To say I am not an enthusiast for the E.U. is something of an understatement but
when I walk along Abbey Road
as I did yesterday with the chairman of its road
and vehicle safety committee and hear him say I just cant believe how anyone
could be so stupid as to design this I feel it is not entirely worthless. He
went on to express his annoyance at anyone who would use one of his companys
reports to justify the idiocy when it does no such thing. This particular idiocy
was signed off by Craske of course but are any of his fellow scoundrels any better?
Researching and filtering the news that flows in my direction is becoming a full-time job but one recent piece immediately stood out as straight-forward and easy to publish, namely that Bexleys wish to clamp down on Freedom of Information requests has arisen again. Last time it was councillor Campbell who was worried about the tales of incompetence and wrong-doing that were getting into the public domain; though he claimed he was only worried about the expense. Campbell and the rest of the disreputable crew should realize that the way to stop residents questioning their every move is to be as transparent as they promise to be and to stop hiding things from auditors, coming to the attention of the Crown Prosecution Service, breaking their own codes on whistleblowing and generally feathering their own nests. Stop being furtive, greedy and stupid and this website dies.
I thought councillor Campbell had come to his senses over F.O.I. requests but if he has the virus has spread to one of his tawdry mates, one Nigel Betts, Conservative councillor for Falconwood & Welling. He reckons that most of this information is freely available on the Bexley website; well if it was - and a bit easier to find - that would be fine, but I have yet to see an on-line reference to which items must be hidden from the auditors and which need not be and the itemised costs associated with parking enforcement which would expose Craskes email to residents who queried the new charges he imposed as the falsehood it is.
It is all of course a put up job between Campbell and Betts. In the list of questions to be asked at next Wednesdays meeting, Betts is on record as asking Campbell about the vast number of F.O.I. requests certain gentlemen have been making. So its an attempt to resurrect the silly scheme to shame those who ask questions. Incidentally if these gentlemen have put in a vast number of F.O.I. requests, then I have a vast number of fingers on my hands.
Not all councillors are tarred with the same brush, one told me he thought the council should be held to account, but maybe he is the one with nothing much to hide. Those that have may wish to note that the number of F.O.I. requests will inevitably increase as more people join in opposing a useless council. Maybe the man who deals with them will be grateful to the gentlemen who ensure that his job is less likely to be cut; and presumably he is not so daft as to proceed with an F.O.I. request for information that is readily available on the web. If he isnt then Betts is even more stupid than he looks and if councillor Campbells reply to councillor Betts at next Wednesdays meeting is a lie it will be reported here within an hour or two of him lying. The gentlemen referred to will all be there watching and listening.