For those who missed this groundbreaking meeting*, and to allow SOS followers to check that the minutes have been accurately recorded, Robert Crick’s question is reproduced below, with his permission.

(*when the advice of Chief Executive, Mark Williams, was overturned.  He had insisted that planning issues could not legally be part of the TAFF’s remit when investigating the East Devon Business Forum. The O&S Committee was not convinced.)

Questions for EDDC Overview and Scrutiny, 28 March 2013

Thank you Chair.

Neighbours, will this committee offer thanks on behalf of East Devon’s council tax payers to Mr Mark Williams for his offer of free “independent legal advice” to this committee, and to the TAFF?

Or will you gratefully decline his generous insistence that he will provide what he described to the TAFF as “two for the price of one”?

Is there not room for concern about a potential conflict of interest when, in his role as District CEO, the CEO may himself be subject to scrutiny?

Can Mr Williams’s legal judgment be relied on?
He appears incapable of distinguishing between a potentially unsound process and its undeniable outcome? (The TAFF cannot call in the LDP but it can investigate the way it was developed.)

Is it appropriate for him to give you advice on how you as Chair of the Scrutiny committee may wish to put to him, personally, such questions as:

Does he regret giving misleading advice about the EDBF and its critics to the Right Honourable Hugo Swire when, on behalf of his constituents, our Member of Parliament made enquiries into apparent conflicts of interest and undue influence throughout the district over a substantial period?
Can Mr Williams explain his failure to take up the legitimate concerns of council tax payers about the alleged abuse of EDDC resources for which he is personally responsible, particularly in his role as line manager to the Economic Development Manager?
Who authorised Mr Williams’s instruction to the Economic Development Manager to absent himself from the recent TAFF meeting, which had important questions to put to that officer following his evasive and contradictory responses at its previous meeting?
When asking the police to investigate allegations against a local development consultant whose company has an annual turnover far lower than the salary of the Economic Development Officer, has Mr Williams advised the police that their remit should extend to the potential fraudulent use of resources and influence by those in EDDC who are significantly wealthier and more powerful than the unfortunately entrapped and obviously disgraced ex-Councillor Brown?

Will you ask the CEO to step down from the TAFF and the O&S committee?

Robert Crick, Sidmouth Futures Forum

For those who could not attend the EDDC Cabinet meeting on Wednesday this week, here is the question put by SOS supporter, Barry Curwen:

You continue to boast and pride yourselves on your transparency and openness, however, when it comes to the Office Relocation Project the complete opposite is true. Again further debate and decisions have been recommended by your officers to be discussed in a private session under Part B of this meeting.  I wish to challenge this recommendation.

The Office Relocation Project is very much a public issue and concern.  It is in the public interest to be kept informed on developments, for two main reasons:- Firstly, because very large sums of public money are being spent.  You have awarded yourself a budget of £314,354 to spend on this project before even the principle of relocation is debated by the full council.  As at the 6 March you have already declared a cost of £243,818 but as this does not include the full cost of officer’s time the real cost to the tax payer is considerably greater. Secondly, the potential impact of losing the largest single employer and two key employment sites would cause significant harm to Sidmouth’s economy.

Apart from the report presented to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on the 26 July 2012, all other discussions and decisions have taken place in private. Please record my comments this evening as a formal challenge to the legality of your actions, as on balance this is very much an issue where the majority of the debate should be in public with only the relatively few number of commercially sensitive items being dealt with in private.

When does this cabinet plan to finally be open, transparent and honest with the public with regard to the Office Relocation Project?