Sunday, 26 September 2010

Democracy tied in knots to suit a disgruntled resident?

For a couple of years now Gilberdyke Parish Council has been subject to a campaign of disruption by the resident who created the undersized culvert in the critical dyke between Scalby Lane and Chestnut Drive (a dyke which he has repeatedly claimed he does not own or have responsibility for). This culvert was created after the Lower Ouse Internal Drainage Board told him not to do it but he went ahead anyway.

This disruption has ranged from repetetive letters and threats to the Parish Council containing spurious claims, to distributing leaflets to the villagers containing false information and blatant lies. He obviously is aware that his activities are creating an atmosphere of dissent and must have some reluctance to being identified in official records as he is now attempting (with the support of the Information Commissioners Office) to have his name removed from all council documents, minutes and public records. If he is so sure of his position why does he not have the courage to be identified?

If the council decide to agree to this the implications for the council and democracy at local level are damaging and far reaching. The council policy dictates it cannot and will not act on the basis of anonymous letters. Therefore if a letter is received even correctly signed and addressed but the sender cannot be disclosed or recorded, it becomes anonymous, therefore any content must be ignored and the letter discarded. Further any matter where a persons name such as a planning application will become public should be held confidential and members of the public be excluded. The situation if allowed to develop would result in the council holding almost all of its meetings in closed session and the present open and accountable system with members of the public free to attend and observe as they wish would end simply to prevent inadvertent disclosure of anyones identity.

Hardly good for democracy or open local government and certainly a conflict with the aims of freedom of information - all because of the antics of a misguided individual with a few followers!

No comments:

Post a Comment