It is common practice for political groups on a district council to meet as a group prior to a meeting of the full council to hammer out common group policy. This saves council time, generally avoids splits within the party, and determines each party’s policy on specific issues.
The Conservative group on Fenland District Council follow this practice of group meetings. As the Conservatives hold 39 out of 40 of the seats, quite why they do this is unclear. It can’t be to form a united front against the opposition - there isn’t an official opposition. Perhaps it is to form a united front against the alleged real power brokers - the Officers of the Council, or it could be to bully the back benchers into toeing the leadership’s line.
Word is that the last meeting of the Con. group was dominated by angry discussion on two subjects - the ever growing number of wind turbines in Fenland, and this blog ! Advice may be being sought !
This raises two intriguing questions:
1) are councillors really considering paying for legal advice over whether they can reverse their own decisions to grant planning permission to a reported 35 turbines within the district ? I’ll save them some money and explain: “no you can’t bend over backwards encouraging turbines, and then challenge your own decisions. It would make you look ridiculous !”
2) As to this blog, the author is truly complimented to learn that it compulsive reading to our august body of conservative district councillors. She also wonders what chortles of amusement and hoots of derision will emanate from the chambers of the lawyers tasked with studying it. However she will continue to sleep easy at night, even with the Democlean sword of legal action hovering over her head. A statement can’t be considered defamatory if it is true. This blogger has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the content, and through the comments facility continues to invite any one to challenge the veracity of anything said.
Any message from this sad little story ? Is this how our senior councillors spend their time, trying to reverse the own decisions and quash freedom of speech ? I have borrowed from Chaucer for the title of this blog, but perhaps should have quoted Shakespeare - “a comedy of errors” or “much ado about nothing”?
Walter Burnett is a pen name.
Literary note: the title of this blog - “Parliament of Foules” is a reference to a poem by Geoffrey Chaucer (1343?-1400) (also known as the "Parliament of Fowls" "Assembly of Fowls" or "Assemble of Foules").The word ‘parliament’ is derived from the french verb ‘parlez’ - to talk. Any inferance that a conservative district council group meeting might be described as a ‘parliament of foules’ - ‘the talk of idiots’ is not intended.
Wednesday, 8 August 2007
THE MYSTERY OF THE SOUTH FENS BUSINESS CENTRE
The South Fens Business Centre was heralded as the proof of FDC’s commitment to Chatteris. We’ve been told that this shining beacon has allegedly 95% occupancy and is a real asset to the community. Is it ?
Rooms were to be available for hire for public events or meetings, but I’ve yet to meet anyone who has ever succeeded in hiring one, because the centre is closed in the evenings after 6.00 p.m. and at weekends - the very times one might want to book it.
Does it contribute to the local economy ? Unlikely - it doesn’t have reasonable pedestrian access to the pubs or tea room in Chatteris for a convivial working lunch.
Does it contribute to local employment ? It appears not. I include an e-mail from a local Chatteris job seeker passed to me :
“Speaking of the SFBC, what is with that place?!? I thought I'd be a bit pro-active and go see if I could find out what jobs there might be. I almost expected the receptionist to force me to sign the official secrets act just for asking what the companies do! As it was, she wouldn't tell me!
Then when I asked if there was somewhere they all advertised their vacancies I was directed to the leaflet wall and told I'd have to ask them directly. I enquired (very tentatively now, as it was like talking to the Gestapo) whether there was an intra-net where the companies in the SFBC might advertise all their vacancies, and was told no, they did not have that either, and NO I can't go round each of them unless I have an appointment! So I have to ask directly, but not directly, only by phone. Hmmm......?
You still can't see who's in there on their website! Makes me wonder more what they're all up to!!! Is the place likely to get bombed?? If so what's the likely blast radius, you and I might need to move!?!
So yeah, that's how I feel about those things, and you can quote me (as a "Chatteris Resident") if you feel it will help.”
The Ordnance Survey include “Secret Nuclear Bunkers” on their maps. This is an apparent oxymoron (a self - contradiction). What can we find out about the South Fens Business Centre? Their web site is so slow as to be useless. The FDC planning interactive map has crashed so I can’t check planning restraints there, and nowhere (that I can find) do they even publish a post code. The local authority generally refer to the clearly signed ‘Fenton Way’ as ‘Dock Road’ a problem which regularly results in an assortment of HGV’s pirouetting in central Chatteris !
So is the South Fens Business Centre therefor “more secret” than a ‘secret nuclear bunker’? Yes !
Walter Burnett is a mouse name.
Rooms were to be available for hire for public events or meetings, but I’ve yet to meet anyone who has ever succeeded in hiring one, because the centre is closed in the evenings after 6.00 p.m. and at weekends - the very times one might want to book it.
Does it contribute to the local economy ? Unlikely - it doesn’t have reasonable pedestrian access to the pubs or tea room in Chatteris for a convivial working lunch.
Does it contribute to local employment ? It appears not. I include an e-mail from a local Chatteris job seeker passed to me :
“Speaking of the SFBC, what is with that place?!? I thought I'd be a bit pro-active and go see if I could find out what jobs there might be. I almost expected the receptionist to force me to sign the official secrets act just for asking what the companies do! As it was, she wouldn't tell me!
Then when I asked if there was somewhere they all advertised their vacancies I was directed to the leaflet wall and told I'd have to ask them directly. I enquired (very tentatively now, as it was like talking to the Gestapo) whether there was an intra-net where the companies in the SFBC might advertise all their vacancies, and was told no, they did not have that either, and NO I can't go round each of them unless I have an appointment! So I have to ask directly, but not directly, only by phone. Hmmm......?
You still can't see who's in there on their website! Makes me wonder more what they're all up to!!! Is the place likely to get bombed?? If so what's the likely blast radius, you and I might need to move!?!
So yeah, that's how I feel about those things, and you can quote me (as a "Chatteris Resident") if you feel it will help.”
The Ordnance Survey include “Secret Nuclear Bunkers” on their maps. This is an apparent oxymoron (a self - contradiction). What can we find out about the South Fens Business Centre? Their web site is so slow as to be useless. The FDC planning interactive map has crashed so I can’t check planning restraints there, and nowhere (that I can find) do they even publish a post code. The local authority generally refer to the clearly signed ‘Fenton Way’ as ‘Dock Road’ a problem which regularly results in an assortment of HGV’s pirouetting in central Chatteris !
So is the South Fens Business Centre therefor “more secret” than a ‘secret nuclear bunker’? Yes !
Walter Burnett is a mouse name.
Monday, 16 July 2007
KING EDWARD COMMUNITY CENTRE
A tale of squandered opportunities,
I have broken it down into ‘bite size’ chunks to minimise the potential risk of readers losing all patience with the continued inactivity of our civic bodies and ‘head butting’ their screen in frustration
The proposals were warmly greeted by the many people at the meeting. Less warmly greeted was the news that Cambs County Council wanted £250,000 if they were to sell the building back to the people of Chatteris.
Unfortunately (and perhaps inevitably) the vital lottery bid was to prove unsuccessful, as I understand it, because there were only months left on the trustees lease on the building with the County Council.
The Trustees needed a minimum of a 25 year lease to qualify for lottery money. As the old lease ran out, County Council eventually offered a new three year lease, which transferred the onerous responsibility of maintenance of the building from the County Council to the Trustees personally. Not only did this scupper any lottery bid, but this dear old building showed little indication of more than minimal maintenance, and little significant improvements by the County council over the preceding years ! Hardly fair on the voluntary Trustees !
The Lottery bid failed, so the grant offer was withdrawn. It’s nearly 4 years ago that this all happened, but I recollect hazily that the lost grant monies totaled over £200,000. This opportunity was disgracefully squandered.
The King Edward Centre is probably the most valuable and indispensable resource at the heart of Chatteris Community life. Sadly it has had a troubled existence for several years. We must all pay tribute to the Trustees, all private individuals, who stepped in 7 years ago to save it from closure. I believe that the burden of financial responsibility currently resting on the shoulders of the trustees is unfair. Under coming terms demanded by Cambs County Council the burden dramatically worsens. I believe that it will become unnecessarily onerous, and down right unreasonable and unfair on the trustees, and on the users.
The many and varied community groups who fill the centre every week pay testament to its value and importance. Its future needs to be secured NOW !
The Trustees are soon coming to speak to Chatteris Town Council. I intend to use my very best endeavours to lobby my colleagues on Council to buy the centre from Cambs County Council. We have to secure its future and stop squandering opportunities of significant grant aid for maintenance and improvements.
3 years ago C.C.C. valued the centre at 1/4 £million. On the open market its probably nearer 1/3 £million now . But Chatteris Town Council doesn’t need to pay that ! Nothing like it. We need to strongly remind Cambs CC that the Government definition of “Best Value” does not always mean the best monetary price. “Best Value” can mean the best value to the Community. And what is of greater value to the Chatteris Community than the King Edward Centre ?.
If, by any chance, you agree with me, and if you think that the Town Council must save the centre, and if like me you believe that they should undertake ‘hard nosed’ negotiations to obtain a true and affordable community value, please let me know. Please feel free to write to me either at home (19 Pound Road, Chatteris PE16 6RL) or c/o Chatteris Town Council, 14 Church lane, Chatteris. Send a petitions if you wish. Now is the time to speak up for what you want!
Chris Howes
Chatteris Town Councillor
Cautionary Foreword.
This author apologises for the severe length of this article. However he believes that the subject matter is so important to Chatteris that he has a duty to be as thorough and detailed in his reported accounts as possible.I have broken it down into ‘bite size’ chunks to minimise the potential risk of readers losing all patience with the continued inactivity of our civic bodies and ‘head butting’ their screen in frustration
Failed Lottery Bid
Late in 2003 or early in 2004 the King Edward centre held a public consultation of exciting new plans to dramatically repair and enhance the building. These were to form the basis of a substantial Lottery Bid and were to be part funded by large grants from government bodies.The proposals were warmly greeted by the many people at the meeting. Less warmly greeted was the news that Cambs County Council wanted £250,000 if they were to sell the building back to the people of Chatteris.
Unfortunately (and perhaps inevitably) the vital lottery bid was to prove unsuccessful, as I understand it, because there were only months left on the trustees lease on the building with the County Council.
The Trustees needed a minimum of a 25 year lease to qualify for lottery money. As the old lease ran out, County Council eventually offered a new three year lease, which transferred the onerous responsibility of maintenance of the building from the County Council to the Trustees personally. Not only did this scupper any lottery bid, but this dear old building showed little indication of more than minimal maintenance, and little significant improvements by the County council over the preceding years ! Hardly fair on the voluntary Trustees !
The Lottery bid failed, so the grant offer was withdrawn. It’s nearly 4 years ago that this all happened, but I recollect hazily that the lost grant monies totaled over £200,000. This opportunity was disgracefully squandered.
Hold the Front Page !
The front page of the community news letter Centrepoint, published a letter in March 2006 on the front page:THE FUTURE OF THE KING EDWARD CENTRE
A personal view from a Chatteris Town Councillor
A personal view from a Chatteris Town Councillor
The King Edward Centre is probably the most valuable and indispensable resource at the heart of Chatteris Community life. Sadly it has had a troubled existence for several years. We must all pay tribute to the Trustees, all private individuals, who stepped in 7 years ago to save it from closure. I believe that the burden of financial responsibility currently resting on the shoulders of the trustees is unfair. Under coming terms demanded by Cambs County Council the burden dramatically worsens. I believe that it will become unnecessarily onerous, and down right unreasonable and unfair on the trustees, and on the users.
The many and varied community groups who fill the centre every week pay testament to its value and importance. Its future needs to be secured NOW !
The Trustees are soon coming to speak to Chatteris Town Council. I intend to use my very best endeavours to lobby my colleagues on Council to buy the centre from Cambs County Council. We have to secure its future and stop squandering opportunities of significant grant aid for maintenance and improvements.
3 years ago C.C.C. valued the centre at 1/4 £million. On the open market its probably nearer 1/3 £million now . But Chatteris Town Council doesn’t need to pay that ! Nothing like it. We need to strongly remind Cambs CC that the Government definition of “Best Value” does not always mean the best monetary price. “Best Value” can mean the best value to the Community. And what is of greater value to the Chatteris Community than the King Edward Centre ?.
If, by any chance, you agree with me, and if you think that the Town Council must save the centre, and if like me you believe that they should undertake ‘hard nosed’ negotiations to obtain a true and affordable community value, please let me know. Please feel free to write to me either at home (19 Pound Road, Chatteris PE16 6RL) or c/o Chatteris Town Council, 14 Church lane, Chatteris. Send a petitions if you wish. Now is the time to speak up for what you want!
Chris Howes
Chatteris Town Councillor
What happened next ?
Letters of support, and a petition were received. The Town Council set up a meeting on 21.03.06 with the Trustees of the Centre, the Town Council, and District & County Councillors Melton and Harper. The story of this meeting has never yet been fully told. But I’ll tell it now !
‘secret meeting .......’
The details of this bid, specifically the proportionate sources of funding, weren’t initially terribly clear, but it emerged after a while that the cunning plan drawn up by FDC was that Town Council should contribute over £100,000 to obtain matched funding. What was the District Council (the designated leisure provider) contributing to this scheme ? Well less than nothing. They were actually proposing charging Town Council between £20,000 and £30,000 just for putting the bid in !
Cllr Howes argued with Cllr Melton that the government requirement for best value could mean best community value, not maximum fiscal value. Three times Cllr Melton interrupted him and dismissed his question as “childish” In fact Cllr Melton wasn’t to answer that question properly until May 2007 (see Blog MORE STUFF)
Cllr Howes then inquired of the leader of the District Council why FDC wasn’t contributing funding themselves. Initially Councillor Harper refused to answer the question on the grounds that he was there as a County Councillor, not a District Councillor. With a hint of sarcasm Cllr Howes reportedly then asked: “ Could we respectfully ask Cllr Harper, wearing his county council ‘hat’ if he could communicate with his colleague, Cllr Harper in his leader of the district council ‘hat’ why FDC weren’t pulling their financial weight”. Cllr Harpo angrily replied (wearing either none, one or both of his hats) “because Chatteris Town Council hadn’t asked FDC for a financial contribution”.
This remarkable answer posed the immediate question why FDC, the bid originator, felt that any suggestion of their making a financial commitment should have come in advance from a second party that were unaware at the time of the proposed bid, despite being included as a major financial contributor. (Makes you want to weep doesn’t it ?)
The meeting was adjourned, because it was suggested that little could be progresseduntil the result of the funding bid be known. This would only be a “month or so”, and in the meantime we mustn’t “do or say anything in case it compromised the bid to Cambridgeshire Horizons”.
At the start of the meeting it was declared that the meeting would be “Private & Confidential” Apparently the District Council had hurriedly cobbled together a bid to Cambridgeshire Horizons for funding which included buying the building at full Market Value.
The details of this bid, specifically the proportionate sources of funding, weren’t initially terribly clear, but it emerged after a while that the cunning plan drawn up by FDC was that Town Council should contribute over £100,000 to obtain matched funding. What was the District Council (the designated leisure provider) contributing to this scheme ? Well less than nothing. They were actually proposing charging Town Council between £20,000 and £30,000 just for putting the bid in !
Cllr Howes argued with Cllr Melton that the government requirement for best value could mean best community value, not maximum fiscal value. Three times Cllr Melton interrupted him and dismissed his question as “childish” In fact Cllr Melton wasn’t to answer that question properly until May 2007 (see Blog MORE STUFF)
Cllr Howes then inquired of the leader of the District Council why FDC wasn’t contributing funding themselves. Initially Councillor Harper refused to answer the question on the grounds that he was there as a County Councillor, not a District Councillor. With a hint of sarcasm Cllr Howes reportedly then asked: “ Could we respectfully ask Cllr Harper, wearing his county council ‘hat’ if he could communicate with his colleague, Cllr Harper in his leader of the district council ‘hat’ why FDC weren’t pulling their financial weight”. Cllr Harpo angrily replied (wearing either none, one or both of his hats) “because Chatteris Town Council hadn’t asked FDC for a financial contribution”.
This remarkable answer posed the immediate question why FDC, the bid originator, felt that any suggestion of their making a financial commitment should have come in advance from a second party that were unaware at the time of the proposed bid, despite being included as a major financial contributor. (Makes you want to weep doesn’t it ?)
The meeting was adjourned, because it was suggested that little could be progresseduntil the result of the funding bid be known. This would only be a “month or so”, and in the meantime we mustn’t “do or say anything in case it compromised the bid to Cambridgeshire Horizons”.
COME ON FDC, COUGH UP !
"This Council calls upon Fenland District Council to commit in principal to match fund all contributions from Chatteris Town Council to purchase and or renovate the King Edward Centre".
Before the motion could be published, the Town Clerk phoned Cllr Howes and passed on a request from the Finance Officer that the motion be withdrawn until it was known whether the bid was successful or not. The matter was never debated, and over a year later, FDC still haven’t been asked to contribute towards the K.E.C.
However it wasn’t only a month or so until we would know the result of this bid which had being given as the reason that no progress could be made. After 3 or 4 months, word dribbled back, that the initial reaction to the bid was unfavourable, but it might be reconsidered if nobody said anything that might rock the boat.
This disgraceful, unnecessary ‘cloak of secrecy’ paralised all visible activity for nearly 17 months ! The facts of the ‘secret meeting’ and the Cambridgeshire Horizons bid emerged during this period, but it is only now that the bid has officially been declared failed.
Following Cllr Harper’s statement that FDC only weren’t proposing financial commitment to KEC because ‘nobody had ever asked them’, Cllr Howes immediately submitted the following written motion for the next meeting of Chatteris Town Council on 4 April 2006:
"This Council calls upon Fenland District Council to commit in principal to match fund all contributions from Chatteris Town Council to purchase and or renovate the King Edward Centre".
Before the motion could be published, the Town Clerk phoned Cllr Howes and passed on a request from the Finance Officer that the motion be withdrawn until it was known whether the bid was successful or not. The matter was never debated, and over a year later, FDC still haven’t been asked to contribute towards the K.E.C.
However it wasn’t only a month or so until we would know the result of this bid which had being given as the reason that no progress could be made. After 3 or 4 months, word dribbled back, that the initial reaction to the bid was unfavourable, but it might be reconsidered if nobody said anything that might rock the boat.
This disgraceful, unnecessary ‘cloak of secrecy’ paralised all visible activity for nearly 17 months ! The facts of the ‘secret meeting’ and the Cambridgeshire Horizons bid emerged during this period, but it is only now that the bid has officially been declared failed.
So where does the matter stand now ?
Chatteris Town Council are now free to debate the matter and ‘suggest’ to FDC that they honour their commitments.
I believe that Chatteris Town Council have an absolute moral obligation to act now. They should offer to buy the King Edward Centre from County Council for £1. In partnership with District Council they could take over responsibility for the fabric of the building and offer the Trustees a 25 year (or 99 year) lease at a peppercorn rent.
This would free the Trustees from the current unfair burden, and finally allow outside money to be injected into the building. The 2003 improvement plans could be dusted down and reconsidered. Amongst other things these included forming a new entrance feature which during the day would serve as a reception and cafe for ‘mums and tots’, and in the evening could possibly serve as that most desperately needed facility - a ‘young person’s cafe’ !
Mind you, FDC could easily contribute to the KEC from the £507,000 they recently received from selling of former Chatteris council land !
Walter Burnett is a pen name
Apparently the County Council have graciously offered the Trustees a new 3 year lease. In addition to maintaining the unfair burden of repair and maintenance on the shoulders of the Trustees, it also demands £10,000 p.a. rent. Is this the Tory pledge in the recent election to guarantee the future of the K.E.C. Well FDC have generously given KEC a grant of £10,000 this year (funded in part by halving the Cromwell Community College grant), but isn’t this simply robbing Peter to pay Paul ? An 3 year lease certainly disqualifies the Trustees from significant grant aid or Lottery money ! It’s not even a temporary and unsatisfactory patch.
Chatteris Town Council are now free to debate the matter and ‘suggest’ to FDC that they honour their commitments.
What could happen ?
At the May meeting of Chatteris Town Council, the newly promoted County Council portfolio holder in charge of Corporate Services Cllr Melton announced that County Council had finally accepted that the requirement to achieve “best value” when disposing of assets, could mean “best community value”, not just “best financial value”.I believe that Chatteris Town Council have an absolute moral obligation to act now. They should offer to buy the King Edward Centre from County Council for £1. In partnership with District Council they could take over responsibility for the fabric of the building and offer the Trustees a 25 year (or 99 year) lease at a peppercorn rent.
This would free the Trustees from the current unfair burden, and finally allow outside money to be injected into the building. The 2003 improvement plans could be dusted down and reconsidered. Amongst other things these included forming a new entrance feature which during the day would serve as a reception and cafe for ‘mums and tots’, and in the evening could possibly serve as that most desperately needed facility - a ‘young person’s cafe’ !
Can it be done ?
Strange to say, yes it can ! Cllr Howes reports that the highly successful Priory Centre halls complex in St Neots is jointly owned by Town and District Councils, and run by a management committee composed of users of the centre, and representatives of the 2 councils. Does Cllr Howes actually know what he’s talking about ? Just possibly he does, he chaired the Priory Centre management committee for several years in the late 1990’s !Anything actually likely to really happen ?
Dunno ! Depends if there is the political will amongst the ruling ‘elite’ to honour promises made both in their literature doing the May local elections, and in a recent newspaper article !Mind you, FDC could easily contribute to the KEC from the £507,000 they recently received from selling of former Chatteris council land !
Walter Burnett is a pen name
Wednesday, 11 July 2007
HOW MUCH ?
Fenland District Council records £172 million worth of assets in their most recent accounts. Where do they come from ?
In 1974 FDC didn’t have a bean until it was donated the assets of the local urban and district councils. Prior to local government reorganisation, many local councils hurriedly built leisure centres or public halls which guaranteed the benefit of their assets was invested in that community. They spent the money rather than passing it on. Unfortunately not so Chatteris. By any account, they just passed the lot to Fenland Hall. Those assets must contribute a significant proportion of what is now £172 million.
It is said that prior to 1974 the clerk to the urban district council had been shrewdly buying up land and buildings on behalf of the Council. Certainly Chatteris owned a lot of land. What’s more much of the rented housing stock FDC operated had been constructed by the benevolent owner of the engineering works, and subsequently given to the Council.
So how much were these considerable assets given to FDC worth in 1974, or even now ? Records are strangely illusive. Chatteris Town Council insists they don’t have any records. OK - the UDC was their predecessor body. FDC apparently stored the documents in a cellar until they were ‘lost in a flood’.
Now these records represent important historical archives. Bizarrely I can easily find out who was granted the deed to a field in Chatriz in 1369, but not what happened in 1974! Not even the County Record Office at Shirehall have any information available to cast illumination on the mystery.
Recently FDC has sold off one of their inherited pieces of land in Chatteris for over £1/2 million, refuses to commit any of the money back to Chatteris, and disdainfully wash their hands over another former valuable Chatteris asset entrusted to them, Grove House.
I’ve always believed that it is the duty of local district councillors to fight for a fair deal for the community they represent. But not so apparently. During a recent some what heated debate recently at Chatteris Town Council, Cllr Colbert reminded District Councillor Murphy that it was his job to fight for Chatteris, and he angrily denied it. Rather than contradict him, the 2 other Chatteris District Councillors present observed that “there are only 4 of us out of a total of 40 of them". So much for the ‘winning team’ approach promoted by the Tories in the May elections !
It is small wonder that Chatteris has been so ill served by FDC for so many years, and has so little to show for FDC’s custodianship, if our councillors have so little backbone ! What hope is there ?
Walter Burnett is a pen name.
In 1974 FDC didn’t have a bean until it was donated the assets of the local urban and district councils. Prior to local government reorganisation, many local councils hurriedly built leisure centres or public halls which guaranteed the benefit of their assets was invested in that community. They spent the money rather than passing it on. Unfortunately not so Chatteris. By any account, they just passed the lot to Fenland Hall. Those assets must contribute a significant proportion of what is now £172 million.
It is said that prior to 1974 the clerk to the urban district council had been shrewdly buying up land and buildings on behalf of the Council. Certainly Chatteris owned a lot of land. What’s more much of the rented housing stock FDC operated had been constructed by the benevolent owner of the engineering works, and subsequently given to the Council.
So how much were these considerable assets given to FDC worth in 1974, or even now ? Records are strangely illusive. Chatteris Town Council insists they don’t have any records. OK - the UDC was their predecessor body. FDC apparently stored the documents in a cellar until they were ‘lost in a flood’.
Now these records represent important historical archives. Bizarrely I can easily find out who was granted the deed to a field in Chatriz in 1369, but not what happened in 1974! Not even the County Record Office at Shirehall have any information available to cast illumination on the mystery.
Recently FDC has sold off one of their inherited pieces of land in Chatteris for over £1/2 million, refuses to commit any of the money back to Chatteris, and disdainfully wash their hands over another former valuable Chatteris asset entrusted to them, Grove House.
I’ve always believed that it is the duty of local district councillors to fight for a fair deal for the community they represent. But not so apparently. During a recent some what heated debate recently at Chatteris Town Council, Cllr Colbert reminded District Councillor Murphy that it was his job to fight for Chatteris, and he angrily denied it. Rather than contradict him, the 2 other Chatteris District Councillors present observed that “there are only 4 of us out of a total of 40 of them". So much for the ‘winning team’ approach promoted by the Tories in the May elections !
It is small wonder that Chatteris has been so ill served by FDC for so many years, and has so little to show for FDC’s custodianship, if our councillors have so little backbone ! What hope is there ?
Walter Burnett is a pen name.
Wednesday, 20 June 2007
MYSTERY OF GROVE HOUSE
OK lets do Grove House. When Cllr Colbert presented her motion to the new Town Council on 5 June, they simply refused to discuss it.
I refer you to a letter from Cllrs Colbert and Howes published in the Fenland Citizen on 20 June 2007:
We find the whole matter of Grove House highly perplexing.
As we understand the situation, Grove House was owned by Chatteris Urban District Council, who transferred its care to the newly formed Fenland District Council in 1974.
The Chatteris Town Council met in the building right up until the mid 1990s and the Museum was housed there.
We understand that in the mid 1990s Chatteris Town Council asked Fenland District Council for the building back, but FDC insisted they would have to pay £250,000 for it (!) so nothing happened.
Then, in 1996, Fenland District Council sold the building to the Isle College for £6,000, under conditional terms and it being used for education for 10 years.
According to the article by Cllr Alan Melton in Citizen Extra, the building was in a poor state and the Isle College undertook a “massive refurbishment” of the building and educational use started in 1997.
First, there are two questions.
(1) Why did Fenland District Council let the building get into such a poor state of repair?
(2) Why were Chatteris Town Council asked for such a huge amount of money only shortly before the sale to Isle College?
Now we move on to the present time, and we are told in Cllr Melton’s article that the building is in a very poor state now and that it cannot be used as a public building “as there is no lift and is not ‘disabled and disability acceptable’”.
This raises further issues.
(1) Why is again in such a poor state if the Isle College had it “massively refurbished”?
(2) Why should it have to have a lift? We have never noticed one in Fenland Hall, or the One Stop Shops.
(3) How about using just part of it as a public building?
(4) How about using the small side building for something like the Youth Cafe that everyone seems to agree that Chatteris could do with?
A motion for the reacquisition of Grove House for the benefit of the people of Chatteris has now twice been put before the Chatteris Town Council, but the majority group will not even discuss the matter.
Surely the Town Council has a duty to the people of Chatteris to fully investigate the condition of the building, and all its possible uses rather than ignore the matter.
And surely the Chatteris community is entitled to some substantial recompense from Fenland District Council for what looks very much like mismanagement of a substantial Chatteris asset.
This was in response to an article in the Chatteris Extra edition of the Fenland Citizen the previous week by Conservative District and County Councillor Alan Melton (and party colleague of 8 out of 12 of the Town Council) Cllr Melton wrote: "... the hope is that some private developer will save the building for domestic use, just like Chatteris House.”
During the life of the previous town council, Cllr Melton stood before them and promised that if at any point in the future Grove House was no longer required for educational use, it would be returned to Chatteris. Well I suppose that a couple of years is “a long time in politics” !
Funny thing though, while Cllr Melton hopes for a ‘benevolent’ developer to ‘save’ Grove House, Chatteris is full of rumours that it has already been promised to a developer. Perhaps Cllr Melton became converted to the idea while working as project manager for a local developer during the restoration of Chatteris House ?
Walter Burnett is a pen name.
I refer you to a letter from Cllrs Colbert and Howes published in the Fenland Citizen on 20 June 2007:
We find the whole matter of Grove House highly perplexing.
As we understand the situation, Grove House was owned by Chatteris Urban District Council, who transferred its care to the newly formed Fenland District Council in 1974.
The Chatteris Town Council met in the building right up until the mid 1990s and the Museum was housed there.
We understand that in the mid 1990s Chatteris Town Council asked Fenland District Council for the building back, but FDC insisted they would have to pay £250,000 for it (!) so nothing happened.
Then, in 1996, Fenland District Council sold the building to the Isle College for £6,000, under conditional terms and it being used for education for 10 years.
According to the article by Cllr Alan Melton in Citizen Extra, the building was in a poor state and the Isle College undertook a “massive refurbishment” of the building and educational use started in 1997.
First, there are two questions.
(1) Why did Fenland District Council let the building get into such a poor state of repair?
(2) Why were Chatteris Town Council asked for such a huge amount of money only shortly before the sale to Isle College?
Now we move on to the present time, and we are told in Cllr Melton’s article that the building is in a very poor state now and that it cannot be used as a public building “as there is no lift and is not ‘disabled and disability acceptable’”.
This raises further issues.
(1) Why is again in such a poor state if the Isle College had it “massively refurbished”?
(2) Why should it have to have a lift? We have never noticed one in Fenland Hall, or the One Stop Shops.
(3) How about using just part of it as a public building?
(4) How about using the small side building for something like the Youth Cafe that everyone seems to agree that Chatteris could do with?
A motion for the reacquisition of Grove House for the benefit of the people of Chatteris has now twice been put before the Chatteris Town Council, but the majority group will not even discuss the matter.
Surely the Town Council has a duty to the people of Chatteris to fully investigate the condition of the building, and all its possible uses rather than ignore the matter.
And surely the Chatteris community is entitled to some substantial recompense from Fenland District Council for what looks very much like mismanagement of a substantial Chatteris asset.
This was in response to an article in the Chatteris Extra edition of the Fenland Citizen the previous week by Conservative District and County Councillor Alan Melton (and party colleague of 8 out of 12 of the Town Council) Cllr Melton wrote: "... the hope is that some private developer will save the building for domestic use, just like Chatteris House.”
During the life of the previous town council, Cllr Melton stood before them and promised that if at any point in the future Grove House was no longer required for educational use, it would be returned to Chatteris. Well I suppose that a couple of years is “a long time in politics” !
Funny thing though, while Cllr Melton hopes for a ‘benevolent’ developer to ‘save’ Grove House, Chatteris is full of rumours that it has already been promised to a developer. Perhaps Cllr Melton became converted to the idea while working as project manager for a local developer during the restoration of Chatteris House ?
Walter Burnett is a pen name.
SHOOT THE MESSENGER !
I must apologise to my many readers (both those that like the blog, and those that love to hate it) for my silence. Following the reports I received of the 5th June meeting of Chatteris Town Council, I was so disillusioned / disappointed / disgusted / outraged / despairing that I felt I had to hold my tongue.
To say what I think would likely invoke a civil action for libel. Now we all know that a remark can’t be libelous if it is true, but on the whole I’d prefer not to have to spend time and money discussing it in Court.
Well what’s been happening ? I’ll deal with Grove House in a separate blog. A source of considerable expectation at the last meeting of the toy council was Cllr Murphy’s anticipated answers to the questions asked him at the inaugural meeting of the new council on 8th May 2007. (previously reported on this blog as More Stuff - yawn). Would the good district councillor be able explain the £17 million reduction in the FDC revenue account ? Could he promise that any of the £507,000 that FDC had received for the sale of land formally belonging to Chatteris, would be re-invested in Chatteris ?
Well surprise, surprise, Cllr Murphy failed to turn up, so the questions remain unanswered. Readers may not be aware the a councillor only has to attend one meeting every six months. Cllr Murphy has already failed to attend two meetings (and apparently neglected to even offer his apologies). He doesn’t actually need to attend again until November. Please Peter, don’t make us wait that long for the answers you promised !
This blog has attracted a healthy number of comments. The majority welcome it and read with interest what our council is doing (or perhaps not doing) on our behalf.
A small (and often barely literate) minority are terribly upset (why do they read it then ?) and have posted hostile comments. However these criticisms centre on speculation on this author’s identity, and criticism of specific councillors that dare to think for themselves, labeling them with that ultimate insult of the reactionary and small minded - ‘new comers’ !
Funny thing is, all the criticism is of the fact of the blog itself. Nobody has suggested that the content is anything other than accurate. A classic case of shoot the messenger ?
Walter Burnett is a pen name.
To say what I think would likely invoke a civil action for libel. Now we all know that a remark can’t be libelous if it is true, but on the whole I’d prefer not to have to spend time and money discussing it in Court.
Well what’s been happening ? I’ll deal with Grove House in a separate blog. A source of considerable expectation at the last meeting of the toy council was Cllr Murphy’s anticipated answers to the questions asked him at the inaugural meeting of the new council on 8th May 2007. (previously reported on this blog as More Stuff - yawn). Would the good district councillor be able explain the £17 million reduction in the FDC revenue account ? Could he promise that any of the £507,000 that FDC had received for the sale of land formally belonging to Chatteris, would be re-invested in Chatteris ?
Well surprise, surprise, Cllr Murphy failed to turn up, so the questions remain unanswered. Readers may not be aware the a councillor only has to attend one meeting every six months. Cllr Murphy has already failed to attend two meetings (and apparently neglected to even offer his apologies). He doesn’t actually need to attend again until November. Please Peter, don’t make us wait that long for the answers you promised !
This blog has attracted a healthy number of comments. The majority welcome it and read with interest what our council is doing (or perhaps not doing) on our behalf.
A small (and often barely literate) minority are terribly upset (why do they read it then ?) and have posted hostile comments. However these criticisms centre on speculation on this author’s identity, and criticism of specific councillors that dare to think for themselves, labeling them with that ultimate insult of the reactionary and small minded - ‘new comers’ !
Funny thing is, all the criticism is of the fact of the blog itself. Nobody has suggested that the content is anything other than accurate. A classic case of shoot the messenger ?
Walter Burnett is a pen name.
Monday, 4 June 2007
COMING SOON TO A BLOG NEAR YOU ........
Tuesday 5 June is the 2nd meeting of the new Chatteris Town Council. Your blogger can hardly contain his excitement !
Will Cllr Murphy don his District Council hat and give full and informative answers to the questions asked him at the first meeting ( faithfully reported to you in my 18 May blog - MORE STUFF) ?
Cllr Colbert has resubmitted her Grove House motion that was disgracefully voted out by the last Council in March 2007:
"Following the cessation of the education use of Grove House, Chatteris Town Council calls upon Fenland District Council to secure the return of Grove House from the College of West Anglia at a figure deemed appropriate given the terms of the sale agreement. Chatteris Town Council further calls upon Fenland District Council to return the building to Chatteris for the benefit of the community at nil cost to Chatteris."
As my ‘Grove House’ blog related, this motion endeavours to give Chatteris the opportunity to have our former building returned to the people it once belonged to - us ! Will we be thrilled to learn that the Council has astonished us by supporting this fine motion, or will it instead bury its head in the sand, ostrich like, and rule out the opportunity of regaining a Chatteris asset?
The fun starts at 7pm with an opportunity for the Public to speak - a few places in the gallery still remain - apply on the door! (If you can’t make it, watch this space)
Walter Burnett is a pin number.
Cllr Colbert has resubmitted her Grove House motion that was disgracefully voted out by the last Council in March 2007:
"Following the cessation of the education use of Grove House, Chatteris Town Council calls upon Fenland District Council to secure the return of Grove House from the College of West Anglia at a figure deemed appropriate given the terms of the sale agreement. Chatteris Town Council further calls upon Fenland District Council to return the building to Chatteris for the benefit of the community at nil cost to Chatteris."
As my ‘Grove House’ blog related, this motion endeavours to give Chatteris the opportunity to have our former building returned to the people it once belonged to - us ! Will we be thrilled to learn that the Council has astonished us by supporting this fine motion, or will it instead bury its head in the sand, ostrich like, and rule out the opportunity of regaining a Chatteris asset?
The fun starts at 7pm with an opportunity for the Public to speak - a few places in the gallery still remain - apply on the door! (If you can’t make it, watch this space)
Walter Burnett is a pin number.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)