The bus stop on Lawford road..RUGBY TORIES BAN COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT TO SAVE - ONE POUND!
DUST NOT PERMITTED ON TORIES
The Environment Agency sees no dust! and see no cement plant. Unconfirmed reports say Rugby CONSERVATIVES, overheard in Conference, say: "There are no dusts on us! Cement plant dust is not permitted to fall on Conservative voters. We have a different way of life, and breathe different air from ordinary Rugby residents. We are clean." Conservative/ Agency envoys have special top-secret plan, to randomly locate three one metres disks to measure "falling dust" in Rugby. Cement Boundary site monitoring requested for seven years is not permitted as the Agency sees no cement works! Tories see no dust. Bets now being taken on outcome of "random dust survey."
AUTHORITIES CHASING OWN TALES?
The Environment Agency refuses to answer any questions about where similar Frisbee dust gauges have ever been used before. The officer said he had no information about any definition of "nuisance dust"; no data about where the frisbees have been used before; no idea to what effect these have ever been put; Faber Maunsell, the Agency's contractor, would ONLY be allowed to answer ANY questions once they had finished the monitoring in a few months time; RBC said they have no idea, but that "nuisance dust" is merely a matter for "officers' professional judgement", and in unenforceable under any existing Law, and has no definition whatsoever. So what are they trying to catch? FALLING STARS?
RUGBY RESIDENTS RIPPED OFF YET AGAIN!
FABER MAUNSELL, the "unlucky" consultants, who seemed to have learned nothing from the three year fiasco of their/our own £500,000 air quality saga, said that they can answer no questions. "We are contracted to RBC who are our clients." SO THE AGENCY IS NOW NOT THE CLIENT AFTER ALL THE CHARADE!
Faber are not allowed to speak, or to give out any information about the monitors. Rugby residents must "Pay up and shut up!" as the Agency and the Council collude to deliberately waste even more of our cash, and to prevent any PUBLIC CONSULTATION and to prevent any worthwhile information from being given out Meanwhile the Agency pretends that they are funding the latest farce. You be the judge - look at the above photos: Is Rugby dirtier than elsewhere?
RUGBY CEMENT COMMUNITY FORUM UPDATE:
HEATHER TIMMS: (of WCC - a main perpetrator in this "game") SHE SAYS COUNCIL TAX PAYERS AND ALL PARISH COUNCILS HAVE NO RIGHT TO ASK WHERE THEIR MONEY IS SPENT!! Following on from the "Silence of the lambs" we now present WCC CLLR TIMMS' own response telling Rugby people to keep on paying, and to STOP asking where their council taxes are being wasted.
From:
To: "Cllr Chris Holman" "Patricia Wyatt" Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 9:26 PM
Subject: Re: Sustainable Environment Panel 27.09.07 Item 10. RCCF.
Dear Pat and Chris
As explained at the meeting, it is for Council to decide how to use rate payers money. And this applies whether it is A POUND or TEN THOUSAND..
It is apparent that officer time used in supporting RCCF runs counter to the principle of the "polluter pays" which I feel none of us would disagree with. Therefore the BREAKDOWN of AMOUNTS etc becomes TOTALLY IMMATERIAL and indeed requires further officer cost for no perceived benefit.
The decision is to facilitate the transfer of the Forum to be fully community owned based on this principle. (????) The expenditure agreed is a maximum figure agreed to facilitate this transfer and is not an annual grant. (NB : This refers to £7,500 from existing Protective Health Budget to appoint new uninformed members for the NEW Cemex controlled forum.)
The questions for the scutiny officers I am not able to respond to and may be areas Chris that you wish to investigate?
With best regards
Heather Timms
IN REPLY TO QUESTIONS FROM RUGBY PARISH COUNCILS' REPRESENTATIVE:
From: Patricia Wyatt Sent: 28 September 2007 20:32
To: Cllr Chris Holman; Cllr Tina Avis; Cllr Ish Mistry; Cllr Neil
Sandison; Cllr Noreen New; Simon Warren
Cc: Cllr Carolyn Robbins; Diane Pask; Lilian Pallikaropoulos
Subject: Sustainable Environment Panel 27.09.07 Item 10. RCCF.
"Dear Councillor Holman, - Chairman of Rugby Borough Council's Sustainable Environment Panel.
LACK OF INFORMATION IN THE REPORT. ITEM 10.
Having attended the Sustainable Environment Panel meeting last evening, the decision taken by members of the ABOVE MENTIONED panel was based and taken on, THE PROPITIOUS reason spoken of by Councillor Robbins, ie "Affecting this Council's, namely Rugby Borough Council's expenditure".
1. Can you explain a breakdown of that supposed Rugby Borough Council's expenditure?
2. Is Rugby Borough Council prepared to make a grant of £7,500 per annum?
3. How much is the cost to HIRE,
a. The Council Chamber,
b. Committee Room 1.
c. Committee Room 2.
for an evening meeting scheduled for two 2 hours?
4. How much money was set aside in the 2007/2008 budget to hold RCCF meetings including refreshments per annum?
5. How much of 2007/2008 budget will this decision have under spent? I wish to record my personal appreciation of the five knowledgeable respresentatives to whom this email is addressed, and their contributions made to the meeting. What happens in the future remains to be seen. Party Politics showed abundantly clear just how undemocratically, decisions are made.
Finally, I point out how inappropriate/inaccurate the last four items on the Agenda Management Sheet (Agenda No. 10 (set on green paper)) are as printed. May I recommend this matter to the scrutiny officers.
1. There are Financial implications - that is what it is all about!!
2. There is a risk of maladministration.
3. There certainly are environmental risks and implications.
4. There could be legal implications from the report... ref. SR letter and other.
5. At 2.1, what is meant by RRCF? (twice is same paragraph overleaf)
Mrs. Patricia Wyatt.
LUNATICS NOW IN CHARGE OF ASYLUM? RBC EHO TALKING HEAD SEAN LAWSON (5.10.07): Email to RCCF members:
"A decision for the Council to hand over the responsibility to Cemex has now been made and approved through the Council's democratic process." (oh???) For "operational reasons" the meeting of 1st October was changed to 16th October - without telling any of those involved. "Your emails were not ignored", but we like to play our cards close to our chest.
"The Council determined to withdraw its secretarial function from the RCCF. Rather than just to cease its support we have decided to hold a final meeting on 16 OCTOBER 5.30 pm TOWN HALL. Any future meetings and arrangements can be discussed then. I look forward to a lively debate and discussion at that time.
I DO NOT EXPECT THAT THIS RESPONSE WILL SATISFY ANY OR ALL OF THE RUGBY RESIDENTS CONCERNS."
BUT TOUGH! RBC CONSERVATIVES AND MEALY MOUTHED EMPLOYEES HAVE ABANDONED ALL AND EVERY DUTY TO THE ELECTORATE, ENVIRONMENT, AIR QUALITY, HEALTH, AND TO THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT WILL NOT BE TOLERATED IN RUGBY!!
RUGBY RESIDENTS ARE NOW: ON THEIR OWN!
No comments:
Post a Comment