Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Biggles Shot Down By Standards Committee

Word on the island grapevine is that Tory Cllr/Dr Moores has had his complaint against Labour Cllr/Sherriffof Nottingham turned down by the standards people. The complaint, regarding some kind of blog-related hissy fit between Thanet Council's two political heavyweights, had already been rejected once. Now it's been rejected again on appeal.

Quite how that affects Westgate-based, banner-tugging Dr Biggles' libel case against The Sherriff, lord knows. (I would have said 'law lord', but we don't have any of those these days, do we?) As previously reported, Cllr Nottingham has obtained the services of top London libel lawyers Carter Ruck to defend himself against cabinet member Dr M's accusations.

Oh well. At least the news is an excuse to use an amusing photo which was sent to me by top Thanetian author Iain Aitch!


Lucy Mail said...

Let he or she who has never had a complaint turned down by the 'standards' commission, on appeal, cast the first stone!

Anonymous said...

Who was it who fiddled whilst Rome burned? Here we have Councillors who are supposed to be doing something to promote Thanet, behaving like a couple of overgrown schoolchildren. Where do they get the time to do all of this? Fire the pair of them and get some peole in who who are focussed on the right things.

Mother Bailes said...

Biggles: "Dam Busted"

puffinman said...

Out soon...."Biggles Ego Dented"

Anonymous said...

I don't think it is a case of two cllrs behaving like school children. Neither is it a case of this being a waste of valuable time which could be better used for Thanet's benefit.

Mark was challenged. He had to defend himself.

But what does that imply ?

Simon would need to prove the requirements for a libel action. Things like he has a reputation to lose which was at threat by what was allegedly written etc.

Political judgment. Integrity ?

It would be impossible, IMO, to argue the case without the issue of being judged by the company you keep.

And fact is Thanet tories do not have to seek troubles out do they ?

Cyril Hoser's legacy alive and well ?

And a recent arrest of a North Thanet former tory Cllr for allegedly downloading large amounts of child porn in the worst category.

I think about ten years ago it was a Labour Cllr Roy Ford (stand to be corrected) a school governor who moved at Margate Charter Trustees to end public fuinding of Thanet's own Lads Army ... Kent Adventure Training Corps.

The funding was ended and in 2003 two of these private lads' armies in Kent lost their KCC Youth Group affiliation status.

Which Thanet tories on Margate Charter Trustees voted to try to keep public funding of Thanet's own pseudo military cadet group ? My information is it was Watt Ruffell and Daly (He recently arrested see above)

Not long before that Charter Trustee meeting Mrs Mortlock had successfully sued Vuice Chair North Thanet tories, George Maison, for libel. Two tory cllrs gave evidence in Aldwych High Court "For" ex tory Cllr Maison (A former adult leader of Kent Adventure Training Corps). DOLDING and HAYTON.

Mrs Mortlock (not me LM) tried to make a crime complaint to POlice alleging perjury by MAISON and HAYTON.

For reasons that have not yet emerged the crime complaint was not recorded.

Mrs Mortlock (not me LM) raised inquiry by the United Grand Lodge of England (Freemasonry). Obviously Masons have every right to privately regulate their own organisation and whatever was done it is their choice whether to publish it.

How would Simon argue his standing and reputation without being judged by the political company he chooses to keep (and issues arising thereform he chooses to avoid .. like the terrorist Jean Bultot and his access to Deal Royal Marines Barracks which one would think an ex RM officer would feel duty bound to pursue ?)

I wonder if Thanet's tories are queuing up to give evidence for Simon ? It may not be too late to give one some scorched fingers over his High Court evidence in 98.

And if, for example, Bill Hayton were to take the stand. EKMT trustee. Why was it only after I reported it to Charity Commission that the £267,000 Butler legacy appeared (three years late ?) on EKMT accounts to Charity Commission.

You bloggers can whinge about not having a museum. But there are unanswered questions. And a High Court witness box is a pretty good place to seek answers.

There are North Thanet tory names on range records for the now closed (Irresponsible operation) 6th Thanet Gun Range. It seemed circumspect to send Mark copies.

Could they be made subject of subpoena.

My money would be on Simon's tory colleagues advising him he flexed his muscles but best avoid the arena. I wait with interest.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

There is a glitchie submitting comments ECR. Sorry about that. It came up error number twice. Now I notice that both comments did upload after all.

Lucy Mail said...

Unusual for you to be concerned about the comments page becoming overly long, nutball!
Though not unusual that you ignore the point and bang on and on about your own tired and uninteresting bilge.
I apologise if you did touch upon on any pertinent point amongst your tirade, but there's no way I was going to spend half the morning actually reading it.

Anonymous said...

Dear Lucy

There is a lot of truth in RC's statements. The Police have covered up some things on this Island and yes there has been a great deal of political involvement.

Why do you think some developers have peppercorn rents and look at the cost of a car park in Ramsgate - and unfortunately all the big items that really cost us the tax payer are down to the Tories?

Anyone wants to take me on in the Blue camp I will gladly accept you offer?

Bluenote keep out of this will lose!!!

Malcolm (the real one)

Lucy Mail said...

Mal - from French, meaning bad.
Cum - Lord knows where that came from, but it means spunk.

Just trying to make you seem a little more interesting there, fella.

Anonymous said...

Good news for Thanet. Councillors will no longer be able to waste our money in this way. The coalition goverment is scrapping the Public Statndards Committee. But what will replace it is still to be decided> maybe councillors will be able to complain to a TDC committee, now that would be a cosy arrangement.

Anonymous said...


Mast as from a ship and bates being the their a similarity there to certain activities in Thanet I think there is?

Mal (the slayer)

Bluenote said...

Wow, the drivel that stems from Retired goes on unabated. Whatever the subject matter he returns to his hate campaign against the Kent Adventure Training Cadets and throws around his, as yet unproven, allegations of paedophillia.

Returning to the actual subject, I agree with the commentator who suggests that our elected representatives would be better employed furthering the interests of Thanet than engaging in name calling and litigation.

Mind you, it is all a political game, exposed for the fraud that it really is by the rapid change of stance of members of the new coalition government. Typically, a VAT increase was good to oppose when campainging but becomes a necessity when faced with the responsibility of government.

Anonymous said...

Goodness, I feel myself agreeing with Bluenote! Actually we have found quite a bit of common ground in commenting on the behaviours of the "political class", drawn from whichever Party, and the media.

What I find really annoying is how politicians treat the electorate like children or, worse, take us for fools. They try to pass off their changes of principle or policy, or even their changes of Party, as something respectable, when frequently the rationale is wholly doubtful. They present false explanations which they know everyone can see through, yet they persist with them nonetheless. For example announcing they will not be standing for election "for family reasons" when there is some serious flack circulating around them, then, when the flack clears, announcing that they will be standing after all - without explaining why the change. It is the "up yours, I can get away with it" mentality. Sadly they usually do.

Peter Checksfield said...

Why don't they just settle their differences over a cup of tea or a naked wrestle or something?

Bluenote said...

Glad to have some accord with someone at last. Whilst I admit to being anti-left in stance I do find the all round hypocrisy of the political game hard to stomache at times.

Seems almost inevitable now, after each general election, that some prominent member of whichever new government will announce he is leaving the wife who just days before was out campaigning with him arm in arm. Diehard worker's champions accept peerages, having said they never would, and many of our new clean MPs are already whingeing about the harsh expenses regime. Shame at what went on before being quickly forgotten.

OK, they are not all bad but they are not all good either. Unfortunately, party dogma makes some, a bit like our litigating councillors, see no evil in their own ranks and no good in any other.

Anonymous said...

Scrap the Standards Committee. Install a cage in Cecil Square and let them fight it out. Two men (or women) enter. One man (or woman) leaves. I appreciate that this approach to conflict resolution might favour the pugnacious Ezekiels of this world but I don't care as long as I don't have to pay for them. The good thing is there's always someone harder than you and, sooner or later, the pugnacious one would get his (or her) comeuppance.