Why did Fenland conduct committee chairman ignore opinions of members who didn’t have voting rights?
I was interested to read your article headed “Councillors’ ‘warning off’ complaint is upheld” (April 4).
I am surprised by the omission from your report that Fenland District Council’s conduct committee actually has six members and the original poll of opinions resulted in 4:2 rejecting the claim.
Unfortunately two of the members were non-voting which resulted in a 2:2 split. Cllr Yeulett then exercised his casting vote but ignored the opinion of the majority of the committee by voting to uphold the charge.
Surely an odd decision and one that should result in Cllr Yeulett reporting himself to his own committee?
A great (fictional) detective uses the test ‘who benefits’ to help to decide guilt.
You may also want to watch:
If that logic had been applied here, then Councillor Steve Emery would have been clearly seen as innocent having had no means whatsoever to benefit from decisions of Manea Parish Council during his entire 30 years of service to Manea as a councillor.
Finally, the photograph you used of Cllr Emery was taken at the opening of the long-awaited improved Manea rail service in January.
- 1 Caravan wedged under Fens rail bridge
- 2 Burglars led police to £170,000 cannabis factory
- 3 7 questions that could decide if you truly are from the Fens
- 4 HGV crashes into car damaged in earlier incident
- 5 Bid to ban ex- mayor running pub “a joke” says cabinet member
- 6 Wisbech to March light rail signalled in ‘levelling up’ bid by Mayor
- 7 Our archives reveal the 'crackpot' idea to re-open disused rail lines
- 8 Jaw-dropping stunts and traditional circus elements combine in unmissable show
- 9 See photos of the intricate final stages of the Huntingdon Viaduct removal
- 10 Man, 20, rapes woman as she slept, court told
As ever, the press builds ‘em up, then knocks ‘em down.