Dominic Beck – files new Interests Declaration

Dominic Beck, the youngest Councillor on RMBC and now the youngest parish council chairman in the Borough, has filed a new Interests Declaration. About time I hear you say!

Dominic Beck’s latest Declaration dated 4th July 2012.

Dominic Beck’s previous Declaration dated 21st June 2011.

Close examination will no doubt be made of these documents and we are left wondering if ‘Wonderboy’ Beck is still not reporting everything as he should, in view of this document:

Company Information Rush House Ltd.

49 thoughts on “Dominic Beck – files new Interests Declaration

  1. That is not good enough, even more interesting in Darren Hughes appointed at the same time. What the hell is going on.?

    Like

  2. It was only my pushing RMBC that got Cllr.Beck to alter his form- and I mean pushing.

    It is interesting that papers show him and Hughes as Directors of Rush House Ltd because Charity Commission do not mention them in its documentation.

    By the way I am sure that it is illegal for a charity to run at a loss and Rush House Ltd had a loss of £2,100 per 2012 accounts.

    Don

    Like

  3. Would not turn up on Charity registration until Annual return done, Charities should not run at a loss but what are these two doing on that board. Hughes has interests in health care, The other one is a director of a company which has contracts with and received money from RMBC

    Like

  4. Beck and Hughes appointed on the same day, not hard to smell a rat is it, would be intrigued to know more on this situation.

    Like

  5. Do you think we should get our mate fly on the wall to use his little wings to fly in and plant himself between Cllr Beck and Hughes lol.

    Like

  6. Why is very body getting they’re knickers in a twist about Hughes and Beck being on the board of an excellent charity? Surely they should be applauded for giving free time to an organisation that is helping lots of young people!!!!!! To suggest there is something cynical about how both of them got on the board at the same time is ridiculous.

    Like

    • Hi Adam,

      Please let me have the pleasure of responding to your thoughtful question, which is simplicity itself to respond to.

      Answer = the self-indulgent political patronage and corpulent junketing and prolific accepting of gifts and hospitality by Da Dodger and the Corn Fed Grunters, Muppets and Clowns, plus their eagerness to put their Cyclops gift-giving muckers on the “Independent Remuneration Panel” who then lavish higher than Sheffield City Council allowances on their Councillor chums has inevitably created a significant vacuum of confidence in ALL Rovrum’s politicians and MPs, particularly Da Laybah herd, and unfortunately as in all situations, the good are destined to be lumped in with the bad.

      Solution = a new Laybah Leedah with highly visible scruples, principles, integrity and selflessness and an eager readiness to serve the Town rather than their own waistline and ego, and who leads by noble example, and maybe, just maybe the tide of cynicism, distrust, disgust, resentment and sheer doubt may begin to ease somewhat.

      Like

  7. Adam, sorry to inform you that we have the right of free speech in the United Kingdom. If we want to get our knickers in a twist about this or anything else then we absolutley have every right. You are also entitled to your opinion but in my own opinion you are being a bit prudish. After all Rotherham Politics has the following statement on it:

    ‘Robust scrutiny of all things political in and around Rotherham. Serving democracy since 2008!’

    Like

  8. When you have been monitoring Rotherham politics as long as some of the people here, Adam you will realise that they have every reason to wonder what they are up to. A lot of these so-called representatives of the people join the Labour Party to advance their careers, not necessarily in politics. Not so long ago you did to get a council house, or the school of your choice and a thousand other things. It gave you an advantage over non-party members. This happens in other parts of the country, the North East being one of the worst. Rotherham Barnsley and Doncaster are still playing the game as regards getting employment for councillors. I remember years ago when I was living in Sheffield, being amazed to find out that Clive Betts before his election to Parliament, was Chief Executive of Sheffield City Council but was Deputy Director of Human Resources in Rotheham. The practice is endemic and has been for years, and again is always worst in councils that have remained in one party control for some years. And the awful part of it is – they don’t see any wrong in it.

    Like

    • Clive Betts was never Chief Executive of Sheffield City Council nor Deputy Director of Human Resources in Rotherham Council. Get your facts right, for goodness sake!

      Like

      • A simple error, Clive Betts was Council Leader of Sheffield City Counci he was appointed as an economist by Rotherham in 1986 The ststement regarding his role as Deputy Director of Human Resources was supplied by RMBC themselves, salary £17.500 Betts was elected to Sheffield City Council in 1976 and became council leader in 1986 THE SAME YEAR ROTHERHAM APPOINTED HIM AS AN ECONOMIST (This from Wikipedia as I could not remember the dates). You may possibly think it’s fine but a number of Rotheham tax-payers weren’t so convinced. It was remarked upon in a Liberal leaflet as I recall at the time.

        Like

  9. I think my last post was misinterpreted, I think there are some excellent contributions from quite a few number of people on this blog and one of the greatest and cherished rights we have in this country is the freedom of speech which I would never want to be diluted in any shape or form.

    The point I was trying to make was what’s so cynical about Hughes and Beck being trustees on the board of Rush House. Now if someone tried to become a trustee and were turned down in favour of these two then I could perhaps understand people getting.

    Like

  10. A little robust scrutiny of your piece about myself & Cllr Dominic Beck regarding our involvement with the Charity which runs Rush House. I feel it is important to clarify the facts in order not to damage this valuable organisation by your careless postings.

    Rush House is a Charitable Organisation providing a range of accommodation and support services including advice and independent living skills training to young people aged 16-25 in the Rotherham area.

    Young People accessing Rush house services are homeless or inappropriately housed and are seeking accommodation with support. Rush Provides support services and fully furnished accommodation in three separate but integrated schemes through a single point of referral, each offering different levels of independence.

    I was approached by the Chairman of the trustees to join the board of Rush House due to my long experience working with third sector organisations both at voluntary and strategic level. These were skills the board, like most charities, wanted to attract. Rush House like many local charities is always short of trustees and looking out for people to bring in skills. My position is voluntary and I receive no remuneration for this work.

    Dominic Beck was similarly approached by the Chief Exec of the charity. The board wished to appoint a role model of a similar age to the vulnerable young people we work with; one who could bring a younger persons perspective and distinctiveness to the board who because of his age would likely have a better understanding of some of the issues faced by Rush House clients.

    To suggest as some of your commentators have that there is some suspicious activity, personal gain or alternative reason for his or my own appointment is completely ludicrous and quite frankly offensive. We’re both contributing to the fantastic and often difficult work of Rush House in a personal and private capacity for the benefit of its service users and the community as a whole. Nothing else. These comments are absolutely pathetic and take all credibility away from your site being a constructive forum for political debate and simply show it to be nothing of the sort.

    A number of charities in Rotherham still have a desperate need for directors/trustees (Rush House still has a shortage of people willing to commit their time and take on the responsibility of being a director) Comments such as the ones on your site are likely to put people off from volunteering because of the ridiculous comments and suggestions as to their motivations for volunteering their time.

    If anyone is interesting in putting time and energy into being a charity trustee I suggest they contact Voluntary Action Rotherham where they are sure to find a group who will be happy to use their skills what every they may be.

    Like

  11. In fairness Darren, people such as yourself and current councillors do not seem to have any communication with the people you represent/represented. If you did, then people wouldn’t feel the need to question your activities, or those of Mr Beck and Ms Hoddinott. If you are helping a charity then obviously that’s great but don’t assume people will know the full story if you don’t make the effort to communicate with them.

    Like

    • Omar, Volunteering and doing work for a charity is not something that needs to be communicated with the public at large. I like most people who do voluntary work, do it for self enrichment and the ability to offer a worthy cause access to skills they ordinarily could not afford. This essentially is a private matter and has little to do with anyone I previously represented as a Councillor.

      With regards to your assertion that I did not have any communication with the people I represented then I’d be open to hear what you think I could have done differently to communicate to every home in the ward I previously represented? I can assure you that I wrote to all householders every quarter throughout my term of office. In my last 18/24 months in addition to these quarterly newsletters I also communicated directly through a column in YourMag(Which was delivered to every home in the ward) every month which contained all of my contact details and what I had been doing over the previous month as their Councillor and what issues were coming up in the area. I conducted an annual survey of the entire ward the last of which I received over 2500 responses in addition to an annual canvass. I used social media maintained an up to date web page containing all the information/forums and held advice surgeries in the community on a weekly basis in addition to street surgeries and public meetings on issues affecting the community. Exactly how did you come to the conclusion that I did not make any effort to communicate with the public?

      Like

      • Your attitude seems to suggest you’re annoyed at the legitimate concerns I have as a Rotherham citizen, and for your information I said SOME councillors and did not aim that specifically at you- personally I couldn’t care less what you did/didn’t do, the fact of the matter is the people of Anston clearly were sick of it, hence Mr Jepson’s excellent victory. I would like to know, as a matter of interest, what MY councillors, who I waste my vote on, do for the community.

        As for the You Mag or whatever it was called, again it didn’t seem to have the desired effect because the people thought you were surplus to requirements! The people who comment on this blog are more than entitled to scrutinise the activities of their councillors, so to refer to their opinions as ‘pathetic’ in your first post just about sums up your cavalier, Tory-ish attitude towards the electorate…or Labour attitude..well which ever party you’re with.

        Like

  12. Omar, Volunteering and doing work for a charity is not something that needs to be communicated with the public at large. I like most people who do voluntary work, do it for self enrichment and the ability to offer a worthy cause access to skills they ordinarily could not afford. This essentially is a private matter and has little to do with anyone I previously represented as a Councillor.

    With regards to your assertion that I did not have any communication with the people I represented then I’d be open to hear what you think I could have done differently to communicate to every home in the ward I previously represented? I can assure you that I wrote to all householders every quarter throughout my term of office. In my last 18/24 months in addition to these quarterly newsletters I also communicated directly through a column in YourMag(Which was delivered to every home in the ward) every month which contained all of my contact details, what I had been doing over the previous month as their Councillor and what issues were coming up in the area. I conducted an annual survey of the entire ward the last of which I received over 2500 responses in addition to an annual canvass. I used social media maintained an up to date web page containing all the information/forums and held advice surgeries in the community on a weekly basis in addition to street surgeries and public meetings on issues affecting the community. Exactly how did you come to the conclusion that I did not make any effort to communicate with the public?

    Like

  13. Omar, Not in the least bit annoyed and apologies if I have misinterpreted your first line”People such as yourself and current Councillors” as referring myself if this was not the case. With regards to people being able to scrutinise the activities of their Councillors in the performance of their duties then I couldn’t agree with you any more. However Councillors are entitled to a private life and activities that are conducted within that capacity are of no interest to the public. Activities that are not Council or political appointments and are in a person’s private capacity are not open to public scrutiny. Both my own and Cllr Beck’s appointment had nothing to do with politics or RMBC. The purpose of the register of interest form is for elected members to record and for the public to see any potential conflicts of interest that may arise from decisions made by elected members in relation to third parties and to ensure fair play. Any contracts that are held are clearly disclosed on the form and it is the decisions on these contacts that are open for public scrutiny i.e. if the said Councillor took any part in these decisions. I have sat on the boards of charitable trusts who give out grants and funding to third sector organisations. These boards conduct very comprehensive reports prior to making any decisions and comments on blogs such as this, which are visible in a standard search, can have a negative impact on their applications success, and form part of these reports which is the reason for my posting. My reason for referring to comments as pathetic refers to suggestions in regards to phone hackings and completely false information about current MP’s which are simply that, pathetic!!

    Like

    • Fair enough, but EVERY councillor will have people in their ward who like to know what they’re doing- probably just because we’re nosey! The non political roles, I agree, do not have to be scrutinised but people can/will discuss them, simply because they’re interested- that’s the point I’m trying to make.

      Like

  14. May not be a very popular view on here but I have to say Mr Hughes has provided a damn good response to some of the outlandish accusations laid against him. Well done Mr Hughes for having the kahoonas to come on here and setting the record straight.

    Like

  15. Mr Hughes
    You appear to have taken exception to what has been said, but the fact of the matter is that unfortunately, if you become a prominent member of society, you are always going to be open to scrutiny. You have put yourself in an awkward position by changing political allegiance and consequently are more likely to be looked at with the proverbial raised eyebrow.

    Rotherham and towns like it seem to encourage the professional meeting attender, or the ‘This’ll look good on my C V’ brigade. I am well aware of the checks made by charitable trusts in giving donations, , and no Trustee of any experience would take any notice of anything appearing on a blog Unfortunately by making long protestations you have made it more likely it will turn up on a search engine. And bear this in mind, none of the criticism was levelled at Rush House or anybody else on that board. The fact Mr Beck has finally managed to comply with the law and put in an up to date Declaration of Interest and the fact that you turn up on the Companies House website and other company check websites puts it firmly in the public domain, which is why the records are available to the public.

    You can hardly wonder, Mr Hughes that people do query things in Rotherham. The greater wonder is that they don’t do a lot more of it.

    Like

  16. Wow me thinketh the gentleman protesteth too much. Darren can you really believe that Dominic Beck has anything in common with the youngsters who need Rush House? He has no concept of the lives these kids have lived. He cannot possibly have any insight to their lives and Rush House are fools if they think he has. As for a role model lets just hope none of them attend any Parish Council meetings he chairs. If Dominic Beck gives as much time to Rush House unpaid as he gives to the parishioners that he is paid to represent he won’t be much use anyway. Your comment borders on being sanctimonious and patronising to the young people who are forced to use Rush House because of circumstances that most of us cannot even begin to understand.

    Like

    • Well said Anne. I would not know the delightful Domiinic if I fell over him in the street but what I have heard has not endeared him to me. And Mr Sylvester puts Darren on his respect is due list does he? I think Mr Sylvester needs to make his mind up whether he runs with the hare or the hounds

      Like

      • Michael
        it is not simplistic when you didge he issue.You have spent a lot of time and energy on the Aston Hall farce, which cost at best £10,000. You appear to refuse to be drawn into the discussion on pilgrims, or the practice of employing councillors in neighbouring authorities, or the fact that they apparently get paid twice for the same chunk of time. This costs hundreds of thousands of pounds a year but you say nothing.
        You are co- opted on to what is, to the best of my knowledge, a Labour dominated Parish Council and minutes from this noble organisation appear not to be published on the internet where they can be read by everyone with an interest.

        Rumour has it that you have joined the Labour Mafia and that you expect to get a set on RMBC in the next year or two – and this from a member of the Labour Party. Rotherham is a small town with a very good bush telegraph. I have no idea whether this is true or scurrilous gossip, but i do wonder sometimes whereyou are coming from.

        Like

  17. caastrickland says “a simple error.”
    Slipshod incompetence, more like.
    Let’s just say that if one of my employees did something similar, he’d be on a formal warning.

    And, then you suggest a Liberal leaflet as a reliable source of record! Clearly demonstrating a complete lack of insight or judgement. That’s a final warning.

    And, as a matter of record, I think you’ll find that he was employed by South Yorks Councty Council before he was elected in Sheffield, and that he was transferred to Rotherham at the demise of the County Council.

    I may not share his politics, but I think he’s entitled to an accurate record, not a piece of fiction.

    Like

    • It’s you isn’t it the Community Champion? Do they pay you to answer these comments on bloggs? Your employees indeed – what a laugh, I did not quote a Liberal leaflet as a reliable source of record, but I can tell you Patrick that one was produced at that time and NOT CHALLENGED BY THE LABOUR CANDIDATE IN THAT WARD OR ANY OTHER WARD. And who are you to issue final warnings. I am well aware that he came from the old People’s Republic, but does that make it any fairer that he should be ostensibly doing a job when quite clearly he is working full time on something else which is also paying him a substantial allowance by the standards of the day. Corruption stinks in every local authority in this area, and it is time it was outed and dealt with. Perhaps you could devote your talents of whatever kind to flushing it out?

      Like

      • Well, there are at least three factual errors in that as well. You’re fired. [Other employees cheer!]

        Clearly, Inspector Clouseau is your role model. However, you seem to lack his saving grace of being able to accidentally stumble across at least one fact, despite his stupidity, clumsiness and incompetence.

        I’m intolerant of corruption and malpractice of any sort in the public and private sector, and have a track record in my own business sector to demonstrate it. But I deal in facts, not wild conspiracy theories, malicious smears or flights of fiction.

        Like

  18. An interesting debate regarding why individuals invest their time and experience into third sector organisations, for many individuals it is for honourable intentions, with no financial reward or public recognition.

    However, there are some individuals, a very small minority, who use the office of Trustee to further their own political or commercial interests; a Trustee will have access to a network of contacts both in the public and private sector, an ideal environment in which to further their own selfish ambitions.

    I do hope that Rush House is not being used as a vehicle to enhance the CV of newly elected Councillor or improve the chances of an ex-Councillor to be re-elected.

    Rush House provides a vital lifeline for individuals whose circumstances are challenging and difficult; it is sanctuary for those in need and gives people hope and an opportunity to move on.
    Hopefully Cllr Beck and Mr Hughes are right for the charity and over time the two new Trustees will demonstrate just what they have contributed to this underfunded and much needed service.

    Do please come back to the blog Cllr Beck and Mr Hughes and let us all know what you have achieved, by acting as a role model, sharing your strategic experience and business acumen with the charity, and particularly how this has contributed to the sustainability and continued success of Rush House.

    I am sure that we will all be very interested to read what you have achieved.

    Like

    • Thank you for bringing some semblence of order to this debate. It has been a concern of mine for some time that the same names turn up on the boards of a lot of voluntary organisations in Rotherham. Regrettably the Labour party has infiltrated a lot of these organisations and this is why a lot of very capable people will not volunteer, because they see what is going on and cannot countenance it. – not for the reasons that Darren Hughes states.

      Like

  19. Factchecker Patrick or whatever other name you choose, you have clearly never employed anyone in you life neither have you ever at any time run a buiness, or it would appear, done anything useful at all. The fact that your postings are coming in in the middle of the night leads me to the opinion that you are yet another of those timewasting sad little tossers who live in some Walter Mitty world. ‘Track record in my own business sector to prove it ‘ indeed! What are you managing director of the Land of Make Believe’ Tell the truth now are you really the Conisbrough Canary or his best mate, or some sad little left wing student dropout – you can tell me, believe me I will understand.

    Like

    • O dear.

      Inspector Clouseau strikes again! He digs another hole for himself with yet more false assumptions and conclusions.

      Just because it’s the middle of the night where you are, does it mean it’s the middle of the night where I am?

      No. And it isn’t.

      It is 21.15 here. Yes……… I’m in the USA keeping some of my customers happy and assisting the UK export drive.

      And as for being a student? Well, 30+ years ago. Happy memories.

      Conisbrough? Well, apart from seeing the Castle from the train, I don’t think I’ve been there in the last 20 years.

      And, I haven’t the faintest idea who you or any of the other posters on this thread are. Nor do I know Patrick, the Conisbrough Canary or his mate! Well, not that I know of.

      I alighted on this site by chance, whilst I was searching for something else, and your post just caught my eye.

      I happen to have an intense dislike of the practice of posting fiction as fact. I’ve been an innocent victim myself in the past – some idiot who got my business confused with one of a similar name – and I know how difficult it is to correct. So, knowing your post was complete drivel, I corrected it.

      Therefore, I would be grateful if you would withdraw your rather unpleasant, completely incorrect and childish aspersions about me.

      Given your track record to date, I can only presume you were looking in the mirror when you referred to “timewasting sad little tossers who live in some Walter Mitty world”.

      Thank you.

      Like

  20. ADAM – Darren Hughes did not set the record straight. Darren Hughes – A fantasist to the end.
    How dare Mr Hughes say he communicated and wrote to all householder every quarter throughout his term of office. This is just not true. Many householders still waiting to receive this!
    Also he says he communicated directly through a column in Your Mag which was delivered to every home in the Ward. This is a lie – Apparently it is not delivered to council tenants. Can we have the facts straight please.
    So many people have complained that Darren Hughes rarely got back to them over any issues raised.

    MICHAEL SYLVESTER – You are easily persuaded. Beware leopards do not change their spots.

    ANT EGGS: You are absolutely right, Dominic Beck cannot have anything in common with the young who need Rush House. He shows little respect to other people, especailly senior citizens and some fellow Borough and Parish Councillors.

    Like

  21. Now I’m back in the UK. The rest of this comment has been deleted because it is outwith Rotherham Politics editorial policy. Rothpol.

    Like

    • Glad to have you back in the UK.

      We are not the kind of blog that takes simple ad hominem attacks upon fellow contributors.

      If you went to a party and then all you did was insult the other guests, how long would it be, before your welcome ran out?

      If you make statements that have the potential to be actionable, you will need to supply the evidence proving it to Rothpol and to reveal you true identity, not for publication, to us.

      Like

      • Your decision to delete part of my post suggests that there is one rule for regular contributors who are given free reign to post fiction as fact and maliciously abuse those who correct them, and another rule for those who hold a mirror up to them. I note that you have deleted, as unacceptable, the phrase “timewasting sad little tossers who live in some Walter Mitty world”. I agree that, as well as being untruthful, it is unacceptable. However, might i draw your attention to the fact that the phrase was introduced to this thread, not by myself, but by Caastrickland.
        It’s time for abit of fair-dealing, methinks.

        Like

        • CAS’s Identity can be established, yours can’t!

          This fact alone gives us much less latitude to publish pejorative comments.

          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.