Final questions answered?

Don Buxton got his final response:

— On Wed, 30/5/12, Battersby, Karl <Karl.Battersby@rotherham.gov.uk> wrote:

From: Battersby, Karl <Karl.Battersby@rotherham.gov.uk>
Subject: RE: FOI Request – 105
To: donbuxton
Cc: “Corbett, Sarah” <Sarah.Corbett@rotherham.gov.uk>, “Pike, Christine” <Christine.Pike@rotherham.gov.uk>, “Kemp, Liz” <Liz.Kemp@rotherham.gov.uk>
Date: Wednesday, 30 May, 2012, 13:45

Mr Buxton, I write in response to your latest email. Apologies, but I thought I had answered point one. I enclose a copy of the cost sheet that was used in calculating the cost of responding to your FOI of the 15th May. I hold no further information on this matter.

In relation to your second point, the answer is no. I did not answer this point, as I thought that this was a rhetorical question. My response would still have notionally cost the same, as I spent time drafting the response and checking the ICO advice. Responding to this correspondence clearly costs time, and therefore money.

I think that we have now exhausted this issue, and I consider the matter closed.

Regards
Karl Battersby
Strategic Director
Environment and Development Services
Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council

Don Buxton responded thus:

Dear Battersby, Karl Karl.Battersby@rotherham.gov.uk  et-al,

Your apology is very publicly noted as indeed is your assumption that part of my letter was “rhetorical”. As you are now no doubt very aware it has proved both embarrassing and expensive for you to yet again make assumptions.

I note with interest that you will not be including further costings to Leeds City Council in relation to their failure to reimburse the Rotherham taxpayers, via RMBC, for the Leader’s profligate use of the civic vehicle for non-RMBC use.

Clearly any further requests to Leeds City Council for payment don’t attract any cost from RMBC in their myopic jumbled-up approach to civic finance. RMBC seems to have developed a highly selective approach to those issues which it decides cost something and those politically embarrassing issues which it wishes to bury and decides don’t cost anything.

Your notional spurious costings are entirely rejected by me, and I would suggest and advise that you consider that it is the fact that Cllr Roger Stone’s non-RMBC use of the civic vehicle which created the cost to the town’s ratepayers in the first place. Happily this was brought to my attention by a strategic friend within Town Hall Towers.

I now choose to end this matter as I can no longer be bothered to spend my time and money exchanging communications with you.

Yours Sincerely,

Donald H. Buxton

11 thoughts on “Final questions answered?

  1. I don’t like their tone, arrogant mob. Why aren’t RMBC demanding reimbursement, after all, they are supposed to be ‘serving’ and ‘representing’ us?! Well, that’s what they tell us when it’s election time, anyway.

    Like

  2. Omar- I seem to recal it was only 60 odd people who voted for you. Clearly the overwhelming number of voters chose Mahroof in comparison to you and the other wannabees. If these people are so arrogant why do they always win with thumping majorities ?????? Isn’t it people like you and some of the other contributors on here who are deluded and arrogant by seeing themselves as true representers of public opinion.

    Like

    • Adam – based upon your posting to Brother Omar you display a similar dismissive approach as Kandoo Karl to those citizens who wish to rightfully, legally challenge and scrutinise the Kandoo Karlz of this world and their unseemly Political Masterz..

      Are you seriously suggesting that because Brother Omar polled 60 votes that this debars him from forming and publishing a citizen’s opinion about those who choose public service as a well-paid safe career?

      If so, then I for one believe that you are very firmly in the supporters’ camp of Da Dodger and his Blue Badge Dodgers with his greasy political patronage machine which rewards aquiescence from kling-ons with junkets to places like Varna in Bulgaria.

      Brother Omar, and others like me, have every right to challenge, scrutinise and to hold to account those who are paid a lot more than Sheffield City Councillors to administer our wonderful little Metropolitan Borough of Rotherham.

      I have no wish to lock horns with you, but publishing your posting which openly supports the sycophantic nether region-licking of Kandoo Karl is just one step too far for me.

      If you are in favour of Da Dodger’s political patronage machine then grow a pair and come right out and state as much, if not, then join the queue of those without the plums to challenge the Rovrum Laybah Grooip’s incestuous nepotistic grip of local politics.

      I personally can’t wait until there is a change of Leader within Da Grooip. Come the day, I hope we get a man/woman with the scruples and principles to take politics, and the Laybah Partee, into the next generation.

      Bahot Shukria mera dost, Khuda Hafiz.

      Like

      • Clearly I seemed to have stirred a hornets nest -)) I absolutely agree 100% that every citizen has the right to hold they’re elected members to account.

        Like

        • No place for Adam in Rotherham Council then!!!

          I might add that there is additionally a fundamental need to hold the highly and grossly overpaid officers to account also – the Members should do this, but they don’t/won’t/can’t!

          Like

    • Adam, I’m having trouble following your logic on some of your comment. Are you suggesting that Mahroof’s high vote is due to his humility?

      Omar’s candidature was an expression of the widely held view, that all of Rotherham’s politicians are loonies, including Mahroof! Omar, was the only ‘official’ one! Is that what seems to be irritating you?

      Rothpol’s readers and contributors understand, that they speak for no one but themselves. They are neither deluded nor arrogant! Nor do they believe they represent public opinion, but at least they have opinions, which they are welcome to share, as are you, Adam.

      Rotherham Politics then, is merely a reflection of the public frustration at the antics in the ‘Town Hall’.

      Like

      • Let’s agree to disagree on this one.On a happier note I hope everyone enyoys our gracious Queens’s jubilee celebrations.

        Like

  3. And since when has expressing one’s opinion been considered as representative of others?

    But then, if you’re not sufficiently intelligent to formulate your own opinion, then do like the rest of the Rotherham voters – der, vote Labour, cos’ thi reyt gud at lukin after t’ordinary folk.

    But don’t you think it’s wrong to stop looking after old people? Er, I don’t know, I’ve always voted Labour.

    And don’t you think it’s wrong that these ‘politicians’ should go swanning off all over the world at our expense? Er, I don’t know, I’ve always voted Labour.

    And don’t you think it’s wrong that these ‘politicians’ should pay themselves more than those in neighbouring towns and cities? Er, I don’t know, I’ve always voted Labour.

    And what about misleading people who ask for information that they are legally entitled to? Er, I don’t know, I’ve always voted Labour

    Er, I don’t know, I’ve always voted Labour
    Er, I don’t know, I’ve always vo….. ………..
    Er, I don’t know.. ….. ……….. ……
    Er, I don’t know
    Er, er, er

    Like

    • Dear Trambuster,

      Your posting is an eloquent explanation of the “Command and Control Culture” that Da Rovrum Laybah Grooip have so successfully implemented over many many generations of Rotherham citizen voters.

      Put up a Grunter with a Red Rosette and it’s elected in Rovrum …

      Because they have dominated local politics to such an unhealthy extent due to a plumless and clueless Opposition of any kind they have been able to intimidate citizens by coming the old chestnut: “If tha dunt think it’s rayt, tha shud purrup for t’Cowncill, or shut thi gob”.

      Well that worked pretty well for them …

      Until along came the Internet which has proved the biggest force multiplier that active and empowered citizens have known to date.

      We can, and do, research their impish and costly activities, we can exchange views, ideas and information between each other … oh, and of course, then there’s that Godsend “the Freedom of Information Act” which has meant that Da Dodger n Da Corn Fed Grunters, Muppets and Clowns and their nether-region licking Ever-so-Umble Retainers in the RMBC Officer Corps now have nowhere to hide and just don’t know how to react and respond to that which they don’t understand, don’t like, and just don’t know what to do with …

      Except of course, obfuscate and spread heifer-dung around the place.

      Thank Heavens there’s a cadre of RMBC Officers and Elected Members who supply information to Rothpol and its friends and who have broken ranks with the political patronage machine and have an eye to a healthier and more open political climate in Rotherham.

      Like

  4. Adam, In case you’ve forgotten, I stood for the Monster Raving Loony Party and we pride ourselves on getting the least amount of votes. Secondly, as stated, I have not said I’m representing anyone but myself and thirdly it was a criticism of ALL RMBC councillors, which you’ll find are a mixture of Labour and Tories. To suggest I am arrogant or deluded is just infantile and ridiculous. (p.s. ‘recal’ has two L’s)

    Like

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.