Wednesday 4 July 2012

Church Farmhouse Museum - The final indignity

On a very bad day for the reputation of Barnet Council, I was not surprised to find this. Barnet Council are flogging off by auction the contents of Church Farmhouse museum.

http://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s4783/1688%20-%20Church%20Farm%20House%20Museum%20Clearance%20Contract%20Public.pdf

Here are two interesting paragraphs
------------------

8.2 Disposal of collection 
The existing collection must be removed from Church Farmhouse by the end of 
June 2012. Material will be disposed of, in accordance with the Council’s Historic 
items Acquisition and Disposal Policy, in four ways:  
• Retain in storage and in handling collections • Pass on to other museums 
• Sell 
• Discard
---------------------------
10. OFFICER DECISION
I authorise the following:
Award of contract to Auction Plus for the clearance and auctioning of items from the Former Church Farmhouse Museum, Greyhound Hill, NW4 4JR Signed Julie Taylor Assistant Chief Executive Date 2 July 2012
---------------------------

Can you spot the deliberate mistake? Section 8.2 says that the collection must be disposed of by the end of June. The contract is signed on the 2nd July. Does this mean that the paperwork has been done retrospectively.

Is this yet another "non compliant contract".

Nothing at Barnet Council surprises me any more. So much for the heritage of Barnet. Is it any coincidence that a Council so hell bent on destroying every decent service in the Borough wishes to obliterate our history as well?

1 comment:

Morris Hickey said...

Very happy to associate my name with the protest about this scandalous waste of time and public money in persecuting (not prosecuting) somebody who acted in the public interest.

Surely the Metropolitan Police have REAL crime to investigate? A recent press report in Redbridge shows 1965 crimes reported, not a single public appeal for help, and a clearup rate of only about 23%. Would it not be a better deployment of police to investigate some of the 77% rather than persecuting a trader?