This blog supports the Rutland Three

I have blogged several times about the Rutland Three - the councillors, now members of UKIP, threatened with legal action first by Rutland County Council and latterly by its chief executive (indemnified by the council).

From over the Leicestershire border it is hard to know the precise wrongs of this affair, and I have talked to a former employee of the council who said that one of the Three is not (how shall I put it?) always the easiest person to deal with.

But my doubts about the three paled after reading a report in the Rutland & Stamford Mercury. It quoted the council's chief executive Helen Briggs:

"You have given me a clear mandate to bring proceedings for defamation in my own name. 

"Before doing so I intend to allow these three councillors a short period of time to 
show whether they can moderate their recent behaviour, and operate as councillors would be expected to, but I shall not hesitate in commencing proceedings unless there is a marked improvement in their behaviour. 

"I will continue to deal firmly but fairly with these councillors, as I would with any other, and I hope that I can rely on your support to allow me to concentrate my efforts on pursuing the best interests of this council and the residents of Rutland ...

"I will not allow these three councillors, or anyone else for that matter, to continue to disrupt the effective operation of this council and me as its chief executive.”

This sounds exactly like a headmistress threatening a group of schoolboys, and that is wrong.

When I was a councillor I was very clear that I was the representative of the people of my ward and that they were the employers of the council's offices - the chief executive included.

Sometimes employers can be unreasonable: that is the nature of employers. But I would not have put up with being addressed like this for a moment.

This blog supports the Rutland Three.