Yesterday, Colin was regaling the Echo with his solution to retaining Canvey’s Concord pool from the evil Castle Point Tories – by setting-up a residents’ fund to pay for its maintenance and restoration.
There was little detail of the fund. No information about which island banks had agreed to accept donations from the public; just a closing quote from Lea Swann promoting her own financial security blanket – the Friends of Concord Beach.
It is understood that the pair, or, as the Echo puts it: ‘fellow campaigners,’ are more than happy to accept any spare cash that the Concord Cafe’s visitors can provide.
Colin appears to have an inside track on the Concord pool discussions, which have been taking place between the Town Council (TC) and Castle Point Borough Council (CPBC) since February. He is quoted as saying that CPBC intends to spend £50,000 on the pool ‘no matter what happens.’
He makes no mention of the additional money just spent on the pool to ensure its continued use this year – and it seems that the reporter, Paul Offord, did not ask him.
Colin also let slip that the TC is no longer looking to take-over the pool from Castle Point Council. Their meetings are apparently now focusing on the two bodies agreeing to share the pool’s costs.
Colin’s plans for his own fund are various. As Offord explains in his piece: ‘if Castle Point Council and Canvey Town Council eventually decide to fund the health and safety repairs between them, meaning the residents’ fund is not needed, everyone who made contributions will be given three options.’
They are: to take back the money; transfer it to Little Havens Children’s Hospice; or use it to boost Lea Swann’s fund.
It is not reported how Colin is proposing to record all individual contributions; but it appears he will be asking our local MP, Rebecca Harris, to attach her name to any final balance his collection may enjoy.
Paul Offord reports: ‘He [Letchford] said the campaigners were looking to get someone above reproach, like Castle Point Tory MP Rebecca Harris, to be the final person to sign off any money that gets paid out from the fund.’
I wouldn’t touch either with a bargepole, Rebecca…
Colin Letchford doesn't want to be Mayor, his intention is to have a Mayor voted for by the whole Borough (rather than a Cabinet Leader voted in by fellow Cabinet members).
ReplyDeleteThe residents fund will be kept at a proper bank, with signiatories including a community figure with nothing to do with the campaign.
Lea Swann will be able to get no benefit from the fund- and has been adamant that it is clear and obvious that she won't.
Colin Letchford's comment regarding the £50,000 the Borough Council will spend 'no matter what happens', is their own figure for demolition of the pool.
The additional moey just spent is for purely temporary remedial work.
Colin (Letchford) has no plans for what is described here as his own fund- there is no such fund, there is just the one residents pool fund. All donations over £5 are recorded on a slip in case the money is not needed.
All of this could have been found out very easily, by simply speaking to any of the people involved.
‘Colin Letchford doesn't want to be Mayor, his intention is to have a Mayor voted for by the whole Borough (rather than a Cabinet Leader voted in by fellow Cabinet members).’
ReplyDeleteYou restate the very lie that Colin Letchford was regaling residents with in order to obtain their signatures on his petition, Tom. The fact is that the Cabinet Leader is not elected by Cabinet Members. Full Council (including the likes of your CIIP chums) elect the leader – who then selects the Cabinet.
‘The residents fund will be kept at a proper bank, with signiatories including a community figure with nothing to do with the campaign.’
My point was that local banks were not collecting upon the funds behalf (an arrangement that most bona fide charities are quick to establish).
‘Lea Swann will be able to get no benefit from the fund- and has been adamant that it is clear and obvious that she won't’
The Friends of Concord Beach fund will not benefit the Concord Café? Just as Letchford’s fund, raised for the Concord pool’s maintenance and restoration, would not benefit Swann’s business? What would happen to her business if either, or both, of the pools were closed?
‘Colin Letchford's comment regarding the £50,000 the Borough Council will spend 'no matter what happens', is their own figure for demolition of the pool.’
I was not disputing the figure; but his statement that the amount would be spent ‘no matter what happens.’ There is no basis for that statement at all.
‘The additional moey just spent is for purely temporary remedial work.’
I do not dispute that the recent money was spent for remedial work; but where is your proof that this is ‘in addition’ to the £50,000 figure. My understanding is that the remedial work was paid for out of the £50K budget.
‘Colin (Letchford) has no plans for what is described here as his own fund- there is no such fund, there is just the one residents pool fund. All donations over £5 are recorded on a slip in case the money is not needed.’
My point precisely. No receipts - and now, you tell us, only amounts over £5 are being recorded. My, my: those youngsters using the two pools are far richer than I was at their age. And there was I thinking that the vast majority of contributions would be in loose change.
‘All of this could have been found out very easily, by simply speaking to any of the people involved.’
What you mean is, Tom: ‘Why didn’t I speak to you before I wrote this article – so you could have given me your spin?’
I think the answer is obvious…
Your paragraph 2- If you just state that anything different to what you say is a lie, there's little point argueing with you. The fact is that the same Leader has just been voted in- again- by a very small number of people. Not the voters of the Borough.
ReplyDeleteYour paragraph 4- Why on earth should a bank collect the money on the fund's behalf? Why critise something of no relevance?
Your paragraph 5- I took your insinuation to be that Lea Swann would benefit from the money raised in the fund. She won't and has arranged it so she can't. She'll benefit only as much as everyone else on the island in that the pool will still be there.
Your paragraph 8- The obvious basis for the statement is that either £50,000 will be spent on demolition, or the £50,000 plus some more will be spent renovating it. Ergo; no matter what happens £50,000 will have to be spent.
Your paragraph 10- If the pool were to be demolished, it would still cost £50,000 to do it. Therefore it is simple common sense that the money spent on remedial work must be 'in addition'. How else can it be reckoned?!
Your paragraph 12- What are you on about? The slips are in triplicate with one retained by the donator as a receipt. The majority of donations will of course be in loose change and to receipt every coin would be ludicrous.
Your paragraph 14- Don't try and tell me what I mean. For goodness sake, if you had spoken to ANYBODY you would have quickly found that what you have written here is complete tosh!
I only log on to this site (a lot- I probably account for a fair number of its 'stat' visits) because I've seen it carries bad misinformation about the pool campaign. I responed once before and hadn't intended to again. I'll end it here, and will only respond again to the more outlandish inaccuracies posted here.
LOL
ReplyDeleteI must hand it to you Tom you really do have a spinmasters mind. Here you are back again replying to Ted's response and without addressing a single issue.
And you wonder why he doesn't ask you for a comment.
ROFL