|See 62 per cent rate rise|
|Councillor J E Brind
Chief Executive Attention: J Cranfield
via Members' Office (x 4340)
8 September 1987
I understand you have decided that Members have more time than Council Officers. I should like you to know that in addition to attending Special Group Meeting on Sunday at 11.30 a.m., I also have to go to meetings on Monday (2 meetings that night), a meeting during the day on Tuesday; I then have a meeting on Wednesday night and a meeting on Thursday night. In addition, I have quite a number of papers to read, I am on several outside bodies, for example the Greater London Night-time and Week-end Lorry Ban, London Planning Advisory Committee, London Borough Grants Scheme (I am only the Deputy on that one) , London Waste Regulation Authority, London Health Emergency (again deputy) , London Boroughs Ecology Committee, North London Waste Authority, Redbridge Conservation Areas Advisory Committee, Greater London North Eastern Valuation Panel (the Rates Tribunal), and I am also a Mental Health Manager for the Local District Health Authority.
I therefore humbly submit that the Officers are in a better position to return the mail I am being sent by the rates campaigners who are harassing me. However, if you do not agree that I have already enough to do without worrying about this harassment, perhaps you think I ought to come and dig your garden as well!
Councillor Jonathan Brind cc: Councillor N Gerrard
|Councillor N F Gerrard
via Members' Secretary Ext. 4340
21st September, 1987
You remember I wrote to Jim Cranfield and suggested that if he didn't think I had enough to do, I could come round and do some digging in his garden? Well, he has virtually taken me up on the offer! He has also given me lots of details about the harassment campaign, which i must say I found exceedingly useful. He then rounds this all off by saying, "I am most reluctant to involve staff in the time-consuming task of investigating the ownership of goods and returning them". Jolly good. *"
Mind you, he does say that I can always come and talk to him about it. Jolly decent. Can you please tell me by what authority this man orders me about? I would very much like to know which committee he has been to and under what power he makes this decision. I would also like to know how I can get it reversed.
It must be obvious that when you receive parcels, not all of them contain a return name and address. It must also be obvious that when you receive parcels, it is not always clear whether they are intended for you or not. In my instance, for example, I have had very important things returned to senders. This has been exceedingly embarrassing for me because the people who these items were returned to were not aware of the fact that I was a Councillor. This made it very difficult for me to explain.
It must also be obvious that when parcels are opened - parcels which may be exceedingly heavy - the postage becomes a matter which is down to the individual Councillor, It may be possible to claim for this but it seems to me a waste of time for me to get involved in paying postage when clearly it is a matter for the Council.
Finally, do you not think that it is about time we told some of the officers that the Council exists to serve the councillors, and the Councillors do not exist to serve the officers.
|COUNCILLOR J, E. BRIND
COUNCILLOR N. F. GERRARD
via Members' Secretary
28th September, 1987
I have just spoken to Ken Kilbey, the Committee Secretary for Land Strategy, and he tells me that the law is that it is the Secretariat who are responsible for minutes of commitees and not committee Chairs. In fact, Mr. Kilbey says that these minutes are only sent to Chairs through courtesy and we have no rignt to even see them before they are published in the committee minutes. My good friend, Dick Drew, used on occasions to totally re-write minutes. Was he a criminal or has the law changed?