CLLR Jon Barry obviously needs no help in dealing with the nonsensical attacks by Cllr Ian Barker on the subject of the recent council decision to advertise the Chief Executive's post (currently filled on a temporary basis). Cllr Barry's recent letters demolished the criticism and raised some relevant points. But Barker's arguments are so contrived and unreasonable that it isn't enough just to squash them.

I think we are entitled to some answers. Why are Barker and his Labour cronies so anxious to put off the day when fresh blood comes in at the top of the Council? Why are they trying to prolong the present unsatisfactory situation? Do the Labour councillors fear the consequences for themselves if someone were to be appointed who would look with a fresh eye at what has gone on in Lancaster over the last few years?

Cllr Barry mentioned the expensive and, as far as anyone knows, unjustified removal of Town Clerk and Chief Executive John Burrows. Does the Labour fear of a new Town Clerk and Chief Executive give a clue about the Burrows mystery? Was Burrows looking at things with a fresh eye? Had he started to ask uncomfortable questions?

I offer a thought. In February 1997, not long before the Councillors and officers started moves to get rid of Burrows, the Council agreed in principle to settle the £1 million law suit with Noel Edmonds. That meant that, even with some foot-dragging, there would be a final settlement by the end of 1997, at least two years earlier than expected. That meant in turn that all the Council's Crinkley Bottom documents would be coming back from the lawyers by the beginning of 1998, again at least two years early. But Burrows was gone before he could look at them. Probably just a co-incidence.

Mike Ford

Silverdale

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.