Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think

Lewes Forum New message

Previous St. Mary's thread contd........

On 8 Mar 2013 at 12:31pm Sparky wrote:
"Simples".....an appropriate name me thinks. At least you admit to talking rubbish but seem unable to answer my simple question. You were the one who started the trolling whilst others were communicating in a reasonably constructive manner. If you are unable to offer anything other than your feeble attempt at suggesting who you think certain people are on this thread, you'd best go crawl back under your rock.
On 8 Mar 2013 at 4:32pm Topic Appropriate Songs wrote:
"Dazed and Confused" Various artists since 1967 Led Zep in 68
On 8 Mar 2013 at 5:03pm Simples wrote:
Sparky, it's a mirror, you and a number of your annonimous trolling friendless do just that, talk rubbish. There is no rock round here to crawl under, they're all taken. Try the Mensa website you'll fit right in.
On 8 Mar 2013 at 5:43pm Sparky wrote:
Still you ignore answering my question, what's up with you apart from your inability to spell
On 8 Mar 2013 at 10:56pm Cllr Donna Edmunds wrote:
@Well I Never, i've not been censored (yet), just been away from the forum for a few days.
I saw the private eye piece today and thought it summed up the situation pretty accurately. I've also seen the documents referred to. Page was asked by the Lib Dems at our last meeting whether he planned to sell off the centre; he gave quite a long and meandering answer that was notable only in that he failed to deny that that was his intention. So it's clear that St Mary's has been tagged for redevelopment, presumably as part of a larger parcel.
As Page - sorry, In The Know - says, it's possible that a better centre might come about through redevelopment. The point that Page seems to have missed is that it should be up to the people of Lewes, particularly those who use the centre, to decide whether that's an option they'd like to persue.
The question, both on this specific issue, and on the wider problem of lack of democratic accountability in LDC, is what we councillors can actually do about it, especially considering we're operating under the 'strong leader' model.
We can ask one question each at full council but can't ask a follow up, so if he blathers on with half truths we can't pull him up on that. We can send in written questions, again which come before council (so only every six weeks) but which can likewise be brushed off. We can ask for some key decisions to go before scrutiny, but with apologies to Cllr Osbourne who does a good job of chairing, the committee has no teeth - all of the information that comes before it is prepared by senior officers, and anyway most of the councillors on the committee have no interest in being forensic or digging too deep.
Consequently i'm really struggling to see what, practically speaking, can be done. If anyone has a good understanding of local government and has any insight or bright ideas please do get in touch - cllr.donnaedmunds@gmail.com - as i'd love to hear from you.
On 9 Mar 2013 at 12:53am WellInever. wrote:
Cll Edmonds, i do not agree with many things you write but thank you for acknowledging what many of us have thought for several years. Our Council Officers, and more bullying Councillors have manipulated our elected representatives into such a pointless position , that we are simply being dictated to by a few individuals. Our Councillors should be ashamed for letting this happen to their electorate. I am astonished that there is so little debate about decisions being made. The arrogance is quite overwhelming.
I would suggest considering a petition of no confidence in Cllr Page's handling of St Mary's as a starting point, given that you know that at least 4000 people are likely to support it. I did not sign a petition about St Mary's but I would sign something about how it has been handled.
I would also like my other Councillors to be explicitly asked what they think of this specific situation.They are either 'for' what has happened or not, and I think it is about time they came off the fence. As Cllr Edmonds states, the issue is a more general one, about how the decision making process is (or indeed, isn't) being carried out.
I hope Cll Edmonds doesn't mind me saying that I am absolutely horrified that of all the political persuasions it is a UKIP supporter that has ended up being the only Councillor so far to peruse a legitimate criticism of what is going on. But good luck to her. The rest might like to join in her criticism , rather than endorsing Cllr Page with the , oh, so familiar, deathly silence.
What would Tom Payne think of this , one wonders.
On 9 Mar 2013 at 12:59am Fairmeadow wrote:
1. Propose, and get seconded, vote of no confidence in Cllr Page.
2. Propose, and get seconded, alternative to "Dear Leader" model.
3. Propose, and get seconded, reduction in salary of said leader.
Given your defection Cllr Donna, the voting outcome of such proposals might be interesting?
On 9 Mar 2013 at 8:48am Sparky wrote:
The original agreement to look for a development partner and the list of sites was voted for by full council last may and was democratically agreed by all councilors including Donna Edwards.
On 9 Mar 2013 at 10:29am Cllr Donna Edmunds wrote:
A vote of noconfidence in Page is one thing, but you need someone else to step in if he's moved aside. Not to put too fine a point on it, i can't think of any current councillor who would realistically do a better job. Most of them, as you all so righly say, have been part of the problem for many years.
Page is dictatorial, but he does at least have a positive vision for the council.
Just thinking aloud here.
On 9 Mar 2013 at 7:01pm Sparky wrote:
May I just point out that the last post by "Sparky" is someone who has pilfered the name of the original "Sparky" from previous posts.
On 9 Mar 2013 at 8:34pm whatonearth? wrote:
Cllr Edmonds, presuming that you are writing all the posts which have your name attached you must be completely barking.. I am afraid you can't have it both ways. Depending on which day of the week it is you write that Cllr page is either dictatorial, or has vision. You claim in one post that Cllr Page is has serious problems with his leadership style, and that you have had many run -ins with him, and are putting together evidence about...something...., and them you claim that no one would be better than the person you are 'investigating' and criticising, whilst also criticising all the other Councillors as being useless, presumably including yourself. I think if anyone should resign it should be you!
Completely bizarre.
On 9 Mar 2013 at 8:38pm Deelite wrote:
@what on earth: "and them you claim that no one would be better than the person you are 'investigating' "

You sure you've got that right?
On 9 Mar 2013 at 9:21pm Cllr Donna Edmunds wrote:
@whatonearth, not barking, just honest. I realise that there's often not much distinction between the two in politics.
It is entirely consistent that Page can be a bad leader, but the least worst of a bad lot. Like all humans he has his strengths and weaknesses. I've said before that he does bring useful skills to the council, the downside is his dictatorial style. But it doesn't follow that other councillors would necessarily do a better job as they too have their strengths and weaknesses. I, for example, also have a vision for the district, but would need a majority vote to be elected. As i'm the only representitive of my party, and our councillors tend to be tribal, i'm unlikely to win in a leadership challenge. Accepting that doesn't make me barking, it makes me realistic.
All those on here who are wondering why us councillors don't 'do something', all i can say is: if you think you can do better, run for election. I for one would welcome a rise in the calibre of my colleages. Not so sure the officers would like it though.

24 posts left

Your response

You must now log in (or register) to post
Click here to add a link »
Smile Wink Sad Confused Kiss Favourite Fishing Devil Cool



Lewes winged messenger 90:132
Lewes winged messenger

Just noticed. TP started "Quote of the Moment", although it's hard to understand what it's for. more
If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.
George Washington