Wilmslow Town Council will reconsider their decision to spend £12,700 on civic regalia following an outcry from local residents.
At their June meeting, councillors voted by nine votes to four to purchase chains of office for their Chairman and Vice-Chairman. Those who voted against the decision were councillors Trevor Jones (author of two articles defending the decision), Don Glover, Christopher Dodson and Ellie Brooks.
It was agreed that the £12,700 would be spent on a Chairman's chain and pendant (£7869), a ribbon with enamelled bar and pendant for the Vice-Chairman (£2876) and ten past Chairman's medals (£1956).
Since reporting on their decision to spend taxpayers money on ceremonial chains, to be worn at civic engagements, dozens of readers have expressed their disapproval by posting comments on wilmslow.co.uk.
Martin Wells commented "Incredibly poor prioritisation. The town, roads, paths and shop fronts are a mess and 12k goes on a set of jewellery!"
Kathleen Morris asked "If the council has so much money sloshing around in its bank account how about taking less from the taxpayer next year? Alternatively, how about using the money to give some employment to a local person in a job which would benefit the community as a whole?"
Aidan Killoran added "Taxpayers money down the drain, what's happened to all of us tightening our belts?"
The Council will now review this decision at their next meeting on Monday, 15th July, after a special motion to revoke the decision was requested by five town councillors.
Councillors Ellie Brooks, Ruth McNulty, Don Glover, Gary Barton and Paul Barton have requested that the decision, taken at the Council meeting on June 17th, to purchase civic regalia is rescinded and reviewed at a later date.
Chairman of Wilmslow Town Council, Keith Purdom told wilmslow.co.uk "Like all my fellow councillors I have very closely followed the public debate on regalia on your site and through personal contacts and through other media.
"My theme for the year is Greater Engagement and whilst this wasn't what I had in mind we do have a clear feedback on this topic.
"We have the opportunity under our standing orders to revisit decisions and whilst this is rarely used it seems completely appropriate that we use the opportunity on this subject. We also wanted to move quickly."
Cllr Purdom added "As for the views expressed by Cllr Jones in his letter on wilmslow.co.uk these are - as he says - his personal views. They are Not the views of the Council and as far as I am aware most if not all of us Councillors wish to disassociate ourselves completely from his views and the way they are expressed."
Wilmslow Town Council will meet on Monday, 15th July at the Oakenclough Children's Centre on Colshaw Drive. The meeting is open to members of the public and will start at 7.30pm.
Prior to the full council meeting, the Community and Order Committee will meet from 6.30pm.
The agendas for both meetings can be viewed in our events calendar.
Click on the Civic Regalia tag below to read all our members comments about this decision and two responses to the comments from Cllr Trevor Jones who has defended the decision saying "The few adverse comments criticising the Town Councils' majority decision to procure a new range of civic insignia at the negotiated figure of £12,700 could be described as a knee-jerk reaction distanced from reasoned thought and dismisses tradition and heritage."
Photo: Former Chairman of Wilmslow Town Council Jim Crockatt (left) wearing the Vice-Chairman's chain, inherited from the defunct Wilmslow Urban District Council, to meet Victoria Pendleton. The Chairman has been using this chain which is on loan from Cheshire East Council.
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
Would a crest embedded neck tie serve the same purpose? You are obviously not bed-fellows with the term “existentialism”.
Council money (our money ) would be better spent tidying up the mess the travellers have caused and continue to make in Wilmslow… and although you are not alone voting to waste our community money at the behest of your personal vanity, perhaps you and your colleagues could engage in physical deeds and efforts that would better demonstrate support for the community .. Councillors (some living very close to the travellers decimation of land have been very quiet over this particular issue…. I wonder why? )
Vic Barlow has the answer ( previous thread)………….. He does a very nice line in neck apparel, any colour you want.. gold, red , black ….What’s the going rate Vic? £8.00 for a choke chain… At least that way a ‘quick’ snatch at the appropriate juncture would ensure acceptable behaviour follows .
And as for allegation of an ‘organised campaign’ just how conceited are these people? Do they not understand in days of austerity and hardship how this potential frivolous waste of our hard earned (and easily taken) cash is both annoying and unjustifiable? This is pomposity at its best ! Have these councillors ever considered falling on their swords? ( non ceremonial, wooden ones of course).. I doubt It.
What did Mahatma Ghandi once say……“I claim to be a simple individual liable to err like any other fellow mortal. However, I have humility enough to confess my errors and to retrace my steps.”
A man revered by others, who demonstrated his strength and humility by actions and WORDS not displaying trinkets of perceived importance, and do we have any acceptance of errors from Councillor Jones…… far from it. Perhaps he should consider his position if so far misaligned from representing the community.
LET COMMON SENSE PREVAIL.................. FINALLY !
Selective mentions of patriotism, the Royal Family and a true sense of history are all very well, but Cllr Jones would do well to heed the warnings of minds better known and better-equipped than his own. Dr Johnson noted that ’patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel’. Now, Cllr Jones is no scoundrel but he should think carefully before adopting their weapons.
Likewise, Lord Acton warned the ‘power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely’ – a relevant caveat when only one party is represented on our Council.
Thankfully there is healthy dissent in the Council about the issue of the chain, but to suppose that all opposition is as mistaken as Cllr Jones claims is unjustified and, at best, naive.
To claim virtue by association with the example of the Royal family is also questionable. The payment for the chain is proposed as an impost on the Wilmslow council tax payers. By contrast when the disastrous fire damaged Windsor Castle, the Queen didn’t appeal to the public purse but opened the chain of successful royal shops which covered the costs of restoration and much more.
I am not averse to a chain of office as such, though its timing is hardly apt and for many people it seems unpopular. It would be far better if we were to fund it by voluntary public subscription, which could be accumulated over time as the council proved its value to the community. I, for one, would make a contribution. The chain would then be a matter for participatory civic pride rather than controversy.
Finally, as an economist, I must join forces with those correspondents who object to the claim that the chain is an investment. It yields no income, and will presumably incur insurance costs: it is a consumption item, with use restricted to one person a year! Dr Hoffman is right to cite the benefits of civic public health which transformed life expectancy in Victorian times.
We should be seeking out items that bring widespread and lasting public benefit. And perhaps we should remember one politician who fell prey to the temptation to rank his pet expenditures as ‘investments’. His name? Gordon Brown.
But, and I know I'm being tedious about this, why will no-one ask Cheshire East Council to explain themselves over the loss of the initial regalia? And why, if it was insured, is it not possible to seek some sort of recompense for the loss? And, if these things were not insured, why not?
I deplore the popular local authority habit of making a mistake or mess and then failing to seek a any kind of resolution. It's far too easy to say sorry (or even not to say sorry) and then spend some more money to create a fix.
You might be able to sort out the original problem and then the public will think you are heroic and money-saving! At least they will know that you have tried in their interest.
This seems entirely equitable.
Cheshire East Council is formed from Macclesfield Borough Council, Congleton and Crewe & Nantwich Borough Councils, together with part of Cheshire County Council.
When it was the old Cheshire County Council, each of Cheshire's 15 Local Boroughs had a Mayor. Our local dignitary was the then mayor of Macclesfield Borough. After re-organisation Macclesfield Town didn't have a Mayor, until last year.
A clue to the 'lost' regalia, (possibly including Wilmslow ?), may lie here ........
http://bit.ly/18ejdVy
http://bit.ly/1bvxzQ9
quote:- "The trustees mantain the historic tradiions of the mayorality and are holding the Macclesfield mayoral regalia - most of which belonged originally to the pre 1974 Macclesfield Borough.This regalia would otherwise pass to the Cheshire East Council. The Trustees are required each year to elect one of their number as Charter Mayor of Macclesfield"
Also, since then we have had a few new ones !
Cheshire East - Mayor
Poynton - Mayor
Bollington - Mayor
Crewe - Mayor
Knutsford - Mayor
Congleton - Mayor
Wilmslow - Mayor ??? (not that I am aware of, they seem to call on the Cheshire East Mayor's services.)
...... I wondered where the regalia for each of the above newly created positions came from ?