Agreed. Actually holding regular surgeries in Innellan shows …

Comment posted Reader queries strange council advertising by newsroom.

Agreed. Actually holding regular surgeries in Innellan shows a respect for the job.

To be fair to the rural councillors though, the problem is where you actually hold a surgery with a small and widely dispersed local population. In that scenario, being always available is a decent response to the reality.

The reverse-charge phone call is an attractively mischievous note.

newsroom also commented

  • We have been advised that the Council pays to advertise councillors’ surgeries.
  • But the Innellan surgery is not a story but reported as an advertisement.

Recent comments by newsroom

  • Perfect fit in new partnership marketing initiative for Cowal’s Creggans Inn
    Had a grin at your imagineering of ‘a sobering run to Dunoon by HM finest’.
    This sort of occasion is obviously about staying overnight and we had expected that this was central to the marketing strategy – but we will inquire.
  • Gigha community ownership on brink of failure
    [Updated below] A sentence in the opening section of this article has been removed:
    ‘Wightman was also allowed personally and unacknowledged, to write a major section of the final report of the Land Reform Review Group [immediately identifiable by its style] – although that was the formal responsibility of others.’
    Mr Wightman has simply said to us:
    ‘This statement is untrue. Please remove it.’
    So of course we have removed it.
    However, the sentence is actually a multiple statement so, for the record because one issue is important – we have asked Mr Wightman to clarify which of its internal statements is incorrect – or if all of them are:
    ‘Did you write any section or sections or parts of any section or sections of the final LRRG report?
    ‘Is it incorrect to suggest that you were ‘allowed’ to write an element or elements of the report, where, for instance, you may have seen this as a right?
    ‘Is is incorrect to suggest that your authorship of elements of the report was ‘unacknowledged’ where we may have failed to notice such an acknowledgement?
    ‘Is it incorrect that the writing of the report was ‘the formal responsibility of others?’
    For Argyll is aware that sections of the final report of the Land Reform Review Group were indeed written by Advisers to the Review Group rather than, as one is entitled to expect – by the topline membership [albeit a regularly shifting one] of the Review Group itself.
    Our analysis of the language style and content analysis of major elements of the report as being both distinctively different from other sections of the report and arguably authored by Mr Wightman, who was an Adviser to the Review Group.
    The passage on ‘ Statutory limitation on land ownership’ seemed a particularly attributable; and the passage ‘Inheritance rights changed to break up established landholdings’ scored a possible similar authorship.
    These analysis may well have come to the wrong conclusions – and if Mr Wightman assures us that he was not the author of any of the main text of the final LRRG report, we will be glad to accept that without equivocation.
    In our article of May 2014 on that report [http://forargyll.com/2014/05/final-land-reform-report-substantial-challenging-provocative-not-final/], we said:
    ‘The lack of philosophical, conceptual and tonal strategic unity weakens the report. It demonstrates the impact of specific influences pulling aspects of it in different directions – sometimes asymmetrically. There is no evidence of any kind of the necessary final editorship. Responsibility for this must lie with the Group’s chair since its inception, Dr Alison Elliot, former moderator of the Church of Scotland.’
    24.00 update:
    Mr Wightman has refused to clarify his position on any of the questions which, as above, we o]put to him, saying: ‘I have no intention of responding to the range of bizarre and unsubstantiated allegations that you make below.’
  • Gigha community ownership on brink of failure
    There is no dishonour in an honourable attempt which fails.
    The Gigha buy out has always been an honourable attempt, whether it succeeds or fails.
    There is also no shame in failure – so much in life is down to the luck of the draw.
    One community buy out may succeed where another may fail.
    Problems arise, though, where the possibility of failure is not factored in to the thinking and where failure is disguised.
    Amongst other aspects of this, where failure is acknowledged lessons may be learned from it that may protect other initiatives from failing.
  • Gordon Brown to stand down from Westminster at General Election
    This was always a puff. Gordon Brown never had any position from which to act as such a guarantor.
  • Hazard warning lights on A83 for Rest and Be Thankful
    And, as a hazard warning at the entrance to the Scottish Parliament, it could replicate the warning at the entrance to Dante’s Inferno.

powered by SEO Super Comments

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • LinkedIn
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Ma.gnolia
  • NewsVine
  • StumbleUpon
  • SphereIt
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • Print

10 Responses to Agreed. Actually holding regular surgeries in Innellan shows …

  1. Back to the source
    http://www.helensburghadvertiser.co.uk/publicnotices/publicnotices/

    Three adverts in one. Planning / Surgery / Planning

    Where else? Same advert as
    http://www.dunoon-observer.com/index.php/public-notices
    possibly only showing this week, updated next.

    Maybe saving money in bulk, maybe sneaking in an advert for surgery between public notices.

    Maybe Sally forgot to pull the Surgery from the Helensburgh paper version.

    Maybe take the opportunity, it’s a last chance to see Dick before May, look at yesterday’s man, say goodbye to him. Thanks, Sally

    Why did it happen?
    I had a quote in mind, a better version for Kilmory is

    Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity, but don’t rule out malice. (Wikipedia)

    Perhaps it was frugality. perhaps Copy and Paste. Maybe they should have kept their Communications Officer in the loop.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Walet B – what a load of tosh “Maybe take the opportunity, it’s a last chance to see Dick before May, look at yesterday’s man, say goodbye to him”

    Wanna bet if Dick walsh stands – he’ll win. :)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • I’m no great supporter of Dick Walsh but…..he at least does hold surgeries, giving people a chance to have their say. Unlike his fellow councillors for Cowal who ” are available ” if you want to ‘phone them. Do the non surgery holding councillors have their adverts paid for them ? Can we call them and reverse the charges as they receive a generous telephone allowance ?

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Agreed. Actually holding regular surgeries in Innellan shows a respect for the job.

    To be fair to the rural councillors though, the problem is where you actually hold a surgery with a small and widely dispersed local population. In that scenario, being always available is a decent response to the reality.

    The reverse-charge phone call is an attractively mischievous note.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Councillor Walsh also holds surgeries in Dunoon.
      All areas have community centres or a village hall or even a hotel room where councillors could meet their public. If you have a point to make you would travel to see him (her) face to face. I was once told by someone from Castle Kilmory that councillors were under no obligation to talk to anybody. So there…………

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. I agree that it is good practice for councillors to hold regular surgeries to allow people to meet and discuss issues with them and I applaud those that find the time do this. I am guessing they are often not that well used be people (although could be wrong and maybe some of our councillors could provide info on this) but it is right that there is regular opportunity for those that do wish to make use of it.

    Given that then I think Cllr Walsh should be applauded for holding regular ones as should others that do likewise (I know for instance that Cllr Freeman holds surgeries once a month, every month). The opportunity to call or e-mail councillors is, of course, always there but I don’t always find this is as useful due to the lack of face to face contact and opportunity to discuss and debate. I would also say that some councillors are better than others when it comes to responding to e-mail contact. I find that most (though not all) will respond in some way or form but not always to the questions posed or in a manner that encourages further involvement. There are some who I have always found very responsive to e-mails (and I include ones within the administration, the SNP, Argyll First, the real independents and also non aligned) and a number who fail miserably to offer any credible response.

    I also think Simon is right that Cllr Walsh probably will be returned in May. My hope is that he is returned as an opposition councillor rather than an administration one.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


All the latest comments (including yours) straight to your mailbox, everyday! Click here to subscribe.