This Domain Name, its goodwill and established presence on the World Wide Web, will now re-exist due to do popular request  having completed its original mission - to encourage the Town Council to establish its own interactive  website  as part of its quest to become a Quality Town Council.

Their new site is now online, though not interactive.

Beaminster Town Council  A Blot on the ‘scutcheon?  Balloting  or “Black-balling? in view of the inclusion of the new Hon Tpersons protocol on its newwebsite  (which site is a vecessary adjunct to the town council’s pretensions to ”Quality Status”!) 

 it is pertinent to remind citizens that An ctual instance that occurred recently, still leaves a bitter taste in the collective mouth of Beaminster,

  

A man was blackballed because he was deemed unacceptable by some member/s of council.

 

 Is it any wonder that some people feel that rather than promoting brotherly love and civility, this ancient Masonic oractice results in applicants being rejected for no good reason?

 

What should be done, to rid us once and for all of this shameful practice of “black-balling”?

 

 Does it promote harmony or justiceto allow any single member of the Council to reject not only a single candidate, but also the opinions of all those who signed their names as recommenders of the candidate plus any or all the members of the “investigating committee” that approved the candidate?).

 

Especially when the secrecy seems to work a traumatic hardship on a blameless man apparently worthy of being honoured by his peers?

 

The occasional failure of the system to work complete justice may be laid to the individuals using it. The person/s who casts such a ballot, then, upon an applicant, wields a tremendous power.

 

(Once again, do we really want each council member to be able to reject a man because he/she believes the candidate is in one of those categories described by other so-called eminent citizens as “not the right sort”?

 

This new protocols allows, even encourages, this use of the ballot for personal vendettas. ( This is not news here in Beaminster – anecdotes abound here too!)  An ill-used “black ball”, and no one can deny that this occurs, diminishes those who casts it, and blackens what should be the good name of BEaminster  - but there is better way to ballot!

 

Our current ballot procedure allow members of council who may be extremely enthusiastic about a petitioner to have their desires blocked by one other member, who may not even have any substantial reason for his position. In Beaminster Town Council, it takes only 2 members to reject a candidate,  

 is there still some perceived good in allowing those who vote negatively to keep their reasons secret from their fellow councillors.? 

What is that perceived "good reason"?  The tyranny of one member is hidden in secrecy and never to be disputed, because he is supposed to know more than the unanimous vote of all his brethren....Only tyrants in history ever worked with such secrecy!"

 

Every negetive should to be justified or else it should bewholly disregarded, and the justification should  required of the council member/s voting to reject a candidate.

 "The best way to preserve a falsity is to keep it secret; the best way to establish the truth is to expose it to the light." 

The answer lies in the the normal and powerful democratic procedure , laid down by Sstatute or all Council meetings in its standing orders.

  

 Members shall vote by show of hands.

                                                                                     


  posted riday 22 Jan 2010