N&STC: Hatchet Job

N&STC: Hatchet Job

~~~~~

Recent Developments

In the days following my address to Newby & Scalby Town Council at the meeting held on Wednesday 11th September 2024, I have been in receipt of a huge number of communications (emails/letters/telephone-calls/FaceBook messages/memory-stick data/audio-video recordings, social media screenshots, interview transcripts, etc, etc), containing a welter of documentation and personal statements from Newby & Scalby residents who continue to be ‘up in arms’ against the Council’s disgraceful conduct going back a whole year to September 2023. In short, I have the whole nine yards.

Without betraying the content of my private and confidential correspondence to the incumbent N&STC Chair, Councillor Richard THOMPSON, I feel free to report that Mr THOMPSON has (thus far) elected to remain non-responsive to my appeal to reason – almost a tacit invitation to me to expose an orchestrated conspiracy of injustice as shameful as any I have exposed in the past fifteen years. Well . . . as you so wish, Mr THOMPSON. I am at your service.

Background

For a general overview, fairly comprehensive Yorkshire Post public domain coverage of this increasingly sordid saga can be reviewed in the following articles

More recent information may be reviewed on the North Yorks Enquirer website, here:

What follows is entirely substantiated by the Council’s own formal documentation (technically flawed though much of it is, whether by incompetence or design).

Bullying Allegations

In September 2023, Ms Helen KING (Manager of the Wellbeing Hub, who had endured the deeply distressing experience of sharing office-space with the notoriously domineering Clerk/RFO, Mrs Jools MARLEY – wife of Councillor Bob MARLEY) lodged a Formal Grievance against the Clerk/RFO with the then-Chair of the Council (for 8+ years), the highly-respected Councillor Reg TOWSE, on grounds of serial bullying and harassment.

The then-Chair, former Councillor Reg TOWSE, in accordance with the N&STC adopted Grievance Procedure, set Ms KING’s Grievance before Council, where it was Resolved to commission an independent professional investigation (by the highly-reputable Castle HR of Scarborough) to investigate and duly recommend the appropriate Resolution to the Grievance. It should be noted that a Council’s Standing Orders, Financial Regulations, Committee Terms of Reference, etc, once formally adopted, have power of authority akin to law.

In mid-November 2023, following the conclusion of Castle HR’s findings – to wit, that the evidence did indeed corroborate “clear and categoric evidence” of “aggressive, bullying and/or intimidating behaviour”  that “resulted in the member of staff, crying, feeling distressed and fearful” (thus exceeding the criteria for civil and criminal prosecution under the terms of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997) and, further, that the Clerk/RFO had acted in “breach of the Council’s policies”.

This information was subsequently reported in the Yorkshire Post (see above URL-links) and, to my knowledge, has never been rebutted by Council or Clerk/RFO. Thus, it stands unchallenged. “Qui tacet consentire videtur”.

[Source: Wikipedia]

On 16th November 2023, N&STC’s Review & Staffing Committee duly Resolved to apply the Council’s Disciplinary Procedure; namely to suspend the Clerk/RFO from duty (from 21st November 2023), pending investigation. A Disciplinary Meeting was then (erroneously) scheduled for 12th October 2023 (a month in the past). A typo – or a subterfuge?

In reality, the meeting was scheduled for 12th December 2023 – but, for undisclosed reasons, it never actually took place (the real reasons will presently become apparent).

Then, on 23rd November 2023, the Clerk/RFO strategically moved to pre-empt the Grievance Procedure by tendering her resignation. To his great credit, the then-Chair, Councillor Reg TOWSE, having first ensured that his formal objection was to be recorded in the Minutes, resigned from the Council forthwith on a point of principle – one may suspect to the delight of the Clerk/RFO. No less than FOUR other Councillors of considerable experience also resigned, on the same ethical grounds as Councillor TOWSE and for the same reasons, over the following weeks. I salute them.

The following excerpt from the ‘draft’ Minutes of the Review & Staffing Committee meeting of Wednesday 29th November 2023 (held at 6:30pm in the Wellbeing Hub) confirm. These ‘draft’ Minutes have since disappeared from the public record . . . but not from mine:

“Retired”, is it? One could be forgiven for concluding that the Clerk/RFO subscribes to the scurrilous tabloid maxim: “Never let the truth stand in the way of a good story!”.

Note, too, the absence in the Clerk/RFO’s “out of office” auto-response email of any mention of the “12 weeks notice as per contract, end of service date 14th February 2024”. One lie after another. Another maxim springs to mind: “Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus”.

On 29th November 2023, unfettered by the moral compass of the now former-Councillor TOWSE, mortal dread of a likely impending Constructive Dismissal Claim to the Employment Tribunal by the Clerk/RFO (who, over the years, appears to have convinced members that she is totally indispensible to the Council) resulted in the new Chair, Councillor Richard THOMPSON, supported by Councillors Derek BASTIMAN, Jackie SMITH and Rachel HOLLIDAY, then Resolved – incredibly – to draft an agreement offering to reinstate Mrs MARLEY to her position as Clerk/RFO, with the UPHELD Grievance still hanging over her head. Personally, I would not trust them to write a ‘Get Well Soon’ card without resorting to ChatGPT.

Curiously, I find no record of the rest of the Council ever having been party to, or even in knowledge of, this incomprehensible and throughly brazen Resolution – which is, therefore, ultra vires (outside of the law) and thus completely irrelevant to the proper business of the Council – a ‘behind closed doors’ fudge.

In short, the ‘convicted’ bully (as determined by Castle HR’s professional investigation) returned to her post unscathed and proceeded to set in train actions the effect of which could only be to wreak vengeance on her accuser, Ms Helen KING, by nullifying her employment position and, with it, her livelihood – quite aside from depriving the community of a much-needed and valued service.

It has often been said, in Council circles, that there is only one thing worse than a tyrannical Clerk – and that is one who is cocky with it. The 2rd February 2024  Yorkshire Post report (linked above) nails the point in spades:

And there she blows!

[See my article “Cult of the Clerk” (pub. 27/10/23)]

The Wellbeing Hub

In broad brush strokes: on the Clerk/RFO’s advice, the Council duly determined to return £18,116.34 of the grant-funding underwriting the continued existence of the universally popular Wellbeing Hub to the donors  – Sirius Minerals: ‘The Woodsmith Foundation’ – who, by the way, had made no request for reimbursement nor expressed any desire to withdraw its grant-funding (as my Sirius contact has since confirmed), thereby making the Wellbeing Hub financially untenable and thus ‘justifying’ the enforced redundancy of the Hub Manager, Ms Helen KING – and, therewith, the loss of Ms KING’s livelihood. The hatchet had found its mark.

To ‘rubber stamp’ this spite-ridden process, the Council then empowered the Clerk/RFO, Mrs Jools MARLEY, to commission and brief an external consultancy firm (Maoni Consulting: Mr Ian MORRIS), for an implausibly small fee of £1,000 (plus ‘add-ons’) to advise on the grant-funding situation. That briefing must, in my view, have been materially incomplete. And I can find no record of questions being raised by Councillors as to any potential conflict of interests there, which is unsurprising since the Clerk/RFO advised the Council to deem all records of the entire process “Confidential”. Little did she know there was a mole in the camp. . .

Following confidential correspondence with Mr Ian MORRIS of Maoni Consulting, who has been commendably open and transparent with me within the proper constraints of client-confidentiality, I can confirm that Maoni’s involvement extended only to the terms of the Clerk/RFO’s briefing regarding ‘The Woodsmith Foundation’ grant-funding and was in no way engaged with the Grievance Procedure against the Clerk/RFO. What Mr MORRIS did not disclose to me was his position as Northern Director of the Society of Local Council Clerks (SLCC) – the Clerk/RFO’s trade body – where his professional relationship with the aforementioned Mr Michael KING (WTC Clerk/RFO) may have raised eyebrows (had anyone on the Council been paying the slightest attention).

Again, the question of due diligence regarding the impartiality of the N&STC Clerk/RFO does not appear to have been challenged by Councillors – or even to have occurred to them.

Defamation Threats – the Law

Ugly rumours have become widespread in the community that the Council has instructed solicitors (reputedly, WELLERS HEDLEYS of Greater London and one other company) to threaten outspoken members of the public with civil proceedings under the terms of the Defamation Act 2013.

The Council knows, or should know – since the Clerk/RFO (like all Clerks) is in receipt of regular National Association of Local Councils (NALC) Legal Topic Notes, specifically LTN30-Defamation, which makes clear to anyone who can read English – that Councils are NOT authorised to bring actions in Defamation (citing Case Law:  Derbyshire Councy Council v. The Times Newspaper Ltd [1993] 1 AER 1011):

Other unchallenged Case Law (specifically, Heeson v PSO [s.38] has determined that:

Any competent solicitor, always provided that she/he has been adequately briefed by the client (or, in this case, the client’s delegated Officer – the Clerk/RFO) will tell you that unless substantial reputational damage resulting in a quantifiable financial disadvantage can be demonstrated, the Courts are unlikely even to consider such claims.

I mention the provision regarding “adequately briefed” because a year ago, on 3rd October 2023, WELLERS HEDLEY sent me a spurious “cease & desist” letter, threatening an action in Defamation against me, allegedly instructed by Whitby Town Council (though, in fact, the Council was unaware and the instruction came from two members and the Clerk/RFO – to whom I will return in due course) which I was able to dismiss in a matter of moments. Of course, using Council funds (i.e. public funds) to pursue a purely private vendetta is a criminal act of corruption (still under investigation by higher authority):

• [Michael KING – the (since resigned – 21/06/24) WTC Clerk/RFO; Cllr. Linda WILD – former WTC Chair/Mayor (3 terms); Cllr. John NOCK – former SBC Cllr. censured for attempting to mitigate the criminal conduct of serial paedophile, former NYCC Chair & SBC Mayor and Alderman Peter JACONELLI]
  

Transparency International defines “corruption” thus:

“The abuse of entrusted power for private gain”

Astute readers will note that the WELLERS HEDLEY solicitor is hoist with his own petard by confirming that any cause of claim is the prerogative not of the Council (whom he misleadingly asserted had instructed him), but of “individual councillors and employees”, who are, of course, more than welcome to sue me – at their own expense, but emphatically not from the public purse.

I hope that the parishioners of Newby & Scalby are now reassured that loose talk of Defamation actions is mere hot air – otherwise characterisable as “corporate bullying” – from an individual already ‘convicted’ of bullying.

I would conclude this section by commenting that any inaccurate or illegal advice provided to N&STC by the Clerk/RFO, Mrs MARLEY, must constitute a breach of her statutory duties (and Job Description) which I intend to pursue through the appropriate channels. The sad thing is that the Councillors (lay people without legal training, mere ‘volunteers’, bless them) are so gullible as to accept the Clerk/RFO’s word as gospel – poor innocent souls.

Going Forward

I have tried – and been seen to have tried – to bring the ‘warring parties’ to the negotiating table – in vain.

Newby & Scalby Town Council is steadfast in its determination to disregard the result of the Parish Poll (96.7% in favour of ousting the present members), just as it is steadfast in its determination to disregard the Gross Misconduct determination in regard to the Clerk/RFO, without whom they are afraid to tie their own shoelaces.

The electorate is no less determined to ‘drain the swamp’ and replace the current membership of the Council with a fully-elected, democratically-mandated Council, worthy of the trust of the community.

I have suggested – I believe most reasonably – that these objectives need not be mutually incompatible. The present members could do the honourable thing and resign; elections could be called, and any outgoing-members aspiring to return to public service could stand for office and campaign for re-election – and let the people (the ‘demos’; Greek =  δῆμος) decide. That is why we call it democracy.

But there remains a seemingly insurmountable obstacle – the Grievance against the Clerk/RFO.

In my view, there remains the matter of the professionally UPHELD Grievance that must be followed to its just and logical conclusion. Surely, in any reasonable view, Mrs MARLEY should be dismissed for Gross Misconduct? A recruitment process should then be implemented, with a view to appointing a new Clerk/RFO – ideally, one who is not an inadequate record-keeper, a bully or a manipulative control freak.

I believe that I hold all of the documentation that the Council would need to successfully defend a Constructive Dismissal claim and would place it at the reconstituted Council’s service, in the public interest.

My suggestion would be for the Chair, Councillor THOMPSON, to summon an Extraordiany Meeting of Full Council, to debate and Resolve a Motion calling to restore the Council’s position to the last letter of the legal requirements (obviously, under exclusion of press and public, as all Staffing issues must be – quite rightly), before receiving the formal resignations of all Councillors, with immediate effect, thus returning the sovereign control of the Council to its rightful masters – the Newby & Scalby electorate.

I leave N&STC Chair, Councillor Richard THOMPSON to ponder now the requirements of LORD NOLAN’s Seven Principles of Public Life, in particular, Article 7 – Leadership:

Come along, Richard, show your electorate that you are “willing to challenge poor behaviour wherever it occurs”. Heaven knows, your ammo locker is full to bursting.

Be a man. Grow some cojones!

Do you think your electors are incapable of determing right from wrong?

At present, you are evincing all the Leadership prowess of the tail that the little kiddies attempt to pin on the donkey!

Where do you see the gain in persisting until you and your Councillors become pariahs in your own community? What would the bowls club think?

But first, a by-election for the Casual Vacancy arising from the resignation of former-Councillor David PICKERSGILL – and whoever else is honourable enough to do the right thing.

Afterword

We could not find an honourable Councillor in Whitby – only a despot who has no grasp of the legislation forbidding Predetermination (Localism Act 2011) – yet nevertheless falsely accused another WTC Councillor of the same infraction. So much for lay ‘volunteers’. Learn the job – or leave it.

The Scarborough News of 2nd October 2023 reported:

• https://www.thescarboroughnews.co.uk/news/politics/council/whitby-mayor-says-he-will-not-resign-ahead-of-controversial-public-vote-4356838

Whitby Town Council meets only every two months anyway. At the last Town Meeting (March 2024), the Chair/Mayor (picture above) could find no response to this question from a member of the public:

“Can you tell us, Mr Mayor, what Whitby Town Council has achieve in the past twelve months?”

Oh, dear . . . lions led by donkeys!

Coming soon: “N&STC: Kindergarten Confidential”.