Déjà vu – Has anything really changed?

Upon opening my print copy of the ‘Tiser this week, on page 6, there was an excellent piece under Gareth Dennison’s by-line, dealing with the Millers loan and the Titans financial arrangements re Millmoor. He was reporting the July Meeting of Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council which took place on Wednesday 27th.

Although generally supportive of helping the Millers, I read the account with increasing incredulity and amazement! I couldn’t believe what I was reading, it was as if Roger Stone was talking about Monopoly money, not real Pounds and Pence of hard earned. By the evening the import of the article had reminded me of the way Layden had operated. Who always explained his actions using confusing terminology to bamboozle listeners that he actually understood what he was talking about! I’m sure he didn’t understand either, because he could never answer the most basic of questions when asked, at the many opportunities I had to see him in action! He was a master of his craft and achieved National prominence largely through guile rather than ability.

The feelings of Déjà vu became ever stronger, the more I let my mind wander to the past when Sir Jack was King of his Castle. I can remember an autumn meeting of a Labour Party Branch in Rotherham when he was explaining the reasoning behind the funding of the Anti Poverty Forum, based in Rotherham. That was Garvin Reed’s little side project, that ended in disaster and Reed spending time in one of Her Majesties prisons! Involving among others, one much younger Roger Stone! That story is for another time, perhaps? I digress.

Layden was fond of terminology such as ‘innovative’ and Roger Stone’s use of this term certainly rings alarm bells! As does the use of the Prudential Borrowing Facility, a right to borrow for investment that Councils have had since 2003. The assurances given to officers, it was stated, were ‘cast iron’, another Laydenism, that no money of ours was being put at hazard!

“Meet the New Boss, same as the Old Boss!” A line from Won’t get fooled again, by the Who. Released on 31 July 1971, exactly 40 years ago today, was an angry denunciation of the dashed hopes of a generation for genuine change. In the wake, of the then, recent events that demonstrated the inability to put dreams into action, the disillusionment was felt keenly by those of us who experienced these events contemporaneously. We may have been guilty back then of more than a little naivety but who would have thought this song might still have resonance in Rotherham of today, in that nothing ever changes, only the people change, in Rotherham of Layden’s  day, councillors waited for the ‘grim reaper’ to remove them from office, not quite such a universal expectation these days, I’m glad to say.

Roger Stone seems to have become a reincarnation of his illustrious predecessor, it would appear, when he makes the following guarantee, “There’s no cost to us.” We will no doubt see in the passage of time, if he is right. Meanwhile, we wait and see, and perhaps ponder upon one of Roger Stone’s more ridiculous claims that, “better football will be played there,” quite on what basis he makes this claim is not clear, but perhaps it was one of those ‘cast iron’ guarantees he referred to earlier in the report?

The report also states that RMBC stands ready to take the same action in other cases and raised the possibility that the Titans might benefit in future, from a similar arrangement.

The simple sad fact of the situation is that absolutely nothing has changed in Rotherham since the 70’s, we still get council decisions, made with no one understanding the consequences of their actions, not even the officers! The officers track record in this respect has been lamentable and no reliable guide as to what is permissible. I would cite the recent case concerning Chris Read, the Bramley traffic scandal and the blue badge abuse scandal as evidence for my assertions. Déjà vu, indeed!


35 thoughts on “Déjà vu – Has anything really changed?

  1. rotherhamtermite – power to ya wood chomping jaws man, go boy go!!

    Following the dire historical line in your article I await with morbid anticipation the next awful cringing announcement in the Queen’s Honours List – “Arise, SIR Dodger, for services to junketing, civic banqueting and expanding waistlines”.

    Your eyes would roll into the backs of their sockets and your toes would wiggle and your ears curl if you read the Hospitality Register entries for a certain corpulent civic leader. Millers, Titans, even Nashville TN are just a few of the venues visited, all on the basis of “maintaining good relations” you see. Hmmmm …

    You can demand those items from RMBC under FOI. Demand, don’t ask, they’re yours for the seeing 🙂


  2. I love it when armchair warriors who do not have the courage to reveal their identity sit there and critise those who get off their backsides and represent their communities. I have no problem with you disagreeing with the decisions of my late father but do have a problem with your insults of his intellect and motivations. Also, did either of you have the courage to challenge Sir John when he was alive and therefore able to defend his actions?
    Why not stand for your communities and represent them in a positive way? Maybe because this would challenge your intellect and motivation?
    Sir John Layden and Roger Stone have done more for the people of Rotherham than either of you would have the intellect to understand.


    • Dear kieth i totally agree with you on this matter,they get put there names forward because the electorate no these people ,so they would,nt get the votes,you,de think with the press coverage some of them get they would have a great start on the average joe bloggs who really wants to represent there town village etc. well did u two challengeSIRjohn when he was alive? p.s some people seem to think if can ,spell correctly thats intellect,derrrrrrrrrrrrrrr


  3. Er, talking of Scum Labour’s promises, I recall when we were originally promised the great joys of early learning via Dolly’s big boooks, that is in addition to all of the other early learning schemes there are in the Borough, we were given a ‘cast iron’ guarantee that there ‘would be no cost’ to council-tax payers.

    And where are we now? well it’s costing us tens of thousands of pounds per annum; and what had to go to pay for Leeda’s obsessions with the Silicone Valley, why it was the services of looking after old people and other more meaningful ways of spending our money.

    As for Layden, I worked at Maltby Council offices back in the day and believe me, that was not a comfortable place to be.

    As for Son of Layden, I wonder just how much he’s contributed to the Silicone Valley Book Club and thereby helped out Leeda and the council-tax payers, so that the older people of the borough can be properly looked after.

    My fervent hope, given Leeda’s advancing years and indeed his cohorts, is that they will become in desperate need of the services that they have so gleefully ditched in favour of Leeda’s discomforting fixation.

    Happy days!!


    • stewartplatt says:
      September 18, 2011 at 8:11 pm
      just checking to see if this works first ,buxton tossa

      JHC, another Professor of Lingua Scotum appears from underneath a stone … welcome friend … I’d be more than pleased to have a public battle of wits via words with you on this forum, but modesty forbids me from humiliating an obviously unarmed man …

      and your particular point on here is???????????????????? …

      please please please illuminate, entertain and inform one and all on here with the power of your wit, charm and amusing repartee …

      the whole world of ether on here awaits your next highly valued and semi-literate contribution to outing the excesses of da Corn Fed Hogs n Muppets down at Town Hall Towers …


    • Welcome Stewart, and the answers simple, yes! Gravatars are used to highlight aspects of personality when choosing one, I imagine?
      You seem to be building up to say something? All shades of legal political opinion and viewpoint are welcome here. Provided of course that they understand that their own views will be subject to critical review. Oh and no swearing please, as increasing numbers of younger people are viewing this blog and I would hate discourse to descend into mere personal abuse and profanity.


    • Ah tink eez a geeza from Maltby … burr ee dunt no arr ta spell, dunt da tink … praps eez not got Spellcheck like t’Cabinet Clown dat carn’t spell iz name rayt … rayt rayt rayt rayt rayt … dat annuva 5-bar gate inntit … 🙂


  4. thats just the kind of remark i would expect from a clown,yes i am from maltby very proud of the fact indeed,stood to be elected for my village and was elected ,perhaps grald could do the same,mind you he would have to use is real name,sorry no chance of that then.like the photo that accompanys your blog but photos of a10s should be for warriors,I THINK,yours stewart


  5. As author of the posting that seems to have been taken exception to, by some including Keith Layden, I exercise my right of reply!
    Can I blog using my real identity? No, not with the likes of those in control of things breathing down your neck. No debate is currently permissible in any open way. I have no wish to follow others more high profile than me into the wilderness, remember Peter Thirlwall?
    Did I challenge, debate with Jack Layden when he was Leader? I said as much in my piece! For the avoidance of Keith’s doubt, I most certainly did on numerous occasions!
    As for my basic assessment, I am entitled to my opinion as you are yours! I have studied my previous text and would not change a word, I thought I was rather gentle on Jack Layden myself!


    • yes rotherhamtermite youwas rather gentle on SIR jack,and him not being hear to answer for himself.as for the right to reply i wish we could all get this priveledge but it seems its not wat u no its who u no.why cant u blog with your real name?


  6. Will the real Stewart Platt stand up! Is he the Stewart Platt of Maltby given to take umbrage at the opinions of others and is currently engaged in intimidation of fellow Town Councillors?
    Stewart Platt should explain his undemocratic inclinations to a wider world!
    Perhaps he would like to email me a suitable contribution? rothpol@rikv.net.


    • sorry rothpol how many stewart platt,s are there,can you ,no will you put on here in writing who stewart platt is in your own words engaged in intimidation of fellow town councillors?.this should be good,well it will if i get a truefull reply,yours stewart platt


      • Rules of the House.

        1. No swearing
        2. No threatening or abusing of other contributors, it is the free choice of bloggers to post anonymously or using a pseudonym.
        There are no other rules except to only post things you believe are true.

        Stewart, you are in danger of offending against the House Rules, others before you have been made unwelcome because of this, please respect our customs in future.


      • dear rothpol,thanks for putting the rules up for EVERYONEto see,i personaly dont see that i could have offended anyone on here,not sworn at anyone or threatened anyone ,everything i put on here will be true otherwise i would,nt use my real name,would i.seems theres a few on here that like to do the name calling of others even when there not here to defend themselves,what is it have some of these gone running to the teacher telling tales,is it my free speach some dont like ,wonder why that can be,i,m baffled,sorry if i,ve offended anyone if u would like me to stop useing rotherham politics u only have to say yours stewart


    • dear rothpol,you state that i am currently engaged in intimidation of fellow town councillors,can no will you tell me who these councillors are so the matter can be cleared up as soon as possible, eg next town councill meeting .i dont like the fact that lies are printed and nobody is held to account ,having read the rules what would this comment come under,yours stewart


      • Fair comment on the basis of private sources that I will not divulge. It is aggressive attitudes, that you have just displayed in your comment addressed to me, that stifles discussion and leads to intimidation if only vicariously! Rothpol.


  7. Stewart has the courage to stand up and be counted. Those of you who do not and are unwilling to identify yourselves are not worthy of my time. Goodbye


Leave your comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.