“I think I’m morally sound” – Christchurch council leader defends decision to use casting vote to keep position

SPEAKING UP: Cllr Ray Nottage during his interview with the Daily Echo

SPEAKING UP: Cllr Ray Nottage during his interview with the Daily Echo

First published in News

THE under-fire leader of Christchurch council has admitted there is ‘work to be done’ following a controversial leadership challenge.

The dispute, which split the Conservative group 11-11, sparked criticism of Cllr Ray Nottage and raised questions about his credibility after he used his casting vote to keep his position as leader – effectively voting twice.

When asked if he thought he had the moral authority and mandate to continue as leader following the vote, he said: “The rules say you have to make the decision in that way.

“I think I am morally sound. My supporters, certainly, my team, insisted that I carry on. Is there work to be done? Of course.”

He said the council did listen to residents, citing the successful £1 for two hours parking charge campaign by the Chamber of Commerce and the community-run Mudeford Wood Centre as examples.

“Can we do better? I am sure we can. Will we do better? I am sure we will, providing we are given a fair chance to respond, because at the end of the day what we are doing is running council tax-payers’ assets,” he added.

He disputed the view that Christchurch council was seen as uncaring.

Over his style of leadership, with one Tory councillor describing it as ‘abrasive and confrontational’, he said his leadership was ‘business-orientated’.

“This description of me as some sort of aggressive, non-approachable, bullying-type manager is not displayed in any way as far as I can see. What I did do quite deliberately was introduce much more robust discussion in the council chamber as it was pretty uninspiring beforehand.

“My team work very well with me, extraordinarily well.

“I do what I do. I don’t think I bully.

“I think I am very positive. I sit down and work out what I want to achieve in terms of outcomes and I explain that as clearly and precisely as I possibly can.

“Within my own ward I don’t think you would get that description. I think what we have is a level of description from people who have hardly ever met me, let alone do business with me.”

He said, while he would take it on board, he didn’t see that in himself.

‘We were looking down some dreadful black holes’

THE council has undergone major changes in the past few years, with the partnership between Christchurch and East Dorset expected to return savings of around £1.4m once the process is complete.

Shared services include Dorset Waste Partnership and the Stour Valley Partnership which includes different shared services between East Dorset, North Dorset and, soon, Poole councils.

Cllr Nottage said: “The interesting thing about the approach to this job, bearing in mind it is one of the biggest businesses in the borough, is very much one of business and we had to take a very pragmatic business view of the situation we were in because we were looking down some pretty dreadful black holes.

“In 2011 we had no idea what the government would be doing in respect of reducing the regional grants.

“So the business approach had to start from square one.”

He added: “Criticisms that come through to the council should take into account the effect it has on those officers who have done a brilliant job under the most difficult of circumstances.”

Looking to the next 12 months, he said key issues include the signing off of the core strategy by the Secretary of State, which is due in the next few days, housing, financial security and maintaining services.

Comments (36)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:00am Wed 2 Apr 14

ShuttleX says...

“This description of me as some sort of aggressive, non-approachable, bullying-type manager is not displayed in any way as far as I can see.

That description of you is spot on Mr Nottage. And yes, I have met you on many occasions. Even Mr Beesley thinks you are a bit rough and ready, and that is the pot calling the kettle black.

You are normally alright, until people disagree with you, or it looks like you are not getting your own way, then the real you comes to the surface. You surround yourself with Yes men, so it's not surprising you are never told just how disliked you really are. Nobody denies you have a tough job, put you don't have stomp all over everybody to be listened to.

If it's any consolation to those that voted against Mr Nottage, Bournemouth Council would have liked to see a change too.
“This description of me as some sort of aggressive, non-approachable, bullying-type manager is not displayed in any way as far as I can see. That description of you is spot on Mr Nottage. And yes, I have met you on many occasions. Even Mr Beesley thinks you are a bit rough and ready, and that is the pot calling the kettle black. You are normally alright, until people disagree with you, or it looks like you are not getting your own way, then the real you comes to the surface. You surround yourself with Yes men, so it's not surprising you are never told just how disliked you really are. Nobody denies you have a tough job, put you don't have stomp all over everybody to be listened to. If it's any consolation to those that voted against Mr Nottage, Bournemouth Council would have liked to see a change too. ShuttleX
  • Score: 24

7:15am Wed 2 Apr 14

Molecatcher says...

A morally sound politician... An oxymoron if ever I saw one...
A morally sound politician... An oxymoron if ever I saw one... Molecatcher
  • Score: 18

7:36am Wed 2 Apr 14

madM74 says...

When asked if he thought he had the moral authority and mandate to continue as leader following the vote, he said: “The rules say you have to make the decision in that way.


“I think I am morally sound. My supporters, certainly, my team, insisted that I carry on. Is there work to be done? Of course.”


Of course they are going to say you should carry on, if they said you shouldn't they would be out of a job!

Is there any way we can get rid of this "leader" (legally) before the next election??
When asked if he thought he had the moral authority and mandate to continue as leader following the vote, he said: “The rules say you have to make the decision in that way. “I think I am morally sound. My supporters, certainly, my team, insisted that I carry on. Is there work to be done? Of course.” Of course they are going to say you should carry on, if they said you shouldn't they would be out of a job! Is there any way we can get rid of this "leader" (legally) before the next election?? madM74
  • Score: 26

7:39am Wed 2 Apr 14

skydriver says...

Yet again Nottage in the press trying to defend his position, there should be no question he should go, if one has to keep defending his position then the position is not right for him. For goodness sake listen to what the people of Christchurch want,for once, QUIT, GO AWAY, RUN AWAY. What annoying man you are even many of your colleagues think you should go. You and you alone are wrecking our town. The legacy you will leave behind is TROUBLEMAKER.and a disliked one at that.
Yet again Nottage in the press trying to defend his position, there should be no question he should go, if one has to keep defending his position then the position is not right for him. For goodness sake listen to what the people of Christchurch want,for once, QUIT, GO AWAY, RUN AWAY. What annoying man you are even many of your colleagues think you should go. You and you alone are wrecking our town. The legacy you will leave behind is TROUBLEMAKER.and a disliked one at that. skydriver
  • Score: 25

8:42am Wed 2 Apr 14

The Witch says...

If you had any morals Mr Nottage you would realize that this is the time to resign, how much more bad press and damage to the image of Christchurch has to happen before you understand that the people of this town do NOT want you as leader of the council, do NOT want you as a councillor and do NOT want to hear your name mentioned ever again.
If you had any morals Mr Nottage you would realize that this is the time to resign, how much more bad press and damage to the image of Christchurch has to happen before you understand that the people of this town do NOT want you as leader of the council, do NOT want you as a councillor and do NOT want to hear your name mentioned ever again. The Witch
  • Score: 18

8:59am Wed 2 Apr 14

Townee says...

Any person with morals would have abstained from the vote because it was about him and certainly not used his casting vote to get his own way. Like most council leader they have no morals about what is right and wrong.
Any person with morals would have abstained from the vote because it was about him and certainly not used his casting vote to get his own way. Like most council leader they have no morals about what is right and wrong. Townee
  • Score: 22

9:04am Wed 2 Apr 14

RM says...

There has been a lot of controversy around Christchurch Council recently & it must be detracting time, money & energy from the main Council business. If Mr Nottage is so sure he's the right person for the job he should stand down as leader now & have a leadership election with him standing as one of the candidates - without either him or any other candidate benefitting from a 'casting vote'. Pigs are all harnessed & ready to fly.....
There has been a lot of controversy around Christchurch Council recently & it must be detracting time, money & energy from the main Council business. If Mr Nottage is so sure he's the right person for the job he should stand down as leader now & have a leadership election with him standing as one of the candidates - without either him or any other candidate benefitting from a 'casting vote'. Pigs are all harnessed & ready to fly..... RM
  • Score: 13

9:05am Wed 2 Apr 14

Hessenford says...

To Cllr Ray Nottage, James Bond once said, "There's a useful four letter word, and you're full of it.
To Cllr Ray Nottage, James Bond once said, "There's a useful four letter word, and you're full of it. Hessenford
  • Score: 15

9:11am Wed 2 Apr 14

twynham says...

Where do these rule he abides by state that he cannot stand down if the majority of the members he is representing vote to have him replaced?

Why do I need to know or meet someone in political power to judge whether I think their views and actions are ill conceived and are against the interest and values of those he is elected to represent?

The overwhelming criticism I have read (and written) are directed at Mr Nottage personally and not at council officers.

It was not council officers who referred to Echo journalists as “scum of the earth”;

It was not council officers who accused Dr Alistair Somerville Ford of “pursuing a personal agenda which was inconsistent with the objectives of the community campaign” and then being forced to apologise.

It was not council officers who said “we conclude therefore that there is local support for this project” (Morrisons)” when it took astute members of the planning committee to realise the NLP report presented to them was grossly inaccurate.

Needless to say, I could go on but I conclude from this article that The Dear Leader is as morally sound as Tony Blair.

I don’t know him personally either!
Where do these rule he abides by state that he cannot stand down if the majority of the members he is representing vote to have him replaced? Why do I need to know or meet someone in political power to judge whether I think their views and actions are ill conceived and are against the interest and values of those he is elected to represent? The overwhelming criticism I have read (and written) are directed at Mr Nottage personally and not at council officers. It was not council officers who referred to Echo journalists as “scum of the earth”; It was not council officers who accused Dr Alistair Somerville Ford of “pursuing a personal agenda which was inconsistent with the objectives of the community campaign” and then being forced to apologise. It was not council officers who said “we conclude therefore that there is local support for this project” (Morrisons)” when it took astute members of the planning committee to realise the NLP report presented to them was grossly inaccurate. Needless to say, I could go on but I conclude from this article that The Dear Leader is as morally sound as Tony Blair. I don’t know him personally either! twynham
  • Score: 9

9:26am Wed 2 Apr 14

skydriver says...

Townee wrote:
Any person with morals would have abstained from the vote because it was about him and certainly not used his casting vote to get his own way. Like most council leader they have no morals about what is right and wrong.
He has the morals of an ally cat, no sorry, an ally cat does have some morals unlike him.
[quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: Any person with morals would have abstained from the vote because it was about him and certainly not used his casting vote to get his own way. Like most council leader they have no morals about what is right and wrong.[/p][/quote]He has the morals of an ally cat, no sorry, an ally cat does have some morals unlike him. skydriver
  • Score: 8

9:28am Wed 2 Apr 14

skydriver says...

madM74 wrote:
When asked if he thought he had the moral authority and mandate to continue as leader following the vote, he said: “The rules say you have to make the decision in that way.


“I think I am morally sound. My supporters, certainly, my team, insisted that I carry on. Is there work to be done? Of course.”


Of course they are going to say you should carry on, if they said you shouldn't they would be out of a job!

Is there any way we can get rid of this "leader" (legally) before the next election??
Yes I quite agree, there must be a way of getting him out, this would be the ideal opportunity Any ideas anyone?
[quote][p][bold]madM74[/bold] wrote: When asked if he thought he had the moral authority and mandate to continue as leader following the vote, he said: “The rules say you have to make the decision in that way. “I think I am morally sound. My supporters, certainly, my team, insisted that I carry on. Is there work to be done? Of course.” Of course they are going to say you should carry on, if they said you shouldn't they would be out of a job! Is there any way we can get rid of this "leader" (legally) before the next election??[/p][/quote]Yes I quite agree, there must be a way of getting him out, this would be the ideal opportunity Any ideas anyone? skydriver
  • Score: 8

9:33am Wed 2 Apr 14

badawi says...

It's not clear to me what Cllr Nottage has done wrong? There's a lot of bluff and bluster on this forum about "he said, she said" but there's no concrete evidence to support any of the contributors claims about said gentlemen? I think there's a lot of grumpy armchair councillor leaders out there who need to offer up something more substantial for once. No - I do not know him personally either. After all these years following the echo, council etc. I've never come across firm facts supporting wrong doing.
It's not clear to me what Cllr Nottage has done wrong? There's a lot of bluff and bluster on this forum about "he said, she said" but there's no concrete evidence to support any of the contributors claims about said gentlemen? I think there's a lot of grumpy armchair councillor leaders out there who need to offer up something more substantial for once. No - I do not know him personally either. After all these years following the echo, council etc. I've never come across firm facts supporting wrong doing. badawi
  • Score: -12

9:51am Wed 2 Apr 14

twynham says...

badawi

It was not "grumpy armchair councillor leaders out there" who voted against him, it was the majority of his Conservative Party Council members.

You want evidence, I have it by the bucket load!
badawi It was not "grumpy armchair councillor leaders out there" who voted against him, it was the majority of his Conservative Party Council members. You want evidence, I have it by the bucket load! twynham
  • Score: 10

10:07am Wed 2 Apr 14

woby_tide says...

Townee wrote:
Any person with morals would have abstained from the vote because it was about him and certainly not used his casting vote to get his own way. Like most council leader they have no morals about what is right and wrong.
My thoughts entirely. Similar to Councillors having to declare a vested interest in Planning Applications and abstaining from the vote else they are referred to the Ethics and Standards Board.

Yet in a vote where one participant has a massive vested interest as the vote concerns their position yet they can have two votes. And then claim they have morals. Absurd and morally reprehensible to boot.

So out of touch now it is frightening that someone who is evidently on a self serving power trip can continue.

If only the voters would wake up and see the sort of person they are voting for. They should all hang their heads too.
[quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: Any person with morals would have abstained from the vote because it was about him and certainly not used his casting vote to get his own way. Like most council leader they have no morals about what is right and wrong.[/p][/quote]My thoughts entirely. Similar to Councillors having to declare a vested interest in Planning Applications and abstaining from the vote else they are referred to the Ethics and Standards Board. Yet in a vote where one participant has a massive vested interest as the vote concerns their position yet they can have two votes. And then claim they have morals. Absurd and morally reprehensible to boot. So out of touch now it is frightening that someone who is evidently on a self serving power trip can continue. If only the voters would wake up and see the sort of person they are voting for. They should all hang their heads too. woby_tide
  • Score: 7

10:25am Wed 2 Apr 14

skydriver says...

badawi wrote:
It's not clear to me what Cllr Nottage has done wrong? There's a lot of bluff and bluster on this forum about "he said, she said" but there's no concrete evidence to support any of the contributors claims about said gentlemen? I think there's a lot of grumpy armchair councillor leaders out there who need to offer up something more substantial for once. No - I do not know him personally either. After all these years following the echo, council etc. I've never come across firm facts supporting wrong doing.
It's was he who has stopped many things within Christchurch,if you read the local papers the answers would be clear. Now just for starters he is the trouble with why Druitt hall was never completed , and all the time he is in office it never will be he doesn't want it , I could continue all I will say just look at the comments and just read what many of his colleagues say about him. So is that proof enough for you.
[quote][p][bold]badawi[/bold] wrote: It's not clear to me what Cllr Nottage has done wrong? There's a lot of bluff and bluster on this forum about "he said, she said" but there's no concrete evidence to support any of the contributors claims about said gentlemen? I think there's a lot of grumpy armchair councillor leaders out there who need to offer up something more substantial for once. No - I do not know him personally either. After all these years following the echo, council etc. I've never come across firm facts supporting wrong doing.[/p][/quote]It's was he who has stopped many things within Christchurch,if you read the local papers the answers would be clear. Now just for starters he is the trouble with why Druitt hall was never completed , and all the time he is in office it never will be he doesn't want it , I could continue all I will say just look at the comments and just read what many of his colleagues say about him. So is that proof enough for you. skydriver
  • Score: 4

10:26am Wed 2 Apr 14

snowandice says...

I bet UKIP cannot believe their luck -heaven help us!!
I bet UKIP cannot believe their luck -heaven help us!! snowandice
  • Score: 1

10:43am Wed 2 Apr 14

jinglebell says...

Has he got a sound mandate to continue? Is he morally sound in using his own vote to remain?
No, on both counts. With a clear split, he has no mandate. By using his own vote, he has ignored the message to resign in favour of retaining power.
By doing so, he has lost even more residents votes; his actions are those of a dishonorable man not interested in the views of others, therefore, why should the electorate trust him to act in their interests.
His actions over this, coupled with his stance over Druitt Hall show an arrogance and love of power. He is not a man of or for the people.
Has he got a sound mandate to continue? Is he morally sound in using his own vote to remain? No, on both counts. With a clear split, he has no mandate. By using his own vote, he has ignored the message to resign in favour of retaining power. By doing so, he has lost even more residents votes; his actions are those of a dishonorable man not interested in the views of others, therefore, why should the electorate trust him to act in their interests. His actions over this, coupled with his stance over Druitt Hall show an arrogance and love of power. He is not a man of or for the people. jinglebell
  • Score: 14

10:45am Wed 2 Apr 14

Valerie W. says...

El Presidente. He'd look more natural in a white suit and medals.
El Presidente. He'd look more natural in a white suit and medals. Valerie W.
  • Score: 6

12:03pm Wed 2 Apr 14

Loyal2AFCB says...

I am afraid we have allowed our town to taken to be taken over by incomers who know little of the the history and culture of Christchurch and its people, and frankly care even less. As a result the place is unrecognisable from my childhood in the 60s and 70s and let me tell you the changes it has undergone have not been for the better.
I am afraid we have allowed our town to taken to be taken over by incomers who know little of the the history and culture of Christchurch and its people, and frankly care even less. As a result the place is unrecognisable from my childhood in the 60s and 70s and let me tell you the changes it has undergone have not been for the better. Loyal2AFCB
  • Score: 6

1:02pm Wed 2 Apr 14

woby_tide says...

Loyal2AFCB wrote:
I am afraid we have allowed our town to taken to be taken over by incomers who know little of the the history and culture of Christchurch and its people, and frankly care even less. As a result the place is unrecognisable from my childhood in the 60s and 70s and let me tell you the changes it has undergone have not been for the better.
I think you'll find it's the residents who have been here the longest who keep voting the Tories in
[quote][p][bold]Loyal2AFCB[/bold] wrote: I am afraid we have allowed our town to taken to be taken over by incomers who know little of the the history and culture of Christchurch and its people, and frankly care even less. As a result the place is unrecognisable from my childhood in the 60s and 70s and let me tell you the changes it has undergone have not been for the better.[/p][/quote]I think you'll find it's the residents who have been here the longest who keep voting the Tories in woby_tide
  • Score: 6

1:22pm Wed 2 Apr 14

Crank says...

Despicable, what he did in voting twice, and despicable what he has done to our town's heritage, especially the eco-crime in Druitt Gardens, once a rich woodland habitat, now a tarmac and lawn wasteland, Despicable how he personally prevented Druitt Hall being rebuilt. Despicable that he presided over the felling of newly protected trees, the demolition of a Georgian manufactury and the construction of vast blocks of flats in its place in the town centre with building access through the trashed and cleared Gardens. Morally utterly bankrupt.
Despicable, what he did in voting twice, and despicable what he has done to our town's heritage, especially the eco-crime in Druitt Gardens, once a rich woodland habitat, now a tarmac and lawn wasteland, Despicable how he personally prevented Druitt Hall being rebuilt. Despicable that he presided over the felling of newly protected trees, the demolition of a Georgian manufactury and the construction of vast blocks of flats in its place in the town centre with building access through the trashed and cleared Gardens. Morally utterly bankrupt. Crank
  • Score: 16

2:27pm Wed 2 Apr 14

skydriver says...

I would have thought by now the Bournemouth Echo would have published a new headline....NOTTAGE RESIGNS, alas this thick skinned individual can't even except all these comments, and still he can't get it .
We, the people of Christchurch Don't Want You., is that clear enough .
And he tells us he's listening , wrong!
I would have thought by now the Bournemouth Echo would have published a new headline....NOTTAGE RESIGNS, alas this thick skinned individual can't even except all these comments, and still he can't get it . We, the people of Christchurch Don't Want You., is that clear enough . And he tells us he's listening , wrong! skydriver
  • Score: 17

5:31pm Wed 2 Apr 14

damnlion says...

Dear Daily Echo,
Please stop printing photographs of this arrogant idiot, it is quite upsetting....

Private Eye are aware of his latest nonsense as well as our MP.....

Look at this...http://raynot
tage.blogspot.co.uk/
And go to Manor Aux quate on this page...unbelievable arrogance !

Sack the bu**er sap.
Dear Daily Echo, Please stop printing photographs of this arrogant idiot, it is quite upsetting.... Private Eye are aware of his latest nonsense as well as our MP..... Look at this...http://raynot tage.blogspot.co.uk/ And go to Manor Aux quate on this page...unbelievable arrogance ! Sack the bu**er sap. damnlion
  • Score: 7

6:06pm Wed 2 Apr 14

agp1337 says...

damnlion wrote:
Dear Daily Echo,
Please stop printing photographs of this arrogant idiot, it is quite upsetting....

Private Eye are aware of his latest nonsense as well as our MP.....

Look at this...http://raynot

tage.blogspot.co.uk/
And go to Manor Aux quate on this page...unbelievable arrogance !

Sack the bu**er sap.
I've just had another look at it. Assessor commented about the spelling being wrong. Mr Nottage has corrected it - except that it's still wrong. Perhaps next time he'd better go to the Savoy!
[quote][p][bold]damnlion[/bold] wrote: Dear Daily Echo, Please stop printing photographs of this arrogant idiot, it is quite upsetting.... Private Eye are aware of his latest nonsense as well as our MP..... Look at this...http://raynot tage.blogspot.co.uk/ And go to Manor Aux quate on this page...unbelievable arrogance ! Sack the bu**er sap.[/p][/quote]I've just had another look at it. Assessor commented about the spelling being wrong. Mr Nottage has corrected it - except that it's still wrong. Perhaps next time he'd better go to the Savoy! agp1337
  • Score: 5

6:26pm Wed 2 Apr 14

sea poole says...

How about this? We'll do a deal with Christchurch -swap the leader of our council (Poole) for the leader of your council. Now who's the winner here...? Or is that stretching things too far?
How about this? We'll do a deal with Christchurch -swap the leader of our council (Poole) for the leader of your council. Now who's the winner here...? Or is that stretching things too far? sea poole
  • Score: 2

6:39pm Wed 2 Apr 14

agp1337 says...

Loyal2AFCB wrote:
I am afraid we have allowed our town to taken to be taken over by incomers who know little of the the history and culture of Christchurch and its people, and frankly care even less. As a result the place is unrecognisable from my childhood in the 60s and 70s and let me tell you the changes it has undergone have not been for the better.
MOST places in the UK are different from the '60s and '70s. The sixties were over half a century ago, for heaven's sake. Over that time period compare, say, 1910 with 1960 ... or maybe 1935 with 1985. Some changes are for the better, some for worse. We always see our childhood past through a halcyon veil.
[quote][p][bold]Loyal2AFCB[/bold] wrote: I am afraid we have allowed our town to taken to be taken over by incomers who know little of the the history and culture of Christchurch and its people, and frankly care even less. As a result the place is unrecognisable from my childhood in the 60s and 70s and let me tell you the changes it has undergone have not been for the better.[/p][/quote]MOST places in the UK are different from the '60s and '70s. The sixties were over half a century ago, for heaven's sake. Over that time period compare, say, 1910 with 1960 ... or maybe 1935 with 1985. Some changes are for the better, some for worse. We always see our childhood past through a halcyon veil. agp1337
  • Score: 2

8:59pm Wed 2 Apr 14

Justin Black says...

Councillor Nottage, enough is enough. You are an embarrassment to the people who elected you as their Councillor. If you cared about Christchurch, if you cared about its residents you would resign as Leader of CBC. You will be responsible for most of your group failing to be re-elected next year. Some of your Councillors work very hard, and you are bringing their time as Councillors to an end.

You deny you are a bully. I think most of the people in this town who have been in contact with you know the truth about that.

Please think of your group of Councillors who will be seeking re-election next year. It is alleged that you could be handing your position as Leader to Rollo Reid.

50% of your group do not support you, accept that and move on.
Councillor Nottage, enough is enough. You are an embarrassment to the people who elected you as their Councillor. If you cared about Christchurch, if you cared about its residents you would resign as Leader of CBC. You will be responsible for most of your group failing to be re-elected next year. Some of your Councillors work very hard, and you are bringing their time as Councillors to an end. You deny you are a bully. I think most of the people in this town who have been in contact with you know the truth about that. Please think of your group of Councillors who will be seeking re-election next year. It is alleged that you could be handing your position as Leader to Rollo Reid. 50% of your group do not support you, accept that and move on. Justin Black
  • Score: 13

10:57pm Wed 2 Apr 14

xchresident says...

“I think I am morally sound. My supporters, certainly, my team, insisted that I carry on."

At a guess 'my team' comprises Portfolio holders whose support for Cllr Nottage may be coloured by the gratitude occasioned by the size of their special allowances.

Dorsetforyou says:

"Each councillor is entitled to a basic allowance which is intended to recognise the time devoted by councillors to their work, including their community representative role, and to cover some incidental expenses incurred by them."

The amount can be substantial.

SEE https://www.dorsetfo
ryou.com/389323
"A Special Responsibility Allowance is paid to councillors (in addition to their basic allowance) who hold special responsibilities, like the Leader and Chairmen. "

Members Allowances Paid for 2012-13 is instructive--
Highest in the totals column (including travelling) has
Cllr Nottage at £15082.71
Duckworth at £ 8928.50
Derham Wilkes at £ 8518.57
Jamieson £8427.20
Davis £ 8269.04
Spittle £8069.90
Phipps £7883.39

as compared with standard allowance such as that received by Independent Fred Neals-- £4034.95

Am I being too cynical?
“I think I am morally sound. My supporters, certainly, my team, insisted that I carry on." At a guess 'my team' comprises Portfolio holders whose support for Cllr Nottage may be coloured by the gratitude occasioned by the size of their special allowances. Dorsetforyou says: "Each councillor is entitled to a basic allowance which is intended to recognise the time devoted by councillors to their work, including their community representative role, and to cover some incidental expenses incurred by them." The amount can be substantial. SEE https://www.dorsetfo ryou.com/389323 "A Special Responsibility Allowance is paid to councillors (in addition to their basic allowance) who hold special responsibilities, like the Leader and Chairmen. " Members Allowances Paid for 2012-13 is instructive-- Highest in the totals column (including travelling) has Cllr Nottage at £15082.71 Duckworth at £ 8928.50 Derham Wilkes at £ 8518.57 Jamieson £8427.20 Davis £ 8269.04 Spittle £8069.90 Phipps £7883.39 as compared with standard allowance such as that received by Independent Fred Neals-- £4034.95 Am I being too cynical? xchresident
  • Score: 5

8:55am Thu 3 Apr 14

Crank says...

Another point not picked up is the emphasis this overweaning person places on running the council as a business. Christchurch is an ancient borough - for instance, it is one of King Alfred's defensive burhs, 10th century. It is so historic but the history has been relentless stripped. Apart from his obligations to respect this history, a borough council is responsible for other things which may not produce revenue but are for the benefit of its citizens. I get the impression that whatever does not fill the council's coffers is targeted as unwelcome and unnecessary by our Dear Leader. His vision is frighteningly myopic. The council as a whole needs a big shake-up in order to make something like, just say, trees, a valuable asset beyond price. Or community halls. Or nature reserves. This is why Nottage simply has to go and the ethos change from 'kerching!' to caring.
Another point not picked up is the emphasis this overweaning person places on running the council as a business. Christchurch is an ancient borough - for instance, it is one of King Alfred's defensive burhs, 10th century. It is so historic but the history has been relentless stripped. Apart from his obligations to respect this history, a borough council is responsible for other things which may not produce revenue but are for the benefit of its citizens. I get the impression that whatever does not fill the council's coffers is targeted as unwelcome and unnecessary by our Dear Leader. His vision is frighteningly myopic. The council as a whole needs a big shake-up in order to make something like, just say, trees, a valuable asset beyond price. Or community halls. Or nature reserves. This is why Nottage simply has to go and the ethos change from 'kerching!' to caring. Crank
  • Score: 5

12:24pm Thu 3 Apr 14

agp1337 says...

xchresident wrote:
“I think I am morally sound. My supporters, certainly, my team, insisted that I carry on."

At a guess 'my team' comprises Portfolio holders whose support for Cllr Nottage may be coloured by the gratitude occasioned by the size of their special allowances.

Dorsetforyou says:

"Each councillor is entitled to a basic allowance which is intended to recognise the time devoted by councillors to their work, including their community representative role, and to cover some incidental expenses incurred by them."

The amount can be substantial.

SEE https://www.dorsetfo

ryou.com/389323
"A Special Responsibility Allowance is paid to councillors (in addition to their basic allowance) who hold special responsibilities, like the Leader and Chairmen. "

Members Allowances Paid for 2012-13 is instructive--
Highest in the totals column (including travelling) has
Cllr Nottage at £15082.71
Duckworth at £ 8928.50
Derham Wilkes at £ 8518.57
Jamieson £8427.20
Davis £ 8269.04
Spittle £8069.90
Phipps £7883.39

as compared with standard allowance such as that received by Independent Fred Neals-- £4034.95

Am I being too cynical?
To be fair, it's not just the Independent. Most Conservative Councillors (apart form those named above) just receive the basic and very minor expenses as well.
[quote][p][bold]xchresident[/bold] wrote: “I think I am morally sound. My supporters, certainly, my team, insisted that I carry on." At a guess 'my team' comprises Portfolio holders whose support for Cllr Nottage may be coloured by the gratitude occasioned by the size of their special allowances. Dorsetforyou says: "Each councillor is entitled to a basic allowance which is intended to recognise the time devoted by councillors to their work, including their community representative role, and to cover some incidental expenses incurred by them." The amount can be substantial. SEE https://www.dorsetfo ryou.com/389323 "A Special Responsibility Allowance is paid to councillors (in addition to their basic allowance) who hold special responsibilities, like the Leader and Chairmen. " Members Allowances Paid for 2012-13 is instructive-- Highest in the totals column (including travelling) has Cllr Nottage at £15082.71 Duckworth at £ 8928.50 Derham Wilkes at £ 8518.57 Jamieson £8427.20 Davis £ 8269.04 Spittle £8069.90 Phipps £7883.39 as compared with standard allowance such as that received by Independent Fred Neals-- £4034.95 Am I being too cynical?[/p][/quote]To be fair, it's not just the Independent. Most Conservative Councillors (apart form those named above) just receive the basic and very minor expenses as well. agp1337
  • Score: 4

4:44pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Julie G says...

Ha ha ha....sorry.....ha ha ha.....I've just managed to calm down, from laughing so much at the headline statement from Cllr Nottage!!!! Talk about distorted view of himself. Ask anyone who has had dealings with him. Ah, , funniest thing I have read this week
Ha ha ha....sorry.....ha ha ha.....I've just managed to calm down, from laughing so much at the headline statement from Cllr Nottage!!!! Talk about distorted view of himself. Ask anyone who has had dealings with him. Ah, [wiping tear from eye], funniest thing I have read this week Julie G
  • Score: 4

8:01pm Thu 3 Apr 14

agp1337 says...

agp1337 wrote:
xchresident wrote:
“I think I am morally sound. My supporters, certainly, my team, insisted that I carry on."

At a guess 'my team' comprises Portfolio holders whose support for Cllr Nottage may be coloured by the gratitude occasioned by the size of their special allowances.

Dorsetforyou says:

"Each councillor is entitled to a basic allowance which is intended to recognise the time devoted by councillors to their work, including their community representative role, and to cover some incidental expenses incurred by them."

The amount can be substantial.

SEE https://www.dorsetfo


ryou.com/389323
"A Special Responsibility Allowance is paid to councillors (in addition to their basic allowance) who hold special responsibilities, like the Leader and Chairmen. "

Members Allowances Paid for 2012-13 is instructive--
Highest in the totals column (including travelling) has
Cllr Nottage at £15082.71
Duckworth at £ 8928.50
Derham Wilkes at £ 8518.57
Jamieson £8427.20
Davis £ 8269.04
Spittle £8069.90
Phipps £7883.39

as compared with standard allowance such as that received by Independent Fred Neals-- £4034.95

Am I being too cynical?
To be fair, it's not just the Independent. Most Conservative Councillors (apart form those named above) just receive the basic and very minor expenses as well.
I'm interested, so have just looked up Sue Spittle. I cannot find why she has this allowance of the best part of £4000. 'Special allowances' are listed, but not in detail: what are they for? She's the 'Portfolio Holder for Housing.' What the heck does that mean, for c£4000? She has just 79% attendance. Most of these positions don't have any description on DorsetForYou about what they actually do, and how the allowance is allocated. A few do. Not complaining specifically about Ms Spittle, just wondering about financial and ethical transparency. To paraphrase Shakespeare: 'Something is rotten in the state of Christchurch.' It needs cleaning up. Maybe 'Our Glorious Leader' could do it, for his £15000+!
[quote][p][bold]agp1337[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]xchresident[/bold] wrote: “I think I am morally sound. My supporters, certainly, my team, insisted that I carry on." At a guess 'my team' comprises Portfolio holders whose support for Cllr Nottage may be coloured by the gratitude occasioned by the size of their special allowances. Dorsetforyou says: "Each councillor is entitled to a basic allowance which is intended to recognise the time devoted by councillors to their work, including their community representative role, and to cover some incidental expenses incurred by them." The amount can be substantial. SEE https://www.dorsetfo ryou.com/389323 "A Special Responsibility Allowance is paid to councillors (in addition to their basic allowance) who hold special responsibilities, like the Leader and Chairmen. " Members Allowances Paid for 2012-13 is instructive-- Highest in the totals column (including travelling) has Cllr Nottage at £15082.71 Duckworth at £ 8928.50 Derham Wilkes at £ 8518.57 Jamieson £8427.20 Davis £ 8269.04 Spittle £8069.90 Phipps £7883.39 as compared with standard allowance such as that received by Independent Fred Neals-- £4034.95 Am I being too cynical?[/p][/quote]To be fair, it's not just the Independent. Most Conservative Councillors (apart form those named above) just receive the basic and very minor expenses as well.[/p][/quote]I'm interested, so have just looked up Sue Spittle. I cannot find why she has this allowance of the best part of £4000. 'Special allowances' are listed, but not in detail: what are they for? She's the 'Portfolio Holder for Housing.' What the heck does that mean, for c£4000? She has just 79% attendance. Most of these positions don't have any description on DorsetForYou about what they actually do, and how the allowance is allocated. A few do. Not complaining specifically about Ms Spittle, just wondering about financial and ethical transparency. To paraphrase Shakespeare: 'Something is rotten in the state of Christchurch.' It needs cleaning up. Maybe 'Our Glorious Leader' could do it, for his £15000+! agp1337
  • Score: 4

9:39am Fri 4 Apr 14

skydriver says...

agp1337 wrote:
agp1337 wrote:
xchresident wrote:
“I think I am morally sound. My supporters, certainly, my team, insisted that I carry on."

At a guess 'my team' comprises Portfolio holders whose support for Cllr Nottage may be coloured by the gratitude occasioned by the size of their special allowances.

Dorsetforyou says:

"Each councillor is entitled to a basic allowance which is intended to recognise the time devoted by councillors to their work, including their community representative role, and to cover some incidental expenses incurred by them."

The amount can be substantial.

SEE https://www.dorsetfo



ryou.com/389323
"A Special Responsibility Allowance is paid to councillors (in addition to their basic allowance) who hold special responsibilities, like the Leader and Chairmen. "

Members Allowances Paid for 2012-13 is instructive--
Highest in the totals column (including travelling) has
Cllr Nottage at £15082.71
Duckworth at £ 8928.50
Derham Wilkes at £ 8518.57
Jamieson £8427.20
Davis £ 8269.04
Spittle £8069.90
Phipps £7883.39

as compared with standard allowance such as that received by Independent Fred Neals-- £4034.95

Am I being too cynical?
To be fair, it's not just the Independent. Most Conservative Councillors (apart form those named above) just receive the basic and very minor expenses as well.
I'm interested, so have just looked up Sue Spittle. I cannot find why she has this allowance of the best part of £4000. 'Special allowances' are listed, but not in detail: what are they for? She's the 'Portfolio Holder for Housing.' What the heck does that mean, for c£4000? She has just 79% attendance. Most of these positions don't have any description on DorsetForYou about what they actually do, and how the allowance is allocated. A few do. Not complaining specifically about Ms Spittle, just wondering about financial and ethical transparency. To paraphrase Shakespeare: 'Something is rotten in the state of Christchurch.' It needs cleaning up. Maybe 'Our Glorious Leader' could do it, for his £15000+!
I understand, although I don't have any proof, they also get free parking permits. You know the ones the rest of us have to pay for., can someone enlighten me on this, is it. True .
If so I wonder if this is considered as a tax free perk or .???????
Just asking.
[quote][p][bold]agp1337[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]agp1337[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]xchresident[/bold] wrote: “I think I am morally sound. My supporters, certainly, my team, insisted that I carry on." At a guess 'my team' comprises Portfolio holders whose support for Cllr Nottage may be coloured by the gratitude occasioned by the size of their special allowances. Dorsetforyou says: "Each councillor is entitled to a basic allowance which is intended to recognise the time devoted by councillors to their work, including their community representative role, and to cover some incidental expenses incurred by them." The amount can be substantial. SEE https://www.dorsetfo ryou.com/389323 "A Special Responsibility Allowance is paid to councillors (in addition to their basic allowance) who hold special responsibilities, like the Leader and Chairmen. " Members Allowances Paid for 2012-13 is instructive-- Highest in the totals column (including travelling) has Cllr Nottage at £15082.71 Duckworth at £ 8928.50 Derham Wilkes at £ 8518.57 Jamieson £8427.20 Davis £ 8269.04 Spittle £8069.90 Phipps £7883.39 as compared with standard allowance such as that received by Independent Fred Neals-- £4034.95 Am I being too cynical?[/p][/quote]To be fair, it's not just the Independent. Most Conservative Councillors (apart form those named above) just receive the basic and very minor expenses as well.[/p][/quote]I'm interested, so have just looked up Sue Spittle. I cannot find why she has this allowance of the best part of £4000. 'Special allowances' are listed, but not in detail: what are they for? She's the 'Portfolio Holder for Housing.' What the heck does that mean, for c£4000? She has just 79% attendance. Most of these positions don't have any description on DorsetForYou about what they actually do, and how the allowance is allocated. A few do. Not complaining specifically about Ms Spittle, just wondering about financial and ethical transparency. To paraphrase Shakespeare: 'Something is rotten in the state of Christchurch.' It needs cleaning up. Maybe 'Our Glorious Leader' could do it, for his £15000+![/p][/quote]I understand, although I don't have any proof, they also get free parking permits. You know the ones the rest of us have to pay for., can someone enlighten me on this, is it. True . If so I wonder if this is considered as a tax free perk or .??????? Just asking. skydriver
  • Score: 3

2:41pm Fri 4 Apr 14

skydriver says...

Justin Black wrote:
Councillor Nottage, enough is enough. You are an embarrassment to the people who elected you as their Councillor. If you cared about Christchurch, if you cared about its residents you would resign as Leader of CBC. You will be responsible for most of your group failing to be re-elected next year. Some of your Councillors work very hard, and you are bringing their time as Councillors to an end.

You deny you are a bully. I think most of the people in this town who have been in contact with you know the truth about that.

Please think of your group of Councillors who will be seeking re-election next year. It is alleged that you could be handing your position as Leader to Rollo Reid.

50% of your group do not support you, accept that and move on.
It's more than 50% don't forget he voted twice..............n
ow is that morally sound! no I didn't think so.
[quote][p][bold]Justin Black[/bold] wrote: Councillor Nottage, enough is enough. You are an embarrassment to the people who elected you as their Councillor. If you cared about Christchurch, if you cared about its residents you would resign as Leader of CBC. You will be responsible for most of your group failing to be re-elected next year. Some of your Councillors work very hard, and you are bringing their time as Councillors to an end. You deny you are a bully. I think most of the people in this town who have been in contact with you know the truth about that. Please think of your group of Councillors who will be seeking re-election next year. It is alleged that you could be handing your position as Leader to Rollo Reid. 50% of your group do not support you, accept that and move on.[/p][/quote]It's more than 50% don't forget he voted twice..............n ow is that morally sound! no I didn't think so. skydriver
  • Score: 3

2:42pm Fri 4 Apr 14

skydriver says...

agp1337 wrote:
damnlion wrote:
Dear Daily Echo,
Please stop printing photographs of this arrogant idiot, it is quite upsetting....

Private Eye are aware of his latest nonsense as well as our MP.....

Look at this...http://raynot


tage.blogspot.co.uk/
And go to Manor Aux quate on this page...unbelievable arrogance !

Sack the bu**er sap.
I've just had another look at it. Assessor commented about the spelling being wrong. Mr Nottage has corrected it - except that it's still wrong. Perhaps next time he'd better go to the Savoy!
Not on allowance though.
[quote][p][bold]agp1337[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]damnlion[/bold] wrote: Dear Daily Echo, Please stop printing photographs of this arrogant idiot, it is quite upsetting.... Private Eye are aware of his latest nonsense as well as our MP..... Look at this...http://raynot tage.blogspot.co.uk/ And go to Manor Aux quate on this page...unbelievable arrogance ! Sack the bu**er sap.[/p][/quote]I've just had another look at it. Assessor commented about the spelling being wrong. Mr Nottage has corrected it - except that it's still wrong. Perhaps next time he'd better go to the Savoy![/p][/quote]Not on allowance though. skydriver
  • Score: 2

2:57pm Fri 4 Apr 14

agp1337 says...

skydriver wrote:
agp1337 wrote:
damnlion wrote:
Dear Daily Echo,
Please stop printing photographs of this arrogant idiot, it is quite upsetting....

Private Eye are aware of his latest nonsense as well as our MP.....

Look at this...http://raynot



tage.blogspot.co.uk/
And go to Manor Aux quate on this page...unbelievable arrogance !

Sack the bu**er sap.
I've just had another look at it. Assessor commented about the spelling being wrong. Mr Nottage has corrected it - except that it's still wrong. Perhaps next time he'd better go to the Savoy!
Not on allowance though.
To be fair the hotel was paid for personally and not claimed on expenses (he's a rich man). However, the sheer ineptitude and lack of political nous to publish this on a councillor's blog, as Victor Meldrew says, 'Fair boggles the mind.' Almost the worst thing is that he doesn't see anything wrong.
[quote][p][bold]skydriver[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]agp1337[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]damnlion[/bold] wrote: Dear Daily Echo, Please stop printing photographs of this arrogant idiot, it is quite upsetting.... Private Eye are aware of his latest nonsense as well as our MP..... Look at this...http://raynot tage.blogspot.co.uk/ And go to Manor Aux quate on this page...unbelievable arrogance ! Sack the bu**er sap.[/p][/quote]I've just had another look at it. Assessor commented about the spelling being wrong. Mr Nottage has corrected it - except that it's still wrong. Perhaps next time he'd better go to the Savoy![/p][/quote]Not on allowance though.[/p][/quote]To be fair the hotel was paid for personally and not claimed on expenses (he's a rich man). However, the sheer ineptitude and lack of political nous to publish this on a councillor's blog, as Victor Meldrew says, 'Fair boggles the mind.' Almost the worst thing is that he doesn't see anything wrong. agp1337
  • Score: 4

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree