Saturday, 7 August 2010

Another day, another Anglesey County Council scandal

Cllr Aled Morris Jones (left) and Cllr O Glyn Jones (right)
Another day, another Anglesey County Council scandal. Just days after Cllr Rhian Medi's little outburst in Golwg, it now emerges that two Original Independent-affiliated county councillors have been suspended by the Adjudication Board for breaching the council's Code of Conduct. Cllr Aled Morris Jones was suspended for four months, and Cllr O Glyn Jones for two months.

Cllr Morris Jones, who is actually a Lib Dem though he sits with the Original Independents, was suspended after complaints regarding the way he chaired two meetings in 2009. It is not clear why Cllr O Glyn Jones was suspended. However both are thought to have breached paragraph 8 of the council's Code of Conduct. The relevant sections are attached below:
Paragraph 8 Code of Conduct Anglesey County Council

I know that issues regarding Anglesey County Council tend to give rise to strong feelings, but I would kindly ask you not to post derogatory comments below.


Anonymous said...

Good! It's high time that poor actions led to meaningful punishment consequences.

Anonymous said...

I was at second council meeting referred to in the BBC's report (as a member of the public.) Both councillors chaired the meeting - AMJ as Chariman, GJ as vice-chairman. It was shambolic for a period of 15 mins.

Insider said...

If Clive McGregor's Letter to Goronwy Parry dated 9th June 2010 is anything to go by. One has to wonder how much influence Anglesey County Council had to warrant such a harsh out come considering the breaches were nothing more than minor procedural errors?

It is already well known within the council that the legal department have already influenced the Ombudsman on a number of occasions.
The whole thing stinks.

Anonymous said...

That Clive McGregor again.

What ever the merits if there has been any form of influence then we need a police investigation.

The whole Council Leadership and Legal Department is rotten to the core.

Anonymous said...

So you can judge for yourselves, read the following extract from Clive McGregor's letter to Goronwy Parry after he had kicked him off the executive.

" I currently have concerns about some members of your Group".

"Your Group includes three members against whom the Ombudsman has made findings and who are soon to face Adjudication Panel hearings, the out comes of which may be affected by recent and current events, and will draw bad publicity for them and those associated with them.

I believe that there are steps which might be taken to resolve some of these issues and ease the way for most of the members of your Group to join the Alliance".

Anonymous said...

If this is what we allow to be done to our elected members over minor procedural errors.
Why has nothing been done over the unlawful purchase of Graigwen? The unlawful payment of thousands of pounds a year in councillors allowances? The impunity given to planning scams? ect.
To say nothing about the pack of lies told by Clive McGregor.

Your Right 20:29 the whole Council stinks and if David Bowles thinks he can cover it up he must be barking.

Anonymous said...

You forgot to mention the Director of Legal Services and her blatant Planning scam.
No good Bringing in the Police, We've already got one of them as the Leader of the Council and look what a dogs breakfast he's turned out to be.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone else other than me, know which Officer In the Planning Dept signed his own planning approval notice recently?
I would name him but I believe that is not aloud.

The Great Councillini said...

"I would name him but I believe that is not aloud. [sic]"

If you can show absolute proof - appropriate documents or such like that you could rely on in Court to defend what you say as true - then truth is an absolute defence against a claim of defamation.

So, if you're sure it's true, name away - not even Druid will object if you show him/her the evidence!

Legal said...

23.08 If true..its not unlawful !
Every PP is scrutinised by a senior officer before release.
To prevent ABUSE !

Anonymous said...

The Ajudication Panel`s decisions will be available here this space.
Meanwhile, what of the abuse of the evicted couple by the pipe-puffing Councillor....we have not forgotten ...another investigation is underway !

Legal said...

Let us not forget that the two disgraced suspended Councillors have also breached the trust of those trusting people who elected them in Rhosybol and Aberffraw.

Legal said...

21.02 On what grounds do you say the Graigwen purchase was illegal, sir ?? Please be specific.

Anonymous said...

Oh here we go again. Anglesey Council is once again resembling the Wild West. The good, the bad and the downright ugly. In this instance it seems like the Bad Guys have managed to get one over on the good guys and the Ombusman has listened to those who shout loudest.
Yes, it seems that AMJ has breached Code and quite honestly - SO WHAT!!! Was this not rectified in the next meeting held? What lasting damage was done? Was there any personal gain?
However it seems that if there is a blatent breach of planning guidelines by the Bad Guys we as residents of Anglesey are left with permanent properties spoiling our landscape and our so called representitives laughing all the way to the bank.
Get a grip Mr Ombudsman and Mr Bowles. Rather than waste thousands of pounds bringing a case against these Good Guys, surely it would be better to have put the same amount of effort into managing working relationships between the council for the future good of the Island and not the historic point scoring of rotten councillors.

Anonymous said...

Oh here we go again. Anglesey Council is once again resembling the Wild West.

Thar's a-gonna be a hangin'. Yeeee Harrr

Anonymous said...

11.42 The Adjudication Panel is Wales`s highest disciplinary tribunal for public representatives, it does not suspend lightly. Are you condoning the improper conduct of these two ?

Prometheuswrites said...

I think the point being made is that these two have committed fairly minor infringements (so far as is yet known) while others have committed (allegedly) much more serious (possibly criminal according to some) breaches, yet a blind eye is turned. If a member of the public breaches regulations the IOACC comes down like a ton of bricks on them.
Even-handedness is seen by us the public as a measure of social justice, otherwise it becomes one law for them in power and another law for us - unwanted feudal values.

Anonymous said...

12.10 As you say "so far as is yet known"....the Panel`s decision will shortly make clear the nature and seriousness of the lets not be too quick to condone, or otherwise.

Anonymous said...

What is apparent from Clive McGregors letter to Goronwy Parry is some form of influence took place to make the outcome as damaging as possible for Cllr's Aled Jones and Glyn Jones, for refusing to sign up to the the unlawful "terms of engagement" and join Clive McGregor's failed Alliance.

This is another criminal offence created by Clive McGregor and goes to show that the whole council especially its Legal Department is Corrupt to it's very being.

An Insider said...

On what Grounds do you say Graigwen purchase was illegal, sir. At 11:31.

"Lynn Ball,10th September 2007".

"I was not present at the meeting but later discovered that the Leader, having relinquished the Chair while the item was under consideration. In his absence the Executive ought to have been chaired by the Deputy Leader".

"However, that procedure was not followed and the item was dealt with while the Executive was Chaired by the Chairperson of the Council;albeit that the Deputy Leader was present".

"The procedure which followed not only failed to satisfy the requirements of the Council's Constitution but was also contrary to statute ( Section 11 (7) of the Local Government Act 2000). The decision arising from this unlawful procedure may therefore be challenged.

The defective procedure could not have been remedied by another meet of the Executive as such a meeting would, by then, have fallen foul of the Access to Information Regulations;of itself raising the prospect of challenge".

"Accordingly, I met with the Managing Director and the Corporate Director (Environment and Technical Services)to express my concerns. I advised that the safest course of action would be not to participate in the auction".

Legal said...

16.05....and the pipe-puffing Leader of the time was intent on going ahead regardless............Yes ?

Anonymous said...

Now that's Corruption, sir.
The Council and PWC have tried every thing possible to covered this up and now its out we should BRING IN THE POLICE AND SUMMONS THE WHOLE BLOODY LOT.

An Insider said...


After Lynn Ball's advice. "It was agreed by the three officers present they would continue despite the failings in the process and the potential for challenge"

"The auction went ahead on the 19th July 2007 and the Council acquired the property. Regardless of any shortcomings in the way in which the Executive processed its decision, the Council became contractually obliged to the vendor
and, at this point, I would advise that a properly constituted Executive ratify its earlier decision of the 16th July 2007. For the avoidance of doubt, this will not remedy the flawed decision but is the best that can be done in the circumstances to mitigate that decision".

Anonymous said...

Isn't this one of the cases of Corruption that Councillor Durkin exposed long ago, just to see it brushed under the carpet by PWC and the Council? Sounds like another nail in David Bowles's squeaky clean image of his Senior Officers and his coffin.

An Insider said...

This bring us back full circle to the letter from Clive McGregor to Derrick Jones the Managing Director at the time.

"It pains me greatly but doesn't surprise me given that the issues surrounding Graigwen have eroded whatever trust and confidence there might be between the ruling Administration and certain members of the Corporate Management team. It may be that we require a Police Investigation into the issue as offences of Malfeasance in Public Office would appear to be made out".

This is the allegations Clive McGregor made and then dropped after Bowles told him to. He told Cllr Durkin to do the same but was told in no uncertain term where to get off. Now we know David Bowles and Clive McGregor are so intent in trying to destroy Cllr Durkin's credibility.

Anonymous said...

What about the unlawful claims of Councillor's allowances we keep hearing about? Lets have them out in the open.

Anonymous said...

Oh hear we go again.

Compared to Cllr Alison Halford of Flintshire County Council, who sought to mislead the Ombudsman investigation into the alleged conduct of a fellow councillor and failed to comply with the Ombudsman's request, that she attend for interview about her alleged breach and getting nothing more than. "No further action necessary". It seems its not so much what you know, but who you know.

Cllr Aled Morris Jones and Cllr Glyn Jones breaches, if there were any pail into insignificance when we look closely at Alison Halfords.

Councillors must when participating in meetings or reaching decisions regarding the business of the Authority do so on the basis of the merits of circumstances involved and in the public interest. Having regard to any relevant advice provided by your Authority's officers, in particular by the Authority's Monitoring Officer.

Having disregarded her own advice in the Graigwen fiasco and then used the same disregard to attack Cllr Aled and Glyn Jones speaks volumes for her honesty and integrity and has got to go.

An Insider said...

As Ms Lynn Ball, the Anglesey County Council's Director of Legal Services is again highlighted I the aforementioned comment I think it only fair that we see exactly what Mr David Bowles has to say about her in another one of his extraordinary letter to all Councillor's on 28/05/2010.

"When I took up my appointment as the Council's Interim Managing Director I received a number of complaints against the Monitoring Officer".

"The allegations included claims of undue influence on the Council's external auditors; Impropriety in correspondence/evidence provided to the Public Services Ombudsman in connection with his enquires; Collusion with a leading member of the Opposition; Inconsistent use of discretion on the issue of section 5A/5 reports; Unauthorised/inappropriate discloser of information and the misuse of the Standards Committee to place information in the public domain".

"Such allegations into the competence of such a key post cannot be left unresolved. In response, I instructed a suitably qualified independent person who has been both a Monitoring Officer and Chief Executive, and who worked with the WAO, to carry out a peer review into the work of the Monitoring Officer covering issues such as those above".

"The investigation is now completed and has shown that in all cases Ms Ball acted appropriately and professionally and with a high degree of competence and skill. This is consistent with Ms Ball's high standing outside of the Council and my own review of documents"!

So Who was this suitably qualified independent person who has been both a Monitoring Officer and Chief Executive, and who has worked with the WAO? No-one seems to know! WHERE'S his report? no-one seems to Know!

Does this Bowles take us all for fools? We know he has no concern for Human Rights, nor simply issues, such as the law of the land, But Bowles to take us all for fools only goes to show that he has no concept whatsoever about the people of Anglesey, their culture or their intellect.

If this is what he calls taking Anglesey County Council Forward, god help us.

Go home Bowles your on a loser.

Anonymous said...

comment the Menai blog says lots of tension in Plaid because they have lots of senior politicians and not enough seats to satisfy them, while Labour and LIb Dems have lots of positions but not enough high quality bods to fill'em.

County Councillor Barrie Durkin. said...

Having read the allegations that the Ombudsman and/or the Adjudication Panel could have been influenced to render such a draconian sentence for nothing more than what was a very small procedural error against Cllr Aled Jones & Cllr Glyn Jones, I have to confess, under normal circumstances, even I find that allegation to far fetched, but we are not dealing in normal circumstances, we are not even dealing with honest people either. We are dealing with people who will say and do anything to cover up their dishonesty and that goes for Lynn Ball, Clive McGregor and David Bowles, among others

I do not say this Lightly, but having been the recipient of threats,abuse,and malicious gossip and bogus complaints to the Ombudsman, I can substantiate that Anglesey County Council does interfere and try to influence The Ombudsman in cases made to him.

We have seen the veiled threats made by Clive McGregor towards Aled and Glyn Jones in an attempt to Blackmail them in to doing his bidding, or else but my case is more direct than that more direct, more open, with an air of untouchable arrogance.

15th June 2010, from Ombudsman.
Dear Councillor Durkin.
I refer to previous correspondence concerning my investigation into the complaint made against you by Mr Lewis-Roberts and enclose for your information a copy of a letter I have received from Mr R Jones, the Council's Legal Services Manager and Deputy Monitoring Officer. In view of its contents, I have decided to suspend my investigation until receipt and assessment of the Council's omnibus complaint"

This move and the contents of that letter are only in the interest of the Council and no one else, certainly not mine. Just more evidence of abuse of power in public office.

The letter in question can be read below.

County Councillor Barrie Durkin said...

08-06-2010 Letter from Robyn Jones, to Ombudsman.

"Thank you for your letter of the 2rd June 2010 addressed to the Council's Monitoring Officer. Miss Lynn Ball. I refer to our telephone conversation on the 4th June 2010".

"As mentioned in the telephone conversation, I shall be grateful if the Ombudsman would consider placing this investigation into abeyance as the Council is currently preparing an omnibus complaint against Councillor Durkin in respect of various matters". The matter which is the subject of the complaint by Mr Lewis-Roberts will form part of the omnibus complaint and the Ombudsman may find it more advantageous to deal with all matters together as part of one investigation".

This shows the depths Anglesey County Council will go to to cover up their Officers Dishonesty and now they have being joined by Mr David Bowles, who knows what further depths they will go to.

You may remember Ex Councillor Mr David Lewis-Roberts, he's the Councillor I accused of Corrupting the Planning Committee to help achieve a favourable outcome for the applicant. This he has now admitted to publicly, but not before he was helped to cover the it all up by Ms Lynn Ball's lack of duty.

Insider said...

"Term of Engagement
If Cllr's, Aled and Glyn Jones, had been members of the New Alliance and as the complaint was made by an Alliance member, Cllr John Chorlton, which is a matter of public record. According to the "Terms of Engagement" number 1. "Make no reference, verbally or in writing, in public or in private, to any issues relating to past conduct, allegations or grievances in relation to other Alliance members".

Would Cllr Chorlton now be facing eviction from the Alliance under Term 4. "Any member of the Groups within the Alliance who does not publicly support this stance shall be ejected from their group"?
More to the point. Is this not further evidence of Clive McGregor's black mail tactics to get the two Councillor's to sign up to his "Terms Of Engagement" and join the Alliance" as portrayed in his letter.

In any event what we are witnessing now is gutter politic's at it's worst and an example that the unlawful "Terms of Engagement are unworkable.

Anonymous said...

7.39 If Insider really is genuinely an Insider who knows what is going on, as certainly appears...what is the point in the Alliance painfully carrying on and putting its Council through this agony ?
The Recovery Board should be called in !

Insider said...

If Anglesey genuinely wishs to retain a Council and an honest one at that, the Recovery Board will need to be called in as what is being portrayed on this Blog is only the tip of the iceberg and the rotting decay of a Council

Whoopla said...

Why on earth would the Omudsman consider it fair to put one complaint in abeyance in response to a future complaint, not yet submitted, by the Council?

It is the Ombudsman's duty to treat complaints on the evidence submitted. But that is the problem - the Ombudsman is a non-democratic organisation that is demonstrably massively biased in favour of local authorities and not the public interest. Have a look at

If one organisation should be abolished to reduce the deficit, it's the Local Services Ombudsman for Wales - a total waste of time and money, and an affront to the concept of justice.

County Councillor Barrie Durkin. said...


"Party Leader slams "harsh" treatment by adjudicator".

Blackmail, Interference, Bulling and Double standards. Both these Councillors were not just dealt harshly for their minor procedural error, they were treated this way because they would not succumb to David Bowles & Clive McGregor tyranny.

What about the unlawful action over Graigwen. The unlawful payments of councillors allowances. Lynn Ball's failure to adhere to her planning conditions until forced too. The lies being told by Clive McGregor and David Bowles to bolster up their Failing Alliance. What's Been done about that lot. I'll tell you what. nothing. Absolutely nothing, Just the usual cover up.

What's been done about the very serious allegations, that Council Officers are involver in a mega fraud involving millions of pounds worth of housing Grant Monies not just Anglesey County Council money and our money but that of the Welsh Assembly's. As far as I know, Nothing again.

It's with this in mind and the fact that Anglesey County Council is being run with an air of unlawfulness, that I am asking the Assembly and the Recovery Board to take over the running of the Council as soon as possible, without David Bowles, who has, in my opinion done more damage to the running of our Council than anyone could ever imagine.

In answer to 11:25.
Yes the Council have interfered and influenced the Ombudsman in my case.
Cllr, Barrie Durkin.

Anonymous said...

13.30 So he`s not going to show up at Sioe Mon then....pity....he might have learnt a thing or two ??
We suppose that CMcG will be there, with his merry men ?

Anonymous said...


Thanks for the link to Ombudsman Watch - very interesting.

Prometheuswrites said...

Following on from the link to 'Ombudsmanwatch' I found this article:

Old(ish) history maybe, but the issues are current.

Also interesting was the second comment found on this follow-up (comments)page:

This made think of the Craigwen affair - as in: who owned the property, what's happening to it, is it being developed, and if so who are the developers?

PS. I'm not having a whinge here about the race-track or it's developers, (not living close enough to be able to hear it).

Part of me likes it that this facility has been developed and presumably it brings in tourism and makes a profit. I believed that the track had been extended and that as part of the extention, noise prevention measures were taken, (Earth banks & baffle fences) - however I'd like to hear from someone one who lives in the vicinity as to how it effects them.

And no, I wouldn't want to take on (or besmirch) the Bodorgan Estates. It's not passed my notice that the coastal footpath bypasses their land.

Anonymous said...

Graigwen was bought by IACC for the principal purpose of acquiring its garden as an access to the Council`s residential development land at its rear....that land was otherwise landlocked.Having acquired the property, IACC will obtain PP for the development of its own land, and doubtless, afterwards, sell what remains of Graigwen.
The project was promoted by the then Leader, and local member, the pipe-puffing Councillor.
A really splendid deal for the Council.
The only other bidder at the auction was the honourable member for Llanerchymedd, incidentally....bidding against his own Council.
Interesting facts.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the information.

I was under the impression that there was already access to the land behind. Was it not wide enough or something?

Still in dark as to who was previous owner. Guess the unspoken question is something about possible pecuniary interests of decision makers or relationships to such.

What's the score on the council buying and selling property - it's not the same thing as investing and preserving assets - (like the Shell Fund!)

Anonymous said...

@16:02 - The only other bidder at the auction was the honourable member for Llanerchymedd, incidentally....bidding against his own Council. Interesting facts.

If he's a councillor is he allowed to bid? But was he actually bidding to buy, or was he bidding to push the price up on behalf of someone else?

Anonymous said...

18.27 The access was not sufficient. This was ransom territory. The previous owner was unaware. The identity of the previous owner is not germaine.
18.35 Nothing to stop a Councillor bidding in his own right, like anyone else. He was not bidding it up for the Council was he ! He was not bidding it up for the owner against his own Council was he !
So he must have seen the opportunity to acquire it himself....and squeeze the Council subsequently for the ransom ??
What do you think ?

Insider said...

Dont get to carried away with the nitty grities.
Its not a matter of whether the Council had the right to purchased Graigwen or not.Its the unlawful way they went about it and the way the Council go about attacking and abusing others who do something so insignificant its hardly worth talking about.
Double Standards that is.
A law for Senior officers and a different one for the Elected members. (well some of them anyway).
Lets not forget it was Lynn Ball who declared it "unlawful". It was Clive McGregor who said there was "Malfeasance" and then both took part in covered it all up.

For those who do not know. The Council where prepared to go to £420.000 to get Graigwen. they brought it for £300.000.

Anonymous said...


Do you know how much it would have gone for if Mr Schofield had not bid?

What was the reserve?

Inside Insider ! said...

What a splendid deal for the Council ? Bought...not brought, Insider ?
19.57 You ask too many unanswerable or irrelevant questions.
An Inside Insider.

Insider said...

The reserve was £300.000.

Anonymous said...

Well there's the unanswerable question answered.
Now what was that about irrelevant?

Anonymous said...

OK, but whats the relevance of it ??

Anonymous said...

Dewar "Twaddle Councillor" I refer to your
letter reproduced 9th Aug 00.20 Bd - RJ.

You say that the the Planning Committee were corrupted. Is it notr time you told us all who the Corruptable Councillors were because they must be as guilty as the corruptor....Come On Mr. Twaddle what is your evidence for both sides of the story.

Or is it just more Twaddle?

Anonymous said...

Gracie Jones got a bag of little stones for helping a councillor. She thought they were un-cut diamons but gues what, typical of Anglesey...they were just little stones!!

Prometheuswrites said...


I believe that the question about 'relevance' concerns the situation where a councillor bids against his own council in a property auction.

Questions could arise, (and indeed been alluded to in earlier posts), as to his motives.

If he were trying to push the price up then why would he do this? For his own benefit or the benefit of the previous owner? If neither, then what is the motive?

Maybe he wanted to buy the property himself, but given the access issue and the importance of such to the councils development plans, then could there not be a conflict of interests based on prior knowledge?

I can't see how it would be of benefit to the council for the council to pay more than the reserve, if there are no other bidders.

Now given that the reserve was £300K and the council paid £300K then all is fine, as far the cost to the council goes, as Mr Schofield's bids did not impact on the final auction price.

Now I suspect you are correct in saying that some of the questions being asked on the blog are not germane to the issue, but that is not the same as not being relevant.

When an authority make inquiries in the course of an investigation one reason those enquiries are made is to eliminate doubt, uncover motivations and remove people from being under suspicion.

The answers to these questions may not have a direct bearing on the final outcome, but they are relevent to exploring and understanding the full picture.

It's one of ways science and police investigations (should) operate - make a hypothesis based on the available data and look for evidence that the hypothesis is not the case.

Anonymous said...

The issue that has been raised is in effect the non-issue of the relevance of the reserve price in the particular context.
It is not relevant, its a digression.
As to the motives of the Councillor, he was not there to benefit anyone but himself, to try and acquire a property which had the benefit of ransom potential against the Council who were otherwise landlocked. If IACC were prepared to bid to £420K and managed to secure it at £300K...see the point ?

Insider said...

Sorry to spoil your fun on this, but the Council have already stated in a letter dated 8th June 2007 that "The property does not hold any kind of ransom value to the Council. The property may present an opportunity to unlock the land to the rear, however, this alone is not enough for to consider paying a ransom value figure".

Authorisation was give to the Council's Agent "to attend the auction and bid up yo a figure of £410.000 to secure the property"

Anonymous said...

12.55 Thank you. We wonder who Insider really is and how he/she has access to such information ? So some senior valuation officer or District valuer, including the portfolio holder for the Council thought it was worth £410K given its strategic value visaviz the Council`s adjoining development land and would have been ready and able to justify this amount to the ever-watchful Council auditors.
So they managed to acquire it for only £300K.....a bargain then.
It appears ES stopped bidding just short of this. I think this is all that can usefully be said ?
What is illegal about this affair ?

Cllr Barrie Durkin. said...

Today's Daily Post.

Islands Mayor campaign Launched.

I would like to thank Cllr John Chorlton, for now agreeing with me that "Anglesey Council need strong Leadership", and that "We need a Leader that can deliver a five-year manifesto which will provide a degree of much needed stability both to the electorate and our staff and support services"

Having shown as an Alliance member his dissatisfaction with the Current Leader Clive McGregor, under the "Terms of Engagement" Will Clive McGregor sack Cllr Chorlton from the Alliance or will Cllr Chorlton s vote of no confidence compel Cllr McGregor to resign?

Anonymous said...

13.16 IF (IF) we must have an elected Mayor, which personally I would not favour for putting too much power in one pair of hands, the candidates must not be a current or past member of this Council.
For obvious reasons !
He/She must come with clean hands.

Insider said...

Thank you too.

People shouldn't be to surprised when they find out, there are some of use who know exactly what's going on and what we are taking about

Anonymous said...

Councillor John Chorlton has shown that the Alliance is in total taters. With weak Leadership, Rhian Medi's stance and the unlawful Terms of Engagement" this out bust by Cllr Chorlton has finish the Alliance in it's present for for good.

Time to go Clive.

Anonymous said...

With respect, with veiled arrogance like that, Insider must either be an Officer, or a member of the Council....divulging privilaged information

Insider said...


Anonymous said...

Has anyone read the Letter in the Daily Post Today By Councillor Glyn Jones?

;-) said...

So you don't get the relevance of asking a question about whether the auction price was pushed up above the reserve,(or not).

The fact (allegedly) that it wasn't doesn't invalidate the relevance of asking the question in the first place, as the answer to the question about the amount of the reserve wasn't answered at the time the original question was asked. Now is that not clear? or do we digress again?

It's getting like that slogan on Harley-Davidson tee-shirts, "if I have to explain it, you wouldn't understand anyway" :)

Insider with better things to do than educate you said...

Best not bother, your a million miles away from what the Graigwen fiasco was all about and if you haven't got it now, dare say you never will, or don't want to.

Anonymous said...

Some ugly abusive comments from ugly abusive people here, regrettably.

Insider again. said...

No not ugly abusive comment from ugly abusive people ( unless your talking about yourself that is?) just some straight talking honesty for once.

Anonymous said...

Anon 15.46

I haven't seen the Post.
What does the letter say?

Anonymous said...

From what we hear about the dishonest surrounding the Ombudsman,Clive McGregor, David Bowes and now Robyn Jones. It appears that both suspended Councillor have also become victims of Anglesey County Council's Dishonesty.

Anonymous said...

I think the words to use are, yov bin ad ova boy'oes.

Anonymous said...

The only scandal I see here is that of the Ombudsman and the Adjudication panel.

There's much bigger scandal than this to come that's for sure.