Comments

DAMESATHOME@YAHOO.CO.UK
send the Dame your information, discretion assured.
Comments are welcome but do not necessarily reflect the view of the Dame.
Offensive/inappropriate comments will be deleted and the poster banned.

Tuesday, 22 February 2011

Keeping Costs Down doesnt Count

Merrick Cockell has often bemoaned the cost of supplying residents with information: after all does he not cynically proclaim 'Council business belongs out in the open, where residents can keep a close eye'.

In reality he prefers to give away as little info as possible to the lumpen proletariat of the Borough

Taking him at his word, and to save the costs Sir Cockle complains about, Justin Downes, local activist, wrote asking if the Leader would answer his very simple information request, Here it is below. No big deal you would think; after all we know that last year he took from taxpayers over £100k so are we not entitled to know what else is tucked away?

Mr Downes says if the Leader refuses his request he will be forced to put in an Freedom of Information. 


Dear Sir Merrick

We both recognise the cost to residents of servicing Freedom of Information requests: you yourself, have made this an issue in the past.

I have recently requested information pertaining to the Fellowship of the British American Project of yourself, Cllr Moylan and Cllr Lightfoot. This is information that could quite easily be supplied without recourse to an FOI- and ensuing cost of servicing. Why is it necessary to go through this rigmarole to
obtain what, on the face of it, is innocuous information?

I am also interested to know what other taxpayer funded posts you hold. Would you be good enough to supply this information without my needing to invoke further expense by making a request under the Freedom of Information Act?  I very much look forward to hearing from you.

Regards

Justin Downes


Mr Downes has asked Hornet to "please state that he is not the Hornet". The Dame knows that very well so is happy to reproduce his eloquent request.

Now you know. 

7 comments:

  1. So Hornet and Mr Downes are telling lies - whatever next - more drivel

    ReplyDelete
  2. 'Dame Hornet, I am happy to confirm that I am an avid fan and share many of your concerns about high-handed behaviour at the Council, but could you please state that I am not you and neither do I know you. Also for the record I met Justin Downes twice around three years ago to discuss charitable funding, and not since then. Current allegations are getting increasingly damaging and I have been forced to take legal advice. Sincerely, Cllr Emma Dent Coad.'

    Hornet is happy to confirm the above as true.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I bet they tell you there is nothing you can do Emma

    Your friend Guido

    ReplyDelete
  4. If you had any guts you would disclose your identity and allow my lawyers to send you an unpleasant missive. But of course, it is easy to descend to personal abuse hiding behind anonymity. Now your Leader is highly expert in the truth as we know so well from his recent excursions to New York gorging himself on $360 dinners with oddities he refuse to name. Very truthful chap: your Leader!
    JUSTIN DOWNES

    ReplyDelete
  5. so 01:16 is still accusing me of being the Hornet:this despite my and the Hornet denying it.Now we know that you are the Leader's sad sycophant,thus may have difficulty in the 'belief areas'
    Anyway,why not declare your identity so my solicitor can send you a short and sharp missive.Dame Hornet should delete anonymous and defamatory comment and of course,the driveler is just such a bore.

    ReplyDelete
  6. and that last comment was from me

    Justin Downes....

    ReplyDelete
  7. BTW a inside guy has told me that ERic of Pickle is trying to find a way of getting rid of La Cockle

    ReplyDelete

Comments are your responsibility. Anyone posting inappropriate comments shall have their comment removed and will be banned from posting in future. Your IP address may also be recorded and reported. Persistent abuse shall mean comments will be severely restricted in future.