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
Go to Top  |  New Topic  |  Go to Topic  |  Search 
 Subject: RE: Public scrutiny and standards
 
Author: Anthony P Berend
Date:   11/3/2001 11:35 pm WEDT
You are joking are you not Cllr Mann?

Scrutiny by committees where the majority of members support those under scrutiny.

Where those members owe allegiance to those under scrutiny.

Where their jobs are at risk [salary £11,000pa for a few hours a week] if they don't toe the line.

It would really be a joke if it weren’t so serious.

So who is being illogical now?

Look at the minutes of the Riverside meeting [posted on this site]. Two members of the so-called consultative committees stood up and told your ex-leader to his face that his committees were a sham. Neither of the speakers where know to the organisers or the majority of the public present.

As my Godfather told me many years ago there are two reasons why politicians should only be paid nominal expenses.

So that :

1. they have to earn their living in the real world and be aware of the pressures on ordinary people.

2. their decisions are never based on a necessity to retain their income and their own livelihood.

Politics should be a service to the community not a money making exercise.

It is with this sense of service that many of the correspondents to this site spend their time and money attempting to route out the corruption and skulduggery in this Council.

The number of staff members of the Council writing under synonyms who are spilling the beans and thereby risking their jobs, is in my mind quite amassing. In time the authorities will take notice and right will prevail. It will take time but with perseverance we will win.

It is the level of supporting evidence – from unrelated sources that keep us going.

Oh! and jokes like yours on scrutiny committees.


Anthony P Berend

PS It is common courtesy to spell my name correctly. You must have seen my name on this site alone 20 times. My name is BEREND no “S”.
Reply To This Message
 Previous Message  |  Next Message

 Topics Author  Date      
 Public scrutiny and standards   new  
 Trevor Clarke 11/2/2001 1:06 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards   new  
 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?   new  
 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     
 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    
 Anthony P Berend 11/3/2001 11:35 pm WEDT
 RE: Public scrutiny and standards     
 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     
 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
 Previous Topic  |  Next Topic
 Reply To This Message
 Your Name:  
 Your Email:  
 Subject:  
  Submission Validation Question: What is 74 - 62? *  
* 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.