Protests in Bristol and Glastonbury - The PCC Sue Mountstevens' Attitude Is Wrong...

 

The Website of PCC Sue Mountstevens

Sadly there have been further clashes between protesters and the Police in Bristol. It has been reported locally by our friends at Somerset Live who are also reporting on a protest in Bath, and also in the national news. 

The right to protest is one that must be valued in England.

Bristol has been put in the spotlight and some of the protests have hit the headlines for the wrong reasons. Avon and Somerset Police has been forced to respond to allegations by a Daily Mirror journalist.

By and large, Somerset Independents does not get involved in Bristol or Bath, as they are not in Somerset. But where there are common problems, we do.

This is especially relevant now that there have been more problems in the Avon and Somerset policing area, to add to the problems that occurred in Glastonbury last year.

We think it is of public interest to publish the results of our questions sent to the current Police and Crime Commissioner Sue Mountstevens. And her non-answers.

Somerset Independents was formed during the first lockdown to stand up for Somerset's residents and their rights, in the face of Draconian and unwarranted attacks on democracy and human rights by MPs, national Government and also by local Government here in Somerset.

In a letter to Sue Mountstevens in late 2020 during Lockdown 2, our Leader Andrew Pope asked her about "Democracy, Public Health and Human Rights during a Global Pandemic".

He asked the PCC (the full context of the questions is below).

 

Q1. During Lockdown 2, please tell us how we can:
(a) deliver leaflets. This is not mentioned in the guidance. Yet postal
services continue.
(b) protest in public. The word “protest” is not in the guidance. Yet
enforcement occurs. It is a human right.
(c) express our opinions. The words “free speech” are not in the
guidance. It’s a human right.
(d) vote in postal or online polls. The word “vote” is not in the
guidance. It’s democracy and a human right.
(e) gather to discuss our opinions. We regard our “work” as
campaigning, so please clarify. Freedom of association is a human
right.
(f) exercise our consumer choice to decide what purchases we
consider to be "essential" or "non-essential" to our work? For
example, at street markets in Somerset, which stalls are “essential”
and which are not?

Q2. As for Q1 (a) to (f), but after Lockdown 2 ends on 2nd December.

As you can see below, Sue Mountstevens gave total NON-ANSWERS. She did not answer about during Lockdown 2, because she took so long to answer - it took a long time to even get questions to her. So much for democracy!

All that PCC Sue Mountstevens could manage was the following non-answer: 

"As the lockdown has now concluded and the Tier system has been implemented you may wish to view the guidance on the gov.uk website in relation to Tier 2 to assist with Q1 a-f and Q2. This should provide you with guidance as to what is permitted in accordance with the regulations for Somerset. It may also be appropriate for you to contact the Returning Officer for the Electoral Commission who may be able to assist.

"As for operational policing matters, I would suggest that you make contact with Avon and Somerset Police directly to outline your intentions re protest and campaigning to seek advice on what they may consider outside of the regulations. You can contact Avon and Somerset Police via their website www.avonandsomerset.police.uk."

 

In the light of the Bristol and Glastonbury protests, Andrew Pope responds today (27/3/21) by saying:

 

"It is very disapponting that Sue Mountstevens was so unhelpful.

I HAD ALREADY READ THE GUIDANCE, WHICH WAS WHY I WAS  ASKING HER TO CLARIFY - for the benefit of residents and the Police! In the letter, I clearly said:

'I have read the over 4,400 word guidance". So why did she point me to the guidance again? To avoid answering my questions!

And then Ms Mountstevens gave the usual PCC non-answer of matters being "operational" and not her remit. This has happened when I have questioned other PCCs. It's what they do when they don't want to answer.

The PCC is supposed to be there to hold the Police to account! But Sue Mountstevens doesn't want to. She is stepping down. Perhaps that is for the best.

Nevertheless, the PCC for Avon and Somerset Police refused to answer questions on our hard-won democratic and human rights.

This is supposed to be the person standing up for Somerset residents!

With attitudes like this, I find it very worrying that she refuses to answer about such fundamental rights. And this is especially concerning given the protests in Glastonbury last year and now in Bristol.

If any of the PCC candidates share her attitude, I fear for the future of the PCC role in Avon and Somerset.

I hope that we get a better PCC this year, but I am not optimistic about that."

The Context of the Questions Asked...

*(Leading up to the questions, Mr Pope gave the following context).

"Residents are increasingly concerned with the authoritarian and anti-
democratic actions of Parliament and Government during the current Boris Johnson Government. I hope that you share this concern, which threatens to overload Police resources with unclear law and unwise law.

My concern is echoed by Lady Hale, former President of the Supreme Court, who said recently:
“it is not surprising the police were as confused as the public as to what was law and what was not”.

Government authoritarianism started with the unlawful proroguing of
Parliament, continued with the rushed Lockdown 1 and Coronavirus Act 2020, and has moved onto further restrictions on hard-won liberties, human rights and freedoms, with the latest being Lockdown 2. Serial and repeated policy failures have led to more restrictions – and more confusion of the public. 

I attempted to ask the following questions to you and the Chief Constable during your recent “Facebook Q & A”, submitting them a day in advance, via Twitter. They were not answered. When I asked why, I was told on Twitter to submit them beforehand next time. I did! Still they were not answered. Then they told me to contact local policing teams – but the whole of Somerset is our area of operations! Then we hear of protesters being fined – not ours, but protesters nonetheless. We note the statement given to The Leveller below in relation to a protest in Glastonbury recently. This protest was nothing to do with
us, but the response by local Police adds to our concerns. And I quote:

“Speaking after the protesters had been dispersed, Neighbourhood Sergeant Simon Lancey said:
‘The right to protest is well established in this country and is a key part of our democracy. Officers in the United Kingdom have a long history of upholding this, policing by consent and ensuring the safety of all those exercising that right. The protest was peaceful, however COVID-19 is a deadly disease and there are restrictions in place to prevent its spread, including against such gatherings of more than two people. We have consistently said that flagrant breaches of the regulations, which are designed to protect public health, cannot be allowed and we hope these fines will deter people from similar action in future.’”

Sergeant Lancey is most correct in his first sentence. But our concern has only grown, despite the fact that the protest was nothing to do with us, and we don’t know the exact details of what happened. So we ask please to make it clear how Somerset Independents can carry on its work in the current legal situation. We wish to obey the law. Please advise how we can do so.

And following the questions, Mr Pope said:

"I have read the over 4,400 word guidance, but the answers to the above questions are still not clear. Like Lady Hale, I do feel for the Police, council officers, businesses and the public in how such “guidance” can be so long but still leaves ambiguity. Lengthy guidance points to bad law.
Somerset Independents in its “work” does not wish to breach the rules, but like much of the “guidance” released during the Global Pandemic, it is ambiguous, incomplete and contradictory. So in the interests of clarity and consistency, please could you answer the above questions."

 

Avon and Somerset Police - What Does Current Commissioner Sue Mountstevens Think?

The Avon and Somerset Police and Crime Commissioner
Website and PCC Sue Mountstevens

Late last year, Somerset Independents Leader Andrew Pope sent a set of questions to the current Police and Crime Commissioner Sue Mountstevens. 

The questions were devised in co-ordination with Somerset residents from listening to the views expressed by them.

Below are some of Ms Mountstevens' responses. We provide them for public information and in the public interest, because Ms Mountstevens is not seeking re-election at May's PCC elections for Avon and Somerset. She was elected as an Independent candidate.

Andrew Pope responds with his views, which have been formed by: 

Andrew Pope

 

• two decades as a campaigner and eight years as an elected local councillor, listening to and acting for residents on policing and crime issues and working with police officers and helping residents with Neighbourhood Watch and feeding back their views on police priorities
  
• speaking at the Police and Crime Panel, against Ms Mountstevens' budget increases and mismanagement of the Police's money,
  
• listening to Somerset residents including those who are supporters of Somerset Independents, concerned about the Police and Crime Commissioner and how she has "gone native" in not representing residents
  
• speaking with former and current police officers and 
• speaking with former Independent members of the Police and Crime Panel.
  

 

We would like to hear from all PCC candidates as to their views on how they view the role of PCC and to hear their responses to the same questions.

 

In her response, Sue Mountstevens made a general comment:

"The role of the PCC is to be the voice of local people in policing and to hold the Chief Constable to account. The aim of all PCC’s is to ensure the delivery of an effective and efficient police service within their force area. 

PCC’s are responsible for the ‘totality of policing’ (all of policing, not just some parts of it) but it is important that they enable the police service and Chief Constable to operate independently. The role does not include operational policing matters, such as Police Officer deployment, the investigation of criminal activity and other law enforcement functions, which are under the independent direction and control of the Chief Constable. The PCC provides the Chief Constable with the annual budget and it is for the Chief Constable to allocate it effectively to support the delivery of the Police and Crime Plan which can be viewed here.

PCC’s will ensure that community needs are met by the police effectively. They work in partnership with a range of agencies at local and national level to ensure there is a unified approach to preventing and reducing crime."

So to the PCC's responses to our questions. 

1. We asked Sue Mountstevens about her being an "Independent" PCC:

"As advocates of independent elected representatives, we believe that the reputation of all independent elected representatives needs to be upheld, according to the Nolan Principles. This is one of the tenets that we believe distinguishes independents from the Westminster parties who regularly tarnish public office, elected representatives and the Principles.

You were elected as an Independent PCC. Hence why we are contacting you."

Sue Mountstevens replied:

"I am one of only four Police and Crime Commissioners (PCC) across the country that are not aligned to a Westminster political party and therefore considered independent of party politics. I am not a politician and during my terms as PCC I have strived to keep politics out of policing."

Andrew Pope comments:

"If Sue Mountstevens claims to keep politics out of policing, then why did she ask the Chief Constable Andy Marsh to present HER budget at the Police and Crime Panel?

According to Panel members, this is normal. But it is wrong. It is HER budget, as she has admitted in her response. She said "The PCC provides the Chief Constable with the annual budget".

So why didn't she present the Budget? In any council budget setting meeting, it is the elected representatives that present the Budget for the Council. So instead of keeping politics out of policing, Sue Mountstevens has politicised the Chief Constable. This is wrong and doing the exact opposite of what she claims.

As for being an "Independent" PCC, I do not agree. Somerset Independents has a set of criteria of what makes a truly independent elected representative. The criteria are lengthy but we have tested them with our colleagues in other parts of the England and Wales and applied them to Somerset's independent councillors. Many of those so-called "Independent" Somerset district and county councillors fall very short of those criteria.

Sue Mountstevens also falls short of those criteria for an Independent, especially in the light of the findings of the investigation into how she appointed John Smith, her Deputy PCC."

 

2. We asked Sue Mountstevens about her appointment of John Smith as her Deputy PCC. We also asked her about the Nolan Principles, which all public servants are bound by. We said:

"Residents and members of the Police and Crime Panel have expressed concern regarding the appointment of the Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner as reported by the BBC. We share the concerns expressed about the Chief Constable appearing to endorse the Deputy, especially as you also endorsed Mr Smith as a candidate for the postponed 2020 PCC elections.

Please could you explain how and why you allowed this chain of events to occur, and whether and why you think that you have upheld the Nolan Principles in doing so?"

Ms Mountstevens replied:

"Mr Smith was appointed as Deputy PCC after the global pandemic caused significant increase in the role of the PCC. There is no specific guidance on appointing a deputy and this resulted in appointment through a transparent process that was approved by a majority vote by the Avon and Somerset Police and Crime Panel. I believe that staying on for another year despite my intention to stand down and seeking support to enable me to deliver on the needs of the community is a clear demonstration of the Nolan Principles and I continue to do all I can to ensure that my team and I can rise to the very real challenge posed by the current climate."

Andrew Pope comments:

"As with the Budget, Ms Mountstevens has politicised the Chief Constable by him appearing to endorse Mr Smith.

PCC's are political roles and the Chief should not be commenting on any such appointment. Indeed, the PCC is there to hold the PCC to account, so any comments would be entirely inappropriate.

Yet that is precisely what happened! The BBC report clearly states that, and I quote:

"Chief Constable Andy Marsh wrote a letter backing Mr Smith as the deputy, which has been criticised as the PCC should hold the force to account."

I have asked her to justify it in the letter that we sent her, but Sue Mountstevens has not given a convincing answer.

And she did not mention the Nolan Principles in reference to her questionable appointment of Mr Smith."

3.  We asked about the boundaries of Avon and Somerset for policing:

"Do you think it is appropriate that “Avon” is connected to Somerset for the Police, but not for any other public service, boundary or role, except perhaps for aspects of the NHS? Would you agree that the priorities for “Avon” are very different to the priorities for Somerset? And thereby resources that should be available for Somerset are taken away for Avon’s use instead? Therefore shouldn’t Avon be detached from Somerset for Policing?"

 Ms Mountstevens said:

"Avon and Somerset Police operate a borderless policing approach that ensures an
appropriate level of resources across the force area but the ability to move and flex across the force area dependent on demand. For example, if an incident in Somerset required additional and specialist resources then resources from across the force area could be deployed to where they are needed most. I do recognise that the difference between the crime types experienced in the urban areas in comparison to the more rural areas, and it is incumbent on local policing commanders to ensure that their local policing teams understand the offending in their areas and work with their communities to problem solve, disrupt and deter offending."

4. We also challenged the level of the public's support claimed by Sue Mountstevens as PCC, using questionable statistics and a questionable survey. We asked:

"[On the PCC website], you claim that the “majority” of people who responded to your survey on policing, supported the approach. Yet it was very close - a 51% to 49% split. Do you feel that the article on your website was therefore exaggerating the extent to which your Police service has consent from the public, in terms of “policing by consent”? Why do you feel that the positive response was so close to the negative response?"

Ms Mountstevens said:

"51% of respondents agree that Avon and Somerset Police has got the right balance between engaging with local people and enforcing the coronavirus regulations, while 40% believe the police are not doing enough to enforce the health emergency rules. The remaining 9% who completed the survey believe the police are enforcing coronavirus restrictions too much. Avon and Somerset Police has adopted a step change more recently in their approach with a clear focus on explain, engage and encourage but with a swifter move to enforcement options when people refuse to engage with direction."

Andrew Pope comments:

"I will let the response from Sue Mountstevens speak for itself, apart from to say that she as PCC also used dodgy statistics over the Police Budget."

5. We also asked Ms Mountstevens a set of questions about Coronavirus, the Glastonbury Festival and other large events such as at the Bath and West Showground. We want to see Somerset residents protected.

Her response was very disappointing:

"Your questions relate to operational policing matters that are subject to discussion and decision-making between the police and the event leads. If you wish to obtain further information on this I would advise you to contact Avon and Somerset Police for the information that you seek. As PCC, I am unable to answer the questions that you have raised."

Andrew Pope comments:

"I've heard this many times from PCC's when I have questioned them.

It seems to be the stock response when they don't want to answer.

She is the elected representative, there to answer for the Police's performance. But when I pass on concerns from the public about the licensing objectives which include public safety, Ms Mountstevens avoided the question.

How disappointing. The Police should be there, working with local authorities to protect us all, and the resources should be prioritised to do that, instead of spending money on new buildings for the Police and spending a fortune on IT."

 

Somerset Independents will continue holding elected representatives to account.

Standing Up For Residents

 

VICTORY: We Prove Mendip Council Broke The Law of Council Meetings

 

Mickey Mouse Mendip Council
Breaks The Law

We told you so!

Mendip District Council is a Mickey Mouse Council, barely above the worst episodes of the Vicar of Dibley.

They do not even bother to follow the most basic of the laws of council meetings.

This includes allowing a chair to preside at his own election! Yes, really!

AND THEN THEIR CHIEF LEGAL OFFICER EVEN DEFENDS IT!

Denise Wyatt, our expert in council governance, wrote to the Monitoring Officer David Clark following the ridiculous January 2021 Scrutiny Board.

Denise Wyatt

Denise pointed out that nobody can preside at their own election. But David Clark disagreed! 

At tonight's March 2021 Mendip Scrutiny Board, they were forced to admit that they had got it wrong.

Mr Clark's full title is "Head of Law & Governance Services and Monitoring Officer". We quote from the Formal Complaint letter that Denise received.

Fake Independent Councillor Chris Inchley did not step down when he was falsely "elected" as Chair at the 25th January 2021 meeting. Then the Vice Chair Barbi Lund was also falsely "elected" as Vice-Chair.

If you remember, and as documented on this website, the former Chair Tory Councillor Philip Ham Ham RESIGNED as Chair at the November 2020 Scrutiny Board. 

Ham is the councillor who owns land involved in the controversial Sandys Hill Lane development near Frome - as reported by Somerset Independents and Private Eye. He resigned due to a lack of scrutiny, during the Easthill "farcical" meeting (Ham's words, not ours).

On 9th February 2021, the Monitoring Officer had tried to explain it away in his arrogant and incorrect response and claimed that:

"the process followed was all in accordance with our standing orders".

He also told Denise that:

"As I have dealt with your query, I consider our dialogue on this matter at an end and accordingly I do not propose to enter into further correspondence with you in this regard.

With kind regards

David Clark"

Denise replied to tell Mr Clark that it was NOT at an end and that the Council's standing orders were wrong and would therefore need to change.

A month after the exchange, on 17th March 2021, Denise received a letter from the Monitoring Officer.

It was another response to her Formal Complaint. NO, IT WAS NOT AT AN END, BEFORE, BUT IT IS NOW!

Confirming that she was right, and as now admitted by David Clark's second letter, the Monitoring Officer wrote:

"the election that took place at the above meeting does not stand as a valid appointment...

The formal appointment of Chair will therefore be addressed at the next scheduled meeting of the Scrutiny Board."

At tonight's Scrutiny Board, the falsely and void "elected" Councillor Chris Inchley was forced to step down.

Senior Council officer Tracy Aarons was forced take over from him to ensure that he did not preside at his own election.

She informed the meeting that the election of Chair and Vice Chair was to be re-done.

Fake Independent Councillor Chris Inchley was elected as Chair and Green Councillor Barbi Lund as Vice Chair. 

This time, they did not preside at their own election.

Denise Wyatt says:

"This is not the first time I have had to challenge the Council's procedure.

As before, I was told there was nothing wrong.

Councillors are left by Mendip's Chief Legal Officer to run amok and totally undermine democracy.

They do not follow proper process with OUR MONEY and our democracy.

AND EVEN TONIGHT, THEY STILL GOT IT WRONG!

They did not have the re-election of the Chair and Vice-Chair on the agenda!

What a Mickey Mouse Council Mendip Is!"

Standing Up For Democracy

 

Council Tax - Hypocrite Green Councillor Hayden Cannot Justify Not Paying!

Green Councillor
Francis Hayden

We reported on Green Councillor Francis Hayden who was banned from voting on Mendip residents' council tax for 2021-22.

Why was he banned? Because he hadn't paid his council tax.

Councillor Hayden is Councillor for Cranmore, Doulting and Nunney on Mendip District Council in Somerset. The ward is between Shepton Mallet and Frome.

We asked Councillor Hayden a set of questions to see if he could justify his failure(s) to pay council tax.

Although he replied, he couldn't justify them. We offered him a right of reply, but he did not answer all of the questions (see below). 

He barely even answered any of them, instead providing pathetic and facetious non-answers.

But Councillor Hayden reckons that his fellow Mendip councillors support his non-payment of council tax. He hasn't provided any evidence. But one Lib Dem Mendip Councillor has leapt to his defence...

It is Frome Councillor Helen Sprawson-White. She is one of the fake independents who used to be Lib Dem, then Independent, then Lib Dem again - despite telling us by email that she would not join any political party! She claimed our pointing out his non-payment of council tax was:

"Below the belt, this year has been incredibly tough financially on many people due to the pandemic; Francis was incredibly honest by stating he was in arrears - not through choice. He didn’t have to declare his personal circumstances he could have abstained."

Not only is her defence lacking in credibility. It is incorrect.  

He was barred from voting at all, by law. And by senior council officers! He cannot abstain, because he cannot vote at all! An abstention IS a vote.

Do you think that Mendip councillors should be supporting a councillor that does not pay their council tax?

One member of the public told us that the Greens are:

"Footpads, vagabonds and hypocrites".

Do you agree?

It seems that Mendip residents are outraged by the increases to council tax. All you need to do is listen to and read the comments from residents of Frome and other parts of the Mendip area such as Evercreech, where Cabinet Member for Finance Councillor Barry O'Leary is the ward councillor.

We asked Councillor Hayden the following questions:

Q1. We like to offer the right of reply to councillors, so would you like to give the public an explanation, and how much you owed Mendip District Council at the time of the meeting?

Councillor Hayden did not tell us how much money he owed on his council tax, or whether he still owes the council tax.

Q2. Would you like to let everyone know whether you will be paying your council tax in the future?

Cllr Hayden also did not say whether he would pay it back.

What did he say, instead of providing some justification. Apparently, he thinks it is OK for him not to pay his council tax:

"there is a global corona virus pandemic going on and that some industries have been hit particularly hard. My own income depends on catering for weddings, parties and music festivals (including Glastonbury) all of which have been cancelled for the last year. Many of my friends have wound up their businesses altogether and are surviving on Universal Credit. Others have adapted and are keeping going on life support with loans, grants, overdrafts, mortgage holidays and, when the worst comes to the worst, delayed bills."

It seems to be lost on Councillor Hayden that he is a councillor, and not separate to your council tax. Councillor Hayden is one of the Mendip councillors that voted on OUR council tax in 2020/21.

Councillors vote on our council tax. Councillors SET THE COUNCIL TAX.

He voted to increase YOUR council tax - but did not pay it himself. 

We think that he should resign. So we asked him whether he would...

Q3. Or will you be resigning your seat, which would seem reasonable?

Of course, Councillor Hayden did not answer this question.

Q4. If you had been able to vote on the council tax setting, how would you have voted? I note that despite being in an "opposition" party, that you voted FOR the council tax setting last year - ANOTHER increase.

Would you have gone along with your Group Leader Shane Collins, who despite being the Leader of an Opposition Group voted FOR the Lib Dems Council Tax increase? 

Of course, Councillor Hayden did not answer these questions either. 

As the Green Group Leader Councillor Shane Collins, voted for the council tax to go up, is it safe to say that Cllr Hayden would have done so, if he was not banned? 

We do not know for sure, because Councillor Hayden did not answer. But it is a reasonable conclusion, because of what he said instead of answering our question. And in the light of the fact that Hayden had voted for an increase the year before, in 2020:

"When it comes to the level of Council Tax we should pay, you will be aware (or at least you should be) that over recent years the government in Westminster has stopped contributing to our income altogether and that as a result our budget has been slashed by around 30%. Under the circumstances I take considerable pride in the services that Mendip continues to be able to offer, especially to the people who need those services most, and perhaps I could offer you the chance to explain if we were to reduce our budget even further which of these services you think should be cut."

So Councillor Hayden does not even think to mention that the budget could be spent more wisely. 

Councillor Hayden even takes pride in Mendip District Council.

At the Council meeting, Hayden did not speak against the increase. He took no action.

Most residents don't take pride. Residents are appalled at Mendip's performance and the increase to council tax by all councils in Somerset.

Try telling Mendip's residents of Councillor Hayden's "pride" when:

• residents' bins were not collected, and if they were, we had to wait THREE WEEKS
  
• residents' recycling was not done, and/or not done properly
  
• we are paying more council tax
• volunteer residents are having to clear up the litter on the streets of Frome that is not collected by Mendip District Council, whose job it is to do this
  
• residents are having pay more to bury the dead
• residents are having to pay more so that Councillor Barry O'Leary and the other Liberal Democrat councillors who run Mendip, can gamble millions of pounds of public money on "property investment"
  

We think that Councillor Hayden will find that residents do not support his view.

He is trying to defend the indefensible.

And again, we point out that Liberal Democrat and Green councillors in Mendip are one and the same.  

They appear to have had a secret deal on where to stand candidates in the 2019 District council elections - and where to not stand candidates - as told to us by a Liberal Democrat but denied by Greens. Just look at the candidate lists - you will see the pattern of collusion.

Some kind of pact continues to this day, with Lib Dems and Greens voting together on increasing your council tax. The Tories did too!

What is the point of voting out the Tories if you just get more incompetence or corruption as with the Tories?

Somerset residents deserve better than Lib Dem, Green or Tory, same old story. 

Whether the rosette is Yellow, Orange, Green or Blue, they all do the same to you.

In Full: The Two Resignations of Independent Police and Crime Panel Members

Police and Crime Commissioner
Sue Mountstevens

Did you know that there is a Police and Crime Commissioner, elected by the people of "Avon" and Somerset? Most people did not vote for Sue Mountstevens, but she is the current PCC. She is not standing in the May 2021 PCC elections.

There is a Police and Crime Panel that is supposed to hold the PCC to account.

Currently it is ALL party politicians as councillors. ALL except for one Independent Panel member, the Chair Richard Brown, who we understand has recently recovered from Covid-19.

There are no Independent councillors, despite there being many Independent councillors in Somerset and "Avon".

We think there is definitely a lack of "independence" and "independents" about the Police and Crime Panel that is supposed to hold to account the supposedly "independent" PCC Sue Mountstevens.

There are supposed to be four Independent Panel members. But there is only one.

The other three have not been filled.

According to the Somerset County Council officer who administers the Panel, one of them resigned in 2020 due to work commitments.

This role has not been filled.

The other two Panel members were Joseph Mullis and Andrew Sharman.

They resigned in protest.

We have gained their permission to publish their resignations in full.

There are PCC elections in May 2021. They are still going ahead, despite the Pandemic.

Their resignations are in full, below. Please note that their resignations are the views of the authors of the resignations and not those of Somerset Independents.

We believe that publishing these resignations is in the public interest, particularly as there is a PCC election in May 2021.

We would be interested to hear from any Police and Crime Panel members, as to their views.

And most importantly, we would like to hear from members of the public about their views about the the role of the PCC and the PCC elections.

Resignation from Police and Crime Panel by Joseph Mullis,  December 2020

"Dear Chair,

As I am entering my 5th year as an Independent Member of the Police and Crime Panel, it has become more and more of a soul searching exercise and as such, I am starting to question my own conscience and integrity and my whole purpose as a Panel Member or actually the purpose of the Panel as a whole.

In short, during the past 2 years I have been somewhat disillusioned by the spiral of decline in the delivery of key functions of the PCC. I have come to the view that honesty, transparency, due diligence and fair process are recurring themes not exercised in her duties. This has factored in to the lack of confidence I have in the PCC and as such does not sit well with me in my continued role as a Panel Member.

It is for these reasons that I, after careful consideration, have taken the decision to resign from the Avon & Somerset Police and Crime Panel with immediate effect.

I am thankful for all the challenges and opportunities whilst having a seat at the table and have met some very dedicated people. I will always value my time spent as a member of the Panel. It is my hope that any UK wide Home Office review in the function of the PCC will evaluate concerns and in doing so can be a vehicle for change.

All that leaves me to say is that I wish you and Panel Members a very happy Christmas and Happy New Year, with the very best for the future.

Kind Regards,

Joseph Mullis"

 

Resignation from Police and Crime Panel by Andrew Sharman, December 2020

" Dear Chair,

 Seven years ago this month I was appointed to the Police & Crime Panel as an independent member.

 At that time, I truly believed in the importance of the role that a Police & Crime Commissioner holds in ensuring local delivery on behalf of residents from the police.

 I also naively believed in our own PCC’s pledge to “keep politics out of policing” and “to be a voice for those without one”.

 I understood our function was to hold the PCC to account on behalf of our residents and I have undertaken that role diligently over my time.

 The past year, for a number of reasons, has been incredibly tough on us all but the recent proceedings of the panel has left me questioning whether such idealistic notions of openness and transparency that I held ever existed or whether we were participating all along in a charade to give the pretence of governance.

 I previously likened the panel to a dental appointment as you turn up once every few months, go through the process and then duly leave it all behind you until the next one. Numerous recommendations in our reports have never been responded to and some really questionable conduct left without nothing more than a letter stating an alternative view from the panel.

 This year two key issues have brought home to me how completely dysfunctional and ineffective a Police & Crime Panel is.

 The performance on Tuesday concerning the fraud issue to me was utterly ridiculous.

 There should never have been a vote of that nature while the IOPC is considering a number of serious allegations against the PCC and her deputy.

 Everyone who supported the PCC will be left exposed should it come out that there was indeed any form of misconduct - given the efforts undertaken to thwart the extraordinary general meeting before the subsequent IOPC referral, the Panel should never have proceeded with this until the IOPC had returned their findings.

 Again key questions were missed or misinformation was provided by the PCC that went unchecked.

 She said BBRS would be dealing with such complaints. Anyone who has looked into it will know that they offer only a civil remedy and not a criminal investigation, so why is the PCC making a false claim about it’s function?

 I still harbour grave concerns around the Thames Valley Police review. I (like so many) laboured under the illusion that this was a full investigation not a limited review via a paper sift.

 We should have received a full report other than a verbal response of receiving “a clean bill of health” from the PCC and her now Deputy (CEO at the time) as that to me was completely misleading to the panel and the wider community.

 I am also gravely concerned that John Smith was involved with the review and the scoping of it. Given the serious allegations made against him by victims, it shows a grave error in judgement for the PCC to have him anywhere near the review.

 It fuels the perception that there is some of interference from the OPCC in what should have been a purely operational matter.

 This is why I could not support the vote you put forward.

 I felt it was wholly inappropriate in the circumstances but also key issues remain unresolved in my conscience. Therefore I am not convinced that the PCC has properly fulfilled her responsibilities in respect of this issue.

 The callous disregard demonstrated to those who have had their lives ruined by fraud has shown me that the “voice of the voiceless” only applies to those the PCC favours and not all, that is not what my expectations of that election pledge was and I’m personally disappointed at the way these victims have been treated by the system that is supposed to be there to protect them.

 The second issue that I am personally struggling with is the whole process around the deputy and his appointment.

 A wide number of issues have, in my view, remained unresolved or not dealt with as robustly as they could have been.

 No PCC should be leaning on their Chief Constable to support a political appointment, especially when they are a declared candidate.

 The issue around undue influence on a democratic process as the election I have struggled to reconcile and the absence of the responses from the PARO on their guidance on this matter troubles me.

 The other declared candidates are disadvantaged as the Deputy is accessing all manner of briefings, meetings, and beyond which gives them an undeniable advantage in the coming election.

 So much for keeping “politics out of policing”, another broken election pledge!

 Balancing my principles within the limitations of the Panel has over this year become increasingly difficult.

 Being the permanent voice of concern has led to me being marginalised and,as previously raised with you and the Monitoring Officer, it is clear that there is a small clique actively working against me.

 Even staff associated to the panel have been briefing against me with fellow Panel members and I’m not prepared to sit quietly by whilst efforts to undermine my position continue.

 I have always stood up for what is ethically right for my conscience and whilst I recognise that this is uncomfortable for those in a position of responsibility, it was that very trait that led to me being appointed.

 It has become nigh on impossible for me to continue given the animosity displayed to me by a few including the PCC herself.

 Despite an electoral commitment to “openness and transparency”, the moment she is held to account over her conduct she has adopted quite a confrontational attitude towards me and it has been noted by others.

 With all these factors in mind, the difficulty in delivering effective scrutiny in this circumstances is only going to increase and as a consequence of these issues, I am resigning from the Police & Crime Panel with immediate effect.

 I have given seven years and during the past year it has been apparent that the warnings and concerns shared with the PCC and Panel are not being heeded and I have significantly more productive work that I can be getting on with.

 The hours given to our work this year with all that has been going on has been draining, so for the good of myself and my family I need to move on.

 I will sign off with one further point.

 The work we do is far more important than I believe many of my colleagues realise.

 Community confidence in policing is essential and stronger scrutiny is needed to assure residents that all is above board with the PCC.

 Knowing all that I have witnessed this year, I believe we are falling well short of that and it must be addressed.

 Hopefully, the Home Office review will provide greater powers and responsibilities because the current set up is failing our community.

 My personal view is that I have lost all confidence in our local police governance and particularly in our own PCC and her deputy.

 They have prioritised succession over the community and we have been exploited to become a key enabler of their personal desire and not what is best for our residents.

 I can not be associated with that and it does a great disservice to her office and the constabulary to have the circus she has created damaging public confidence and faith in our local policing.

 I would urge them both to consider their positions because their conduct has brought the OPCC and Avon & Somerset into disrepute.

 This is not what the exceptional team at the OPCC and our brave and professional police family deserves.

 They should be able to go about their business of keeping our communities safe with the calamity being inflicted on their collective reputations by the PCC and her Deputy.

 I hope that if there’s any integrity or credibility remaining within them, they will step down to allow a fresh start for all.

 That would be the biggest act of public service they have provided this year.

 If not, I hope that their duplicitous and manipulative conduct is remembered at the ballot boxes.

 All that remains is to thank you and colleagues (past and present) for your time over the years and I wish all well for their future endeavours - on the plus side, this will be the last time you have to read one of my essays!

 Yours sincerely,
 Andrew Sharman"

Who Is Holding Our Police To Account? Not the Elected PCC for one...

 

The Avon and Somerset Police and Crime Commissioner Website

The Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Police is currently Andy Marsh. He is not supposed to be a political figure, but a servant of the public - a civil servant. The Police is not the same as a council, or Government, but that is what he is supposed to be - outside politics and that is what the majority of the public want.

Mr Marsh regularly claims that his Constabulary polices us citizens by "consent" of the public. This is supposed to be a long-held principle of policing in England. Mr Marsh was brought in after the previous Chief Constable was removed.

• But what happens if you are unhappy with the Police? You can lodge a complaint.
• What happens if you do not like their priorities for policing?
  
• And what happens if you are unhappy about how Police money is spent?
• What if you think they are spending public money on the wrong things?
  
• Who do you contact?

Do you write to your MP? Maybe you could, as some of the Police budget comes from the Government. Other parts of the budget come out of your council tax. Did you know that? It is there on your council tax bill, dropping onto your doorstep now or soon.

The vast majority of Somerset residents believe that "politics" should stay out of policing. Whether they perceive "politics" as meaning Westminster party politics, or just the general definition of all politics, is not clear. What does it mean in practise?

Instead of keeping politics out of policing, the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition Government during 2010 to 2015 (David Cameron and Nick Clegg) had an idea.

Despite public opinion, they brought politics into policing.

They brought in the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC), a person that is elected.

In the first elections, the turnout was incredibly low. It was a cold November. The legitimacy of the PCC is questionable because of this low turnout. Turnout was higher in the second elections, but they coincided with other elections. 

The fact is that the vast majority of people did not vote in the PCC elections and their legitimacy and accountability is seriously under question.

During those elections, the current incumbent PCC Sue Mountstevens, claimed that she wanted to keep politics out of policing. She stood as an Independent. You would think that Somerset Independents would support that. In principle, we do. But not all independents are the same, as we have already made clear on this website. Somerset Independents holds all elected representatives to account.

So has Ms Mountstevens done what she promised - kept politics separate? The evidence suggests that she has not.

Our Leader Andrew Pope spoke at the Police and Crime Panel. It is supposed to hold the PCC to account. He reports:

Andrew Pope
Leader of Somerset Independents

"At that virtual meeting, they considered the PCC's Budget. I asked them to refuse it. They did, but then when I was not there for the follow-up, they caved in to the PCC.

It is important to note that it is Ms Mountstevens' Budget, and not the Chief Constable's Budget.

Yet during the meeting, Ms Mountstevens pressured the Chief Constable to give a presentation on the PCC's Budget. It should be the PCC presenting it, not the Chief Constable. Ms Mountstevens, by doing this, politicised the Police.

This is doing what Ms Mountstevens promised that she would not do. She is putting the Chief Constable in a position that he should not be in - a political position on how public money is spent and whether the public should pay more.

As a former public servant and a former councillor, I feel for Mr Marsh that he was asked to do this. And I understand from former Panel members of the Police and Crime Panel that this is something that has crept in over time.

Ms Mountstevens is elected and she needs to answer to the public.

Something is wrong with how Ms Mountstevens has been a PCC. She is not standing in the May 2021 PCC elections, which is probably for the best given the circumstances. Ms Mountstevens has been dogged by controversy.

All the Police and Crime Panel are party politicians, except for one.

Independent Panel members are missing. There is just one, and the three other roles have remained empty. The public need to know why. Two Independent Panel members resigned in protest. We have their resignations in full and with their permission, we will be publishing them. The public need explanations. But Ms Mountstevens is leaving.

I hope that any future PCC will stop putting politics into policing. 

To what extent that is possible and will be possible, given that the role itself is political, remains to be seen. Perhaps they should be scrapped altogether? 

I have been listening to a group of residents including former Panel members, potential candidates and a former PCC candidate, as to what their views are.

I have also been speaking to current and former police officers about it.

I would be interested to hear from members of the public as to their views on this matter.

Somerset Independents mostly focus on Somerset. But if you live in the "Avon" area - South Gloucestershire, Bristol and Bath, feel free to get in touch too.

Somerset Independents will continue to hold those in power to account - including those independents who we feel are not worthy of the name."

Standing Up For Somerset's Residents

 

Council Tax Going Up: Why Don't You Ask Councillors Why?

 

Lib Dem, Labour, Green or Tory
SAME OLD STORY

Somerset Independents was formed a year ago to listen and act for residents.

We have listened to how people have struggled during the Pandemic.

We have listened how residents feel that councils and the Government have continually let them down and spent huge sums of public money without explanation or accountability. 

Money which we, the taxpayers, will have to pay back - or even our grandchildren will have to.

We listened to, share and empathise with residents' outrage at how and why council tax is increasing at this horrible time.

Your council tax bill is made up of several parts.

And you will find that most, if not all, parts, HAVE INCREASED! The Somerset County Gazette has reported:

"Each of the five local authorities is raising their portion of the council tax by the highest possible amount they can without triggering a referendum, with similar rises being planned by the police and fire services."

That is why we took action, after we had listened to residents.

 

Standing Up For Residents

As reported on this website, Somerset Independents Co-Founder and Leader Andrew Pope spoke at the Police and Crime Panel and Somerset County Council. Andrew pointed out their failure to spend our money wisely and with residents' priorities in mind.

Andrew asked them to refuse increases. At the first Panel, they refused the increase. But then councillors caved in with a minor change, adding more cost to council tax bills.

Also as reported on this website, Co-Founder Denise Wyatt spoke at Mendip District Council. Denise asked them to refuse increases, pointing out Mendip's major failings to deliver basic services for residents including collecting the bins every three weeks, "if we are lucky" because residents are regularly having missed collections. 

Mendip's failings make residents feel that the council lets them down, even on the bins. But they also want residents to do their own litter picking, and to fund councillors gambling with public money on property investment.

Mendip's Lib Dem, Green and Tory Councillors and fake independent councillors* all voted to increase your council tax.

They voted to do this. But one Green Councillor has not even paid his council tax. More details here.

What can YOU do to hold councillors to account?

Join us in standing up for residents! We are volunteers who formed Somerset Independents to stand up for residents.

Councillors are supposed to listen to you. They are supposed to represent your interests. Instead, they are voting through council tax increases.

Why don't you help us to hold them to account? 

We ask you to write to your councillors and ask them to justify why they voted to increase your council tax.

You can get in touch with your councillors by putting your postcode into the WriteToThem.com website. It will also tell you which councils govern your area.

You can also get in touch by visiting the Councillors page on your local council website.

For Mendip District Council, it is here.

For Somerset West and Taunton District Council (previously West Somerset and Taunton Deane councils, before councillors voted to merge them), it is here.

For South Somerset District Council, it is here. 

For Sedgemoor District Council, it is here.

For Somerset County Council, it is here.

There are also parish and town councils that take even more of your cash. Ask your parish or town councillor how they voted and why. They do not appear on the WriteToThem.com website.

For example, residents of Frome are complaining about the 9.2% increase by Frome Town Council. Frome Town councillors need to explain why they approved this. Here is their website, but we cannot publish all the parish and town councils for Somerset here. There are too many.

At least the Frome Town Council website is better than the others above, with a clear link to the councillors on the home page. One of the worst is the Sedgemoor website, on which it is very difficult to find contact details for the councillors.

We give you the tools to act.

Please let us know their responses. 

Standing Up For Residents and Their Money

 

 

* None of the Mendip independents are truly independent. More of that elsewhere on our website.

Mendip Green Councillor Hasn't Paid His Council Tax!

 

Green Councillor Francis Hayden
Has Not Paid His Council Tax

Green Councillor Francis Hayden was BANNED from voting on your council tax. 

Because he had not paid his council tax. Yes, really. Ask him why. Here is his email address:

cllr.Hayden@mendip.gov.uk

We have asked Councillor Hayden and his answers were facetious and pathetic. He did not answer our questions and cannot justify his non-payment of council tax - as we show in this article here. We would be interested to hear what his response is to you. Here are his other contact details.

Mendip councillors voted to increase your council tax, but one of their councillors hasn't paid.

WHAT A CHEEK!

The Green Group of councillors Leader Shane Collins voted to increase your council tax. We have asked him why, but he has not responded. Here are his contact details.

We have suggested that Councillor Hayden should resign his council seat.

Councillor Hayden and Councillor Collins both voted in 2020 to increase the council tax, along with almost all other Mendip councillors - Lib Dem, Green, Tory or fake independents*. Ask them why. We have.

We provide the contact details for you on this website here. 

Standing Up For Residents

 

* We say "fake" independent. Because we have the evidence to show that none of the so-called "independent" councillors on Mendip are truly independent. We challenged them and several squirmed back to the Lib Dems or Tories. The worst culprit was Councillor Helen Sprawson-White, the Chair of Mendip District Council. We have it in writing that she would not join a political party. Then she did - the Liberal Democrats which she was previously a member of. Councillor Hayden has been trying to defend Councillor White on social media, in the light of attacks from Frome residents and businesses.

Comeytrowe/Trull Development - Lib Dems Fail But Then Try To Cover It Up!

Somerset Lib Dems
Will Say Anything For Votes

Somerset Lib Dems will say anything for votes. Or anything to try to defend the Liberal Democrats from their record of failure across the County.

In a letter to the County Gazette, a Mr "Alan Paul" of Taunton, talks about the Comeytrowe/Trull Development.

He says that it would be easy to blame the Planning Committee, and then:

"But the real culprit is Government planning regulations which gives all the power to the developers, leaving councillors who represent local residents almost powerless."

An "Alan Paul" was previously a Lib Dem county councillor. 

Is this a remarkable coincidence, or is he writing to the Gazette to try to absolve the Lib Dems for their failures? It appears to be the latter.

Leader of Somerset Independents, Andrew Pope, says:

"Mr Paul is letting off the Liberal Democrat councillors and Lib Dem-run Council. 

Yes, developers can appeal refused applications but residents cannot. It is not fair. 

But the councillors and council officers have to hold the developers to account. The planning process allows them to, via Section 106 agreements, planning conditions and proper accountability. But they clearly aren't doing this. Galmington and SWaT Council needs better councillors and officers. 

Mr Paul's letter reads like an apology for the Lib Dems, because it is.  SWaT Council is a total failure, and the furore over the Playing Fields - caused by Lib Dem councillors - is another example of this. 

Lib Dem or Tory (County Council), same old story."

Standing Up For Somerset's Residents