A View from the Public Gallery

A Letter to the Editor from Whitby resident PETER COOPER, whose impressions – following his attendance at a recent meeting of Whitby Town Council – may encourage other residents to see for themselves where half-a-million pounds a year goes in the hands of self-appointed dinosaurs.

~~~~~

Sir,

A View from the Public Gallery

Nestled in the charming Pannett Park, Whitby Museum stands as a testament to the extraordinary history and culture of the town. This quaint museum, with its dusty shelves and intriguing displays, invites visitors to embark on a journey through time. Within its walls, ancient artefacts of a bygone era, from maritime relics to geological wonders that reveal the secrets of the earth, the museum is a treasure trove of knowledge waiting to be uncovered. When visiting, you may find yourself lost in the mists of time, captivated by the tales of those everyday people who have shaped Whitby’s rich heritage. Whitby Museum offers a truly extraordinary experience to all.

Whitby Museum not only showcases the town’s historical significance, it also is the home of Whitby Town Council, and within its walls its Councillors meet regularly – everyday people whose decisions arguably shape the future of the town. Sometimes, the meetings held are billed as extraordinary meetings and, like a number of their meetings, members of the public are invited to come and observe, and even make a small contribution if they wish.

Last week, one such extraordinary meeting was to take place, so I braved the cold, wet weather and went along. Would this meeting be a truly extraordinary experience like a visit to the museum? Would the views of the Councillors be those of a bygone era as the younger folk of the town often say? Would a treasure trove of knowledge be revealed as the Councillors worked through the agenda? With an open mind and in great anticipation, I took my place on the public bench.

The first thing that struck me about the meeting was the sheer number of Councillors present for what is a relatively small parish. I counted 14 Councillors present, and this is not the full number as a number were absent. Why so many?

As the meeting got under way, I began to feel like a museum visitor lost in the mists of time, an initial plethora of procedural issues such as references to previous meeting’s minutes, proposals, votes, motions… all very dull and unengaging. Little wonder I was just one of four members of the public sitting there – the average man on the street could not endure such dullness.

Eventually, we arrived at an agenda item which had been discussed at previous meetings going back over a year now – the public toilets in Whitby. This enlivened the meeting, as there was clearly a division between the Councillors on this issue. The toilets have been managed by a company called Danfo for a number of years, and previous meetings had revealed a huge downturn in income from the toilets in recent years – indeed, one toilet returned the paltry sum of just £13.47 over a period of many months due to a credit card/wifi issue and allegedly no-one either at Danfo or the Council noticed this problem – a loss of many thousands of pounds of revenue from this one toilet alone. Other unresolved issues included a verbal variation of the contract between Danfo and the Council during the Covid lockdown, giving away 50% of toilet revenues to Danfo in addition to their contract payments rather than the Council keeping 100% of them as before. This ‘giveaway’ has continued to this day, despite there being no written record of this contract variation, how it came about, or who agreed to it. 

The agenda item this evening was merely to discuss the terms of reference for a working party to look into the worrying issues concerning the public toilets, in particular the substantial loss of revenue. However, the discussion did not go well, with a number of Councillors complaining that the decision to have a working party was made in haste at the end of the last full Council meeting, and one in particular, Cllr Linda Wild, was very unhappy with the whole idea. She disliked the idea of Councillors examining the past work of others which would, in her eyes, lead to blame being apportioned. Cllr Wild also struggled to understand a word in the working party’s terms of reference which was ‘remediation’ – despite clearly struggling to pronounce this five-syllable word, she simply kept on going back to it.

Eventually, to appease Cllr Wild, other Councillors put on their ‘thesaurus’ hats and brainstorming ensued, and eventually an alternative word was chosen. Still, Cllr Wild was not happy, asking for the working party idea to be scrapped completely, saying it wasn’t needed – the Town Clerk and others could do the work and then the full Council agree what to progress with Danfo. Cllr Elizabeth Mulheran then joined in the debate, suggesting that the working party should have a quorum of five, a rather strange idea as it only had four members because a fifth member could not be found.The discussion trundled on and on, amendments were made to the terms of reference, motions were passed and the lid finally closed on the issue.

Will the working party be flushed with success, I couldn’t help wondering? Documents such as minutes of crucial meetings appear to have been lost or mislaid, verbal agreements to a written contract appear to have been made but not recorded anywhere, and the working party cannot approach either the former Town Clerk or other employed staff, or current/former Councillors to ask them about their recollections of what happened. Doesn’t bode well no matter how many motions are passed…

The final item on the agenda of this extraordinary meeting was the Maritime Hub, a subject of much controversy in the town. Cllr Jacqui Layman had submitted a motion saying that Whitby Town Council should withdraw its support for the project. Cllr Layman gave a detailed presentation to the meeting which covered the business case for the hub, the lack of commercial interest for it (a statement received from NYC stated Head of Terms – a letter of intent not legally binding – had been agreed with just one tenant) and the consultation in which 30,000 people and businesses were consulted  (this surprised me – a figure which is three times the adult population of the town). Sadly however, the presentation was abruptly cut short by the Chair/Mayor Robert Dalrymple before Cllr Layman could complete it and deliver a conclusion, which was a shame as she had clearly done her homework.

Cllr Mulheran, who earlier had wanted a quorum of 5 for a working committee with only 4 members, had another numerical issue here, claiming two tenants were in the frame for the hub and not one as indicated on NYC’s statement. Cllr Wild and Cllr Sandra Turner then steered the discussion to how the building would attract out of town training providers and universities, reviving the maritime industry and creating jobs for local people.  I couldn’t help thinking about Eskdale School at this point, a redundant building which would be ideal for both maritime and other training/further education/sixth form for the town – an existing educational building that can be repurposed, extended and developed rather than this controversial new build.  No other aspect of the project was discussed – the finances not stacking up, the controversial location that was causing much local controversy, the flood risks, the poor state of the harbour and so on. In the end, a vote was taken, and the motion wasn’t carried, i.e. the Town Council continues to support the project.

So, what thoughts did I go away from the meeting with? I observed what I would term a fair amount of dysfunction which does concerns me as a parish resident who pays a precept on top of my Council tax to fund the Council, and the Council spends tens of thousands of public money each year – or more accurately the people sitting around the table this evening spend the money. The public toilet issue seems to be not only an instance of poor financial management, but also one of poor administration – records not kept, or simply lost, and then you add to this a number of Councillors assimilating slowly, having poor recall with an unwillingness and lack of enthusiasm to fully investigate the problem at the Council level so as put them in good stead when progressing the issue with Danfo… 

Some Councillors come over as having limited expertise, and some Councillors weren’t even prepared for the meeting – the Town Clerk had to remind some on more than one occasion that information they were asking for was actually contained in documents distributed with the agenda. Some Councillors spoke with passion and authority – Cllrs Amanda Smith, Turner and Layman come to mind. Top marks to Cllr Layman who did her homework and gave a very detailed statement about the Maritime Hub, however I couldn’t help noticing that the responses were dominated by Cllrs Wild, Turner and Joe Redfern – all who sit on the Town Deal board and were therefore bound to speak against the motion with their conflict of interest in the matter. The maritime hub debate was steered away from the concerning issues of lack of commercial interest, concerns about public consultation and the unsuitability of the site, development of a registered cargo wharf and running costs not covered, and focused just on the hopes that it would revive the maritime industry and bring training and job opportunities to the area – a good thing of course, but surely all other issues must be taken into account when making an informed decision as to whether or not support the town Council should support a controversial project?

It is also clear that there are divisions within the Council – personal conflicts and disagreements were clearly illustrated by responses to questions and points put forward. How can a Town Council effectively serve the community, ensure consistency in service delivery when what I would term ‘the old guard’  town Councillors are wanting to limit the diversity in perspectives, ideas and knowledge of the ‘new blood’  town Councillors? It’s almost like a sense of ‘we have always done it this way, who are you to question it?’ Should a Council like this be spending large sums of public money, signing long-term contracts for services and giving opinions on major local issues when there are such divisions and also conflicts of interest? Such conflicts, in my experience, lead to poor decision-making and problems further down the line.

I really do feel that the Town Council needs to engage more with its residents – regular community events, newsletters and questionnaires distributed with doorstep magazines, web-based consultations, street stalls at local events, citizen juries and informal meetings where residents are invited to share their views and opinions. Just three minutes at the podium in these formal outdated meetings and the occasional community event in the park is simply not enough. With 19 Councillors and a staff team of six, I am sure much more can be done.  

As change will not be something we see any time soon, I really would urge residents to get involved in local issues and a good way they can do this is through Whitby Community Network, a dedicated group of local people who hold monthly meetings with invited guests and discuss topical local issues of concern in detail and seek solutions. Their website can be found at https://www.whitbycommunitynetwork.org.

Also, residents should find out who their Town Councillor is, too; make their views known, and ask for them to be shared and discussed at the next Town Council meeting – and then chase for feedback.

Change is desperately needed as local democracy in its present form is … well, undemocratic!

Yours, etc

Peter Cooper

Whitby