All rights reserved THERE IS A NEED FOR A STRONG RESIDENTS’ GROUP AT RYEDALE By PAUL ANDREWS

One question I am often asked is “Why did you leave the LibDem council group two years ago”? So perhaps it is time the public has an answer.

I had been writing articles for the Gazette for many years before I was elected. All of these articles are on my website, and it will be seen that my views on local matters have changed very little since then. I have no hidden agenda – my views are also summarised separately as “My aims and objectives” on the website.

I wanted to follow up these aims and objectives, and thought the LibDem Group was the best group to work with. Instead, I found that all the three larger political groups were so closely bound together by an informal executive or “Leaders’ Group” (the “Gang of Four” as I call them), that it was impossible to do so. So I joined David Clarkson, (a retired senior policeman who had left the Tory group for similar reasons), as a separate Residents group.

Let me give some examples.

Firstly, there was the issue of flooding. The Council had always shown its concern for Malton, Norton and Pickering, but had done very little to help the farms and villages of Ryedale outside these towns. There was public concern about the advice received from the Environment Agency – particularly in regard to the cleansing of rivers. After 23 years experience of working for public authorities, it was obvious to me that, if the Environment Agency was to be seriously challenged, what was required, as a first step, was the report of an independent civil engineer. The cost of a desk study turned out to be just over £5,000. This paltry sum was too much for the Gang of Four, and our suggestion was opposed by every other councillor except John Clark’s Liberals. (See website: click on “Articles” and then on “Land Drainage and Flooding”).

Then there was last year’s outrageous 25% increase in car park charges, which was intended to cover an anticipated budget shortfall of £171,000. The charges came into effect in April, but by July the anticipated £171,000 shortfall had turned out to be a £260,000 surplus. So there was no need for the increase, but 28 councillors decided to spend the surplus as a windfall on other matters, rather than bring the charges down. It took the Residents Group and a campaign by the Gazette a year to get the 28 Councillors to sort the matter out.

Then there was the attempt to outsource the Council’s Revenues and Benefits Section to a partnership with our capped neighbour, Hambleton. This was reported to committee in July 2005, as a confidential and exempt item. It appeared that the proposal did not make sound business sense. So I opposed it, but was cut off half way through my speech. Afterwards, work on the partnership went ahead with the agreement or acquiescence of every other political group – and certainly with the full knowledge and approval of the Gang of Four. A report was presented to Council on 24th April. The Residents Group examined and carefully analysed this report before the meeting, and I sent a number of e-mails pointing out various concerns, including the fact that the benefit to the Council of spending £1M of public money (which included a £685,000 government bribe) would be only £65,000 per annum, which would not start to accrue until three years after implementation – a clear case of jam tomorrow. The debate split the Council and went on from April to September, when the scheme was thankfully dropped, but it should be remembered that, until 24th April, there was no serious opposition.

And now there is still the issue of Ryedale’s reserves. These are about eight million pounds – they exceed Ryedale’s annual budget. Some authorities have rules about reserves. Schools, for example, are not allowed to keep more in reserve than 5% of their annual budget. So why are Ryedale’s reserves so high? There is a capital works programme, but this is £2M under spent, and, if the Council does not have the resources to deal with it, why not? This money needs to be spent and invested in worthwhile projects for the benefit of the community, such as the proposed dry sports hall. Then the value will remain in Ryedale, and will not transfer to another district if there is another local government reorganisation.

All these and other matters (our campaign to reopen the Wentworth Street public toilets, for example) show the need for a strong residents’ council group, dedicated to the protection and promotion of the interests of the Ryedale community alone. At the moment there are only two of us. We cannot exist without support. The stands we have made will not have endeared us to the other council groups, and the Residents Group can expect to have the full force of the party machines of the LibDems and Conservatives unleashed against us at the forthcoming May elections. So, if you think we are doing our best for the community and would like to help, or even stand for election as a resident, our contact details are with the Council, and we can also be contacted through this website.