Today's most viewed
Park's reputation committee bans the public
A committee set up to restore faith in the National Park Authority following recent controversy banished the public and press from a meeting today.
Authority members attended a meeting of the newly formed Investigation and Reputation committee on Monday afternoon, but opted to remove members of the public before getting down to business.
Cllr Michael Williams was the sole member who voted to allow the public to view the proceedings at the meeting.
He said: "Public perception of this authority is so appalling at the moment, we can only make it worse if we discuss this in camera.
"I am not happy about this. The Monitoring Officer's report was a public document, and the staffing matters have been dealt with. We have now gone beyond that."
Cllr John Griffiths said documents had been sent to the committee in confidence, and members would be unable to discuss them properly if the public was allowed to be present.
Dr Ruth Williams, who chaired the meeting at the Memorial Hall, Newport, said: "We will report back to our April meeting in full public view."
The committee was set up in the wake of a damning report by the Monitoring Officer, who conducted an urgent investigation into the purchase of the Qinetiq building, East Blockhouse, Angle.
The concept of the committee was branded radical by the Authority, and described as a "decisive and unprecedented step" by Chairman Cllr Simon Hancock.
It aimed to examine all aspects of the controversial case, and make recommendations.
The Park's asset management committee, of which Gary Meopham was a member, decided not to buy the land and buildings, but it was then bought by Mr Meopham and members of his family.
Mr Meopham was disciplined with a final written warning as a result of the report's findings.
What do you think about the meeting being held in private?
Leave your comments below.
6:24pm Monday 3rd March 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: Stevo, P Dock on 6:40pm Mon 3 Mar 08
u couldn't make it up!
Posted by: Reg on the Rath, Milford Haven on 6:47pm Mon 3 Mar 08
Maybe the Park Authority Chairman should appoint a sub-committee to investigate the reputation of the newly formed Investigation & Reputation Committee. If it wasn't such a serious matter you'd be forgiven for thinking it's hilarious!
Maybe the Park Authority Chairman should appoint a sub-committee to investigate the reputation of the newly formed Investigation & Reputation Committee. If it wasn't such a serious matter you'd be forgiven for thinking it's hilarious!
Posted by: John Doe, Pennar on 6:52pm Mon 3 Mar 08
You know, often in my life I've made rash judgements, only to be humbled and enlightened to genuine reasons when I've been given the facts......but OH...MY...GOD!!!
What are these people thinking? Absolute Keystone Cops material. It absolutely beggars belief that they conduct the first meeting of such a gathering of minds in secret.
They've just doubled the damage that was caused by their last debacle.
Cllr Hancock sort it out please for your own reputation and that of the authority in general which may never recover from recent events as it is, has the authority penned a suicide note at all?
You know, often in my life I've made rash judgements, only to be humbled and enlightened to genuine reasons when I've been given the facts......but OH...MY...GOD!!!
What are these people thinking? Absolute Keystone Cops material. It absolutely beggars belief that they conduct the first meeting of such a gathering of minds in secret.
They've just doubled the damage that was caused by their last debacle.
Cllr Hancock sort it out please for your own reputation and that of the authority in general which may never recover from recent events as it is, has the authority penned a suicide note at all?
Posted by: James Evans, Pembs on 6:58pm Mon 3 Mar 08
In the words of John McEnroe: "You cannot be serious."
In the words of John McEnroe: "You cannot be serious."
Posted by: John Doe, Pennar on 7:07pm Mon 3 Mar 08
Do they not REALISE that there wouldn't need to be "decisive and unprecedented steps" if the authority had done the decent thing in the first place and sacked Neopham.
I've always been led to believe that Cllr Hancock was one of the few good men at Cambria House but this affair is definately putting him at risk of having his reputation tainted.
Do they not REALISE that there wouldn't need to be "decisive and unprecedented steps" if the authority had done the decent thing in the first place and sacked Neopham.
I've always been led to believe that Cllr Hancock was one of the few good men at Cambria House but this affair is definately putting him at risk of having his reputation tainted.
Posted by: Bill, P/Dock on 1:01am Tue 4 Mar 08
Are we surprised? No! this sort of thing is the NORM.
Are we surprised? No! this sort of thing is the NORM.
Posted by: David Edwards, Stackpole on 9:32am Tue 4 Mar 08
I wonder which section of the Local Government act they used to exclude the public?
I wonder which section of the Local Government act they used to exclude the public?
Posted by: John Doe, Pennar on 9:50am Tue 4 Mar 08
There will be some mumbo jumbo released as part of a press statement to counter this further criticism telling us how it was in the public's best interest that this meeting was conducted in private and that the authority is "committed to transparency and integrity in all it's actions" etc etc etc etc etc
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
z
It's a shame that so many of the people who run for local office seem to only be interested in paying lip service to the real wishes of the normal people that elected them once they have got into office.
These people will have their come uppance, sometimes it takes longer than we'd like but their time will come, in one way or the other.
There will be some mumbo jumbo released as part of a press statement to counter this further criticism telling us how it was in the public's best interest that this meeting was conducted in private and that the authority is "committed to transparency and integrity in all it's actions" etc etc etc etc etc
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
z
It's a shame that so many of the people who run for local office seem to only be interested in paying lip service to the real wishes of the normal people that elected them once they have got into office.
These people will have their come uppance, sometimes it takes longer than we'd like but their time will come, in one way or the other.
Posted by: Steve, Birmingham on 10:25am Tue 4 Mar 08
Pathetic
Posted by: Andrew Lye, Johnston on 1:56pm Tue 4 Mar 08
At least some members of the public knew the meeting was on. I didn't even know that. Have the National Park AND the press kept it quiet? LOL ..
David Edwards, yes the LGA does make provisions to exclude the public. I hope they had good reasons as my interpretation of it when I was a councillor was to always ALLOW the public, unless there were very good reasons to exclude the press and public. Its not something you should have to do because of habit, or just feel like it!
At least some members of the public knew the meeting was on. I didn't even know that. Have the National Park AND the press kept it quiet? LOL ..
David Edwards, yes the LGA does make provisions to exclude the public. I hope they had good reasons as my interpretation of it when I was a councillor was to always ALLOW the public, unless there were very good reasons to exclude the press and public. Its not something you should have to do because of habit, or just feel like it!
Posted by: david Edwards, stackpole on 2:47pm Tue 4 Mar 08
It was on their website but no mention of excluding the public was on the agenda. We fought long and hard to get automatic "let's exclude the public" not to be the norm at the County Council if it was likely to be embarrassing but it seems, sadly, that old habits die hard on PCNPA. I have written to the monitoring officer, who should be our guardian against such abuse, for his justification for such cowardly behaviour by the committee.
It was on their website but no mention of excluding the public was on the agenda. We fought long and hard to get automatic "let's exclude the public" not to be the norm at the County Council if it was likely to be embarrassing but it seems, sadly, that old habits die hard on PCNPA. I have written to the monitoring officer, who should be our guardian against such abuse, for his justification for such cowardly behaviour by the committee.
Posted by: Reg on the Rath, Milford Haven on 4:36pm Tue 4 Mar 08
I notice on the Park's website that the next 2 meetings in March are to be held at Llanion Park, Pembroke Dock. Let's hope that they have the decency to inform the public prior to the meetings if they are to be held in camera before we spend £1.50 on the bridge crossing. After all, we the public and paymasters, can't claim travelling expenses!
I notice on the Park's website that the next 2 meetings in March are to be held at Llanion Park, Pembroke Dock. Let's hope that they have the decency to inform the public prior to the meetings if they are to be held in camera before we spend £1.50 on the bridge crossing. After all, we the public and paymasters, can't claim travelling expenses!
Posted by: malcolm calver, Manorbier on 9:08pm Wed 5 Mar 08
I note with interest the comments of David Edwards from Stackpole, perhaps this is
the same David Edwards, Labour Party member and activist?
Mr Edwards enquires as to "which section of the Local Government
Act..(was)..used to exclude the public"?
To my knowledge the Pembrokeshire Labour Party has two County Councillors,
Sue Perkins and Simon Hancock as members on the PCNP and one appointed
member of the Labour Party Christine Gwyther the ex AM on the PCNP authority.
I note in the press today Jane Davidson, the WAG Minister for the environment,
sustainability and housing reappointing Fiona Lake on to the PCNP Authority.
Perhaps Mr Edwards, if he is the same David Edwards, would inform us how many
of the Labour members and appointed personnel I have detailed attended the
meeting and which way they voted on the exclusion of the public.
If Mr Edwards is not David Edwards, Labour Party member I hope he is successful
in the answer to his question.
I note with interest the comments of David Edwards from Stackpole, perhaps this is
the same David Edwards, Labour Party member and activist?
Mr Edwards enquires as to "which section of the Local Government
Act..(was)..used to exclude the public"?
To my knowledge the Pembrokeshire Labour Party has two County Councillors,
Sue Perkins and Simon Hancock as members on the PCNP and one appointed
member of the Labour Party Christine Gwyther the ex AM on the PCNP authority.
I note in the press today Jane Davidson, the WAG Minister for the environment,
sustainability and housing reappointing Fiona Lake on to the PCNP Authority.
Perhaps Mr Edwards, if he is the same David Edwards, would inform us how many
of the Labour members and appointed personnel I have detailed attended the
meeting and which way they voted on the exclusion of the public.
If Mr Edwards is not David Edwards, Labour Party member I hope he is successful
in the answer to his question.
Posted by: Jim, Pennar on 10:32pm Wed 5 Mar 08
I expect you are right Mr Caver, he could well be the critical Mr John Doe as well, because I haved lived in Pennar for the last 29 years and there is no Mr J Doe in this neck of the woods or on the electoral list, so you could well have solved two mystery ID's in one go. Labour at their best - finger poiting.
I expect you are right Mr Caver, he could well be the critical Mr John Doe as well, because I haved lived in Pennar for the last 29 years and there is no Mr J Doe in this neck of the woods or on the electoral list, so you could well have solved two mystery ID's in one go. Labour at their best - finger poiting.
Posted by: Mike, Pembs on 10:38pm Wed 5 Mar 08
Somebody should ask the Park how many complaints are currently under investigation by the Monitoring Officer and what they relate to. There are other complaints.
Somebody should ask the Park how many complaints are currently under investigation by the Monitoring Officer and what they relate to. There are other complaints.
Posted by: John Doe, Pennar on 9:08am Thu 6 Mar 08
Calm down Detective Inspector Jim, don't give up the day job will you.........
Never mind finger pointing, the whole point of the matter is the disgraceful show by the authority in this matter.
And it's Calver, not Caver.......DOH!
Calm down Detective Inspector Jim, don't give up the day job will you.........
Never mind finger pointing, the whole point of the matter is the disgraceful show by the authority in this matter.
And it's Calver, not Caver.......DOH!
Posted by: David Edwards, Stackpole on 10:20am Thu 6 Mar 08
In answer to County Councillor Malcolm Calver.
Yes, I am the Labour member and former Labour Group Leader on PCC and I chaired the National Park Planning Committee for two years.I have never written a comment other than in my own name.
Having made enquiries of the Labour members on the Committee, before I posted my comments, I can tell you that Cllr Hancock was absent but Sue Perkins and Christine Gwyther were present and voted to exclude the public; I made my views known to them.
As for Fiona Lanc (not Lake,)I have no idea if she was present but I do know that she has no Labour Party connection.
In answer to County Councillor Malcolm Calver.
Yes, I am the Labour member and former Labour Group Leader on PCC and I chaired the National Park Planning Committee for two years.I have never written a comment other than in my own name.
Having made enquiries of the Labour members on the Committee, before I posted my comments, I can tell you that Cllr Hancock was absent but Sue Perkins and Christine Gwyther were present and voted to exclude the public; I made my views known to them.
As for Fiona Lanc (not Lake,)I have no idea if she was present but I do know that she has no Labour Party connection.
Posted by: malcolm calver, Manorbier on 10:32am Fri 7 Mar 08
Thank you David for informing us of the way your fellow Labour Party
supporters who are representatives on the Pembrokeshire Coast National
Park voted.
The difficulty I have with your party and its members both locally and nationally
is the discemable trend that exists in that they say one thing when out of
office and another when having to make decisions following election. We
saw in Parliament only yesterday the result of the electorate trusting Labour
and Liberal party politicians over the issue of Europe. No issue in my
opinion could be more crucial to our nation than a question concerning the
European Union due to the ramifications it may have in so many ways in our
daily lives. Although you are undoubtedly aware I must refer you to the
assurance you and your party colleagues gave the electorate in your
manifesto concerning the promise of a referendum on any changes to the
European constitution.
Thank you David for informing us of the way your fellow Labour Party
supporters who are representatives on the Pembrokeshire Coast National
Park voted.
The difficulty I have with your party and its members both locally and nationally
is the discemable trend that exists in that they say one thing when out of
office and another when having to make decisions following election. We
saw in Parliament only yesterday the result of the electorate trusting Labour
and Liberal party politicians over the issue of Europe. No issue in my
opinion could be more crucial to our nation than a question concerning the
European Union due to the ramifications it may have in so many ways in our
daily lives. Although you are undoubtedly aware I must refer you to the
assurance you and your party colleagues gave the electorate in your
manifesto concerning the promise of a referendum on any changes to the
European constitution.
Posted by: David Edwards, Stackpole on 1:36pm Fri 7 Mar 08
I couldn't agree with you more,Malcolm, on the general point of politicians saying one thing and doing another. It applies to all parties including Tories and UKIP with whom your views on europe resonate. However the european debate is not what this article was about so I will leave that for another time.
I couldn't agree with you more,Malcolm, on the general point of politicians saying one thing and doing another. It applies to all parties including Tories and UKIP with whom your views on europe resonate. However the european debate is not what this article was about so I will leave that for another time.
Posted by: Reg on the Rath, Milford Haven on 11:28am Sat 8 Mar 08
Enough is enough gentlemen, this has descended to the lowest of the low, political in-fighting. This report was originally concerned with the banning of the public from a public meeting not about the political ins and outs prior to the local elections!
Enough is enough gentlemen, this has descended to the lowest of the low, political in-fighting. This report was originally concerned with the banning of the public from a public meeting not about the political ins and outs prior to the local elections!
Posted by: Gwallgof, Pembroke on 9:14pm Fri 28 Mar 08
That's public faith restored then!!
That's public faith restored then!!
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
