Email sent to scottish minister in latest stage of appeal process!
In reply to your communication of 10th Jan 2013, I wish to know who will adjudicate on this appeal. Who are the Scottish Ministers you refer to in your letters ? In his letter of 19th December, Kenneth Gibson MSP stated that his ministerial colleague, Derek MacKay, would adjudicate. As Mr Mackay is involved in the promotion of BID in Scotland, surely this is a conflict of interest.
We have no confidence in this appeal process because;
1) our initial appeals to the returning officer at North Ayrshire Council were ignored. Elma Murray took ten days to send a dismissive response.
2) further requests for information were ignored by the N.A.C.
3) denial of the recorded delivery request under the Freedom of Information
4) our initial letters to leaders of parties within Scottish Government on 21st November requesting an appeal were not answered promptly in view of the time constraints. An e-mail to my personal account on 29th November giving us less than 24 hours to submit written appeals by 30th November!
5) when we actually complied with that, then a demand on 15th December for separate letters from each complainant, stating which regulation was contravened. This, at the run-up to Xmas and the busiest time for traders, and with parliament closing by 21st December.
6) when we complied with that by 18th December, we are told by Kenneth Gibson on 19th December that it would seem unlikely we will get a re-ballot
7) I note that of the 30 appeal letters sent 18th December, you have removed 11 because they were unable to attend our meeting on 29th November and have been deprived of the right to appeal.
1) our initial appeals to the returning officer at North Ayrshire Council were ignored. Elma Murray took ten days to send a dismissive response.
2) further requests for information were ignored by the N.A.C.
3) denial of the recorded delivery request under the Freedom of Information
4) our initial letters to leaders of parties within Scottish Government on 21st November requesting an appeal were not answered promptly in view of the time constraints. An e-mail to my personal account on 29th November giving us less than 24 hours to submit written appeals by 30th November!
5) when we actually complied with that, then a demand on 15th December for separate letters from each complainant, stating which regulation was contravened. This, at the run-up to Xmas and the busiest time for traders, and with parliament closing by 21st December.
6) when we complied with that by 18th December, we are told by Kenneth Gibson on 19th December that it would seem unlikely we will get a re-ballot
7) I note that of the 30 appeal letters sent 18th December, you have removed 11 because they were unable to attend our meeting on 29th November and have been deprived of the right to appeal.
Tellingly, you say you cannot deprive BID the right to set up the registered company on 19th January based on a ballot result achieved by deliberately depriving so many of a vote.
The numbers of complainants clearly demonstrates that this was a deeply flawed process, but the attitude of N.A.C. and Scottish Ministers seems to be one of "how do we prevent a re-ballot at Largs", rather than "how can we right the wrong perpetrated on Largs business owners".
The numbers of complainants clearly demonstrates that this was a deeply flawed process, but the attitude of N.A.C. and Scottish Ministers seems to be one of "how do we prevent a re-ballot at Largs", rather than "how can we right the wrong perpetrated on Largs business owners".
Four elected councillors attended the meeting on 29th November, and heard testimony of some of the intimidation by certain steering committee members, as well as that of those of us deprived of a ballot paper, yet when 2 were prompted to speak , they ignored that and instead tried to "sell" BID to a hostile audience.
Do not underestimate the strength of feeling here in Largs. We know the truth and we will continue to fight this scandalous abuse of our electoral rights.
Do not underestimate the strength of feeling here in Largs. We know the truth and we will continue to fight this scandalous abuse of our electoral rights.
In her letter of 20th December Elma Murray states that " voting packs were issued to 313 eligible voters on 19 September 2012 by 1st class Royal Mail . Each voting pack contained a covering letter; a ballot paper; instructions of how to complete the ballot paper; an explanation of the arrangements for the ballot; a copy of the business plan prepared by the BID proposer, and a promotional DVD".
More than 30 of us, to date, dispute this claim.
My letter of 21st November asked " Can you clarify who exactly was responsible for the posting of the said information?"
We received no reply.
My next letter to Elma Murray was on 23rd November asking for a list of the 280 eligible businesses under the Freedom of Information Act.
We received no reply.
Kenneth Gibson, MSP referred us to Mr Alex Anderson. We wrote to him on 25th November, again asking " who was responsible for posting/distributing the BID information and ballot/voting paper".
We received no reply.
Then I received a reply from Kenneth Gibson, MSP, dated 19th December, enclosing a copy of a letter from George Hunter, NAC Town Centre and Regeneration Manager, in which he states Largs Matters carried out the following work - (item 2) " circulated a 20 page business plan which accompanied the ballot"
So, who is telling the truth here? I believe the statement from Mr Hunter is correct as
1) Too many of us (30 to my knowledge) did not receive a business plan and ballot paper.
2) this would explain the testimony of business owners who state that members of the BID steering group had their business plans and ballot papers in the final couple of days of balloting, when they visited their premises and tried to get them to vote "yes".
More than 30 of us, to date, dispute this claim.
My letter of 21st November asked " Can you clarify who exactly was responsible for the posting of the said information?"
We received no reply.
My next letter to Elma Murray was on 23rd November asking for a list of the 280 eligible businesses under the Freedom of Information Act.
We received no reply.
Kenneth Gibson, MSP referred us to Mr Alex Anderson. We wrote to him on 25th November, again asking " who was responsible for posting/distributing the BID information and ballot/voting paper".
We received no reply.
Then I received a reply from Kenneth Gibson, MSP, dated 19th December, enclosing a copy of a letter from George Hunter, NAC Town Centre and Regeneration Manager, in which he states Largs Matters carried out the following work - (item 2) " circulated a 20 page business plan which accompanied the ballot"
So, who is telling the truth here? I believe the statement from Mr Hunter is correct as
1) Too many of us (30 to my knowledge) did not receive a business plan and ballot paper.
2) this would explain the testimony of business owners who state that members of the BID steering group had their business plans and ballot papers in the final couple of days of balloting, when they visited their premises and tried to get them to vote "yes".
Also, Ms Murray claims voting packs were sent to 313 eligible businesses. This I noted was a similar figure to that quoted in the Business Plan I first read on 10th November ( page 11 - approx 312). Yet the e-mail on 5th November from Ron Muir giving ballot results states there were 280 eligible businesses. What is the true figure ?
As she has denied our request under the Freedom of Information Act sent by recorded delivery on 11th December, we still do not know the details of how many eligible businesses were included in this ballot, and how many were, like us, excluded from the ballot.
So, which is it ? 280 or 313 ? We demand transparency.
We have sought a review, but , no doubt, the cover-up will continue, and we will have to take it to the Commissioner.
Finally, I wish to address the personal attack on me by the Chairman and Vice Chairman in their response letter to you on 3rd January.
1) My husband was invited to an informal meeting of Largs Matters, but declined as I own the business. So informal, that Mr Varu suggested he attend dressed as the clown. He was insulted by this. Of course, no mention of BID!
2) Five businesses nearby did not get any Bid information or Ballot papers. One business owner nearby was duped into voting "yes" by Mr Sunil Varu before he had a chance to read the business plan. He was unaware of the financial and legal implications until my mother informed him a week after the ballot. Hence his letter of protest to the Returning Officer.
3) I am entitled to my opinion, and had I known about BID I would have mounted a No campaign. More importantly, I was entitled to receive the BID plan etc and a ballot paper ! The 30 of us denied our democratic rights will continue this battle, as we have always said the business owners of Largs were entitled to a free and fair vote, and we would accept a democratic result. Mrs J Harris
No comments:
Post a Comment