A profanity filter is employed. Please use a valid e-mail with your message and a valid name if at all possible. Please keep to the posters subject.
RICHMOND WATCHDOG OPEN FORUM
 Subject: Who?
 
Author: R H
Date:   11/2/2001 3:25 pm WEDT

who guards local government and elected members?

You do, or don't as the case may be.

The Ombudsman holds no brief to watch. He responds to complaints. You first have to find evidence. He then writes an advisory report that has no legal force. One in every twenty recommendations that the Ombudsman makes is rejected by the Councils complained against.

The Local Authority is the local authority. The general presumption is that you elect trustworthy and effective representatives. If, instead, you manage to elect imbeciles and crooks, c'est la vie.

When all said and done there is no reason to suppose that anybody else to whom you may be able to complain would be any more effective or less corrupt.

With best wishes,
Ron Harvey






Reply To This Message

 Topics Author  Date      
 Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Trevor Clarke 11/2/2001 1:06 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards     
Knowledgeable 11/2/2001 1:30 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Richard Meacock 11/2/2001 2:35 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Knowledgeable 11/2/2001 2:50 pm WEDT
 Why?   new  
R H 11/2/2001 3:14 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Trevor Clarke 11/2/2001 3:41 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Solomon Green 11/3/2001 3:59 pm WEDT
 Who?    
R H 11/2/2001 3:25 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Cllr Laurence Mann 11/2/2001 9:10 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Trevor Clarke 11/3/2001 9:52 am WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
RichardMeacock 11/3/2001 10:43 am WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Cllr Laurence Mann 11/3/2001 9:46 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Anthony P Berend 11/3/2001 11:35 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Cllr Laurence Mann 11/4/2001 7:37 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Trevor Clarke 11/4/2001 10:08 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Laurence Mann 11/5/2001 8:56 am WEDT
 Hypocrisy   new  
R H 11/5/2001 10:59 am WEDT
 RE: Opposition   new  
Trevor Clarke 11/5/2001 11:43 am WEDT
 RE: Opposition   new  
R H 11/5/2001 12:19 am WEDT
 RE: Opposition   new  
Laurence Mann 11/5/2001 1:08 pm WEDT
 Rents   new  
R H 11/5/2001 6:02 pm WEDT
 RE: Rents   new  
Cllr Laurence Mann 11/5/2001 8:43 pm WEDT
 RE: Opposition   new  
Laurence Mann 11/5/2001 1:03 pm WEDT
 RE: Opposition   new  
Trevor Clarke 11/5/2001 9:56 pm WEDT
 RE: Hypocrisy   new  
Laurence Mann 11/5/2001 1:00 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Anthony P Berend 11/5/2001 0:13 am WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Laurence Mann 11/5/2001 9:04 am WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
In the know 11/5/2001 2:51 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Laurence Mann 11/5/2001 3:37 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Knowledgeable 11/5/2001 3:40 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Trevor Clarke 11/5/2001 4:05 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Cllr Laurence Mann 11/5/2001 8:55 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
Trevor Clarke 11/8/2001 11:38 am WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
RichardMeacock 11/8/2001 12:05 am WEDT
 ????   new  
R H 11/8/2001 2:23 pm WEDT
 RE: ????   new  
Trevor Clarke 11/8/2001 4:37 pm WEDT
 RE: ????   new  
R H 11/8/2001 8:49 pm WEDT
 Reply To This Message
 Your Name:  
 Your Email:  
 Subject:  
  Submission Validation Question: What is 77 - 25? *  
* indicates required field
     

Sexist, Racist, Rude or unnecessary messages will be removed. Tolerance to anonymous messages will be at the discretion of the administration body. Anyone who insults the owner of this forum will be barred for life. No adverts permitted.