LETTERS – Letter was uncalled for

I wish to make it clear that I am writing this letter as a private individual and an elector of South Holland District Council and not on behalf of Long Sutton Parish Council.

I was surprised to see in July 21, 2022 edition of the Voice that the Vice-Chairman of South Holland District Council has had the time to write such a long letter to directly and indirectly publicly criticise an employee of Local Government when there are other pressing matters to deal with.

Surely the loss of the integrity of conservation areas in the town centres in South Holland, the loss of major businesses in Spalding town centre, litter, the viability of the South Holland Centre, closed public toilets, the car parking charges debacle, unserviceable car park payment machines and urgent attention to the creaking infrastructure of all the large settlements in South Holland are more important matters for his and SHDC’s attention.

Maybe he and his colleagues should also address the continued resistance of SHDC to the adoption of the Community Infrastructure Levy. If it were in place now Long Sutton would be receiving hundreds of thousands of pounds directly to invest in our parish instead of zero under the present S106 fund which is inaccessible.

In his letter the Vice-Chairman of SHDC makes reference to the apology I sent to the UKSPF Team however, he failed to advise that I had also provided evidence to support that, at the time of my statement to Coun J Tyrrell at the June meeting of the Long Sutton Parish Council, I believed my comments to be correct.

It is clear that the Vice-Chairman was made aware of my apology so I would assume he was also made aware of the evidence I provided with screenshots to UKSPF that the emails he quotes were in fact hidden in spam and were not evident by the email title from the other spam emails of which there were many.

I have provided the screenshots to the Voice to support this.

I also question why the Vice-Chairman has chosen to attempt to infer I am incompetent in a public newspaper rather than a letter to my employer?

Being a clerk to a council does not remove my employment rights.

It is not the first time South Holland District Council and some of the elected members have sought to unfairly and publicly discredit me.

I have been victim to this behaviour many times over the years including:

• A public apology to me from SHDC when incorrect statements were read at a public meeting by Coun Tyrrell and printed in local newspapers advising that I was wrong in relation to the public consultation of the proposed introduction of parking fees in Long Sutton which they had to retract.

• A current and a former elected member of SHDC have in the past formed the Lincolnshire Independent Party to force me from my employment in which they succeeded but were made to make a substantial settlement to me because of their misogynistic behaviour.

• Being subjected to vitriolic and disgusting abuse on social media which was wholly uncalled for with the instigator of the vile and unwarranted abuse against me publicly supported on social media by Coun Tyrrell.

I will never forgive or forget those who enjoyed the uncalled-for public annihilation of me and the distress caused to my daughter. I hope you or your children are never subjected to such disgusting behaviour. It is not pleasant I assure you.

However, I do now anticipate because of the Vice-Chairman’s letter and my subsequent reply that I will no doubt be subject of detrimental conversations again on social media. A letter that was unwarranted and uncalled for.

Would the Vice-Chairman wish to confirm if he would call out an employee of SHDC in such a way?
I would guess not because of the HR department and the unions would bring him to task but it appears I am fair game as a mere parish council employee with little means of redress.

I also wonder if Coun Tyrrell made known to him his response at the meeting that it was up to me as clerk and for the council to find out any information and policies regarding South Holland by going on the SHDC website and that it was not his duty as our elected ward member to inform us of SHDC matters.

Following this advice maybe Coun Tyrrell could publicly clarify the following because it is not on the SHDC website:

• How he voted at the SHDC meeting regarding the proposed closure of the Long Sutton Market?

• If he could advise how to navigate the planning system to build multiple dwellings outside of the Planning Boundary?

• If he financially benefits in any way from funding raised for the Men’s Shed?

District councillors seem to have forgotten they are paid handsomely in expenses to fairly represent the electors of their wards not to use their position to benefit themselves or to publicly demean a resident regarding their paid employment and the unpaid volunteer members of a parish council.

The district councillors are our paid public servants not the other way around.

Karen Treacher
SHDC Elector