Scrutiny Board chair Councillor Ralph Pryke has described the opponents of the barbeque scheme as “vocal”. His Lib Dem colleague Sue Bentley used similar words a year ago when she described residents who wanted Woodhouse Moor to be included in the DPPO proposed for Hanover and Woodhouse Squares as a “vociferous group”. If those who oppose the Lib Dems are characterised by them is this way, is it equitable that they and their allies should be in control of the boards that scrutinise the workings of the council?
John Illingworth said at the most recent meeting of the Scrutiny Board, “Nemo iudex in sua causa” – No one should be the judge of his own case. And yet this is what happens every time a Scrutiny Board hears a complaint from the community about the barbeque proposal. It’s time for the overseeing of the workings of the council to be taken away from the Scrutiny Board and handed over to an independent body.
(photo courtesy of RaeA)
There’s a old saying; The law locks up the man and woman who steals the goose from off the common, but lets the greater villain loose who steals the common from the goose!
As for the DPPO on Woodhouse Moor. I see that a DPPO is either on the cards, or in place for the streets of Farsley. Could that have something to do with Councillor Andrew Carter being the local ward member for the area?
I dont follow Albert’s point about DPPOs. Sorry!
Oh, and in relation to the Scrutiny Board, it is worth noting that some of those decisions not to pursue inquiries have been supported by Labour members.
However, its an easy argument to make that a Scrutiny Board is not being independent because it comes up with a decision that goes against the complainant. On the basis of that logic, presumably their decision yesterday to SUPPORT an investigation into by-laws did not actually happen!
Martin – I think the point Albert was making about the Farsley DPPO was this, “How come it’s so easy for outlying areas to get DPPOs when it was such a fight to get one on inner city Woodhouse Moor?”
And in relation to the meeting of the Scrutiny Board that you refer to; it merely decided that the matter was worth looking into. This is the same decision that was reached by an earlier Scrutiny Board that met in June.
The point I was making about the Farsley DPPO; Is Councillor Andrew Carter a NIMBY?
It will be interesting to see if any of the Executive members agree with the deputation about the lack of local authority provision for the travelling community, which has been allowed to drag on since 15th July, is to be heard at the 9th December’s Executive Board meeting. Will Councillor Andrew Carter accept a Gypsy & Traveller caravan site in his Farsley back yard as much as he was willing to have the DPPO??