Council Leader Says His Colleague Should Apologise For ‘Bloody Rabble’ Remark

Published on: 18 Nov, 2016
Updated on: 20 Nov, 2016

Cllr Moseley, at the April 6th meeting, issuing the erroneous instruction that it was prohibited for the public to record the meeting without prior permission.

Cllr Moseley, at the April 6th 2016 planning meeting, immediately after which she made the controversial remark.

The council leader at Guildford Borough Council has admitted he believes Cllr Marsha Moseley should apologise for comparing the public at a planning meeting she chaired to a “bloody rabble”.

The admission comes in a Surrey Advertiser report [Nov 18 2016] which refers to an independent investigation report commissioned by the recently departed monitoring officer, Satish Mistry.

The conclusions of the same report were published in The Guildford Dragon News three months ago, in August, in a story headlined ‘Bloody Rabble’ Remark – Investigation Recommends Councillor Apologises.

Council leader Paul Spooner

Council leader Paul Spooner (Con, South Ash & Tongham) told the Surrey Advertiser: “To the best of my knowledge Cllr Moseley has not yet apologised and the monitoring officer has not yet closed the case. Either Cllr Moseley apologises to the complainants or the matter will go to a hearing.

“Whilst I believe the original complainants, all activists at GGG, [one complainant told The Guildford Dragon he was no longer a member of GGG when he made the complaint] were vexatious in their original complaints I do feel that Cllr Moseley should have apologised to those it may have offended.”

There appeared to have been an impasse between the former monitoring officer and Cllr Moseley over the requirement to apologise. But if no apology, in line with the report’s recommendation, is forthcoming the matter will go to a hearing of the Corporate Governance and Standards Committee at GBC. It is next due to meet on November 24 but the matter does not appear to be currently included in its agenda.

According to the GBC website, the committee is currently chaired by Cllr Moseley’s partner, Cllr Nigel Manning (Con, Ash Vale), who would presumably stand aside for any consideration of the issue. The committee comprises: seven borough councillors, three independent co-opted members of the public (some of these posts may be unfilled at present) and three co-opted parish representatives.

Responses to Council Leader Says His Colleague Should Apologise For ‘Bloody Rabble’ Remark

Jim Allen Reply

November 18, 2016 at 2:47 pm

Shouldn’t Cllr Moseley be suspended from the party for bringing it into disrepute? Recently a male member for Burpham was very quickly suspended. Why is this lady not being treated in a similar manner?
Lisa Wright Reply

November 18, 2016 at 11:05 pm

Would it of made a difference if the complaint had come from a different political party then?
Raymond Oliver Reply

November 20, 2016 at 1:58 am

Any chance that the councillor who started a petition to make traitors out of anyone who supported rejoining the EU should be dealt with like this? Or do double standards apply here?

I can handle being called part of a rabble but I won’t be branded as a traitor!
Adrian Atkinson Reply

November 22, 2016 at 8:48 am

The council leader seems to be queering the pitch when, on social media, he claims the Cllr Moseley has said sorry and that:

“I understand that Cllr Moseley has now apologised to complainants but at least one has refused apology. Pathetic GGG politics”

He has deliberately missed the point or just in error. The apology should not be to those who complain about a councillors/committee chair’s behaviour, it has to be wider than that. The independent investigation reportedly concludes that: “the comment ‘brought her office and the council into disrepute.'”

It went on to say: “…for the monitoring officer to seek a local resolution by which councillor Moseley apologises for her comment at the next available meeting of the borough council.”

“This would involve the monitoring officer consulting with the independent person and the complainants on whether this was a fair resolution which would help to ensure higher standards of conduct for the future.”

Nowhere, has it been suggested that a suitable remedy for the Cllr’s alleged transgression is to apologise just to those who complained about the behaviour.

The report goes on to say that if Cllr Moseley does not make a public apology, the report would be forwarded for a “local hearing” as provided for in the “council’s arrangements”.

This council just needs to “suck it up” and do what’s right, rather play party politics. Cllr Moseley did wrong and the independent investigation gave clear guidance on the remedy.

Cllr Holliday was servery chastised recently, perhaps because his views were against the council leader’s pro remain stance – does the lack of similar sanction and social media comments show that the council and it’s leader effectively supports Cllr Moseley’s view that the public are a “bloody rabble”.

The council leader Paul Spooner has expressed the view via Twitter that Cllr Moseley should apologise but did not specify whether the apology should be made publicly. Ed
David Smith Reply

November 23, 2016 at 4:54 pm

It’s hard to see what this councillor should be apologising for as the people in the chamber that night were behaving like “a disorderly crowd”.

This behaviour wasn’t isolated to this meeting – the same happened in the Waitrose planning committee meeting. People shouting out like petulant children when they don’t get their way, which to be clear, is to see absolutely no development of any kind anywhere.

Well done councillor [Moseley] for saying what any well-mannered person was thinking. It’s hard to find another town where people behave in such a way – it’s embarrassing.
Pete Knight Reply

November 23, 2016 at 4:57 pm

To apologise makes the kind of audience behaviour, exhibited that night, seem acceptable. It wasn’t and the people who behaved like a bloody rabble (which is a polite way of describing it) should take a long hard look at themselves.