Being independent is best for town

I was elected primarily on my promise to oppose the Core Strategy housing proposals, now replaced by a Local Plan with even more housing. I was disillusioned with the leadership of the Conservative group and the requirement to support policies dictated by the executive which often conflicted with my conscience, the best interests and wishes of my constituents and the people of Warwick. I also have had concerns regarding the abrasive management style of Cllr Doody, who has not fostered debate with his backbenchers and legitimate concerns were constantly unheeded. He only narrowly survived a recent leadership election.

Passionate about Warwick issues, I have worked extremely hard dealing with a multitude of residents’ problems and I believe I have a very good hands-on relationship with my electorate. However, I came to realise that, with regret, the only way I could be free to ask questions, speak and vote according to my conscience would be to resign from the Conservative group and become an Independent.

I did not resign because Cllr Dhillon was publicly held to account. Irrespective about the rights or wrongs of what Cllr Dhillion is alleged to have said, I was deeply concerned about changes to the process for hearing the complaint and the diminished role of the established standards committee. In my opinion a legal mechanism was used to sidestep the WDC constitution without previous council debate. When I tried to raise my concerns about due process at our group meeting, Cllr Doody tried to stop me speaking, and then said that I could ask my questions at full council which, in the event, was not allowed.

I understand that so far this year WDC has incurred £610,000 in legal costs recharged from Warwickshire county. Further considerable legal costs were incurred in this process. It is of concern that public money is being used for WDC’s legal representation when a complaint is lodged by an officer against a councillor; but that the councillor, has to pay for his legal representation from his or her own personal finances.

I am pleased that Cllr Doody wants Warwick to remain a great town. This differs from a recent statement he made that “Warwick is dead”! Perhaps an underlying attitude was expressed, which I found deeply disturbing in our council leader and extremely inaccurate.

A few observations and corrections about the support that Warwick has received.:

The current Local Plan is different from that agreed by the Conservative group, with far more houses. The plan that was put forward in 2012 was not agreed by all councillors as several Warwick councillors had requested that development should be spread equitably across the district and disagreed with the numbers of houses proposed. The vote that was taken in June was controversially whipped by the Conservative leader and three of us did not vote.

Despite 98 per cent of the public objecting to the previous plan consultation this new draft Local Plan has increased the housing allocation, led by the Conservative group. There are too many houses in the draft local plan, in the wrong location and the impacts on the Warwick area would be devastating.

Before any public consultation took place the executive agreed in principle proposals for St Mary’s Lands which seems solely concerned with the future financial wellbeing of a very rich tenant. My request that there should first be representation from the residents at early meetings was flatly refused. It remains to be seen how meaningfully the public will be included in the promised consultation process

I note that the Boxing Club had been allocated funds to set up at the Racecourse in a disused basement bar and WDC now pay £350 per month for their rent directly to a commercial organisation.

£19,000 was spent on a boundary review consultation, yet WDC are now consulting again at a further cost of £18,500 regarding Warwick Gates becoming a parish. If this were supported by Warwick Gates residents, it would effectively bankrupt Warwick Town Council and lose town councillor representation from the whole of the Warwick area.

The £120,000 for health and well-being activities was originally intended for Racing Club Warwick, but was granted not to an organisation but outside the district.

£1.4 million of the developer’s contribution to Chase Meadow’s sports provision was diverted to the remediation of St Nicholas Park when it could have been allocated to the new community centre. Also the flood alleviation pond is not fit for purpose and the roads are therefore still unadopted.

The fire station which provided an excellent emergency service for our historic county town was a tremendous loss to Warwick and the promised new station has never materialised. It is also shocking that we have also lost our police station, never to be reinstated.

St Nicholas Park cameras were from the original match funding for the failed lottery bid, which was then allocated to park improvements.

The Priory Park land was originally part of the park anyway but somehow became part of the land put up for sale.

The Chapel Street premises that housed the Iris Lees charitable organisation were originally purchased by public subscription for midwives, and trustees held the building on behalf of Warwick. However, WDC registered the premises with the Land Registry and then sold them. My request that some of the sale proceeds come back to Warwick was refused.

I believe that by my becoming an Independent I am better placed to hold the WDC executive to account and continue to serve the interests of my constituents diligently and free from constraint.

Cllr Linda Bromley, Warwick District Council, Warwick South ward