any day today rss facebook twitter

Bonkers Blog January 2016

Index: 20092010201120122013201420152016201720182019

4 January - Maximising personal gain

The blog below is one of several relating to Bexley Councillor Maxine Fothergill and Bexley Council’s Code of Conduct Committee. This note aims to make it clear that the events reported between December 2015 and the Summer of 2016 whilst accurate reflections of various events, disciplinary hearings and sanctions brought against Councillor Fothergill they are individually insufficient to explain the whole story.

Two members of the Bexley-is-Bonkers team met with Councillor Fothergill at a secret location on 16th September 2016 where she explained to us what had really happened. She was able to convince us that she was the victim of a miscarriage of justice.

There were compelling reasons why Councillor Fothergill should be believed. It seemed likely that the Tory High Command in Bexley had taken revenge on her because Councillor Fothergill had reported one of their associates to the police for theft.

Councillor Fothergill requested that the explanatory note prefixed to relevant blogs (which first went on line a few days earlier) be further strengthened so that readers are fully aware that reported events, whilst accurate at the time, did not reflect her innocence and that Bexley Council’s charge of misconduct and “gaining a financial advantage for herself” was malicious.

This is a modified version of the note Councillor Fothergill asked to be placed here.

FothergillI don’t know much about Councillor Maxine Fothergill. I’ve seen her chair meetings in a reasonably proficient fashion but she has never been reported as saying anything significant or especially silly at council meetings.

The first time she came to notice as somebody with something to hide was when she removed her address from the Register of Members’ Interests after the clueless Eric Pickles provide the get out clause. Any councillor who said their life was in danger could claim anonymity under Section 32 of his Localism Act. Bexley’s flexible Monitoring Officer, Akin Alabi, was happy to oblige the paranoia.

Maxine Fothergill’s most frequent contribution to a meeting has been to say how brilliant everyone else is and sometimes be repetitive as if she has not been paying attention.

She was once the subject of a blog devoted just to her. During the 2014 election campaign someone queried how a resident of Gravesend could be a Bexley councillor at all. She still claims to live at 51 Mayplace Avenue but it is widely thought to be little more than a P.O. Box.

Maybe a dubious residency qualification is not very popular among her colleagues and certainly heaping praise on them doesn’t appear to have won many friends, how else would one explain so many leaks of information over the past couple of weeks?

L-R. Head of Members’ Services, Dave Easton. Kenneth Atmore (†). Head of Committee Services, Kevin Fox. Councillor Stefano Borella (hidden behind Mick Barnbrook standing). Chairman Cheryl Bacon. Councillor Nigel Betts. Head of Legal Services, Akin Alabi. Lynn Tyler, Legal Team Manager. So called Independent Person, Rebecca Sandhu.

† Mr. Atmore is a former Independent Person called in to advise the newcomer although Council minutes (PDF) reveal that Ms. Sandhu’s 2013 appointment was due to end in May 2015. See below.

It is probable that the nine people in the image caption were later joined by Maxine Fothergill’s legal representative and none were supposed to breathe a word outside the meeting, however one must assume that plenty of hints were dropped to friends with varying degrees of detail. It may account for the variation between the many whispers but at the heart of them is that Maxine Fothergill’s attempt to “confer an advantage for herself” involved a vulnerable old lady moving out of her house after what may have been a flawed valuation.

By all accounts - or should I say most accounts - the old lady was selling up to finance a move to sheltered accommodation and she had no close or local relatives. Maxine Fothergill in her role as Estate Agent was presumably involved in it being obtained at an unnaturally low price, although only one informant actually says so. However if that was not the case I cannot see how the “conferred advantage” was obtained.

A council employee was somehow persuaded to buy, some say for cash, although where the money came from no one is saying, however almost everyone says that Councillor Fothergill was able to get her hands on his house cheaply and rent it for a high price.

Whilst the detail remains a little vague at present there can be little doubt that the property transaction must have gone somewhat beyond an Estate Agent making an honest living. How else would Bexley Council justify the Misconduct tag? According to most people the sale actually went through, no one says it didn’t.

The rest of the story is largely incidental. It is said that the allegedly nefarious transaction took place more than a year ago and a distant relative of the elderly lady complained to Teresa O’Neill. Whether Bexley Council sat on it for a year or the relative was slow to discover what had happened I do not know.

Maxine Fothergill’s legal representative was said to be Councillor June Slaughter, a semi-retired solicitor. (Since confirmed by the draft minutes.)

I’m not sure why anyone’s first thoughts would be to go to Council Leader Teresa O’Neill in such circumstances, my first ports of call would be a solicitor and then the police. Unfortunately if reports of where the complainant lives are true there is little chance of them stumbling across this blog and providing first hand information.

The Chairman of the Code of Conduct Committee is Councillor Cheryl Bacon (Conservative, Cray Meadows), no stranger to dishonesty herself but not, as far as we know, well versed in the art of fraud. Councillor Nigel Betts (Conservative, Falconwood & Welling) is no angel either with a history of covering things up. He backed the move to publish the addresses of FOI requesters on the Council’s web site and more recently wanted to ban the taking of photographs at meetings, contrary to law.

The third member of the Committee was Councillor Stefano Borella (Labour, North End). Whilst the range of sanctions on rogue councillors is restricted (see below) I would hope he’d think a minor wrist slapping inappropriate for Misconduct. Why choose to remove Maxine Fothergill from the Appeals Committee with its record of meeting only once a year, why not the loss of her £3,000 a year Vice-Chairmanship of the Resources Scrutiny Committee?

Perhaps there is a link between the Appeals Committee and its responsibility for the Members’ Appeals Panel. One can hardly have Fothergill hearing her own appeal. Even in a borough as corrupt as Bexley that might be a step too far. Exclude that and what sanction has there been? None.

There is no news on what has happened to Fothergill’s accomplice . the council officer.

GoogleIn the couple of weeks in which I’ve been researching Maxine Fothergill this little message has become apparent. Bexley’s secrecy machine has gone into overdrive. Of course, if a Labour or UKIP councillor had been in the frame, there would have been a Press Release to local news organisations.

As well as “conferring an advantage” on herself Maxine Fothergill has been found guilty of bringing Bexley Council into disrepute. It is probable that the Code of Conduct Committee’s meeting would have slipped by unnoticed if it was not for a handful of old men who keep an eye on the calendar of meetings and Bexley Council has tried very hard to suppress every bit of information. An unlinked URL like is not going to be a popular destination. Thanks to the Conservative councillor who drew my attention to it.

As the clear intention is that no one should know about Fothergill’s exploits, it could be argued that it is not Councillor Fothergill who was likely to heap disrepute on Bexley Council but Bexley Council itself will for engineering another of its infamous cover ups.

Seven sanctions were available to the Committee…
Only (a) and (d) has been applied and in the latter case only to the minimum possible extent.

There may well be sufficient councillors who take such a dim view of what Maxine Fothergill gets up to to generate the whispers but she must also have sufficient friends in high places to protect her from exposure in the press (g). People who live in glass houses etc…
Expiry date


Return to the top of this page