19 March 2009

Welcome to the pleasure dome

Date: 10th March 2009
Place: The Tin Dunny, Somerton Business Park
Event: Another meeting of Somerton Town Council


So, the Tin Dunny is open for business and it got off to the usual poorly attended start that typefies much of what Somerton Town Council does. Thirteen local residents, 0.27% of Somerton's population, attended the meeting along with two members of the local police and one county councillor whilst the Town Council was there in strength with no absentees. Obviously they wanted to enjoy the comfy chairs and the hugely energy wasteful air conditioning.

07:30 and the meeting got off to a flying start with the beautifully coiffed Paddy the K welcoming everyone to the building, a building that he explained was known in some quarters as the 'Tin Dunny' (you read it here first). Paddy went on to refer to a recent meeting with the Primary Care Trust and explained that the surgery in Somerton doesn't play any part in the PCT's long-term strategy. For some elderly members of the community this announcement might cause some anxiety but for me it signals another property deal in the offing.

07:32 and the meeting was addressed by Stewart Brand who is the new Beat Manager for Somerton. Paddy invited Q's from the public and my own personal hero, Cllr Ian Neale, jumped straight in with a mini-rant about being charged £51.50p (by SSDC) for a road closure order associated with the French Market. His point, when he finally made it, was that, having paid £51.50p (taxpayer's money, Ian, not yours), the Police should be policing the road closure, neatly ignoring the fact that the money was paid to SSDC for administration. Its also worth pointing out that, even if the police were involved, and were the police charging at the same rate as Somerton Town Council is now charging for administrative research (£25.00 per hour), the police would attend for 2 hours 3 minutes and 36 seconds (assuming one officer).

07:41 and the highlight of this exchange came when a member of the public raised the issue of 'police response'. Cllr Neale (please someone, shut this guy up) went for the jugular with a question about 'policing targets' and Stewart Brand referred to "community policing" and "policing by consent". In a rather sarcastic stage whisper Cllr Neale made a comment about "Your consent or ours?". Very SWP! He followed this up with the old Torygraph comment about "We supply the money for the Police." Just like we (the taxpayer) supply the money for the Tin Dunny, Ian, and you certainly don't give a damn about making that activity transparent or accountable. Quoting some old tome, deal with the beam in your own eye.

For the next 20 minutes we were entertained with nothing of significance other than a very detailed discussion about the height of dog poo bins and who was or wasn't using them.


08:03 and Cllr Deering noted that a furniture shop near the triangle was doing food and how he objected to the Town Council not being consulted. Well, excuse me Cllr Deering, what about the town not being consulted about the purchase of the Tin Dunny? Then Cllr Beale joined in the fun (a rarity these days) by informing the meeting that she had taken the matter to Environmental Health and the Environmental Health Officer has no objection. Cue Cllr Neale who suggested that, "He's getting free lunches.". No wonder Council Officers get pissed off with tin pot Town Councillors. It also made me wonder if Somerton Town Council should start a 'Grass-up your neighbour committee'.


08:05 and Cllr Rees made some sort of announcement about a meeting with the Management Committee at the Sports Club. From what I hear, the terms 'management' and 'Sports Club' are mutually exclusive but, none the less, Cllr Rees said that the public were invited to attend. Obviously this is in preparation for Somerton Town Council handing over another bundle of cash to the Sports Club so that they can build their Mini Dunny (quotes already received by Somerton Town Council). And that raises an interesting point. From what I hear, the management and finances of the Sports Club are shambolic to say the least. Yet we are often told that the Sports Club is hugely successful. So, if they are so successful, why can't they raise the money for their own Dunny? Why do they have to come to Somerton Town Council to get the dosh? And why isn't Somerton Town Council using the funds (the receipts from leasing the Parish Rooms) to pay off borrowings and thereby reducing the burden on Somerton's ratepayers? Quoting from Toyah Wilcox's tune, "its a mystewee".

08:15 and the Leader of the Gang, Cllr Canvin, observed that the organisation of District and County was working very well and was 'joined up'. Obviously Cllr Canvin's war against bureaucracy is paying dividends. Next stop Afghanistan?

08:20 and the meeting died on its feet. Everyone was invited for the grand tour of the Tin Dunny, now sporting a fabulous dance floor. Before I left I did a bit of knocking on walls and I couldn't find much in the way of insulation. I'll be interested to see what the heating bills are like. Obviously the previous owner didn't think about running costs when they built the Dunny, although they did consider 'disabled access' for the first floor. Lucky us.

Till next time.

Niall

11 March 2009

A casual conversation...........

Last evening I attended the first Somerton Town Council meeting to be held up at the 'Dunny'. It was an interesting meeting, not for what actually happened but for what didn't happen. But I'll get to that on another day. For me, what was interesting was the opportunity, after the meeting, to speak with an ex-councillor and have an exchange of views. That's what I want to write about now but a bit of context would be useful.

Last year, around June I remember, I received a rather nasty letter from lawyers acting for Somerton's Town Council. The lawyers proposed that, in the view of their client who, I assume, was Somerton's Town Council, I had libeled their client. As a result of that view, they required me to retract unreservedly and, furthermore, they required me to disclose to their client the identity of every person with whom I had shared this supposed 'libel'.

Well, like most people, I don't like being threatened but I decided to take this approach seriously and I passed the letters on to my own lawyer whose opinion was that there was no libel. I had not said that, for example, Councillor X is accepting bribes or that Councillor Z was having an affair with a donkey. Had I said anything like that, then there would have been a case to answer. Had I accused a Councillor of counterfeiting documents with the intention of 'passing off', then that would also have been libel. No, what I had done, and continue to do today, was to comment on the 'culture' of Somerton's Town Council as well as commenting upon the statements and actions of its councillors. I see this as part of the democratic process but it would seem that my actions, now represented by this blog, are seen as being antagonistic or at least that is how this ex-councillor, who I'll call Cllr. Blue, that is how they saw my views.


Blue was at last evening's meeting to celebrate the first official function of the 'Dunny' and, for Blue, the 'Dunny' represents 'success' and 'the future'. The Town Council has managed to pull it together and now everyone else has to pull together to make it a success. Blue is right in that there is no point in shunning the 'Dunny' because it exists and, most importantly, it has to be paid for so making it a success is in the best interests of the local taxpayer (who will pay for, used or not).

During our conversation, I made many of the points that I have already expressed in this blog and Blue dismissed them all. From Blue's viewpoint, all critiscism is negative and obstructive and the only reality that Blue would recognise was the need to move forward, no matter what. And I assume that Somerton's current councillors share that view.

But for me, the 'Dunny' typefies the failings of Somerton's Town Council. The 'Dunny' has been foisted upon the ratepayers of Somerton with no consultation, engagement, thought or consideration. The greatest loss symbolised by the 'Dunny' is the lost opportunity to build or to strengthen the community. If you look at a little village like Leigh (in Dorset, a handful of miles from the centre of Yeovil) you see how a community hall can draw the whole of the community together. The community of Leigh did the fund-raising and quite a bit of the construction and, as a result, the community has a very real investment in the resultant building. The community of Somerton has no such investment in the 'Dunny'.

I don't know whose vision is represented by the 'Dunny' but I'd hazard a guess that, for the most part, it represents Cllr Tony Canvin's vision. Afterall, it is built on land bought from Tony Canvin by members of the local development community. It is located on an industrial estate that is, as I understand it, owned or controlled by Tony Canvin. And for the most part, it is being fitted out by Tony Canvin or on his instruction so maybe rather than calling it the 'Tin Dunny' maybe it should be called the 'Tony Canvin Memorial Hall'. What it will never be, irrespective of what it is called, is the beating heart of Somerton's Community. And the reason for that is because Somerton's Town Council refused to allow the community to become stakeholders in the project, leaving them, instead, to pick up the tab for the whole sorry tale.


For me, the 'Dunny' will never be free of taint. It will always represent a convenient deal, a swap of assets. How different things might have been had the opportunity that was Etsome Terrace been allowed to blossom. Some indication of what could have been is described in the planning file for Etsome Terrace. But, however it was achieved, Etsome is now a residential development and the community of Somerton ends up with the 'Dunny' and the bill.

Till next time.

Niall

9 March 2009

Taking care of business ...........

Date - 24th February 2009
Location - Parish Rooms, Somerton,
Occassion - Meeting of Somerton's Town Council.

The meeting was attended by 13 Councillors with the Public represented by 11 brave souls, less than 0.25% of the populace.

07:35pm and the meeting got off to a cracking start with a member of the public who was convinced that the Landspeed Record was being broken with monotonous regularity on the Langport Road. This individual sought to pour scorn on the local 'Speedwatch' effort and the exchanges with Councillors took on a vaguely surreal tone. The plot was lost early on and the discussion covered most aspects of traffic regulation relating to some view of 'speeding'. But things took a sinister turn when Cllr Webber intoned that she had been informed by the Police that they (the Police) were waiting for fatalities (on the Langport Rd) before doing anything and with the obvious implication being that the Police were being negligent. The item was concluded leaving me completely mystified as to what, if anything, had been the point of the debate.

07:55 - light relief with a discussion about noxious smells from the Whiscombe Landfill site seemingly caused by broken pipework adjacent to the lagoon. Cllr Harrison gave a very good explanation of the problem and went on the explain that resolution was being handled by the Environment Agency.


08:05 - Finance and the Council was asked to approve the fortnight's raft of expenditure. A respectful silence fell across the gathering as Cllrs viewed the depth of the financial hole down which the Council is falling. Obviously the figures are so shocking that they could not be shared with the Public but, after some further moments silence out of respect for those deceased taxpayer's pounds, payments were approved unanimously.

08:11 - correspondence and Somerset Links requested financial support and got a grant of £1,000 in the coming Financial year. STC was invited to join the Rural Links Network and the meeting was informed that South Somerset is already a member of SPARSE whereupon Cllr Neale enquired if this was more C-R-A-P. Very witty. There was a request for support for the Tour of Britain and the STC was quite animated in its enthusiasm for cycling through the town (probably because Speedwatch won't be required).

08:29 - the Council was informed that the Flood Awareness workshop to be held at Donyat had been cancelled because the venue ............................ had been flooded. Laughter all round.

08:30 - a curio. The Town Clerk has been meeting with the Land Registry and it was agreed that the Town Council should seek to register all its land or property assets. I've been wondering exactly what Somerton Town Council actually owned and it looks like the Town Council isn't too sure either.


08:35 - the Town Council was addressed by Greta Mattingley representing a local community group which was seeking the support of the Town Council for an initiative to purchase the Old Town Hall building and convert it into an 'enterprise centre'. This item sparked off some interesting comments from councillors and it became apparent that the local business association is well represented on the Town Council. Cllr Jerry Rees, also Chairperson of Somerton's Business & Trade Association, waffled on about "unfair competition", a theme re-inforced by Cllr Nigel Bisgrove and this exchange made me wonder about the make-up of the Town Council and what part of the community it actually represents.

Obviously the Leader of the Council, Tony Canvin, is a major mover and shaker in the business community with property and business interests spread across the town. Cllr Paddy Keenan (Chair of the STC and Tony's mouth-piece) is another prominent member of the business community and Cllr Rees is clearly heavily involved as are Cllr's Bisgrove and Smith. Cllr Beale may also be related to 'Beale Transport' and there may be other members of the Council with significant connections to the local business community.

I have long wondered about the activities and machinations of Somerton's Town Council and it has been my impression (one that I share with many other members of the local community) that Somerton's Town Council does not represent the wider community of Somerton. Nothing made that clearer that the manner in which the Town Council destroyed the concensus that was built by the Community Hall Steering Group. Back in 2006, it was my impression that a small core of the then Town Council (Cllrs Canvin, Keenan, Gardiner, Smith and Langmaid) were determined to ensure that the wider Community did not gain any significant voice in deciding the future of the Community Hall project. Today, almost three years later, the Town Council has sold land to one local builder (Edgar Homes) in exchange for an industrial shed (owned by Edgar Builders) which was built on land sold to Edgar Builders by Anthony Henry Canvin (aka Cllr Tony Canvin). Seems to be a lot of business interest there and not too much community. But maybe I'm just being cycnical. Forgive me.

Anyway, the discussion about the old Town Hall project rumbled on until Cllr Ian Neale waded in with his usual insightful contribution. He prefaced his comment with some blether about not being "against" the project but he wanted to know if the Enterprise Group had sought the support of 2/3rds of the 3,000 adults (his number) in the Parish. Well, Cllr Neale, forgive me for saying this but these guys aren't asking for anything more than an expression of support and you want them to canvas the town. So how much support did you get before you decided to spend over a £1,000,000 of taxpayer's money on the Tin Dunny? I don't remember you asking for anyone's opinion. What a jackass.



In the end Cllr Paddy managed to make some sort of disingenuous expression of 'support in principal' for the idea and after another couple of minutes the meeting came to an end. But not before we were reminded that the next meeting will be ...................... at the Tin Dunny. If 10 people turn up that will mean that each seat cost £100,000. I can't wait.

Till next time.

Niall