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:   11/5/2001 0:13 am WEDT

I think we should all note the meaning behind Cllr Mann's comment.

"We have all been elected by the entire Group before being nominated to the Council".

The word "group" is significant.

Not the whole Council but the Lib Dem Group of Councillors. The result of this secret group decision is then rubber stamped by the Council with the Lib Dems using their majority to appoint their nominee.

Hardly a open way for an investigatory committee Chairman to be appointed. Hardly likely to result in a body that will closely scrutinise their own leadership.

So in principle Cllr Mann is accepting what I said in my previous posting. The Chairman allegiance is to the Party.

For the committee to have any effect it should be chaired by a member of the Opposition and have an equal number of members from each party – not based on the number of Councillors in each party. I know a novel idea and not likely to be accepted.


Anthony P Berend
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   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    
 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     
 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 87 - 12? *  
* 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.