https://parkfarmneighbourhoodwatch.blogspot.com

Making it happen. Holding officialdom to account. Frank, fearless and free. THE DIGITAL NEIGHBOURHOOD WATCH BLOG. Join our conversation https://parkfarmneighbourhoodwatch.blogspot.com YOU MAY NOW VIEW PETERBOROUGH TRIBUNE OVER A SECURE WEB LINK: https://parkfarmneighbourhoodwatch.blogspot.com PASS IT ON!

PBROtrib PAGEview COUNTER excludes casual browsers scrolling through a selection of posts

Thursday, February 28, 2013

Tory Toff gets party membership shredded as Cereste loses the Royal Borough (housing) plot again ...


"Terry. What a nerve, I've got another open letter from that Marco String Vesty geezer.
I sold 'im a home dyed black version of your leather coat for a couple of Sovs.
I'm now his new best friend. He wants us to move the business,
out of  'Pooters' manor and up to Peterborough !?"

(Minder TV location sequences were shot all over North Kensington) 
 Kensington & Chelsea Councillor Emma Dent Coad (Lab) said...     "Thank you for this excellent and well researched expose. You have it on the button. You will find similar comments on my own blog: 
http://emmadentcoad.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/dear-poor-people-go-away-and-stop.html   Keep writing, and let's stop this insanity."

The Marco Cereste Open Letter explained...

You really have to seriously consider if Cllr Marco Cereste is living in this world, or in a publicly funded ring fenced fantasy world of his own.  Or perhaps he is not aware of the actions of a former leader of a Conservative local authority (Westminster) one Dame Shirley Porter, who had played a key role in a scheme that sold off council homes to potential Tory voters?

She originally faced a judgement debt of some £27m plus interest and costs, following a prolonged legal battle. The gerrymandering scandal relates to a decision in July 1987 by Westminster to sell 500 homes each year under a policy called "building stable communities".

We refer of course to the Leaders latest adventure offering Peterborough social housing to the social housing toffs of Kensington, and perhaps the Dear Leader would like to consider this dictionary definition of a Toff: "In British English slang, a toff is a mildly derogatory term for someone with an aristocratic background, particularly someone who exudes an air of superiority."  This brings us back to the so called open letter sent to our Scottish owned weekly newspaper, and not democratically released through the PCC Press Office, as an official council document or response. But nothing daunted we have obtained a copy of the so called open letter and will take you through the important parts, line by line from the point of view that the PCC solicitor must have seen and approved the draft before releasing it.

OPEN LETTER

MC:  Many people will have read and heard about tentative discussions between our city and the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea regarding the possible purchase of land on which to build homes for current RBKC tenants.

TRIBsays  Kensington councillors report this week they have not been party to any discussions and know nothing at all about it.

PLEASE CLICK ON READ MORE ICON BELOW




MC: Some people will have rushed to conclusions about a proposed partnership and dismissed it before considering what the potential benefits could be to the city [of Peterborough]

TRIBsays Marco Cereste is known for sailing very close to the wind (and flying too near the sun a bit like Icarus), he rarely confides with his councillors, only conferring when its Cereste done deal, and has reduced his councillors to a block voting mechanism, some councillors even stealing a furtive look at the Leader before daring to vote. His threat to remove the public from the Cabinet meeting last week and a refusal to answer questions, demonstrates that any form of democratic debate in this city is routinely trashed. Cllr. Cereste has often said that "his door is open and that everyone who writes to him will receive a reply" unfortunately he then added the rider " the reply might not be what they wanted to hear" or put another way its Cerestes way or the highway....

MC: WE have not entered into secret talks. After a meeting I'd attended with RBKC leader Sir Merrick Cockell [known locally in West Ken as Pooter] we discussed how we could potentially work together and we've had a couple of conversations since.

TRIBsays Our information is that MC met MC [Pooter] initally at a LGA Local Government Association meeting ( LGA is an expensive lobby organisation, not all local authorities belong as many say they cannot afford the fees. Peterborough City Council can seemingly afford the membership.  Sir Merrick Cockell, Leader of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea is currently Chairman of the LGA). The Chief Executive is Carolyn Downs. Its not recorded if the drinks included champagne or spumante...

The LGA was formed on 1 April 1997, in the middle of the 1990s UK local government reform which created unitary authorities (Peterborough is a Unitary Authority). The association is the direct successor to several per-type associations, most recently the Association of County Councils, the Association of District Councils and the Association of Metropolitan Authorities.

What is very clear is that as to being secret, none of the Kensington councillors knew of the 'several meetings' and a release of MC's official diary and related expenses for such meetings would perhaps resolve the issue. Clearly Leader Cereste 'bigged up' the initial encounter with the LGA Chairman Kensington Toff "Pooter", who in turn saw an opportunity to offload some of the massive annual RBKC debt incurred by his pet Opera in the Park, as the Holland Park Residents  Association is seeking to deny extended planning permission for the huge Opera tent to remain in situ. It could of course be moved to the Peterborough Embankment or the former B&Q site, which has been levelled and we pick up the bill running at some £90,000:00 per annum.

MC: As leader I get approached by a whole range of organisations interested in working with us. - and the reason that no one hears about them is that they quite often don't come to anything.

TRIBsays  They say truth will out, and the fact that PCC  has a payroll of very highly salaried council officers and executives to take and evaluate all these approaches, begs the question "Why is the political leader Marco Cereste filtering and interfering in all of these opportunities. Could he in fact be scoping business opportunities for the Lark prefixed 'Byzantine' group of companies, rather than inviting in other locally based firms to bid for the work?  No, what a silly idea....

Well placed City sources say they will not invest in Peterborough, as they claim Cllr. Marco Cereste literally places himself or his office, at the heart of each and every potential deal.  Taking a look at his very title, Councillor, Grand Officer (Gr. Uff. Italia) Marco Cereste, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Growth, Strategic Planning, Economic Development, Business Engagement and Environment Capital, and due to add a health portfolio to his list on All Fools Day (April 1st),  the number of portfolios confirms the spiders web approach he maintains and seems to rule and control his majority party councillors with a rod of iron. Perish the thought of a free vote!

The City of Peterborough is not supposed to be an Italian style dictatorship, although the Leader flaunts his Italian decoration ahead of his Christian or given name; although we understand it wasn't included in full as part of his UK Representation of the Peoples Act election information. Why was this excluded?  We as a democracy also do not subscribe to a one party state, there are however rules and conventions to be democratically applied.

Something that has taken a back seat in recent years, and sadly each and every one of the majority party councillors know it. They are not allowed a free vote, and in many cases under the Cabinet system, few are consulted, indeed councillors like Sheila Scott OBE, seem to the casual observer of  being incapable of understanding her brief to the detriment of Peterboroughs' disadvantaged children.

MC: Instead we have a clear and proper procedure when an idea is set to become council policy, which includes discussion with cabinet and the wider council and public consultation.

TRIBsays The recent Cabinet meeting held just a few days ago shows just how fragile the democratic process is. Within minutes of opening the cabinet meeting the Leader was already threatening to clear out the public and refused to engage with or answer questions of worried residents over the closure of Play Centres. Public consultations are a joke, paying lip service, going through the motions, the recent budget document shows that in every case where a resident has made a valid comment, the Leader just takes an alternative view, there is no follow up or bending from the original dictat. Read them for yourselves in the Slash and burn Budget documents featured on here over the last few weeks. Even the language used is misleading. Deep and savage cuts and deterioration of services are dressed up as "savings", just how stupid do the the authors of the document think we are?

We had a consultation exercise for the Care Homes, that worked well. The PCC simply parachuted in an interim director with experience of closing down Care Homes, a Mr Terry Rich, at a fee earning rate of over £1,000:00 a day plus VAT, He is still around....

MC: Following that there is a formal decision making process. The fact that we have not reached these stages illustrates how early our discussions are at.

TRIBsays The simple fact is that the Leader was rumbled, and the whole wretched  social cleansing scheme exposed not just by the Trib. but also the BBC Network, BBC London, ITV, LBC Sky Radio News,  Global  radio and CNS plus several West London media outlets and the ET.

Simply the Leader didn't do his homework as his 'hot' Kensington contact, known locally as 'Pooter' is considering a move further up the political feeding chain moving on from fronting Kensington and Chelsea and likely to be leaving the LGA post as well, all this said to be happening in May. But latest information is the path to greatness has been 'moved aside, and 'Pooter' has apparently indicated he'll stay at K&C until 2013... http://emmadentcoad.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/dear-poor-people-go-away-and-stop.html

MC: I understand that because of the way this proposal has been presented in many arenas it may be unpopular with some.

TRIBsays Well the Leader has the answer in his hands by turning over a new leaf and embracing the idea and concept of democracy. Specifically ending robotic block voting and being fully open and frank on all his dealings and sharing financial information.  Unlike the Freemans solar panel debacle where the PCC is on the hook for just under £1,000,000:00 but astonishingly thinks he's winning as only £300,000 has been handed over to the contractors so far! But the Leader suggests that will be recovered as a last resort through legal action....don't think so Marco, you've just opened up years of litigation and still not a single kilowatt of revenue generating electricity to show for it.

MC:  But I believe it is undemocratic to use misinformation to close down a debate before it has even begun. Thousands of people are moving to the City every year  - and if this proposal results in something or not -  this won't change. The difference is RBKC residents would come with their own homes ready built.

TRIBsays Classic if not vintage Marco Cereste, now clearly backed into a corner, it's double talk. What misinformation? The RBKC councillors sat they know nothing about it. Kensington residents associations know nothing about it. PCC councillors know nothing abut it. Peterborough residents know nothing about it. But how many Lark Group of Companies directors and property speculator/ developer / advisers knew something about it? Only Marco Cereste and his close cohorts seem to know the detail, but Peterborough MP Stewart Jackson picking up on a residents comment  that it was a case of classic social cleansing or  engineering, then dived straight in.

The Conservative Party after all has previous damaging form on this. Dame Shirley Porter, the Tesco heiress, was fined for illegal 'gerrymandering' and eventually fled to Isreal where she is today. BBC News reported at the time:  Dame Shirley Porter has paid £12m into Westminster Council's bank account, in settlement of the surcharge for her role in the homes for votes scandal. The former leader of the local authority had played a key role in a scheme that sold off council homes to potential Tory voters.  She originally faced a judgement debt of some £27m plus interest and costs, following a prolonged legal battle.

We obviously need to ensure our own local councillors don't follow the same sorry  path as the fines are personal and not protected by compensation insurance. Sometimes robotic voting comes with a sharp financial bite, and that isn't misinformation Marco! Are your councillors aware of the consequences?

MC: Young people and their families find it very difficult to buy or rent in London as it's so expensive. RBKC could buy land and build homes for young ambitious people.This is something they could do tomorrow if they wanted, as they just need to get planning permission - but instead we are investigating whether there would be greater benefits from working in partnership.  

TRIBsays   Following World War Two bombing and the clearing of slums within the borough, RBKC lost around half of its population between 1890 and 1980, reaching a low of 130,000. The population then increased to 179,000 in 2007, but has since decreased declined, and there are now around 158,000 residents. Nonetheless it is still the second most densely populated London borough, with 132 persons per hectare.  RBKC is London in microcosm. It has the second highest average income in London, of £36,000.

However, this prosperity is not shared equally, the borough also contains above average levels of deprivation. (Peterborough is also noted as having a significant child deprivation problem). RBKC deprivation is almost exclusively concentrated in the north of the borough, with the five northerly areas of Norland, Colville, St. Charles Notting Barns and Golbourne each including at least one 'Lower Super Output Area' in the 20% most deprived in the country. Golbourne is the 8th most deprived ward in London, out of 627. Earl’s Court, Redcliffe and Cremome also include areas of disadvantage., Julian Bray lived in London W8 and SW10 for many years, he says the normal pattern is with a growing family to move south of the river or further out within the M25 box. Moving to Peterborough is simply not an option, and  RBKC upper quartile residents know it. It is not even if we are to be on the High Speed Rail Line as Nottingham is. The PCC is closing or outsourcing services and a slash and burn budget has just been rubber stamped by Cabinet.. Cllr Cereste is about to add the heavily debt laden NHS portfolio from April 1st to his already long list of responsibilities, and in almost every area that he has taken 'a personal interest' sadly it is a list of repeated failures or grandiose schemes that simply do not add up in today's austere fiscal terms.  And if they do its all using borrowed money, saddling our children with high levels of debt for decades to come. Trust us Marco Kensington on Nene  isn't an option, any more than water taxis, cable cars, opera houses and a casino is ...

RBKC's own health panel offer this additional information:

Residential house prices in the borough are the highest in the country, meaning many of the borough’s residents are affluent and highly educated. However, more than half of all housing in the four most northerly wards is social housing, with most of this area falling into the 20 per cent most deprived in the country.

However, large inequalities do exist: deprived communities in the north of the borough generally have higher levels of unemployment and worklessness, higher proportions of children and young people with close to half living in poverty and over half living in overcrowded situations.

Culture, ethnicity and religion

Close to half the Kensington and Chelsea population (43 per cent) were born abroad and the borough has the largest proportion for people classifying themselves as ‘White other’ of anywhere in the country.

The borough is home to a wide range of different communities, particularly from Western Europe, North America, the Middle East and North Africa. In particular, the borough has the largest numbers of Americans (6,000), French (5,000) and Italians (4,000) of any borough in London.

These communities are most concentrated in the centre and south of the borough. The largest Black, Mixed and other Ethnic (BME) numbers are found in the north of the borough, in areas of relative deprivation.

After English, Arabic is the most commonly spoken language, with over 5,000 speakers. Two thirds of these were born in Iraq, Lebanon and Morocco. North African and Middle Eastern communities are generally more common in the north of the borough, although the Iranian (Farsi speaking) population are most concentrated in the centre of the borough.

The Portuguese speaking community are split between Brazilians and Portuguese, the latter more common in the north. Over half of the borough’s residents classify themselves as Christian and one in ten Muslim, (rising to 1 in 5 in Golborne ward in the far north).

__________________

Sadly the remaining half of the so called 'open letter' provides little or no new information and really isn't worth the analysis, as it is more a justification for his unorthodox unitary buttoned down style of stewardship of our City. Hopefully the full  text of the letter will be published on the PCC council website for all to see, as this response is already winging its way round the world...   Add your thoughts to the Comments panel below...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sent: 02/03/2013 09:08:14 GMT Standard Time
Subj: From the Hornets Nest Kensington & Chelsea Blog

From the Hornets Nest    http://fromthehornetsnest.blogspot.co.uk
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dark forces at work in the Royal Borough....
Marcos' Best New Friends In Night of the Long Knives

Posted: 01 Mar 2013 04:04 PM 

It’s the talk of the town….last night a member of the KENSINGTON & CHELSEA Tories had his membership ritually shredded...CLICK HERE!

 http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Qe4A5NoPm20/UTB-0pHQ4RI/AAAAAAAAEZI/4WwkSI_jcyw/s1600/url.jpeg

MATTHEW CARRINGTON  CONSERVATIVE CHAIR

Conservative Association was in session before a kangaroo court presided over by Grand Panjandrum chairman, Matthew Carrington. 

The court, more formally known as the Executive Council, has responsibility for meting out ruthless justice to those tories  who ‘go native.’

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-DCbePkZENJs/UTB-dqEvziI/AAAAAAAAEY8/yw7nV0LgKyI/s1600/url-1.jpeg

BILLY JAMES 

The defendant, a Mr Billy James, was hauled, in chains, before Mr Carrington and fellow judges and accused of bringing the Party into disrepute….no sniggering please.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-WPE3H9AvTXk/UTB_SlqkjYI/AAAAAAAAEZM/YreOsvnrhsc/s1600/images.jpeg

THE PARTY AGENT  
SPANISH HOTELIER 
JONATHAN FRAZER-HOWELLS 


Anyway, the charge against  Billy was that he had sent a highly charged letter to the Mail on Sunday containing some very choice allegations against our fragrant agent, top to tail Louis Vuitton clad, Spanish hotelier, Jonathan Frazer-Howells. This is a fascinating comment.... clearly from someone who knows the inside track.

"I used to be a K&C Conservative member and postholder before leaving due to my perception that something was not right. I remember Billy James - a longstanding Conservative, senior businessman and thoroughly nice man. I would believe his word over J F-H any day. If he is moved to have to go to the press there must be something seriously wrong. He should be reinstated and his concerns investigated - this is not a way to treat anyone. K&C is becoming a real disgrace to the Conservative Party."

And The Dame hears that there was much anger amongst members present at the way they were refused the opportunity to view the evidence and the manner in which Carrington bullied Billy.

Anyway, the Dame is conferring with her friends on the London Standard Newspaper so watch this space......

So far, the Dame has been unable to ascertain the nature of the ‘charges’ so if anyone can help her ‘get to the bottom’ of it all she will be full of gratitude.  The Court found Billy guilty as charged and his Party membership card was shredded before his tear filled eyes. 




NEWSDESK 01733 345581 E&OE   Peterborough Tribune 2013 

P'BORO TRIB. SEARCH ENGINE

LONDON EVENING STANDARD NEWSREEL

google83466ac7cb7103b1.html]

JULIAN BRAY AVIATION SECURITY NEWS 01733 345581 UK ISDN 01733 345020


UPDATES: Post are transmitted from a variety of remote sources, immediately published on servers in the USA, additions, updates and any corrections added later on the blog version only.


Editorial policy: WE DON'T CENSOR NEWS, we will however come down hard on lawbreakers, all forms of ASB - Anti Social Behaviour, and anyone or group who seek to disturb or disrupt our neighbourhoods and communities, or in anyway abuse, take unfair advantage or financially disadvantage our citizens.

We support the Park Farm Neighbourhood Watch and digitally carry the messages from this independently resourced Neighbourhood Watch Scheme. A scheme operated following written guidelines to us directly from the Home Office.

We are openly but constructively critical of all political parties (actual and sham), pressure groups, overbearing 'jobsworths' and those who seek to waste public funds, abuse public office, ramp up expenses, BUY VOTES and/or engage in any form of directed or robotic voting.

Whilst accepting that many in Public Office perform a valuable service and make a worthwhile contribution, there are others who are frankly rubbish. Although Julian Bray is the editor, there are several Blog administrators / correspondents who actively contribute by remote transmission to this blog.

So it could be some days before the copy (content) is seen by the Editor and properly formatted. We consider all representations and correct any facts that are clearly deficient.


OUR HUMAN RIGHT TO LAMPOON AND CRITICISE POLITICIANS

The Peterborough Tribune supports:

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) an international non-profit organisation working to defend the freedom to be informed and to inform others throughout the world.

Today, 30 years since its creation, RSF has enough experience and on-the-ground support to defend press freedom on a global scale. RSF accomplishes its work through its wide network of correspondents established in 130 countries, its 12 offices (Vienna, Brussels, Rio de Janeiro, Helsinki, Berlin, Madrid, Stockholm, Geneva, Tunis, Washington DC, London, and Paris) and its consultative status at the United Nations, UNESCO, and the Council of Europe.

As a leading defender of press freedom and freedom of information, RSF alternates public interventions and effective behind-the-scenes actions. www.rsf.org/en





THE HIGH COURT has ruled....People have a right to lampoon and criticise politicians and public officials under the Human Rights Act, the High Court has ruled.

We have the full High Court judgment, saved as a page on here. l

ampoon (lampoon) Pronunciation: /lamˈpuːn/ verb [with object] publicly criticize (someone or something) by using ridicule, irony, or sarcasm: the actor was lampooned by the press noun a speech or text lampooning someone or something: the magazine fired at God, Royalty, and politicians, using cartoons and lampoons.


Derivatives: lampooner noun lampoonery noun lampoonist noun Origin: mid 17th century: from French lampon, said to be from lampons 'let us drink' (used as a refrain), from lamper 'gulp down', nasalized form of laper 'to lap (liquid).

NUJ CODE OF CONDUCT

NUJ Code of Conduct

The NUJ's Code of Conduct has set out the main principles of British and Irish journalism since 1936.

The code is part of the rules and all journalists joining the union must sign that they will strive to adhere to the it.


Members of the National Union of Journalists are expected to abide by the following professional principles:

A journalist:

1 At all times upholds and defends the principle of media freedom, the right of freedom of expression and the right of the public to be informed

2 Strives to ensure that information disseminated is honestly conveyed, accurate and fair

3 Does her/his utmost to correct harmful inaccuracies

4 Differentiates between fact and opinion

5 Obtains material by honest, straightforward and open means, with the exception of investigations that are both overwhelmingly in the public interest and which involve evidence that cannot be obtained by straightforward means

6 Does nothing to intrude into anybody's private life, grief or distress unless justified by overriding consideration of the public interest

7 Protects the identity of sources who supply information in confidence and material gathered in the course of her/his work

8 Resists threats or any other inducements to influence, distort or suppress information and takes no unfair personal advantage of information gained in the course of her/his duties before the information is public knowledge

9 Produces no material likely to lead to hatred or discrimination on the grounds of a person's age, gender, race, colour, creed, legal status, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation

10 Does not by way of statement, voice or appearance endorse by advertisement any commercial product or service save for the promotion of her/his own work or of the medium by which she/he is employed

11 A journalist shall normally seek the consent of an appropriate adult when interviewing or photographing a child for a story about her/his welfare

12 Avoids plagiarism The NUJ believes a journalist has the right to refuse an assignment or be identified as the author of editorial that would break the letter or spirit of the code.

The NUJ will fully support any journalist disciplined for asserting her/his right to act according to the code

The NUJ logo is always a link to the home page.

(As modified at Delegate Meeting 2011)

PBROTRIB CHARTER


Rights Holder Charter
Version: January 2009 v.3
Introduction
This Rights Holder Charter (“Charter”) sets out the terms and conditions governing the relationship between Julian Bray, Park Farm Neighbourhood Watch blog entitled Peterborough Tribune (PBROTRIB) on the Blogger and other platforms, and an individual or company making a Contribution to PBROTRIB (“Rights Holder”). The purpose of this document is to ensure that the Charter terms are
incorporated into to all Contracts with each Rights Holder, so both parties areclear as to how PBROTRIB may use content. This Charter does not apply to content submitted:
· using a feature or interactive service that allows
the individual to upload to and display content on any of PBROTRIB websites
(including social sites), apps, WAP sites or any web address owned or operated
by PBROTRIB as may link to the terms accessible at
(User-Generated Content (“UGC”)); or
·
This Charter applies to all Rights Holder Contributions, except where the Rights Holder is already subject to a separate
written agreement with PBROTRIB in relation to Contributions, or where PBROTRIB
has agreed in writing to vary or amend the Charter due to exceptional circumstances. Formation of the Contract

By sending PBROTRIB a Contribution you are making
an offer to PBROTRIB to use the Contribution.’ PBROTRIB’s use of the
Contribution is acceptance of your offer and creates a Contract on the terms of this Charter. Submission of a Contribution by you is an acknowledgement that
you agree to the terms of this Charter. If you do not agree to the Charter you must email us as soon as possible to raise your objection and withdraw your
submitted Contribution, otherwise you will be deemed to have accepted the Charter terms.
Definitions
Contract: the agreement between PBROTRIB and the Rights Holder relating to the Contribution incorporating this Charter and the Special Terms (where applicable);
Contribution: material (written, audio, visual, video or audiovisual) created by the Rights Holder and will be
classified as either Material You Send Us or Material We Request From You;
Credit: for Material You Send Us “© [insert name of Rights Holder and Year]”;
Publication: means one or more publications owned or operated by PBROTRIB. Licence: the licence granted by the Rights Holder to PBROTRIB
as set out in the Licence sections of this Charter;
Personal Data: has the same meaning as provided in section 1 of the Data Protection Act 1998;
Material You Send Us: a Contribution as set out under the Material You Send Us paragraph;
Material We Request From You: A Contribution as set out under the Material We Request From You paragraph; Rights Holder: name of the of the individual or company which has created the relevant Contribution; Special Terms: written terms between PBROTRIB and the Rights Holder relating to the Contribution that are not set out in this Charter and/or vary this Charter; and User-Generated Content: content submitted by an individual through a feature that allows the individual to upload material to any of PBROTRIB websites or social sites.
Conflict with other Agreements: If there is any inconsistency between any of the provisions of this Charter and the Special Terms, the Special Terms shall prevail. To be clear, where no Special Terms are agreed in writing, the Charter will apply without variation. Sending us a Contribution –
The information Rights Holders please provide To PBROTRIB When sending us a Contribution, please provide the following information:
·
Your Full Name;
Your Full Address; and Your Contact Telephone Number and Email Address.

We will not be able to provide Credits where a
Rights Holder has not provided the relevant information.

Material You Send Us

Material You Send Us is a Contribution that is
received by PBROTRIB from a Rights Holder. The Contribution may be solicited or unsolicited. The following are examples of Material You Send Us:
PBROTRIB has seen the Rights Holders’ photograph on a third party website. PBROTRIB contacts the
Rights Holder and asks to use the photograph. (Solicited). A Rights Holder speculatively submits a range of photographs to and for PBROTRIB’s use. The Editor may or may not decide to use one or more of the photographs. (Unsolicited) Material You Send Us does not include UGC, Material We Request You To Send Us or material that is governed under any
other relationship between the Rights Holder and PBROTRIB. PBROTRIB is under no obligation to accept any Material You Send Us for review and if accepted for review is under no obligation to offer a Contract. Should PBROTRIB decide that it wishes to use the Contribution, it will be governed by the terms of this Charter. PBROTRIB is under no obligation to use the Contribution. If you wish to submit a speculative Contribution to us, please
contact the appropriate PBROTRIB title. Please note that PBROTRIB will not be able to acknowledge receipt of your Contribution and any submission is at the Rights Holder’s own risk.
Material You Send Us – Licence Terms
PBROTRIB believes that Material You Send Us is the
Rights Holder’s property and that the Rights Holder should not need to give up all its rights for the Contribution to be used by PBROTRIB. Therefore, by
sending us a Contribution, the Rights Holder grants the following irrevocable licence in perpetuity to PBROTRIB: The right to publish, reproduce, licence and sell the Contribution as part of the Publication throughout the world in the following formats:
-- the physical printed Publication;
-- in a replica layout in any electronic format of
the Publication;
-- on the website version of the Publication;
-- in any PBROTRIB apps delivering the Publication
to a reader; and
-- on any PBROTRIB social media pages.
-- The right to publish extracts or the whole of
the Publication (which may or may not include the Contribution) when promoting PBROTRIB’s business or subscriptions in media advertisement, show cards and other promotional aids. The Right to authorise The Newspaper Licensing Agency and similar reprographic rights organisations in other jurisdictions (“RROs”) to distribute or license the distribution of your Contribution throughout the world in any language(s) for RROs’ licensed acts and purposes as amended from time to time, and to keep available your Contribution through such RROs. The unlimited right to amend, edit, select, crop, retouch, add to or delete any part of the Contribution, in any format, whether electronic or otherwise, including the right to remove or amend any meta data associated with the Contribution.

The right to store the Contribution electronically.
In return for the licence granted in relation to the Material You Send Us, PBROTRIB will endeavour to provide the Credit with the Contribution. The licence granted to PBROTRIB shall survive any termination of the agreement between PBROTRIB and the
Rights Holder. Material We Request From You
Material We Request From You is a Contribution that
has specifically commissioned by PBROTRIB. PBROTRIB will contact a Rights Holder and
commission them to provide a Contribution in relation to a brief. An example of Material We Request From You is: PBROTRIB needs a photograph of a country building. PBROTRIB instructs the Rights Holder to attend the venue and take picture of the building. Material We Request From You does not include UGC, Material You Send Us or material that is governed under any other relationship between the Rights Holder and PBROTRIB . The Rights Holder will provide its own equipment and materials to fulfil its obligation for Material We Request From You. PBROTRIB is under no obligation to use the Contribution. Material We Request From You –
Assignment and Licence
PBROTRIB believes that Material We Request From You should be PBROTRIB ’s property as PBROTRIB has requested the Rights Holder’s services and instructed them to create the Contribution on its behalf. However, PBROTRIB acknowledges that the Right Holder may need a licence from PBROTRIB to
use the Contribution for limited purposes. Therefore, in submitting Material We Request From You to PBROTRIB , the Rights Holder assigns to PBROTRIB with full title, right and interest all existing and future intellectual property rights in the Contribution. In return, PBROTRIB will endeavour to give a Credit to the Rights Holder and PBROTRIB grants the Rights Holder a non-exclusive, non-transferable licence to use the Contribution in its own online and offline portfolio, provided that the following copyright notice is applied to the Contribution “©Peterborough
Tribune, used under limited licence”.
General notes about Rights: Any rights granted to PBROTRIB or the Rights Holder under this Charter shall survive termination of the Contract for any reason. Rights Holder Promises The Rights Holder promises: that it owns the Contribution and / or is (and will continue to be) authorised to grant the rights to PBROTRIB; nothing in the Contribution is blasphemous, discriminatory, defamatory, untrue, misleading or unlawful; that the Contribution complies with the NUJ Code of Professional Conduct and the Independent
Press Standards Organisations Editors’ regulations and Code of Practice; the Contribution does not contain any virus, Trojan horse, hidden computer software or similar; the Contribution does not infringe the intellectual property rights of any third party; where the Contribution contains Personal Data, all
the necessary consents in compliance with the Data Protection Act 1998 have been obtained; where the Contribution contains images of children under the age of 16, written parental consent has been obtained and can be provided on request; and maintain and comply with, at all times, the highest ethical standards in the preparation, creation and delivery of the Contribution.
Complaints In the event that a complaint is raised in relation to a Contribution, the Rights Holder agrees to co-operate fully with any internal or external investigation or process. Status. The Rights Holder is an independent contractor and nothing in the Charter shall render the Rights Holder an employee, worker,
agent or partner of PBROTRIB. The Rights Holder is responsible for any taxes/national insurance payable in relation to any services provided under the Charter.
Indemnity The Rights Holder shall keep PBROTRIB indemnified in full against all loss incurred or paid by PBROTRIB as a result of or in connection with any claim made against PBROTRIB by a third party:
arising out of, or in connection with the Contribution, to the extent that such claim arises out of the breach of this or any terms of this Charter (including any Special Terms); and for actual or alleged infringement of a third party's intellectual property rights arising out of, or in connection with the use of the Contribution except in so far as the claim arises as a result of changes made by PBROTRIB or a breach of the Licence by PBROTRIB.
Variation of the Charter No variation of any term of this Charter will be effective, unless it is set out in writing (letter, fax or email) and signed by
a relevant authorised representative of PBROTRIB. If you wish to submit a Contribution and are unable to agree with the terms of this Charter or if you
have any questions regarding this Charter, please contact a relevant authorised representative of the PBROTRIB publication.
Problems & Disputes In the event of a problem or dispute in relation to a Licence and/or in connection with this Charter, in the first instance the Rights Holder and the Editor will look to resolve the dispute amicably. Application of the Charter Unless otherwise agreed, this Charter shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and English courts will have exclusive jurisdiction