Role of North Yorkshire chief constable to be re-advertised

Julia Mulligan

Julia Mulligan

First published in News
Last updated
York Press: Photograph of the Author by

THE chance to lead North Yorkshire Police is to be readvertised to ensure the “best possible person” is recruited.

Julia Mulligan, the police and crime commissioner for the county, decided to readvertise despite a day-long selection process on Monday when four candidates were interviewed for the chief constable role.

She said although there was a “range of highly talented candidates” she wanted to “test the market again” and said those interviewed were welcome to reapply.

Temporary chief constable Tim Madgwick, viewed by many as the favourite for the role, said yesterday: “While I am clearly disappointed with the result, I am committed to leading the force through this interim period.

“We have a lot to achieve over the next couple of months, not least of which is a continued focus on performance and the successful consultation on the police and crime plan.”

The decision not to appoint Mr Madgwick was questioned during a public webchat with Ms Mulligan last night, when she was asked how she could “justify” not appointing the “well-respected and admired Tim Madgwick” who has “already been in role for many months”.

In response Mrs Mulligan said: “You’re right Tim’s doing a great job. However, I’m not going to comment on individual applications for the permanent post of chief, that would be totally inappropriate. Apologies.”

Mr Madgwick, North Yorkshire Police’s former deputy chief constable, temporarily took over the reins in May 2012 from former chief Grahame Maxwell and said he would “throw his hat in the ring” to take on the role permanently.

Upon her election, Mrs Mulligan said her priority was to find a new chief constable and said she was looking for a “highly motivated, vocationally driven senior officer” who will go further in “understanding and tackling the root causes of crime and antisocial behaviour”.

The role offered a £133,068-a-year salary for a four-year fixed term, with more money for “exceptional candidates” and a potential benefits package.

In a statement yesterday, Mrs Mulligan said: “My assessment panel and I undertook a comprehensive and exhaustive assessment process [on Monday] where a range of highly talented candidates displayed many strengths and aptitudes for the role.

“However, I am determined to ensure that the public gets the best possible person to lead North Yorkshire Police and hence I want to test the market again.

“I have therefore decided to re-advertise the post. Yesterday’s candidates will be welcome to reapply if they so wish and I am still confident of making an appointment as soon as practically possible.”

A spokesman for the police and crime commissioner office said it would advertise and seek to appoint as soon “as is practical”. They denied that it would save money as with a temporary chief constable in post “there are no salary savings to be made”.

Comments (29)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:25pm Tue 12 Feb 13

HPSauce says...

Not the first time this has happened.

Feel sorry for the acting CC, about as publicer "you're not good enough" you couldn't wish to see.

Mulligan and her like in other counties are a walking disaster for the police forces in the country. The sooner that political decision is U turned the better.
Not the first time this has happened. Feel sorry for the acting CC, about as publicer "you're not good enough" you couldn't wish to see. Mulligan and her like in other counties are a walking disaster for the police forces in the country. The sooner that political decision is U turned the better. HPSauce
  • Score: 0

6:28pm Tue 12 Feb 13

neutral observer 2 says...

There's better out there
There's better out there neutral observer 2
  • Score: 0

6:47pm Tue 12 Feb 13

Yorkie41 says...

Well Well Well it seems like more money wasted re-advertising and interviewing, when all the time you have the names of the suitable candidates. ( this does not make any sense to taxpayers.
Well Well Well it seems like more money wasted re-advertising and interviewing, when all the time you have the names of the suitable candidates. ( this does not make any sense to taxpayers. Yorkie41
  • Score: 0

8:11pm Tue 12 Feb 13

Sillybillies says...

Good, we don't want anyone contaminated by association with two disasters of former chief constables, or the current joke of a police force we are cursed with in North Yorkshire at the present time. Humberside and West Yorkshire got new chief constables from outside, and so should North Yorkshire.
Good, we don't want anyone contaminated by association with two disasters of former chief constables, or the current joke of a police force we are cursed with in North Yorkshire at the present time. Humberside and West Yorkshire got new chief constables from outside, and so should North Yorkshire. Sillybillies
  • Score: 0

8:44pm Tue 12 Feb 13

ExPatBob says...

A shame the public didn't get the same chance when she was thrust upon the county...... Waste of money as the officer in the chair at the moment is more than capable of doing the job. Mistake...
A shame the public didn't get the same chance when she was thrust upon the county...... Waste of money as the officer in the chair at the moment is more than capable of doing the job. Mistake... ExPatBob
  • Score: 0

9:07pm Tue 12 Feb 13

Paul Meoff says...

ExPatBob wrote:
A shame the public didn't get the same chance when she was thrust upon the county...... Waste of money as the officer in the chair at the moment is more than capable of doing the job. Mistake...
Surely a contender for the most stupid post ever.

The public did get a chance - she is an elected official. There was another candidate that they could have voted in. How much more chance should the public be given?
[quote][p][bold]ExPatBob[/bold] wrote: A shame the public didn't get the same chance when she was thrust upon the county...... Waste of money as the officer in the chair at the moment is more than capable of doing the job. Mistake...[/p][/quote]Surely a contender for the most stupid post ever. The public did get a chance - she is an elected official. There was another candidate that they could have voted in. How much more chance should the public be given? Paul Meoff
  • Score: 0

9:13pm Tue 12 Feb 13

ExPatBob says...

If you're going to say my post is stupid. That is fine and is your opinion... But you really let yourself down with "how much more chance should the public be given?" No need to say anymore.
If you're going to say my post is stupid. That is fine and is your opinion... But you really let yourself down with "how much more chance should the public be given?" No need to say anymore. ExPatBob
  • Score: 0

10:01pm Tue 12 Feb 13

Yorkie41 says...

ExPatBob wrote:
If you're going to say my post is stupid. That is fine and is your opinion... But you really let yourself down with "how much more chance should the public be given?" No need to say anymore.
Here here, wonder what was in it for Paul Meoff. The Public have a right to criticise, and make their concerns heard any time they dam well wish.
[quote][p][bold]ExPatBob[/bold] wrote: If you're going to say my post is stupid. That is fine and is your opinion... But you really let yourself down with "how much more chance should the public be given?" No need to say anymore.[/p][/quote]Here here, wonder what was in it for Paul Meoff. The Public have a right to criticise, and make their concerns heard any time they dam well wish. Yorkie41
  • Score: 0

10:04pm Tue 12 Feb 13

York1900 says...

The job as it as been advertised and the only people who wanted the job have applied for it

This sounds to me that she wants to have a yes preson in the job who will do her bidding with out question
The job as it as been advertised and the only people who wanted the job have applied for it This sounds to me that she wants to have a yes preson in the job who will do her bidding with out question York1900
  • Score: 0

10:25pm Tue 12 Feb 13

spottycow says...

WE need the best person for the job if that means doing interviews again im all for it . I would prefer someone from outside the force as a tax and rate payer for the last thirty three years i want the best for my county
WE need the best person for the job if that means doing interviews again im all for it . I would prefer someone from outside the force as a tax and rate payer for the last thirty three years i want the best for my county spottycow
  • Score: 0

10:32pm Tue 12 Feb 13

Paul Meoff says...

ExPatBob wrote:
If you're going to say my post is stupid. That is fine and is your opinion... But you really let yourself down with "how much more chance should the public be given?" No need to say anymore.
What I mean dopey is how much more chance should there be than a public election. Maybe that's too difficult for you to comprehend.
[quote][p][bold]ExPatBob[/bold] wrote: If you're going to say my post is stupid. That is fine and is your opinion... But you really let yourself down with "how much more chance should the public be given?" No need to say anymore.[/p][/quote]What I mean dopey is how much more chance should there be than a public election. Maybe that's too difficult for you to comprehend. Paul Meoff
  • Score: 0

10:51pm Tue 12 Feb 13

capt spaulding says...

Paul Meoff wrote:
ExPatBob wrote:
If you're going to say my post is stupid. That is fine and is your opinion... But you really let yourself down with "how much more chance should the public be given?" No need to say anymore.
What I mean dopey is how much more chance should there be than a public election. Maybe that's too difficult for you to comprehend.
Your posts say far more about yourself than any opinion you may possibly hold.
Bet you were the playground bully of your day.
[quote][p][bold]Paul Meoff[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ExPatBob[/bold] wrote: If you're going to say my post is stupid. That is fine and is your opinion... But you really let yourself down with "how much more chance should the public be given?" No need to say anymore.[/p][/quote]What I mean dopey is how much more chance should there be than a public election. Maybe that's too difficult for you to comprehend.[/p][/quote]Your posts say far more about yourself than any opinion you may possibly hold. Bet you were the playground bully of your day. capt spaulding
  • Score: 0

11:12pm Tue 12 Feb 13

Yorkie41 says...

The fact that the minority off citizens voted for her Paul Meoff, doesn't mean we should not have to put up with her and except what she wants. The fact that hardly anyone voted for her means in my opinion no one wanted her. I don't think she should have any say in who gets this position it should go to an independent board made up of the different police organisations, and if you have not got a suitable candidate on your list now there is something radically wrong. does she forget she is here to serve the people and not just herself.
The fact that the minority off citizens voted for her Paul Meoff, doesn't mean we should not have to put up with her and except what she wants. The fact that hardly anyone voted for her means in my opinion no one wanted her. I don't think she should have any say in who gets this position it should go to an independent board made up of the different police organisations, and if you have not got a suitable candidate on your list now there is something radically wrong. does she forget she is here to serve the people and not just herself. Yorkie41
  • Score: 0

11:31pm Tue 12 Feb 13

RooBeck says...

In the current political climate towards radical change aimed at the leadership in UK police-forces, then Mrs.May and Mr.Cameron would be pleased if she placed an advert in the USA, and brought in a Marshal Earp! Afraid the writing is on the wall for the temporary post-holder and he should be writing-off for a post elsewhere! Wasn't he similarly "knocked back" for the role of Deputy Chief Constable around 18 months ago, by the Selection Panel of the now defunct Police Authority??
In the current political climate towards radical change aimed at the leadership in UK police-forces, then Mrs.May and Mr.Cameron would be pleased if she placed an advert in the USA, and brought in a Marshal Earp! Afraid the writing is on the wall for the temporary post-holder and he should be writing-off for a post elsewhere! Wasn't he similarly "knocked back" for the role of Deputy Chief Constable around 18 months ago, by the Selection Panel of the now defunct Police Authority?? RooBeck
  • Score: 0

1:14am Wed 13 Feb 13

yorkma says...

What a complete waste of money. The current Acting Chief is fine and should remain in the post. She was elected to make decisions not bring outside consultants at whatever ridiculous amounts. The post itself is all politics not independents.Not surprised Mr Madgwick is somewhat miffed, must be strange turning up for work and having to sit and work with someone who clearly does not want him around. Tax payers money to burn or so it would seem.
What a complete waste of money. The current Acting Chief is fine and should remain in the post. She was elected to make decisions not bring outside consultants at whatever ridiculous amounts. The post itself is all politics not independents.Not surprised Mr Madgwick is somewhat miffed, must be strange turning up for work and having to sit and work with someone who clearly does not want him around. Tax payers money to burn or so it would seem. yorkma
  • Score: 0

1:25am Wed 13 Feb 13

Dave Taylor says...

What a stupid waste of taxpayers' money. The best candidate is almost certainly the one right under the Crime Commissioner's nose.
What a stupid waste of taxpayers' money. The best candidate is almost certainly the one right under the Crime Commissioner's nose. Dave Taylor
  • Score: 0

7:00am Wed 13 Feb 13

neutral observer 2 says...

RooBeck wrote:
In the current political climate towards radical change aimed at the leadership in UK police-forces, then Mrs.May and Mr.Cameron would be pleased if she placed an advert in the USA, and brought in a Marshal Earp! Afraid the writing is on the wall for the temporary post-holder and he should be writing-off for a post elsewhere! Wasn't he similarly "knocked back" for the role of Deputy Chief Constable around 18 months ago, by the Selection Panel of the now defunct Police Authority??
A common theme which im glad she didnt ignore.
I would guess the impression given was Madgwick was a shoein, so why bother applying.
2 different bodies, have decided he's not suitable.
I'd much prefer their judgement, rather than some pressure from non-informed comments on here.
Another chance for the negative doom merchants to bemoan the democratic process.
[quote][p][bold]RooBeck[/bold] wrote: In the current political climate towards radical change aimed at the leadership in UK police-forces, then Mrs.May and Mr.Cameron would be pleased if she placed an advert in the USA, and brought in a Marshal Earp! Afraid the writing is on the wall for the temporary post-holder and he should be writing-off for a post elsewhere! Wasn't he similarly "knocked back" for the role of Deputy Chief Constable around 18 months ago, by the Selection Panel of the now defunct Police Authority??[/p][/quote]A common theme which im glad she didnt ignore. I would guess the impression given was Madgwick was a shoein, so why bother applying. 2 different bodies, have decided he's not suitable. I'd much prefer their judgement, rather than some pressure from non-informed comments on here. Another chance for the negative doom merchants to bemoan the democratic process. neutral observer 2
  • Score: 0

7:11am Wed 13 Feb 13

roobarb85 says...

Of course we should have a top quality appointment and reject sub-standard candidates.

The delicious irony is that the electorate of North Yorkshire thought exactly the same at the PCC elections in November - but we didn't get the chance to vote for "none of the above"
Of course we should have a top quality appointment and reject sub-standard candidates. The delicious irony is that the electorate of North Yorkshire thought exactly the same at the PCC elections in November - but we didn't get the chance to vote for "none of the above" roobarb85
  • Score: 0

8:16am Wed 13 Feb 13

Pete the Brickie says...

To be fair to Mrs Mulligan and the panel they are doing a thorough job here, I for one welcome that, not that I would put Mr Madgwick in this catagory, but anything that avoids the possibility of the likes of Della Canning, Graham Maxwell or Adam Briggs holding roles like this ever again is money well spent in my opinion.
To be fair to Mrs Mulligan and the panel they are doing a thorough job here, I for one welcome that, not that I would put Mr Madgwick in this catagory, but anything that avoids the possibility of the likes of Della Canning, Graham Maxwell or Adam Briggs holding roles like this ever again is money well spent in my opinion. Pete the Brickie
  • Score: 0

11:38am Wed 13 Feb 13

Capt. Dobie says...

York1900 wrote:
The job as it as been advertised and the only people who wanted the job have applied for it This sounds to me that she wants to have a yes preson in the job who will do her bidding with out question
I agree with York1900- and Mulligan said : "those interviewed were welcome to reapply." Hmmm.

Really? That looks like 'try again but work on these points for next-time #winks#'.

OR, they've panicked and thought, durrr...we should've picked Candidate A or whatever...

Or it gives the candidate chance to devalue (re-brand?) themselves to become a 'yes man' to get the job, as York1900 suggests.

Unless it's a cunning ploy to get the job and throw a merry twos-up at her...sneaky...

A job interview isn't a driving test...as many adverts state 'previously unseccessful candidates need not apply.' Maybe they're using that ploy as a 'committment filter', so by the final round of 'try again', you've only got a single candidate left.

Buffoonery of the highest order.
[quote][p][bold]York1900[/bold] wrote: The job as it as been advertised and the only people who wanted the job have applied for it This sounds to me that she wants to have a yes preson in the job who will do her bidding with out question[/p][/quote]I agree with York1900- and Mulligan said : "those interviewed were welcome to reapply." Hmmm. Really? That looks like 'try again but work on these points for next-time #winks#'. OR, they've panicked and thought, durrr...we should've picked Candidate A or whatever... Or it gives the candidate chance to devalue (re-brand?) themselves to become a 'yes man' to get the job, as York1900 suggests. Unless it's a cunning ploy to get the job and throw a merry twos-up at her...sneaky... A job interview isn't a driving test...as many adverts state 'previously unseccessful candidates need not apply.' Maybe they're using that ploy as a 'committment filter', so by the final round of 'try again', you've only got a single candidate left. Buffoonery of the highest order. Capt. Dobie
  • Score: 0

11:45am Wed 13 Feb 13

Capt. Dobie says...

OR she's changed the interview criteria/ TORs and ALL the candidates have expressed concern on being asked something completely out of sync with the Chiefy Const job...

'Do you think I am a buffoon?'

Erm....yes..?
OR she's changed the interview criteria/ TORs and ALL the candidates have expressed concern on being asked something completely out of sync with the Chiefy Const job... 'Do you think I am a buffoon?' Erm....yes..? Capt. Dobie
  • Score: 0

1:33pm Wed 13 Feb 13

RooBeck says...

Reading the regional media outlets/newspapers over the past week or so, have noticed that the new P&CCs of Northumbria, Cleveland, Humberside & West Yorkshire (all neighbours of North Yorkshire), appointing new Chief Constables. Presuming that these new P&CCs speak and liaise with one another, it may well be, that Mrs.Mulligan liked the professional abilities and standing of some of the candidates for those posts and they could have been on the list of those very recently rejected (but hadn't applied for the North Yorkshire post), but who will still be seeking a top post. Could she just maybe, hope that some of these unsuccessful candidates now turn their eyes to North Yorkshire, now that she has opened up the selection process again? Maybe slightly cynical and wide of the mark, but just a thought and it might be that simple!!
Reading the regional media outlets/newspapers over the past week or so, have noticed that the new P&CCs of Northumbria, Cleveland, Humberside & West Yorkshire (all neighbours of North Yorkshire), appointing new Chief Constables. Presuming that these new P&CCs speak and liaise with one another, it may well be, that Mrs.Mulligan liked the professional abilities and standing of some of the candidates for those posts and they could have been on the list of those very recently rejected (but hadn't applied for the North Yorkshire post), but who will still be seeking a top post. Could she just maybe, hope that some of these unsuccessful candidates now turn their eyes to North Yorkshire, now that she has opened up the selection process again? Maybe slightly cynical and wide of the mark, but just a thought and it might be that simple!! RooBeck
  • Score: 0

1:36pm Wed 13 Feb 13

The Great Buda says...

Dave Taylor wrote:
What a stupid waste of taxpayers' money. The best candidate is almost certainly the one right under the Crime Commissioner's nose.
She in her self is a waste of money.

The majority of the public showed how they wanted her or her opponent by not voitng for either.

She should resign.
[quote][p][bold]Dave Taylor[/bold] wrote: What a stupid waste of taxpayers' money. The best candidate is almost certainly the one right under the Crime Commissioner's nose.[/p][/quote]She in her self is a waste of money. The majority of the public showed how they wanted her or her opponent by not voitng for either. She should resign. The Great Buda
  • Score: 0

2:32pm Wed 13 Feb 13

MadHaxMan says...

Pete and Reg have this one bang right to me.
The recent history of rotten apples in senior positions at NYP should provide ample salutory lessons for all future recruitment - don't forget that both Briggs and Maxwell were recruited from other forces (not sure about Della Canning).
I hope this lady is not one who just looks for someone who can talk top-class management gobbledygook with the worst of them, but has no real interest in or affinity with his/her officers, and just sees North Yorkshire as the next "career move". Just for the record, two members of my extended family are serving NYP officers, and they both have high regard for Tim Madgwick, not something they would say lightly.
Pete and Reg have this one bang right to me. The recent history of rotten apples in senior positions at NYP should provide ample salutory lessons for all future recruitment - don't forget that both Briggs and Maxwell were recruited from other forces (not sure about Della Canning). I hope this lady is not one who just looks for someone who can talk top-class management gobbledygook with the worst of them, but has no real interest in or affinity with his/her officers, and just sees North Yorkshire as the next "career move". Just for the record, two members of my extended family are serving NYP officers, and they both have high regard for Tim Madgwick, not something they would say lightly. MadHaxMan
  • Score: 0

5:10pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Caecilius says...

Paul Meoff wrote:
ExPatBob wrote:
A shame the public didn't get the same chance when she was thrust upon the county...... Waste of money as the officer in the chair at the moment is more than capable of doing the job. Mistake...
Surely a contender for the most stupid post ever.

The public did get a chance - she is an elected official. There was another candidate that they could have voted in. How much more chance should the public be given?
But the public made it crystal clear that they didn't WANT a party-political police and crime commissioner (or should that be "commissar"?), regardless of which particular party's interests that commissioner served. You might as well create - by diktat - a post of Unqualified Superintendent Brain Surgeon at a prestigious hospital, put Frank Spencer and Mr Bean up as candidates, and then claim that, because 3% of the electorate voted for Bean and 2% for Spencer, the public warmly welcomed your innovative idea and enthusiastically endorsed Bean for the job. 87% of voters in North Yorkshire weren't interested in having anyone in this post imposed upon us by the government, and didn't vote. 6,400 people, including me, went to the trouble of going to the polling station and sending that message by spoiling their ballot paper. 92% of people eligible to vote didn't want Mrs Mulligan. 94% didn't want her opponent. If you think there's anything democratic about her appointment, you're dreaming.
[quote][p][bold]Paul Meoff[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ExPatBob[/bold] wrote: A shame the public didn't get the same chance when she was thrust upon the county...... Waste of money as the officer in the chair at the moment is more than capable of doing the job. Mistake...[/p][/quote]Surely a contender for the most stupid post ever. The public did get a chance - she is an elected official. There was another candidate that they could have voted in. How much more chance should the public be given?[/p][/quote]But the public made it crystal clear that they didn't WANT a party-political police and crime commissioner (or should that be "commissar"?), regardless of which particular party's interests that commissioner served. You might as well create - by diktat - a post of Unqualified Superintendent Brain Surgeon at a prestigious hospital, put Frank Spencer and Mr Bean up as candidates, and then claim that, because 3% of the electorate voted for Bean and 2% for Spencer, the public warmly welcomed your innovative idea and enthusiastically endorsed Bean for the job. 87% of voters in North Yorkshire weren't interested in having anyone in this post imposed upon us by the government, and didn't vote. 6,400 people, including me, went to the trouble of going to the polling station and sending that message by spoiling their ballot paper. 92% of people eligible to vote didn't want Mrs Mulligan. 94% didn't want her opponent. If you think there's anything democratic about her appointment, you're dreaming. Caecilius
  • Score: 0

7:15pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Paul Meoff says...

The Great Buda wrote:
Dave Taylor wrote:
What a stupid waste of taxpayers' money. The best candidate is almost certainly the one right under the Crime Commissioner's nose.
She in her self is a waste of money.

The majority of the public showed how they wanted her or her opponent by not voitng for either.

She should resign.
That's democracy for you. The majority did not vote for Satan's daughter in the 70's and 80's but the evil one still got in 3 times.
[quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dave Taylor[/bold] wrote: What a stupid waste of taxpayers' money. The best candidate is almost certainly the one right under the Crime Commissioner's nose.[/p][/quote]She in her self is a waste of money. The majority of the public showed how they wanted her or her opponent by not voitng for either. She should resign.[/p][/quote]That's democracy for you. The majority did not vote for Satan's daughter in the 70's and 80's but the evil one still got in 3 times. Paul Meoff
  • Score: 0

7:33pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Yorkie41 says...

Paul Meoff wrote:
The Great Buda wrote:
Dave Taylor wrote:
What a stupid waste of taxpayers' money. The best candidate is almost certainly the one right under the Crime Commissioner's nose.
She in her self is a waste of money.

The majority of the public showed how they wanted her or her opponent by not voitng for either.

She should resign.
That's democracy for you. The majority did not vote for Satan's daughter in the 70's and 80's but the evil one still got in 3 times.
I think this comment By Paul Meoff, should be treated with the contempt it deserves. Now we all know where he is coming from.
[quote][p][bold]Paul Meoff[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dave Taylor[/bold] wrote: What a stupid waste of taxpayers' money. The best candidate is almost certainly the one right under the Crime Commissioner's nose.[/p][/quote]She in her self is a waste of money. The majority of the public showed how they wanted her or her opponent by not voitng for either. She should resign.[/p][/quote]That's democracy for you. The majority did not vote for Satan's daughter in the 70's and 80's but the evil one still got in 3 times.[/p][/quote]I think this comment By Paul Meoff, should be treated with the contempt it deserves. Now we all know where he is coming from. Yorkie41
  • Score: 0

10:04pm Wed 13 Feb 13

capt spaulding says...

Yorkie41 wrote:
Paul Meoff wrote:
The Great Buda wrote:
Dave Taylor wrote:
What a stupid waste of taxpayers' money. The best candidate is almost certainly the one right under the Crime Commissioner's nose.
She in her self is a waste of money.

The majority of the public showed how they wanted her or her opponent by not voitng for either.

She should resign.
That's democracy for you. The majority did not vote for Satan's daughter in the 70's and 80's but the evil one still got in 3 times.
I think this comment By Paul Meoff, should be treated with the contempt it deserves. Now we all know where he is coming from.
Yes Parkside Close.
[quote][p][bold]Yorkie41[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paul Meoff[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dave Taylor[/bold] wrote: What a stupid waste of taxpayers' money. The best candidate is almost certainly the one right under the Crime Commissioner's nose.[/p][/quote]She in her self is a waste of money. The majority of the public showed how they wanted her or her opponent by not voitng for either. She should resign.[/p][/quote]That's democracy for you. The majority did not vote for Satan's daughter in the 70's and 80's but the evil one still got in 3 times.[/p][/quote]I think this comment By Paul Meoff, should be treated with the contempt it deserves. Now we all know where he is coming from.[/p][/quote]Yes Parkside Close. capt spaulding
  • Score: 0

7:16am Thu 14 Feb 13

Paul Meoff says...

capt spaulding wrote:
Yorkie41 wrote:
Paul Meoff wrote:
The Great Buda wrote:
Dave Taylor wrote:
What a stupid waste of taxpayers' money. The best candidate is almost certainly the one right under the Crime Commissioner's nose.
She in her self is a waste of money.

The majority of the public showed how they wanted her or her opponent by not voitng for either.

She should resign.
That's democracy for you. The majority did not vote for Satan's daughter in the 70's and 80's but the evil one still got in 3 times.
I think this comment By Paul Meoff, should be treated with the contempt it deserves. Now we all know where he is coming from.
Yes Parkside Close.
So it's you is it. I wondered who that was in the raincoat always standing outside the gates.
[quote][p][bold]capt spaulding[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Yorkie41[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paul Meoff[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dave Taylor[/bold] wrote: What a stupid waste of taxpayers' money. The best candidate is almost certainly the one right under the Crime Commissioner's nose.[/p][/quote]She in her self is a waste of money. The majority of the public showed how they wanted her or her opponent by not voitng for either. She should resign.[/p][/quote]That's democracy for you. The majority did not vote for Satan's daughter in the 70's and 80's but the evil one still got in 3 times.[/p][/quote]I think this comment By Paul Meoff, should be treated with the contempt it deserves. Now we all know where he is coming from.[/p][/quote]Yes Parkside Close.[/p][/quote]So it's you is it. I wondered who that was in the raincoat always standing outside the gates. Paul Meoff
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree