20 November - Searching for Justice
This site runs on hand-written html code; I don’t like the imposed
uniformity of blogging software and doing it myself allows it to be Google
friendly. It takes time but sometimes pays quick dividends. Councillor
Philip Read’s diatribe about
predominantly black Christians which was on line three
hours after he delivered it was indexed by Google six hours later. Try a search
for ’Philip Reed Bexley’ and it is top of the list. John Watson followed suit
with his site
and within forty hours of its launch was on page 5 of Google with a simple
‘Bexley council’ search. Bonkers started life on page 9 before it got to sit
under the council’s official site. Three times in the last week people have said
to me “Bexley council must really hate/loathe you”. I don’t know;
understanding twisted minds is not my forté, but I
don’t suppose I have many fans there.
Read’s tirade against the Labour party and religious groups was in my opinion
completely out of order, why did the Chairman, councillor and mayor
Val Clark not put a stop to it?
What is she there for? Why, for that matter did she allow Craske to let rip at a
member of the public and choose, if you can believe what is on the council’s own
website, to avoid answering his question by pulling a nonsense out of thin air?
Whilst I feel he should be made to answer for his outburst I am informed by
those in the know that a report to the Standards Board would be a waste of time.
Why? Because the council has it totally under its own control.
The soon to be abolished Standards Board for England offers guidance to the
effect that local Boards may be formed of a majority of lay-members, people
without vested interests, not councillors who will protect their well paid own.
Bexley of course ignored that and has a Standards Board which is far from
balanced and impartial. I am finding it very hard to find aspects of Bexley council which
are wholly honest and not tinged with corruption.
The code of conduct for Bexley councillors says that they must not “bully
any person; intimidate or attempt to intimidate any person who is or is likely
to be a complainant, witness, or (be) involved in the administration of any investigation
or proceedings”. Craske clearly failed that paragraph and them sat stony faced
and deep purple from hairline to double chin throughout the meeting’s 150 minutes.
