Letter: David Reeves’ Accusers Should Have Attended Complaints Hearing

Published on: 20 Sep, 2017
Updated on: 20 Sep, 2017

Cllr David Reeve (GGG) and complainants Cllrs Paul Spooner (Con) and Caroline Reeves (Lib Dem).

From Graham Richings

On Monday, September 11 I attended the complaints hearing at Millmead House in respect of Cllr David Reeve. This matter was well reported in The Guildford Dragon NEWS.

I am currently awaiting a reply from James Whiteman, managing director of Guildford Borough Council (GBC), to say exactly how much these complaints, the investigation and hearing, cost us the taxpayers of Guildford.

The complaints were made against Cllr David Reeve by Cllrs Paul Spooner and Caroline Reeves. Neither of these complainants attended the hearing. Caroline Reeves was apparently on holiday.

In my view, they should both have been present. The complaint appears to have related to some allegedly confidential information concerning predicted figures for future employment figures some fifteen years ahead. This is clearly guesswork and might not even be accurate, so why is it confidential?

The lawyer who carried out the investigation, and recommended GBC find David Reeve guilty, seriously misled them. So, what some observers have called a “kangaroo court” found David guilty.

The investigator maintained that there was no public interest in the housing numbers that are proposed in the Local Plan. This clearly is not true because I have written to GBC on numerous occasions asking how the figures have been calculated and they refuse to explain and have written to me saying that they will not answer any more of my letters on this matter.

A lot of other people have made similar enquiries. I subsequently sent the following email to Cllrs Spooner and Reeves. Cllr Spooner has not responded. I sent a second email asking him for a reply by Tuesday 19th, advising him that if I did not get a reply I would send a copy of the original email and this covering letter to the local press.

This was my email:

“Dear Councillor Spooner,

Last Monday I attended the disciplinary hearing in respect of David Reeve.

Please can you explain why you were not present as you were one of the complainants? It seems an extremely cowardly thing to do, to make a complaint and then not be there. There may have been a need to question you. Whatever Cllr David Reeve did it was in the public interest. We need to know, and are entitled to know, how the housing need figures have been arrived at for the Local Plan.

I have made written requests for that information on a number of occasions and it has been refused. I have the letters to this effect. What are you people trying to hide? It all looks very suspicious.

How much did that whole charade cost? Do you even consider how much you personally cost us the taxpayers for this petty complaint? The public interest is an overriding fact here and you yourself would be making this information public if you had a shred of decency and a sense of public duty.

As a taxpayer, I would like an explanation. Please can you explain to me exactly how the housing figures were arrived at? Have you even checked the calculation? Has any councillor or official done so? How do you know that they are correct? At least Councillor Reeve did the decent thing! You are putting your trust in a private company that has an interest in housing development. They are not going to be impartial.”

Editors note: James Whiteman, managing director of Guildford Borough Council, has said: “Cllrs Spooner and Reeves were not required to participate in the Hearings Sub-Committee meeting. The process the council followed was in accordance with the procedures set out in the council’s constitution.”

Responses to Letter: David Reeves’ Accusers Should Have Attended Complaints Hearing

John Perkins Reply

September 21, 2017 at 10:13 am

Why were the complainants not required to participate?

I suppose we should consider ourselves lucky they weren’t granted anonymity too. That would be consistent with GBC’s obsessive desire for secrecy.
Valerie Thompson Reply

September 21, 2017 at 3:29 pm

Well said!

Not of public interest?

What have concerned local people been asking for over the past few years?

We have been demanding that GBC release the research information leading to the numbers of new houses it claims are needed. However, Justin Gardner who did the research, have stated that the work is “their own intellectual property”.

How can this be so? We, the local tax-payers have paid for this information. The rules, regarding information about SHMAs, say quite clearly that this information should be made available to the general public.

GBC say that they have not seen the research. How then, can they declare that they know it is accurate? The Executive, and Cllr Spooner in particular, must have seen it, but the other councillors were refused access.

This is truly an immoral attitude.