I wanted you to be the first to know!

NOTIFICATION OF NEW POLITICAL GROUP

Please be advised that with affect from today Monday 19^th October 2009 that together we the following members of Council:

Cllr Tony CLARKE

Cllr Jean HAWKINS

Cllr Malcolm MILDREN

Have formed and wish to be treated as a new political group on the council known as “The Independent Group” based on the following shared principles:

INDEPENDENCE: We are not a political party, and we will follow no Party/Group whip, nor impose on our group members any actions other than to respect our core values and principles. We will remain individual Independent voices in Council.

EQUALITY: We believe that all are born and remain equal and all should have equal access to the same life opportunities and experiences, we abhor racism and intolerance and fight the injustices they bring. We will work together to achieve equality of opportunity for all citizens of Northampton and to all users of Council services.

HONESTY: We believe that politics, local and national has become riven with self interest and party manipulation, we will inform the citizens of the town through our actions and through Council the true position of our Town and Council and let the people make their own judgements.

TRUTH: Likewise we believe that the public must always be told the truth, even when it is not pleasant for them to hear, we will therefore be open and truthful in all our dealings.

LOCAL PRIDE: We believe in Civic Pride and we are proud of our heritage and at ease with our future. We want only what is best for our town. Therefore we will work constructively with other members and groups on Council where we feel they have the best interests of the town at heart.

We ask that the Council make the necessary arrangements and alterations under regulation 8 of the Local Government (Committees & Political Groups) regulations 1990 forthwith.

Cllr Tony CLARKE Leader of Group

Cllr Malcolm MILDREN Deputy Leader

Cllr Jean HAWKINS Business Manager

(My apologies for those outside of Northampton who will not know that Cllrs Hawkins and Mildren resigned from the Liberal Democrat whip at the weekend and in doing so made a brave and couragous stand against the way the Council is currently being run. Thier switch to sit as Independents reduced the administrations majority from 5 down to 1)

Expenses. Now even the MP's are angry

I said previously on this blog that the row over MP's expenses would not go away simply by them electing a new speaker, and this weeks latest revelation following Sir Thomas Legg's audit of MP's past and present is proof positive of the story having legs well beyond the stride of the Daily Telegraph.

I am also pleased to inform readers that Sir Thomas Legg's letter to me this week (his review extended to the previous parliament when I was a member) included the words every MP past and present wanted to see on the page, namely that:

"In your case, having examined the records in the light of my interpretation of the rules and standards in force at the time, I have not identified any payments made to you under the ACA during the review period which I consider call for any repayment or further supporting evidence to be provided by you. Accordingly, my conclusion is that no further action is required from you in this matter"

That's ok then I guess, but as I published all my expenses, every year I was in office in my annual reports I didn't expect anything different, but other MP's were not so relieved. And what is angering most is that whilst expenditure on gardening and cleaning bills have been retrospectively challenged against newly applied limits, expenditure on "flipped" second homes and house/flat rentals seem to have been ignored. As a result some who thought they were in the clear were having to explain to their local press why they now had a bill to pay, and others including my old friendly Nemesis in Northampton South Brian Binley were able to breath more easily.

But hang on whats this sentence at the end?

"I should add that my findings do not deal with any payments which to my knowledge are under separate investigation by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, by the Police or by HM Revenue and Customs"

and in his accompanying notes he tells us that

"Where an MP used the ACA to enter into a conflicted transaction, for example by buying or renting a second home from a close relative, a company in which he or she had shares, or a close associate such as an employee, the transaction will be regarded as tainted, and the whole payment accordingly invalid. This will be so even if the MP can show that it was effected at arms length or that the public purse has not suffered"

So that's all about as clear as mud then!

And therein lies the problem, was Legg's review thorough enough? did he make errors? was it fair to change the rules retrospectively? and in all the confusion how can any of us know any more who did what? claimed for what? and at what cost to the tax payer? or to their own reputation?

To the rescue however comes the"MP's expenses data visualisation tool" brought to you kindly by the Daily Telegraph and found here

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5633164/MPs-Expenses-Telegraph-launch-MPs-expenses-data-visualisation-tool.html

Here how to work it. First of all find your MP's dot on the screen. The using the sliding rule against Mortgage/Rent slide (side column) slide it to the right until your MP's dot disappears and then slide left slightly until it appears again. This gives you an indication of how much of your money they are spending to live in their second or flipped home. It should also tell you now (bottom right in blue) how expensive your MP is so far out of the 646 members in parliament.

Now whilst leaving the Mortgage/Rent slide where it is repeat the process for Cleaning/Laundry, Food, Gardening and total expenses each time leaving the slides at the last point at which your MP's dot disappears and then reappears by sliding slightly back.

Sometimes you will find your MP claims nothing under one heading but shedloads under another! Once completed your MP will either be surrounded by his/her fellow members dots (meaning they are an average spender) or isolated and lonely (meaning they are creaming it in!)

And at last, there you have it again in the bottom right hand corner your MP's very own ranking in the 2010 MP's "snout in the trough stakes" out of the 646 runners and riders

The final slide is a bit misleading as the salary will be dependent on government posts (ministers) or special allowances (opposition) and the tool is also useful because it excludes travel which often distorts the figures (MP's from Scotland for example have much higher travel expenses)

So how did your MP fare? let me know in the comments box if you like.

I have looked at the results for Northamptonshire and they do not make happy reading for some.

The lights are on but nobody's home

Tory leader of NCC, Jim Harker's crazy new plan to save money for an ailing Conservative administration at County Hall by switching off every third street light on all main roads in the Shire is as unpalatable as it is unsafe. But furthermore it is proof positive that the Tory's as an administration have not got the first idea as to what their own policies are, let alone how to enact them.

Just last year the then Tory Portfolio holder for Highways Cllr Bob Seery announced to the press under a spotlight of publicity that hard work by the administration and officers had secured an

"£89 million cash injection from the government to revitalise street lighting throughout the county"

http://www.northamptonshire.gov.uk/en/news/Newsreleases/Pages/lights.aspx

This money in the form of a PFI (private finance initiative) will eventually have to be paid back by you and me through our Council Tax But the benefit to us all of taking the loan out then for something we didn't know we needed, was according to Council to:

"reduce potential road accidents, improve community safety and reduce night time sky pollution. The PFI credits also mean that the county’s street lights, illuminated signs and bollards will also be properly maintained"

So excited was Bob that he told us that:


“It will enable all street lighting, which is the responsibility of the county council, to be improved in an expedited manner. If these financial resources Hadn’t been obtained it would have taken a great many years to carry out this work.

“In addition to providing modern, improved and safe street lighting the opportunity will be taken to address related environmental issues as well as contributing to improving safety and communities as a result of which everybody in the county should benefit.”

So after just 12 months what benefits have we seen from our £89m loan? and if we have addressed the environmental issues then why does Jim Harker propose now that we now turn off one in three street lights?

Are they for improving road safety or making our roads more dangerous? and do they really care for the environment or clueless as to how to really make green savings?

I am told that for a fraction of that total amount of £89m that all the County's street lights could be upgraded from the current ancient unreliable timer switches (which come on and off when they please it seems) to a computer based centrally controlled system which manages street lights on and off when they are needed on a hourly basis according to light levels.

This would save a small fortune, year on year and improve safety and reduce our carbon footprint, but it's all too much like common sense for our Tory Shirocracy to consider it, after all they have only just grasped the concept of the on/off switch.

I am also told by a proffesional driver that the distance between street lights is determined by the speed limit for the road, with them being closer together on roads with 30mph and further apart at 40mph or 50mph and so on. So by turning off every third light drivers at night will be tricked by the eye into thinking they are driving on a faster road than they are on.

So will Jim pay the fines of those caught out by his crazy and dangerous plan? or mores the point will he accept the responsibility for any pedestrian casualties if caused by badly lit roads?

And how we we tell which lamps need replacing and which don't, when a third of them are off and others just needing a bulb?

I will of course be asking the County Council just what they have done with the borrowed £89m which we are all still paying for and why it hasn't been used to make the very savings Jim needs without the last Tory to leave County Hall at night having to switch off the lights

I Yield............. and I resign......................but not just yet.......................

So its official that Tony Woods has now fallen on his sword after such a long and damaging episode in the body politic which is both Northampton Borough Council and the Northampton Liberal Democrats.

But any relief at his finally seeing the damage he has caused to their collective reputations was immediately turned into disbelief tonight when Cllrs discovered from the Councils Press Release that even his resignation has within it its own clauses and conditions.

It seems as if Tony's decision is to resign.........................but on his own terms.........................and when he is ready to do so !!!

I guess as an engineer he needs to examine his resignation from all possible angles before postulating on who should succeed him and when.

The press release tells us that his resignation will not be immediate (so much for the King is dead, long live the King) but instead will have effect from the next Council meeting at the end of October.

It also tells us that he has decided (not his group) that he will still be leader when the Cabinet meets next Wednesday in order to ensure that important matters before the meeting are dealt with properly.

In other words any successor couldn't possibly be up to the task of stepping into his shoes and chairing an important cabinet meeting (that will boost the public confidence in his successor) and as such he will lead his way out of the back door on his own terms?

What does this say about the ability of his the current Deputy Leader of the Council and likely candidate for the top job Cllr Brian Hoare? That he is not up to the task of chairing next weeks cabinet? And what message does it send to the rest of his group who may be looking to succeed him? That they two are second best?

But more importantly what message does it send to the public who believe that a resignation is a resignation full stop?

I wonder what would our fan base at the football club say if after we we had sacked Stuart Gray a few weeks ago that we then announced that he would remain in charge for the next two games because they were far too important for any new manager to take charge for?

And what does the new leader of the Liberal Democrat Group, once chosen do until such time as "The Leader" (this time in English rather than Italian) postulates that it is his time to go

Tony Woods seems to have invented a new political end game of snatching turmoil out of the hands of defeat.

Liberal Democrat Councillors must be wondering where will it all end..............................................

The public will thinking a whole lot worse.

I wish I had just moved that Bl**dy Car

***STOP PRESS*** 5.30pm Wednesday 7th Oct 2009 NEWS JUST IN OF PRESS RELEASE DUE FROM NBC BEFORE 6PM ANNOUNCING THAT TONY WOODS HAS STOOD DOWN AS LEADER OF NORTHAMPTON BOROUGH COUNCIL AND AS LEADER OF THE LIBERAL DEMOCRAT GROUP: ENDS

News reaches me from yesterday standards board hearing that the Potentate Tony Woods was found guilty on two counts of breaching the Councils Code of Conduct.

Not news in itself as most of us who followed the story from the start knew he was guilty from day one. In fact I often wondered why in the face of such irrefutable evidence why TW didn't just come clean, get his apology in early and make a suitable donation to the Mayors charity to cover any cost or advantage assumed.

But as I alluded to previously the issue was never about the car, it was always about attitude, and whether or not Tony had it in him to either accept or admit his guilt or apologise not for an error of judgment but for the act in itself.

In many ways the standards board could not have been more severe with him yesterday, many will think he is lucky not to have been suspended outright, but Tony would have welcomed that as it would have gave him the right to appeal to a higher body and prolong the pain further. But to order him to write and apologise and to dictate to him the words he will use in the letter was the very worst punishment you could ever dish out to someone totally unwilling to accept the part they themselves played in this whole sorry affair.

I am told he spent the whole day blaming everyone but himself? John Dickie got an earful, as did the Chronicle and Echo, as did members of the Standards Board at the end. Although the act of loudly clicking a ballpoint pen on and off in the face of the chair whilst she is trying to read the judgement seems bizarre behaviour in the extreme.

But on top of all this I understand I too got a walk on part. Woodsie it seems was very upset by my blog entry of August 19th

http://tonyclarkeindependent.blogspot.com/2009/08/astragate-fallout.html

where I shared with readers the Market Traders reference to TW as Il Duc'e and my own observations as to the pictorial likenesses between the two. But my fellow independent Fitzy must take the original credit for the character observation which was first seen in his blog in January when he wrote:

"Portly Woods sauntered to and fro like a latter-day Benito Mussolini, gesturing behind his own back as he spoke, which is a particularly interesting habit if you've ever studied body language and psychology."

http://www.fitzynorthampton.co.uk/archives/61-Nick-Clegg-Whitewash-Meeting.html

What this all has to do with him abandoning his car is difficult to fathom? but I was told that TW is now considering reporting me to the Standards Board or even suing me for daring to publish my view.

Well Tony if that's your answer, then bring it on, I will add it to the collection of knives regularly pulled from my back in the shape of pointless references to the Standards board for varied trivial reasons, and also in the shape of Councillors who won't sit next to me in the chamber and draw up secret pacts not to talk to me or work with me!

Why you as Leader of the Council, or for that matter any other group of Councillors on the Borough Council are so worried about one independent Councillor is beyond me. But I thank you all for the compliment.

But if we do fall out over my previous posting (let alone this one) then all I will say is that I sincerely wish that you had spent more time reading the advice I gave within the post and in the Council Chamber rather than concentrating on what was meant as nothing but humour.

If it helps jog your memory , I said to you at full council earlier this year that

"It's never the big things that bring administrations and Leaders down, it is often the smallest sometimes trivial events such as leaving your untaxed car in the Council car park for months which will get you in the end."

And in my post of August 19th I commented on your case by saying that:

"It is the air of arrogance and indifference when questioned that condemns him, not his actions alone" after the reports from yesterdays hearing I stand by this completely."

I also offered the following advice:

"Sometimes saying Sorry at the outset not at the end is a far better policy. Sometimes remembering that whatever the title says on your post that you are no more important now than you were first achieved office and supposed greatness is also very good practice."

"It's humility, and genuine remorse that will save you Tony not belittling your detractors and undervaluing their opinion."

I honestly feel that you should have heeded this advice far earlier and before you were forced to do so. Imagine if you will, standing up in the chamber in January and saying:

"Mr Mayor, this was an error on my part, I should have moved the car earlier, I apologise to the whole council for not doing so I have now moved the vehicle and I will make a donation to the Mayors charity by way of recompense for any cost incurred or privilege wrongly taken"

Hindsight I know is always easy, but I believe you had plenty of time before then to come up with a better defense than denial and obstinacy.

The other part of my advice in my blog of August 19th was that:

"The local standards board committee will of course have the final say, and that's how it should be, but the damage to his reputation and the Lib Dem group on the Council not to mention his standing within his own group are probably damaged far beyond the level they need to be."

The standards board have now had their say, nothing to do with me, or your pictorial likeness to Il Duce, and I understand that the Lib Dem group will do likewise on Friday.

No one Councillor of the forty seven serving NBC is better than any other, not one of us should be treated or be expected to be treated any differently either, all of us are in control of our own actions, and each of us should learn that disrespect for each other outside of the normal political knock about and disrespect for our office will comes with an expected ricochet when fired out into the public arena.

So write the letter, accept that you were wrong and move on, one thing on which we will both agree on is that at present the council has far more important things to worry itself about and spend its time and energy on than your 12 year old astra.

Whether you are able to lead that challenge is now in the hands of your own members.

But please, please stop blaming me and everyone else for your own actions and ommisions.

Unity and Unitary are the only saviours for local government

The combined energies of our local Labour, Liberal Democrat, and Conservative Councillors at both the Guildhall and at County Hall are being consumed almost entirely by trying to convince an ever shrinking public interest that the other two Party's are both unfit to govern and that only they alone can save us all from the very deep trouble we find ourselves in.

Meanwhile both the Tory County and Lib Dem Borough administrations continue to blame the Labour Party for the mess both Councils are now in despite the red flags coming down at the Town Hall in 2003 and at County Hall in 2005. All normal knock about stuff in the body politic I hear people say? But Northampton at present can't afford such luxury

Of course the outdated and remote two tier local government system that we continue to suffer under, allows this to happen often in a complete mirror reversed image. In other words at the Town Hall the local Tories berate the hapless Lib Dem's for their failures in local office often within hours of them having crossed the road and changed roles from where a Lib Dem opposition at County Hall has distributed the blame onto the ruling Conservative Party for sometimes the very same issues.

As an example, a couple of weeks ago I challenged Richard Church (Lib Dem) at the Town Hall over the state of the newly laid York Stone paving slabs in Gold Street which are now covered in grease and chewing gum because no one bothered to seal the freshly laid slabs. Richard (having waxed lyrical in his portfolio holders report as to the schemes success) told me it was nothing to do with the Borough Council and it was the County Council who had let the contract. Surprise Surprise when I tackled Jim Harker (Tory) last Thursday at a County Council meeting he defelected the blame and reminded me that the work was a partnership between NCC, NBC and WNDC. Since I have been informed privately that the County Council tried to tell the Borough Council officers that York Stone was the wrong choice but they just wouldn't listen.

All trivial stuff really but the same pandemic of BSE (Blame Someone Else) decease is evident on much more important issues, such as the drawing up a Joint Core Strategy (strategic plan) between themselves collectively before consulting on it with themselves and all then saying what an appalling hash they have all made of it! Talk about politicians having a penchanc'e for self flagellation!

So we now unbelievably have a strategic plan proposed by the West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit (NBC, NCC, SNC and DDC) which has been rejected fully by both SNC and NCC with NBC and DDC both choosing to be self critical without having the full courage of their conviction to reject it outright.

So who in all of this has got it right about who is wrong? Well all of them really, you see all have failed to govern and all have seemingly contributed in their own special ways to the state our Town and County are now in. Of course John Prescott must also shoulder some of the blame as the Local Government Act 2000 which brought in "Cabinet" style local government has probably damaged our democracy even more than the local politicians who have administered it.

I must also share part of the responsibility having voted for thesame act in Parliament as an MP but little did we know then that the egotistic and the power hungry would turn an opportunity to decentralise the decision making process into an excuse to concentrate all power and decision making at the centre and within the executive without proper scrutiny.

Ruling administrations of all colours across the whole country have simply grabbed power for themselves whilst paying lip service to any proper scrutiny and the need to keep the whole council engaged. Chief Executives are equally guilty of hoarding decision making powers and ever delegating more and more decisions to their chief officer colleagues, leaving many Councillors both in opposition and within the ruling party (but outside the cabinet) wondering why they bothered to stand for council in the first place.

But for Northampton and indeed the County to recover and strengthen its democratic accountability we need all of the parties to find common ground over the urgent need to reorder our local governance. We need Northampton to be in control of it's destiny again through the establishment of a Unitary (one tier) council based on its own agreed boundary. Other Unitary authorities for either the remaining County or perhaps more plausible North Northamptonshire and South Northamptionshire also need establishing.

But we also need to act quickly, collectively and locally and fight for our right to govern now before an even worse fate is imposed down on us from on high. Having suffered for 5 years from the quangocratic ramblings of West Northamptonshire Development Corporation do we really want to risk any new government whatever its colour imposing on us a West Northamptonshire Unitary Council?

Some will say we need to prove our competence to govern first before we can demand any new structure, I say that it is our very structure which prevents us from delivering that competence in the first place. Where else in the UK can we find a population of 200,000 plus people unable to vote for one council to govern and deliver all of its services? Where else in the UK will we find bi annual elections electing different Councillors and political administrations to different councils who then spend most of their time opposing each other and most of their tenure wasting their energy on party politics instead of providing public service.

Perhaps what we really need is less party politics altogether? and an electorate willing to elect more Independents who will put the needs of the town before the needs of their party. Perhaps we also need a few brave souls from within the party's to have the courage and foresight to say the Party is over and become Independent's themselves?

We need somehow to find common ground and purpose, to achieve unity in Local Government to achieve Unitary Local Government and if the party system can't deliver that or prefers to continue with its backbiting and blame agendas then they should stand aside.

Gag Removed ?

I thought you would appreciate this latest exchange of emails between Councillor and Council.

Not a victory yet, more an attempt to inform me that they always meant to change their mind and did so themselves without my intervention, and in response to my constituents challenge not mine, but still good news for my constituent.

J***,


I fully understand the Council's position in respect of the 2004 Traffic Management Act and I would not dream of interfering or playing a part in the decision making process or in deciding the outcome of any individual challenge or representation.


However please do not presume my intention or intent. Nor should you challenge my constituents right to involve me to seek advice and ask me to seek clarification from yourselves.


I have every right to represent my constituents and argue their case up to the point of not interfering in the decision making process. Therefore could you please advise me on the points I have legitimately made and if you have any difficulty in doing so I suggest you raise this with the Chief Executive and or the Monitoring Officer.


Yours sincerely


Cllr Tony Clarke,
Independent,
Castle Ward

Dear Cllr Clarke



Thank you for your recent email.



I can inform you that the Penalty Charge Notice has already been withdrawn on the basis that a valid permit was produced as part of the challenge lodged by your constituent.



Yours sincerely

Mrs J S******* - Parking Investigation Team Leader

Parking Services - Northamptonshire County Council

Do they honestly think they can silence me?

Hot on the heels of yesterdays blog outlining the lengths some will go to undermine the role of democratically elected Councillors, today's blog outlines an equally worrying attempt by the officer class to silence the elected voices.

This time take a bow J*** S*******, Parking Investigation Team Leader at Northamptonshire County Council.

I have exchanged many an email with J*** and her predecessors over the years in defence of my constituents. In fact over a period of 10 years plus as a local Councillor and 8 years as an MP I must have dealt with 100's if not 1000's of complaints regarding wrongly issued parking tickets and over zealous parking wardens.

My latest case involves a nice guy who lives in a residents permit parking scheme who was ticketed for not displaying his permit. He puts it at the top of his windscreen, the parking warden not seeing it, ticketed him and took a pretty poor photo which proved nothing. My constituent having failed to get any sense from the system and a refusal to withdraw the ticket came to me for help.

I respectfully pointed out to Parking Services that the guy had a permit, had paid for it, it is registered on the system and that the Councils evidence was inconclusive, so would they please consider withdrawing the ticket.

It's called "Representation" you can find a broader understanding of the concept within the "Representation of the People Act 2000"

But J*** quoted a different act to me when answering my enquiry. She told me:

"Unfortunately we are unable to process the request you have made on behalf of your constituent, as the Traffic Management Act 2004 clearly states that "elected members and unauthorised staff should not, under any circumstances, play a part in deciding the outcome of individual challenges or representations"

She then tried to tell me that should my constituent have any queries then he should contact Parking Services himself!

Do they think I was born yesterday? Do they really think I can be silenced? The change in the law in 2004 simply made it clear that Councillors had no magic bullet to cancel a ticket, and that they cannot instruct the Council to do so. It wasn't a charter for officers to be able to silence local councillors and deny residents proper representation

I responded to her and to the Chief Executive of the Council pointing out to them that I had no intention of "playing a part in deciding the outcome" that is for her and her team to do, but no one was going to stop me representing my constituents and standing up for them if I believe the Council has acted wrongly

My very duty as a Councillor is to represent my constituents, and to ensure they get fair play, and to ensure that the Council on to which I am elected has a fair system in place for dealing with such complaints.

It is up to my constituents to ask me if they wish me to represent them and put their case. It is up to me to offer whatever advice I wish back to them.

But when I get obstructive, over officious responses back to me as an elected member from an officer who should know better, then as I did yesterday I really start to question whether or not any democratic accountability is left within our system of local governance.

Some of you may remember last year when the County Council tried to raise the costs of residents permits in Northampton from £25 for a residents and Visitors permit to £60 for what is already an appalling service. The Council were shamed into withdrawing their plans and under the then portfolio holder Cllr Bob Seary they promised a review of the scheme?

So what happened to it?

Perhaps if the Council don't like me representing individually the people who elected me, then I should simply ask all the people within the scheme area and in other schemes in the town to individually write in a formal complaint to the Council asking them where the review they have been promised has got to?

We could then if not satisfied with their answer all take up individual cases with the Local Government Ombudsman to enquire as to whether the Council are administrating the scheme correctly and fairly?

Perhaps we could ask why their staff have only a selective knowledge of the 2004 Act and why they are suggesting Councillors cannot represent their constituents or act on their behalf?

I am so angry and so incensed by this attempt to silence an elected member that I am now even more determined to represent constituents with such cases. So if you have been given a ticket in Castle Ward get in touch, I will be more than happy to fight your corner. I can't take the decision to squash the ticket, that is clearly not within my power, but I will not be told who I can and cannot represent and how I can or cannot represent them.

I will not be silenced.

No accountability, No democracy, No point

Tonight Northampton Borough Council asks it's 47 elected Councillors to vote on its "Annual Governance Statement" which gives an external auditors view on whether or not the Council ensures its business is conducted in accordance with the law and whether or not its systems of internal control are sufficient to manage risk.

NBC's external auditors KPMG who get paid around £250,000 a year to tick the right boxes over this and the financial audit have said amongst other things this year that:

"There are a number of concerns that the internal structure of NBC does not always match the portfolio holder responsibilities." and also that:

"There was also a concern from portfolio holders that their political “hot topics” which had immediate media and public attention did not receive the same degree of focus on the agenda as items on improvement plans. The council’s communications team have been working to address this."

On top of the above we then also pay Price Waterhouse Cooper a further fee for carrying out an "Internal Audit"

And then if we weren't audited enough we then have our national rating set by the government which despite all our auditing still puts NBC at the bottom of the pile as a "Poor" 1 star Council.

So tonight I will vote against the statement of Annual Governance, not least because I have little faith in the number crunchers and auditors who are to me nothing more than a bunch of overpaid and over remote consultants, but also because I believe on Northampton Borough Council that we do not have any local governance at present. The report tonight is really about 2008/09 but its findings only magnify the current difficulties in 2009.

Decisions you see,now and then are not taken by Councillors, not even within the Cabinets inner circle, they are taken by Senior Council Officers at their management board and handed down to a puppet administration as a "Fait Accompli"

Opposition Councillors and even Councillors within the ruling Party are the last to find out what the Council is planning or implementing. Budgets are changed, services withdrawn, expenditure agreed, staff appointed, all without even a pretence of elected accountability or proper electoral scrutiny.

This year it is worst than ever. For instance we all voted reluctantly in February for a rise in fees for Pest Control Services to help us balance the books, the Council then went and scrapped the Service altogether! Officers also agreed deals with other authorities to enter into partnerships to Market Test and possibly deliver core services and set on staff without any approval from Cabinet.

Last week 250 staff at Cliftonville were told they were moving out of their offices completely and that redundancies will most probably arise, all without even a mention of the plan to elected members. So why do we bother then with Councillors? after all we are hardly flavour of the month amongst the electorate, so why not let the people making all the decisions take all the flak and deal with all the complaints?

Why indeed? because it can only get worse. With all of the three main Political Parties bragging at their conferences about who will cut public expenditure the most, we know that Local Government has nothing to look forward to over the next few years other than Cuts on top of Cuts on top of Cuts.

Council Leaders will be told then, even more so than now, by their Chief Executives not what they can choose to do, but simply that these are the cuts you will implement, and that you can't say that there will not be any more.

Of course to hide all of this Councils will continue to champion its capital projects and grant aided schemes to cover up for their subservient obedience. In Northampton this means we get a new Fountain on the Market Square to look at whilst at the same time they close all the Public Toilets. It means we get a new Marina in Beckett's Park whilst our existing green spaces become overgrown and turned into "wildlife areas" due to cut backs in grass cutting and grounds maintenance. And it means that a town which can't even afford to employ a rat man can afford to have a "Market Square Entertainments Officer" to keep us all happy when buying our bananas.

Well the other 46 "elected" members can go along with all this deceit if they please, but I am not prepared to mislead anybody. I seriously say to my electorate that the only thing they get back from me for their vote at present is a glorified Social Worker and an awkward bugger happy to stir up the pot and fight on their behalf to make sure they get their share of a increasingly poor service.

I even contemplated standing down last week, resigning my seat and forcing a by election to stand once again on a platform of no confidence in our electoral system, only the cost of such a move at a time when every penny needs to be spent on the most needy in our society stopped me from doing so.

But I wont be silenced, I won't go along with the flow and I wont pretend to the voters that the Council's improving when it is clear that that is not the case.

I believe however that I am not alone. I believe that there are also those in all three parties who also agree with me. Some of them over the past few months have had the courage to tell me so, a smaller number have been willing to support me in the chamber at the time of a vote.

When times are very hard and when the Government trys to clamp down on spending whilst at the same time is still telling you that you must build more houses and provide for more people then we need elected councillors more than ever who are prepared to stand up and fight for our town and collectively take on those who oppose us. We need Councillors from all party's willing to put Politics to one side and work together to secure a better deal for Northampton.

What we don't want and don't deserve is a bunch of lily livered cowards unable or unwilling to challenge authority at local or national level and not prepared to stand up and declare that they have the elected authority and that they will make the choices and the decisions on behalf of the people who elected them.

Those willing to vote against the Annual Governance Statement tonight or even willing to abstain may just start to show the public that all is not lost.

Separated at Birth

It seems I owe Cllr Tony Woods an apology. Apparently he was most taken aback by my reference to his pictorial likeness to Benito Mussolini in a previous blog.

So much so, that he mentioned it in the Council Chamber. The Chronicle and Echo though then wrongly attributed this slur to my good friend John Dickie. John is understandably very angry at this accusation and wants me to put the record straight following a similar correction in the newspaper. John in no way likened TW with Il Duc'e, he instead in his blog compared him to uncle Joe Stalin!

I however would like to personally apologise and put the record straight and to show him that there are no hard feelings, and no harm intended (and to hopefully cheer up his time at conference) I include today a few other likenesses for him to giggle over in declaring the runners and riders in the:

2009 23,000 GUINEAS NORTHAMPTON LIBERAL DEMOCRAT BOROUGH COUNCIL LEADERSHIP STAKES

It seems as Tony's probable day of destiny on October 6th (see astragate, the fallout) approaches that several of the Lib Dem faithful have already jumped ship and are busily parading their favourites for the forthcoming race around the Guildhall ring.

So as a definitive form guide, together with our own totally in fun 'separated at birth' likenesses are the SP's for the opening account


Even Money 1/1 Brian (Roger DeCourcey) Hoare

Pictured here with fellow Lib Dem Cllr John Yates, Brian must start as the even money favourite, a safe pair of hands and a likely candidate for the 'lets not rock the boat too hard' punters




2/1 David (Sven) Perkins


Coming up fast on the hard right rail, Cllr David Perkins could just carry the Lib Dem dressing room with his quiet man team talks and right wing ball work






13/2 Brenden (Lawrenson) Glynane

This pundits choice might not make it to the 'Match of the Day', due to other engagements elsewhere. An outside chance unless another Jockey can be found to ride the opposition in the County Council Stakes.





20/1 Paul (Jordan) Varnsverry

Varno would love to go the distance here but may be seen as too over keen by his peers. The likeness? Well they may be facially different (not to mention the body) but both Varno and our Katie would of course do anything and say anything at the moment just to get their mug in the papers



So who is it be? Have I missed any late entries? and can any other 'separated at birth' figures be found at the Guildhall?

So place your Bets........................................Your's ever

Tony (Moylesy) Clarke