Caistor Council - Why wait for nine months?

0
Have your say

May I have the opportunity to respond to your article in the Rasen Mail dated 18th February relating to the disqualification of Caistor Cllr Galligan, the question must be asked, why did it take the council 9 months to respond to the absent member when the Local Government Act 1972 clearly states and I quote “ the office falls vacant without further ado after a member is absent for 6 months”.

I found the response to my letter on the subject of absentee councillors at the last council meeting most strange, Cllr Caine declared “ a lot of people ( I assume he means councillors ) attend meetings in the day, it is not just, I am a councillor tonight “ how so very bizarre and unfounded that statement is, I invite members of the public to read the council minutes over the last year and I can assure them that the overwhelming majority of councillors have never attended any meetings other than the monthly council meetings.

Cllr Savage declared “ sometimes it is more a case of quality rather than quantity, it is for the electorate to decide “ what a very strange comment from a retired solicitor, does she mean that she doesn’t need to attend many meetings because she adds quality to the few meetings she does attend!

Cllr Sandham said that he has been working on projects to bring people into the town, I for one support his endeavour as a businessman but it has no connection with his being a councillor or failing to attend meetings.

Cllr Barkers comments about councillors not being paid is interesting, would she expect better attendance if they did receive payment ?

I am of the opinion that It is important for the public to realise that being a councillor is not for self gratification, it is to help and serve the community and be prepared to commit considerable time on a voluntary bases.

Michael Stockwood

Caistor