any day today rss facebook twitter

Bonkers Blog January 2016

Index: 20092010201120122013201420152016201720182019

18 January - Dodging the question, but was it dodgy dealing?

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.

Mr. Bryant’s question to Bexley Council’s Head of Legal asked how he as a member of the public could perceive that Councillor Maxine Fothergill had brought the council into disrepute when he is not supposed to know anything about her alleged Misconduct.

It was perhaps too philosophical and general a question for Mr. Alabi as any answer he might give could only confirm that Bexley council’s words were carefully chosen in order to mean nothing.

FothergillMr. Alabi has decided to treat the question as a Freedom of Information request which will require the provision of documented facts and allows him 20 days to give an answer instead of only five.

Perhaps Mr. Alabi intends to provide chapter and verse on what Fothergill has done but more likely he will instead refuse to answer his own FOI, leaving Mr. Bryant’s question unanswered.

How is one supposed to have a perception of something which is an unknown?

Whatever Alabi does it is unlikely to confirm anything except that Bexley council has to be secretive because it is corrupt to the very core.

Fothergill conferred a financial advantage on herself, Bexley’s Code of Conduct Sub-Committee has said so, and their verdict was that no meaningful sanction should be applied - and given the restricted range of options that Bexley council allows itself that was almost inevitable.

None of the seven options include referring Fothergill to the police, instead she is to be removed from the Appeals Committee so that she cannot hear her own appeal against the wrist slapping. It has been reported that she is to appeal which implies that she cannot see that, if she did it, abusing her position for financial gain cannot be right.

For the record, Mr. Barnbrook’s FOI was as follows…

On 10th December 2015, the Members’ Code of Conduct Complaints Sub Committee ruled that Councillor Maxine Fothergill breached the following paragraphs of the Council’s Member Code of Conduct.

Para 3(1) Conferring an advantage or disadvantage on any person, or act or gain financial or other material benefits for herself, her family, friends or close associates.

Please provide details of the advantage or disadvantage, financial gain or other material benefits.

Para 3(8) Conducting herself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing her office or the London Borough of Bexley into disrepute.
Please provide details of the conduct that brought her office or the London Borough of Bexley into disrepute.

Index to related blogs.


Return to the top of this page