Roger Edwards

I assume this is a question?

 

To be fair, nobody can be responsible for closing down a forum or website other than the administrator or host in this case only 'Roderick Robinson' from the BR website is responsible for his own actions.

 

If you read the rules of most forums including this one you will see that the author of any post is responsible for it's content.

(You acknowledge that all posts made to these forums express the views and opinions of the author and not those of any staff member or administrator of Belmont Voice and hence cannot be held liable.

By proceeding to post you agree to these rules and must obey them at all times)

 

By refusing to remove the said email would not in my opinion, rendered the admin libel.

 

My personal opinion is that he possibly did not have the time to continue with the site and took the easy way out! thus also gaining a certain amount of sympathy, especially in the manner in which he did.

 

I think it is unfair to try to lay the blame at Cllr Powell's door in this instance.

 

The difference between Belmont Voice and the BR website in mainly in the way we allow comments to be made, in the case of the BR website this was done by emailing the admin your views and personal opinion, then he would edit that view of yours to suit himself, then publish his edited version, which I know happened on many cases.

 

Here at Belmont Voice the forums are LIVE! there is very little editing, if any at all and any comment/post/opinion is published exactly how the author intended it to be.

 

So I am sorry but I cannot see how Cllr Powell can be solely blamed for the closure of the BR website in this instance.

Collin

What is being said by persons in the know Roderick Robinson was threatened with legal action by Cllr. Powell, because I belive that truth hurt.

On 31/10/2010 at 14:57, Glenda Powell said:

Colin - Having just read three replies to your post 'putting the record straight' I wish to respond to the accusations made about me by Roger Edwards.

 

1. I am accused of in his words 'slagging off' Mavis Edwards, if you look back I refused to comment to the allegations made about Mavis. I also asked you to take the posts off BV as Mavis was very ill with no hope of recovery.

 

2. In regards to Cllr Phil Edwards I only said what he himself told me, when I ask him to join BV and that was 'he would he consider coming onto the site when it was more established'. You reiterated that he said that yourself on this site in the last twenty four hours .

 

3. I have never 'slagged off' Parish Cllr Schoffer on BV, the only time I went back at him was in a confidential email sent to all parish councillors and myself, with almost daily updates of Mavis condition. It was Mark Schoffer who was 'slagging Phil Edwards off' in one of these emails I 'replied to all' and asked where was his compassion at this time (I had just heard Mavis had died)

 

4. In regard to the BR website I DID NOT close it down, it is not in my power to do that. I advised the web admin that:-

a. A fifteen year old girl was to young to be on the website.

b.That I had infact been advised that it was someone else who had written it.

c. I ask that he removed the emails as the content was libellous, as I work closely with the legal dept on a committee at council and they advised me that was the case. As the BR web admin was unsure who had written the email from 15 year old, and I advised him who the other people were although they used an alias they had infact email me for help as it was their private email address. Because of this the BR admin chose to close the email facility down to protect his website.

 

The local parish election:-

 

I did not, or could not force a parish council election! many people asked me what to do to ask for an election as they did not want anyone co-opted onto the PC. I advised that if anyone called for an election there would be a cost involved, if they decided to co-opt no charge would be forthcoming. I was not advised until three days before the closing date that an election had been requested, and that there were two other candidates had come forward. I WAS ASKED BY MANY RESIDENTS TO STAND FOR THE ELECTION so I did.

 

I would not be allowed to use BV as an election tool, there are strict rules about an election that all candidates have to abide by.

 

I politely ask that Roger Edwards to get his facts right before commenting on my conduct.

Cllr Powell.

With regards to 4 & 5, did you or did you not threaten the editor of Belmont Rural with legal action, that action of yours closed down the site, this is a very well know, so do not tell porkies.

With regards to 1, 2 & 3, you are living in cuckoo land, to my knowledge Cllr Edwards & Schoffer do not belong to this website, and you were in a position to put the facts right. But no, you sat on your laurels and wanted to destroy those two Councillors, so you did not put the facts right,

As I said previously you have taken over this site and made it your own, and this can be seen by the number of entries you have made, you are very biased and anti other fellow councillors in fact you are for yourself and very selfish.

On 30/10/2010 at 11:23, Colin James said:

To put the record straight.

When the original Belmont Voice Website back in 2007, I bumped into Cllr Powell and told her my intentions for a more up to date forum website which we now have. She said to me that she was thinking of setting up her own website, where as local people within the ward could contact her and visa-versa, so I suggested that she could use this site as her own base (so to speak) although, now, maybe I wish I had made it more clear to her as she honestly believed that the site was hers and advertised the fact.

Recently, what with a few people suggesting the the site is biased towards Cllr Powell, I have exchanged several emails with Cllr Powell reminding her that the site was actually mine (all paid for and I set it up) and now this could be the reason behind some of the other councillors perhaps not joining as one member has suggested.

This is probably my fault in all fairness to Cllr Powell as I should of made it more clear in the beginning that BV could be used by her to be in contact with her constituents, along with any other Councillor, so there has clearly been a misunderstanding somewhere along the line, but no monies have been paid by her, so I am a little confused to how this was misunderstood.

Belmont Voice the site and domain name are solely owned by myself, nobody else is involved in any way shape of form, hence my post earlier. The site, the graphics, and logo etc were all created by myself and are my copyright.

I sincerely apologise to Cllr Powell for any embarrassment that may have been caused to her, although I did think I had made it clear in the beginning, that said, this site is here for ALL residents and Councillors to use as a vehicle in which to communicate with each other and have serious debates.

Belmont Voice (BV) is an independent website community for discussions and issues related to the Belmont Area/Ward.

 We do not represent anyone or any organisation.

 Publish your thoughts and opinions on news, issues, planning and developments within the Belmont ward.

(in the main this will relate to the BRPC but may also relate to HCC)

 As residents of the Belmont Ward (Belmont - Hunderton - Newton Farm) you are invited to take part in local discussions about the environment, surrounding area's and where we live.

If you do not live within the ward, you are still invited to register in join in our discussions, if you live in Hereford there may be issues that you would like to highlight or raise.

 You have direct access to other residents and your Councillors via this website.

 We will endeavor to publish all the latest news and issues as soon and and often as we can.

 This site can be used as your communication with each other without having to leave your home!

 Remember!! If you start or reply to any topic or post YOU are responsible for your content.

 Please join in and feel free to start a new topic or discussion.

 Above all please be polite to others and observe the guidelines and rules of this site.

I now hope that this clarifies everything and we can now continue to get back to posting.

Colin,

I now believe you that this site is yours, and I withdraw my allegation of saying you were a liar, and its Glenda's website.

The site is a good, a little complicated, but it has been taken over by Glenda Powell, she allowed Cllr Schoffer and Cllr Edwards to be slagged especially as Mavis Edwards was dieing. Most of the entries are by Glenda Powell, and you could say she has taken over with her friends.

We do need a community website but one without Glenda, so that other Councillors and residents could participate without fear of being slandered and slagged. I feel although it is your website, she has taken it over as her own, and while she is on this site I doubt if you would get any councillors or decent residents to participate.

Also most people know she closed down Belmont Rural email, which was a great loss to the community, and this site could have taken over if it was not for Glenda Powell.

She forced a parish council election with the help of this site, only to discover that she was not wanted. I ask, has she attended Belmont Parish meetings and if so how many? I doubt if any, or possibly one, the good people are saying she has lost the plot.

You have my commiserations.

Well you could NOT be further from the truth, THIS WEBSITE IS NOT CLLR POWELLS!!!!!

 

I PERSONALLY SET UP THIS WEBSITE OF MY OWN FREE WILL AND TOTALLY AT MY OWN EXPENSE.

 

THIS SITE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CLLR POWELL IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM! SO BEFORE YOU START MAKING FALSE STATEMENTS MAY I SUGGEST THAT YOU GET YOUR FACTS CORRECT.

 

I HAVE RUN WEBSITE AND FORUMS FOR OVER 12 YEARS, SO I THINK THAT QUALIFIES ME.

 

THAT SAID, TO BE FAIR TO CLLR POWELL, SHE IS THE ONLY ACTIVE COUNCILLOR HERE! HENCE WHY SHE SEEMS TO GET ALL THE FLACK! I PERSONALLY THINK ITS DISGUSTING THAT NONE OF THE OTHER CLLRS ARE NOT REPRESENTING US ALL ON HERE, ARE THEY NOT PROFESSIONALS?

 

AS FOR THE BR WEBSITE, I DID NOT AGREE WITH THE WAY IN WHICH ALL POSTS AND EMAILS WERE EDITED TO SUIT THE EDITOR, "FREEDOM OF SPEECH" LIVES HERE! (THAT'S WHAT FORUMS ARE FOR!) AS ALL POSTS INCLUDING THIS ONE ARE LIVE AND ARE REAL OPINIONS OF OUR MEMBERS.

THE BR EDITOR/ADMINISTRATOR OBVIOUSLY GOT A LITTLE FRIGHTENED AND CLOSED HIS SITE, IN MY OPINION HE WAS CLEARLY UNSURE AND HAD NO CONFIDENCE AND WHAT HAD BEEN SAID ON THE SITE, OTHERWISE THE SITE WOULD STILL BE ACTIVE TODAY.

 

ITS EASY TO VERBALLY ATTACK OTHER MEMBERS ESPECIALLY WHEN ALL THESE MEMBERS HIDE BEHIND ALIASES, I HAVE SEEN THIS FOR YEARS ON MANY FORUMS, REAL HONEST PEOPLE WITH GOOD CONSTRUCTIVE COMMENTS AND CRITICISM

USE THEIR REAL NAMES, HENCE WHY ALIASES ARE OFTEN NOT TAKEN SERIOUS NAD USUALLY IGNORED.

 

THIS FORUM IS HERE TO STAY, AS FOR THE MEMBERS, THEY WILL COME AND GO FROM MY EXPERIENCE...

I would think that the only reason other Councillors do not join this website, when Mavis Edwards was dying she and Cllr Edwards were being slagged off, Cllr Schoffer was slagged off, so I would think it be a good reason for Councillors not to joining this website. The other reason is that Glenda Powell is on hear.

In response to megilleland, I have to agree with their comments that this site is biased as we recently have seen with the Belmont Rural Website. When the situation got difficult Councillor Powell as we all well know threatened the site so it was closed down due to these. This thus left democracy floating in the air, what happened to freendom of speach, all the comments made were true and factual, this site was useful where issues could be posted and a real debate started and of course the Parish Council would also take note of these and try to address them.

 

I wonder if people really know what is going on with Glenda Powell you will all shortly find out?

 

END

To BELMONT re megilland it was I who wrote the reply and not megilland just to put the facts right, the reply does not show up that clearly and one gets the impression that megilland replied to megilland.

I certainly agree with you’re your comments, and with ref to “I wonder if people really know what is going on with Glenda Powell you will all shortly find out†I am excited and I cannot wait.

ame='Glenda Powell' date='27 October 2010 - 03:03 PM' timestamp='1288184580' post='657']

To Belmont re megilleland it was I Roger who wrote the reply and not megilleland, just to put the facts right

 

People may remember that a meeting was called four years ago (February 2006) to highlight the threat to open space at Argyll Rise by development from Herefordshire Housing. At that time it was agreed to pursue an application to turn this piece of land into a town green and protect it for future generations.

 

Newton Farm Town Green Action Group made an initial application to create this green and following a public inquiry in July 2007, it transpired that we met all the criteria (4 points), except one, which was that the residents were using the land "by right" and not “as of right". Herefordshire Housing was delighted with this result and urged Herefordshire Council to refuse the application for town green status.

 

Surprisingly, ignoring the inquiry inspector's report, Herefordshire Council's lawyer recommended that the Council registered it as a town green. However, Hereford Housing's QC at the council meeting (November 2007) argued that Herefordshire Council would be wrong in going against the inspector's report. The Council followed the inspector's advice and rejected the application.

 

It would appear that the saving of this piece of land would be lost, except that NFTGAG had a second application in hand, due to a change in the law, and this was submitted to Herefordshire Council for consideration (October 2007). Herefordshire Housing is again opposing the second application and NFTGAG are submitting new evidence that we hope will overturn the original decision to not create the green.

 

Due to the protracted delay in dealing with this second application, a complaint was made against Herefordshire Council through the Local Government Ombudsman. This has resulted in the Council ensuring it gets advice on the law of town and village greens from one of the country's most experienced barristers in this field, Mr Vivian Chapman QC.

 

The hearing is to be held before the Regulatory Committee at Brockington, Hafod Road on Tuesday 2nd November 2010 at 2.00pm. Mr Vivian Chapman QC will advise the Committee with Miss Morag Ellis QC for Herefordshire Housing and Christopher Whitmey for Newton Farm Town Green Action Group.

 

Any public support for this cause on the day would be extremely welcome.

To Mr MEGILLELAND

I only hope that our 3 local district councillors do not say anything, as I fear if you do win, the Regulatory Committee may be classed as favouring there fellow councellors. Therefor it could be an apeal.

I suspect that the 3 local district councillors will not read this message as this website is gradually dieing because of lack of support as we all know who close down the Belmont Rural Website. The only person to read this will be Cllr Powell, as this is her website and is biased in favour of her. In reality this website is not a true representative voice of the people of Belmont, Hunderton, or Newton Farm. This website is Glenda Powell, you can tell by all the entries.

Merryhill cottage has it own soak way, the tank has been emptied, the liquid from pipe is being tested every week, I have been advised Persimmon is persuing the matter with the owners of the other properties so it is in their hands now

Glenda,

Could I leave it in your hands, so that Persimmons do not brush it under the carpet.

Glenda,

Has the sewage saga died a natural death, as I went round the pond yesterday evening and I can still see liquid coming out of that pipe. Admittingly a lot cleaner, but should it or should it go to a soak away.

I am far from perfect, but my response was a sarcastic one as you were the one who started the personal insults by saying I should engage brain before you speak.

 

I still stand by my original post that I believe there was some discrimination, maybe it was in the tone of the remarks.

 

We will have to agree to disagree I'm afraid, but nevertheless the point being that there is raw sewage contaminating the pools and it needs rectifying as a matter of urgency.

 

Councillor Schoffer has already pointed out that this is a health hazard.

Victor,

We call it a truce, I may have jumped in with both feel with you.

Pax Dominus Verbiscum.

It is the manner in which the discrimination was written and also this suggesting English fisherman are somewhat different?

does the above remark not qualify then?

 

Your wrong sorry but you are, anyone can see just by reading this that "Our Eastern European Friends and the term English" suggests that this group of people are different fisherman? I know a couple of local fisherman and they have often taken fish home to eat too.

 

 

May I suggest you read this "Racialisation of central and east European migrants in Herefordshire" I have attached the pdf for you to engage your brain and read it, once your brain is fully engaged try learning to spell correctly too. (Mr Politically Incorrect)

 

 

While you are at it have a read of this article, his thoughts were along the same lines as yours funny enough, politically correct!

Politically incorrect article

On Page 2 Leila Dawney quotes "Central and Eastern European migrants."

I also think that her report may have racialist tendencies quote “attracting white Christian Migrants from the new A8 European member statesâ€Â. Food for thought.

The news paper uses these words “Eastern European thieves†which is politically correct,

But by specifying Rumanian and Eastern European Gypsies, he is racialist by specifying the race and branding a type of person. The law states you cannot specify Race, Religion Colour.

The term Eastern European thieves as used by the news paper, or as used by Mark Schoffer “friendsâ€Â, was not offensive and was correct, also they are our friends, but they do like to eat fish like carp, were I like salmon and trout plus cod, please note carp is not sold in our shops.

I can only suggest you read your publications you quoted.

I am very sorry I may not have had the education you have had, and I know I make the odd spelling mistake, I am not perfect like you.

It is the manner in which the discrimination was written and also this suggesting English fisherman are somewhat different?

does the above remark not qualify then?

 

Your wrong sorry but you are, anyone can see just by reading this that "Our Eastern European Friends and the term English" suggests that this group of people are different fisherman? I know a couple of local fisherman and they have often taken fish home to eat too.

 

 

May I suggest you read this "Racialisation of central and east European migrants in Herefordshire" I have attached the pdf for you to engage your brain and read it, once your brain is fully engaged try learning to spell correctly too. (Mr Politically Incorrect)

 

 

While you are at it have a read of this article, his thoughts were along the same lines as yours funny enough, politically correct!

Politically incorrect article

I can only suggest you read the acts 2000,2001, and 2006s I quoted as they are as written by Parliament, and I will agree to disagree with your interpretation of the law.

Victor Wright and admin I am afraid you are talking a load of old ribbush.

I, I blaim admin for not reading what they published, if now they consider that the comment of Mark Schoffer was anti recialist then he should have not published it.

The comment our Eastern European Friends is politically correct, had he named a race then it could be construded as raicialist. You only have to listen to BBC news and they use western Europeans Eastern Europeans, Americans and Aisians. Because no country is selected the above statement was politically correct. I do understand that the comment made about those people eating the fish they catch is the truth, if you don’t believe me ask any fisherman.

2, Victor I am afraid you have not read:-

a. RACE RELATIONS (AMENDMENT) ACT 2000

b. The Race Relations Act 1976 (Statutory Duties) order 2001

c. Equality Act 2006©

All found on the government site, http://www.opsi.gov.uk

So please read, digest, engage brain before you speak.

I was there last week it is such a pretty area but there is rubbish, can the council not remove this? it would not take long

Your local Councillor Edwards does a regular rubbish clear up of his own accord, I have seen him. If you are not happy to walk amongst litter and dog poo give him a ring. I got his phone number for you from the notice board in Westhome Road, give him a ring 01432350688 and let him know how you feel.

Having spoken to the local police officer last night outside Northolme Centre she told me that she with the environment enforcement officer were going to the pools this morning, the black bags were removed and on investigation found evidence who had put them there!

Glenda

Joining the tiers we now have furniture, and a bit of home gym I saw this for sale at car boot on Sunday afternoon. Obviously it did not sell so it is now dumped at the ponds, on way home from car boot. I expect but don’t remember the seller had a van, but to dump at council site if you have a van you have to pay hence they dumped it at the ponds.

The ponds are being destroyed by the fishermen lighting fires under trees causing damage by fire to the trees, leaving human excrement, and litter which awaits to be collected by Cllr Edwards, who is nursing the fishermen to destroy the ponds.

It is no longer a pleasure to walk round the ponds on the weekends with drunken fishermen lying across the foot path, dog poo's, and other rubbish. Would you like to take your children pond dipping there?

I have complained to my local parish councillor, and he said he complained to Mr R. Hemblade and Cllr Edwards, but nothing is being done.

My Parish Councillor said his words have fallen on deaf ears, they just don’t want to know, he said there will be a meeting on 15 July 2010 at 5.30 pm at the end of Westholme Road, where the public and fishermen can voice their thoughts.

The garden rubbish has been removed from Belmont Pool, but the tiers are still there but now joined by toilet systern.

I was wondering who will remove the tiers and the toilet systern, it look as if Amey have removed the garden rubbish, but are the tiers are too difficult?

Cllr Edwards says how wonderful he is, but has done nothing yet to clear up the rubbish.

Very nice picture, very professional

I am aware that Cllr Powell reported all the rubbish and tyres in and around the pool last week, it was my understanding that Amey were going there?? I have had a quick walk around this morning and everything is still there.

 

Maybe it will take a little longer...

Colin I had a walk round with our young'un, they were still there, I also saw youths swimming in the lower pond, I just wonder what will happen to the ponds if one of them drowns.

Colin

Many thanks for showing the truth, I am sorry that Cllr Edwards could not see the tiers; there is also a white TV in the bank. Also Colin there is a very large sack in the smaller pool filled with something light as it is half floating, if you get a chance can you get a picture for the website, so that if Cllr Powell be kind she could ask Amey to remove if it is feasible.

It is a shame that people keep dumping rubbish into the ponds, also litter, but I feel it is the society we live in, where the children are not educated about dumping rubbish at a young age. So can we blame the schools and the parents.

Roger it is not a swan sir, trust me,I know the difference have another look, and if you look carefully you will see him perched on the wood, I took this one just before the other one as the other was much better picture.

 

Colin, I can now see the heron thanks.

Roger - Just for clarification I give my constituents 100% of my time which ever part of the Belmont Ward they live in, so it is not a case of when I put my mind to it! maybe you should consider standing for election in 2011 then you would see for yourself how much time a councillor put in to represent their constituents.

Sorry Roger I don't agree, she was merely suggesting to contact Cllr Edwards as he was only there the day before, & why not!! he is the chairman, apparently... and also at this present time is she not a parish councillor? thought that position was vacant as I saw on another posting. Election is today is it not? so it should be passed to an active councillor, yes?

 

Cllr Edwards is also there to represent the constituents of the belmont ward, as are other councillors, so where are they and why are they not on here answering our questions, especially now that the other site, is all but closed.

Frank you do not realise the politics of residents, some people come to Cllr Powell for certain reasons just think:-

1, Some people do not like Cllr Edwards and look towards Cllr Powell for help.

2, Some residents realise that Cllr Powell when she puts her mind to it, she gets things done.

Here are just two reasons why, there are others.

A Heron over Belmont Pool, I took this evening

 

Nice picture Collin, I can see the swan but where is the heron, you will have to find is the Kingfisher, the rubber tiers and the TV next.

When/where can I get the results of the election?

Glenysp see below

The PUBLIC WILL DECIDE Yes Glenda they did.

I made the effort to attend Eastholme Community Centre for the count, it appears way out in front was a battle between Dawn Killeen, and Adrian Bridges, only five votes between them but way down bottom was Cllr Powell with only 30 votes.

Yes the public thought before they voted two things: -

1. Who closed Belmont Rural website?

2. Who's website instigated the election?

Writely or wrongly they made their decision.

“The PUBLIC WILL DESIDE†Yes Glenda they did.

I made the effort to attend Eastholme Community Centre for the count, it appears way out in front was a battle between Dawn Killeen, and Adrian Bridges, only five votes between them but way down bottom was Cllr Powell with only 30 votes.

Yes the public thought before they voted two things: -

1. Who closed Belmont Rural website?

2. Who’s website instigated the election?

Writely or wrongly they made their decision.