Alderley Edge candidates announced for Borough election

Time for a change, I think.

What a choice ?
Where's Screaming Lord Sutch when you need him ?
(I know, he's dead, but I'll still vote for him just to upset the apple cart)

I think my sense of fairness may have got the better of me here!!!
I know that Frank has done a fair bit of good work over the years on both the P.C. and C.E.C.
This is where i have a slight problem,I think you should only be able to stand for one or the other,as being on both 'could' create a conflict of interests.
That's all folks.

To David Hadfield,

Frank Keegan has and hopefully Craig Browne will give this ward a great deal of their time in their desire to make things better.

The alternative in future could be that you put yourself forward for election.

Just a thought.

If the voters of Alderley Edge do not vote off Frank Keegan it will serve them right if genuine Conservatives have have his personal gospel propagated for another four years.

Good Luck Alderley First.

(I write as a member of the Conservative Party for over 50 years)

Good Luck to the Alderley Edge First candidate.

I know that some people on this site have questioned Frank Keegan on his attitude to the public. Some people have questioned his Conflicts of Interest. I can reliably inform you all that Cheshire East Council's Monitoring Office consider that he has not broken the code of conduct. I know this because I raised an official complaint about Frank Keegan with them and the highlights of their findings were as follows; Calling someone "a harmless wee man" could not be considered offensive or sufficiently disrespectful to engage the code of conduct. There is no evidence of a close association between Cllr Keegan and the Emerson Group. It is debatable whether the subject member was acting in his official capacity at the time he was making the posts on alderleyedge.com

So, if you don't agree with them, I would strongly suggest that you make your vote count and restore some degree of integrity to the borough.

Martin.. In your capacity of "reliably informing ", What is the conflict that was personally declared and recorded in February 2015 PC minutes ? , without guess work, without assumption, what is it ? Not a political diversion of an answer, just clarity ? Its not really your responsibility to answer,I know, but the author of the comments continues to fails with reasonable requests for an explanation ...Its not recorded formally anywhere I can see .
I've always found that honesty is the best policy and manners cost nothing.,,and yes,your right Integrity does count.

Nick Jones

Like you, I am in the dark. I just look at the posts on this site and draw a conclusion.

Martin,

I'm puzzled.

The insult about being "a harmless wee man" was directed at me by Frank some considerable time ago.

I have never complained about it (officially) and so am curious as to how this has been recorded somewhere as you suggest.

Had I wanted to make a complaint I would have done so - more because of the fact that Frank had insinuated that he had sought opinion from people who knew me who had (apparently) reassured him that I was just "a harmless wee man" and because, when challenged, Frank gave the impression that he would be in touch with me to apologise but never did.

I am by no means alone in having been insulted by Frank Keegan, I am merely a member of a club with a growing membership.

You say that there is "No evidence of a close association between Cllr Keegan and the Emerson Group." Why then is Cllr Keegan not able to participate in discussion involving that company? Why did Cllr Keegan declare an (undisclosed) gift from that company on disclosure forms and why was Cllr Keegan suspended a few years ago amidst suggestions that there was an improper relationship between him and the company?

It is accepted that Cllr Keegan was cleared (at that time) of any wrong-doing but recent events bring a strong sense of deja-vu and I (for one) remain "cautious."

Martin Dixon,

You make me laugh out loud about integrity. You made a complaint about me, fair enough, but you asked that your name be withheld from the subject of the complaint. The Monitoring Officer refused, and she and I discussed the issue and I thought that a complaint by someone who lives in Stockport and works in Stockport, either had a big grudge against me or against Emerson Group.

Your complaint, since you raised part of it here, is that I voted for the Local Plan without declaring an interest when I ought to have known that Emerson MIGHT, at some point over the life the local plan, want to develop a site. [Any site, any time, whether currently owned by Emerson or not]

Besides deciding that this was a fanciful complaint, I reminded the Monitoring Officer that “my interest” was that the Chairman of Emerson had invited me to Christmas Lunch, with a number of other people, and since I calculated that the cost was more than the then declarable limit of £25, I registered an “interest".

I also pointed out to the Monitoring Officer that the declarable limit has been raised to £100 by the Government, and that, had it always been so, I would never have had to register an
interest.

You invite people to cast their votes in the local election and to try to restore the integrity of the Borough Council.

I am more than happy to match my integrity against yours, any day of the week. My life is an open book - my details are all over the internet, and anyone can make allegations with impunity (even whilst asking for anonymity). I can have people make any number of allegations against me, and I am happy that I can rebut them all.

Mr Dixon, it is a busy time, but I am going to find time this week to pray for you, that God may release you from your demons, because I seriously believe you are a troubled person in need of prayer and support.

Alan Brough,

Let me explain how people use the system. Martin Dixon complained about me voting for the Local Plan when I should have declared an interest re Emerson Group; JUST in case that doesn’t work, he adds in another complaint that I had called you a “harmless wee man” which was a breach of the code.

He knew, or ought to have known, that the Monitoring Officer would reject the planning complaint, so he adds in another one, which just happens to be about you.

He does this because he hopes that if and when the Monitoring Officer decides that the main complaint is baseless, he gets a second bite at the cherry. He hopes the Monitoring Officer decides that I have breached even a small part of the Code re “Alan Brough”; if that were to have happened, he could then proclaim that he had complained about Planning, and the Monitoring Officer had upheld the complaint in part. Even though the part which could have been upheld is minor, he gets to link it with a more damaging claim.

Anyone who doesn’t know me, never met me, doesn’t even vote in this area, and yet he tries so hard to damage me is in need of professional help.That is why I take pity on him and offer to pray for him.

I will address your other concern in a separate reply.

Cllr Keegan

Thank you for clarifying that you have an interest with the Emerson Group. Would I therefore be correct in thinking that you are required to declare that interest in any council meeting where matters relating to Emerson are discussed or voted on?

Well said Frank (and thats from a UKIP supporter !)

Just in case anyone is Frankly unclear about the nature of my complaint, it can be seen by following this link. http://bit.ly/1COJTFb

I am not at all sure of how this conversation helps local democracy ... Echoes of Westminster and all that ... Can we talk about the issues please

Well - on my complaint - CEC/14-15/AG31 - it was determined that following a grovelling letter of apology by Frank, no further action would be taken. However, Frank was not exonerated from a breach of the code of conduct and was written to concerning his use of language on a public forum.

Well; Frank may have gone underground (again) but the CEC Councillor who lives on Heyes Lane seems to have surfaced without any mention of the street where he lives in his manifesto:
http://bit.ly/1HWVpFb

There is no doubt that the medical centre and the festival hall development are very important to the village and Mr Keegan has been involved with this project. But I think there is a huge problem that has been overlooked.

In the PC meeting on 9th February Cllr Keegan declared a DPI (Declarable Pecuniary Interest)
in relation to item 10. which was “To agree signing of building contract with Jones for Medical Centre and side entrance.”

This has a major impact on Mr Keegan’s ability to operate at a PC or Ward level with regards to these projects. Within the CEC Code of Conduct it states “You may not participate in any discussion of, vote on, or discharge any function related to any matter in which you have a pecuniary interest as defined by regulations made by the Secretary of State.’

Furthermore in the Department for Communities and Local Government document on Openness and transparency on personal interests; it states “It is also a criminal offence to knowingly or recklessly provide false or misleading information, or to participate in the business of your authority where that business involves a disclosable pecuniary interest. It is also a criminal offence to continue working on a matter which can be discharged by a single member and in which you have a disclosable pecuniary interest.”

Mr Keegan will surely argue that his disclosure of a DPI was Personal and not prejudicial. In which case the constraints documented above do not apply. It is for Mr Keegan himself to firstly decide if there is a personal interest, which he has done and evidenced by his disclosure. He must then go on to decide for himself if it is prejudicial or not. Guidance on this is available in the CEC publication The Model Code of Conduct – An Explanatory Leaflet Relating to Personal and Prejudicial Interests. This states;

“Your personal interest will also be a prejudicial interest if all of the following conditions are met

(1). The matter being discussed affects your financial position or that of any person with whom you have a personal interest.
(2). Where a member of the public who knows the relevant facts would reasonably think your personal interest is so significant that it may prejudice your judgement.
(3). It does not fall into one of the exempt categories; which are;

- if you hold a tenancy or lease with the Authority as long as it is not relevant to your particular lease or tenancy
- setting Council Tax or a precept
- any ceremonial honour
- statutory sick pay, if you are in receipt of such
- school meals or transport unless specific to your child’s school or where you are a parent-governor”

In this case, points 1 & 3 are clearly met. So I must conclude that Mr Keegan feels that point 2 is not met.

So I guess it boils down to whether any members of the public feel that his interest prejudices his judgement.

Hi Martin

Frankly, I don't care whether you live in Alderley Edge or Timbuktu, the information you have provided us with in the above post is extremely useful for those of us who wish to form our own opinions about this candidate who has put himself forward for re-election for both the Parish Council and to represent our village on CEC.

I have always felt that this forum has offered Frank Keegan the perfect opportunity to set the record straight about this matter and, indeed, he has been directly invited to do so on many occasions over the last several years. His stubborn refusal to respond to these requests in itself leads me to draw my own conclusions. I'm sure the same can be said for the many hundreds (or perhaps thousands) of other voters who read this site regularly and take an interest in the future of this village (and the integrity of those who will be representing us on the Parish and Cheshire East Councils). Add to his historical silence on this matter the fact that he has chosen not to submit a candidate profile, in spite of all the other candidates having done so, and my suspicions only grow stronger. He has had every opportunity to reveal to us, the voting public, the facts around this matter and he has very clearly chosen not to.

So we, the electorate, have to decide whether we have been furnished with enough facts for our suspicions to be allayed. Are we confident that Councillor Keegan has been transparent in his dealings on the Council on our behalf? I know what I think....

It would be helpful to residents if Mr Keegan would simply be more forthcoming about the exact nature of his potential conflict of interest so that voters can judge for themselves how significant it actually is. Without this transparency doubts are bound to remain about his ability to carry out his Council duties with the necessary impartiality.

Thanks Martin for making things so clear.

A critical question, then, re Frank Keegan and his Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest in February 2015.

Is it merely a Personal Interest or is it an Interest that will be Predjudicial to him being able to vote, amongst many other issues, on the Medical Centre, the Festival Hall, the proposed car park?

"Where a member of the public who knows the relevant facts would reasonably think your personal interest is so significant that it may prejudice your judgement."

If this is the case, and Keegan can't even be in the room for discussions on the above, then he will be absent for the most part of any Parish Council meeting.

Hopefully this issue will be redundant if, as I suspect, Craig Browne wins the election for Ward Councillor.

Guess what I am trying to say is that Frank Keegan has compromised himself to the extent that he can no longer be effective in either ward or PC. So there is only one sensible choice that people can make; vote for the other guy.

Hey Martin,

It's not just a case of "vote for the other guy"

Craig Browne is an exceptionally strong candidate in his own right with a wealth of experience and skills that will serve Alderley Edge incredibly well.

Not only tha,t but he has the energy and drive to kick down some of the doors that the past AEPC Councillors found were slammed in their faces...."Cant do THIS because CEC said so!" - "Can't do THAT because CEC said so".

We need a representative on our Parish Council that can stand up to CEC and make them realise that Alderley Edge is a "Jewel In The Crown" and they damn well better listen to what we tell them...... Craig Browne IS that man!

I agree totally!! Craig has my vote. I will be also be voting for all 9 of the Alderley Ede FIRST candidates, Can't wait for Thursday. Good Luck Craig!!