Hospital job for our very own Mark Edgell!!!

Dear Rotherham Politics Readers,

It was with a sense of disappointment, but not disbelief that I read this recent article in the “Star” –

It seems there’s no limit to the extent to which Rovrum’s Corn Fed Grunters, Muppets and Clowns will put both feet into the civic trough to find an easy feed at taxpayer expense. Not for them a lowly-paid hard-working job, no way Comrade, no way at all.

I would be interested, overjoyed and full of happiness to find out just what special talents, abilities, lifes experiences and commitments this latest drain on the public purse will bring to the Board of Rotherham Hospital Foundation Trust.

We must be getting pretty desperate to be taking on such parachute champions.

Kind Regards,

Previously on Rotherham Politics: Where are they now – Mark Edgell?

Dolly Parton Imagination Library – A disaster in the making?

A Rotherham Politics reader who wishes to remain anonymous sent Rothpol this very interesting link:

This document repays careful reading but the most alarming is the cost £1,200,000!

Centralised purchasing arrangements, such as being proposed here, invariably go wrong leaving the Authority taking such responsibility with egg on their faces, oh and losing a lot of our money!

Emma Hoddinott – Taken To Task!

Dear Rotherham Politics Reader,

Well well well, if I’d know then what I know now, I wouldn’t have given Ms Laybah Candidate the time of day, or me vote

What a sodding cheek when aspirant, but unsuccessful candidate for Parliament and now newly-elected Wickersley Ward RMBC Councillor, Ms Emma Hoddinott has to bus-in Cllr James Alexander, Leader of City of York Council to go “on the knocker” as they so politically call it in the smoke-filled chambers at Tweetun Wheeltappers & Ferret Handlers’ Club and Institute (CIU Affiliated).

I wish they’d knocked unannounced at my door cos I know quite a few English and foreign words which equate to “go though forth into the desert and multiply” and which I could have shared with them to show my disdain, disrespect and total dislike for this style of Blairite New Laybah codology.

But word on the block is that there will soon be an updated form of communication control from within the coterie of Corn Fed Grunters, Muppets and Clowns, and that any comms with the media, including Twitter-Twatter and Facebook will have to be referred to the Stasi Chief of Corporate Communicayshuns … and iffen she giz it the OK then it’s on, if not it’s off.

I bet that some of the RMBC Old Contemptibles who were writing letters to the press when she were still a lass licking lollies in t’nursery will have a few choice words of their own to say on this matter of desperate, insecure corporate political mind control.

Candidate for a Parliamentry Constituency? Yes please, anywhere. Let’s get shot and gerrid of ASAP and be gone from our little Borough where we’ve invested our lives, our money, our property, our livelihoods and where our children get their education – and where we’ve got a large stake in the outcome.

Yours Sincerely,


Mrs Overall’s Acorn Antiques – Parish Council Meeting 18th June 2012 – Olympic Edition!


Parish Council Meeting  –  18 June 2012


In the run up to the Olympics

Make sure you have your go faster stripes on
Get ready – On your marks, get set, Goooooooooooooooooooooo
And they are off – Little discussion – Just reading through the agenda
Are they practicing for the Olympics , must be they have  broken the 100metre dash.

Q Didn’t Beck say last time he was not going to have discussion, to save time
A Yes – But – Just let us wait and see
Q Reminiscent of old times with yesterday’s men?
A Ooooh yes   –   And look what happened to them

Pistol fired – Pistol fired again – Another false start – Offenders back to the blocks
Race restarted  – they are off again –
Late entrant coming up on the inside

A Member of the Public – ex Parish Councillor (Labour)
“I was a bit surprised to learn that the grass cutting contract had been awarded to Cllr Baker,  I am not suggesting he had prior knowledge (we think you are) certainly he could have had more favourable access in his application for the contract.  I wonder why the grass cutting is not being done in-house?”

Q Does the Parish Council have the equipment for maintaining large grassed areas or the space to store such equipment.
Q Are the parish workers fully employed
A Of course they are
Q Doesn’t she know RMBC have cut the grass cutting budget throughout the Borough
A Well wouldn’t you think she would!  Being a  Labour supporter, she most likely supports the policy.

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm – Not a well thought out question – Is she still a magistrate?  Hope she thinks her decisions out more clearly.

The Chairman, Booming Beck (Labour):-  Discussions and any possible implications had taken place

Cllr Thornton (Independent)   “ Can I assure you everything was above board, he was not present in any of the discussions.

The member of the public:  “I take on board what you say and I think it was a very unwise thing to do.”
Q Was it all  above board
A  Well it most certainly seems so.

Whoops – stepped out of lane – immediate disqualification
Independents coming up strongly

No 29 Bus Service

This service has been withdrawn and understandably members of the public are upset and concerned.

Cllr Burton implied the cuts were due to privatisation and harked back to a time when the services were much better.
Q Is she wearing rose tinted glasses
A Must be – the services always left a lot to be desired prior to privatisation

Contestant stumbles and cheats by catching the bus!
Another disqualfication

Gardeners Question Time – Part 1

Weeds are Growing says Cllr Brindley
Q Oh deary dear, well they do don’t they and where is this tragedy happening
A In the gulleys and gutters of South Anston
Q Well aren’t they growing everywhere
A Yeah they are
Speed up, revving like Billy Ho – and like a flash – in comes Cllr Dalton I will take that up with RMBC
Q Now just a minute, Was this a set up so that Cllr Dalton could yet again wrest parish matters and take them to the Borough
A Well they are bezzy mates

Oh Ho Ho Ho Cllr Jepson (Independent) quick out of the blocks and over the hurdle – He had already enquired about this problem and the use of the street cleaning vehicles and GUESS WHAT FOLKES – There are the 3 vehicles for use in the Borough – Soon to be reduced to 2  –  Oh dear what a disaster  –

First out of the blocks takes the trophy.

Gardeners Question Time – Part 2

Oh Dear Another Tragedy – Cllr Brindley – Grass is growing on the grassed areas at the cross roads
Booming Beck – That’s RMBC Land

Oh deary deary deary – That is 2 questions about RMBC issues  – I do wonder why!!
Surely we are there to discuss parish council issues – Surely time wasted on RMBC issues prevents the parish issues being discussed.

Disqualified from the race for two false starts

Code of Conduct

Councillors were asked to accept RMBC’s Code of Conduct at the last Finance Meeting.
The full council was asked to ratify this at the Parish Council Meeting

Q Was it pointed out that the Standards Committee does not exist at present
A Yes
Q Was it pointed out that nobody knows what the make up or constitution is going to be
A Yes
Q Was it pointed out that no rules are finalised
A Yes
Q Was it pointed out the pecuniary interest rules have not been published
A Yes

So what did the vote produce:-
Acceptance of a non-existing committee!!
Acceptance of a non-existing committee membership!!
Acceptance of non-existing rules!!
Acceptance of non-existing pecuniary interests!!
Ain’t this another = Buggers Muddle
Well it is Anston Parish Council ain’t it!!

All competitors wearing red socks disqualified

Independents – On the home stretch and chests out for the white tape

AND THE WINNER IS ——– Certainly not the people of Anston!

All puffed out – Gasping for air – Can’t get my breath!

Goodnight All

Mrs Overall

Rotherham’s Disgrace – The questions begin? FOI 166 – An answer of sorts is received!

Don got his answer:

On Wed, 27/6/12, Corbett, Sarah <> wrote:

From: Corbett, Sarah <>
Subject: FOI Request 166
Date: Wednesday, 27 June, 2012, 10:33

Dear Mr Buxton,

I refer to your recent request for information regarding the article in the Star newspaper.  Please note that some of this information is not held by Rotherham MBC.  The information is held by Rotherham Local Childrens Safeguarding Board (LCSB) who operate as a separate legal entity from the Council.  However, the Council will respond on their behalf and I can therefore provide the following information:

1. The total cost of the High Court injunction and any and all of the cost of legal advice and/or opinion given to RMBC from either within or without the organisation, in relation to the Serious Case Review mentioned in the article.

A high court injunction was not obtained.  The cost of the legal advice has not yet been calculated, therefore this information is not held by either the Council or the LSCB.

2. Please provide a specific itemised cost and date breakdown in relation to the legal costs requested in (1) above.

Please see response to (1) above.

In accordance with the procedures of Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council (RMBC), I am advising you that the cost to the authority in responding to this request has been £30.09 which reflects the staff time and administration costs involved. RMBC however does not currently make any charge to customers for processing Freedom of Information Act requests.

If you are not satisfied with this response you have the right to an internal review by the Council.  Please contact us via the above email address or by post to Sarah Corbett, Information Governance Manager, Legal Services, Riverside House, Main Street , Rotherham , S60 1AE .

If you are not satisfied with the internal review, you can appeal to the Information Commissioner.  Contact details are: Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane , Wilmslow, Cheshire . SK9 5AF. Telephone 01625 545700. Alternatively go to

Yours sincerely,
Sarah Corbett

Information Governance Manager
Information Governance Unit
Legal Services
Resources Directorate

Don Buxton replied thus:

Dear “Corbett, Sarah” <>

Thank you for your half-hearted attempt at answering my FOI

1. I will continue to press RMBC on this specific matter until I have been informed what specific legal costs RMBC has incurred as indicated in my original question

2. I also dispute your ridiculous spurious notional cost you attribute to my FOI enquiry and I require you to provide me with an itemised breakdown as to how your organisation has reached this fanciful notion

3. Surely someone at RMBC is “having a larf” when they can’t measure the legal costs that I enquired about, but some civic beancounter can assess my FOI at £30.09

Yours Sincerely,
Donald H. Buxton

Previously: Rotherham’s Disgrace – The questions begin?

Rotherham’s Disgrace – RMBC Website concealing more than revealing – Answer Supplied

Don Buxton received his reply:

On Tue, 26/6/12, Rimes, Kevin <> wrote:

From: Rimes, Kevin <>
To: Don Buxton
Cc: “CYPS-Complaints” <>, “NAS-Complaints” <>
Date: Tuesday, 26 June, 2012, 11:00

Dear Mr Buxton

Thank you for contacting us regarding your enquiry about the RMBC website and the following web page –

Having looked into this matter I am able to provide you with the following information in response to your enquiries:

1.      I can inform you that the link had unfortunately not been updated correctly when the location of the document you refer to had changed.

2.      The web page in question has now been updated and the document included on the RMBC website for the public to access.

Having discussed this matter with colleagues responsible for this web page I am informed that although consultation with the general public was completed in December 2011; consultation with other stakeholders is still ongoing.  Therefore if you wish to comment on the Draft Strategy then your comments and views on this document will be gratefully received.

May I take this opportunity to thank you again for your enquiry and for bringing this matter to our attention.

Yours sincerely

Kind regards

Kevin Rimes
Service Improvement Officer
Performance and Quality (Children and Young People Services)
Commissioning, Policy and Performance
Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council

Don acknowledged thus:

Dear “Rimes, Kevin” <>

Thank you for your response and your apology for RMBC’s dire corporate failure to ensure that its corporate website is kept updated and easily accessible by citizens ratepayers who wish to freely access statutory information.

I will continue to maintain a watching brief on any or all aspects of RMBC’s provision of statutory information via its corporate website, and in that regard I may well contact you in the future should RMBC again fail in its corporate duty to provide statutory information to citizen ratepayers.

In the meanwhile I now consider this particular matter to be closed and thank you for your assistance.

Yours Sincerely,
Donald H. Buxton

Previously: Rotherham’s Disgrace – RMBC Website concealing more than revealing – Questions asked

Come on RMBC, get your website working properly!

At this time of year Rothpol likes to spend a few idle minutes having a look at the interests declarations online published on the council’s website, the 28 day time limit for declarations now having expired.

Readers should know that a major update of the council’s website took place a few weekends ago and I thought it prudent to wait for it to ‘bed in’ for a while before making any serious attempts to use it.

I clicked on my bookmarked link to the council’s website and easily navigated to the section where councillors information is to be found, so far so good. Starting at the beginning I clicked on the link for Shabana Ahmed it gave almost no information save for her address. There was no link for an interests declaration made since her election for the first time in May 2012, either?

In view of this, I decided to check Jahangir Akhtar’s page next as I knew there had been a link there in the recent past. Yes there was the comforting sight of a link, I clicked on it with confidence. Imagine my surprise then, that the download offered was for another new councillor, Lauren Astbury and not Jahangir Akhtar as the link indicated. Oh dear!

I have railed at RMBC’s website in the past, to no avail it would seem. This information must be available for us to examine at our leisure. The fact that it isn’t, is an outrage to democracy and a major failing, in the connected world we now live in.

Come on RMBC, get your website working properly!

I nearly forgot to mention, that the political lead on this one is down to Jahangir Akhtar.

Library Consultation – What it means for Wickersley – Chris Read’s Response – Is that it?

Don got his reply from Chris Read:

“Dear Don – thanks for your email.

We are aware of the proposal in the consultation and have begun over the past few days to make enquiries to establish the rationale behind this specific proposal for Wickersley.

Once we have been able to get answers to our questions, Emma, Sue and I will sit down together to agree our response to the proposals, and at that stage we will be able to answer your questions properly.

With best wishes,
Chris Read”

Is that it?

Library Consultation – What it means for Wickersley

This interesting Email simply must be shared with readers:

Dear RMBC Cllrs Ellis, Read and Hoddinott,

I have received the attached information relating to planned “changes” (aka “cuts”) to our local libraries service and I am astonished to find that our own magnificent library here at Wickersley which is currently open for 45 hours per week is proposed to be cut to 40 hours per week!.

Our library has 66990 visits per year and 3642 active borrowers (among the highest number according to RMBC’s own figures!

I note with a sense of sarcasm and profound disappointment that by comparison the library in the Aston Ward will INCREASE its hours while it boasts a minuscule amount of support from its host community – Aston Library – currently open for 44.5 hours per week -53155 visits per year – 3158 active borrowers – proposed increase hours to 49 per week.

Once again the residents and ratepayers of Wickersley are destined to be disadvantaged and to see their hours transferred to a community who show nowhere near the level of support as that of Wickersley’s residents and ratepayers.

My feeling is that once again my village is on the receiving end “of the Grald effect”.

Please will you inform me of the following at your earliest convenience –

(a) do you intend to oppose the proposed reduction in Wickersley’s Library hours?

(b) if not, why not?

(c) what specific, measurable, active measures you intend to take to oppose the proposed reduction in Wickersley Library’s hours?

(d) do you intend to organise any public meetings, and when and where, across Wickersley Ward to inform the public of your plans to oppose the proposed reduction in Wickersley Library’s hours?

(e) do you plan to oppose the proposed reduction in Wickersley Library’s hours within –
1. the Rotherham Labour Group, 2. RMBC Cabinet, 3. at full Council Meetings?

(f) if none of the 3 above, please inform me why not.

(g) do you intend to make use of the media to conduct a campaign of opposition to the proposed reduction in Wickersley Library’s hours.

I also note with considerable derision that RMBC are spuriously claiming to be responsible for the creation of the new Wickersley Library, whereas in fact it is my firm belief that the Wickersley Community Centre and Library building is owned by Wickersley Parish Council and was a project that was initiated and actioned and funded entirely by our Parish Council and that RMBC merely rent space from the Parish Council to use for library purposes!

Yours Sincerely,

Donald H. Buxton

See also: Libraries Consultation? Will this be the usual sham?

Mrs Overall’s Acorn Antiques – 18 June 2012 Finance Committee

Mrs Overall’s Acorn Antiques

18 June 2012 Finance Committee

Welcome to Martin Crowther – New Chair – At last! Someone who understands finance.

No Agendas available for the public
Q Why on earth not
A The clerk was asked
Q What did he say
A Well he mumbled a couple. of times (totally inaudible)
Then shouted to the public it is an omission. Can you hear me now
Wow clear and loud – so the mumbling is deliberate?

Cllr Martin Crowther the Chair
Q Wasn’t he absent when he was voted as Chair
A Yes
Q Thought you had to be present
A Well yu know – It is Anston Parish Council
Q How did he do
A A bit nervous and a bit rushing
Q Think he will improve
A Sure

Previous Minutes:

Cllr Thornton (Independent) asked that the minutes be changed by resolution.
They were not a true record of events AGAIN.  The final two lines of the minute were proposed to be deleted.
The Labour party plus Independent Labour voted against the proposal thus leaving the inaccurate recording in the minutes.

Q Why did councillors vote to retain minutes that were untrue
A Come off it – yu know it’s Anston Parish Council –
Q Is this a new thing
A Oh goodness no – integrity – forget it – this is the umpteenth time they have voted to
keep untrue recordings in the minutes. They don’t record what happened but what they would like to have happened.

INTEGRITY!      INTEGRITY!       INTEGRITY!   Get a dictionary and understand the definition councillors

Booming Booming Beck  – Why was he shouting “Move we accept the Minutes”
Waaaaait a minute –
Q   Wasn’t he chairing the previously meeting
A   Most definitely
Q   Wouldn’t he know the minutes were untrue
A   Most definitely

SO – Our newly elected Chair of the Parish Council is willing to condone the false recording of minutes. Shouting “Move we accept the Minutes” To cover his mistakes!

INTEGRITY!   INTEGRITY!   INTEGRITY!  Get a dictionary and understand the definition Chairman

Awards Evening aka  The Parish Council Bun Fight

When the question of the costs of this freebie for councillors came up guess what Cllr Judy Dalton said “I do not eat anything at this and I try very hard not to listen to the music”

No sarcasm then Cllr Dalton!   oink oink

Booming Beck “I would ask Clive (Jepson, Independent) not to mutter under his breath when I am speaking”

Q Was this bun fight, the one the good socialists voted for us, the ratepayer, to pay for them and
their partners
A Yes
Q How much do taxpayers have to cough up for their bun fight each year
A £1,000
Q Have they increased charges to children’s groups this year
A Oooooooh Yes
Q Have they reduced the bun fight budget
A Ooooooooh no  –    snouts in trough oink oink

INTEGRITY!   INTEGRITY!   INTEGRITY!   Get a dictionary and you know the rest

On the recorded vote when Cllr Jepson (Independent) abstained
Q Why did Booming Beck insult him saying “Councillor Jepson is a disgrace”
A  And this from someone who’se integrity has been questioned, see above,
Q Is it acceptable for the Chairman to comment on peoples voting method –
A NO –  Trying to influence councillors decisions in this manner is bullying.
Q Is the Chairman getting too big for his boots
A You Bet – should listen to more experience councillors

INTEGRITY!   INTEGRITY!   INTEGRITY!   Get a dictionary and look up bullying

Quiz Night:

Q Is this another freebie
A Yes
Q Is it open to all taxpayers
A NO – just the same old lot
Q What does it cost us the taxpayer
A  Around £300
Q Is a private club profiting
A You Bet
Q How
A Bar Sales
Q Was it proposed to send letters out to all Anston public houses asking if they wanted to
A Yes to make it more fair this year, finally!

Well councillors the new Standards Regime starts on the 1 July 2012 –  Aint that gonna be interesting!


Goodnight All, with Probity, Honesty etc.,
Mrs Overall