EDITOR – As you are aware there were two vacancies on the town council (Market Rasen) and five applications.
Those applying each submitted a presentation to the sitting councillors and two were selected for membership of the town council by those councillors in attendance.
This means of selection is totally undemocratic and reeks of manipulation, cronyism and collusion.
I would like to make the population of Market Rasen aware that this is not the preferred method of selecting those persons who apply for membership of the town council and where there is more than one candidate for any position.
Without doubt the council would have advised you of this procedure when they announced that this matter was to be addressed although, in similarity with most insurance policies, this would be found in the small print.
The procedure currently in place ensures that if a document requesting an election is submitted to West Lindsey District Council and is signed by ten members of the electorate, then the town council is bound to hold an election to give us all the opportunity to select a Councillor of our choice.
One would have thought that any group, such as the town council, seeking transparency, would have relished the opportunity to open the selection process to the local populace, but they appear to have been strangely reticent in this respect.
One candidate I have been in contact with was totally unaware that the opportunity to appeal to the electorate was an option.
This is not a personal matter based on preference for any particular candidate as I have absolutely no contentious issues with those selected, although I remain disgusted by the process that allowed them to be selected as town council members.
However, the town council have taken obscene advantage of a system which has allowed them to ensure that the members they have selected fit the preferred mould and who are unlikely to rock the boat by resistance to and with unwanted suggestions as to how to improve on their current level of performance.
If our town council had a shred of conscience, and certainly in the knowledge that the electorate have been disadvantaged by their means of selecting their latest members, they would resign en masse and give the electorate a genuine opportunity to select who should be working on their behalf.
I urge them to do so – but am not holding my breath. However, if the two newly selected councillors would like to give credence to their selection I would urge them to resign independently in order to give the local electorate the election to which they are most certainly entitled.
NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED