On Newbury Today, the story of note is a piece on Tony Vickers stepping down from the governance and audit committee over changes to the process of calling an Extraordinary General Meeting.

http://newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?articleID=14653

New rules from the Tories mean that anyone wishing to call an EGM (hasn't been one in five and a half years anyway) must now command support of a quarter of the council. Although I can see why the Con (sorry, Lib) Dems might see calling "stitch up" as an easy way to object to the motion, and why stepping down may generate a bit of PR for the Libs... But surely this is why they need to retain their positions on committee's??? To hold the Tories to account and stop them from getting away with murder???

As a very wise young lady said to me this evening, surely all of the councillors should be dedicated enough to turn up at meetings??? Add to the fact that they have 16 councillors, it's not as if they ever vote differently anyway!!!

Tony Vickers, first you try to defend your party at local level for the mistakes of the Westminster crew by calling into question Labour's record in Government, then you blow thousands on signs that are only relevent to you (thank heavens for the "vanity fund") and now you throw the rattle out of the pram and jack in a position where you have a position to keep the Tories in some kind of check. Add to that the fact you only ever talk about cycling matters... What are you actually doing that is in the public interest??? It seems like everything you do is only in the interest of Tony Vickers!!!

EDIT: 13 councillors is what it would take to call an EGM

Why did the Tories change the rules?  Anticipating trouble ahead?

But surely if the 16 Lib members turn up, it's a bit of a non issue as they all vote the same way. This is what I hate about local politics here, both parties vote the same way all of the time. No personalities, no backbone or nobody brave enough to stand up to their own party when it comes to it.

There will be trouble ahead... but even if the Libs could call an EGM, they would be out voted on any subject as the Tories have around two thirds of the council. In the view of democracy, I hope Brian Burgess and Adrian Hollister get elected as independent members at the local elections, also the apolitical guy if he stands. We need people on the local authority that represent the views of those who they serve, not the views of the head of the local party!!!

I'd still like to know why the Tories changed the rules.  Even if the Lib Dems are outvoted on matters, at least it goes on record for future scrutiny.

I agree, there must be a reason for the change. However, Cllr Graham Jones (not often I agree with him!!!) is right that most authorities would require a third or half of the council to back a motion such as this. Maybe the Lib Dems realise that they face losing some of their seats next year, as people like Adrian Hollister (Greens), Brian Burgess (independent) and the Apolitical candidate if he stand will all be trying to target seats held by Liberals. Let's just say that the Libs lose four seats, they then need to rely on the other councillors to back their motion. I think the distribution of power at West Berks will be shaken up a little next year, so maybe that is why they are complaining. Saying that, should another party get a decent amount of seats, would the Libs locally be forced to work with the Tories???

Quoted from richard.garvie

I agree, there must be a reason for the change. However, Cllr Graham Jones (not often I agree with him!!!) is right that most authorities would require a third or half of the council to back a motion such as this. Maybe the Lib Dems realise that they face losing some of their seats next year, as people like Adrian Hollister (Greens), Brian Burgess (independent) and the Apolitical candidate if he stand will all be trying to target seats held by Liberals. Let's just say that the Libs lose four seats, they then need to rely on the other councillors to back their motion. I think the distribution of power at West Berks will be shaken up a little next year, so maybe that is why they are complaining. Saying that, should another party get a decent amount of seats, would the Libs locally be forced to work with the Tories???

Yes but we will still have the same idiots in Market Street running the show!

Quoted from Nobby

Yes but we will still have the same idiots in Market Street running the show!

Nice cutting comment there. Obviously you put in a great deal of thought before posting that.

It's time to change that. You will see early next month what the alternative proposal is, and I urge you to vote for it. Don't elect the same old faces to let you down time and time again. Come May, you will have a team of people to elect who are only interested in improving the place in which we live, not furthering their own agenda.

Quoted from richard.garvie

would the Libs locally be forced to work with the Tories???

Why not?  They have pursued pretty much the same policies for years.

not furthering their own agenda.

What is the Newbury Stadium?

The Newbury Stadium would have been a community stadium built by a supermarket company to provide a home for Newbury FC, to allow the council to sell the existing Faraday Road pitch as they wish and also see a vast amount of green space retained for that use, instead of being sold to a developer. Part of the site saved would have been made available for furture employment creation and the landowner concerned would have realised the same value of the land as she would have realised for building houses. Everybody wins. But I have now gave up on the project, as has the retailer. With no funding, none of the scheme is posible. With all of my personal business interests now in Leicestershire, Rutland, Northamptonshire and Lincolnshire, I cannot be accused of furthering my own agenda. If elected, I will continue to look at possible schemes that would provide Newbury FC with a long term future, unlike the current administration and the one before it that tried to remove the football ground without providing a suitable alternative.

As an area, we lost out on a massive oppurtunity to create an area of Newbury that would be kept predominantly green for ever with covenants put in place to ensure nothing would ever be built. As it stands, the land agents of said site are launching a massive legal challenge against West Berks as no matter what the result is, they wouldn't have to pay the bill (would fall on landowner or the council). Once again, I tried to think outside of the box and create something positive, only for it to be brought to an end by the same inward thinking policy of our local establishment. Should the land agent win the legal challenge, we may well see houses appear on the site in question which would be a disaster. I can honestly say that the chances of the deal I brokered being ressurected are very slim.

The football ground must still be threatened - WBC have their eyes on the land to use to create the public green space they have to supply in order to justify using public green space in Victoria Park to build their effing beloved pavillion.

The football ground IS under threat, more so now than ever before. But the council solution would be to ship Newbury Fc off to ground share with Thatcham. I am a big football fan, and was involved with a non league club for a number of years so I "get" the situation from all sides. I tried to do something about it earlier this year, but nobody from the council was interested in discussing it as my opinion or expertise is obviously not in line with theirs. Although I don't often get to watch Newbury, Thatcham or Hungerford, I will support these clubs as much as I can regardless of whether I'm an elected member or not. There is small print in the Faraday Road lease which means the council will have to provide an alternative facility if they close the current ground, what the council don't understand is that a facility of equivalent standing would cost around £4m I'm told.

I think lovejoy was trying to assume that if elected, I would further my own agenda by building a community football stadium. I can't say it will be my number one priority, but it is something I would like to achieve if elected. It's not exactly benefitting me though, as I'm not exactly a member, supporter or shareholder of the club so the argument is irrelevent.

Newbury isn't a football town. AFC Newbury used to get an attendance of less than 50 every time I went to see them so a big stadium (in non-league terms) wouldn't be sustainable.

Newbury's main sports are Rugby, Cricket and of course Racing.

Did I say anything about "a big stadium"??? An equivalent facility that allows the club to generate revenue through function room hire etc. I also believe there were 200 when I went to watch Newbury FC the other week. What do I know???

Again, do we pack Newbury FC off to Thatcham as the current administration are trying to railroad through, or do we try to establish a facilty that can allow the club to grow and progress through the leagues??? I do believe that the club would rather stay in Faraday Road, but ever since I moved here councillors have tried to have them moved (even when it was AFC Newbury)!!!