Today I visited two places that have over the last few years difficult areas for the Liberal Democrats Epping and Brentwood.

 I knocked on doors in Theydon Bois for our candidate there and then went delivering in Brentwood south in the afternoon.  I found that we have gained new activists and were invigorated.  I found that in Brentwood they need to updater their literature over the next year if they are to go onto bigger and better things and to challenge the Tory run council seriously.

It is very rare to have the Local Government Ombudsman to give a verdict of maladministration on a council. 

Forest Heath has been the subject of this finding.   The Conservative group at last night’s meeting seemed to have great difficulty in accepting the ruling of the ombudsman.  Several suggested delay, the leader said with a heavy heart etc etc.

The ‘Independents’ were keen to review the evidence as presented and put that point of view in the debate.

 I strongly believe the Ombudsman is there to protect the public and to make sure that Councillors and the Council always act with the utmost integrity.    The Ombudsman found that he Council in this case had not and I welcomed the decision and the fact that it was accepted if only by 9 votes to 6.

I went campaigning with two old friends today,  I went delivering with Robin Whitmore, our excellent candidate for Westgate in the morning.  It was very cool I must say  but Robin is battling hard against a tough Labour opponent.  

I then went down to Thurrock and went campaigning with Earnshaw Palmer in Chafford Hundred.  In the inclement weather door knocking was difficult but he seemed to have a reasonable response, I fear not good enough to win though.

The residents of Red Lodge seem to have  had to wait an interminable time for any amenities to be  provided for them as the village expands.   The continual building and the dust and fumes that it creates   for the existing residents without any extra amenity must be a real drag.

Everything seems to happen at a snail’s pace.  One of the Conservative Councillors for the ward never show’s up for meetings.  I think the residents of Red Lodge could do with better representation!

We had our great debate about the future of local Government in Forest Heath on Wednesday night.  The Tory group looked and acted very subdued on it all.   they have been told by the Government that they can’t put in a proposal for the staus quo,  so they haven’t.    60% of residents  say they would like the system to stay as it is and it is ignored.  Very few contributions of worth except for my colleague Andrew Appleby, who pushed his solution for a single unitary in Suffolk with a well thought out piece despite my disagreement with his conclusion.

My view is when this Government says that you can’t do something then this is the moment to start campaigning for it.  I don’t believe any of the options on offer are great solutions with the emasculation of local government that has happened over the last 25 years.  Until we are offered real local government where people have a real say in decisions affecting their lives then I can’t see why this type of change has to be acquiesed in.

 I would like to hear your views.

Well the questions were asnswered but my colleague Ian  Radford wasn’t allowed to ask them at Council.  The chair  tried to talk to Ian before the meeting and not make a fuss.  

When Ian tried to speak he was prevented from raising the key points. 

The standing orders of the council are being undermined by a rather one sided interpretation of the rules methinks.   The end result is that the council taxpayer is not served well.

The Lib Dem group on Forest Heath tried to put a stop on the £3.2 million refurbishment of the council offices.   The Tory group voted it through even though nobody knows whether there will be  a council to have offices in this time next year.

 A delay would have meant that we didn’t waste council taxpayers money on a building that was defunct.

Since then that vote it has transpired that we didn’t have all the facts before us.  As a result Lib Dem Cllr Ian Radford has tabled the following questions:

1        From what date in February has the Office Refurbishment Project been without a project manager?

2        Why did Appendix B to Report COU8/351 dated 5^th March 2008 show the existence of a project manager when this was not the case? 

3.How long do you anticipate it will take to get a project manager in place and at what estimated cost?

4        When is the earliest date by which the project board now expect to be able to bring to council a fully costed specification of the project bearing in mind that Report COU8/351 presented to Council on 5^th March 2008 identified the 16^th July 2008 as the target date? 

5        What is the expected cost in terms of bringing that specification to Council, both in terms of money spent and in terms of officer time?

6        How much has been spent so far on the project, outside consultants and officer time, including communication costs?

7        If the project could fails a Value for Money assessment when fully costed and specified because of the Boundary Committee’s deliberations, will any costs incurred have to be treated as a revenue cost and therefore have a direct effect on council tax payers?

8        Why was the Project Board meeting scheduled for 26^th February deemed ‘not required’ when it appears a major change in the management of the project was happening?

9        Why was any or all of this information  not made available to full council on 5^th March 2008, particularly as this information would have been valuable when considering the amendment proposed that the refurbishment project be put on hold for 6 months until a better understanding of the future use of the building is established, and that full costings of the essential repair works be obtained?

It will be interesting to see the answers we get to these questions.