 |
| No Show: Deputy Tory Leader didn't turn up to fight his corner |
TBG can exclusively report back from last nights Full Council meeting at crisis hit Crawley Borough Council.
A sweltering evening saw a packed public gallery with much anticipation among the spectators who were eagerly awaiting the evening's entertainment.
The first shock of the evening saw gasps from the public gallery as it was announced that under-fire 'No Confidence' Deputy Chairman Political, Cllr Karl Williamson, would not be attending the meeting, tbg can reveal.
The atmosphere was electric at public question time, which soon turned to outrage as a question about the chaos in the town's Conservatives was ruled out of order by the Mayor. A shouting match ensued which resulted in a burly council security guard removing the microphone from the member of the public who tried to ask the question.
More sparks flew as Labour councillors lined up to use an agenda item on substitute members on committees, as a vehicle to lay into the absence of Conservative councillors at meetings. Councillor Ian Irvine (Labour) finished a fiery attack by blasting that "Councillors should be attending meetings rather than dining at the Giggling Squid!"
It is, however, not known if Cllr Williamson's absence this time was due to having another dinner at Crawley's upmarket Thai restaurant, whose menu includes succulent Roast Duck slices on deluxe Baby Leaf Canapes, with a menu description that you can "drizzle the spicy dressing all you want over it."
12 comments:
I trust that as he appears not to have the bottle to attend he will either resign or pay back his allowance. After all his attendance record has been consistently bad since he got elected.
An FOI request on his attendance since his election in 2011 would probably show he has the lowest attendance of any councillor over the last two years. How exactly did he get on the council's cabinet and why is he still there?
He had less than 50% attendance at one stage! And for the record the Giggling Squid is not upmarket. Does have an interesting record of breaking planning regulations though!
I suppose attacks like those are one way to defend against claims of sexual harassment. Whether they will make the attackers look like idiots should Lanzer be found to have abused his position remains to be seen. Maybe that's why they are anonymous.
Meanwhile, with all these councillors commenting here (possibly on this post, definitely on others), what are you doing about the issues facing residents?
You should all resign your seats and let people who are not devoting their energy to personal spats run the Council.
Only the Masonic councillors are expecting Lanzer to be found guilty. Everyone else in Crawley knows it is a stitch-up and blackmail.
I trust that the 'anonymous' individual who is quick to make accusations about masonic councillors is going to step forward and reveal who they are?
I doubt it. The gutless wonder is obviously to scared. Isn't it amazing how brave the coward is in the shadows.
Guilt or innocence is for the police investigation and party investigation to decide. No one else.
How many councillors have not declared their freemasonry on their register of interests as required under the law?
What on earth has free masonry got to do with Cllr Lanzer being investigated for sexual harassment, or the fact that a lynch mob was gathered to persecute the person that made the claim? It is not surprising that you have all been taken to standards - the majority of Conservatives in Crawley are a nasty bunch of individuals that are more interested in themselves than the residents they are supposed to be serving. SHAME ON ALL OF YOU!
You have almost got it right on your blog. The unknown is in the Non-camp and 2 from the Non-Non camp also qualify as DAWFT as well as Non-Non.
OK you can own up, is this blog really just an elaborate advertising ploy for the giggling squid?
And I agree with Cllr Burke, if you have something to say stop hiding behind anonymity and say it. Or better yet don't say it at all! The police will decide if there is anything to answer with the allegations and how people spend their time away from the council is really nothing to do with anything.
I think Masonry is a red herring. Serious allegations have been made, but instead of awaiting the outcome of investigations, some appear to have decided who is guilty of what already, and launched these no-confidence votes to get back at the accuser.
Even if the allegations against Lanzer are false, the way his 'friends' have behaved bring the party and the council into disrepute.
So all this is going and Duncan Crow is challenging to be leader in one post, joining UKIP in another, hanging round cowdray in another with teddy bears, investigated by the police in another.
Is this the kind if person we want running the town OMG
Post a Comment