Councillors in Hyndburn - Are they fit for purpose? - Page 16

gondola · 30-03-2007, 16:48

''The only way to sort it out is at the ballot box on election day''

That is true, save when the candidates put forward are all considered unfit for office. In that case the disillusioned voter chooses not to vote and thus becomes a part of the rapidly growing non-vote. I think there has to be a debate about the credentials, integrity and merit of those seeking to become candidates. This was clearly highlighted here this week when I alerted readers to the fact that Mr Safdar had agreed a pact with the Tories prior to him being forwarded for an internal election for the Labour Party. I also detailed the fact that he had lost by one vote, and that had he won he would have been supported by his party.Had he won, the Labour party would have imposed a candidate on those that adhere to their principles, in effect forcing them to choose a man they suggest has no integrity or not to vote. That is not democracy at it's best.

Incidentally, so far as regards the state of the Council's finances, perhaps Mr Britcliffe needs to ensure that those that swindel the coffers of the Council and organisations affiliated to it, are subjected to the principle of law enforcement and made to pay back that which they have swindled. In that way, the balance sheet would look rather more robust.

Lolly · 30-03-2007, 16:49

........

Sorry couldnt help myself! lol.

Neil · 30-03-2007, 16:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by gondola

Incidentally, so far as regards the state of the Council's finances, perhaps Mr Britcliffe needs to ensure that those that swindel the coffers of the Council and organisations affiliated to it, are subjected to the principle of law enforcement and made to pay back that which they have swindled. In that way, the balance sheet would look rather more robust.

See there you go again.
Who is swindling the Council?
If you know then state it as a fact.
If you don't know then don't imply someone is.

chav1 · 30-03-2007, 16:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lolly

........

Sorry couldnt help myself! lol.

chav pokes lolly in the eye

wake up girl

gondola · 30-03-2007, 17:00

I repeat, without reservation - those that swindel the Council coffers need to be subjected to the principle of law enforcement.

lancsdave · 30-03-2007, 17:02

So to sum up so far;

Some councillors are good. Some are bad.
Some councillors take care with expenses some go OTT and allegedly border on fraud.
Some prospective councillors don't have a clue which party they want to run with, others are more dedicated.
Some councillors are fit to be Mayor, some aren't.

Not very conclusive is it... I know lets start this thread again

Neil · 30-03-2007, 17:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by gondola

I repeat, without reservation - those that swindel the Council coffers need to be subjected to the principle of law enforcement.

And I repeat - Who are you suggesting is doing the swindling.
I agree that if the Council is being swindled then action should be taken.

panther · 30-03-2007, 17:06

cant believe that this thread is still going

Margaret Pilkington · 30-03-2007, 17:08

Gondola......I am not one to pull people up about their spelling....(goodness knows we all have our weaknesses) but for you I will make an exception.....just because you are so wordy. Swindle is the correct spelling.....not swindel.
To the moderators - sorry for the thread wander.

gondola · 30-03-2007, 17:08

Neil,

I jest not - however the manner in which it is revealed has to be done with a degree of care. I would relish the opportunity to disclose the information I have with immediate effect, but I know it needs to be done in a certain way.

What I am proposing in the meantime is to raise awareness that all is not in order amongst the 'councillor fraternity'.