Press banned from Brighton and Hove golliwog hearing

The Argus: Dawn Barnett Dawn Barnett

A hearing into a councillor’s comments that golliwogs are not racist will take place behind closed doors.

Brighton and Hove city councillor Dawn Barnett, pictured, is to be hauled in front of the local authority’s standards board after a complaint from a member of the public.

It is alleged that the Conservative politician brought her office into disrepute when she made the statement. 

No specific reason was given for the ban. 

But officials have confirmed that the press and public will be barred from the hearing, which will take place in Hove Town Hall tomorrow.

A council spokeswoman said: “The hearing of the complaint by the Standards Panel will take place as a part II hearing. This means it will not be open to the public or the press.

“However, the decision of the panel and the reasons for the decision will be made public after the hearing.

“It was decided to hold the hearing in private after taking into account all the circumstances and in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1972.”

The initial hearing last month was cancelled after Coun Barnett fell down a flight of stairs in the town hall.

Comments (47)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:23am Wed 18 Dec 13

mimseycal says...

Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done. This not only smacks of a kangeroo court but actually has become a kangeroo court. The Panel has lost all credibility by its skulking behind closed doors!

This was not a complaint by a member of the public. It was a complaint by three members of the public and the unaccountable, unelected, non-transparent BMEWF; with the latter being the main reason for this hearing taking place.
Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done. This not only smacks of a kangeroo court but actually has become a kangeroo court. The Panel has lost all credibility by its skulking behind closed doors! This was not a complaint by a member of the public. It was a complaint by three members of the public and the unaccountable, unelected, non-transparent BMEWF; with the latter being the main reason for this hearing taking place. mimseycal

6:55am Wed 18 Dec 13

allykatz says...

This is a total joke, we are a country of free speech, we are free to say and think what we want, even if it occasionally may offend people, she'd have been better off punching a councillor in the face there would have been less repercussions.

Golliwogs are not racist in my opinion either. Nostalgic and maybe form a by gone era when opinions were slightly different, but in their context today not racist, its the same as women should be at home whilst the men work, its an old fashioned view, but does that stop nostalgic programmes and posters? no, nor would anyone find it offensive to women, we know that times have changed and things are very different, However when it comes to colour of skin no one knows what to do and gets all agitated. We should never hide from the past, and often it is there to remind us of how much we have moved forward.

Best of luck to her
This is a total joke, we are a country of free speech, we are free to say and think what we want, even if it occasionally may offend people, she'd have been better off punching a councillor in the face there would have been less repercussions. Golliwogs are not racist in my opinion either. Nostalgic and maybe form a by gone era when opinions were slightly different, but in their context today not racist, its the same as women should be at home whilst the men work, its an old fashioned view, but does that stop nostalgic programmes and posters? no, nor would anyone find it offensive to women, we know that times have changed and things are very different, However when it comes to colour of skin no one knows what to do and gets all agitated. We should never hide from the past, and often it is there to remind us of how much we have moved forward. Best of luck to her allykatz

7:19am Wed 18 Dec 13

monkeymoo says...

What will we do when the Rugby World cup comes to England in 2015?

Will we not be allowed to mention the New Zealand team 'The All Blacks', for fear of offending someone!?
What will we do when the Rugby World cup comes to England in 2015? Will we not be allowed to mention the New Zealand team 'The All Blacks', for fear of offending someone!? monkeymoo

8:29am Wed 18 Dec 13

BURIRAM says...

Gollywogs are not racist, I am Black and I love Gollywogs. People who say things are racist when they are not are troublemakers who have nothing better to do in there life and there are plenty of them in Brighton.
Next thing you will hear is that Jelly Babies are banned as they promote child abuse when you bite them.
Gollywogs are not racist, I am Black and I love Gollywogs. People who say things are racist when they are not are troublemakers who have nothing better to do in there life and there are plenty of them in Brighton. Next thing you will hear is that Jelly Babies are banned as they promote child abuse when you bite them. BURIRAM

8:40am Wed 18 Dec 13

Quiterie says...

So let me get this clear..... this is the same Council who last week became the first place in the country to formally oppose the "gagging law".

Brighton and Hove Council have also issued the most confidentiality clauses (or "gagging orders") for staff as they left their roles in the country over the last 5 years.

And now the press and public are barred from this hearing without any reason being given.

You can see why the public are confused with these 'mixed messages' surrounding openness....
So let me get this clear..... this is the same Council who last week became the first place in the country to formally oppose the "gagging law". Brighton and Hove Council have also issued the most confidentiality clauses (or "gagging orders") for staff as they left their roles in the country over the last 5 years. And now the press and public are barred from this hearing without any reason being given. You can see why the public are confused with these 'mixed messages' surrounding openness.... Quiterie

8:52am Wed 18 Dec 13

Maxwell's Ghost says...

The lack of transparency by this particular council is unacceptable.
When are the unions and the press going to step in and challenge how this council operates with regards to honesty, transparency and the publication of fair and accurate information. It's rather ironic that most of them were campaigners and anarchists before they were elected and now they behave like a dictatorship having secret meetings and issuing false propaganda and having consultations without issuing any governance around them.
Grubby.
The lack of transparency by this particular council is unacceptable. When are the unions and the press going to step in and challenge how this council operates with regards to honesty, transparency and the publication of fair and accurate information. It's rather ironic that most of them were campaigners and anarchists before they were elected and now they behave like a dictatorship having secret meetings and issuing false propaganda and having consultations without issuing any governance around them. Grubby. Maxwell's Ghost

9:08am Wed 18 Dec 13

Fight_Back says...

This screams cover up, corruption and conspiracy by the council and it's officers. Let us not forget that one of the complainers was a council employee - Tim Read - who told Cllr Barnett's constituents that they would be better off paying out of their own pockets to put CCTV on their own properties as the council didn't have the money to install CCTV for the local area. CCTV is needed to help fight the anti-social behaviour and drug dealers in the area. Maybe the council would have the money to put in CCTV if idiots like Mr Read didn't raise ridiculous complaints like this one.
This screams cover up, corruption and conspiracy by the council and it's officers. Let us not forget that one of the complainers was a council employee - Tim Read - who told Cllr Barnett's constituents that they would be better off paying out of their own pockets to put CCTV on their own properties as the council didn't have the money to install CCTV for the local area. CCTV is needed to help fight the anti-social behaviour and drug dealers in the area. Maybe the council would have the money to put in CCTV if idiots like Mr Read didn't raise ridiculous complaints like this one. Fight_Back

9:09am Wed 18 Dec 13

tykemison says...

Staggering. The only reason they are keeping the meeting free from prying eyes/ears is because deep down they know they are bullying the councillor and would look even more idiotic if someone reported the facts, disgrace.
Staggering. The only reason they are keeping the meeting free from prying eyes/ears is because deep down they know they are bullying the councillor and would look even more idiotic if someone reported the facts, disgrace. tykemison

9:14am Wed 18 Dec 13

s&k says...

No press allowed in a democracy?
No press allowed in a democracy? s&k

9:19am Wed 18 Dec 13

shining star says...

BURIRAM wrote:
Gollywogs are not racist, I am Black and I love Gollywogs. People who say things are racist when they are not are troublemakers who have nothing better to do in there life and there are plenty of them in Brighton.
Next thing you will hear is that Jelly Babies are banned as they promote child abuse when you bite them.
Well said BURIRAM, I totally agree with you. Yours is the post that these ridiculous anti gollywog brigadier's should listen to, you can't appease a conscience by pinning the guilt on a gollywog. The racism is in the mind of the person who reads that in the gollywog.
[quote][p][bold]BURIRAM[/bold] wrote: Gollywogs are not racist, I am Black and I love Gollywogs. People who say things are racist when they are not are troublemakers who have nothing better to do in there life and there are plenty of them in Brighton. Next thing you will hear is that Jelly Babies are banned as they promote child abuse when you bite them.[/p][/quote]Well said BURIRAM, I totally agree with you. Yours is the post that these ridiculous anti gollywog brigadier's should listen to, you can't appease a conscience by pinning the guilt on a gollywog. The racism is in the mind of the person who reads that in the gollywog. shining star

9:30am Wed 18 Dec 13

Sussex jim says...

We have had a major enquiry about a cabinet minister allegedly calling a policeman a pleb. We have had the police investigating a Sussex MP describing a constituent as unkempt. Now we are having a Council hearing behind closed doors because a councillor make a comment about a toy in a shop window.
It is good to know that we live such happy carefree lives, with no serious problems to worry about!
We have had a major enquiry about a cabinet minister allegedly calling a policeman a pleb. We have had the police investigating a Sussex MP describing a constituent as unkempt. Now we are having a Council hearing behind closed doors because a councillor make a comment about a toy in a shop window. It is good to know that we live such happy carefree lives, with no serious problems to worry about! Sussex jim

10:03am Wed 18 Dec 13

pithound says...

I think I will emigrate to North Korea. After decades living in Brighton I doubt that I will notice much change in the secretive style of governance.
I think I will emigrate to North Korea. After decades living in Brighton I doubt that I will notice much change in the secretive style of governance. pithound

10:28am Wed 18 Dec 13

salty_pete says...

This is reminiscent of the PC brigades' opposition to the naming of the Black Dyke Band when they performed in New York. It is bad law that allows subjective opinions to be given credibility. People will often take offence when none is intended, it shouldn't mean they are hauled before a kangaroo court.
This is reminiscent of the PC brigades' opposition to the naming of the Black Dyke Band when they performed in New York. It is bad law that allows subjective opinions to be given credibility. People will often take offence when none is intended, it shouldn't mean they are hauled before a kangaroo court. salty_pete

10:31am Wed 18 Dec 13

Roy Pennington says...

previous papers, now censored, here retrieved
http://brightonbygol
ly.wordpress.com/

the reason , it seems, for the ban is that there was security incident at the previous meeting and therefore to avoid the possible repeated racial abuse the meeting will be held 'in camera' unless the Panel members decide otherwise.
previous papers, now censored, here retrieved http://brightonbygol ly.wordpress.com/ the reason , it seems, for the ban is that there was security incident at the previous meeting and therefore to avoid the possible repeated racial abuse the meeting will be held 'in camera' unless the Panel members decide otherwise. Roy Pennington

10:45am Wed 18 Dec 13

Council Pounder says...

Fight_Back wrote:
This screams cover up, corruption and conspiracy by the council and it's officers. Let us not forget that one of the complainers was a council employee - Tim Read - who told Cllr Barnett's constituents that they would be better off paying out of their own pockets to put CCTV on their own properties as the council didn't have the money to install CCTV for the local area. CCTV is needed to help fight the anti-social behaviour and drug dealers in the area. Maybe the council would have the money to put in CCTV if idiots like Mr Read didn't raise ridiculous complaints like this one.
I too have spoken with Tim Read about anti-social behaviour and found him very helpful and supportive, as were the other members of his team that I dealt with. If you genuinely believe he gave you wrong advice or didn't do his job then you should make a formal complaint. Critisising individual council officers on a public forum where they have no right of reply smacks of bullying behaviour.
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: This screams cover up, corruption and conspiracy by the council and it's officers. Let us not forget that one of the complainers was a council employee - Tim Read - who told Cllr Barnett's constituents that they would be better off paying out of their own pockets to put CCTV on their own properties as the council didn't have the money to install CCTV for the local area. CCTV is needed to help fight the anti-social behaviour and drug dealers in the area. Maybe the council would have the money to put in CCTV if idiots like Mr Read didn't raise ridiculous complaints like this one.[/p][/quote]I too have spoken with Tim Read about anti-social behaviour and found him very helpful and supportive, as were the other members of his team that I dealt with. If you genuinely believe he gave you wrong advice or didn't do his job then you should make a formal complaint. Critisising individual council officers on a public forum where they have no right of reply smacks of bullying behaviour. Council Pounder

10:47am Wed 18 Dec 13

Fight_Back says...

In addition to one of the people complaining being Tim Read ( a council employee ) it transpires one of the others is a certain Dan Hermitage. I'll give you one guess who his employer is !!!!

So we have two council officers raising petty complaints about an elected councillor. I'd suggest it is they who are bringing the council into disrepute and should face disciplinary action for wasting taxpayers money. I'd also be interested if they raised the complaints during their work time and using council provide equipment and technology ?
In addition to one of the people complaining being Tim Read ( a council employee ) it transpires one of the others is a certain Dan Hermitage. I'll give you one guess who his employer is !!!! So we have two council officers raising petty complaints about an elected councillor. I'd suggest it is they who are bringing the council into disrepute and should face disciplinary action for wasting taxpayers money. I'd also be interested if they raised the complaints during their work time and using council provide equipment and technology ? Fight_Back

10:49am Wed 18 Dec 13

Fight_Back says...

Council Pounder wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
This screams cover up, corruption and conspiracy by the council and it's officers. Let us not forget that one of the complainers was a council employee - Tim Read - who told Cllr Barnett's constituents that they would be better off paying out of their own pockets to put CCTV on their own properties as the council didn't have the money to install CCTV for the local area. CCTV is needed to help fight the anti-social behaviour and drug dealers in the area. Maybe the council would have the money to put in CCTV if idiots like Mr Read didn't raise ridiculous complaints like this one.
I too have spoken with Tim Read about anti-social behaviour and found him very helpful and supportive, as were the other members of his team that I dealt with. If you genuinely believe he gave you wrong advice or didn't do his job then you should make a formal complaint. Critisising individual council officers on a public forum where they have no right of reply smacks of bullying behaviour.
He has every right of reply on here.
[quote][p][bold]Council Pounder[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: This screams cover up, corruption and conspiracy by the council and it's officers. Let us not forget that one of the complainers was a council employee - Tim Read - who told Cllr Barnett's constituents that they would be better off paying out of their own pockets to put CCTV on their own properties as the council didn't have the money to install CCTV for the local area. CCTV is needed to help fight the anti-social behaviour and drug dealers in the area. Maybe the council would have the money to put in CCTV if idiots like Mr Read didn't raise ridiculous complaints like this one.[/p][/quote]I too have spoken with Tim Read about anti-social behaviour and found him very helpful and supportive, as were the other members of his team that I dealt with. If you genuinely believe he gave you wrong advice or didn't do his job then you should make a formal complaint. Critisising individual council officers on a public forum where they have no right of reply smacks of bullying behaviour.[/p][/quote]He has every right of reply on here. Fight_Back

11:07am Wed 18 Dec 13

Aronlip says...

BURIRAM wrote:
Gollywogs are not racist, I am Black and I love Gollywogs. People who say things are racist when they are not are troublemakers who have nothing better to do in there life and there are plenty of them in Brighton. Next thing you will hear is that Jelly Babies are banned as they promote child abuse when you bite them.
Surely jelly babies are sexist. You get more Jelly baby when thay are all boys than when they are all girls.
[quote][p][bold]BURIRAM[/bold] wrote: Gollywogs are not racist, I am Black and I love Gollywogs. People who say things are racist when they are not are troublemakers who have nothing better to do in there life and there are plenty of them in Brighton. Next thing you will hear is that Jelly Babies are banned as they promote child abuse when you bite them.[/p][/quote]Surely jelly babies are sexist. You get more Jelly baby when thay are all boys than when they are all girls. Aronlip

11:13am Wed 18 Dec 13

ThinkBrighton says...

What next? Gingerbreadmen or jelly babes.
It's about time this group of know nothing over paid biggots tried to do what they are paid for RUNNING THE CITY and not victimising (which is just as bad as racism) a person who has commited no wrong
What next? Gingerbreadmen or jelly babes. It's about time this group of know nothing over paid biggots tried to do what they are paid for RUNNING THE CITY and not victimising (which is just as bad as racism) a person who has commited no wrong ThinkBrighton

11:14am Wed 18 Dec 13

mimseycal says...

Roy Pennington wrote:
previous papers, now censored, here retrieved
http://brightonbygol

ly.wordpress.com/

the reason , it seems, for the ban is that there was security incident at the previous meeting and therefore to avoid the possible repeated racial abuse the meeting will be held 'in camera' unless the Panel members decide otherwise.
Not good enough. Fear of the possible, the probable even should never be an excuse to avoid doing the right thing. Witness the suffragettes, witness the human rights campaigners, witness the abolition movement.

It reeks of a kangeroo court where the decision has already been made and they are just going through the steps to justify it. The whole thing reeks to high heaven and beyond.
[quote][p][bold]Roy Pennington[/bold] wrote: previous papers, now censored, here retrieved http://brightonbygol ly.wordpress.com/ the reason , it seems, for the ban is that there was security incident at the previous meeting and therefore to avoid the possible repeated racial abuse the meeting will be held 'in camera' unless the Panel members decide otherwise.[/p][/quote]Not good enough. Fear of the possible, the probable even should never be an excuse to avoid doing the right thing. Witness the suffragettes, witness the human rights campaigners, witness the abolition movement. It reeks of a kangeroo court where the decision has already been made and they are just going through the steps to justify it. The whole thing reeks to high heaven and beyond. mimseycal

11:17am Wed 18 Dec 13

mimseycal says...

ThinkBrighton wrote:
What next? Gingerbreadmen or jelly babes.
It's about time this group of know nothing over paid biggots tried to do what they are paid for RUNNING THE CITY and not victimising (which is just as bad as racism) a person who has commited no wrong
The BMEWF aren't running the city. They just blackmail the council.
[quote][p][bold]ThinkBrighton[/bold] wrote: What next? Gingerbreadmen or jelly babes. It's about time this group of know nothing over paid biggots tried to do what they are paid for RUNNING THE CITY and not victimising (which is just as bad as racism) a person who has commited no wrong[/p][/quote]The BMEWF aren't running the city. They just blackmail the council. mimseycal

12:07pm Wed 18 Dec 13

Old Ale Man says...

It is the decision made by the officer conducting the meeting to hold it behind closed doors and the complainants are B&HCC staff , if you can call them members of the public?
It is the decision made by the officer conducting the meeting to hold it behind closed doors and the complainants are B&HCC staff , if you can call them members of the public? Old Ale Man

12:09pm Wed 18 Dec 13

mimseycal says...

Old Ale Man wrote:
It is the decision made by the officer conducting the meeting to hold it behind closed doors and the complainants are B&HCC staff , if you can call them members of the public?
Not all the complainants are members of staff at BHCC. One at least does not work for BHCC. Aside from which, being employed by BHCC does not of necessity mean you are no longer a member of the public.
[quote][p][bold]Old Ale Man[/bold] wrote: It is the decision made by the officer conducting the meeting to hold it behind closed doors and the complainants are B&HCC staff , if you can call them members of the public?[/p][/quote]Not all the complainants are members of staff at BHCC. One at least does not work for BHCC. Aside from which, being employed by BHCC does not of necessity mean you are no longer a member of the public. mimseycal

12:29pm Wed 18 Dec 13

DistinctLackOfGravitas says...

Guys, if anyone's interested I've got some great anti-semitic Nazi propaganda posters for sale, they're really "nostalgic" for that "bygone era" when "opinions were slightly different". They weren't offensive in the historical context of 1940s Germany so obviously they're not offensive to anyone now either.
Guys, if anyone's interested I've got some great anti-semitic Nazi propaganda posters for sale, they're really "nostalgic" for that "bygone era" when "opinions were slightly different". They weren't offensive in the historical context of 1940s Germany so obviously they're not offensive to anyone now either. DistinctLackOfGravitas

12:31pm Wed 18 Dec 13

Fight_Back says...

mimseycal wrote:
Old Ale Man wrote:
It is the decision made by the officer conducting the meeting to hold it behind closed doors and the complainants are B&HCC staff , if you can call them members of the public?
Not all the complainants are members of staff at BHCC. One at least does not work for BHCC. Aside from which, being employed by BHCC does not of necessity mean you are no longer a member of the public.
Of the 4 complainants :

2 are B&H Council employees
1 has worked closely with the council on tenancy issues
The fourth I suspect has links to the council based on the sector he works in

Of the 2 council employees at least one has had a run in with Cllr Barnett a number of times and I believe both employees work together.

Having read the complaints I'd suggest all are whimsical and fairly pointless with one of them being pages and pages of diatribe written by someone with the worlds biggest chip carefully balanced on their shoulder.

You are right, council employees are members of the public, voters and tax payers BUT this smells like a witch hunt, tastes like a witch hunt and looks like a witch hunt - which means in all probability it IS a witch hunt.

Cllr Barnett has upset a number of council officers over the years - they clearly thought this was a change to get her back - at least now their identities are public and their conspiring is open for all to see.
[quote][p][bold]mimseycal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Old Ale Man[/bold] wrote: It is the decision made by the officer conducting the meeting to hold it behind closed doors and the complainants are B&HCC staff , if you can call them members of the public?[/p][/quote]Not all the complainants are members of staff at BHCC. One at least does not work for BHCC. Aside from which, being employed by BHCC does not of necessity mean you are no longer a member of the public.[/p][/quote]Of the 4 complainants : 2 are B&H Council employees 1 has worked closely with the council on tenancy issues The fourth I suspect has links to the council based on the sector he works in Of the 2 council employees at least one has had a run in with Cllr Barnett a number of times and I believe both employees work together. Having read the complaints I'd suggest all are whimsical and fairly pointless with one of them being pages and pages of diatribe written by someone with the worlds biggest chip carefully balanced on their shoulder. You are right, council employees are members of the public, voters and tax payers BUT this smells like a witch hunt, tastes like a witch hunt and looks like a witch hunt - which means in all probability it IS a witch hunt. Cllr Barnett has upset a number of council officers over the years - they clearly thought this was a change to get her back - at least now their identities are public and their conspiring is open for all to see. Fight_Back

12:56pm Wed 18 Dec 13

mimseycal says...

I agree with you that this smells like a witch-hunt. However the witch-hunt goes beyond Dawn Barnett. The BMEWF wants BHCC to raise the bar on racism.

As for the working closely on resident issues ... being appointed a member of a panel is one thing. It requires actually turning up to meetings before you can be considered involved.
I agree with you that this smells like a witch-hunt. However the witch-hunt goes beyond Dawn Barnett. The BMEWF wants BHCC to raise the bar on racism. As for the working closely on resident issues ... being appointed a member of a panel is one thing. It requires actually turning up to meetings before you can be considered involved. mimseycal

1:33pm Wed 18 Dec 13

mimseycal says...

DistinctLackOfGravit
as
wrote:
Guys, if anyone's interested I've got some great anti-semitic Nazi propaganda posters for sale, they're really "nostalgic" for that "bygone era" when "opinions were slightly different". They weren't offensive in the historical context of 1940s Germany so obviously they're not offensive to anyone now either.
What I as the Jewish descendant of of a family that was almost totally wiped out in the concentration camps, including a 9 and 11 year old girl and boy with their parents in Auschwitz, find offensive is that anyone would think that I am that emotionally, socially and intellectually undeveloped that I cannot tell the difference between then and now. That I need protecting from a past by removing all references to that past.

And you are wrong by the way. Those posters were as 'offensive' then as they are now. The only difference really is that now you can only throw me in jail after full due process and not merely because I happen to be a Jew.

But by all means discuss 'offensive' and the extend to which people should be protected from being offended ... because in effect that is what all this amounts to really.
[quote][p][bold]DistinctLackOfGravit as[/bold] wrote: Guys, if anyone's interested I've got some great anti-semitic Nazi propaganda posters for sale, they're really "nostalgic" for that "bygone era" when "opinions were slightly different". They weren't offensive in the historical context of 1940s Germany so obviously they're not offensive to anyone now either.[/p][/quote]What I as the Jewish descendant of of a family that was almost totally wiped out in the concentration camps, including a 9 and 11 year old girl and boy with their parents in Auschwitz, find offensive is that anyone would think that I am that emotionally, socially and intellectually undeveloped that I cannot tell the difference between then and now. That I need protecting from a past by removing all references to that past. And you are wrong by the way. Those posters were as 'offensive' then as they are now. The only difference really is that now you can only throw me in jail after full due process and not merely because I happen to be a Jew. But by all means discuss 'offensive' and the extend to which people should be protected from being offended ... because in effect that is what all this amounts to really. mimseycal

1:59pm Wed 18 Dec 13

thevoiceoftruth says...

DistinctLackOfGravit
as
wrote:
Guys, if anyone's interested I've got some great anti-semitic Nazi propaganda posters for sale, they're really "nostalgic" for that "bygone era" when "opinions were slightly different". They weren't offensive in the historical context of 1940s Germany so obviously they're not offensive to anyone now either.
This comment just shows your ignorance of the subject. To compare mass genocide with a doll is absolutely ridiculous.

If you read up in the history of the golliwog then you would know that initially he was the hero of the book. Yes, there were negative depictions of Golly in Enid Blyton books for example, but there are plenty of positive depictions.

Gollywogs are frowned upon simply because the name was used as a racist slur. Yet racism still exists, even though it's rare to see a Golly these days.

Comparing a vintage Robertsons ad with Nazi propaganda is just another way to silence anyone who disagrees with you.
[quote][p][bold]DistinctLackOfGravit as[/bold] wrote: Guys, if anyone's interested I've got some great anti-semitic Nazi propaganda posters for sale, they're really "nostalgic" for that "bygone era" when "opinions were slightly different". They weren't offensive in the historical context of 1940s Germany so obviously they're not offensive to anyone now either.[/p][/quote]This comment just shows your ignorance of the subject. To compare mass genocide with a doll is absolutely ridiculous. If you read up in the history of the golliwog then you would know that initially he was the hero of the book. Yes, there were negative depictions of Golly in Enid Blyton books for example, but there are plenty of positive depictions. Gollywogs are frowned upon simply because the name was used as a racist slur. Yet racism still exists, even though it's rare to see a Golly these days. Comparing a vintage Robertsons ad with Nazi propaganda is just another way to silence anyone who disagrees with you. thevoiceoftruth

2:31pm Wed 18 Dec 13

Man of steel says...

For those of you that have not looked at the Standards Panel 74 page report on http://brightonbygol
ly.files.wordpress.c
om/2013/12/dawn-barn
ett-standards-agenda
-28-11-13.pdf I copied the relevant bits here, however they seem to contradict themselves, at 3.5 and 3.6 they state the Dawn has done no wrong, but then at 3.7a and 3.7b they state that she has.
The rest of the document are the complants from Mr Hermitage, Mr T Read,
Mr N Madhar and Brighton & Hove City Council Black and
Minority Ethnic Workers Forum.
The complaint from Mr Madhar is long and rambling, mostly comparing Dawn with dictator type regimes abroad.
3. CONTEXT/ BACKGROUND INFORMATION
3.1 The investigation concerns a complaint raised by f
our separate individuals and groups into an
allegation of member misconduct by Councillor Dawn Barnett.
3.2 The complaints raised refer to comments made by
Councillor Barnett in her capacity as an elected Member
to the Argus newspaper on 30 August 2013.
3.3 The newspaper article focussed on the sale of golliwog
placemats by a Brighton store which had received objections
about the sale of the items on the grounds they were
offensive, held negative connotations and reopened old wounds.
3.4 Councillor Barnett told the newspaper reporter that golliwogs
were nostalgic, not racist, and complaints about them were
“political correctness gone too far”.
3.5 The finding of the investigation is Councillor Barnett has
not personally directed a disrespectful or racist remark
against any individual or group and has therefore not breached
the requirement to treat others with respect.
3.6 Secondly, the investigation found that Councillor Barnett has
not caused the local authority to breach any of its equality
duties.
3.7 However, on a balance of probabilities the investigation does
conclude that Councillor Barnett has brought her office or
authority into disrepute. The main reasons for reaching this
finding are:
a. That her support for and encouragement for the continued sale
of golliwogs, instead of fostering good relations between people
who share a protected characteristic and those who do not,
had the potential to cause division and offend some sections of
the community.
b. The Council has given a commitment to zero tolerance of racist
attitudes and behaviours. Councillor Barnett’s statements to
the newspaper are not consistent with these requirements.
3.8 It will be for the Hearing Panel of the Standards Committee to
reach their findings in respect of the information presented;
and, should they find that a breach of the Code of Conduct did
occur, to determine what sanctions, if any, are applicable.
For those of you that have not looked at the Standards Panel 74 page report on http://brightonbygol ly.files.wordpress.c om/2013/12/dawn-barn ett-standards-agenda -28-11-13.pdf I copied the relevant bits here, however they seem to contradict themselves, at 3.5 and 3.6 they state the Dawn has done no wrong, but then at 3.7a and 3.7b they state that she has. The rest of the document are the complants from Mr Hermitage, Mr T Read, Mr N Madhar and Brighton & Hove City Council Black and Minority Ethnic Workers Forum. The complaint from Mr Madhar is long and rambling, mostly comparing Dawn with dictator type regimes abroad. 3. CONTEXT/ BACKGROUND INFORMATION 3.1 The investigation concerns a complaint raised by f our separate individuals and groups into an allegation of member misconduct by Councillor Dawn Barnett. 3.2 The complaints raised refer to comments made by Councillor Barnett in her capacity as an elected Member to the Argus newspaper on 30 August 2013. 3.3 The newspaper article focussed on the sale of golliwog placemats by a Brighton store which had received objections about the sale of the items on the grounds they were offensive, held negative connotations and reopened old wounds. 3.4 Councillor Barnett told the newspaper reporter that golliwogs were nostalgic, not racist, and complaints about them were “political correctness gone too far”. 3.5 The finding of the investigation is Councillor Barnett has not personally directed a disrespectful or racist remark against any individual or group and has therefore not breached the requirement to treat others with respect. 3.6 Secondly, the investigation found that Councillor Barnett has not caused the local authority to breach any of its equality duties. 3.7 However, on a balance of probabilities the investigation does conclude that Councillor Barnett has brought her office or authority into disrepute. The main reasons for reaching this finding are: a. That her support for and encouragement for the continued sale of golliwogs, instead of fostering good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not, had the potential to cause division and offend some sections of the community. b. The Council has given a commitment to zero tolerance of racist attitudes and behaviours. Councillor Barnett’s statements to the newspaper are not consistent with these requirements. 3.8 It will be for the Hearing Panel of the Standards Committee to reach their findings in respect of the information presented; and, should they find that a breach of the Code of Conduct did occur, to determine what sanctions, if any, are applicable. Man of steel

2:55pm Wed 18 Dec 13

mimseycal says...

Well, I intend to arrive at Hove Town Hall tomorrow morning in good time to attend the Hearing as a member of the public. If they won't let me in, then I will sit outside ... No way will I allow this hearing to be held in the secretive obscurity that modern 'star chambers' delight in.
Well, I intend to arrive at Hove Town Hall tomorrow morning in good time to attend the Hearing as a member of the public. If they won't let me in, then I will sit outside ... No way will I allow this hearing to be held in the secretive obscurity that modern 'star chambers' delight in. mimseycal

3:44pm Wed 18 Dec 13

RaveyDavey says...

Aronlip wrote:
BURIRAM wrote:
Gollywogs are not racist, I am Black and I love Gollywogs. People who say things are racist when they are not are troublemakers who have nothing better to do in there life and there are plenty of them in Brighton. Next thing you will hear is that Jelly Babies are banned as they promote child abuse when you bite them.
Surely jelly babies are sexist. You get more Jelly baby when thay are all boys than when they are all girls.
Probably depends upon how big their jelly boobies are?
[quote][p][bold]Aronlip[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BURIRAM[/bold] wrote: Gollywogs are not racist, I am Black and I love Gollywogs. People who say things are racist when they are not are troublemakers who have nothing better to do in there life and there are plenty of them in Brighton. Next thing you will hear is that Jelly Babies are banned as they promote child abuse when you bite them.[/p][/quote]Surely jelly babies are sexist. You get more Jelly baby when thay are all boys than when they are all girls.[/p][/quote]Probably depends upon how big their jelly boobies are? RaveyDavey

3:45pm Wed 18 Dec 13

kmhove says...

I am offended. Genuinely and deeply by this Golliwog business. (And this is no joke or facetious comment) I am deeply offended that any council body should deem it necessary to bring such proceedings against a councillor who expressed a personal opinion, whoever they expressed it to and under whatever circumstances, and I think it is THEY, the councillors and unelected officials behind this complaint who bring the council into disrepute, not Dawn Barnett.
But of course, I am only a genuine member of the rate paying, voting public, so my being offended is of no account.
I did not vote any councillor into office to become involved in matters like this.. I voted them in to manage the day to day running of the town. Unfortunatelyl that is far too mundane a task for many of them who consider that their high role is to indoctronate us all with their views and opinions.
The so called "zero tolerance" of the council reminds me of the quote that "I will not tolerate intolerance" !
I am offended.
I am offended. Genuinely and deeply by this Golliwog business. (And this is no joke or facetious comment) I am deeply offended that any council body should deem it necessary to bring such proceedings against a councillor who expressed a personal opinion, whoever they expressed it to and under whatever circumstances, and I think it is THEY, the councillors and unelected officials behind this complaint who bring the council into disrepute, not Dawn Barnett. But of course, I am only a genuine member of the rate paying, voting public, so my being offended is of no account. I did not vote any councillor into office to become involved in matters like this.. I voted them in to manage the day to day running of the town. Unfortunatelyl that is far too mundane a task for many of them who consider that their high role is to indoctronate us all with their views and opinions. The so called "zero tolerance" of the council reminds me of the quote that "I will not tolerate intolerance" ! I am offended. kmhove

4:00pm Wed 18 Dec 13

Brighton1000 says...

Fight_Back wrote:
Council Pounder wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
This screams cover up, corruption and conspiracy by the council and it's officers. Let us not forget that one of the complainers was a council employee - Tim Read - who told Cllr Barnett's constituents that they would be better off paying out of their own pockets to put CCTV on their own properties as the council didn't have the money to install CCTV for the local area. CCTV is needed to help fight the anti-social behaviour and drug dealers in the area. Maybe the council would have the money to put in CCTV if idiots like Mr Read didn't raise ridiculous complaints like this one.
I too have spoken with Tim Read about anti-social behaviour and found him very helpful and supportive, as were the other members of his team that I dealt with. If you genuinely believe he gave you wrong advice or didn't do his job then you should make a formal complaint. Critisising individual council officers on a public forum where they have no right of reply smacks of bullying behaviour.
He has every right of reply on here.
Bullying behaviour? The guy is giving his opinion? Formal complaint, Jesus no wonder this city is in such a mess, All you lot seem to wanna do is infight with each other! Get out of Brighton!!!!! FFS
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Council Pounder[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: This screams cover up, corruption and conspiracy by the council and it's officers. Let us not forget that one of the complainers was a council employee - Tim Read - who told Cllr Barnett's constituents that they would be better off paying out of their own pockets to put CCTV on their own properties as the council didn't have the money to install CCTV for the local area. CCTV is needed to help fight the anti-social behaviour and drug dealers in the area. Maybe the council would have the money to put in CCTV if idiots like Mr Read didn't raise ridiculous complaints like this one.[/p][/quote]I too have spoken with Tim Read about anti-social behaviour and found him very helpful and supportive, as were the other members of his team that I dealt with. If you genuinely believe he gave you wrong advice or didn't do his job then you should make a formal complaint. Critisising individual council officers on a public forum where they have no right of reply smacks of bullying behaviour.[/p][/quote]He has every right of reply on here.[/p][/quote]Bullying behaviour? The guy is giving his opinion? Formal complaint, Jesus no wonder this city is in such a mess, All you lot seem to wanna do is infight with each other! Get out of Brighton!!!!! FFS Brighton1000

6:45pm Wed 18 Dec 13

stir up says...

As has been said what next, we cannot make jokes about other nationalities but it is OK for them to make jokes about us and our country. Golliwogs have no political relevance what so ever, To me in my opinion Barbie Dolls are offensive as they a load of rubbish, as are those who live in this country and take all the advantages this provides and then set themselves up to stop other people getting on with their lives by setting up minority groups about anything they can think of they do not like. They are stop this stop that types.
As to the closed doors hearing perhaps some one should use the act that allows you to access information under the Freedom oi Information legislation. That would really upset the council.
As has been said what next, we cannot make jokes about other nationalities but it is OK for them to make jokes about us and our country. Golliwogs have no political relevance what so ever, To me in my opinion Barbie Dolls are offensive as they a load of rubbish, as are those who live in this country and take all the advantages this provides and then set themselves up to stop other people getting on with their lives by setting up minority groups about anything they can think of they do not like. They are stop this stop that types. As to the closed doors hearing perhaps some one should use the act that allows you to access information under the Freedom oi Information legislation. That would really upset the council. stir up

6:51pm Wed 18 Dec 13

Brighton1000 says...

stir up wrote:
As has been said what next, we cannot make jokes about other nationalities but it is OK for them to make jokes about us and our country. Golliwogs have no political relevance what so ever, To me in my opinion Barbie Dolls are offensive as they a load of rubbish, as are those who live in this country and take all the advantages this provides and then set themselves up to stop other people getting on with their lives by setting up minority groups about anything they can think of they do not like. They are stop this stop that types.
As to the closed doors hearing perhaps some one should use the act that allows you to access information under the Freedom oi Information legislation. That would really upset the council.
Barbie is fit though, You cant take that away from her
[quote][p][bold]stir up[/bold] wrote: As has been said what next, we cannot make jokes about other nationalities but it is OK for them to make jokes about us and our country. Golliwogs have no political relevance what so ever, To me in my opinion Barbie Dolls are offensive as they a load of rubbish, as are those who live in this country and take all the advantages this provides and then set themselves up to stop other people getting on with their lives by setting up minority groups about anything they can think of they do not like. They are stop this stop that types. As to the closed doors hearing perhaps some one should use the act that allows you to access information under the Freedom oi Information legislation. That would really upset the council.[/p][/quote]Barbie is fit though, You cant take that away from her Brighton1000

7:18pm Wed 18 Dec 13

Idontbelieveit1948 says...

mimseycal wrote:
ThinkBrighton wrote:
What next? Gingerbreadmen or jelly babes.
It's about time this group of know nothing over paid biggots tried to do what they are paid for RUNNING THE CITY and not victimising (which is just as bad as racism) a person who has commited no wrong
The BMEWF aren't running the city. They just blackmail the council.
Careful, you said "blackmail", you know where this kind of language can get you !!!!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]mimseycal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThinkBrighton[/bold] wrote: What next? Gingerbreadmen or jelly babes. It's about time this group of know nothing over paid biggots tried to do what they are paid for RUNNING THE CITY and not victimising (which is just as bad as racism) a person who has commited no wrong[/p][/quote]The BMEWF aren't running the city. They just blackmail the council.[/p][/quote]Careful, you said "blackmail", you know where this kind of language can get you !!!!!!!!! Idontbelieveit1948

7:26pm Wed 18 Dec 13

Idontbelieveit1948 says...

A nursery rhyme for our increasingly absurd times :-

Local politics are becoming so fraught,
And tempers are becoming too short,
Us locals are fearing
The golliwog hearing
Is just a kangaroo court
A nursery rhyme for our increasingly absurd times :- Local politics are becoming so fraught, And tempers are becoming too short, Us locals are fearing The golliwog hearing Is just a kangaroo court Idontbelieveit1948

7:44pm Wed 18 Dec 13

mimseycal says...

Idontbelieveit1948 wrote:
mimseycal wrote:
ThinkBrighton wrote:
What next? Gingerbreadmen or jelly babes.
It's about time this group of know nothing over paid biggots tried to do what they are paid for RUNNING THE CITY and not victimising (which is just as bad as racism) a person who has commited no wrong
The BMEWF aren't running the city. They just blackmail the council.
Careful, you said "blackmail", you know where this kind of language can get you !!!!!!!!!
Read the paperwork and you will see that the charge of blackmail is justified.
[quote][p][bold]Idontbelieveit1948[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mimseycal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThinkBrighton[/bold] wrote: What next? Gingerbreadmen or jelly babes. It's about time this group of know nothing over paid biggots tried to do what they are paid for RUNNING THE CITY and not victimising (which is just as bad as racism) a person who has commited no wrong[/p][/quote]The BMEWF aren't running the city. They just blackmail the council.[/p][/quote]Careful, you said "blackmail", you know where this kind of language can get you !!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Read the paperwork and you will see that the charge of blackmail is justified. mimseycal

11:00pm Wed 18 Dec 13

ghost bus driver says...

BURIRAM wrote:
Gollywogs are not racist, I am Black and I love Gollywogs. People who say things are racist when they are not are troublemakers who have nothing better to do in there life and there are plenty of them in Brighton.
Next thing you will hear is that Jelly Babies are banned as they promote child abuse when you bite them.
First the head, then the body, then the legs.

But then you do need to be wearing an insane scarf when you eat them.
[quote][p][bold]BURIRAM[/bold] wrote: Gollywogs are not racist, I am Black and I love Gollywogs. People who say things are racist when they are not are troublemakers who have nothing better to do in there life and there are plenty of them in Brighton. Next thing you will hear is that Jelly Babies are banned as they promote child abuse when you bite them.[/p][/quote]First the head, then the body, then the legs. But then you do need to be wearing an insane scarf when you eat them. ghost bus driver

2:15pm Thu 19 Dec 13

downbythesea says...

Gollywogs? Politically correct nonsense, it infuriates me that some people have nothing better to do than try to whitewash history, most SANE people would agree it is something from the past, and only treated as "racist" by PC loonies and moaners with flap all better to do!
Gollywogs? Politically correct nonsense, it infuriates me that some people have nothing better to do than try to whitewash history, most SANE people would agree it is something from the past, and only treated as "racist" by PC loonies and moaners with flap all better to do! downbythesea

6:50pm Thu 19 Dec 13

Idontbelieveit1948 says...

downbythesea wrote:
Gollywogs? Politically correct nonsense, it infuriates me that some people have nothing better to do than try to whitewash history, most SANE people would agree it is something from the past, and only treated as "racist" by PC loonies and moaners with flap all better to do!
Careful, you said "whitewash" you know where this kind of language can get you !!!!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]downbythesea[/bold] wrote: Gollywogs? Politically correct nonsense, it infuriates me that some people have nothing better to do than try to whitewash history, most SANE people would agree it is something from the past, and only treated as "racist" by PC loonies and moaners with flap all better to do![/p][/quote]Careful, you said "whitewash" you know where this kind of language can get you !!!!!!!!! Idontbelieveit1948

7:06pm Thu 19 Dec 13

downbythesea says...

Idontbelieveit1948 wrote:
downbythesea wrote:
Gollywogs? Politically correct nonsense, it infuriates me that some people have nothing better to do than try to whitewash history, most SANE people would agree it is something from the past, and only treated as "racist" by PC loonies and moaners with flap all better to do!
Careful, you said "whitewash" you know where this kind of language can get you !!!!!!!!!
aaagh yes, you're right, I meant to say "non specific coloured pigment washed"!
[quote][p][bold]Idontbelieveit1948[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]downbythesea[/bold] wrote: Gollywogs? Politically correct nonsense, it infuriates me that some people have nothing better to do than try to whitewash history, most SANE people would agree it is something from the past, and only treated as "racist" by PC loonies and moaners with flap all better to do![/p][/quote]Careful, you said "whitewash" you know where this kind of language can get you !!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]aaagh yes, you're right, I meant to say "non specific coloured pigment washed"! downbythesea

12:38am Fri 20 Dec 13

Man of steel says...

So what happened?
Or is that secret as well?
So what happened? Or is that secret as well? Man of steel

12:47am Fri 20 Dec 13

mimseycal says...

The result will be made public. I did ask for a time but best we were told is hopefully Monday ...
The result will be made public. I did ask for a time but best we were told is hopefully Monday ... mimseycal

2:51pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Richada says...

BURIRAM wrote:
Gollywogs are not racist, I am Black and I love Gollywogs. People who say things are racist when they are not are troublemakers who have nothing better to do in there life and there are plenty of them in Brighton.
Next thing you will hear is that Jelly Babies are banned as they promote child abuse when you bite them.
Thank you!

A voice of reason.
[quote][p][bold]BURIRAM[/bold] wrote: Gollywogs are not racist, I am Black and I love Gollywogs. People who say things are racist when they are not are troublemakers who have nothing better to do in there life and there are plenty of them in Brighton. Next thing you will hear is that Jelly Babies are banned as they promote child abuse when you bite them.[/p][/quote]Thank you! A voice of reason. Richada

2:56pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Richada says...

Roy Pennington wrote:
previous papers, now censored, here retrieved
http://brightonbygol

ly.wordpress.com/

the reason , it seems, for the ban is that there was security incident at the previous meeting and therefore to avoid the possible repeated racial abuse the meeting will be held 'in camera' unless the Panel members decide otherwise.
"Security incident"?

Did someone take a jar of Robinsons into the previous meeting?
[quote][p][bold]Roy Pennington[/bold] wrote: previous papers, now censored, here retrieved http://brightonbygol ly.wordpress.com/ the reason , it seems, for the ban is that there was security incident at the previous meeting and therefore to avoid the possible repeated racial abuse the meeting will be held 'in camera' unless the Panel members decide otherwise.[/p][/quote]"Security incident"? Did someone take a jar of Robinsons into the previous meeting? Richada

3:16pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Richada says...

mimseycal wrote:
The result will be made public. I did ask for a time but best we were told is hopefully Monday ...
Sounds just like our rubbish collection that...............
[quote][p][bold]mimseycal[/bold] wrote: The result will be made public. I did ask for a time but best we were told is hopefully Monday ...[/p][/quote]Sounds just like our rubbish collection that............... Richada

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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