Abraham Lincoln
If given the truth, the people can be depended upon to meet any national crisis...
Guildford news...
for Guildford people, brought to you by Guildford reporters - Guildford's own news service
By David Reading
The saga of the two absent Ash parish councillors came to a head on Monday evening when the full parish council faced searing criticism from members of the public and from its two Independent members.
The mainly Conservative council has been embroiled in controversy since the two councillors, Helen and Tony Gorham, left the area to live in Marlborough, Wiltshire, in 2020.
Since then, they have not attended a single parish council meeting in person. Their only attendance has been at committee meetings held online. This was permitted during the pandemic, but a High Court ruling in the spring of 2021 meant that attendance at online council meetings would no longer count.
The council, led by its chairman Cllr Nigel Manning, has steadfastly refused to accept that the two councillors should resign. Some residents believe it is because he wishes to avoid the risk of his party losing more seats at by-elections.
Despite hearing legal advice that the coupleâs membership was unlawful, the council wasnât convinced and voted in May to pay for a barrister to clarify the position. The barrister was told an opinion was needed by the end of August.
But at Mondayâs meeting, it was revealed that the barristerâs opinion had not been received, leading to anger and frustration among the residents who attended. They were furious that the matter had been allowed to drag on, with the two councillors remaining in post. The barristerâs fee of ÂŁ2,400 for the advice has already been paid.
See also: The Case of the Absent Ash Councillors Descends into Farce
During public discussion time, resident Carl Cookson asked: âDoes the council believe there should be a deadline and that the evidence of the other legal sources should then be considered?â
He added: âI donât understand why you are still dithering when you have received two professional opinions from people in senior positions. This is an embarrassment to the whole parish.â
Those two opinions were:
But during Mondayâs meeting Cllr Tonks â standing in for an absent Cllr Manning â insisted that the matter was still unresolved and without the barristerâs report, there was nothing to be discussed.
However, Independent councillor Carla Morson insisted there was plenty to discuss, saying that the legal advice received so far was âunequivocalâ â and the Gorhams should be disqualified from membership of the council.
In an impassioned speech, she said: âThey have not attended a face-to-face meeting in over a year. Are we really content that this is right and correct for our residents? Morally and ethically what the Gorhams are doing is wrong.â
She added: âOur prayer at the beginning of the council said we want to represent our community to the best of our effort. We are not doing that. By not making a decision we are making the situation worse.â
And she raised the question: Because there is plenty of evidence the Gorhams should be disqualified, is the council operating illegally?
Cllr Morson said that in the absence of the barristerâs advice, the council should âbite the bulletâ and make a decision now about the status of the Gorhams â a view supported by fellow Independent Pat Scott.
But they were told this was not possible because such a decision was not on the agenda. In response, Cllr Morson said there was a solution to this: the council could call an extraordinary meeting and resolve the matter within 14 days.
Throughout the meeting, Cllr Tonks appeared to have only one argument against the barrage of criticism levelled at the council. The council canât do anything, he said, until the barristerâs opinion arrives.
He said: âWe have chased this up, but they havenât completed it yet. Obviously, weâre not their only customer. We have done all we can. They have indicated that they will get back to us as soon as possible.â
In his opinion, despite the advice received, this was all a grey area and a correct interpretation of the law was unclear. âWe must wait for the barristerâs opinion,â he repeated.
Cllr Morson was also perplexed why she and other members had been kept uninformed about the email exchange between Cllr Tonks and Anne Bott, chair at SALC â in which Ms Bott gave her opinion that the Gorhamsâ continued presence on the council was illegal.
These emails came to light following a Freedom of Information request from resident Carl Cookson.
Cllr Morson said: âThere should have been discussion on this. The last email was date Aug 11. I have heard nothing until the last couple of days about those emails. Why are all of us â parish councillors representing the community â why is it not discussed with us when these things arise?â
Cllr Tonks didnât share the emails with members until after they were reported in the Guildford Dragon.
He said: âWe were awaiting legal advice and I felt there was no urgency in sharing those emails.â
As Cllr Tonks continued to insist that no decision could be made, and the council had to await the barristerâs response, anger and frustration got the better of the members of the public present but they were told firmly that they were not permitted to interrupt.
Disregarding the direction, Mr Cookson declared: âYou should set a deadline for an outcome to be decided. That should be the next council session. You should then have everything in your possession to make a decision. Rather than discuss it â do it!â
Cllrs Helen and Tony Gorham have been invited to comment.
This website is published by The Guildford Dragon NEWS
Contact: Martin Giles mgilesdragon@gmail.com
Log in- Posts - Add New - Powered by WordPress - Designed by Gabfire Themes
Recent Comments