PughTube: Not ‘Acting In An Official Capacity’ Leaked To IW Radio

At 7am this morning IW Radio were reporting that a sub-committee of the Ethical Standards Committee (ESC) at the Isle of Wight Council have concluded that David Pugh did not break the Code of Conduct when he shouted expletives at the partner of local MP, Andrew Turner in the car park outside the Valentine’s Ball of the Council Chairman.

David PughThe findings have not been officially be released by the council.

They say that the Assessment Sub-Committee of the ESC found that David Pugh, Leader of the Council and Shanklin County Councillor, was not “acting in an official capacity,” so therefore did not break the Code of Conduct.

The decision was made after a member of the public lodged a complaint against Cllr Pugh.

The radio report went on to say that this element of the complaint made by Cllrs Bacon, Lumley and Welsford earlier in the week would also be dismissed.

Information not officially released
We haven’t had any word of this finding, nor has another Island paper that we spoke to today.

Naturally, we contacted the council press office first thing today, but they tell us that the findings of the sub-committee haven’t officially been released.

Given the number of comments that the PughTube story has generated – over 670 as we write – letting VB readers know the findings would have been an obvious choice.

The information must have been leaked to Isle of Wight radio with sufficient time for them to have had David Pugh into the studio to record his reaction, so they could prepare and run the story at 7am today.

We’ve emailed David Pugh for a statement.

This leak occurs the day before The Gazette has promised to ‘tell all’ about the night that included David Pugh’s outburst.

Advertisement
Subscribe
Email updates?
61 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Cicero
15, December 2015 11:59 am

Good on yer Sally! Thank goodness for professional journalists!

Vix Lowthion
15, December 2015 12:21 pm

Thank you OTW for this. It means I can follow this meeting at my desk in my lunch hour, because I cannot attend as I am at work.

craig williams
15, December 2015 1:03 pm

Whats the chances of having a line into newport ?

Frank James
Reply to  craig williams
15, December 2015 2:00 pm

Nowhere near as high as having a very pricey and controversial HS2 line elsewhere, and probably nowhere near as high as losing Island Line thanks to Tigger and his friends.

Chris
Reply to  craig williams
16, December 2015 12:42 am

Realistically, nil.

Rod Manley
15, December 2015 2:03 pm

Stewart Blackmore is absolutely right it will ultimately be a political decision made by Claire Perry.

stephen
15, December 2015 4:10 pm

20 minute service would be good but would there be requirements for extra rolling stock and crew to maintain a resilient diagram of train movements.

Presumably clever timetabling to get passing points at St Johns, Sandown & possibly Brading – in case of late running – would be necessary.

Chris
Reply to  stephen
16, December 2015 12:45 am

I understand an unadvertised 20min service has been run occasionally in recent years, but there’s not much opportunity to make up delays and its rarely justified – rationalisation, with just a loop at Brading, would cut costs and allow a half hourly service.

Richard
16, December 2015 7:51 am

Chris
Are you saying we should just have the one loop at Brading and remove all the lines?
This would not allow any flexiability in the event of disruption.

Chris
Reply to  Richard
16, December 2015 6:23 pm

Yes, apparently this is what Network Rail were proposing just a few years ago when they were looking to resignal during the Olympics and realistically a single loop would be perfectly sufficient. Removing the second track between Esplanade and Smallbrook would cut maintenance and renewal costs, allow the Steam Railway to operate into Ryde St Johns, and perhaps see some speed restrictions raised by removing points and… Read more »

Richard
16, December 2015 9:59 pm

Chris How would we maintain flexiability if we have an operational incident? At the moment because we have the infrastructure in place to play trains we can still maintain a service of sorts. Also how does it allow for growth if we give up this infrastructure? How nice would it be to run a service to Newport, but it’s not going to happen because all the infrastructure… Read more »

Chris
Reply to  Richard
17, December 2015 1:12 am

It would make little difference having one passing place instead of alternating between two, especially if the loop at Brading was ‘dynamic’ – long enough that trains can pass at speed rather than stopping to wait. I’m not suggesting selling land off for housing but the current infrastructure was for a 20/20/20 minute service that almost never ran – a single loop will cut renewal and maintenance… Read more »

phil008
19, December 2015 8:41 pm

the biggest mistake here is the length of the franchise, 7-9 years doesnt bode well for any company to invest, why wasnt a longer franchise considered? Chiltern Railways have a 22 year franchise, that enables the company to invest knowing it will re coup its money over the years. Light rail has been suggested and whilst this would reduce costs, the cost to install would be very… Read more »

phil008
21, December 2015 2:38 pm

Heres some rough working out of figures based on information from the franchise consultations on DfT website. Station footfall for Lymington Pier is 123,918. Assuming they travel the length of the branch line at 4.00 for a day return generates 495,672.00. With the half hourly service starting at 06:14 and finishing around 23:00 that would require 3 drivers and 3 guards, plus the need for 2 more… Read more »

reCaptcha Error: grecaptcha is not defined