Public Vote of No Confidence in Teignbridge District Council
We wish to register a vote of No Confidence in the Teignbridge District Council and call for a public enquiry.
We register this vote of No Confidence and lodge a call for a public enquiry in response to the actions of the full Council meeting on 30th November 2021 where a vote of No Confidence was issued to Councillor Alan Connett and whereupon a highly undemocratic tactic was used to handle this vote of No Confidence
In a response to the issued Vote of No Confidence the Leader, Councillor Alan Connett, revealed a list of misconducts apparently committed by a number of Teignbridge District Council councillors. Members of the public, all of whom who have attended council meetings in the past, personally witnessed highly inappropriate and aggressive behaviour on the part of some councillors toward their colleagues who questioned some of the Council’s decisions during this meeting.
We, the undersigned, as a consequence wish also to register a vote of No Confidence in all councillors voting in support of the Leader.
Furthermore, we have lost all confidence in the planning and decision-making processes of Teignbridge District Council with regards to the housing developments in Newton Abbot and in other areas of Teignbridge.
We have lost all confidence in Teignbridge District Council’s understanding of democracy and its ability to administer the local economy and to comprehend and fulfil their obligations towards the residents
We have reasons to believe that Teignbridge District Council is deliberately ignoring all properly lodged comments and objections which the people of Teignbridge are making with regard to housing developments in the area and that the Council has an agenda of keeping the residents and some councillors at arm's length whilst giving full attention to developers.

One example: TDC lack transparency before and after decisions are taken as evidenced by the lack of democratic consideration to the objection of 5000 petitioners to removing the Alexander Theatre, no consideration was even raised by Councillors or TDC Officers when internally considering the brief for an initial Town Improvement grant application of the existence of the professional theatre facility and no consultation with stakeholders was made before submitting designs removing the theatre to support the TDC application.

We have reasons to believe that Teignbridge District Council is making changes in the constitution of the Council in order substantially to free themselves from any liability for breaching relevant laws and/or from a charge of disrespecting its contractual and moral obligations
The Teignbridge District Council Chief Executive Officer and Leader have been in charge and have handled the financial budget so poorly that a Section 114 must now be considered essential. We believe they are jointly and severally responsible and should be held to
account. We no longer have confidence in the Chief Executive Officer and Leader to administer our local economy.
We, the undersigned, have evidence demonstrating that Teignbridge District Council has no understanding of the requirements of the Coronavirus Act 2020 and has adopted emergency powers without obtaining (as required by the Act) evidence to justify its decisions with regard to implementation of the Act. The ill-judged and prejudicial decision to follow Central Government’s health emergency guidance has caused irreversible damage to our local economy, this decision primarily impacting - with highly negative and continuing consequences - on privately-owned local businesses, privately-owned farms, and on the lives of all residents.
.
Exhibit 1
Replies of Teignbridge District Council to the questions and request for policy review by the public with regard to the adoption by Teignbridge District Council of powers contained in the Coronavirus Act (2020) and the Government health emergency guidance.
Council Leader Alan Connet failed to answer public question during the full council meeting on 20 /2021 September by denying his and Teignbridge District Council’s responsibility for deciding on that matter.
Teignbridge District Council failed to procure and to make available evidence to justify its decision on lockdowns, to implement lockdown restrictions, and to justify its request for extensions of its rights to administer the local economy under the Coronavirus Act (2020).
below- A quote from one of many data’s documents obtained by the members of the public under the freedom of information act clearly showing no evidences of a health emergency in Devon during the lockdown 2020 :
Freedom of information request Ref /DPT 20/21/216 Date. 04/01/2021 – “I want to know how many deaths has been caused by covid only during the period of from 1February 2020 until December 20th, 2020 “Responses: “Devon Partnership NHS Trust has recorded no deaths from covid 19 within the trust for this specific period “
Exhibit 2
Replies of Teignbridge District Council to public questions versus replies received from Freedom of Information requests.
Teignbridge District Council failed to provide and to make available a risk assessment on COVID-19 tests; it failed to provide and to make available a risk assessment on the imposition of mask-wearing; it failed to procure and to make available a risk assessment on the vaccination programme.
Below- FOI request 13186: Please include evidence used to support the proposal/program also including the
detailed information on all brands of Covid “Vaccine “risk assessment data, legal requirement for Vaccine certification, health and safety and liability status, national and regional health, death, burial, cremation, and risk assessment data used by the council to justify the decision to enable Sherborne House in Newton Abbot to become a major vaccination site for the district.https://www.inyourarea.co.uk/news/new-covid-19-vac... https://wearesouthdevon.com/newton-abbot-town-cent...
"Responses : We are unable to answer this question as we do not hold the information asked for. We have been advised and supported by the Director of Public Health at Devon County Council and you may feel it is more appropriate to submit your questions to the County Council
FOI REQUEST Any documents highlighting dates and attendees of the council 2020/2021 health emergency meetings and consultation on national and regional health status, which include: death, hospitalisation, number of hospital beds, burial, and cremation data and the statistics covering the period of each year from 2015 up to and compared to the current date. "Responses: We are unable to answer this question as we do not hold the information asked for. Public Health is managed by Devon County Council.
QUOTE FROM THE CORONA ACT :
It is recommended that local authorities ask their director of public health (DPH) for advice to ensure that there is sufficient evidence for the imposition of any measures. Local authorities must consider any advice that their DPH gives. It is important that the 3 legal conditions are met before a direction is issued. It is for individual local authorities to assess this on a case-by-case basis.
if DPH advice has been given, then a local authority must consider it, and this consideration will form part of the local authority’s overall decision-making. However, a local authority is not bound to follow the advice and could decide to depart from it
a local authority is also not prevented from obtaining advice from other sources (as suggested above) which can be considered and fed into the local authority’s decision
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/local-a...
Exhibit 3
Public questions in regard to Teignbridge District Council’s advertising/promoting experimental medical interventions (the so-termed ‘vaccines’ in respect of the virus SARS-CoV-2 and the disease COVID-19 which it is asserted to cause) without providing notice of the side-effects (Adverse Reactions and Death) submitted for full Council meeting on 20 September 2021.
Council Leader Alan Connect denied the involvement of Teignbridge District Council in any medical promotional campaign despite clear evidence contained in the Teignbridge District Council newsletter published on the Teignbridge District Council website exhorting people to “stay jabbed”https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/UKTDC/bul... . During the September meeting another councillor responded to the same question by openly slandering members of the public using the derogatory and pejorative term “antivaxxers”. Further, this councillor categorically and publicly, in her official capacity as a public servant and a Teignbridge District Council councillor, reassured people that the ‘vaccine’ is safe and stated unequivocally that everyone should submit to it; this reassurance and urging was based, as she admitted, solely on the evidence of the opinion of some of her personal friends.
Several members of the public submitted questions on topics related and relevant to coronavirus measures taken by Teignbridge District Council to all councillors to be answered during the full Council meeting on 30 November 2021. The questions were refused on the grounds that they were submitted after the deadline (two working days prior to the date of the meeting and before midday on the deadline day), although this was not the case.
In the week following the meeting some members of the public received replies to their originally-refused questions, once again denying Teignbridge District Council’s involvement in any actions to promote medical procedures and/or medical interventions. These answers were thus not addressed openly in front of the Council and the public, as they were submitted to be, but privately and by one individual; we view this as an attempt to deny liability and/or culpability.
Teignbridge District Council failed to research, comprehend, and respect relevant laws on advertising medical procedures https://www.gov.uk/guidance/advertise-your-medicin...and/or medical interventions before making the decision to collaborate in and fund a campaign promoting a programme of experimental medical procedures and/or medical interventions, which programme is itself in contravention of the Nuremberg Code, the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, the European Charter of Patients’ Rights, and the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
We, the undersigned, are all well aware of the substantial financial outlay that the Local Authority has spent on invalid and/or ilegitimate projects created under the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Emergency and Climate Emergency titles. Whilst we all want and need to see Teignbridge become a greener place in which to live, work, shop and which to visit, the Council’s attempts to achieve these aims are in direct opposition to any form of environmental protection.
One example of this is that, as part of the climate emergency project, a large area of local woodland was first of all claimed by a third party to be a highly appropriate area for housing development and then, with Council approval, was wantonly and recklessly destroyed.
Another example of the highly detrimental effects of the climate emergency project and the coronavirus emergency measures is that of farmers being pushed into land management schemes and pressured into becoming de facto entrepreneurs in a collective farming and communal farming scheme. The scheme aims for member-owners to engage jointly in farming activities as a collective, and state farms, which are owned and directly run by a centralized government; entirely as per Communist China.
The farmers are not allowed to question the rollout and imposition of this scheme promoted by the Local Authorities and the policy is being enforced with no public debate. Farmers are left with no other choice but to sell their lands to councils, banks, or to the “mass” developers and investors such as Baker Estates and others alike, whereupon ancient and generations-owned family farmland is force-converted into large housing developments with a huge and negative environmental impact.
In view of all the above it is clear that Teignbridge District Council is in breach of its duties and obligations and is acting unconstitutionally. On these grounds, of all of which we have documentary evidence, we lodge our Vote of No Confidence on each head and call for a public enquiry. The people of Teignbridge have now called a referendum using the powers provided by the Localism Act 2011 and the Local Government Act 1997, with a view to replacing the current governance system in Teignbridge and establishing a more democratic local administration. We believe councillors should work for the people, not against them.
Teignbridge residents