Not unreasonable to co-opt new member
PUBLISHED: 10:55 17 July 2008 | UPDATED: 15:49 11 May 2010
I WOULD like to set the record straight over my comments on the waste of money of holding a by-election and it making no difference to Royston Town Council by saying they were mine and mine alone. I did not make them as a representative of the Conservat
I WOULD like to set the record straight over my comments on the waste of money of holding a by-election and it making no difference to Royston Town Council by saying they were mine and mine alone.
I did not make them as a representative of the Conservative Party, but as a representative of Royston's Council Tax payers.
With only 21 months to run to the next full town council elections, and with 12 of the current members having being elected as Conservatives - mindful that £2,000 is a lot of taxpayers money - it seemed not unreasonable to allow the vacancy to be filled by co-option.
It should not be forgotten that the vacancy occurred through the death in office of a member. I consider that it would be a civilised thing to do in such events, to allow the party whose member died to fill the seat by co-option, particularly where the circumstances are such that an election would have no effect on the "political" balance of the council.
I am not aware that any of the writers of the three letters in last week's Crow have attended any meeting of the town council for many years.
They would have realised that all town councillors work together in a non-political manner to achieve the best for Royston.
Times have moved on and we have sensible and mature councillors who do not bring party politics into the council chamber.
We often do not agree among ourselves, but will always try to reach a common position that is best for Royston.
I, for one, would welcome independent members on the town council, and if you want to help the town, consider standing.
However, as a life-long believer in Conservative philosophy, and a member of the Conservative Party, I stood under the party's name; although it is well understood that when I don't agree with a matter before the town council, I vote as my conscience dictates.
As regards Hazel Lord's comments on the railway crossing, I don't think anybody has blocked the idea of a crossing. The practical reality of getting a crossing has proved difficult, but the town council has long supported a crossing, and is fully behind the present proposals.
If democracy is so important, why did neither the Labour nor Liberal Democrats fight the recent Haltemprice by-election?
Why do both parties support the further transfer of our democratic rights to an unelected bureaucracy in Brussels?
Democracy is alive in Royston, but I also believe in not wasting Council Taxpayers money on vanity politics.
As for Chris East's comments on what happened in the 1980s, it is now 2008, and much has changed, although it is still no business of a political party's association as to what an elected councillor says.
I suggest Mr East reads the oath of office a councillor has to follow and he will see that we take an oath to represent all the voters, not a political party or association.
CLLR ROD KENNEDY
Royston Heath Ward