Letters: Mr Borman - hero or villain?

Mr Borman has in the past written to Richmond District Council. That is his right. But for the council to embark on a campaign of ridicule to try and stifle freedom of speech is disgraceful.

Richmond District Council accuses Mr Borman of running up a bill for £125, 000 by writing to them. This is not true and the public should be aware of that.

Nowhere in the council's accounts, which are open to public scrutiny, does this figure show - or indeed any other figure regarding Mr Borman.

ALAN GATENBY

Chairman,

46 Brough Meadows,

Catterick Village.

Sir, - When are Richmondshire District councillors (not Mr Harry Tabiner, the chief executive to the council) going to listen to the people who elected them and stop being dictated to by the chief executive?

The recent press reports initiated by Richmondshire Council accusing a council taxpayer, Mr Bernard Borman of Leyburn, of wasting £125,000 of public funds is not true and once again the council sets out to intimidate and harass a member of the public.

If the public at large believes that Mr Borman, caused the waste of £125000, then they surely believe in fairies.

It is interesting that Mr Tabiner, the dictator, refuses to let the public know how much the paintball exercise and candlelight dinners for 11 senior employees of RDC cost, but when he wished to intimidate a member of the public, he plucked a spurious figure from the air and has caused much distress to the persons on the receiving end.

Mrs M A CALVERT-NEWSOME

66 Brough Meadows,

Catterick Village.

Sir, - Please would you be good enough to let me have space in your column about the report on Mr Bernard Borman.

This man is mainly a bully and if anyone is arrogant and vindictive, it is him. I cannot see why Mr Gatenby, chairman of the newly formed Richmondshire Tax Payers' Association which has the aim of reducing not incurring high taxes, has Mr Borman as a member, when he is costing the Richmondshire tax payers £125,000.

It is hypocritical to say or keep going on about the £7-8,000 spent on the team building exercise and two nights at the Morritt Arms as you cannot compare the two sums. The council only needs one person like him and it is one too many - I for one begrudge my money, as I think many others will, being used in a vendetta to try to bring down our chief executive and bully him into resigning. Mr Tabiner is good at his job.

Mr Borman, if he has a grievance, can go on to the RDC floor at their meetings and do what any normal person does - talk in a proper manner or even air his views.

Regarding his title, anyone can call themselves anything. My lineage goes back to Adam and Eve not just to the Romans; and as for pedigrees, who cares, it is the person that counts.

Mr Borman's pastime has become an obsession and to some he's a menace. If he's that clever in law, why has he lost so many cases. Even when he put up for election at Middleham he did not win. As Ann Robinson says "You are the weakest link", put up for election next year or shut up.

ANN FRENCH

1 Copper Beech Way,

Colburn.

Sir, - I write in the defence of Mr Bernard Borman. I have never met him but I know of him through his letters to the press. I am aware he raises hackles, but more importantly he raises pertinent questions - perhaps this is what irritates Richmondshire Council officials.

That Mr Tabiner (chief executive) should make personal comments in the national press and liken Mr Borman to Victor Meldrew is deplorable and highly unprofessional.

I recently wrote to Mr Tabiner requesting information about the Aske training course. The reply I received was discourteous, evasive and dismissive. If Mr Borman received replies in similar vein then I can well understand his frustration.

I would remind Mr Tabiner and Coun Blackie that thousands of British soldiers gave their lives in two World Wars to preserve the freedoms we enjoy today, especially the right to free speech. No council official has the right to, or surreptitiously attempt to, place restrictions on the number of questions a member of the public may raise. This is nibbling away at the fabric of democracy.

To state that Mr Borman has cost ratepayers thousands of pounds is provocative and unfair - the price of freedom cannot be measured in monetary terms.

I say, to Mr Borman and others - do not be discouraged from putting questions to the council: it is your right.

JOHN OLNEY

West Underbanks Farm,

Reeth Road,

Richmond.

... and a few words from the man himself

Sir, - Your paper and its sister papers have done sterling work to expose waste of public money. The latest revealed to taxpayers is the saga of Thornborough Hall.

I attended a meeting a few years ago of Richmondshire planning committee where it was stated it would cost half a million pounds to bring the building up to date. It was also revealed that loss due to running costs amounted to £30,000pa.

At that time, I wrote to the district auditor drawing his attention to the fact that 1,500 electors of Leyburn could not afford to engage in such a speculative enterprise, even taking grants into account.

Even the old community centre was running at a loss.

Leyburn Town Council should have consulted the district auditor prior to completing the transaction, and he should either have approved it or issued a notice warning the town council not to proceed.

The fact that this procedure was not followed has incurred additional expenditure which is entirely a matter between the town council and the district auditor.

The district auditor is obliged by law to follow the procedures which he is adopting. We know the financial equation is not working because council tax payers of Leyburn have to have a 67pc increase in their precept, an unprecedented rise for any parish or town council.

Like most people in Leyburn and the surrounding area, I wanted this building retained for the benefit of our community, but I am not aware public demand had existed for it to be brought under the ownership of a small town council such as Leyburn.

If Richmondshire operated at a loss, how can we expect Leyburn to turn that into a profit? Having done it, we are stuck with it, and I hope that, against all predictions, Thornborough Hall will eventually operate at a profit.

It is also a misconception that the existence of the library was bound up with the purchase of the hall by Leyburn Town Council. There is a tenancy agreement which secures the library for many years to come in its present premises.

It is wrong and quite unconstitutional to instigate a "witchhunt" when those who are hunting the "witches" are in fact entirely responsible for the present situation.

BERNARD BORMAN

Greenways

Brentwood

Leyburn