Read the story by clicking here.

Note the failure to ensure the best price for properties sold by the council. MBC are saying that they wont even consider selling some of the facilities that they are closing. They’d rather spend our taxes demolishing them than turn an honest profit and reduce the amount they need to cut over the coming years.

Also, reading the following, it has echoes of Mallons intention to borrow tocontinue his demolition of Gresham and Middlehaven…

‘The Town Council, having sold public land to fund the purchase of the industrial unit, failed to pay off the Public Works Loan Board loan, which will be a burden on the local taxpayers for another 17 years.’

‘When their actions are brought to the attention of the authorities, as is the case with Somerton, there are no consequences for those who made the decisions. However, there are significant consequences for local taxpayers who are forced to fund the consequences of those actions, diverting much needed funds from local need to interest and capital repayment.’

Anyone know if we can stop this folly before it happens or do we have to sit back and suffer the burden before our gung-ho council are held to account? And if we CAN nip this in the bud, how do we get the Audit Commission interested in appraising MBC’s plans?

There now follows an extract from Wikipedia on the history of Middlesbrough:

“In 1801 Middlesbrough was a hamlet with a population of just 25 people living in four farmhouses. During the latter half of the 19th century, however, it experienced a growth unparalleled in England. Development began with the purchase of the farm in 1829 by a group of Quaker businessmen, headed by Joseph Pease the Darlington industrialist, who saw the possibilities of Middlesbrough becoming a port for the transport of northeast coal. Four initial streets, leading into the market square, were duly laid out. This cause was facilitated by an 1830 extension of the Stockton and Darlington Railway to the site, which all but erased the logistical obstacles to ongoing development of the town. Before this, the shipment of coal had been problematic owing to the shallow waters around Stockton-on-Tees. The opening of the Clarence Railway, in 1833, which shared some of the Stockton and Darlington Railway’s track, also provided the stimulus for the growth of Port Clarence on the opposite side of the river to Middlesbrough.”

So, thats 1801, Middlesbrough was a hamlet of four farmhouses, 210 years ago. If Charlie can find any of those farmhouses and acquire them for demolition under the current regeneration program, I’ll knock them down for him free of charge. With my bare hands. And I’ll eat the rubble. And if he can find a single house in Middlesbrough that is 750 years old, I’ll buy it for him to live in.

Joking aside, what must people think of Middlesbrough Borough Council when someone who is supposed to be an executive member goes onto a live show and makes claims so outrageous and, when challenged as to their accuracy, blames a council employee for his inability to self-censor such claptrap and accuses the radio presenter of bias.

Moreover, what must they think of the people that elected this pillock?

Post Script:

Just as an afterthought which came to me as I walked around Coulby Newham, marvelling at the Tudor architecture.

Lets assume for one crazy minute, that Charlie was right (as opposed to his ‘researcher’ being wrong!) and that the average age of houses in Britain is 750 years old. Given the boom in house building over the past decade, in order to reach an average age of 750, there must be large numbers of people, somewhere in the country, living in caves.

But that isn’t the main point that struck me. If the average age of a house is 750,  and housing in Middlesbrough is less than 200 years old, then surely, by knocking down comparatively young houses in Middlesbrough and not replacing them with newer houses ( ‘green’ space or temporary car park), the mathematical result would be to INCREASE the overall average property age?! So, in order to stop the average age of housing increasing, MBC should STOP  knocking down houses!

I think this is what the ‘yoof’ refer to as an ‘epic fail’, Charlie.

Mr Dixons solicitor, in mitigation, stated that the reason for the attack on Sir Stuart was in relation to a long-held dispute with the MP.

Many years ago, Mr Dixons son was attacked at the roadside and left for dead in an alleyway. A man was subsequently arrested and found guilty but Mr Dixon and his family believe that the case was not fully investigated by the police. Mr Dixon approached his local MP – Sir Stuart Bell – for help and received nothing.

For an MP that hasn’t held a surgery for 13 years, whose neglectful style of ‘representation’ of the people of Middlesbrough is exposed in the John Walsh film ToryBoy  and who faces an investigation by party leader Ed Miliband into allegations that he prefers to reside near Paris, France and does very little to earn his £65,000 per year, you can see why he would be keen to ensure that further bad publicity is kept out of the papers.

The hearing was adjourned for reports until 5th March. Sir Stuart did not attend the hearing.

UPDATE: 1530hrs.

Seems that the Press Association have now taken up the story, with it appearing on Huffington, BBC, Northern Echo and Evening Gazette websites.

You can also watch the incident on YouTube, by clicking here.

So much for Press Reporting Restrictions. Well done to all concerned!

Dennis has been an active campaigner on this subject (and many others) for many years and is currently trying hard to bring the issue of asbestos removal from Erimus housing stock to the attention of the Middlesbrough public. He has enlisted the support of The Northern Echo, as the council-supporting Evening Gazette wont touch anything that might show MBC in a bad light.

Dennis has written an open letter to councillors in Middlesbrough expressing his concerns and calling on them to act. You can read the letter by clicking on the ‘Asbestos’ tab at the top of the page. Hopefully, this will be the first of many informed submissions on the subject from Dennis.

Apparently, cllr McTigue and her ‘passing acquaintance’ Tony ‘Tosha’ Warren have had a bit of a tiff.

Regular readers will recall previous posts questioning how both cllr McTigue and Tony Warren manage to submit letters to the Evening Gazette on the same subject, expressing the same views and opinions, sometimes even managing to get them printed on the same day. In the past, I’ve expressed a theory that cllr McTigue composes the letters, then disseminates the information to her disciples for them to send to the media.

When the Gazette looked into instances of ‘ghost-written’ letters, Barbara Dunne came forward and suggested that cllr McTigue had offered to draught letters for her, or pass her letters to submit to the paper. Every time such suggestions were made, cllr McTigue vehemently denied any such activity. And when I suggested that the same thing was going on with Tosha, he claimed, frequently that he and cllr McTigue were no more than passing acquaintances and that he didn’t submit letters to the Evening Gazette on behalf of cllr McTigue, believing that a range of ‘authors’ gave her rantings more chance of being published.

From what I’ve heard, cllr McTigues narcissism has got the better of her yet again and recently, she couldn’t resist taking credit for writing a particular letter. Unfortunately, it had Tonys name on it. Now Tony is up in arms, crying that her slip, once it gets out, will destroy his credibility.

For long enough, Tony Warren has taken a holier-than-thou, butter-wouldn’t-melt attitude to other posters. Always taking the moral and righteous high-ground in order to berate and belittle fellow forum contributors, while purporting to only tell the truth. Truths like ‘he has no contact with cllr McTigue’. Or that she doesn’t pass information to him.

I have, in the past, warned that his association with cllr McTigue would come back to bite him. The woman has no sense of self-censorship which cannot be over-ridden by her short fuse or deep sense of vanity. She has turned on so many people that have offered support or help in the past, this was bound to happen sooner or later.

The real shame? On a good day, Tony made some excellent points and observations regarding MBC, many with which I agreed whole-heartedly, both online and through the Gazette. So now, we have to wonder just how much of his information came through cllr McTigue and, given the blatant lies that he has told about the nature of the relationship between the two of them, will we ever be able to separate the truth from the bull? Moreover, will he now accept the error of his ways and denounce his pact with the Demagogue of Beechwood? It seems to be the only way to regain some of his credibility. And if he does sever links with cllr McTigue, where will he get his information from in future?

Trial Date: Monday 13th February 2012

Start time: 10am

Public Gallery: Open

Needless to say, I will be there to hear the details of the case, especially what drove a man who has received a community award from Hazel Blears, no less, (read more here and here) to throw eggs at his local MP during a Service of Remembrance. And I’ll post them here, if I’m allowed to. I wonder if Sir Stuart will be there? Maybe he’ll appear live via le satellite link!?

Middlesbrough Borough Council has a body called an ‘Overview and Scrutiny Panel’ (OSP) Nothing odd there, they were introduced under the 2000 Local Government Act. Their function and purpose is explained here.

Now, at the moment, here in Middlesbrough, the problem of asbestos in council and Erimus housing is something of a ‘hot potato’ (which probably makes it even more dangerous!). There’s some debate about what has been done to remedy the problem, how much money has been paid to whom, how long ago it was paid and how little progress has been made in over a decade. On hearing that the issue was being ‘called-in’ by the OSP, local man Dennis Lane attended the meeting, as something of an expert in the field.

By and large, our OSP are Labour Party nodding-dogs, in place to give some sort of credibility to our ineffective and wasteful council. Imagine, if you will, being in a position to hand-pick the people whose job it is to monitor your behaviour. You too might employ your mates (or in the case of the council, your party brethren) in the knowledge that they’ll look the other way or, when called upon to actually scrutinise something, ensure that there are enough of your mates on the panel to simply nod it through.

Anyway, back to the meeting. Information was read out which was at odds to some original historic information and Dennis Lane challenged it, asking the chair of the panel, cllr Jan Brunton (Labour) for permission to speak on the subject. Cllr Brunton denied Dennis the opportunity, telling him that ‘this is a business meeting’.

Now, if you click here, you can see the bit about ‘Engaging with the Public’, which includes this little nugget:

“Use of Witnesses – Members also spoke with a variety of experts who attended panel meetings to assist the panels in making informed decisions about a topic.”

Yet, when a local expert on the subject of asbestos asks to contribute to the scrutinisation of an issue concerning asbestos in council and housing association stock, he’s denied the right by the chair. Furthermore, none of the panel moved to ask Mr Lane to explain his background, knowledge and the basis upon which he thought it pertinent to offer his insight. At best, we have a Scrutiny Panel incapable of scrutinising their own procedural performance and at worst, we have a Scrutiny Panel prepared to nod through anything that MBC do and avoid awkward yet pertinent questions to be raised.

At best, cllr Brunton is being paid an allowance of £6000+ to chair meetings she is incapable of running within the constitution. At worst, this is a deliberate attempt to keep something quiet, in order to keep happy the people who appointed her to the post for which she is paid her £6000+ ‘allowance’ (and can, therefore, remove her from the post if they’re not kept ‘happy’).

More interestingly, what is it that Dennis Lane knows that cllr Brunton doesn’t want to wind up in the minutes of one of her meetings? After all, it’s difficult to deny knowledge once that happens?!

Clearly, there is no solid proof either way just yet. It may be that the only way to find out for sure is to attend the trial next week.

I’m going to advise both parties that, at 7pm this evening, I’m going to post here all of the information that I have now been sent regarding the forthcoming trial of Terry Dixon, for throwing eggs at Sir Stuart on Remembrance Sunday and why Mr Dixon is keen to have his day in court, in order to put in the public arena the reasons for his actions.

If I post that information here, then I will be able to confirm that the rumour was just that, nothing more than a rumour. If, however, I dont post the information, then we must assume that I have been prevented from doing so. In which case, much like the Ryan Giggs scenario, it’s going to take someone to use their parliamentary privilege to bring this matter to the fore.

See you all later. Or not.