What's happened with the Standards case with councillor Wheeldon? has it all happened? Is she still on the council? was she at the town council and the planning committee of the district last week? is there going to be a report abt it?
--
Posted by Anonymous to swanage view at 2/27/2006 10:26:36 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
36 comments:
The Standards Board for England concluded their hearing yesterday, and found Mrs Wheeldon guilty of the charges against her: namely use of foul language and misconduct in not declaring a personal interest in official matters.
She has been disqualified for a year, from both District and Town Councils, with immediate effect.
Will there be a report? No doubt there will be Tory squeals that this is a travesty of justice, and the Advertiser probably won't even mention it!
Mrs J Wheeldon.
A breath of fresh air. Did she swear at someone? Tough! have they not heard swear words before? and are they that sensitive that it hurt them?
Come off it, In my humble opinion, with this action, surely you make yourselves a laughing stock?
We need a few souls around that will call a spade a spade, and not a flaming shovel!
OK she should not have done it ...But where for heavens sake is a bit of common sense.
Brian Guy
Perhaps it was the "not declaring a personal interest in official matters" which was the cause of the suspension? Isnt that a form or fraud?
People elected to public office and entrusted to represent us are supposed to follow certain basic standards of behaviour. Amongst other things:
They are not allowed to abuse people.
They are not allowed to bully people.
They are not allowed to threaten people.
They are not allowed to use their position and inside knowledge to gain advantage over others.
It is recognition of the failure to follow these basic but essential courtesies and procedures that has led to the immediate disqualificatoon of this person from office.
She had very nearly become an unperson so far as the PDC website is concerned. She has gone from the list of councillors and a search for her name revealed only one page, which was somehow missed, showing her name in a list of councillors responsibilities.
Quite Orwellian really.
Given the list of unacceptable behaviours for a person holding public office, I can think of another Swanage councillor who should be subject to the same treatment as Mrs Wheeldon.
How does this process work?
See www.standardsboard.co.uk
It looks like the rot has set in, will the council now reveal some of the secrets its been keeping,"municipal" ect, ect, its time to cast aside the deadwood,sycophants,a--- kissers,and the people who supposedly have the best interests of the town at heart,and lets get rid of the crap that is bringing this town down.
I am assuming the above "Anonymous" will be standing for office, as well as taking the easy option to criticise on this site.
there is a really appallng story in the echo tonight about this. no mention of the miscondct of bullyng to remove mention of where she lvies from a report. did the councl write it themslves? what kind of newspaper is this.
It would not surprise me if the Echo was simply echoing a PDC press release as thats what they always do. Their local weekly organ, the Advertiser, is even worse. When did we last see a piece of investigative journalism in there? A couple of years ago when there was an auditors report roundly criticising PDC's total lack of vision but all we saw in the local press was a regurgitation of Bill Trite's press release saying they had been praised for being good at avoiding being cheated by benefit fraudsters.
Conclusion: a free press won't bite the hand that feeds it press releases.
I can't find any press release abt Mrs Wheeldon's disqualification on the PDC website. Itwould be entirely inappropriate fr any council press release to quote her the way the Echo does after she has been disqualifd from office. But typical isnt it of Trite to be attacking the organisation f the hearing. He says it was shambolic. isnt it about time he was asked and answered the question of why the counci of whch he is the leader and paid for that allowed her to insult and bully people. the council is shambolc rathr the standds board. Trite has a lot to answr and shld be held to accnt. its abt time the chickens came home.
Sorry. it was she who actually is said by the echo to have called the standards board hearing shambolic and a kangeroo court. Trite called it an appallingly conducted mockery of a fair hearing, which of course more or less means shambolic. and she admits to swearing a member of staff in a moment of stress. hohum. i've heard her talking & it sounds from that she's often very stressed........
WHO,S NEXT BILL TRIPE,WINDY MILLER,NICK LEESON, CHICKENS COMING HOME TO ROAST?
Could anon of 10.28 please tell us what on earth he is talking about.
While I understand the need for some to post without giving your name. To make your argument more convincing, it would be better if we knew who you are.
Me? I'm a good looking! But elderly local. Big grin!
Brian Guy.
How the Echo ran the story...
(2 March 2006)
FORMER MAYOR 'BREACHED CODE'
by Andy Davey
A POPULAR Swanage politician with nearly 20 years' experience has been disqualified from office for a year for swearing at a council officer.
A year ago, Purbeck district councillor Julia Wheeldon was the subject of a complaint from fellow councillors for allegedly swearing at the council's engineer, Mike Goater, in 2003.
The tirade was said to have come when Cllr Wheeldon was criticising a report into a coastal landslip at Durlston Bay cliffs in 2000.
The landslip threatened the Purbeck Heights and Hillcrest blocks of flats, but the report prepared by experts suggested it also threatened the Durlston Cliff flats, where she lives.
Now a tribunal has found the former mayor of Swanage in breach of the district council's code of conduct on four counts, including "not treating others with respect".
She was disqualified by the Adjudication Panel for England - the same organisation which controversially suspended London mayor Ken Livingstone for likening a reporter to a Nazi concentration camp guard.
Cllr Wheeldon called the tribunal a "kangaroo court" and claimed the proceedings were conducted in a "shambolic fashion".
Unless she wins an appeal, a by-election will be called for her Swanage South seat and she will not be able to stand.
But she said the outcome of the tribunal had convinced her not to run in the May 2007 council elections anyway.
"Unfortunately I am a larger than life character and I don't suffer fools gladly," Cllr Wheeldon, who is chairman of the district's planning board, said.
"I admit I did swear at an officer in a moment of stress.
"I was trying to make sure by questioning what was happening that the right procedures were carried out."
Purbeck District Council is required to adopt a Code of Conduct that sets out rules governing the behaviour of its members, and any member alleged to have breached the code is investigated by the Standards Board for England.
Leader of the district council Bill Trite pledged to write a letter of complaint to the Adjudication Panel of England, which oversaw the tribunal.
"I have been present at many enquiries and investigations, but never such an appallingly conducted mockery of a fair hearing as this."
A spokesman for the Adjudication Panel of England said: "We don't want to make a comment."
First published: March 2, 2006
Standards Board hearing at Purbeck House Hotel, 27 February 2006
These are notes of and relating to the conclusion of the recent hearing. If you have any reason to believe anything is inaccurate, please make it known by adding a comment.
Preamble.
All interviews were completed on the first day of the hearing on November 8 th 2005. Mike Goater, an officer of Purbeck District Council, spoke of contacts with Councillor Wheeldon about a report to the Council by the independent consultants, High Point Rendel (HPR). The report concerned the causes of the landslip at Pinecliff Walk into Durlston Bay in December 2000. Councillor Wheeldon came to see him in his office on February 11 th 2003 in an angry mood. She is said to have asked him to use his influence to get all references to the Durlston Cliff flats and their property values removed from the HPR report and also to have directed foul language at him. On a separate occasion on August 18 th 2003 she was alleged to have challenged Mr Goater and Mr Garwood, another officer, after a meeting at Swanage Town Hall. She again asked for a draft of the HPR report to be altered and again directed foul language at the Officers. Councillor Wheeldon accepted using colourful, but not foul, language at the first meeting. However, she said that she was there as a resident and not as a councillor. With regard to the second meeting, she denied that it ever took place.
Councillor Wheeldon was also alleged to have used foul language at a meeting with the Belle Vue Landslip Action Group on August 19 th 2003. The Group sought the meeting with her because they were trying to get something done about the landslip near their flats, which are adjacent to Durlston Cliff flats, after nearly three years. Councillor Wheeldon denied using foul language and that she met the group in her role as a Councillor, rather than as a resident.
Completion of the hearing. February 27 th 2006, at Purbeck House Hotel.
A written statement from Councillor Miller concerning the meeting at the Town Hall on August 18th 2003 was considered at the outset. Since November 8 th 2005 he had added three paragraphs to his original statement. In these he now said that Julie Wheeldon was never out of his sight at Swanage Town Hall on that morning and that therefore the meeting with Mike Goater and Roger Garwood could never have taken place. The prosecuting barrister submitted that the three paragraphs should not be allowed as additional evidence. The defence barrister said that they should be allowed and that Councillor Miller’s memory had strengthened. They were allowed.
The Prosecuting barrister then reviewed the charges and made two main points. First, Councillor Wheeldon had used foul language in a bullying manner which was designed to intimidate. Secondly, she had used her position as a councillor to try to remove the Durlston Cliff flats from the HPR report in order to gain personal advantage for herself.
The Defending barrister said that Councillor Wheeldon does not use foul language, only colourful language. According to Councillor Wheeldon and Councillor Miller’s strengthened statement, the August 18 th meeting had never taken place. Neither had her client used foul language to the Belle Vue Landslip Action Group. They should accept that. Moreover, she spoke to this group as a consultee, not as a Councillor. There was no confusion of roles.
The findings of the Adjudication Panel with regard to the facts, many of which were in dispute.
1. We believe the substance of Mr Goater’s evidence concerning the meeting held on February 11 th 2003 .
2. Despite the conflicting evidence, we think it likely that the meeting on August 18 th 2003 did occur.
3. We find that foul language could well have been used at the meeting with the Belle Vue Landslip Action Group on August 19 th 2003.
4. We consider that the repeated use of foul language to those who are not in a position to respond amounts to bullying.
5. We consider that in the above meetings, Councillor Wheeldon was acting as a Councillor from the objective viewpoint, whether or not she thought she was.
Final submissions.
The Defending barrister admitted that certain breaches of the code had occurred but said that these were isolated incidents. On certain of the accusations, her client was not even sure of what she was being accused. Her client had an outstanding record as a Councillor and was re-elected in May 2003 with a very large majority. All she had been doing was to try to defend the public interest. She had support from all the political parties.
The Prosecuting barrister stated that, as a result of the Panel’s finding on the facts, a disqualification was needed. Councillor Wheeldon’s intention to influence the HPR report for financial gain justified this. She had breached the Code of Conduct on numerous occasions. Approaching officer’s directly for personal reasons and bullying them was a misuse of power. Moreover, there seemed to be a more general tolerance of inappropriate language in the Council. The panel should send out a message that it is inappropriate for Councillors to conduct themselves in this way.
The Adjudication.
The Respondent, Councillor J. Wheeldon, breached the code of conduct by:
1. Using inappropriate and offensive language in conversations with council officers and local residents.
2. Arranging meetings with senior council officials and outside consultants to discuss matters in which she had a personal and prejudicial interest.
3. Using her position as a Councillor to achieve an advantage for herself, and other residents of properties that were affected by a coastal erosion report.
The Respondent should be disqualified for one year from being or becoming a member of the relevant authority or any other authority within the meaning of the Local Government Act 2000. The disqualification is effective from today.
The District Council has been providing insufficient training for District and Parish Councillors, particularly in relation to the Code of Conduct and in member and officer relationships and culture.
The Respondent has the right to appeal to the High Court. This must be exercised within 28 days. The respondent’s barrister took leave to appeal.
Copy of letter to the Echo (re article 2 March) and Advertiser (article 9 March]
Dear sir/madam
I was disappointed in your article about former Tory councillor Julie Wheeldon being sacked from Swanage Town Council and Purbeck District Council. It was particularly surprising that your report included no reference to one of the main reasons for her dismissal: failing to declare her personal and prejudicial interest in council matters under debate.
While she may indeed be the "larger than life character " she claims, if you had included more specific detail maybe readers would better understand the significance of the offences. If you had reported (as the record shows) that an elected public official of long experience had called a council employee a ****ing ****hole, it might have conveyed the severity more clearly. But then, as a family newspaper, perhaps this omission is understandable. It was also sad to note no sense of collective shame on the part of her Tory colleagues, but rather an attack on the very system that exists to ensure decent conduct.
This kind of behaviour reflects badly on all councillors. As a new councillor myself, I am glad that there is a body such as the Standards Board for England to advise and monitor proper conduct. It seems to me that if senior Conservative councillors are unhappy with the system, and are not prepared to be accountable, they should consider standing down from their elected positions of responsibility.
Yours sincerely
Mike Hadley
Councillor (Liberal Democrat), Swanage Town Council
This was a long time in coming, the people of this town are not stupid even if at times they cannot be heard, lets get rid of all the councillors who purport to be doing good for the town whilst having their own agendas its long overdue that meetings are held of an evening when people who genuinly do care can attend and have their say, but it will never happen in this town lets be a lot more open about things and maybe the town itself may start to benefit for a change.
I know this is Toytown but it is a bit of an embarrassment to have the Standards Board remind us of what a gang of bumpkins we are.
The findings of fact are that, amongst other things, Julie fired off a string of playground insults at a senior officer in front of another officer. The case law on doing this has been quite unambiguous since 1978. It is not acceptable to swear at subordinates. Mr Goater, and the other officer present, were entitled to walk out and claim buckets and buckets of compensation. Those with their heads in the sand might cough and splutter at this but it is the law of the land. Fortunately they did not and the council was spared paying out a six figure sum. Julie then compounded the offence by telling the press that her remarks, which of course had never been made, were said because she does not suffer fools gladly. This begs the question, what sort of councillor can describe her officers as fools and expect to get away with it, even if she thinks the conversation was a figment of their imagination? This is very confusing.
Her alibi was that she was never there and never swore at Mt Goater so exactly why she came up with this remark is a bit of a mystery.
I do feel some sympathy for Mr Miller who suddenly remembered that Julie had been with him all morning on the day in question despite having previously made a statement omitting this vital fact. The poor fellow's memory was clearly playing up as the Board decided that she had not been. Having, in effect, accused two senior officers of lying his position became rather difficult but as luck would have it his other commitments now preclude him from continuing in office so we don't have to worry about the state of his memory any more. Phew!
Can someone tell me what Mrs. Wheeldon's status will be when she has served the disqualification period. Surely she will not be allowed to continue as a councillor or is that too much to hope.
It's not like being banned from driving. She won't automatically get back on the council after a year. She has to stand for election, and be elected - so if she does stand whether she gets on any council is up to you as a voter. There are elections due in May next year in Swanage, including for the seat she has held on Purbeck, so legally she could stand for that. She'd have to have a brass neck to do that after all this is known.....and the public would have to be really dumb to vote for her......but
Thank you for the comments posted 9.33AM. Will the lady's party allow her to stand as their candidate? I suppose she could stand as an independent. As you say the voter has the final decision.
Regards,
Tony.
From some of their comments, it seems the conservatives don't see any of this as a problem! They seem to operate in a world where normal values don't apply. So they will probably put Miller and Wheldon up again -- and the unthinking voters will declare their undying loyalty regardless of behaviour and performance.
It's no great secret is it that Mrs Wheeldon has been more or less able to call the shots within Swanage's Tories. As you say, it seems the party is more or less in denial over this appalling episode and seems bent on wanting to shoot the postman rather than do anything significant to deal with the problem.
As to Miller, you would think he's in a different position.
As one of the postings says he's accused council officers of lying and then the standards hearing has decided that the officers were telling the truth.
The implication is that they think he was not.
What's the legal status of these hearings? If it had been a courtroom drama you'd think the next stage would be for Plod to start investigating Miller's evidence and his sudden clear memory of something that happened several years before (and which he would have had no earthly reason to keep in mind)!
The hearing was before an adjudication panel which is a legal tribunal, in the same way that an employment tribunal is, which means that it had a legally qualified chairwoman.
The full decision is at http://www.adjudicationpanel.co.uk/index.php?page=Decisionpage&APERef=0300&APEID=611
and is a most interesting document.
Now that the "breath of foul air" has gone, along with "windy", could you not put back the original posting about the affair of the Youth Centre staff. This man has no reputaion to defend after all.
From the Western Gazette 9 March 2006
FORMER MAYOR BANNED AFTER FOUR-LETTER OUTBURST
Be the first reader to comment on this story
A Former mayor who called an engineer a "f****** w*****" in a row about protecting property from landslips has been disqualified from being a councillor. Julie Wheeldon is one of Purbeck District Council's longest-serving councillors, and was first elected in 1988.
A by-election is now on the cards after a standards board tribunal found the 70-year-old Tory councillor for Swanage South had flouted the authority's code of conduct.
An earlier hearing of the adjudication panel on 8 November was told that Mrs Wheeldon had used four-letter language when she challenged the council's engineer Mike Goater.
The charges relate to the Durlston Bay Coastal Strategy Study, which had previously been investigated by a panel of district council members in 2004. Following a number of allegations made against her, Mrs Wheeldon was investigated by a standards board representative.
In December 2000, there was a serious landslip at the Durlston Bay cliffs near Swanage that had resulted in a threat being posed to the Purbeck Heights and Hillcrest blocks of flats.
Mrs Wheeldon is a resident of the nearby Durlston Cliff flats.
When a firm of leading consultants reported on the landslip, its opinion was that the block in which she lives could also be at risk.
The panel hearing last year was told by Mr Goater that Mrs Wheeldon had angrily confronted him after an initial report on the coastal strategy was produced.
The strategy looked at the risks to property in the area and examined whether a scheme to protect them from landslips could be justified.
He told the panel that she had said she did not want anything mentioned in the report about the block where she has a flat, maintaining it was her belief that it was not at risk.
Mr Goater said that during the altercation, the councillor was "shouting at times", that she described a consultant involved as "a f****** w*****" and said that if the council engineer agreed with the consultant then he was "a f****** w***** too".
Mr Goater said that while he thought the comments were inappropriate in the circumstances, he had not complained at the time because "it wouldn't serve any useful purpose".
Mrs Wheeldon maintained she had made it clear she had been speaking on behalf of residents at the time.
The panel heard that in a separate exchange she had hit out at him and the then environmental services boss Roger Garwood - calling them "arseholes" - after telling them she wanted to speak to them following another meeting in Swanage Town Hall.
But Mrs Wheeldon told the panel: "I don't use bad language - I use colourful language. There's a great difference."
She had admitted to the panel she was "mouthy" and "loud and boisterous" but claimed that as she was "a larger than life person", people thought she had said things when she had not.
A standards board investigator identified four code of conduct issues to put before the case tribunal for the national adjudication panel.
The hearing was adjourned until last month so further evidence could be considered and at last week's hearing the panel found she had breached the council's code of conduct by:
Not treating others with respect;
Conducting herself in a manner that could be reasonably regarded as bringing the office or authority into disrepute;
Using her position as a member improperly to confer for herself or any other person, an advantage or disadvantage; and
Improperly influencing a decision about a matter in which she had a prejudicial interest.
A bid for a grant for cliff stabilisation at the at-risk cliffs subsequently failed when the Government department responsible decided the falls were not a result of sea erosion, but from water coming from inland.
The complaint to the standards board emerged after a district council what-went-wrong review of the coastal strategy at Durlston bay, which reported back on its controversial findings to councillors at the end of 2004.
Its clear from all this that Julie could have a glittering career writing novels. Her "colourful language" and choice turn of phrase make her ideal. The tribunal concluded that some of the things she told them were quite fictitious as well.
How was it she described the residents of one block of flats? "Frowsty old men in gardening trousers" I think. What a wonderful way of talking about people who turn to you for help. If only she had enjoyed the services of a Boswell to record these pithy comments for posterity. The best part is she says she used some of her famously colourful language at meetings she says she never even attended. What strength of personality! People were left with a clear memory of what she had said without her ever having to be there to say it. Not many of us can do that.
She seems to have generated a stream of tales over the years, none of them remotely likely to be true, about interventions in planning matters and "helping hands" extended to fortunate supplicants which could be turned into a marvelous novel.
On reading the the Advertiser this week one would be forgiven in thinking that the town had losttwo of its guiding lights.After reading George Willeys glowing tributes in his column Ithink the time has come for dear,dear,George to hang up his pencil,You see George you can only fool some of the people some of the time it would appear that george has lost that little bit of zip, or failing that his memory is in the same state of decline as you know who so please George shut the door quietly on the way out.
Sadly i think I have to agree with you, George has been a long and loyal servant but I think the time has come for him to hang up his writing pad + pencil, his slight bias is becoming a little more obvious time to go if you cant sort fact from friction
Sadly i think I have to agree with you, George has been a long and loyal servant but I think the time has come for him to hang up his writing pad + pencil, his slight bias is becoming a little more obvious time to go if you cant sort fact from friction
There is a full copy of the Tribunal's report in the Swanage library
(or you can download from
http://www.adjudicationpanel.co.uk/index.php?page=Decisionpage&APERef=0300&APEID=611
Remember Mr. Willey is not an investigative journalist, just a columnist in what is little more than a parish magazine. His genial weekly notes are not intended to stir-up outrage, and must pass for approval of his editor who is concerned purely to sell advertising space. Perhaps a proper paper is needed.
A proper local paper would be wonderful. It has been tried before but it was a small local production which did not have the resources to compete for the estate agents advertising which is essential to make it pay. The Advertiser, which is part of a very large group, simply cut its rates until it had put the competition out of business and having got a monopoly put them back up again. I believe this kind of thing is called a free market economy and is supposed to be good for us.
Post a Comment