betterMiddlesbrough, now on the Twittersphere.

I’ve had my laptop fixed this week, which will make posting on here much simpler. I was posting from my BlackBerry PlayBook, and the WordPress site isn’t 100% compatible with the BlackBerry OS.

To celebrate the return to my laptop, I’ve decided to expand the betterMiddlesbrough experience, and re-activated an old Twitter account, in order to cross-post stuff between here and twitter.

Those of you who know me well will realise that this is going to be the biggest challenge of my blogging career. It’s not the technical aspects that will cause me difficulty. Can you really see me being able to cope with a limit of 140 characters per post ??!!

You can follow me (that’s ‘follow’ Joan, not cyber-stalk!) @JohnFromBoro .

I can’t promise that I will be up to Stephen Frys post rate but links to and from Middlesbrough related articles will be available both here and on Twitter.

As I’ve been actively seeking out other relevant tweeters to follow, local councillors and Middlesbrough-related organisations, I can’t help but notice that some local councillors will allow anyone to ‘follow’ their feeds, while others want to vet who sees their posts. Why would anyone go onto a social media site such as Twitter and then vet their audience in such a way, unless they are ashamed of what they tweet and don’t want it to get out.

Go on, Len J, show me yours and I’ll show you mine!

Walk for Representation, an update.

Apologies for my absence from the blog  for a while. It’s been a combination of taking a much needed break and family circumstances.

This post is to continue to try to raise awareness of the plight of Mark Heslehurst, a Middlesbrough man abandoned by his MP, Sir Stuart Bell, in his hour of need.

You can read the whole of Marks story by clicking here, or read on for an abridged version of the story. (I accept that I may miss out important bits, if this bothers you, click the link!)

Essentially Mark set up a business in France, providing an English-language school for a major pharmaceutical company. He was made aware of a case of sexual harrassment which went quite a way towards the top of this company. The perpetrator was sacked but, as this person had close ties at the top of the company, a campaign of intimidation was started against Mark and his family, his wife Dominique, a French/Cambodian national and their offspring. They fled France, moving to England, the threats continued. Mark has campaigned outside the HQ of the company concerned in the US (where he was again threatened) and also outside 10 Downing Street.

As the pressure built, his marriage broke down and Mark entered into a custody battle for his son, here in the UK. A ruling decided that the case must be heard in France, so his former wife returned to France, where she absconded to Cambodia, as she feared for her safety in France.

Cutting a longer story relatively short, Mark approached his local MP, Sir Stuart Bell, for help. He wrote to Bell over 40 times. He campaigned (lawfully, under permit) outside 10 Downing Street for 11 days. Bell initially ignored him, then, when he finally bothered to respond, told Mark to ‘Go Away’ and ‘Come back when you have 100,000 signatures on a petition’. Bell denies making these comments but five witnesses have signed statements to support Marks claim regarding Bells response.

So, Mark set about collecting 100,000 signatures – and got them! 97,000 of them from local people from Teesside and the North East. And still, Mark cannot get a meeting with Sir Stuart Bell, let alone have support from his own MP.

Mark set off from Middlesbrough on Saturday, 7th April, to walk to Downing Street to deliver his petition directly to the government, ideally to spark a debate in parliament which may lead to him being reunited with his son. At last look, he was on the A606.

There are a few questions that should be asked about Bells (lack of) involvement in this case.

1) We are told that Mark suffered systematic threats and intimidation while living in France. Could this have a bearing on Bells willingness to act on behalf of one of his Middlesbrough constituents, given his preference to spend much of his time living in France? If he was to make waves, could Bells honorary title, Chevalier of the Legion d’honneur, be stripped?

2) Mark claims that BioMerieux, the company at the centre of the story, bribed a sheriff in North Carolina, where Mark publicly protested against the company, the sheriffs son subsequently being employed by BioMerieux. Has this French company also bought themselves the silence of a British MP?

3) Given the longevity of this story, the local aspect, the ‘Walk for Representation’ which carries forward the campaign against Bells deference for his constituents by the Evening Gazette it is really odd that a search for ‘Mark Heslehurst’ on the Gazette website turns up NO REFERENCE to this story at all! Will they finally take an interest in this international story when Mark reaches Downing Street?

4) Ed Miliband promised us that his Party would investigate the claims against Bell. What happened?

I see that Tom Robinson, former member of the Youth Parliament for Middlesbrough, wrote to the Gazette letters page recently, praising Sir Stuart for taking just ‘eight short days’ to respond to a letter he sent regarding the murder of 2,500 Colombian Trade Unionists over the last 20 years. What Tom doesn’t tell you is that he used to WORK in Sir Stuarts Parliamentary Office! IF it takes him eight days to get a response to a letter which has absolutely no bearing on his constituency, what chance do we mere mortals have of getting him to do anything for the people of Middlesbrough, people like Mark Heslehurst??!! Maybe Tom would like to ask Sir Stuart to intervene on Marks behalf?

Operation Sacristy, March 2012 update.

This just dropped into my mailbox.  Many thanks to the sender. I must point out that the copy forwarded to me had no indication of its origin, nor did it contain any notification of restrictions of its use. It did, however, claim to be ‘non-confidential’ information.

It is a copy of the March 2012 update on Middlesbroughs favourite police investigation. I have taken the liberty of highlighting one or two key phrases which I think should be considered.

“Operation Sacristy

 

The Authority is in regular contact with the Sacristy team and on 9th March 2012 all members met with Keith Bristow (Director General of the National Crime Agency) who is heading the investigation, Members received a comprehensive update and had the opportunity to ask questions and discuss the issues with Mr Bristow. The investigation is being progressed as quickly and professionally as possible. There are, however, matters relating to both misconduct allegations and criminal conduct, that still require a thorough investigation. The investigations into many of the aspects of alleged misconduct by senior police officers are  virtually complete and it is intended that a report will be submitted to IPCC on these matters within two months.  It will then be for the IPCC to consider the file and then send it to the Police Authority (hopefully within two weeks) to determine the course of action (within 3 weeks of receiving it).Based on these estimates (and they are only estimates) it would mean that the Authority will have considered the investigator’s report (in relation to any alleged misconduct of senior officers only) and determined a course of action by the end of June. The Sacristy team comprises of a total of 27 members of staff dedicated to these enquiries from North Yorkshire, West Yorkshire and Warwickshire. To date (29/02/2012) the following have been entered on the Home Office Large Major Enquiry System (HOLMES) ;

•

715 Nominal’s [named invidividuals];

•

1,779 Actions;

2,325 Exhibits;

•

4,963 documents, including  764 statements,  595 reports and 37 recorded interviews.The costs of the inquiry have been regularly reported. The forecast expenditure for Operation Sacristy for:

•

2011-2012 is £1,475,000.

•

2012-2013 is £1,700.000 at current resource levels.We are still waiting for a formal response from the Home Office to the Authority’s application for a special grant although indications are positive.

 

Overall the investigations deal with criminal offences, police misconduct matters and staff discipline issues. The matters under investigation are complex and extensive, some relate to matters that occurred several years ago, some more recent. Some of those under investigation are very senior public figures and leaders, occupying influential positions with significant responsibilities and powers. There are very significant public interest issues involved. It is only right that such individuals are held to account to act professionally and in accordance with the law, the standards of professional behaviour and the Nolan principles of Public Life. It is also important that communities can have confidence in senior public officials to comply with systems and rules, to ensure that the necessary checks and balances are adhered to, in order to provide effective governance and financial propriety. The investigation is striving to minimise costs but it is also cognisant of expectations to complete the enquiry as quickly and as professionally as possible. It is not viable or feasible, nor in the interests of justice to complete partial enquiries.”

So, in asking for Operation Sacristy to be curtailed, citing the financial impact upon the forces ability to provide ‘frontline’ policing, neither prospective Police Commissioner candidate cllr Barry Coppinger nor Mayor (council ‘leader’?!) Mallon were acting ‘in the interests of justice’. Hardly the sort of thing you want to find on the CV of your Police Commissioner or any other senior official.

The essential question must now be ‘why?’

If neither of them are directly implicated in the investigation, then who are they trying to protect and why? Party ties? Personal friends? Lets not forget that, as a former senior police officer and a former member of the Police Authority, Mallon and Coppinger will undoubtedly have contributed to those 764 statements, so they will know what this investigation is concerned with, as they must have been subject to interview prior to providing a statement.

One other aspect of this update concerns me. The investigations into certain aspects are almost complete, a report will be made to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), who will then consider the report ‘and then send it to the Police Authority (hopefully within two weeks) to determine the course of action’. Am I reading this right? After all is said and done, it is for Cleveland Police Authority to determine what action should be taken against any of the ‘senior officers’ found guilty of misconduct? What a perfect opportunity for those under investigation (for the investigation includes members of the Police Authority, past and present, as far as we know) to declare their solidarity and close rank. ‘You scratch my back’ doesn’t just seem to be the sort of corruption being investigated, it also appears to be a potential way of getting away with it too!

If the timescales are to be believed, then even if the current warm weather is the only bit of sunshine we see all year, there are going to be plenty of people feeling the heat during the summer.

Walk for Representation

On April 7th, local man Mark Heslehurst will set off from Middlesbrough on a trip to London. Nothing unusual about that, except that Mark will be travelling on foot. He intends on delivering a 100,000 name petition to Downing Street, calling for him to be reunited with his son. There is also a second reason for the walk. In his own words…

“The walk will also be to highlight the absence in all areas of Middlesbrough life by MP sir Stuart Bell who has denied representation to the people of Middlesbrough for 15 years…. The walk will begin with rally at 10 am then we will walk past town hall then gazette office. many will walk to outside of town with me….Middlesbrough people can you be there and bring friends?”

You can add your support on the ‘Walk for Representation’ facebook page by going here.

https://www.facebook.com/events/255158941237961/

Again, apologies for the lack of a hyperlink, it will be posted separately as a comment, below.

Labour councillor is alien offspring.

I’m saying nowt. I don’t need to. Just read this, if you haven’t already.

Apologies, my ‘hyperlink’ button seems to be playing up! The link has been posted separately in a ‘comment’ below.

 

John Ryle

I’ve been contacted by a few different people regarding John Ryle, the one-time moderator from The Evening Gazette Forum, using the ID ‘JohnR’. If the announcement in the Evening Gazette last week related to the same man, then it would appear that John has passed away. On the EG forum, John took the brave step of volunteering to try to moderate the exchanges between warring factions of Middlesbrough Council; councillors using their supposed anonymity to lambast each other in public. Instead of being recognised as the peacekeeper, he was often rounded upon by both sides, each accusing him of giving preferential treatment to their opponents. In the end, his role became untenable and he returned to the rank and file posters. I always found him to be fair, informed and motivated by a desire to use the Gazette forum as a device to help improve the town. He was one of the few who surrendered his anonymity and had the good grace to put his real name to his opinions. He was also one of the people that inspired me to follow his example, give up my anonymity and create this blog. If the information is correct, Middlesbrough has lost, in my opinion, an asset. If anyone has any further information, or simply wishes to leave a message on this thread, please feel free to do so. On this occasion, former EG ID’s will be accepted as appropriate, no real names necessary.

Godspeed, JohnR.

Another impossible ‘vision’ from MBC.

At the time of his re-election, I suggested that Mayor Mallon should commit to promising that he would have no more new ‘visions’ for the future of Middlesbrough and instead concentrate on bringing at least one of his pet projects to fruition during this term in office. So, true to his word, Ray isn’t having any more ‘visions’.  Charlie Rooney is having them for him. You can read more on the Evening Gazette website here:

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/2012/03/22/120m-middlesbrough-town-centre-vision-84229-30596042/

First, you will notice that the piece is heavy with ‘on the ground’ information, like what will be built where. But there’s no mention of where we are going to find 120 million pounds. Without the finance, what is the point in conducting a  costly ‘consultation’ process? Especially as the word ‘consultation’ is a complete misnomer and usually consists of MBC telling you what you are getting and ignoring any concerns or objections.

The map seems to suggest that the plan is to knock down a supermarket and build another one on the Royal Mail sorting office site, and build more empty shops on the Sainsburys site. Then build even more on a number of other sites around Cannon Park. The idea is to emulate Teesside Park because that’s where people go to buy convenience and bulky items. So MBC wants to stitch up Stockton Borough Council by competing with Teesside Park and Portrack Lane, simply because they aren’t in Middlesbrough.

The obvious problem is this. People go to Teesside Park and Portrack Lane in their cars because it is free to park. Is this new development going to provide free parking? If it doesnt, it will not compete with Teesside Park or Portrack Lane. If it does provide free parking, it will either kill Middlesbrough Town Centre, where the council charge for parking, or they will have to make parking free in the Town Centre, losing a vital income stream. This makes the whole plan unviable. If MBC have £120 million pounds to spend then, to compete with Teesside Park and Portrack Lane, the answer is simple. Remove parking charges from the town centre, thus attracting more shoppers and, therefore, more businesses and use the money to make up the shortfall in revenue.

Some of the comments on the story on the Gazette page suggest that retail behemoth Tesco are behind the funding of this idea. I wonder if Tesco have heard the rumour that, right across from this proposed site, MBC are busy closing down the community centre and care facility on Union Street (using the cuts and regeneration into low cost housing as convenient excuses) while there’s a back-door plan to use these buildings to create a drop-in centre for addicts, prostitutes and other community miscreants. How much will it cost to secure the parking facilities at the new retail park in order to maintain customer safety and confidence, if this rumour is true and all the local smackheads and hookers are to be camped on their doorstep? And who will foot that bill?

Building more shops will not create more jobs. We are seeing large retailers reducing their number of outlets, so any businesses will simply relocate their existing operations and staff, leaving current premises empty. At least that will give Mayor Mallon something new to swing his wrecking ball at.

Where does MBC think we are going to get more mney from to spend at these new shops? They just squeezed us all for a 3.5% Council Tax rise, when they didn’t have to. They are cutting back on public services, things that people will have to pay for instead, while Independent Councillors have had suggested cuts to council budgets for things like advertising and subscriptions dismissed by the Labour majority. At a time when there is even less money in peoples’pockets than ever, who will shop in these new shops?

Trying to recreate an ‘out of town’ shopping park in town doesn’t always work- look at Chandlers’ Wharf in Stockton. It tried to do just that and now has a Mecca bingo and a Grosvenor casino on the site, along with a drive-thru Burger King and a tyre centre which has been boarded up for years. No retail at all.

Middlesbrough and the wider Teesside area need new, innovative and unique attractions to bring people here, not just another juggling of corporate retail outlets from one site to the next. MBC did well with the digitalcity concept but we should be building on creating more jobs and facilities within future-facing industries. I’ve said before that we could look into becoming a major force in the creation of ‘green’ energy, from manufacturing wind turbines to research and development of new ways to generate power. Teesside has a biomass plant, it will soon have an offshore wind farm, it has a nuclear power station. We have had a petrochemical plant for decades. Why shouldn’t we now be at the front line of energy technology, with sustainable, well-paid, professional jobs?

Something else once mentioned on the Evening Gazette forum was the lack of a decent, sizeable open air venue in the area. Think ‘Milton Keynes Bowl’, a major, 100,000+ capacity venue to rival The Stadium of Light or Gateshead Stadium. It would bring millions of visitors and their wallets to Teesside, creating jobs into the bargain.

Maybe then people would have the brass in pocket to support new shopping parks.