first. It was only when his reply didn't make sense because he was misapplying the law that I posted on the forum. If on the other hand the Clerk and the Council had applied the law correctly then I would have been satisfied and nothing would have been posted.
As for her resignation she cannot resign from something she is already disqualified from.
This event could very well be seen as a cover up on your part because you and the Clerk were not following the law. Both you and the Clerk should both write to Laura Selway and apologise for your mistake.

Both you and the Clerk should reflect on this event and rather than shooting the messenger you should have both applied the law and then this mess of yours wouldn't have happened and Laura Selway could have fulfilled her term.

The consequences.

If Laura Selway continues as a Parish Councillor the Council would be acting illegally. For instance: If Laura Selway turned up to a meeting and in doing so a quorum of councillors was achieved and was then found to be disqualified then all the decisions made at that meeting would be void because the meeting was inquorate.

Another reason was as a parish Councillor Laura would have been privy to sensitive information about personnel issues. Being disqualified this would mean the Parish council could have breached the Data Protection Act.

John Vickery is the Proper Officer of the parish Council and it is his duty to inform the Council when it is going to act illegally. John Vickery has the qualifications for being a Parish Clerk.

It turns out that Simon Crocker is also a qualified Parish Clerk employed by Caldecote Parish Council and standing for election as a Conservative Candidate for the Bourne Ward.

Ron says: The Parish Clerk and the Chairman of the Parish Council should know the law. Yet they misapplied the law and were found out. Rather than coming clean this incident was whitewashed. I hope both John Vickery and Simon Crocker have written to Laura for not following the law and letting Laura be disqualified.

Karate and Public Buildings

At a recent Parish Council Meeting, Associated Karate Schools wrote a letter complaining about the Parish Council hiring out The Hub to another Martial Arts Club called Adrenaline Martial Arts.

The Hub is a public building and must be for hire to all those who wish to hire this building unless they are for illegal reasons.

In the letter the following is stated:

The letter goes on:

That is wrong. The Clerk was wrong to ask other club. Inform - Yes. Allow the other club to have a veto - No.

The letter goes on:

They can do because they are not public buildings. The Hub is a public building and open to all.

Nor should the Parish Council be worried about whether AKS loses money.

Associated Karate Schools runs 4 venues in Cambourne. Adrenaline is looking to run 2.

Ron says: The Hub is a public building which is open to be hired by all. There must not be any discrimination. If Adrenaline wants to hire and there is space that is competition. If AKS is unhappy about competition then AKS can hire from their other facilities. What is also wrong is the Clerk interfering in who can and cannot hire The Hub. 

The General Election 2015 in South Cambridgeshire

The winner is Ho-de-ho Allen, the Conservative Candidate. All we need now is to vote and the result. As a seat that is designated as a safe seat the General Election will pass South Cambridgeshire by.

Who is standing?

Ho-de-ho Allen - Conservative
Gerald Kindersley - Liberal Democrat
Simon Saggers - Green Party

The UKIP candidate has died so they are looking for another one.
The Labour candidate resigned last year so they are looking for another candidate.

Cambridgeshire is pretty safe for the Conservatives with 6 safe seats out of 7. The Cambridge constituency isn't a safe seat and is currently Liberal Democrat held. Labour wants to win this seat. The Conservative voters in Cambridge should seriously consider whether to vote tactically for the Liberal Democrats rather than elect a Labour MP. I would urge them to do so.

Labour hasn't any interest in any of the other seats in Cambridgeshire so might as well concentrate all resources on Cambridge.

The Liberal Democrats have the same problem as Labour. They need to retain Cambridge and have no real interest anywhere else in Cambridgeshire and should be concentrating all their resources on winning in Cambridge.

The Green Party has no real electoral prospects but as an insurgent party they need to get their party name in front of voters.

UKIP have a few prospects. Huntingdon, North West Cambridgeshire and North East Cambridgeshire are all constituencies where UKIP does better than most. UKIP needs to decide where it will fight. Shailesh Vara or Jonathan Djanogly are both good candidates with Vara as prime candidate for UKIP to go after.

The Conservatives have a few seats they need to retain outside of Cambridgeshire. Peterborough, Bedford and Stevenage are seats the Conservatives need to retain. Resources would be better spent on retaining these seats rather than trying to win in Cambridge.

Ron says: Living in a safe Conservative seat mean no other party is interested in South Cambs. Does it really matter who I actually vote for? I doubt it.

Whatever happened to the Council Tax freeze?

Why has my Council Tax gone up!

In 2010 Band D council tax for Cambourne was £1482.88. Now it stands at £1611.16. That is an extra £128.28. An increase of 8%. Whilst 8% doesn't seem high it is not the zero promised by the Conservatives or the Coalition. The local authorities that receive government money increased by £99.74 or 6.7%. The Parish Council, which doesn't get any Government money has raised CT from £92.21 to £120.75. An increase of 31%.

An what is the most galling? It is the Conservatives in Cambridgeshire that have increased Council Tax. The following Conservative run authorities have not frozen their council tax:

The County Council.
The District Council
The Fire Authority
The Police Authority and Commissioner

All are or were Conservative controlled at the time of breaking the Conservative promise to freeze council tax.

If the travellers can do this why can't we?

The travellers invaded part of Cambourne over the Christmas period. The area along the St Neots Road borders the parishes of Cambourne and Bourn.

SCDC has a number of signs up in this small area. This is what they say:

A maximum of £50,000 and/or 6 months in prison. The SCDC logo is in the upper right hand corner. When the travellers left did they clear the site they had been occupying? No is the simple answer.

Looks pretty clear apart from the orange gas canister. Looking more closely.....

A couple of more small blue gas canisters.

Over the fence was various dumped items.

Various items strewn across this area.

A pallet.

A broken shovel.

Black bags dumped so SCDC can come round and collect. 

A better collection than for permanent residents.

As the sign said the area is "subject to surveillance". Obviously this surveillance didn't include all this tipping, dumping and littering. 

Ron says: If I was to litter and dump all this on the side of the road I would be properly prosecuted and fined. Yet it is one rule for the travellers, who don't pay council tax and another for the residents of SCDC.

Lister Wilson UKIP candidate for the General Election has died

Lister Wilson the UKIP candidate for South Cambridgeshire has died. A former Conservative Councillor for Bourn at both District and County councillor he made some splashes. I won't speak ill of the dead.

This will mean a new UKIP candidate for South Cambridgeshire. Martin Hale from Willingham looks in the frame for this job.

Ron says: Apparently Lister was very ill. Standing whilst ill can cause a delayed election or if elected a by-election.

Trailer park still being subsidised!

The Parish Council is looking to charge the Council Taxpayer for the Trailer Park. 

Ron says: Why is this service being run as cost to the Council Taxpayer? This should be running at a profit not a loss. 

And what was missing?

In the minutes of the Parish Council meeting 4th November 2014 it was stated:

13. ELECTORAL REVIEW OF CAMBRIDGESHIRE
It was expressed that Cambourne should be a County Division in its own right
with one Councillor dedicated to Cambourne and not as part of the Bourn Ward.

It was:
RESOLVED that the Chairman and Parish Clerk would review the consultation
documents and present a report at the Council meeting on 13th January 2015.

Did the Chairman and Parish Clerk present a report to the Parish Council meeting on 13th January 2015? No they didn't!

Ron says: When it comes to complaining about no county councillor exclusive for Cambourne the Parish Council cannot complain.

Hi-di-hi South Cambs. Ho-de-ho St Albans

Ho-de-ho Allen has resigned here seat on St Albans District Council. The by-election for her former seat is on 29th January 2015.

School Crossing Patrol money cancelled

As part of expanding the Parish Council by upping the number of staff cuts have to be made. One such cut is the money for Schools Crossing Patrol.

Although the Parish Council wasn't spending any money on the School Crossing, taking money without providing this service, the Parish Council has decided not provide a SCP at all by deleting money for this service if it was ever to start.

Ron says: Having taken all this money for this service without providing this service are the Cambourne council taxpayers going to see any of this money back? Of course not!

Ho-de-ho

Ron says: Should we greet heidi-hi Allen with HO-DE-HO? I feel we should.

Ron even helps sheep

Poor sheep caught on brambles. Mrs Swanson called and Ron rushed to release this sheep entangles in brambles. On release the sheep walked off without bleating thank you. Good deed for the day!

And the electors need to learn....

what a Parish Council is allowed to do!

In an email to the Parish Council from Richard Pearce there is an air of certainty that our Parish Council and Parish Councillors are responsible for BT Infinity.

Richard talks of shambles and people who are not doing their job. But in the short tirade Richard misses the point. BT Infinity is the company which has to provide Broadband not the Parish Council. The Parish Council has no authority over BT Infinity.

Ron says: Poor Dominic Plunkett, no wonder he resigned, getting these sort of emails from residents must be off putting. Councillors do have some duties to the public. But getting BT Infinity to upgrade broadband isn't one of these duties.

Not a very good Parish Council budget

Part of looking at the Budget there are some glaring anomalies. Some examples are in the following: 

The above shows the overspends on certain budgets during the current year. Below are the budgets for next year.

Areas of concern.

Plant and Equipment. This has shown continual overspend on this budget for each year at @ £21,000 in the past few years. This year the PC is looking at an overspend of £11,950. With this history overspend just adding £2,000 to the budget for next year seems very short.

Plant maintenance. This has also overspent. Looking at the projected amount and what has already been spent this year there is a discrepancy of @ £1,000 overspend

Repairs and Renewals. This has a variasble spend but always above the £10,000 budgeted for next year and a whacking great big £63,000 overspend this year.

Christmas Lights. This has continually overspent. Although the amount budget is projected to be spent this year is £1,000 the actual amount spent so far is £3,305. This amount is not reflected in the budget.

Fireworks. This has continually overspent. Although the amount budgeted in each year is £2,660 this hasn't stopped the PC overspending in each year. As with the Xmas Lights although the amount projected to be spent this year is £2,660 the PC has already overspent by £1,710. This is not reflected in the budget.

Ron says: Budgets are a bit of a guess at the best of times. Though when costs of the service are already higher than budgeted for then these costs must be taken into account in future budgets. 

Who is the Labour candidate for South Cambs?

I was looking for any declared candidates for the General Election on 7th May 2015 for the South Cambridgeshire which includes part of Cambridge covering the Queen Edith's ward. On the Labour website it says the candidate is: Sue Birtles. (As seen below)

The only problem with this is Sue Birtles isn't the candidate. In fact Sue resigned as a Councillor on Cambridge City Council way back in September 2014 having been selected in April 2014. In an article in the Cambridge News it is stated: "Sue Birtles has recently resigned from her role as both a city councillor for Queen Edith’s and parliamentary candidate for South Cambridgeshire."

Further: "Cllr Herbert added that a fresh selection was now underway to fill the parliamentary candidate seat."

Sue gave the reason for resigning as: 

But Ms Birtles told the News: “The decision partly revolved around Queen Edith’s particular position, because it’s not in the parliamentary Cambridge seat, so I never received the support.

“I would have left in May, but the party were very concerned they might have a small majority - I was put under quite a lot of pressure to stay, basically.

“There were various issues in the Labour group which I raised with the party leadership, and in my view they were not adequately addressed. I also raised it higher up in the Labour party chain, where I would say there was also not an adequate response.

“I was never on an equal status with the other councillors and for various reasons I felt I was marginalised. The main priority for all the parties is the parliamentary seat, and there was very little interest in addressing the problems in Queen Edith’s.”

Ron says: Sue Birtles misses the point of being a Labour Parliamentary candidate for South Cambs. Labour will never win in South Cambs so Sue was just a "paper candidate". Minimal resources and minimal help. The Cambridge constituency is where the fight is. Queen Edith's ward is at the bottom of the list.

What I don't understand is Sue was looking to leave in May 2014 having been selected only in April 2014.