john smith talks about it :
lol ) that uh the clerk as we know is not here due to circumstances beyond his control (eek!!) however i would state that uh the three councillors that are still in the room have nothing to do with his absence and would welcome him to walk through the door tomorrow back into his office things are being uh investigated by cheshire east and i'm afraid that's all i can say i'd like to say a great deal more but unfortunately i'd have to leave it at that i hope that answers your question and i apologize that i can't give you any more information"
Well, excellent job of dismissing all possible suspicion there, John. Sterling work.
I watched a zoom meeting of our local district council discussing the provision of infrastructure for electric cars. The level of ignorance was astounding. One of my neighbours who is a councillor told told one the Tory councillors to stop getting their information from the Daily Mail and to do some proper research with "real" facts.
Round here all the county and district meetings are streamed live from the council chambers and it seems the zoom equivalents are too.*id never thought about how zoom meetings are recorded and how they could leak out. this might encourage others to leek more
a problem i have encountered is once things get this factional and abusive is how to get new people in to join to revive it - they come to one meeting, experience the horrors, and are never to be seen again!!
yes but beyond the world of parish councils there must be so many private disastrous meetings with endless drama happening at any one moment
The recordings for ours are on the relevant council's website.
its an interesting dynamic the formal meeting... i'm a big believer that water tight procedure is the ultimate leveller, but it can give undue power to the petty pedantic legalist obstructivists who delight in abusing procedure. If someone has got that legalist mind then they are more likely to rise into a position of procedural power, and once there they can reek havoc.
Actually my head is mainly in my hands because of the stupid and irrelevant questions they ask, and the amount of time discussing minor details while ignoring the big issues and the ones that have been raised by the people they are supposed to represent. The most successful ones have been where there's a chair who actually knows her stuff and pretty much tells them all what to decide. Not much of an advert for democracy of course.
i watched the unedited directors cut last night
explains things a bit more fully
does anyone know exactly what was going on? i havent seen the TV reporting of this. What is being said?
My understanding is the chairman, who on one level looks reasonable and is correctly following procedure, is in fact a pedant and bureaucratic dictator and a nightmare
-he called no meetings during the pandemic? hence this extraordinary meeting
-jackie weaver has been brought in as some kind of outside mediator to restore order/adjudicate
an interesting question over whether she really does have power to kick out the chair. in the directors cut she explains that she does
though if that is what is happening it needs a new chair appointing permanently, whereas john Smith gets the role "for this meeting" only?
so many questions
i have nothing buy sympathy, have sat in as bad meetings myself - whats going on here i think is an attempt of changing of the guard and justly pushing out of stubborn awkward elements who abuse their power. though its a bit bodged. is that right?
i forget the chairmans name, but hes an utter dick in this meeting (below) in which he presides totally and ignores any awkward question
(this is good stuff here)
he has his supporters on the council though, in fact its about a 50/50 split from what i can see
