BREAKING NEWS ... SOUTH TYNESIDE HOMES TO BE AWARDED TWO STARS
Exclusive news has reached the WebTeam that South Tyneside Homes the arms length management organisation (ALMO) set up by South Tyneside Council to oversee the borough’s social housing is to be awarded a two star rating.

Unconfirmed reports suggest that the Audit Commission who carried out a second inspection of South Tyneside Homes in March felt that sufficient improvements have been made since the previous failed inspection in 2007 to warrant South Tyneside Homes being ranked a two star organisation.

The Audit Commission are due to publish their findings shortly and if as predicated South Tyneside Homes is awarded two stars they will secure £167 million of additional funding which is desperately needed to bring all the borough’s social housing up to Decent Homes standard. 

Apparently senior staff from South Tyneside Homes, South Tyneside Council and a select group of senior Labour politicians including South Tyneside Homes board members, the leader of the council and his cabinet have already been told that South Tyneside Homes has received ‘unofficial’ notification of the award. However, it seems that the trade unions whose members have worked tirelessly towards achieving the two stars have still to be told, although it’s likely that certain union officials close to the labour group may well have been told but have probably been sworn to secrecy. 

Meanwhile the WebTeam caught up with the newly elected Independent Councillor Ahmed Khan. Ahmed seemed genuinely surprised by the news and said, “If what you are telling me is true it’s brilliant news for the thousands of council tenants in the borough, they can at last look forward to their homes being modernised and brought up to an acceptable standard”. Ahmed went on to say, “I would also like to pay tribute to the staff who have worked tirelessly over the last two years to achieve this goal, often in the face of criticism and under difficult circumstances”. 

However, Ahmed did offer a word of warning to those charged with delivering the Decent Homes programme. He said, “The real challenge of delivering the Decent Homes standard starts now. I hope for the sake of every council tenant that all the money intended to improve the borough’s council homes is actually spent were it was intended and not on bureacracy, highly paid managers and self promotion. It is now time to borough council tenants first”.

Ahmed also gave this promise, “I will be scrutinising very carefully how and where this money is spent and shall challenge any decisions made that effectively result in money being ‘siphoned off’ from the stakeholders of South Tyneside Homes, in other words the tenants”.

No one from the Labour group was prepared to comment officially, however, sources close to the leadership claim that senior labour politicians are delighted that there is at last some good news for labour especially given the drubbing they received in the recent local elections. 

The Webteam suspects that labour’s spin gurus may already have gone into overdrive to try spin the news to suit thier Labour’s political agenda.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE OLY AND GEORGE SHOW AWARDED WOODEN SPOON
Its official, Olive Elsom the wife of local political chameleon George Elsom is the inaugural winner of the virtual wooden spoon award. The award is given to the worst performing and least convincing candidate in the local elections.

Olive who stood in Beacon and Bents as an ‘Independent’ in what appeared to be a deliberate attempt to split the vote has been awarded this year’s gong for her ‘sterling performance’ in convincing the electorate to vote for her, or not as the case may be. Olive is now officially the worst performing and therefore by definition the least popular candidate of the 2008 local government elections.

Olive was only able to hoodwink (oops convince) 43 people that she was serious about representing them – yes she polled a miserable 43 votes; the lowest number of votes cast for any candidate in the entire borough of South Tyneside. Well there’s always 2010 Oly and George!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WEBTEAM TO OVERSEE SITE
In recent months www.southtynesidealliance.info has seen a dramatic increase in visitor numbers despite the fact that the site took a back seat during the election period due to other priorities namely winning seats from Labour.

Earlier this week a number of individuals interested in developing and maintianing the website met informally to discuss their ideas and to agree a strategy for the future direction of the site. The group agreed a 5 point plan which will take effect from 15th May 2008. A summary of the plan can be found below:

1. Ownership of the site is transferred to Skorpion Webservices. 

2. The group agreed that the site should for the time being remain as a website in the traditional sense of the word. It was decided not to develop an Alliance blog due to the problems associated with updating and maintaining a blog especially in relation to un-moderated comments.

3. A small team (known as the WebTeam) will oversee the development and maintaince of the website.

4. The WebTeam will have an editorial function and will ensure that the content of the site is updated regularly.

5. All Alliance members will be encouraged to contribute to the site. The WebTeam will also publish articles submitted by individual members of the Alliance on the basis that the article(s) submitted may not necessarily reflect the views of either the WebTeam, the Alliance or any individual(s) within it.

For the record the WebTeam is; Laura Khan, Steven Cairns and Dennis Alsop.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SOUTH TYNESIDE – NO LONGER A LABOUR STRONGHOLD
As predicated Labour suffered its worst election defeat in 40 years with hundreds of seats changing hands. The largest single benefactor across the country proved to be the Tories. Even in the North East the Tories made gains in Northumberland, North Tyneside and even Sunderland.

In South Tyneside events took a different turn with the rapidly growing Independent Alliance storming to victory in key seats across the borough. Labour lost a total of 4 seats to the Independent Alliance and came within 10 votes of losing a fifth. Interestingly all the other opposition parties failed to pick up a single seat between the. It seems that the Tories and Liberal Democrats failed to convince the people of South Tyneside that they can offer a genuine and credible alternative to Labour.

The Independent Alliance was particularly jubilant following a landmark victory over Labour after successfully defeating Paul Waggott the leader of South Tyneside Council. Independent candidate Geraldine White polled 1,212 votes in the hotly contested Fellgate and Hedworth ward in Jarrow, compared with 1,090 for the outgoing council leader. Conservative candidate Ian Armstrong polled just 209 votes.

Cllr. White, 64, said: "This is a big leap forward for the Independents in South Tyneside and this victory is extra special, because I have beaten the Labour leader of the council”.
Fellgate and Hedworth has now become an Independent stronghold following Cllr. White’s election, she now joins fellow Independent Cllrs. Harrison and Waddle in the council chamber.

Cllr. White believes that complacency and arrogance contributed to Mr Waggott being ousted. Cllr. White said: "I won because of the non-accountability of Labour in this area, and the fact that they have not properly represented the people of the ward”.

Labour suffered another loss in the Monkton ward, which John Hodgson took for the Independents following sterling work over the last 4 years. Cllr. Hodgson beat Labour’s Terry Fairley into second place by more than 100 votes. The Conservative candidate Marc Foster polled less than 200 votes.

Meanwhile in the South Shields constituency Labour also took a battering as they lost two seats to the Independent Alliance. The results have been hailed as the beginning of the end of Labour's stranglehold on power in the council chamber.

Ahmed Khan was triumphant in the Beacon and Bents ward, where he emerged with a majority of more than 430, after seeing off a challenge from Labour's former mayor and cabinet member John Wood. Cllr. Khan narrowly lost out to the Labour candidate in 2007 and subsequently launched a legal challenge which eventually led to the revelation that more than 1000 postal votes went uncounted and 18 ballot boxes containing them had ‘disappeared’.

A delighted Cllr. Khan said: "I feel like all the work and effort of the last two years has been worthwhile. The people of Beacon and Bents have put their faith in me and I aim to repay them through hard work, commitment and by ensuring their voice is heard."

Gordon Finch makes a swift return to the council chamber after stunning the newly crowned labour leader of the council Iain Malcolm by taking the first seat for the Independents in Horsley Hill ward. Cllr. Finch said: "I had a good feeling as I was going around the doors – people didn't want to vote Labour. This result clearly shows that Labour is a spent force and that local people have had enough of what Labour stands for”.

Another big winner was Cllr. Allen Branley who was re-elected in Westoe ward and romped home with a massive majority of more than 1200 votes.

Independent Alliance group leader Cllr. Jane Branley was in buoyant mood after her group’s positive showing.

Cllr. Branley, who helped form the Independent Alliance two years ago, with the aim of creating a real opposition to Labour in the borough said: “We want to talk to people, to actually listen to what they have to say. The Independents who have been elected are all positive people, and these results are a beacon of hope to the people of the borough”

Since the election it seems all Labour has managed to do is squabble over the scraps of Paul Waggott’s ‘empire’. In fact the priority for many seems to have been to ensure that they get a morsel or two. The annual carve up meeting of the Labour group should prove an interesting affair indeed.

Contrast this with the Independent Alliance, who within hours of the results being announced were out personally thanking people who had voted. They were also busy completing the formalities associated with being a councillor, organising surgeries, walkabouts and meetings and taking calls from the public regarding local issues and concerns. Perhaps this is way the people of South Tyneside voted in their thousands for a change?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE RESIDENTS OF SOUTH TYNESIDE

Dear Elector,

On Thursday 1st May, the future of the borough of South Tyneside will be decided. What that future looks like will be entirely up to you. What South Tyneside has at the moment is a council which has been dominated for decades by one-party politics. That political party is the Labour Party and this has resulted in a council which carries on as though the electorate does not exist.

For 49 weeks of the year, the people of this borough are ignored or derided as ‘lunatics’ by a group led by the man who uttered such a remark, Paul Waggott. For three weeks you will see some of that group scurrying about delivering leaflets in an attempt to persuade you to continue to re-elect them.

The Labour Group exists with a mere 16% of the electorate voting for it. The majority of people who vote in this borough do not vote Labour. Unfortunately, a vote for any of the other political parties is effectively a vote for Labour.

The Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives are not going to win any more seats; indeed the former party is likely to lose seats this year. It would not matter whether they gain or lose as in the Council Chamber, they consistently vote with the Labour Group. They do not oppose any of their actions, they do not propose any alternatives; they look very like members of the Labour Group!

For the past four years the Independent Alliance has been working to represent your views in the Council Chamber. We base our work on what you have told us. In all the wards where we have a campaign group, we regularly carry out surveys, we have held public meetings, we distribute newsletters publishing our activities and encouraging public response, and we have supported campaigns that you consider to be important. This has given us the confidence to say we have a good idea of what the electorate in this borough wants, and on this we have based our policies.

We are campaigning for;

• More effective financial management which stops such things as the loss of £10.9 million experienced two years ago, the necessity to rely upon the windfall from the Airport Authority to prop up the budget and the spending of at least £1 million a year on consultants

• A reduction in the spending on councillors themselves which amounts to at least £1.25 million per year

• Open and transparent decision-making in which the public are consulted before decisions are made and not afterwards

• Local people deciding local priorities – not national parties based in London with little or no understanding of our needs

• A borough which has the dynamic developments seen in Gateshead, Newcastle and Sunderland – and not four shops in the centre of South Shields, the roofs of which blow off in a breeze

• No further increases in the Council Tax, the Independent Alliance has not proposed anything other than this, regardless of Labour spin to the contrary

The Independent Alliance has candidates in 10 wards: Beacon & Bents, Bede, Biddick & All Saints, Boldon Colliery, Fellgate & Hedworth, Hebburn North, Hebburn South, Horsley Hill, Monkton and Westoe. In 2007 we won two of these seats and came second in eight others. In all of these wards, we hear the same refrain; ‘Well, I’m not voting Labour!’ To make this have any effect, we would ask you to seriously consider voting Independent – any other vote is a vote for Labour. Not voting is simply allowing the Labour Group to continue to ride roughshod over the people of this borough. Labour only need to lose eight seats to lose control of the council.

This is the year when that can be achieved. We would ask you to think and vote strategically; whatever your national affiliation, put changing the composition of the council first. Your vote can be the one to help achieve this.

Signed by

Coun Allen Branley, Coun Jane Branley, Coun Tom Defty, Gordon Finch, Coun Steve Harrison, John Hodgson, Ed Keller, Ahmed Khan, Laura Khan, Kevin Lees, Steve Pattison, Stephen Rhodes, Coun Victor Thompson, Coun George Waddle and Geraldine White.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

INDEPENDENT ALLIANCE MAKES HISTORY.
The Independent Alliance is delighted to endorse the candidacy of Laura Khan who is standing as an Independent candidate in Hebburn North in the May local election. Laura is a pupil in the sixth form of St Josephs School in Hebburn and at the tender age of 18 years makes history by becoming the youngest ever candidate in South Tyneside’s local elections and one of the youngest in Britain.

Laura’s interest in politics first began at the age of just 14. Laura joined the debating society of her school which went on to win the South Tyneside Final. The team went on to compete in the Northern Area Final at Durham University. Laura is also a member of the Young People’s Parliament. Laura regularly attends Council meetings including the Borough Council and Community Area Forums.

Laura stated, ‘I enjoy discussing issues that affect my life and the lives of those around me but I felt I needed to but words into action.’ She has been helping with the Independent Alliance campaign for two years and has canvassed and leafleted throughout the borough. Laura added, ‘I am convinced that local people are not best served by national party politics. It seems to me that political parties just tell their members what to do and this means that ordinary people do not get a chance to put their views across.’

Laura believes that young people should take a more active role in the decision making process especially as the decisions being made are likely to affect young people the most for generations to come. Laura explains, “Lets face it the average age of those making important decisions in South Tyneside on the peoples behalf is approaching 60 and, whilst I accept that experience is an important part of the decision making process I cannot help thinking that the decisions being made are short term and unlike the younger generation they are not going to have to live with the consequences of those decisions for decades to come.”

Laura went on to say, “It concerns me greatly that very little thought appears to go into the long term consequences of the decisions being made today it’s almost as though the future does not exist. Surely it’s time to think of the legacy we leave behind for future generations, before it’s too late?”

Laura has used her time in Hebburn to find out about the area as well as studying for her ‘A’ levels. Laura has been offered a place at Northumbria University (in Newcastle) to study law and is convinced that this will help her serve the people of Hebburn with honesty, integrity and commitment.

Cllr Jane Branley, Independent Alliance campaign organiser, said, ‘Laura is a very impressive young woman. She is bright, articulate and full of confidence; a credit to both her parents and St Josephs School. She is just the kind of person we need to see getting involved in local politics. I am sure she will make an excellent councillor.’

Laura has already started her campaign by writing her election address and attending meetings in the Hebburn North area to get a greater understanding of the issues she will need to tackle when elected. Cllr Steve Harrison of nearby ward , Fellgate & Hedworth, added, ‘Laura is a breath of fresh air, just the kind of person who will one day make Leader of the Council and that could be sooner rather than later when Councillor Waggott gets the boot!’

Cllr George Waddle also of Fellgate and Hedworth Ward who is acting as Laura’s Election agent added, “It’s an honour and a privilege to represent Laura and I am convinced that this mature, level headed young woman will serve the people of South Tyneside with distinction for years to come.”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LABOUR COUNCILLOR ARRESTED OVER RACE ROW 
A councillor has been suspended by local Labour Party chiefs, after being arrested on suspicion of racially aggravated disorder.

                                           
                                                     (Rob Dix Labour Councillor for Harton)

Rob Dix, who represents Harton Ward in South Shields, is believed to have been involved in an alleged row involving a traffic warden in South Shields town centre last week whilst delivering for his employer Parcelforce. Neil Fleming, spokesman for Labour North, confirmed that Councillor Dix, of Summerhill Road, South Shields had been suspended by the party, pending the outcome of the police investigation.

Parcelforce Worldwide, who Councillor Dix is understood to have been working for at the time, said a full internal investigation has been launched, but refused to say whether he had been suspended. Spokesperson Marie Gray said: "Parcelforce Worldwide has been informed of an incident involving a driver on Wednesday March 26.

Councillor Ed Malcolm, chief whip of the Labour group on South Tyneside Council and who is seeking re-election in Simonside and Rekendyke ward which includes a significant Yemeni Arab community, said: "We cannot make any comment until the police have concluded their inquires." A spokesman for Northumbria Police said: "We can confirm that a 52-year-old man was arrested at Chapter Row, South Shields on 26 March on suspicion of racially aggravated disorder.” He was released on police bail, and will return to the station on 7 May."

Councillor Dix who is currently the vice-chair of the council's Regeneration and Resources scrutiny committee and is also the subject of on-going police inquires following alleged remarks he made during his election campaign in 2007 was unavailable for comment.

UPDATE:
Although suspended from the Labour Party Rob Dix continues to attend council meetings and sits on the Labour benches!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO THOSE MISSING BALLOT BOXES?
The majority of people in South Tyneside are aware of the controversy surrounding 18 missing ballot boxes containing amongst other things more than 1000 rejected/spoilt postal votes and uncounted ballot papers. However, few people are aware of the apparent ‘fairy story’ surrounding the alleged loss of these important documents.

Much has been said about the fact that Ahmed Khan who brought the legal challenge on behalf of the people of South Tyneside ‘lost’ his case, nothing could be further from the truth. Ahmed could not proceed with a legal challenge on the grounds that the evidence he was seeking to examine (via a court order) had somehow been mysteriously ‘lost’ whilst in the possession of the council. The court dismissed the application on the grounds that the documents no longer existed. However, the judge in his summing up stated that the council’s explanation as to how they ‘lost’ the documents was “at best opaque”.

The Independent Alliance believes that the people of South Tyneside should be told the truth about what really happened and how the council tried to hide the fact that it ‘lost’ more than 1000 postal vote ballot papers for nearly 6 months. Over the coming days the majority of homes in South Tyneside will receive a leaflet entitled ELECTION FRAUD? Would You Believe It? This tells the amazing and unbelievable story of how our 4* council claim to have lost 18 ballot boxes … it makes incredible reading! Click here: ELECTION FRAUD? Would You Believe It? and decide for yourself.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 JUSTICE THE SOUTH TYNESIDE COUNCIL WAY!

Following the recent publication of an article in Shields Gazette earlier this week http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/Ballot-battle-leaves-a-32000.3727413.jp concerning Mr Ahmed Khan and the “Case of the Missing Ballot Boxes”, we are faced with a startling fact; despite being aware that the ballot boxes were missing on the 8th May 2007, South Tyneside Council represented by Brian T Scott, Returning Officer, allowed legal proceedings to continue unhindered until 22nd October 2007. Mr Khan is now being pursued legally for costs amounting to £30,000.00, nearly all of which were accrued after the ballot boxes were “lost”.

The fact that the ballot boxes went missing is an injustice, the fact that the Council wishes Mr Khan to pay for their error and neglect only exasperates the matter.

I have covered this issue many times, and on the 11th January I posted in detail on the contents of Mr Khan’s original electoral petition to the High Court, of which I had obtained a copy, see  http://thenorthernherald.blogspot.com/2008/01/humble-pie-not-on-menu.html I posted in detail on the contents of Mr Khan’s original electoral petition to the High Court, of which I had obtained a copy. However, a series of leaked documents have arrived on the news desk, shedding more light on the affair. The documents are original copies and none are embargoed. I have therefore decided to follow the same scenario as it did in earlier this month and outline them in the form of a rolling diary. This approach reveals what a travesty of justice the case is. It also shows that from 8th May 2007, the Council were involved in, endorsed and created, the biggest election conspiracy in modern politics within the Borough.

For background and additional information please refer to the post above.

1. 23rd May 2007:
Original election petition lodged in the High Court of Justice. Section 3 of the petition makes 6 allegations, 2 of which are:

a) That a serving councillor and candidate for election in the Horsley Hill Ward, Iain Malcolm, was observed to be in unauthorised possession of postal ballot papers on 26th April 2007.

b) That postal ballot papers were opened on 27th April 2007, contrary to indications provided on 17th April 2007 that postal ballot papers would be opened on 3rd May 2007 at 22.00 hours onwards

The petition was served upon Audrey McMillan, Brian T Scott (Returning Officer) and the Director of Public Prosecutions.

2. A court bundle submission supplied by Sharpe Pritchard, Solicitors and Parliamentary Agents, Chancery Lane London, reveals the following affidavit account of the Council’s version of events:

Russell Cochrane, Deputy Returning Officer 

* at the conclusion of the postal vote opening session on 4th May 2007, there were 54 ballot boxes of papers, 18 boxes of valid postal voting statements and 18 ballot boxes of rejected postal voting statements. 

* They were locked in the Reception Room, Town Hall, with computer equipment.

¨ Further 18 ballot boxes of valid postal vote ballot papers locked in the basement of the Town Hall with 105 ballot boxes from polling stations. 

* 4th May 2007 at 8.30am, Michael Outerson (Porter) asked to clear the Reception Room as it was needed for function. Valerie Stephenson (DRO) agreed. John Erskine (Porter) took 36 ballot boxes to the corridor next to Basement 34, where the other boxes were stored. 

* 8th May 2007: space was prepared in the basement rooms to create room for the ballot boxes. 

* 8th May 2007 at 4pm: Lindsay Dixon informed Valerie Stephenson that the ballot boxes containing the rejected postal voting statements and ballot papers were not in the corridor. Stephenson established the John Erskine was not on duty till the next day and would speak to him then. 

* 9th May 2007: Lindsay Dixon spoke to John Erskine who confirmed that he had put them in corridor BR34 

* A search ensued. No boxes were found. 

* 9th May 2007: Valerie Stephenson informed Russell Cochrane of events, who informed Brian T Scott. Irene Lucas (Chief Executive) and David Slater Executive Director Regeneration and Resources were briefed. 

* 10th May 2007: Scott and Cochrane conduct further search. CCTV footage of car park viewed by Council staff. 

* Porters interviewed with no new evidence emerging, though a casual porter did “skip” some black bags (skip emptied on 8th May 2007). 

* 11th May 2007: arrangements made to examine contents of skip. Not done till 23rd May as specialist equipment needed to open skip.

* Russell Cochrane spoke to the “casual porter” on at least 3 occasions and each time he denied he had done anything wrong. Yet in the Court bundle Cochrane makes the statement: “In the absence of certain knowledge and taking all possible factors into account, I can only conclude that in my opinion the papers in question were inadvertently removed from their ballot boxes as waste, bundled together with genuine election waste in plastic bags and disposed of in error by being placed in the waste skip in the car park. I am aware that this conflicts with the statement received from the casual porter, but to my mind this can be the only rational explanation”.

3. Email from Simon Paget-Brown, Mr Khan's legal representative to Ashley Badcock and Lucie Wibberley, Sharpe and Pritchard representatives:

“I have still to receive your evidence. The Court Order of 17th July 2007 stated that the same was to be received by 20th August 2007. Nearly tow months have passed. Unless your evidence is received by 4pm on Wednesday 17th October 2007, I will be forced to make an Application to Court seeking to strike out any late evidence. Please ensure that the same is received by return as without your evidence, preparation for the court hearing is being hampered”.

4. Letter from Sharpe Pritchard to Court Manager, Newcastle Crown Court re Rule 53 Application, asking that the matter be held in a closed court.

“We should draw your attention the fact that the Claimant’s application is made under Rule 53 of the Local Elections (Principal Areas) (England and Wales) Rules 2006 and that Rule 53(6) requires that the hearing of the application should be held otherwise than open court and we should be grateful if the matter and the evidence filed in the application could be listed/treated accordingly."

5. Letter from Sharpe Pritchard to Mr Khan’s legal team, 7th November 2007 attempting to gag Mr Khan and stop him speaking to the press:

“In the event that we are able to agree a settlement of both sets of proceedings, we cannot ignore the fact that the proceedings have resulted in significant local press and public interest. The Returning Officer to date has simply responded factually to press enquiries, without making any comment on the merits of the proceedings. The proceedings cannot now be withdrawn without any public comment by the Returning Officer. While the Returning Officer would be entitled to respond robustly to future press enquiries as to the merits the proceedings and the costs incurred in defending them, it would be preferable if all the parties were to agree a joint press statement along the following lines.
Please take your clients instructions.

“Election Petition Withdrawn”

Ahmed Khan with the consent of the Returning Officer and Audrey McMillan has agreed to withdraw his petition challenging the election in the Beacon and Bents Ward at the May 2007 local elections. An application has been made to the High Court for permission to withdraw the proceedings. The decision was made after considering the Returning Officer’s formal response to the proceedings. It was not considered right in the public interest to incur any further costs, which will be substantial.

This statement is issued jointly on behalf of Mr Khan, Mrs McMillan and the Returning Officer. The parties will not be making any further comment on the matter”.

6. In reply to an email from Ahmed Khan asking him to ensure that all ballot boxes under investigation were safe and secure, Brian T Scott on 14th May 2007 addressed the issue of the Petition and also replied re his obligations. Here is the exact text:

“I am aware of my duties with regard to the retention of documentation”

So there you have it in front of you, direct quotes, full reproductions of texts and a full account of the Council’s version of events. These documents have never been in the public domain in their entirety before, so you are the first to see them as originals.

But what does it all mean? Here are my comments and perspectives:

1) Deputy Returning Officers Submission: why were 18 boxes of ballot papers stored in an insecure corridor, and 123 ballot boxes of undisputed and accepted votes locked in a room? Surely, it should have been the other way round?

2) Why were CCTV tapes viewed as late as July/August?

3) Why, when the porters have denied any wrong doing on at least 3 occasions, does the Deputy Returning Officer still maintain that their involvement is the “only rational explanation”?

4) Despite the fact that the ballot boxes were known to be missing on 9th May 2007, why were Mr Khan and his legal team not updated about the situation? On 17th July 2007, 20th August 2007 and 17th October 2207, Sharpe Pritchard had “official” opportunities to release this information. They could have been honest about the situation anytime between 23rd May 2007 and 23rd October 2007. They deliberately chose not to.

5) With the knowledge that they had withheld evidence pertinent to the case, is it any wonder they chose to insist that the November case be heard behind closed doors with the public and press excluded?

6) The November attempt to “gag” Mr Khan is a travesty, and an indication of the arrogance and unaccountability which permeates South Tyneside Council. Sharpe Pritchard state “it was not considered right in the public interest to incur any further costs, which will be substantial”. This is an outright lie. If they had been concerned about public costs they would have been honest about the missing ballot boxes on the 9th May onwards.

7) Brain T Scott said on 14th May 2007 “I am aware of my duties with regard to the retention of documentation”. Clearly he was not, as the ballot boxes had been missing for a least 6 days. It is against the law to either loose or deliberately destroy ballot boxes and their contents, yet Mr Scott has not been disciplined or reprimanded for this clear breach which occurred under his supervision.

8) Finally, let’s once again return to the issue of the casual porter, an unnamed temporary employee, who by the grace of the fact that he put some black bags into a skip, is the Council’s convenient scapegoat for a disgraceful affair. However, here’s one more official document. In a letter (8th January 2008) to a member of the public, Brian T Scott outlined a response to a supplementary question ruled out of order at December’s Council meeting. The “casual” porter referred to is now described as such:

“The person concerned is not an agency worker. The Council regularly employs him as a porter on a casual basis as and when his services are required. He receives appropriate training that is necessary to do his role”

Clearly, the porters did not throw the ballot box contents or the boxes into a skip. In the council’s own words, they are sufficiently aware through adequate training what their duties entail, and it does include destroying election material either knowingly or otherwise.

If this were the plot for a novel, it would be unbelievable. The whole scenario is riddled with holes, cover up’s and deliberate conspiracies. The Council deliberately withheld evidence, forcing a member of the public to now face a financially crippling legal bill. What better way to get rid of a thorn in your side?

The Council are quoted as saying “Mr Khan could have avoided much of these costs had he withdrawn the proceedings earlier, as he was invited to do so”. Perhaps if the Council had not been involved in a conspiracy to hide the truth, then Mr Khan would have withdrawn his petition. However, they didn’t tell the truth, conspiring for 5 months to hide the facts, and conspiring for 5 months to allow legal bills to mount up.

This is not democracy and this is not justice.

PLEASE NOTE:
The article above appears on http://thenorthernherald.blogspot.com and has been reproduced in it’s interiority with the permission of author.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ALLIANCE TO BOYCOTT COUNCIL MEETINGS
The Independent Alliance called for an Extraordinary Meeting of the Council to allow the public to ask questions and to present two notices of motions. At the last Council meeting the public were outraged to find that their questions were talked out by questions presented by members of the Labour Party.

Cllr Jane Branley said, ‘We requested another Extraordinary meeting because we consider that the way the Labour leadership is dealing with the public is unacceptable. We want them to be able to get answers to their questions. The Extraordinary meeting was also to consider a resolution which called for the Leader of the Council, Cllr Paul Waggott to resign. Cllr Steve Harrison said, ‘It is disgraceful that the man who called the public lunatics and asked the officers to find ways to stop them asking questions should be supposedly leading the Council.’ He is a disgrace.’

The other notice of motion was calling for the Council to rescind the bill for nearly £30,000 presented to Mr Khan who tried to examine rejected postal votes only to discover that they had all been ‘lost’. This bill reflects the legal costs of the Council. Cllr Branley stated, ‘The Council is effectively trying to bankrupt Mr Khan for daring to take legitimate legal action.’

However the Independent Alliance were alarmed to discover that none of the questions from the public are being allowed and the resolution about the legal costs has also been rejected. Cllr Branley commented angrily, ‘If the public cannot ask questions and the councillors cannot debate public issues what is the point of any one attending these farcical meetings? They are sham democracy and the Labour leadership is constantly conniving to keep things behind closed doors and out of the public domain.’

The Independent Alliance will be boycotting the meeting on Friday as a demonstration of their support of the public’s right to know what the Council wants to keep out of the public eye.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ALLIANCE CALLS AN EXTRAORDINARY MEETING OF THE COUNCIL ON THURS 24th JANUARY Under the constitution of South Tyneside Council it is possible for five elected members of the Council to request that the Mayor call an Extraordinary Meeting of the Council. Such a request was recently been made by the Leader of the Independent Group Cllr Jane Branley. Cllr Branley stated, ‘The Labour Group is doing everything allowed in the constitution to prevent the answering of questions and a full debate on motions concerning major issues in the borough.’

At the last full meeting the Labour councillors nominated to answer the sixteen questions submitted by members of the public used the time to make false personal accusations against Independent councillors, told the members of the public the were wasting tax payers money and suggested that the public should go to the library to find out what they wanted to know. What they did not do was answer the questions.

Cllr Branley commented, ‘We tried to have a major debate on the perilous position of South Tyneside Homes and all the Labour Group could do was shout comments suggesting I was a fascist or that I never attend meetings. Both are patently untrue but it was interesting that this was all they could do in the defence of South Tyneside Homes.’

The Alliance are concerned that the Labour Group does not want to discuss anything of interest to the people of the borough in public. Cllr Branley said, ‘We are determined to hold them to account and this is what this Extraordinary Meeting of the Council will attempt to do.’

The Extraordinary Meeting will be held in the Council Chamber at the Town Hall on Thursday 24th January and will commence at 2.30pm.

The meeting is open to the public.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ROBIN COOMBES STANDS AGAIN
The Alliance are delighted to announce that Robin Coombes will be standing in Whiteleas as the Independent candidate in the forthcoming local elections in May.

Robin who is well known in Whiteleas has been overwhelmed by the public's support and said, “so many people have asked me if I would stand again and to be frank how can I let all those people who put their trust in me at previous elections down?” Robin feels that with such public support behind him the people of Whiteleas will finally get a truly Independent voice to represent them.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

COUNCIL COVER-UP OVER MISSING BALLOT BOXES 
After the local election in May 2007 the Independent candidate for Beacon & Bents Ahmed Khan launched a Petition to the High Court challenging the result. Mr. Khan lost by a mere 30 votes and was concerned that the 80 rejected postal votes were not available for scrutiny at the count. Mr. Khan said, ‘I felt that it was very important to see those rejected ballot papers in the same way as candidates see spoilt ballot papers at the count. It could have been that they had been rejected for trivial reasons like a small mistake in someone’s date of birth.’ At the count a request for a recount was turned down by the returning officer which made Mr. Khan even more determined to resort to the law to investigate the rejected votes.

After six months of constant delays on the part of South Tyneside Council the Petition was due to be heard on Monday 12th November. Cllr. Jane Branley, Leader of the Independents, is outraged by the delays, ‘This would appear to have been a tactic to drag out the process for as long as possible in order to put Mr. Khan to ever increasing expense both in terms of time and money. The Council has also had the cheek to demand that any enquiry takes place behind closed doors. What are they trying to stop the people of South Tyneside finding out?’

The Council have been employing one of the more expensive firms of barristers to handle their case and yet they were unable to present their evidence which would have been available on May 8th until late October. The content of this evidence is such that Mr. Khan is now withdrawing his petition. He stated, ‘What we have found out makes it impossible to go ahead with the petition. What we will be doing instead is asking the police to investigate possible criminal activities associated with the local election.’

The Chief Constable of Northumbria Police has been contacted by Cllr Branley. ‘This is no longer an issue focusing only on the election in Beacon & Bents. It concerns possible election fraud throughout the borough. It is essential that the people know what has gone on and I am determined that South Tyneside Council will not get away with covering this up. Every elector should be confident that their vote will be counted.’

The Independent group are also investigating other allegations of impropriety associated with the local election and are working with the Electoral Commission and the Standards Board.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------