31 December - Bonkers Man of the Year 2012
Bexley council is not as easy to ridicule as it used to be. The end of 2011 was marked with a
tongue in cheek but factual mickey taking
of several councillors which is impossible to repeat for 2012. Maybe fewer silly things are
happening or perhaps they are getting better at hiding them. So instead of a dozen names
available for an award only one man can be honoured for his maladministration in 2012.
Who should it be?
The
clown mayor Alan Downing obviously deserves consideration for telling
councillor Peter Craske that he didn’t have to switch on his microphone if he
didn’t want to thereby ensuring that the Civic Centre hearing loop didn’t work and chalking up
an offence against
Equalities Legislation. The Local Government Ombudsman
hasn’t finished with him yet so perhaps any award can be deferred to next year.
The purple pygmy councillor Peter Craske is old hat now. So last year and a
spent force. Whether he is eventually charged with a crime or he isn’t doesn’t
much matter. The police have said
the criminal blog originated on his home phone line and the
Association of British Bookmakers must be overjoyed to have their name
linked to crime whenever someone searches the web for their Public Relations Manager.
Council
leader Teresa O’Neill is tarred with a similar brush. The police have said that political
interference damaged their Craske enquiries and it’s not hard to guess where that originated from.
We know it was O’Neill who spun the police a false story that resulted in me being formally warned
of arrest if I continued with this website and John Kerlen being arrested for harassment.
John was found not guilty due to lack of evidence - not surprising as Bexley councillors
had made the whole thing up - and my warning was withdrawn following intervention by
the Independent Police Complaints Commission. All because councillor Teresa O’Neill made a
statement to the police (it’s on the record) which was false. She may be the epitome of
a dishonest small time politician but it is not exactly news, she professed total innocence when
her predecessor Ian Clement was caught with his hand in the till too.
For something new I must reach beyond the usual suspects.
Who
was it who deliberately misinterpreted the council’s
Standing Order 84
to sideline 2,219 residents who felt that Bexley having the
6th highest senior officer salaries
in the country was unjustifiable?
Who admitted there is
nothing in council protocols to forbid photography on council premises before public
meetings but on his own initiative has banned every request to use a camera?
Kevin Jobsworth Fox, Head of Committee Services and Scrutiny must be Bonkers Man
of the Year in every sense of the word. The runner’s up prize is awarded to
Bexley council’s Head of Human Resources who, after a complaint was submitted,
backed Fox’s decision to the hilt. No justification for it, just unswerving
support by one council numbskull for another. Mr. Nick No Brains Hollier, the
man to watch in 2013.
28 December - Normal service may prove to be elusive
It’s going to be hard to escape from the Christmas lethargy so it is perhaps
just as well there is no news really worthy of comment. Just to prove that I
have not succumbed to drink or norovirus…
The friendly police officer
told me on Christmas Eve that she had waded through ¾ of the forensics’
report on a second batch of councillor Peter Craske’s communications devices.
At that rate of progress it will be another week before the job is finished and
if the officer took no Christmas and New Year break - but she did.
It was rather impressive that I reported a new and unfortunately positioned
pothole to Bexley council on the 24th and it was fixed - maybe not very expertly
- the same day but it was disappointing to note that the
street
lights along Knee Hill have reverted to type. i.e. off all night with one on
during the day.
Two
people have drawn my attention to the fact that Danson Road is to be
disrupted by three months of gas main replacement starting next week. That will
be nice for anyone driving between Crayford and Welling and attempting to bypass
Bexleyheath using Albion Road, usually the easiest way. They will find it blocked half way along and
the obvious diversion from there is Townley Road and a variety of minor roads which
emerge, guess where? In Danson Road of course. A degree of chaos would appear to be more than likely.
Will I lose all credibility if I admit to getting Christmas good wishes of the
electronic variety from two politicians? One Labour and one Conservative; which was nice. Thank you both.
Now it’s back to the letter to the Independent Police Complaints Commission that I
have to write, not my idea of New Year fun.
The phrase is borrowed from the friendly - I am not being sarcastic - police officer who told me at the beginning of the month that the Craske investigation would be “all wrapped up by Christmas”. All that has happened since then is that another of councillor Craske’s computers came back from the labs on the 11th but with a report that would take another week to digest. One might imagine that there would be a need to consult the Crown Prosecution Service but no further information has been forthcoming so unless that changes the Bonkers Blog will also be wrapped up for the week. Happy Christmas everyone.
22 December - Parking fines. Exposing Bexley’s dishonesty. (Episode 11)
Mr. Chris Loynes was the best Bexley council could offer when the retired
policeman insisted on an independent enquiry into how they had come to record a
series of untruthful statements in connection with an alleged parking offence and
then confirmed them all when irrefutable evidence showed them to be wrong. The
reality was that their procedures did not allow for any checking; extortion of
money irrespective of the facts was the priority.
The policeman was looking for more than an apology, he was looking for an acceptance that the policy was
fundamentally dishonest and should be changed. Mr. Loynes would only accept that
they were “unfair practices” but were not criminal. He also assumed that the fined
motorist was looking for monetary compensation because Bexley council had ‘fined’ its
parking contractor £120 and had thereby profited from its own dishonesty. The motorist’s
reply on 5th July 2010 made it absolutely clear that Mr. Loynes was wrong.
That
letter must have been difficult to answer because it was late October before
there was any reply. Bexley’s Chief Executive, Mr. Will Tuckley, took three pages to
explain that the only thing they had got wrong was not having adequate signage outside
the KFC takeaway in Bexleyheath Broadway. It had taken a whole year to make no real
progress. There was no recognition that Bexley’s appeal procedures take no notice
of any evidence supplied during the initial stages.
Frustrated by the lack of progress the persistent complainant resorted to the Freedom
of Information Act and took his case to Bexleyheath police. Unfortunately he almost
immediately came up against Chief Inspector Tony Gowen who is well known for his
reluctance to take action against Bexley council.
Bexley council continues to flout parking laws. An examination of the PATAS adjudications
for this month alone shows Bexley to be allowing fewer days for discounted payment
than the law prescribes (Case Reference: 2120504543) and is fining people for
momentary stops of two or three seconds. (Case Reference: 2120593190 and others.)
This story is reported in an indeterminate number of episodes.
A cumulative version is provided for convenience.
A
reader asks why the traffic disruption in Highland Road is going to last twice as long as that in Broadway.
See the details below.
It might be a mistake but on the other hand Highland Road is to be permanently shut as
part of the Tesco development on the current Civic Centre site and work will
start on that just as the Broadway chaos comes to an end.
Just how much Tesco paid Bexley council to permanently deprive residents of the use
of a cross town shortcut isn’t known.
The public was excluded from the relevant
meeting although according to councillors present they weren’t allowed to know either.
Transparency Bexley style.
Another thing that may be a mistake is part of a recent letter from the police
describing how councillor Peter Craske’s phone line was used to set up Bexley
council’s obscene blog. I can’t make up my mind if the explanation is extremely
poor or whether it is deliberate obfuscation. It certainly isn't totally correct
and maybe almost 100% wrong. Neither does it have any real relevance to the initial failed investigation.
The critical question was surely the source IP address, not the one that Google
happened to be running the blog on at the time.
If there are any experts out there who recognises the following text as an accurate explanation
of what is involved in setting up a Google Blogspot I would be pleased to hear from them.
PC Nolan is an MIB (Intelligence Bureau) officer. At the time of her report the blog had not been removed.
20 December - No news is not necessarily good news
It’s
inevitable that not much happens at this time of the year and people have better things to do
than read about Bexley council. Today there is close to nothing to report.
There is no sign of any Christmas parking concession this year, not that
last
year’s delivered at the 11th hour with minimal publicity was worth having. This
year there will be no charging on Christmas and Boxing Days plus New Year’s Day.
Neighbouring boroughs are no better with no obvious announcements on their websites. Money must be short.
The Department for Communities has announced today that Bexley is to get a reduced
Council Tax Grant next year; 1·5% less than in 2012 -
source BBC website. Eric Pickles helpfully provides
a 50 point list of ways that councils can save money. I can’t see
Bexley rushing to take up many. Getting rid of Chief Executives and cutting top
salaries by 5% or more are all things that Bexley council is dead set against. Much
more likely is that the public will be asked for more money via stealth taxes.
i.e. increased prices for services.
At number 28 in the list of money saving ideas is this one…
Common Purpose, is
widely believed to be
a pernicious charity
brain-washing the ruling classes in the ways of world domination.
Interesting that Eric Pickles should pick it out from so many reputable management training facilities. Perhaps he knows the truth of it.
19 December (Part 2) - Chaos looms
There
is a comment on the
Sidcup Community Group
website headed ‘Consultation Fatigue’. The author has noticed that we are suffering from a surfeit of
consultations. The hospital, the police, Bexley’s ‘core strategy’, the river crossing,
Sidcup High Street. Will they make a scrap of difference? Probably not, but at least
there is a consultation on Sidcup High Street. In Bexleyheath Broadway you are
getting a mixed use area,
a massive parking trap and chaos while the work is done. Like it or lump it.
Broadway is to be west bound only and Albion Road the reverse. That should be
great fun. For those who don’t know the area it makes a sort of reverse
roundabout, albeit a large one, and by reverse I mean traffic will have to go
around it in an anti-clockwise direction so that both traffic streams will have
to cross each other at the Bowling Centre roundabout.
While trying to cope with that drivers will be expected to read the signs warning
that there are no yellow lines on Broadway but parking is forbidden or face a fine.
You want more? Highland Road is being made one way with a bus lanes. It might have been better
to have just closed the town until June 2013.
19 December (Part 1) - Police story unravels
The police allegation against the former Government Chief Whip, Andrew
Mitchell, has begun to unravel and he has said the revelations “shaken my
lifelong support and confidence in the police”. Join the club Andrew; the data provided to me by recent
police letters regarding Bexley council’s obscene blog doesn’t stack up either.
Just a small example…
They reveal that the Metropolitan Police Intelligence Bureau when asked to look for
the blog’s source IP (Internet Protocol) address initially said that “no source could be
identified” but on being given additional information (viz.
a corrected date)
replied positively to Bexleyheath police who reported that “sufficient information was received”.
All of this on or before 23rd October 2011.
A new document in my possession assures me that the investigation has been “expeditious” and
an older one records that the decision to apply for a search warrant for councillor Craske’s Sidcup address
was taken on or about 30th May 2012. One might wonder why it should have taken seven months to
act on an IP address. A strange interpretation of the word expeditious. Probably the “political interference”
will have had something to do with it.
When the police and a politician meet head on it’s a tough call to pick the liar.
In the Mitchell case as my friends know, I said the police were up to no good. I
should have put a bet on it.
18 December (Part 2) - This evening’s Cabinet meeting
It’s off. Cancelled at the last moment. Now that is going to disappoint at
least four or five Bexley residents who will have to find something else to do.
Maybe queen Teresa was upset that
Her Majesty refused to grace her cabinet with the Royal presence, it seems a rather extreme way for Kevin
Fox to dodge his obligation to provide facilities for bloggers as well as the press.
The good news is that the police overtime bill will be slashed.
18 December (Part 1) - Useful idiots
Where
would we be without them? Short of things to report for starters.
Mick Barnbrook posed a question for the next council meeting due a whole three
months away. “Why do members of the public have to have their private addresses published in the
agenda for full council meetings when asking a question whereas councillors do not?”
Kevin Fox, Bexley council’s principal manufacturer of pathetic excuses, merely said that the
protocol that authorises the compulsory publication of Bexley residents’
addresses is not a policy and only policy questions are allowed at council
meetings. It’s an insane attempt to pervert the English language but that is
what Fox said and what one must expect from him.
Mick responded quoting the thesaurus to Fox but to no avail. Back came the reply
“I have spoken to the Mayor and his decision remains as originally communicated to you”.
A
complaint has been dispatched to the Local Government Ombudsman. The LGO usually
takes exception to councils that break their own rules to the disadvantage of individuals.
That makes two complaints currently with the LGO about the pen jabbing mayor Alan Downing.
One day he might realise that acting the constant imbecile causes more grief than it is
worth. On the other hand this website might starve to death. Even idiots can be useful.
I don’t generally complain to Bexley council because the repercussions take up too much time but
I made an exception
when Kevin Fox said his precious protocols allowed the taking of photographs before a
meeting began, but not during one. Then when told of the proposal to take a
photograph well before a meeting started and in a manner only one step removed
from getting Fox to press the shutter button, he told me he had made a
decision to disallow all photography.
I was not best pleased by Fox’s obstinacy and apparent disregard for the stated protocol and asked
him for an explanation or an alternative. The alternative was “Would you prefer to be honest for
once in your life and say that there are no circumstances in which Bexley Council will observe the
spirit of the new laws?” I did not get a reply but I did get a telling off from the Head of Human
Resources, a thin-skinned bureaucrat by the name of Nick Hollier, who
appears to believe his authority extends outside the Civic Offices.
Ooh, that’s really scary. The request for an honest answer instead of the earlier contradictions has
caused distress and the implication that Fox lies for a living is offensive. No
protestation that Fox hadn’t lied in the earlier answers nor was any reason
provided for a decision contrary to the protocols previously quoted.
The situation is not unlike that discovered by Mr. Barnbrook the common
features being protocols, a refusal to explain them and Fox. I shall have to take a
leaf out of Mick’s book and see if I can interest the LGO in another Fox Fiasco.
17 December (Part 3) - Crime and no punishment
Just when you thought that the corruption and mismanagement at Bexleyheath
police station could not get any worse along comes another installment of their
attempt to pervert the course of justice to cover up a crime investigation because one
of their friends and associates was involved. Then they ‘fix’ things so that he is beyond the
reach of the law.
The father continues his alarming story…
It sounds like widespread corruption to me. Teresa O’Neill, also pictured, must
be well aware of it of course having exploited it occasionally.
The complete story so far.
17 December (Part 2) - Tavy Bridge - No hub, no hope
It’s not just surreptitious underhand mission creep with 24/7 parking charges that gets readers scurrying to their keyboards, Gallions Housing Association is far from popular too. This is what a Tavy Bridge resident had to say about the weekend feature on his area.
The regeneration of Tavy Bridge is taking years, with no date set for completion. The chemist
that was there has now apparently merged with the one in Abbey Wood near the train station. [Browne’s in Wilton Road.]
With the few shops remaining, which will be next to go? Gallions, along with Bexley Council, should be
addressing the lack of shops now, there will soon be none left willing to move back in after the
regeneration. Or is this the idea? New shop owners willing to pay greatly inflated rents?
How much do the councillors for Thamesmead know about Thamesmead? In the New Year I may address this by sending some questions.
Tavy Bridge itself is in Thamesmead East ward
but it is close to the border with Lesnes Abbey ward. Two Thamesmead East councillors (Malik and
Persaud) live miles away in Welling and I do not recall either of them speaking about Thamesmead,
indeed I do not recall one of them speaking about anything. The
third councillor, Sandra Bauer, doesn’t even live in the borough but also
expressed concern about the shops when the plan was approved. If Tavy Bridge was
the reader’s nearest shopping area but lives in Lesnes ward, then the best of luck
getting any sense out of councillor John Davey.
17 December (Part 1) - Parking charges up again - percentage : infinite
I
always take a look at the Public Notices that Bexley council puts in the News
Shopper each week, though it’s not always easy to work out what is being
proposed. I’d guess most people don’t bother, nor do they stop to read scraps of
paper affixed to lamp posts etc.
The following is typical of the responses to the news that evening, overnight and
Sunday charges are being introduced to yet more areas of the borough…
Your Saturday blog
about the creeping movement towards full 24/7 pay parking does not seem to have any rhyme
or reason apart from the obvious of raising revenue. They seem to be targeting a few
roads in each part of the borough. Not obvious how or why they have been selected.
From my knowledge of the roads in your photos I’d hazard a guess that they are targeting
roads with terraced housing and not much off street parking so that by charging 24/7 they
hope to catch residents when they come home from work and who normally park on the road
outside their houses.
If this is their hope then as with their other measures it is likely to be
circumvented by residents squeezing cars on to front gardens however small.
They have not included Townley Road where all properties
already have driveways for off road parking. Of the road in your photo a major
effect is likely to be on the Sunday congregation at the adjacent church since
they only have a small car park. Are the council not obliged to give some sort of
traffic based reasons why 24/7 changes are deemed appropriate? e.g. Easing traffic
flow/removing congestion or some such twaddle however spurious.
Without some basis being given which could then be disputed; on what grounds would objections
be considered? Any sort of guidance you could give to your blog readers to help
them object effectively might encourage them to do so.
I’m not sure I can give advice on parking matters. I am rather proud of never giving Bexley
council a bean for parking in my 26 years in the borough, it’s the sort of question I would
have passed to Notomob before its demise.
As the writer indicates, one really needs to know what is in their devious minds
before an effective challenge can be mounted. I suspect it might be possible to
formulate a Freedom of Information request seeking the correspondence which led
to the decision to make the changes and maybe discover what imaginary problem
they are trying to solve. Too much advice giving has in the past led to being embroiled
in hugely time consuming activities for which there is simply not enough time in the day.
One piece of advice I could perhaps give: stop voting the same old faces into power! They only abuse it.
16 December - Out of sight, out of mind
There’s no reason for anyone living south of Upper Belvedere to ever descend
Knee Hill and travel towards Thamesmead. There is no route across the river thanks to
Teresa O’Neill and the few shops (Morrisons, Iceland, Argos and Wilkinsons) can be found elsewhere.
It is a dead end in both senses of the words. So I shouldn’t have been surprised when a friend from
the Bexley Council Monitoring Group said he had
no idea there were lakes within Thamesmead.
I suspect that all the Conservative councillors are just as ignorant. Most live in
the plush parts of town. None at all have addresses anywhere near Thamesmead or
within the lower part of the borough that sits close to sea level. It probably
explains why the North is so neglected and possibly why councillor
Mike Slaughter was happy to condemn people to live in run down Tavy Bridge
for longer than is necessary.
For the benefit of councillors who cannot bring themselves to stray off their well beaten track I offer
today’s Photo
feature.
14 photographs taken with the aid of a rather unforgiving low sun, early yesterday morning.
Note for the gobsmacked councillor Val Clark. This is what “ugly and sixties” is; not the new
scheme.
Click any sliding image for the large version of that particular photograph.
15 December (Part 2) - Get Out of Jail Free
At the beginning of the week
I was forecasting that two threads of the police
investigation into the crime perpetrated via councillor Peter Craske’s phone
line would reach a conclusion. The prediction was based on police promises and
at the 11th hour it has come half true. This morning the postman delivered a
letter from the Met. Police Directorate of Professional Services (DPS) in response to my
complaint of 7th June 2012.
Late on Wednesday evening the new investigating officer who has shown herself to
be infinitely more aware of the requirement to keep victims informed than her
predecessors emailed to apologise for another week of unavoidable slippage to her current enquiries.
Today’s letter from the DPS comes up with an ingenious excuse for last year’s investigation coming to
a premature end.
It may even be true. When the Met’s Intelligence Bureau (MIB) - the name
suggests they keep all they have in one place -
was asked to attempt a trace on the obscene blogger they were told it was posted
on 21st February 2011 instead of 21st May.
Inevitably the MIB found nothing and the investigation crumbled as a result. If
Chief Superintendent Dave Stringer had told us that when we met on 10th February
2012 instead of wittering on about new evidence coming to light we may well have
thought far more of him. As it is his reluctance to be truthful allowed various
other theories to evolve. There was no new evidence.
Maybe because of pressure from MPs; on 23rd September 2011 a new
DCI was asked to review the case and spotted the mistake. Effectively the
case was restarted then and with such alacrity that the culprit was allowed a
whole 13 months to ditch his computer and lose as much evidence as possible.
Every policeman involved has been deemed to have acted in a wholly professional
manner. The fact that the two who interviewed the council Chief Executive regarded Elwyn
Bryant‘s complaint as a counter allegation” when he had nothing to counter,
rather than a legitimate crime report in its own right is ignored.
However the DPS’s report does helpfully repeat the fact that Bexleyheath police issued me with a
Harassment
Form 9993 (after reporting
what an Erith blogger said about Teresa O’Neill) at the request of
Bexley council in error and it is “withdrawn” which reminds me that Bexleyheath
police has never written to tell me. Perhaps they haven’t come to terms with
being duped by council leader Teresa O’Neill & Co. and it was helpful to use it as a plank on which
to build their false claim against John Kerlen. He hadn’t even referred to the Erith blogger, let alone
pen what he was initially charged with writing.
15 December (Part 1) - Give a politician an inch, he’ll steal your money
From
my own selfish point of view this
Parking by Phone lark is
brilliant. As a reluctant motorists, if I need to get to Bexleyheath, I hitch a
lift from a friend who drives through it almost every day and return on the bus.
It used to be a bit awkward finding a place to safely jump out of the car, but now it is easy.
All around the central area there are empty bays which in the days of parking meters were always occupied.
This, as even some of the brighter councillors have noted, is doing parking revenues no good at all - they are
down. It probably does wonders for the business community too but Bexley council are only paying lip service to that.
With so much street parking subject to 24/7 charges oppressed motorists are finding free parking just beyond the
Craske Zone. Although that purple faced disaster is no longer in charge of Realm Wrecking there is no sign of retreat,
far from it; the Craske Zone is being surreptitiously extended.
The street shown is a cul-de-sac which doesn’t even have houses along the first
part of it. An ideal quiet parking spot in the evening when traffic there is even more minimal.
At the moment it is free to park after 5.30 p.m. but not for much longer. It is shortly to switch to 24/7
(“At any time”) charging. Another purely money grabbing exercise by Bexley council. Another stab in the
back for the town’s night life. More proof that “Working for you” is an empty lying slogan.
Note: Photos taken in the pouring rain of
14th December 2012. Thank goodness Pentax SLRs are water resistant. Pity my coat isn’t.
14 December (Part 2) - Tar very much Brian
My
regular correspondent Brian Barnett has a knack of being in the right place at the right time, or at least the newsworthy place. Most recently the photo of a
Parsons Brinckerhoff van
is his; I think I am going to have words with him for passing his latest camerawork to the News Shopper but he has asked me to put it here too.
This time he was on the scene when FM Conway’s asphalt layer overheated in Pickford Lane. For the full description of what he saw at lunchtime today
take a look at the News Shopper
complete with video and some choice language from an onlooker.
Fortunately no one was seriously harmed; just as well now that we have no A&E.
I’ve met Brian a couple of times and thought him to be a young fellow who enjoys taking photos.
The News Shopper says he is 54. Thanks Brian, now I feel even older!
14 December (Part 1) - Planning meeting report
The
main attraction last night was the two major redevelopment plans, Larner
Road in Erith and the Tavy Bridge area of Thamesmead. In the chair was
councillor Peter Reader who does the job perfectly well but whose skills are not
stretched by a committee from the more reasonable end of the Bexley spectrum.
The nature of the meeting does not generally lead to political point scoring and
the absence of the council’s leading exponents of the art such as the Bacons, Teresa
O’Neill and Linda Bailey is welcome. On the other hand it makes for a long and
tedious meeting as the committee ploughs through the relatively mundane house extensions.
The sound system appeared to be defective again and with an audience peaking at
just over 30 murmuring and moving on the constantly creaking seating and
councillors addressing the chair in the opposite direction, audibility was a
problem at times. One planning application went through very quickly and not a
single word could be heard from the gallery.
The Larner Road application was for Phase I which consists of some smaller
multi-occupancy dwellings (flats to you and me)
fronting the North End Road. 15 storey blocks will be replaced by five,
four and three storey buildings arranged so as to form a ‘slope’ down to the
regular houses to be built behind them. (Phase II.)
The
planning officers made their usual competent presentation with impressive
Computer Generated Images which are unfortunately not made more widely
available. A major feature is to be the ‘Home Zone’ which is said to be a
“lightly trafficked community space and the hub of social interaction providing
safe play opportunities for young children’. This proved to be the most
controversial aspect of the design.
The houses planned for Phase II will each have their own gardens but funding for
them is not yet available and only outline permission was being sought last night.
Chris Taylor was the ‘sponsoring’ councillor but he spoke only very briefly in
favour presumably sensing he was kicking at an open door.
Councillor Colin Tandy (Bexley’s representative at the London Fire and Emergency Planning
Authority) was keen to bring his specialist knowledge to the fore and advocated dry sprinklers
in the multi-occupancy buildings and hard wired smoke detectors.
His suggestion sounds like a good one but no one knew if those safety features were
already included nor was it clear that his suggestion was taken on board.
Councillor
Val Clark was worried by the concept of a Home Zone and felt it would
give rise to neighbour disputes over parking and children kicking balls at cars.
The planning officers said that such schemes are “actively encouraged by
government guidance”.
Councillor John Waters said he wanted to ask some “silly questions”. Why is the
number of dwellings planned for Phase II so vague? Because it’s only an outline
plan; and why are more than 10% of parking spaces to be for the disabled when the
requirement in Bexley is usually said to be 7%. The only thing silly about that question is that
there was no answer.
Councillor Margaret O’Neill was concerned that the loop road around the
development will “become a kind of racetrack. There is a lot of
anti-social behaviour in the area”. I thought a big part
of the plan was to produce housing that would not encourage that sort of thing. Apart
from that bit of negativity she thought it was “a wonderful plan”.
Councillor Munir Malik was concerned about the loss of affordable accommodation
but was reassured by the fact that although the number of units might reduce
slightly, bedsits will be replaced by family units with an overall increase in
floor space accommodating more people than before. He too was a little concerned
about the Home Zone and wondered whether vehicle access could be restricted to residents.
Councillor Brian Bishop was the voice of commonsense who had evidently taken the trouble to
look at similar schemes elsewhere and said it should be “given a chance as the design should
ensure harmony”. John Waters agreed, saying “it is fine as it is”.
Councillor Michael Slaughter said the scheme was “imaginative” but he “had
reservations”. Once again it was the Home Zone. “Different colour blocks doesn’t
stop traffic” he said, which if true is going to prove
fatal in the Broadway.
Councillor Bishop moved that the plans be approved and he was seconded by councillor Margaret O’Neill.
Exactly one hour after discussion began the vote was carried unanimously in favour.
By
the time the committee moved on to discuss Tavy Bridge the audience numbers had
fallen to five. The Larner Road residents had actively supported Orbit whose
representative addressed the committee but the small contingent from Thamesmead had no one from Gallions to speak up for them.
Councillor Sandra Bauer, the ward councillor, did not display the enthusiasm I had
expected. “I am not against this development. This is not a community plan, it has lost
its hubs, the shops. The scheme is a gamble.” In an obvious reference to the recent
anti-Gallions protests by residents, she went on to say
that Gallions residents pay more ‘taxes’ than other Bexley residents and deserve more.
Councillor Waters said “it was another very nice scheme” and councillor Malik
said “it was a great scheme”. In reply to one of his questions, the planning
officer said “there are no specific community facilities“ but there is to be a
library. Councillor Malik was assured that not only was the floor space
increased but, this being a high rise development, the number of affordable
dwellings was increased too.
Councillor Val Clark said she was “gobsmacked by the large tower blocks. It’s
ugly and I don’t like it”. Outside the meeting she was heard to say it looked “so
sixties”. The planning officer’s graphics, in my opinion, showed none of the Thamesmead
brutalism style of architecture so beloved of film makers and TV producers and the plan
was overwhelmingly approved. Only councillor Mike Slaughter voted against. I have no idea
why. One can only assume he would prefer that Thamesmead people continue to live in
Clockwork Orange conditions.
Tavy Bridge was over and done with in just 30 minutes. It was five past ten but the long
suffering councillors had more house extensions to examine. I had better things to do.
Note: For the younger generation and those with failing
memories, Stanley Kubrick’s film, A Clockwork Orange was filmed in and around Tavy Bridge.
13 December (Part 3) - Larner Road and Tavy Bridge get approval
The Larner Road Development Plan (Phase I) and the Tavy Bridge Redevelopment (Phase III) were both approved at the planning meeting this evening.
13 December (Part 2) - And answer came there none
The Metropolitan Police are in the news today for failing a young rape victim and at the
other end of the scale I received two emails this morning expressing concern for the apparent
uselessness of Bexley police. The treatment meted out to innocent parties is “astounding” and
they don’t respond to enquiries were the themes.
Many people seem to be too scared to stand up to the police with the result that their
standards spiral steadily downwards but there are exceptions. The
Bexley resident who exposed their dishonesty in court and three weeks ago I received an unsolicited
copy of an email which initially caused me much amusement but it conveys a serious message.
It was written by Mick Barnbrook who took time off from reporting crooked MPs to
the police and Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards (†) to give Chief Superintendent Victor
Olisa the benefit of his thoughts. The Borough Commander neither acknowledged it nor did he reply.
Dear Chief Superintendent Olisa,
Thank you for responding to my email and your invitation to ask questions
relating to “Hate Crime” and “Use of police resources”.
As you are aware, I am a former Metropolitan Police Inspector, having
spent part of my career at Bexleyheath Police Station.
I am therefore somewhat dismayed at the apparent disregard by yourself and officers at
your station towards two senior citizens who have been the subject of a homophobic hate crime.
This crime was reported to Bexleyheath Police Station eighteen months ago
and having followed the "Bexley-is-Bonkers" website, if what is being reported
on there is true, you should all be ashamed of yourselves.
The
unprofessional attitude apparently being adopted by yourself and your staff would
never have been tolerated when I was a serving officer and you would all have been looking
for other employment.
Having decided to take no further action initially and now taking so long to deal with a
crime that could have been dealt with many months ago, any third party might reach the
conclusion that there is some sort of conspiracy between Bexleyheath Police and Bexley
Council to drag the matter out for so long that a decision will be reached not to charge
anybody, as it is not in the public interest.
Any assurance from you that this is not the case would be welcomed by me.
More.
† Mr. Barnbrook got in early with his complaint that the Secretary of State for Culture,
Media and Sport allowed her parents to live in a Wimbledon property for which she claimed £90,718
in second home allowances. Mick was tipped off by one of his many newspaper contacts.
13 December (Part 1) - Time is running out
Today is the last day on which to respond to the consultation process for the South London Healthcare Trust, now in administration. Greenwich and Lewisham have seen protestors on the street in their thousands, in Bexley very few. The same sort of apathy that allows corruption to exist in its public bodies. However at least Bexley council has put its cards on the table so far as the hospital situation is concerned. Greenwich and Lewisham seem to have been more than a little reticent.
Bexley
• Setting aside the working title of 'Health Campus' and retaining 'Queen
Mary's Hospital' as the preferred name of the site.
•Strong support for the commitment to provide a range of healthcare services at
Queen Mary's Hospital, bringing to an end uncertainty about its future.
•A welcome for the retention of the Urgent Care Centre at QMS, subject to a
commitment to quality and raising the role and profile of the service.
•Concern about the loss of in-patient elective surgery at QMS and the additional
travelling this will mean for residents using the elective centre at Lewisham.
•A call for urgent action to improve public transport links to Darent Valley Hospital.
•A call for income from any land sales at QMS to be reinvested into local
community-based services and for any future sales of land or buildings on the
site to be subject to the agreement of the local Health & Wellbeing Board.
•Support for a community-based care strategy, supported by much-needed new
investment in local services, that could help reduce the number of elderly
patients needing hospital beds.
•Concern over the likely impact of the closure of the A&E and maternity units at
Lewisham on patients using neighbouring hospitals.
It does at least suggest that someone has given the subject some thought and I heartily
approve of the call to get rid of the title ‘Health Campus’. At the very least it represents
a psychological downgrade from being known as a hospital easing the way for further cuts.
Greenwich council’s ‘protest’ was confined to the closure of Lewisham’s eight
month old A&E facility referring to…
Greenwich
• The existing levels of demand.
• The growth of the population in recent years.
• The projected growth in years to come.
• The lack of facilities in Bexley.
• The lack of clarity as to how CCG commissioners can be made to create these facilities.
•The lack of clarity as to how CCG commissioners and their patients can be forced to use the elective care facilities at Lewisham.
Somebody must have spent at least ten minutes working on that highly technical
response, but it was better than what Lewisham council managed…
Lewisham
• The council will be submitting a response to the consultation.
To add your own views go to http://www.tsa.nhs.uk
before midnight.
CCG: Clinical Commissioning Groups.
12 December (Part 2) - Christmas is coming
I’ve only seen Bexleyheath’s Christmas decorations during daylight hours but
to me at least they looked as if they may be quite good, certainly better than
anything I am likely to see in my neglected North West corner of the borough
where one trader is selling Christmas trees from a patch of derelict land and
has stuck some lights on one of them.
A reader tells me that Welling is not much more festive, being blessed by just one
tree. This is not Bexley council’s fault. In 2011 under the old Scrooge councillor
Craske only Bexleyheath shopping centre was given any money but the new Cabinet Member
for Public Realm, Gareth Bacon and wife Cheryl chairing thee Scrutiny Committee - now
ain’t that just cosy? - have been relatively generous.
From the Public
Realm Scrutiny Committee Agenda of 9th October 2012…
Bexleyheath traders have also raised their own funds. If Welling has decided to
blow all their £2,000 on a single tree Bexley council may not be to blame.
12 December (Part 1) - Parking fines. Exposing Bexley’s dishonesty. (Episode 10)
Having
established to everyone’s satisfaction that the parking penalty issued to the
retired and disabled ex-policeman should not have been issued
by Civil Enforcement Officer BL286, but he lied on his report, and that Bexley’s appeal
process is unlawful as it automatically rejects representations to save time, the argument
shifted to whether this is deliberate policy or a one off mistake.
The answer was obvious but no one at Bexley council wanted to admit it, not even Mr. Paul
Moore who in other respects had tried to right Bexley council’s wrongs. Unlike
some of his colleagues he was rewarded with only two pages of handwritten A4.
After a polite rejection of the cheque the Director had offered as an olive branch to the
ex-policeman’s favourite charity, it put the argument as follows… (edited extracts)
You appear to misunderstand the word ‘error’. An error is a mistake but both CEO
BL286 and Authorised Officer I.S. are guilty of a deliberate lie on their
statements in an attempt to extort money from me.
You are aware that I have requested the Chief Executive to instigate an
independent review. He has declined and insisted on going to the next stage of
the complaints procedure. This is wrong, the senior officers do not have
training and experience in criminal investigations. Parking Services should not
be investigating themselves.
You and I are never going to agree whether their behaviour is criminal or an
error. Only an independent review can decide.
Clearly
the complainant has no knowledge of Bexley council’s idea if what usually constitutes
an independent review body. i.e. choose the chairman from a known pool of sympathisers and
pay him over £2k. a year for his loyalty, but I digress. What happened next?
Mr. Chris Loynes (still among the most popular of searches leading to this site -
this is today’s list) was appointed to carry out an ‘independent’ investigation
and he set out his understanding of the situation and terms of reference in a
letter dated 30 June 2010.
Mr. Loynes’ take on the matter was rejected five days
later. Another two pages of A4 the detail of which should perhaps wait until next week.
This story is reported in an indeterminate number of episodes.
A cumulative version is provided for convenience.
11 December (Part 2) - Safe houses
Bexley
council’s Monitoring Officer’s decision to allow eight Bexley Conservative councillors
exemption under Section 32 of the Localism Bill
such they need not make a declaration in the Register of Members’ Interests has been challenged in two ways.
Firstly an FOI request for their submissions relating to the nature of the “violence and
intimidation” allowed by the legislation which could persuade me to rethink my own
listing of their addresses.
At best the answer is likely to be ‘names redacted’ which will make revisions impractical.
I imagine most councillors have at some time or another received minor abuse but it
would have to be very specific to be a real threat. Since Bexley councillors have a track
record of reporting even imaginary threats to the police - pitchforks, torches, dog faeces
anyone? - I rather doubt that the claims for exemption are anything other than pure fiction.
The second is a plea for exemption for members of the public who are compelled by Bexley
council to have their home addresses published irrespective of what risk that may impose
on those who ask questions at council meetings. When Mick Barnbrook reported all those
fiddling MPs to the authorities the privacy of his address was respected. Bexley council
has no such scruples and put him under threat. He has since been treated to
what councillor Melvin Seymour wasn’t.
The decision to curtail questioning as much as possible and publish addresses was taken at
a special meeting
on 27th April 2011 chaired by Controller and purveyor of false information
to the police, Teresa O’Neill; the detail being…
• Disallowing the recording of meetings because the result may be edited.
• The mayor may disallow questions from anyone he/she has previously deemed
troublesome or in the language of the time, had expressed “parsimonious appreciation”.
• Questions which are in any way similar to another asked within the last six
months will not be permitted.
• Residents whose questions are accepted will have their personal details, name
and address etc. published.
• Questions relating to staffing levels and salaries will not be permitted.
• Questions about operational matters, i.e. not policy, will be disallowed.
• If the questioner fails to attend the meeting his/her question will be rejected.
Since then unofficial changes have crept in. The current excuse for not recording meetings is, ironically,
that the public’s privacy might be compromised. Questions are allowed when the questioner fails to
appear but only if the question allows a favourable answer, and most recently,
policy questions
are disallowed if the answer is likely be prove embarrassing to the council.
11 December (Part 1) - Rotten to the core
If the first three installments of this story hasn’t convinced you that some of Bexleyheath’s police officers are incompetent and uncaring to the point of corruption then this one should do the trick. A father continues his story of how several police officers conspired to cover up an assault by one of their associates and deprive a badly injured teenager of justice and compensation.
Last
week I introduced Bexley Police’s investigation of a serious assault, where family of the investigating
officer (PC1) shared close friends with the assailant’s family. If you remember, before compiling the
evidence, PC1 is reported to have downgraded the charge against the attacker, intervened to challenge
his exclusion from school, declined to receive the medical evidence and concluded that it was just
“a little bit of messing around”.
PC1 noted in the crime report that he would be interviewing the victim “with his mum” in attendance; but
when we (the victim’s parents) arrived for the interview, we were told to leave the police station while PC1
interviewed our son (aged under 16) without a second officer or any other adult present. This was
“usual practice” for Bexley Police, according to PC1, despite him interviewing the attacker with his father
and his solicitor present.
Our son’s interview was neither recorded on tape, nor was any note made of it
in the crime report. Due to eye injuries from the attack, our son was unable to see properly to write or
read his own statement; but never mind – PC1 would do all this for him. Notes were made in the crime report
a few days later about the interview being inadequate – that PC1 needed to take a fresh statement from our
son as a “priority action”; but despite PC1’s supervisor DS1 being informed that PC1 had obtained the
statement, no new statement was ever taken.
PC1 was then asked by DS1 and DI1 to “review” and “assess” the CCTV, and he concluded that it “merely shows
a group of persons at the end of the playground” and had “no evidential value” (although how he managed to
make this assessment is a mystery, as it later transpired that Police had actually seized the wrong CCTV
footage - a still shot of the school entrance gate).
PC1 had also already taken receipt of statements given by seven witnesses and the attacker himself. Nearly one
month later, according to the Headteacher of the school where the assault took place:
• PC1 phoned the school to say he had altered some of the statements and wanted to come to the
school to get witnesses to sign the altered versions.
• When the school asked him to email some details, he claimed he didn’t know how to send emails (he must
be a fast learner, as within a few weeks, there is a note of him in the crime report emailing another
officer about the investigation).
• He then bypassed the school and visited three of the witnesses at their homes to get the altered versions
re-signed, and claimed that parents of three of the other witnesses refused to
allow them to give statements to Police (despite all of these parents having no recollection of any
Police officers ever contacting them about the matter).
• Ultimately, the original statements of the attacker and the seven witnesses all went missing from Police files.
The school was so concerned about PC1’s behaviour that it telephoned his manager DI1 (the officer previously in
charge of the obscene blog investigation) to complain. This complaint was passed on to PC1, who then told
us about it, assuring us “it doesn’t bother me – I get them every week”. However, according to the Headteacher,
despite several messages being left for DI1 to call the school back about the complaint, he didn't return
these calls.
With two senior officers (DS1 and DI1) dealing with the case, you would imagine that at least one of them would
have noticed that something was wrong with this investigation.
So did they do anything about it? … What do you think? (More to follow.)
The nonchalance about a complaint sounds familiar. That is very close to what
Chief Superintendent Stringer and his deputy Tony Gowen said to me when we met
on 10th February this year.
The complete story so far.
10 December (Part 2) - Building bridges with residents
I suppose it comes with the job description but I find myself regularly looking
at other local news websites in and around London. Whilst others report
council indecision and incompetence only Bexley provides the ammunition on an almost
daily basis with which to accuse it of deep seated dishonesty leading to corruption.
In Barnet which vies to be the most hated council in London, the councillors regularly
discuss matters with their critics on blogs, forums, by email and at public
meetings. Photography is OK by them; they do not find the need to hide behind a
wall of secrecy. Unlike in Bexley there is little sign of the council being in bed with
the police. True the anti-terrorist police were
persuaded to arrest a parking
campaigner but they weren’t instructed by their political masters to let their council leader go free when he
was alleged to have assaulted that campaigner and committed motoring offences.
When Barnet residents took over their council chamber last week in
protest at the council cabinet’s decision to hand over all their
responsibilities to Capita on a ten year billion pound contract the police merely observed the
situation. Here the police threatened to arrest John Kerlen when he was
slow to remove himself
when asked to leave the public gallery of a public meeting. When councillor Linda Bailey
assaulted him with the immortal words “I can do what I like”,
Bexley police agreed with her and said she could whilst on council property.
Nearer home in Greenwich the talk is not so much its council but criticism of
Transport for London and the Health Care Trust. Greenwich council is
collaborating with Newham across the river pushing the case for improved river
crossings whilst in Bexley the council takes the short sighted view that a ferry
boat is good enough. A feeble stop gap measure will ensure the borough is left
in the dark ages, transport-wise, for another 20 years.
And all because the lady values her Brampton seat and the local NIMBYs more than
the wider prosperity she acknowledges improved infrastructure would bring.
Greenwich statement on a white background (from their own fortnightly newspaper), Bexley
on blue (from their quarterly magazine) and Newham is so
confident that Boris Johnson will make the right decision that it is recruiting
Civil Engineers already. (From the vacancies section of their own website.)
Greenwich council is asking for your
support for its campaign. Bexley council is asking that you make it that little bit harder for its residents to find a job.
10 December (Part 1) - “Political interference”
This
could be an interesting week for anyone still following the pursuit of
Bexley council’s obscene blogger. The original failed investigation was
referred
to Metropolitan Police Commissioner Hogan-Howe last June and he asked his
Directorate of Professional Standards (DPS) to look into it. I have been advised
that their reply is now awaiting the signature of a senior officer. Some of
councillor Craske’s computing gear is also due back from forensic examination by
Wednesday. It could be that Mick Barnbrook’s theory is correct.
Mick was a police officer for 31 years and an Inspector at Bexleyheath for some
of that time and he has said from the outset that the answer to the complaint
would be dependent on the outcome of the current investigation.
In his possibly jaundiced view the obscene blogger must walk free because anything else
would suggest the first investigation failed due to negligence and if by chance someone
was charged a good reason for the earlier failure would have to be manufactured.
I put the suggestion to the DPS a couple of months ago and they strongly denied it, but
at that time they expected to send me a reply by mid-October but
they delayed it. I am always more inclined to believe cock-up
over conspiracy but last week it was confirmed that the DPS are indeed liaising
with Bexleyheath police’s current enquiry team.
I can’t see why an investigation into the failures of 2011 needs knowledge of
what is being done now. Maybe I should be more prepared to listen to Mick’s voice of experience.
After I indicated here that I had given up hope of the blog culprit being found and
shifted the emphasis to the question of why, someone emailed me about the
disappointment of never seeing anyone charged over the obscene blog but on the
contrary I believe far more has been achieved than if a single political career
had come to an end. His cohorts would have stood back and shaken their heads in
mock condemnation whilst adopting an air of total innocence.
Clement all over again.
The way things have worked out is far more damaging.
We
know where the blog originated. On a device linked to the internet connection which terminates in
Craske’s house. We don’t know who actually published it, it could have been a man with a laptop
who had cracked his Wi-Fi password in a car parked outside Craske’s house.
Someone so clever that he not only cracked the password but also knew the names
of people wandering around the Cinema Car Park two months earlier under the gaze of Craske’s CCTV
system. And someone who coincidentally got wind of Elwyn Bryant and me visiting the Civic Offices only an
hour or two earlier. So nothing is certain, Craske may have had the motive but we might never know who wrote that blog.
The extreme delay in solving a relatively low level crime is acknowledged to be
“ridiculous” and it has been confirmed that there has been “political interference”.
If I ever doubted that I stopped doing so the moment council leader Teresa O’Neill
appointed Peter Craske to two council committees the moment his
bail conditions were lifted. For good measure we know that the removal of Craske’s bail
conditions was not the result of a considered decision by the investigating
officer but of an order which came down from on high.
So whilst it is unlikely that a guilty councillor will be seen in the dock only to
disappear and be forgotten soon afterwards, there is now something far more memorably damaging to
be kicked around. Confirmation that the authority figures in Bexley are not believers in
justice for all and that Bexleyheath police are susceptible to outside influence. I suspect
that Elwyn Bryant will be seeking the views of his MP, James Brokenshire, on that to see what
the Minister for Crime at the Home Office thinks of what goes on on his very doorstep.
If you do not believe Bexleyheath’s police is corrupt, just wait until you see the next installment of
the Playground Saga tomorrow.
9 December - An early Christmas present from Bexley council
I
took a look at Broadway yesterday to see how the refurbishment is getting along.
Not very fast was my verdict. The road surface is unchanged except that the
yellow lines have been prematurely removed. There can be only one reason for
doing that in advance of laying the new blocked surface; parking revenue.
Motorists are now confronted by something new. No lines, no signs on nearby
posts, just a sign on a ten foot post on entry to the Restricted Parking Zone.
Drivers have to read it as they negotiate a roundabout at one end or a
pedestrian crossing at the other. Two motorists paid the price as I watched and
more than likely won’t be spending their money in Broadway again with a bigger and
better shopping centre only six miles away. It’s Mike Frizoni’s way of saying
Happy Christmas.
I’m
no expert on block paving but that around Christ Church looked good enough to
me. However while opening the new gate I was struck by how crudely made it is
compared to the original ironwork. Perhaps it is just a temporary measure as
it appears to have been butchered and bodged together from oddments of scrap
railings. The baseline is all over the place too.
Maybe it is just me looking for trouble and no one else will notice but if the
Reverend William Henry Pincott finds out he might bring down the wrath of God.
8 December (Part 2) - A Frizoni Folly claims a victim
Not
a Frizoni Fatality fortunately but close.
As the search engine referrals suggested,
the removal of the pedestrian refuge from the Long Lane crossing has resulted in injuries to a pedestrian.
Long Lane forms part of the main route from Thamesmead and Abbey Wood to the centre of Bexleyheath and
consequently busy for much of the day. The pedestrian crossing is no more than two car lengths from
a crossroad junction and aggravated by the proximity of the Shell filling station. Residents have complained
to Bexley council many times since the original crossing was needlessly altered without response.
As
the photographs taken at 10:30 this morning indicate, on sunny mornings
pedestrians are tempted to launch themselves into the traffic stream almost
blind. Note the woman shielding her eyes.
On the 29th November a man in his sixties who lives very close to the crossing
and presumably very aware of its dangers was hit by a car exiting the petrol
station. The driver was presumably keeping his eye on passing traffic
and the crossing without its central refuge was no longer as obvious as it was.
Additionally it was dark and the crossing beacons being shrouded are near
invisible to motorists approaching from the side roads.
Frizoni’s Folly is an accident waiting to happen predictable to anyone who stands and
observes for five minutes but not to the Bexley Buffoons content to sit in their warm
offices drawing huge salaries and transferring responsibilities to Parsons Brinckerhoff for a mere £4 million.
Eye witnesses have said the man was thrown over the car and badly injured.
Perhaps Mr. Frizoni would like to send him a Get Well card?
Previous reports on the Long Lane Lunacy.
6th March 2012.
2nd April 2012.
20th November 2012.
8 December (Part 1) - This man is an utter disgrace to his office
OK,
tell me something new I hear you say.
Eight Conservative councillors insist that
their private addresses are kept secret as
they consider themselves to be at risk of violence and intimidation and that
apparently is OK. However no member of the public in Bexley has the right to take part in
the full democratic process unless his address is published for the world to see.
Immediately after
the last council meeting
(7th November 2012) a question was submitted for the next one on 6th March 2013 - they don’t like to
do too much in return for their generous allowances, poor dears.
The question was…
Why do members of the public have to have their private addresses published in the
agenda for full council meetings when asking a question, rather than checked and verified
as being correct, whereas councillors, many of whom do not show their private addresses
in the register of members interests, do not have their addresses published?
And the answer?
Your question will not appear on the agenda for the next Council meeting. This is because
the Mayor does not consider it to be a policy matter and is not therefore permissible under
the Council's agreed protocol.
Who can doubt that we have a deaf abusing moron for a mayor when he won’t
accept that Bexley council’s policy on public questions is not a policy matter? One
day the residents of Bexley may wake up to the fact they have a criminally inclined
undemocratic council whose members delight in abusing their positions.
Note: The letter is signed by Mr. Kevin Fox, the man who
contorted council standing orders to silence 2,219 residents who signed a
petition calling on Bexley council to reconsider their senior salary levels
which are among the very highest in the country. The CEO is 6th on the Tax
Payers’ Alliance Rich List. Kevin Fox is also the man who said that council
protocols permit photography in the council chamber but who refuses to permit it
under any circumstances. Kevin Fox is clearly totally unfit to hold any
executive position.
7 December (Part 2) - In each others pockets
Bexley council and the borough’s police force don’t seem to be very happy
about their suspiciously close links being exposed. Who but council leader
Teresa O’Neill could march into a police station with a pack of lies and half
truths and get the Borough Commander to send a file to the CPS before carrying
out an investigation? Yet we know that is what happened because the IPCC said
so. This is what Bexley police said after John Kerlen and I were issued with warning
letters for “criticising councillors on a personal level”.
It’s a statement of fact but they considered it to be something worth including
in the file prepared for the malicious and ultimately futile prosecution of John Kerlen.
After posting anything on the web most people later check what they have
written, maybe because they like admiring their handiwork or through an
obsessive desire to check they’ve made no mistakes; or maybe just to show off to
a friend. I would assume that obscene bloggers are no exception and that if a councillor was
the culprit he might use a council computer to take a look. This was on Nick
Dowling’s mind (for he was libelled too)
when he asked Bexley council on 12th September 2011 if it had checked all their computers.
This was their response to Nick’s questions five months later on 20th February 2012…
1. Has the website http://malcolmknight.blogspot.com been viewed on or
through any Bexley Council IT system since its apparent inception on 21st May
2011?
Yes
2. If the answer to question 1 is yes, was there an internal investigation? What
was the time frame of the investigation, the result of the investigation and any
consequent sanctions?
No, as it was referred to the police.
3. What were the actions of the Deputy Director (ICT) when made aware of the Blog?
A list was generated of those staff who had accessed the above site to ensure
that only business-related access had taken place in line with the Council’s
internet use policies. A statement on internet and IT security was provided to the Police.
4. Did the Blog originate from within the London Borough of Bexley or via a Councillor?
The matter was referred to the Metropolitan Police to investigate. The London
Borough of Bexley is aware that the Metropolitan Police have a range of forensic
tools to analyse the content and source of web activity. The Police have not
responded to the Chief Executive regarding any Council or Councillor involvement
in this website.
I would guess that if you committed arson but were caught after dialling 999 when you realised
someone was trapped in the fire the police would at the very least check your alibi and see if
you smelled of petrol before accepting your protestations of innocence. So what did Bexleyheath
police do when they realised their suspect was a councillor? They had councillor Craske’s
home computer forensically checked but what about any he might have used in the Civic Offices?
Nothing! “The computers were not checked because Bexley council provided a signed statement
that no council computer had accessed the site.”
It was Will Tuckley who
referred the matter to the police on 9th June 2011. He
appears to have been “aware that the Metropolitan Police have a range
of forensic tools to analyse the content and source of web activity” but the
police glossed over the council’s admission that their tools are inferior. And
why do the police assume the council’s statement is not a lie?
Bexleyheath police can protest all they like that
they do not offer Bexley
council special facilities but are any other criminal suspects allowed to
declare their own innocence? And what are we to make of those two words
‘political interference’.
Something smells.
7 December (Part 1) - Searching the web
When news is in short supply I sometimes think I could start a feature that answers the questions people ask Google etc. that are directed to this website but no answer is available. After the never ending ‘Craske arrested’ and ‘Melvyn Seymour perjury’ the variety is almost infinite. My failure to find a link for Register of Members’ Interests yesterday showed that readers often know the answers. There have been 912 questions so far this month - including some duplicates - and among them are…
“What is the speed limit in North Cray Road?” Answer: 60 m.p.h. when it opened,
40 m.p.h. now.
“Bexleyheath shopping centre awful”. Answer: Yes if you need to park there.
“Bexley councillor Jackie Evans age”. Answer: Who cares?
“Accident last week on Long Lane zebra crossing.” Answer: Yes. A Frizoni
Folly claimed another victim.
“Parking restrictions Christmas 2012 Bexley.” Answer: They will tell us around
the 22nd December if last year is anything to go by.
“Does speed camera in Gravel Hill work both ways?” Answer: No. At least I hope not.
“Visiting a factory where cloth is manufactured”. Answer. Google isn’t perfect
after all.
Perhaps readers will have some better answers.
6 December (Part 2) - Readers to the rescue
Register of Members’ Interests
Eagle eyed
readers have directed me
to the Bexley council website links to the Register of Members’ Interests.
You have to go to each
individual councillor’s page and I had expected a single link and a list for ease of access, instead
it takes four clicks to get to a single entry and back to the place where you
can choose another. That's 250 clicks to see the lot.
It isn’t only councillor Peter Craske who sees a need to hide himself away from
the public gaze by invoking Section 32 of the Localism Act, which says…
A member or co-opted member of a relevant authority has an interest (whether or
not a disclosable pecuniary interest), and the nature of the interest is such
that the member or co-opted member, and the authority's
monitoring officer, consider that disclosure of the details of the interest could
lead to the member or co-opted member, or a person connected with the
member or co-opted member, being subject to violence or intimidation.”
Do they all believe they have done such a thoroughly bad job as a councillor
that residents are out to get them?
Those who don’t really like being in the public eye are Cheryl and Gareth Bacon,
Colin Campbell, Sybil Camsey, Val Clark, Peter Craske, James
Spencer and Chris Taylor. All Conservatives.
A council insider once said that if councillors were compelled to put their details
on the web “they would lie even more”. That person was wrong; they prefer to say nothing.
How many councillors have had their collar felt?
The Freedom of Information request dated 20th July 2012 asking if Bexley council is
“aware of any councillor being the subject of a criminal investigation by the
Metropolitan Police in the last 18 months. If so, how many?”
is still not answered.
For the record only one was arrested in connection with the obscene blog and he
remains the only suspect. And to those anonymous tipsters who say he wasn’t
alone I can only suggest you report your concerns to the police. Crime number
3906909/11.
Outsourced to Capita
“You really need to do some digging into Bexley Council and how they
outsource the collection of Council Tax.” So said an anonymous message earlier
this week and I have little doubt that the contractor, Capita, should be looked
into. Alas, Capita is not a ‘Public Body’ so the Freedom of Information Act does not apply to them.
On the one occasion Capita decided to take issue with me over my single occupier
council tax discount I told them my contract for services was with Bexley
council and that I wouldn’t deal with them directly. Bexley council seemed to
agree as I corresponded only with them and they resolved the problem efficiently
enough - long before this website existed.
I have studied a file relating to services
provided to Bexley council by Capita which was intriguing to say the least. It
related to a rather complex benefit fraud where it
could be argued that the principal offender got away with it and the minor one who
had been sucked in was set up. A claim form had certainly undergone suspicious looking
alterations which allowed it to be used against him.
Below is an extract from Capita’s files which may not make a lot of sense by
itself; however the reason why the landlord didn’t have a rent book is that she
wasn’t the landlord at all, she was the ‘tenant’s’ live in girlfriend and she
was on the fiddle.
Capita knew that, there is a whole load of contemporaneous documentary evidence
to prove it, but they didn’t want to know. I’m still not sure if they were in on
the fiddle or were supremely incompetent. The overpaid benefit was never recovered. A five figure sum.
6 December (Part 1) - Their motto is: “Say nothing”
Bexley councillors don’t like you to know too much about them. Councils are
encouraged to put their Register of Members’ Interests on line, needless to say
Bexley has refused to do that, If it did so there would be no need for anyone to
make an appointment to view it under supervision with copying forbidden. If
Elwyn Bryant and I had not made that appointment in May 2011 councillor Peter
Craske’s phone line might never have been used for the uploading of obscenities
to the web. But maybe things are about to change.
A Google search for ‘register of interests peter craske bexley’ found this…
It continues in similar vein. With the connivance of the new Localism Act Peter Craske has
declared absolutely nothing. At last it is safe for Bexley councillors to put their Register
on the web. At least three others are up on line already but so far I have not
been able to find a publicly accessible link on the council’s website.
Click image for the original page.
5 December - Craske had the motive. Craske rented the phone line. Does anyone doubt who did it?
There’s another new police team investigating the source of Bexley council’s obscene blog. The previous investigating officers are no longer with Bexleyheath police. How law enforcement can be improved by such rapid turnover is unknown, probably it’s impossible. However the good news is that the new team has proved far more approachable and forthcoming than any that have gone before; the bad news is that the first investigatory team has almost certainly screwed things up big time.
So
how do I judge the new crew to be more forthcoming? Easy. Elwyn Bryant and I
were invited to a meeting and almost immediately councillor Peter Craske was
named as the man arrested for misconduct in public office and the obscene blog
suspect. When Elwyn and I expressed surprise and said we had until then been
subjected to so much secrecy that we had not even been told it was a man arrested,
the new team was incredulous. The 18 months to get to the current stage was
unprecedented and the aim was to “wrap things up by Christmas”.
For the first time we learned that the original IP address trace led directly to
councillor Craske’s house. The obscene blog was set up on a device connected to Craske’s
telephone line. It was agreed that
the
circumstantial evidence against him is overwhelming.
The first of his computers to be forensically examined proved to be clean. The
year wasted doing nothing was a golden opportunity to buy a new one or even
replace a hard drive. The month between applying to magistrates for a search warrant
and executing it might not have helped justice take its course either.
Currently a second device is being forensically examined. “If that proves to be
clean there will be nowhere else to go”. “What about the recent obscene messages
that came from a Parsons Brinckerhoff computer?” I asked. The new team knew
nothing about them. Contrary to assurances by the previous investigating officers,
that crime
had not been linked to the old one. Conspiracy or cock-up?
Who knows; but I have provided the new team with the facts and it agrees they could
change the outcome should the second computer be clean. But it’s another six weeks lost
with its consequential dilution of evidence through the incompetence
that would appear to be the norm at Bexleyheath police station.
“Who
released Craske from Bail?” Elwyn wanted to know. The answer was steeped in
police jargon however a few generic questions
revealed the only possible source. The order had come from the very top. Maybe
my speculation wasn’t too wide of the mark. Earlier on the excuses given for
the unwarranted delays included “too much red tape” and “political
interference”. Maybe it was a reference to the interest shown by MPs Teresa Pearce and James Brokenshire
but that wasn’t how it sounded.
My point about Craske being
welcomed back into the council
by leader Teresa O’Neill after being given some assurance that the case against him would be dropped and the
risk of further embarrassment was low was met with silence but not entirely straight faces.
If the police in Bexley want to change their reputation for dishonesty and
curtail the speculation that secrecy encourages they might consider adopting the
attitude of their new team. If it had been given unfettered
discretion, Craske may have been charged and found guilty by this time last year.
Instead Bexley police and Bexley council were busy
pinning false harassment charges
on blogger Olly Cromwell. (John Kerlen.)
The Timeline will be updated.
4 December - Not so secret pay off
Once
upon a time there was a Bexley council solicitor personally selected for the job by Ian Clement,
the disgraced former leader of Bexley council. Her name was Angela Hogan and she was
a Deputy Director and Head of Legal Services. She resigned soon after
Clement got himself
into trouble and Bexley council decided against reporting Clement to the
police. There were suggestions that all these events were linked.
I heard one councillor and one council officer suggest she left the council’s
employ under a cloud. When asked if there had been a financial settlement
both said something like “of course not” and implied (and in one case said), she
wasn’t really very good and there would have been no pay off.
The people from the Bexley Council Monitoring Group (BCMG) decided they would
try to confirm that with a Freedom of Information request. Was there a golden
goodbye or not? A simple Yes or No answer was all that was required. Bexley
council decided to give no answer at all. The Information Commissioner sent
Bexley council a nine page letter instructing them to give an
answer. Bexley council still said No.
With no more help forthcoming from the Information Commissioner the BCMG decided
to take the matter through the Information Commissioner’s complaints procedure
which means a Judge and a Tribunal.
Soon after the file went before the Judge for a preliminary hearing another member
of the BCMG stumbled across this entry on the council’s website. Not bad money
for a simple resignation!
They decided to continue with the complaint to the ICO’s Tribunal
to see how far Bexley council would go to defend their wish to maintain secrecy
of a figure that was in the public domain. Quite a long way was the answer. The
Judge and the BCMG exchanged several long telephone calls.
Eventually when it was clear that Bexley council was about to hire a barrister
and waste more public money on their obsession with admitting nothing, the BCMG
decided it was time to own up. The Judge was informed and soon afterwards Bexley
council told the BCMG what they already knew.
This concludes a story begun in earlier blogs from
November 2011 and
August this year.
The entry currently on
the London Councils website is unexplained. (See right hand of this rotated extract.)
3 December (Part 2) - Who were they protecting this time?
Episode three of the story of Bexleyheath police dishonesty exposed at Dartford Crown is now available. Tantalisingly. the author and father of a young lad assaulted and seriously injured at school still withholds the names of the police officers concerned but the extent of their incompetence which appears to be their trademark is clear to see. Some may think that incompetence is not the only problem endemic at Bexleyheath police station.
words “Another person also became involved – a regular police constable
whose family shares close friends in common with the attacker’s family” turn out to be very significant.
The complete story so far.
3 December (Part 1) - More anon
Not all anonymous messages are of
the
Parsons Brinckerhoff variety, some provide tip offs and others polite
observations. Most give no clue as to why the messages should be anonymous but
occasionally it is all too obvious.
I used to try to spot serial anonymous senders but gave up after I mistakenly convinced
myself that a series of messages were all from the same source and drew some seriously
wrong conclusions as a result. Recently I have not attempted to be that ‘clever’ and
I file them all together with no attempt to segregate them into sources. You can’t win. I
now I find I have dismissed as a ‘nobody’ someone I should probably have identified as
a ’somebody’, but it never occurred to me. Maybe the serial anonymous senders should
allocate themselves a four digit PIN to save my blushes.
I
have been occupied elsewhere for most of the weekend and come back unable to
remember either of the two subjects that I had planned to cover next. This is
not a good start to the month; maybe the Sidcup Community Group will not mind if
I ‘steal’ some of their news about what used to be a historic coaching inn while
I do battle with the grey cells.
After initially agreeing to retain the facade of the Black Horse Inn the
developers installed a concrete crushing machine next to it and from what
one could judge from a roadside view, hung scaffolding from the ancient wall. Not
surprisingly it became unsafe in their eyes and they demolished it. When Bexley
council’s planning committee got to hear about it they insisted on a substitute
structure pictured here. Not up to much is it?
The planning department agreed it was a poor effort and issued an Enforcement
Notice but it looks like the developer was never really serious about their
promises and have appealed against the order.
The full story, a picture of the inn in its heyday and how you can strike back
against the developer if you feel so inclined are all on
the Sidcup Community Group’s website.
1 December - Parking fines. Exposing Bexley’s dishonesty. (Episode 9)
I
had better bring you another installment of the parking saga before everyone begins to forget.
A disabled ex-policeman had won an admission from
Bexley council that they take no notice of any evidence supplied at the first
appeal stage preferring to rely on a report by their own staff, which in this
case was an outright lie.
The retired policeman didn’t think eventually dropping
his fine and allowing Bexley council to carry on inflicting their injustices on
more motorists was a satisfactory outcome. Neither did he think that making the parking
contractor pay the fine instead of him could be morally justified. Why should
Bexley council profit from the unjustified misery it inflicts on innocent motorists?
Another hand written letter was sent to Bexley council, this time it was five pages
of A4 to Chief Executive Will Tuckley. It covered a number of examples of how Bexley council’s policy is unjust…
“An Authorised Officer has considered all evidence presented from both parties.
The officer has rejected your representation. This is a blatant and barefaced
lie. He has not considered any part of my evidence. Bexley Parking Services
(BPS) policy does not allow him to.
[Another] scenario [is] if I receive a
Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) and I believe I have reasonable grounds to contend, then I
send my representation to Bexley Parking Services, who reject my contention out
of hand, stating as they do, an Authorised Officer has considered all evidence
from both parties etc., then rejects my challenge. At the same time he
threatens me that if I continue to pursue this challenge and I lose, I will have
to pay the full amount of £120.
Although I feel my challenge is reasonable, against my better judgment I decide I
cannot afford £60, let alone £120, so I capitulate and pay £60.
What happens next? BPS add my £60 to their bulging coffers and close the case or
write to me and say sorry, we did not really take your evidence into account or
attempt to visit the site. The initial rejection is just a ploy to give us more
time. We are returning your £60.
The wronged motorist was in effect asking Mr. Tuckley; is BPS run by a bunch of
fraudsters or not? And given what they had already admitted to him he had a very
valid point. How would Tuckley wriggle out of that one? He passed the questions on to Mr.
Moore (Director of Public and Corporate Services) again. In a letter delivered by hand, Mr. Moore admitted that the PCN
should never have been issued and that BPS did not bother to take note of the
evidence supplied. Everyone had lied in an effort to extort money from the
disabled pensioner. CEO BL286 had lied on his report. The Authorised Officer
I.S. lied about considering the evidence.
The question of Bexley council profiting from inflicting unwarranted misery on
motorists was answered in a way I haven’t come across before. Mr. Moore took out
his own cheque book and gave the motorist a cheque for £60 drawn on his own
personal account payable to the motorist’s favoured charity. Mr. Moore appears
to be a generous man anxious to put right his employer’s misdeeds, however the
ex-policeman did not think it right that anyone but
Bexley council should pay, and returned it.
This story is reported in an indeterminate number of episodes.
A cumulative version is provided for convenience.