Christine Lawton is a district councillor and, as the portfolio holder for housing, is legally responsible for seeing that her officers carry out their duties professionally, diligently and honestly.
For this work, and for the 30 or so meetings she attends annually, Coun Lawton is paid £11,957 a year, plus expenses.
According to the 2011 Localism Act, Christine Lawton has a duty:
1. to act solely in the public interest
2. to be accountable to the public for her decisions and actions and submit to whatever scrutiny is appropriate to her office
3. to be as open as possible about the decisions and actions she takes and to give reasons for her decisions
4. to take steps to resolve any conflicts arising in a way that protects the public interest
5. to promote and support these principles by leadership and example, and act in a way that ensures public confidence.
Unfortunately, in my experience, Coun Lawton does none of these things.
For the past year, I have been helping a friend who has been in dispute with the council‘s housing department over its decision to allow his neighbour, without his knowledge or approval, to annex and fence-off most of his front garden.
Despite contradictory statements from housing officers, their failure to explain why the decision was taken or why he was never consulted, an admission of untruths and the invention of non-existent legislation by their own complaints officer, Coun Lawton appears to have turned a blind eye to such serious issues of professional probity.
Housing officers have never bothered to visit the site to inspect the problem themselves while Coun Lawton has made no attempt to excuse or explain the council’s breach of its own tenancy agreement, to contact the tenant before or after her “investigation” of his complaints and has declined a face-to-face meeting.
Not exactly a shining example of the “selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership” that the law demands.
Name and address supplied
