Reply to THIS thread
Start a NEW Talkback Thread
Talkback Home

Councillor Jerrard - Mary (19th Dec 2011 - 14:36:13) If you call your political party “The Justice and Anti-Corruption Party”, then you really have to be beyond reproach, squeaky-clean, whiter than white, and all that; in fact you have to be a paragon of virtue. Having just read Councillor Don Jerrard's recent Talkback entry “Bramshott & Liphook Parish Council By-Election – Thursday 8th December 2011” (http://www.liphook.co.uk/?section=interactive&page=talkback_thread_wide&id=4018) he has certainly been anything but virtuous. I have to say that I am utterly, utterly astounded at the content of his narrative. To say that it is just a rant completely understates the low level to which our elected representative appears to have stooped, and indeed a vision comes to mind of a bitter man, foaming at the mouth, subsumed by a red mist and hammering away at the keyboard of his computer. The narrative is certainly at odds with a clear and measured style one would expect from a former solicitor. However, anyone might be capable of such lapses and one could even excuse the schoolyard tone of Cllr. Jerrard's diatribe as an aberration, were it not for his absolutely appalling reference to Cllr. Anna James. Cllr. Jerrard asserts that “The electors of Bramshott & Liphook must be thoroughly fed up with paying for elections caused by the resignations of Cllr Mrs. Anna James and her cronies” This statement is vile beyond belief. Cllr. Jerrard would have been fully aware that Anna James resigned from her District seat in order to care for her wonderful and highly regarded husband Sam, who very sadly became terminally ill. How dare Cllr. Jerrard speak in this way? How dare this man purport to speak on behalf of the electorate in this manner? For Cllr. Jerrard to seek to make political capital out of the tragic misfortune of a fellow Councillor in this manner is indescribably callous and hurtful. His behaviour calls into question Cllr Jerrard’s suitability as a representative of the people of Liphook in any form - in such circumstances, even Tony Blair would have tendered his resignation! I personally think that the man should get down on his knees and apologise to Anna. To go on further (and frankly, I would rather be sitting down with a cup of tea, watching a replay of Strictly Come Dancing), Cllr. Jerrard even has the temerity to question Anna James' right to endorse candidates of her choosing for our December by-election, now of course decided. Because the candidates Nigel Newman and John Tough “were soundly defeated in the May elections” Cllr. Jerrard questions their right to stand for election again. Hypocritically, Cllr. Jerrard nominated his own JAC Party crony (to use his terminology) Eddie Trotter who had also been rejected by the people of Bramshott and Liphook in the May elections. Ironically, in the December by-election, the parish elected John Tough anyway and the hapless Mr. Trotter stumbled into last place yet again, probably doomed by Cllr. Jerrard’s endorsement of his own candidate as “much more boring” (yes, he really does say this!) and, wait for it, “tends not to shout too much” – translation: “he only looses his rag now and then” or alternatively “he doesn’t do anything for the local community”. In all this, there is a complete disregard for the democratic process and standards for treating political adversaries and the electorate respectfully. Like the rest of us, Anna James has the democratic right to endorse whomsoever she considers suitable for the job – and politicians like Cllr. Jerrard should restrain their crude urges at character assassination and restrict themselves to discuss differences in policy - it is called agreeing to differ and respecting the other man's opinion, which may just happen to be different from one's own. Jerrard displays outrageous arrogance in his dictatorial, abusive, higher-than-mighty style, and fortunately the electorate voted as they saw fit, not as Jerrard sought to instruct them. Cllr. Anna James, please accept all our apologies for what you have had to put up with.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - liz (19th Dec 2011 - 18:24:31) This is just appalling behaviour by a member of out parish council, and I think that he should be thoroughly ashamed. I do think that he should apologise to Anna James liz

Re: Councillor Jerrard - Mrs Sue Potter (20th Dec 2011 - 12:48:33) I am quite appalled at reading this, I lived in Hampshire for many happy years and my son still does, and I myself was widowed just over a year ago, so I am only to fully aware of the grief that this lady councillor must still be suffering. Councillor Jerrard should be prevented from entering the council chambers until he has issued a written apology which should be made public

Re: Councillor Jerrard - liz (20th Dec 2011 - 14:30:30) The 'liz' commenting above seems to be another 'liz' which is a bit confusing. I'm the old (very) liz and have no comment on this thread. Perhaps the new 'liz' can use a new variation of 'Liz' - if you see what I mean!

Re: Councillor Jerrard - pam (20th Dec 2011 - 16:21:56) Thank you Mary for your posting which appeared on Liphook Talkback on 19 December. It was extremely well written and put into words what many of us are feeling. It is not necessary for me to elaborate on anything that you have said, but I heartily endorse everthing in your posting. Anna James, during her time on the Parish and District Councils, worked tirelessly for Liphook. She does not deserve the vituperative, venomous, spiteful and unfounded criticisms and remarks that have been made about her and her late husband, Sam. She will be sorely missed by many Liphook parishoners.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - liz black (20th Dec 2011 - 16:22:47) apologies liz I will sign in as above I still think that this is atrocious behaviour by this Mr Jerrard and surely there must be some process or code of conduct that parish councillors have to follow7

Re: Councillor Jerrard - nick (20th Dec 2011 - 16:51:20) i do not know this gentleman (Jerrard) but from reading the remarks he has made and the response to his remarks make me wonder what other cllrs make of this. He can be reported th the standards board but i believei one has to follow certain guidlines (nb i assume you have all read the report re the finance investigation that has been going on suprised Jerrard hasnt made comments about that as well)

Re: Councillor Jerrard - john (20th Dec 2011 - 17:22:17) If you are in the public eye and state your support for someone like NEWMAN you have got to be able to take some flak.If you lay with dogs you get fleas.So if you cant stand the heat get out of the kitchen!

Re: Councillor Jerrard - Rob (21st Dec 2011 - 10:58:16) John, the public are always free to make stupid and offensive statements like yours and we generally ignore then. But when an elected politician does so, that is quite another matter. If Councillor Jerrard knew that Councillor Anna James resigned as District Councillor to care for her terminally ill husband Sam James then Jerrard’s electioneering about Anna James wasting taxpayer's money by forcing a by-election is not just callous but is very disrespectful. Jerrard’s party website says that if councillors fail to treat each other or the public with respect or bring a public office into disrepute they are breaking a Code Of Conduct and should be suspended or disqualified from office. Can we now expect a statement from our representative, a resignation or an investigation?

Re: Councillor Jerrard - dee (21st Dec 2011 - 14:50:59) Fyi John, calling Anna a dog or a flea or whatever is no better than those politicians like Jerrad Fyi Mary, I saw a claim on Councillor Jerrards website that "”we only deal in FACTS. The articles contain no speculation or guesswork, and we leave it to you to make your own decisions". I got Jerrards election leaflet that came throu my door He accuses Anna James not declaring to council she had a vestid interest after her secret meetings with the owners of the Bohunt Manor. So I thought Jerrard must be talking about FACTS here. your story about Jerrards appalling behaviour explains why Jerrard said those things about Anna James. His website says "”At the local level there have been instanses of people in political parties who are district, town or city councilors making money out of such things as planning, placing of contracts with friends, and friends being paid high fees to run enquiries to cover-up the actions of corrupt council offers and members." So yes, just like using the suffering of a political opponent for his own advantage, it seems like now Jerrards wants to suggest something is corrupt about Anna James to try to persuade us to vote for him instead? I wish I hadn’t now. Rather than give us any proof facts or get his informant to give us proof he prefers us to do a little guesswork and jump to conclusions. Funny that, isn’t it, for a man who claims to only deal in FACTS? So he is solicitor so he would know its safer to rely on gueswork and put ideas in our heads to us instead of giving real facts or proof. The damage to Annas name is done and now how can she prove ever that she did not do something? It seems that the sneeky Jerrard has much more to apologise to Anna James about than you would know.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - john (21st Dec 2011 - 18:40:46) Did she help stich up councillor evans?

Re: Councillor Jerrard - Michael Healy (25th Dec 2011 - 22:09:18) As a past and hopefully future resident of Liphook I am amazed that such a man as this is in a position of responsibility when clearly unhinged. To be so rude to a woman is unforgivable especially one who has lost her much respected husband and who has also given unstinting service to the community. The man is a bounder and deserves to be laughed at as a fool. With his ill considered statement one shudders at the impression he gives of the village, small minded and meanspirited spring to mind and with it more than a hint of incompetence.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - liz (28th Dec 2011 - 16:47:53) Pam and Dee are absolutely correct about the appalling behauviour of Mr Don Jerrerd. I think that Mary has expressed her dismay at this man very welll and he sets a very poor example for the younger generation. How are we to raise a repectful younger generation when this sort of thing is done by our leaders in the community Councillor Jerrard we are waiting for you to apologise to Anna James. Show us that you at least have the decency to do this and bring all the ill feeling in the parish council tto an end it would be a wonderful guesture at this important time of the year. If you cannot do this, then you are not fit to be our elected representative? and I for one hope that you stand down and make way for someone else with higher standards of integrity

Re: Councillor Jerrard - helen (28th Dec 2011 - 18:01:59) I am sure that by calling people unhinged you are putting fuel on the fire. If there is something which Councillor Jerrard has said and is not true then it is up to Councillor James to answer.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - liz (28th Dec 2011 - 20:04:39) Helen I think the fact that Don Jerrard has made these vile comments on the other posting which Mary has highlighted, and the fact that we are aware of Anna James sad loss, and I have to say a loss to all of us in Liphook, and the fact that Anna has acted with dignity throughout, speaks for itself; Don Jerrard s behaviour is frankly disgusting and he is an appalling example to young people;

Re: Councillor Jerrard - john (28th Dec 2011 - 22:02:15) Helen dont take any notice of this lot . I suspect they are newmans kin and dont even live in the parish. Looks like they are talking the same old rot as normal!

Re: Councillor Jerrard - Rob (29th Dec 2011 - 13:29:33) John, it really is quite silly trying to kill off discussion of a legitimate public issue with personal attacks. If you agree with Councillor Jerrard’s public allegations then please provide supporting evidence – something he has failed to do so far himself. And the issues are a very serious indeed - the honesty and motives of Councillor Jerrard have been questioned and these doubts deserve a serious response from the Parish Council – its own integrity is now in question too. Dee, I can’t quite see your point about Councillor Jerrard’s allegations of corruption against Councillor A James. Did he accuse her of corruption or not? For him to even suggest in public that a fellow Councillor is corrupt is an extremely serious allegation. As a solicitor he would know that he must immediately present evidence of wrongdoing to the Parish Council, to the Police Force and to East Hants DC? Has he done this? If not, he must withdraw any allegations and must clarify any misleading suggestions he has made. Parish Councillors use Talkback freely to voice their views as Councillors, so now PLEASE TELL US, are the recent public allegations made by “Councillor Jerrard” against Councillor A James supported by the Council or not? And on another matter, suggested in different thread on this website, did Councillor Jerrard break professional confidence of the Council or not? If Councillor Jerrard is under suspicion of misconduct, will there be an investigation or not?

Re: Councillor Jerrard - liz black (2nd Jan 2012 - 16:30:52) FOR GOODNESS SAKE, WOULD YOU ALL STOP GOING ON ABOUT PETTY LOCAL POLITICS, AND WHO DID WHAT TO WHOM. The subject here, which Mary set out so well, goes beyond any of that type of stuff. What Councillor Jerrard has done by attacking Anna James in the way that he has done goes beyond what is acceptable even in the bear-pit forum of local politics. He has crossed a line of common decency and sought to enhance his position by attacking this lady in this manner, and it is frankly deplorable and disgraceful. It may have been an oversight by Cllr Jerrard, and he may have have overlooked the circumstances of Anna James' resignation, but he should apologise for this. Councillor Jerrard, you have used Talkback to promote your own agenda on other occasions, would you now please explain yourself and your behaviour by responding and apologising ?

Re: Councillor Jerrard - Pam (5th Jan 2012 - 12:25:17) Many people in Lipook are awaiting a response from you with regard to recent allegations and insults you have posted on Talkback regarding Anna James. As has been previously stated by Liz Black you are happy to use Talkback to promote your own agenda, so please use it now.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - Dawn Hoskins (6th Jan 2012 - 14:02:10) I have just read this thread and would like to know which bit of it is considered to contain a statement which is untrue, as it is very long. Untrue statements should NOT be made by Councillors and if that is so - it must be dealt with by the Council as it may be a Standards [regulatory] issue. It is well known that Councillor James nominated Dr Tough and Mr Newman and also that she [and others] made police statements regarding Councillor Evans talking to the clerk. But she has never resigned from the Parish Council and has always remained a Parish Councillor so I am a bit confused. Is there another thread I should be reading in conjunction with this and if so can someone point me to it. Thanks.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - liz (7th Jan 2012 - 10:55:51) Dawn Thank goodness one Councillor has come forward to talk about this ! The point which to me is totally unacceptable is Councillor Jerrard\'s appalling reference to Anna James, as Mary and others have highlighted above, and which I think is so cruel and a bad example to young people. Don Jerrard says: The electors of Bramshott and Liphook must be thoroughly fed up with PAYING FOR ELECTIONS CAUSED BY THE RESIGNATIONS OF ANNA JAMES AND HER CRONIES. We all know that Anna resigned her district seat to care for her terminally ill husband Sam. Isn t this exactly what any of us would do in such circumstances ? What would you do Dawn if someone close to you was terminally ill ? No doubt you would wish to do all you could as any any decent , humane person would wish to. Being on hand for someone terminally ill, would mean that you could not discharge your civic duties as you would like to. So obviously you would resign to do the right thing, which in Anna\'s case was to be there for her husband - council matters are just so less important in these circumstances, as I am sure most people would agree, and there are always others to step in to carry out any necessary civic functions. Don Jerrard, however, sought to exploit this, and turn this to his JAC PARTY s gain, by by suggesting that Anna \'caused\' an election, and that the electorate were then lumbered with the costs of such an election. Most people would be aware that Anna has given many many years of service to the community on A VOLUNTARY BASIS, and I for one commend her for what she has done. Jerrard seems to overlook this, and even begrudges her resigning to look after her husband because it means an election is needed to replace her. How incredibly small minded and mean Whether you agree with Anna s policies, like her or dislike her, we should still treat any individual with kindness and thoughtfulness in the sad circumstances that she found herself in last year herself. I also ask why Jerrard has to use such words as CRONIES ? This is just derogatory and childish, and not the grown sort of discussion that we expect from our Parish Council. The use of this sort of word (and his disrespectful references to Anna in the context of her resignation) only continues to foster an environment of hostility within the Parish Council. This is just plain madness, and you all need to move on, agree to disagree, but more than anything show respect and kindness towards each other. If there is a code of conduct that the Parish Council has to follow, you mention a Standards issue (?), which requires councillors to be respectful to each other, then I certainly think that Don Jerrard should be reported and made to account and explain himself. Don Jerrard has had ample opportunity through this column (which he has in the past used to express his own views) to retract, apologise or explain his behaviour, and he has not done so yet, despite being invited to do so in a number of entries. I ask any reader how would they feel in such circumstances ?

Re: Councillor Jerrard - pam (7th Jan 2012 - 14:42:45) In reply to Dawn Hoskins’ posting I would like to draw her attention to my postings. The word “untrue” does not appear in either of them. The words, “spiteful, vituperative, venomous” do and I stand by these words. It is not so much what Cllr Jerrard says, it is the insulting and misleading way he says it and more to the point what he does not say. He states that the electors of Bramshott and Liphook must be thoroughly fed up with paying for elections caused by the resignation of Cllr Mrs Anna James and her cronies. He does not say that the reason Anna James resigned from the District Council (not from Parish incidentally) was the sudden recurrence of her husband’s serious illness. Cllr Jerrard refers to her “cronies”. That in itself is insulting and degrading, but he does not name them. Is he referring to Sam James, Anna’s late lamented and much respected husband? If he is, then he has really sunk to the depths of depravity. I have read the other postings in this thread and I cannot see the word “untrue” in any of those, so Dawn perhaps you need to read them again. However the words “allegations, criticism, appalling, dictatorial, abusive, unhinged” to name but a few, do and the feeling demonstrated in these postings reflect the feelings of many of the electors of Liphook. I think that what comes over loud and clear is the unnecessary nastiness in that original posting by Don Jerrard. He implies that Anna James and her cronies resigned simply to incur more expense which would have to be paid by Liphook parishioners – he never mentioned the £200 an hour being paid to the solicitor who is working out how to finally dismiss the clerk or the fact that this solicitor works for Baker Mackenzie his former employer and heaven knows what Pauline Lucas was and possible still is, being paid. REQUEST TO DON JERRARD. Please have the decency to reply to this and the other postings and have the courage and humility to apologise unrservedly to Anna James. If no apology is forthcoming, in my opinion, you are not fit to serve the electors of Liphook as their councillor or in any other capacity.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - David (7th Jan 2012 - 14:47:36) Question: Was Mrs James aware of her husband's condition prior to accepting the position of chair? If so why did she take on a job whch she must have known it would have been impossible to handle in a satisfactory manner?

Re: Councillor Jerrard - Rob (9th Jan 2012 - 14:30:16) Mrs. Hoskins, You request clarity on Cllr Jerrard’s statements and although I cannot speak for others in the parish, I do consider that it is in Cllr Jerrard’s best interests for him to explain his intemperate language and apparent loss of control, while it is in all our best interests for him to get a fair hearing over his conduct. (1) Cllr Jerrard suggests in a very long posting here on 8th December, that Cllr A James’ wasted of taxpayer money by resigning as District Councillor. People were incensed at what they saw as Cllr Jerrard’s cruel and insulting manner when he knew very well that Cllr James resigned to better care for her terminally ill husband. His remarks made during the week of a by-election were seen as cheap and crude political point scoring. (2) Cllr Jerrard’s May election flyers alleged that Cllr James had secret meetings with developers. No evidence was offered when asked for, and although Cllr Jerrard seemed to have pulled short of a direct accusation of corruption, the implication was clear that something underhand was afoot. Clearly, such innuendo, which Cllr Jerrard repeated again on the actual day of the by-election in comments on this forum, was seen as intended to influence the outcome of the election. (3) People asked how Cllr Jerrard dared to challenge Cllr A James’ democratic right to nominate or support election candidates when the voters’ decision is what matters. (4) People smell the whiff of hypocrisy to Cllr Jerrard’s assertion that the by-election candidates supported by Cllr James were not suitable because they were “soundly defeated” in the earlier May election … However, Cllr Jerrard himself nominated a Mr. Trotter also of the JAC party to stand again in the by election (unsuccessfully) despite being the most unpopular candidate in the May election (and again in December) (5) Cllr Jerrard raised a topic of a new library in Liphook and it seems from Cllr Easton’s comments that confidential discussions with the County Council had indeed been held. The question was asked whether Cllr Jerrard had breached professional confidence and further questions were asked on this forum on whether Cllr Jerrard deliberately fed misleading information about the library discussions to this forum - but no answers were offered. (6) When standing for the County Council election in September (unsuccessfully), Cllr Jerrard distributed electioneering leaflets implicating one of the other candidates in shady practices - questioning a planning application by Cllr Ferris Cowper that had followed proper due process – the insinuation by Cllr Jerrard was of ‘insider dealings’ within the planning committee, although Cllr Jerrard was very careful not to make any direct accusation of corruption. (7) People suggest that Cllr Jerrard lured them into voting for him with the promise to ‘bring harmony where there is discord’ in a troubled parish and to introduce openness and accountability against what he alleged to be secrecy and ‘back-room deals’ in the previous Council. Some mentioned his public crusade against corruption “to expose fraud, corruption and other criminal activities at local and national level and put in operation the actions to bring the offenders to justice. Unfortunately this means using our police force that we will show is equally negligent or selective in its behaviour… It will do this by publishing the facts of what has been happening on its websites, and letting the public decide what is dishonest or corrupt. Eventually, the public will realise what is going on, and hopefully bring the dishonest politicians and Council officers to account for their past misdeeds” – quoted from Cllr Jerrard’s website. Cllr Jerrard’s desperate tone in public statements on this forum, in his electioneering leaflets and on his JAC party website have given rise to serious concerns about his integrity and honesty and his suitability to represent people of the parish. Mrs. Hoskins, you say that the Council is obligated to deal with “untrue statements”. There clearly are many forms of “untruth”, through both statements and insinuations. Cllr Jerrard operates by publishing highly personal attacks, by sowing seeds of doubt and carefully worded suggestions about the integrity of people, all without offering proof and assuming guilt unless proven innocent. It does now seem to me that Liphook politics has degenerated into undignified mud slinging, blaming, and pursuing personal agendas rather than addressing the real needs of the whole community, which you and all the other councilors were elected to do. Are those measured and fair councilors risking the taint of the junior partner in the LIB-JAC Coalition? Is the tail now wagging the dog? I, for one, look forward to hearing answers from you.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - liz (10th Jan 2012 - 09:18:54) I had really hoped that this thread would have been resolved by now, but it just seems to go on and on! I am not aware of the Councillor Cowper accusations and had not seen him amongst the candidates for the election last month. EDITOR could you help please and explain the position and more about Councillor Cowper and the accusations made against him by Don Jerrard. Was there an outcome to this ? It is true that Don Jerrard does seems to criticise and look for fault in other councillors a lot, and I seem to remember that he had things to say about some irregularity with Councillor Tough as well. The point is , what has Jerrard ever DONE for the village ? It is always easy to criticise others, and he does not even live here! It is hypocritical that Don Jerrard, objecting to resignations of others with the cost implications to the electorate of a forced election, asked us to support Councillor Jordan in the December elections, because Councillor Jordan had himself resigned earlier in the year ! I actually think that Councillor Jordan is one of our best Councillors and he has done so much for the village over the years, so no complaints here, it is just the hypocrisy that I object to. All this sniping has to end, and we must forgive Councillor Jerrard if necessary so that we can all move on, or, as my grandchildren would say - Build a bridge and get over it!!!

Re: Councillor Jerrard - pam (10th Jan 2012 - 13:40:31) Dawn, as I said in my brief reply to your posting in the Pre Parish Council Thread, you seem to confusing the Liphook Talkback Threads. So I am replying in the Councillor Jerrard Thread as I think this has more relevance. I will give below a precis of my previous Thread and make the following points in answer to your criticisms. 1.The word “untrue” does not appear in my posting re: Cllr Jerrard. The words spiteful, vituperative and venomous do. 2.It is not so much what Cllr Jerrard says as the way he says it and what he does not say. 3.Her refers to Anna James and her “cronies” but does not name them. 4.The posting requests an apology. Perhaps you could read my posting again along with the postings placed Mary, Liz Black, Mrs Sue Potter, Rob, Dee, Michel Healy and Liz on the same Thread as these have also been ignored. I ask once again for Councillor Jerrard to respond and apologise to Anna James. Finally I would draw attention to the latest and very eloquent posting from Rob in response to your posting on the Cllr Jerrard Thread. He has comprehensively and succinctly covered all aspects of Cllr Jerrard’s flawed and distorted “rants”, his undemocratic innuendo particularly during election campaigns, his insulting and intemperate language, his distortion of the facts, the lack of proof and the embellishments. Rob has, in his posting gone right to the “nub of the matter” namely that, and I quote “Cllr Jerrard operates by publishing highly personal attacks, by sowing seeds of doubt and carefully worded suggestions etc, etc, etc”. Cllr Jerrard does not offer proof, but his oft quoted JAC Party mantra is “If it’s not true, why don’t they sue?” thereby implying people are guilty unless they can prove their innocence. As a solicitor Cllr Jerrard should appreciate the irony of this, surely. Cllr Jerrard seems to be hiding behind you, Dawn – I think he knows he has been rumbled, people are not stupid and many of us are still waiting for proof of his many and varied accusations and an apology to Anna James.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - helen (10th Jan 2012 - 16:11:18) Surely Pam you are creating problems by expecting someone to apologise for something they did not say?

Re: Councillor Jerrard - pam (10th Jan 2012 - 17:02:20) Helen, you obviously have not read the postings if you really believe that Cllr Jerrard has nothing to apologise for. Alternatively your ideas on common decency, kindness to others, understanding and integrity must be vastly different to mine.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - Increasingly Concerned (15th Jan 2012 - 12:10:55) The Silence is Deafening! I have just read the latest thread, Time for the Parish Council to Come Clean or Resign, and more and more it is becoming apparent that the common denominator at the root of stagnant mess that the Parish Council seems to be stuck mired in, is Councillor Don Jerrard. Councillor Jerrard appears to be driven by personal grudges, to be a divisive element, and to have a complete inability to operate a dynamic and forward looking Parish Council. This is not in the interest of the community. I say this with great care, because it does now seem that Jerrard is in control of the Parish Council, and others are in awe of him, and, as others have pointed out, it does indeed seem that the Tail is Wagging the Dog ! Questions have been asked of this Councillor, and as yet no answers have as been offered. As I have said, The Silence is Deafening, and I wonder if we are to have another Whistleblowing

Re: Councillor Jerrard - Dawn Hoskins (15th Jan 2012 - 22:12:29) I am happy to speak to real people, but am not prepared to talk to unknown quantities called 'increasiongly concerned' without knowing who they are. Do me the decency of giving me your name - and I will answer you! For the record, I have spoken to Mr Jerrard who did say he would answer these questions. He is still a working lawyer and is dealing with very complicated matters taking up a lot of his time - it may just be that he has been too busy to come on here and chat - however I will remind him again. It is unlikely he will want to talk to people who won't even give their names though.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - Pam (16th Jan 2012 - 11:17:37) Dawn When I saw today that there had been two more replies on the Councillor Jerrard Thread I really thought that Councillor Jerrard had at last found the courage to place a posting himself on this Thread. Sadly this was not the case. Although your latest posting on the Councillor Jerrard Thread replies to “Increasingly Concerned’s” posting, I feel its content insults the intelligence of many people who read Liphook Talkback. Firstly, although I do use my name and it is my correct Christian name, what does that actually mean? It does not identify me as I am sure there are many Pams who read Liphook Talkback and although I would not use a pseudonym, I do not really see what difference it makes if someone calls him or herself “Increasingly Concerned” or anything else for that matter. It makes them no more identifiable. It seems to be the policy of some of the councillors in the new “regime” on Liphook & Bramshott Parish council to create “smoke screens” to divert and distract. Secondly, I ask again why are you speaking for Councillor Jerrard? He has made it increasingly apparent that when he wants to, he can be extremely eloquent, albeit in an unpleasant and abusive way, and the statement made by yourself that “it may be he has been too busy to come in here and chat” beggars belief. It is well known that people who use this phrase, usually do so when they are avoiding and why does he have to chat to you about it? He certainly was not too busy to write his insulting, ranting, distorted and unpleasant posting on The 8 December in the Bramshott & Liphook Parish Council By-Election – Thursday 8 December, 2011 posting that prompted Mary to start this present Thread ie Councillor Jerrard. I say again, Councillor Jerrard you have been rumbled, so stop hiding behind Dawn Hoskins and answer your critics, but read the postings carefully first so that your answers are relevant and accurate.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - Dawn Hoskins (16th Jan 2012 - 16:03:04) So now you are being rude to me Pam? I speak for myself and only myself. Why are YOU speaking on behalf of Councillor James? Is she hiding behind you? Goose - Gander etc I thought I was answering to assist but seeing as that is not good enough for you and you are determined to be rude to me regardless I will comment no further on it. I am nobody's keeper. If Mr Jerrard want's to reply he will and there is nothing I can do about it. You demanding apologies left, right and centre, does that mean you are going to say sorry to me for trying to be helpful but being belittled by you none-the-less?

Re: Councillor Jerrard - Steve Miller (16th Jan 2012 - 18:53:03) Hmmm The words pram, throw, toys and out come to mind but not necessarily in that order!

Re: Councillor Jerrard - pam (17th Jan 2012 - 15:21:15) Dawn I do not think that you read the postings carefully enough. Please point out any part of my posting that you consider rude. I really would be interested. You state that I am demanding apologies left, right and centre. I have requested one person to make one apology ie Councillor Jerrard to Anna James for his original and very unpleasant posting in December. That is all. I am sorry if you think that this is demanding apologies left, right and centre. I am not speaking on behalf of Anna James. I am speaking for myself and expressing the shock and disgust I felt, as a human being, when reading Councillor Jerrard’s original posting on 8 December, when he made his degrading and unforgivable remarks about Anna James and her cronies etc, etc - even more so because of the sad circumstances which necessitated Anna’s resignation from the District Council. I am very sorry for you if you feel belittled by me, but that is your problem, not mine, as this was not my intention.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - Dawn Hoskins (17th Jan 2012 - 18:29:02) You may be right in your statement about me not reading carefully. Since I am recently disabled my medication is very strong and does leave me woozy most of the time. However, what I do read into your post is that insulting the intelligence of people; that I am a member of a regime; that I am hiding behind a smoke screen in order to distract people; that I am speaking for Mr Jerrard when I have made it clear I am speaking for myself and that I am allowing or permitting Mr Jerrard to hide behind me. Medication or not – I find that rude. Last post on the matter.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - john (17th Jan 2012 - 22:01:11) No one gave a monkeys about councillor Rob Evans feelings when he was set up mr Evans is a decent man.As for the behaviour of people such as Groves Newman & James it also has upset a lot of decent people in the parish .

Re: Councillor Jerrard - helen (17th Jan 2012 - 23:18:30) I know that it is indeed bad taste to probaly continue this thread, but I will point out one thing, both Mr and Mrs James could have decided not to stand for the elections back in April/ May, as sadly indeed Councillor James had been seriously ill for at least a year before that. There is a Councillor attendance record on the Hampshire County Council website. Perhaps we can now end this thread.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - rob (18th Jan 2012 - 14:56:42) Councillor Hoskins, can we put the record straight, please? 1. The public raised serious questions about Cllr Jerrard’s behaviour. 2. You intervened by saying that you would look into the matter. 3. You also said that the Parish Council is obligated to investigate any breach of Standards. 4. Cllr Jerrard remains silent on the matter of his own conduct while being prepared to publish derogatory comments about other councilors 5. You took offence when one commentator asks if Cllr Jerrard’s continuing silence seemed like he is hiding behind you, concluding that you will not comment any further on the matter. 6. Every single question raised about Cllr Jerrard’s aberrant behaviour remains unanswered. Councillor Hoskins, you stated that “Untrue statements should NOT be made by Councillors and if that is so - it must be dealt with by the Council as it may be a Standards [regulatory] issue.” So, I looked up the Standing Orders on the Parish Council website and found a Code of Conduct for Parish Councillors. [I do encourage everyone interested to look at it too]. The Code is very clearly on how Councillors should behave, and not just about making “untruthful statements” as you seem to imply. It seems that Councillors are bound by the law to “treat others with respect”, “not to bully any person”, “not disclose information given in confidence” and to behave with “Honesty and Integrity, Objectivity, Accountability, and Openness”, and amongst many other things all “Councillors have a Duty to Uphold the Law”. If Councillor Hoskins feels unable currently to stand up for the truth (I personally think she is very capable and dedicated to the local community), would any other Council Member please consider your public duty and please keep us informed.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - pam (18th Jan 2012 - 18:37:55) Usually when people try to draw a line under something, it is either because they want the last word or because they are losing the argument. I fully support Rob's request in his posting for another councllor to come forward and explain why Councillor Jerrard seems incapable of answering his critics. What has happened to all that openess, transparency and accountability? It is my understanding that Sam James's illness was in remission during 2010 and the early part of 2011 and I assume that he felt that he would be able to continue doing the work he loved on the Council, but sadly he became ill again. I am sorry if anyone finds that an inconvenient truth.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - helen (18th Jan 2012 - 18:52:28) I believe that the onus is on individual councillors to report if they feel another councillor has been rude, so it is up to Councillor James to report it to the Standards Committee at EHDC if she feels she has been slighted in this way.If she does not want to report it then let it rest now.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - john (18th Jan 2012 - 18:59:38) Well its a pity Councillor James and her chums dont live by the same code .

Re: Councillor Jerrard - helen (19th Jan 2012 - 00:03:34) It is not up to others to answer for Councillor Jerrard, nor is it up to others to think they should answer for Councillor James. Councillor James was sadly ill for a long period, and did not attend meetings because he was ill.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - ant (19th Jan 2012 - 09:37:14) Hello everybody. Everyone seems to have forgotten my questions which I made on Talkback on 8th, 15th and 20th December last year, which was in reply to Don's message Bramshott and Liphook Parish Council By Election 8th December 2011. I asked: A. Had Don Jerrard broken a confidence by disclosing in public a matter which the Hampshire Council had requested not to be disclosed in public and which should be treated in strict confidence. This was to do with a possible new Library which the council had been in discussion with Bohunt Manor and the doctors for nearly two years. B. Did Don Jerrard mislead us by saying that the new Library proposal was dependent on new houses being built at Bohunt Manor C. Was Don Jerrard misleading us about a Nature Reserve at Bohunt Manor which he seemed to say would be affected by a new library there. I asked him to identify and explain which nature reserve this could be but he still has not replied! I know that the World Wildlife Fund owned the property once, but was it declared a nature reserve ? It is curious why Don has not replied at all and therefore is this now a matter for the CODE of Conduct board which others have mentioned already. I think that Don is probably trying to do a good job but people will just continue to be suspicious until he provides answers and better still, just clear the air with others in the council, so come on Don just resolve this so we can all move on.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - helen (19th Jan 2012 - 10:06:49) An answer to the first part of the question, nowhere is it stated Hampshire County Council asked for the matter to be treated in confidence? where did you get that from? Ant, are you just now troublemaking with inside info?

Re: Councillor Jerrard - ant (19th Jan 2012 - 11:07:15) Hi Helen I explained that this came from the GP in the other thread on the 15th December, and even suggested on 20th December that Barbara checked all this with the Hampshire council and the doctors. So yes, I suppose doctors is my inside informant. Hopes this is helpful

Re: Councillor Jerrard - pam (19th Jan 2012 - 16:44:30) Helen Again, I repeat I am not speaking for Anna James, I am speaking for myself and at the risk of being repetitive, because you do not seem to read my postings, I am expressing my own disgust at the content in Councillor Jerrard’s original posting i.e. The Bramshott and Liphook Parish Council By Election 8th December. The remarks were intemperate to say the least and people who hold public office must be accountable for the things they do and say. If Councillor Jerrard had made those comments about any councillor I would have felt the same abhorrence and would expect at the very least that he should justify such comments. I do not know if Anna James feels slighted or whether she feels inclined to report it to the Standards Committee, but that is beside the point. If he has any conscience, Councillor Jerrard should take responsibility for his own actions and answer his critics. Councillor Jerrard is a democratically elected councillor and should show respect to fellow councillors and the parishioners of Liphook alike even if he does not agree with them. Insulting innuendo is divisive, achieves little and damages much. Councillor Dawn Hoskins on the other hand was speaking for Councillor Jerrard by making excuses for his lack of response, one of these being that he was a practising solicitor and might have been too busy to reply. That is speaking on behalf of someone else. Finally, Helen why do you assume that anyone who puts something in a posting on Liphook Talkback that you do not agree with is a troublemaker? I specifically refer to your last posting and I quote “Ant, are you now troublemaking with inside info?” I thought that the idea of Liphook Talkback was to enable people to air their views albeit without insults, derogatory remarks and rudeness and to continue contributing to a Thread for as long as they like, not when you or anyone else feels a line should be drawn under a topic. That is democracy.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - dee (20th Jan 2012 - 14:47:40) Oooh Dawn! are you a bit to touchy, my dear? You say concilor jerrad is to busy being a lawyer to deal with parish matters but he says with his election leaflet he is a retired solicitor and has plenty of time to cleanup Liphook! You say he cant come to Liphook so maybe he should just step down if hes so busy - but its better if he gives us some answers first as you promised he will. You offered to look into his conduct and even report it to the standards group at hampshire council but now you say its none of your business which sounds like you have been got at, Im sorry to say. And Helen, for your info politics has behavior standards by law and its the duty the hole council to make sure that standards are kept and its possible for anyone of the public to make complaints about bad behaviour and not what you say that its only the victim of bullying and lies etc that must do somethiing. And John, if you have problems against Ana James that is still no excuse for jerrads bad behaviour, now is it? And you are always free to report complants and if you have proof then she will be delt with just like jerrad should. And now the newspaper today says the library is shut for even longer, this looks like the start of the end for it to me, But jerrad has already decided that we cant have a better library for Liphook and he wont even let us hear anything about the other options they talked about even tho its our library not his. And now the paper also says our football club is doing so well but cant go up the league because our pitches are to small and has no lights but jerrad tells us that he wont allow the football lights our clubs must have before it can go up. What is going on with our council??? are they suposed to help Liphook or not??? Why is jerrad leading them on this road??? Why is the libdems run by this other lot anyway???

Re: Councillor Jerrard - Steve Miller (20th Jan 2012 - 15:06:14) I didn't understand a word of that! Perhaps this thread has passed it's sell by date.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - peter l (29th May 2012 - 21:05:50) In light of Peter R's new thread, Wake up Call 25th May 2012, I thought that some of you may be interested in this little thread I have found on Mr Jerrard and his antics. Reading through all this stuff again is just mind blowing, and so many questions simply remain unanswered by this Councillor. Can someone please explain what this man intends to do in his position of responsibility as our representative.

Re: Councillor Jerrard - Peter R (13th Jun 2012 - 17:48:09) Jane You will see from Mary's reply to Cllr Jerrard's posting and other replies that there are people in Bramshott & Liphook who do not like what is going on at the moment.

Reply to THIS thread
Talkback Home