“The Lie of the Land”

“The LIE of the Land”

Guest Author ALDERMAN NORMAN MURPHY examines the existential crisis at Yorkshire Coast BID Ltd and challenges BID Chair Clive Rowe-Evans to justify his propaganda.

~~~~~

As many of you will have seen. elected members of Scarborough Borough Council (SBC) were called, on 28th July, to the Town Hall (KREMLIN).

The purpose of the summons was to debate, and vote on, a motion of No Confidence in the Labour Council backed private company known as the Yorkshire Coast Business Improvement District Ltd. (YCBID).

An organisation which has the capacity to extort from our local business £5 million in additional tax.

The debate was, as might be expected of SBC under the leadership of Steve Siddons, a complete fiasco and the incompetence and duplicity of all the main players, both elected members and Officers of Paid Service, will no doubt feature in many forthcoming articles.

However, my initial attention was drawn not so much to the antics of the Council, elected members and senior Council Officers, during the debate, hilarious and tragic in equal measure though it was, but by the comments made after the meeting by the Chairman of the YCBID Board, Clive Rowe-Evans.

Interviewed after the meeting by the Scarborough News (worth noting here that no similar opportunity of an interview was given to the Anti-Bid Group (ABG), Clive Rowe-Evans said the motion had “been largely strong-armed by a select number of businesses in the area.”

Now, I don’t know what Rowe-Evans considers to be a “select number” of businesses, or indeed which businesses he is referring to, as, of course, he is careful not to name anyone.

However, there were representatives from over 80 local business at the Town Hall on 28th July – a very impressive number during the working day, by any standards.

Moreover, there would, undoubtedly, have been considerably more but for the fact that many business owners were trying to earn a living, at the height of the season, and simply could not afford to take the time off work to attend the meeting.

So let’s be clear, Clive, this is NOT a select number of businesses who are opposed to paying the Levy. It is, as far as I can see, every local business that YOU are strong–arming into paying what many consider to be an unjust and undemocratic, and many would add, illegal tax.

Those business representatives who were prepared to lose money to attend the meeting on 28th July were NOT “strong–armed” into attending. They attended willingly because the tax YOU are imposing on them, disgracefully aided and abetted by SBC, is crippling their businesses and they are desperate to have the Levy abolished.

Claiming that local business owners were strong–armed into attending the meeting is, in fact, an outright LIE.

However, our Clive was not content with just misrepresenting the motives of those who attended the meeting – LYING – he went much further and rubbished the whole anti-bid campaign claiming that the “evidence presented in the lead up to the decision has not been accurate and reflective of the work (YCBID work) that has been delivered.”

Now, and this is where it gets interesting. If the evidence presented by the anti-bid campaigners is not accurate and is not reflective of the work carried out by the YCBID, could Rowe-Evans please clarify where the inaccuracies, which he claims exist, are to be found?

What evidence, Clive, have the anti-bid campaigners presented to Levy-payers that is untruthful?

The anti-bid campaigners claim that over the last three years, employees of YCBID have taken £294,017 in salaries. 

What is inaccurate about that?

The anti-bid campaigners claim that , over the last three years, only £36.65 in director’s expenses.

What is inaccurate about that?

The anti-bid campaigners claim that YCBID has snaffled £210,684 in operating costs (however, no details on what these operating costs were has ever been published). 

What is inaccurate about that?

The anti-bid campaigners also claim that SBC has charged YCBID £132,460 to collect the Levy fees.

What is inaccurate about that?  

And how are the anti-bid campaigners being inaccurate when they highlight that YOU, Clive Rowe-Evans, did NOT attended the University of Surrey from 1961 to 1965, where YOU claim to have obtained an MA in Hotel Management, as the University of Surrey did not come into being until it was granted its Royal Charter in 1966?

It would appear that YOU, Mr ROWE-EVANS, actually attended Battersea College of Advanced Technology. This would suggest that Mr ROWE-EVANS is more likely to hold, at best, a Higher National Diploma.

What is inaccurate about that?

What, as I see it, the above does suggest is that Mr Rowe-Evans is, in fact, a consummate LIAR.

Anyone who believes a single word YCBID and SBC say to counter the claims of the anti YCBID campaigners, is in my view, delusional.

Many would argue that both YCBID and SBC have consistently, over the last three years, twisted the truth and LIED about the costs, legality and validity of the YCBID.

Their motives for wanting the YCBID to continue in existence are, as I see it, completely transparent.

The YCBID is, evidence suggests, a £5 million GRAVY TRAIN and SBC and Clive Rowe-Evans have first class tickets and, looking at how hard they worked to block the motion of No Confidence, they intend to ride in style for as long as they possibly can.

The YCBID has all the appearance of a MAFIA-style money making operation, designed to make a select few very rich at the expense of a large number of local businesses, and the local business community know this and they are not going to let a bunch of parasites steal away their hard earned money.

That, SBC and Clive Rowe Evans, is a concept you will be unfamiliar with: i.e. THE TRUTH.

PS: Do the MAFIA operate in TUSCANY, anybody? Just asking for a friend.

Arrivederci suckers!