Lead Members Introduced at TDC

New “lead Members” have been introduced at Thanet District Council, who will, in the future, support Cabinet Members.

The idea was agreed Thursday 21 May at a full Council meeting, when it was also agreed that they would receive no additional payments for undertaking this role.

There will be ten lead members, all from the Tory Group, each supporting the whole or a specific part of a Cabinet portfolio. Their brief will be to act as an advisor to their portfolio holder, lead on policy development, and chair advisory and consultative meetings. They will also be able to substitute for cabinet members at meetings, though not vote on their behalf.

The idea of a group of Councillors helping each of the members of the Council’s Cabinet may appear innocuous but on reflection will be seen as a mistake.

Ezekiel’s original proposal was for each of these Conservative members to be paid £500 annually. When it became apparent that this would not be popular with the council taxpayer, this was watered down, first to £200, and now to no payment at least for two years. A cynic might say that having used the carrot of payment to gain his colleagues votes for his leadership bid, Cllr Ezekiel no longer needs to risk the bad publicity.

Quite apart from the waste of money this is a ill thought through measure. At full Council, I asked two questions:
One, to the Chief Executive of the Council asking if this would further distort the relationship of his paid staff with members of one political party at the expense of others. Of the 33 Tory councillors on TDC, 2 are chair or vice chair of the council, 10 are committee chairs or vice chairs, 7 are in the Cabinet and now 10 are lead members. That is 29 out 33 with some executive role in the Council.
My other question was to the Council’s monitoring officer. I asked if Lead Members, through their intimate relationship with Cabinet Members, would effectively become part of the Council’s Executive and therefore not be available for the important task of holding the executive to account through scrutiny.
The monitoring officer is considering the implications of this.

Thanet Council Meeting on Night Flights

Ramsgate residents should be aware that Thanet Council Tories are preparing to cave in to the airport operators requests to ditch the "106 agreement that protects residents from night time flights at the airport.

An important step in this process will happen on tuesday, when Thanet Council's Airport Working Party is to receive views of KIAC (the Airport Consultative Committee) on Infratil's request to allow night flying. This is a public meeting, note the highly unusual venue!

Airport Working PartyTuesday, 19th May, 2009 7.00 pm
Attendance Details
Agenda Frontsheet PDF 55 KB View agenda as HTML
Agenda reports pack PDF 266 KB
Add meeting to your calendar
Venue: The Passenger Lounge, Kent International Airport



Airport Working Party – 19 May 2009
Main Portfolio Area: Regeneration & Environment
By: Brian White, Director of Regeneration
Classification: Unrestricted
Summary: The Airport Working Party is examining the subject of night-time flying before making its recommendations on the subject matter to be included in any potential future night-time flying policy regarding Kent International Airport (KIA). The purpose of the meeting is to
receive the views of Members of the Kent International Airport Consultative Committee
1.0 Introduction and background
1.1 In recent years there have been two proposals for scheduled night-time flying at KIA. The first concerned EU Jet and the introduction of a number of regular passenger services to European destinations. The second, at the beginning of this calendar year concerned the opportunity of British Airways International Cargo relocating its hub from Stansted to KIA.
1.2 On both occasions it was considered necessary and appropriate by the Council to receive and report applications for scheduled night-time flights on an exceptional basis. There not being the six month period prescribed in the S.106 Agreement for consultation to the Council available.
1.3 In both the public interest, and the business development prospects of the Airport Owner; Infratil, the Airport Working Party has been asked to investigate and report on the subject of night-time flying. It has visited other regional airports, looked at policies and procedures in place and now wishes to receive the views of the Airport’s own Consultative Committee before producing its recommendations. The intention being that Infratil be invited to submit an application for night-time flying such that the six month period of consultation with the Council can commence.
1.4 This proactive approach is clearly in the best interest of all parties. The Council will be able to let interested groups and parties have their say on the very principle of night-time flying and on the extent to which it may be acceptable. Whilst the airport owner will be in a position, once a policy is in place to compete with its regional competitors and attract business. It is already noted by the Working Party that in certain respects the S.106 Agreement regarding KIA may deter aircraft operators.

South Thanet MP puts receipts on line

Stephen Ladyman MP has posted his receipts and claim forms on-line.

Stephen Ladyman, the MP for South Thanet has added his expense claim forms and receipts to his web site as well as providing unaudited data, that won't be officially released for another year. for his expense claims for 2008/9.
The MP first provided details of his expenses on his website early last year and update them in April to include the latest information. He has now expanded the information provided to allow access to the raw claim forms and receipts.
Stephen commented "People are understandably angry about what they've read in the newspapers and heard on the news in the last week but although copies of receipts and claim forms had been leaked to the Telegraph, the same information wasn't available to MPs in a form we could publish until a few days ago. In the interests of full transparancy I've now published everything I can via my website. Some information has been redacted to stop bank account details being released and to comply with data protection laws because third parties were referred to but otherwise my constituents have now got everything that I've got."
"I hope that people don't tar all MPs with the same brush. I've long advocated a reform of the expense system and greater transparency and done my best through my own web site to set an example. The vast majority of MPs are hard working and honest. If some have made mistakes they should be held to account but we should not all be blamed for their mistakes."
"On the doorsteps of Ramnsgate today and as I've met people all around the constituency in the last few days most people have said they understand that not all MPs have expolited the system, they want those who have done so punished but they don't blame us all for the errors of the few. I'm also pleased to say that they have been very kind and understanding to me personally."
The website address is www.stephenladyman.info and then follow the link in the contents column to 'Steve's Expenses'

They are not "all the same" !

It's hard to overstate how shocked and annoyed Labour members I have spoken to have been over the revelations about MPs expenses in the Telegraph and other newspapers. Those of us on the ground floor, knocking on doors and doing all the donkey work should not be made to feel ashamed of being engaged and involved in politics. Our neighbours pay for it through their taxes - we do that and give up our spare time and spare cash.

MPs may bleat that "all parties are at it" or that they are underpaid compared to GPs or they are victims of the press, but none of this washes. To your average voter, MPs aren't underpaid at all. To your average party member who gives so much for free, the MPs sense of entitlement is shocking.

At stake is the reputation of the Labour party - this must come above the needs of individual MPs. In the 80's, Labour was constantly attacked over letting extremists hijack the party. It wasn't till Neil Kinnock publicly took on Derek Hatton and other Militant extremists at the party conference that the tide started to turn and the public began to see that Labour was serious about putting its house in order. By contrast, the Conservatives did not deal with Neil Hamilton in the 1997 election. They foolishly allowed him to represent them, so the story became "Conservatives back MP who receives money in brown bags". They should have protected their party and forced him to step down. Labour mustn’t make the same mistake. The MPs with the worst abuses cannot be allowed to contest the next election representing Labour.

I accept that part of the problem is the system that invites MP’s to claim an allowance for the extra expense of having to run a second home. I note, that it is an allowance, not an expenses claim. Nevertheless, the emphasis should be on the words “extra expense”. Frankly, some of the expose in the press is trivial and could be forgiven as long as the system is now changed. However some is not, and amounts to little better than fraud, especially over the, “switching “, of second home designation to maximise the amounts claimable.

I also accept that, in the Labour Party at least, it is just a few MP's that have grossly abused the system.

South Thanet MP, Steve Ladyman has issued the following:

"A personal message about expenses - as I know that strong feelings were expressed at last night's Ramsgate branch meeting. Members of the Party are right to be angry about some of the things that have been revealed but I hope you won't tar us all with the same brush.

I have never claimed for any furniture or household items or any repairs or alterations.

I have not claimed to have my moat cleared nor to have my tennis court repaired.

I certainly haven't been involved in using the allowance for 'flipping'. This year and last year my expenses have been on my website with an explanation of how they arose. Out of 650 MPs, 440 claimed more money than me in the expense table despite me having a working office in the constituency (whereas many of the others that claim less in the expense table have only a Parliamentary office and therefore pay no office rent,electricity or phone costs). My receipts are not on the website because, until they are released by the House, I don't have them in electronic form. I can assure you, however, they are beyond reproach and only include legitimate claims.The current debacle must be sorted out and if any MP (of any Party) has abused the system they should answer to their electorate and in the case of the Labour Party must answer to their GC which has every right to deselect them if it is justified.

Steve"

Dr Stephen Ladyman

MP for South Thanet

House of Commons

Same Old Tories

The Employment Opportunities Bill, tabled by Senior Conservative Christopher Chope, who as a minister helped bring in the Poll Tax, is timetabled for its second reading in Parliament next Friday 15 May.
During the Bill’s first reading, Mr Chope said it will: “introduce more freedom, flexibility and opportunity for those seeking employment in the public and private sectors.”
The bill, which is supported by ten other Tory MPs, aims to:
- allow employees to opt-out of the minimum wage
- ensure all public sector jobs are advertised openly
- grant the ‘right to work’ under the Declaration of Human Rights by allowing workers to be paid less than the minimum wage

The minimum wage provides income protection and security for millions of workers. It stops unscrupulous employers from driving down wages across the board. The new Tory ‘Employment Opportunities Bill’ would allow employers to opt out of their responsibility to their staff to pay a fair days wage for a fair day’s work and effectively bring an end to the National Minimum Wage.
“This shows the Tories in their true light and is a little insight into what a Conservative Government would do. They are still fighting the battles of the 1980s and 90s when they abolished the wages councils and left millions of workers without wage protection. David Cameron talks about an age of austerity, well we now know that he means it for low-paid workers.
There is always pressure on wages and the minimum wage is needed to ensure people are paid fairly.
I urge anyone who cares about the protection of our workforce to log on to www.wageconcern.com and sign the petition to save our minimum wage.”
John Prescott, whose first job 55 years ago was working as a chef at the Patten Arms in Warrington on £2 7d a week in a job protected by the Wages Council Act, added:
“Only a Tory could suggest that not being able to work for less than minimum wage would be a denial of Human Rights. This from a party that actually wants to abolish the Human Rights Act and provide cheaper labour.
“We call on everyone who believes in fairness and social justice to join Wage Concern and help us kill this Tory Bill on May 15th.”
Dave Prentis, UNISON General Secretary, said:
“Christopher Chope and his Tory cabal want to turn the clock back to the days of poverty pay where workers are exploited by unscrupulous bosses. The sham Caring Conservatism is stripped bare by their plans. They have shown clearly that they are not on the side of ordinary hard-working people.
“The minimum wage is a symbol of a civilised society, a floor to protect workers that gives them dignity. It is needed more than ever in tough economic times. And isn’t it typical of the Tories that their response to the recession is to rob the poor to keep the rich?
We fought long and hard to establish the statutory national minimum wage, in the teeth of opposition and unfounded scaremongering about massive job losses. Any attempt to dilute or abolish it will be resisted.
Wage Concern is a grassroots campaign to stop that bill - and needs your help.
Let’s show the Tories we don’t support their ridiculous, dangerous and immoral position by:
1. Signing the petition here
2. Joining the campaign mailing list here
3. Getting your friends to join the Facebook group
4. Lobby your MP here
5. Kill this Tory Bill on Friday 15th May.
Kill This Tory Bill