Saturday, 20 October 2012

From Malice to Malarkey


This is your ‘Rutland Roving Reporter’ back again with more salacious gossip from the ‘Streets And Suburbia.’ (Known in certain circles as ‘S.A.S.’).


At the risk of being perceived as a plagiarist I have to bring to your attention an article from our county’s most balanced publication, ‘The Rutland Times’ (18/10/12; page 3 – certain names have been withheld to protect the innocent) in which it mentions a disturbance at a recent meeting of Oakham Town Council’s Parks and Planning Committee.  The paper reports that an un-named person was removed by “officers” after refusing to leave the meeting.  This was due to the person’s strong objections to a decision being made at the meeting. The meeting had to be adjourned because of the apparent outrageous actions from the individual who gave the chairman no option but to ask for the intervention of the police and halt the proceedings.   

Now, you may think that that could be the prerogative of an individual in a democracy (freedom of speech and all that malarkey) but after further investigation it appears that this is not the first time certain ‘individuals’ have disrupted meetings at the Town Council and at that ‘other place’ down the road.  At a recent meeting at that ‘other place’ it seems that there were unwarranted interventions by individuals who thought that they were the only people who needed to be heard. Even as they held up badly written signs, (that looked as though they had been done by a two year old), they still persisted to show little or no respect for the rule of law and not an iota of respect for people elected to act on their behalf in local governance.  My apologies for the reference to two year olds, after all they could have done far better.  

Ignorance is the word that springs to mind and it would appear that their actions on that evening left three council members no alternative but to leave halfway through the meeting out of embarrassment and disgust at the antics and comments from the individuals concerned. Their names don’t appear to be on any minutes or any reference made as yet, except in anecdotal evidence, but I guess we know who they are. And we wouldn’t want to write anything we couldn’t support without proof, unlike false reports often blogged by he who shall not be named.

Could it be that the same people are committing these near felonious acts at strategic venues or is there a band of professional disruptors doing the rounds in Rutland at every opportunity?  This reporter has no evidence that there has been disruption at meetings in the villages around our county town, or even at meetings in that other town down the road, so we can only assume that they have difficulty with transport, funds for taxis or even no transport of their own that would enable them to travel the country at will.  Mind you it seems not to hinder one particular individual who pops up just about everywhere and even eats out at expensive notable ‘posh’ Tory backed restaurants south of Bedford.  They say the nachos and roast pork are particularly good but better with apple sauce – if you can get it before the waitress decides you look a bit too shifty and dishevelled to eat there. 

The problem of the kind of disruption mentioned above is becoming prolific from what our team of researchers has discovered with the culprits being identifiable for being of a dishevelled and unkempt appearance.  I would suggest that the organisers of the demonstrations around the country on Saturday 20th in protest against austerity measures in the UK be very aware of people described as ‘unkempt and dishevelled’ with one of them carrying a camera and the other a broom. It might be that they will attempt to hijack the demo and turn it into a farce.  They’re good at that. 

It could however be a problem solved if the suggestion from the letter’s page (18/10/12; p.8) of the Rutland Times is to be taken up by RCC.  The suggestion from the writer is to move the council offices from Catmose to Ashwell and sell the current offices as a “...swish hotel” by a “responsible private company.”  That would be a good idea because the disruptive element would have to travel at night (the broom would come in handy if it is a tandem) and without any visible means of support or transport they would be stuck in Oakham with only one target for their indignation and ill temper. 

Finally there is the a suggestion that the individual who is being disruptive has the talent for suggesting that anybody who does something for charity is fair game for his attention, in the most despicable way.  Let’s not forget of course that the only charitable action he has ever been involved in is when he bought himself a train ticket from London to Rutland some 9 years ago.  Apparently the main reason he is here is because that’s all he had left from the handout from a church in London who needed to pay him off before he administered his own brand of coup de grace based on bluff, elasticity of the truth and fear. What a shame he didn’t have a few more ‘quid’ in ‘compo’ then he could have gone all the way to that phallic heaven he admires so much – Hoy!

For the next instalment of 'SAS' tune in again soon to Laughing Stocks, I have a sneaking suspicion it might be sooner rather than later.