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

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

Friday, November 08, 2013

PANTO SEASON OPENS EARLY Peterborough Cllr Seaton writing Grim Fairy Tales for Christmas?

Breakfast for Cllrs Seaton & Cereste is served
- with HP Sauce naturally....
+++PORKIES ALERT +++ PBROTRIB believes the Company Number for Blue Sky Peterborough Limited is 07781846 and is shown at 8th November 2013 as being active. Not dissolved. Not dormant!

It seems that prime fat spitting porkies are again flying all over the place this Panto Season. [Oh no they're not!]

Jolly Cllr Seaton has joined the ever growing list the PBROTRIB is keeping, and that various Town Hall Pravdas, and the historically  proud but now cowed once a week newspaper wish to bury, note that in jolly Cllr Seatons email list he excludes the PBROTRIB


We put it to Cllr Seaton that he is deliberately misleading the residents of Peterborough, suggesting the free spending financially out of control  Blue Sky Limited company set up by the PCC is dormant but according to a search at Companies House company number 07781846  Blue Sky Peterborough Limited is still  active... is this the mystery company? We put the PCC to proof as to where all the funding for an LGA exhibition  in June 2013 in Manchester was sourced and who on the PCC Audit Committee sanctioned the huge expenditure? 

For the avoidance of any doubt, the exhibitors blurb is reproduced below.....

Why was the monitoring officer sacked, or was she pushed, the exit was after all very rapid...?

From: Cllr Seaton David <>
Date: 6 November 2013 18:15:43 GMT
To: Cllr Cereste Marco <>
Cc: Cllr Allen Sue <>, Cllr Arculus Nick <>, Cllr Ash Chris <>, Cllr Casey Graham <>, Cllr Dalton Matthew <>, Cllr Davidson Julia <>, Cllr Day Sue <>, Cllr Elsey Gavin <>, Cllr Fitzgerald Wayne <>, Cllr Fletcher Michael <>, Cllr Forbes Lisa <>, Cllr Fower Darren <>, Cllr Fox John <>, Cllr Fox Judy <>, Cllr Goodwin Janet <>, Cllr Harper Chris <>, Cllr Harrington David <>, Cllr Hiller Peter <>, Cllr Holdich John OBE <>, Cllr Jamil Mohammed <>, Cllr Johnson Jo <>, Cllr Khan Nazim MBE <>, Cllr Knowles John <>, Cllr Kreling Pam <>, Cllr Lamb Diane <>, Cllr Lane Stephen <>, Cllr Lee Matthew <>, Cllr Maqbool Yasmeen <>, Cllr Martin Stuart <>, Cllr McKean Dale <>, Cllr Miners Adrian <>, Cllr Murphy Ed <>, Cllr Nadeem Mohammed <>, "Cllr Nawaz Gul* (No Direct E- Mail Link)" <>, Cllr North Nigel <>, Cllr Over David <>, Cllr Peach John <>, Cllr Rush Brian <>, Cllr Saltmarsh Bella <>, "Cllr Sanders David* (No Direct E- Mail Link)" <>, Cllr Sandford Nick <>, Cllr Scott Sheila OBE <>, Cllr Serluca Lucia <>, Cllr Shabbir Nabil <>, Cllr Shaheed Asif <>, Cllr Sharp Keith <>, Cllr Shearman John <>, Cllr Simons George <>, Cllr Stokes June <>, Cllr Swift Charles OBE <>, Cllr Sylvester Ann <>, Cllr Thacker Paula MBE <>, Cllr Thulbourn Nick <>, Cllr Todd Marion <>, Cllr Walsh Irene <>, Beasley Gillian <>

Cllr SEATON writes:

Subject: Re: Letter from Stewart Jackson MP to Cllr Cereste
Dear Fellow Members

In light of the exchange of letters, [Cllr. Seaton] wanted to share with you my briefing to the Evening Telegraph provided today in response to the individual questions they asked us about the statements made by Stewart Jackson in Parliament yesterday.

For the avoidance of any doubt this is not our response to everything Stewart said - just our responses to the specific questions the newspaper asked. As you will see below, and note from the letter sent by Cllr Cereste, we will be writing an open letter to Stewart addressing all of the inaccuracies.

I also wrote to Stewart about the Empower conclusions prior to his statement to Parliament - that email was acknowledged and confirmed he had received them.

Kind regards

We have always sought to work closely with Stewart Jackson MP, who represents constituents in our city. Regrettably, we do not recognise the renewable energy plans nor the process that he describes.

Nor do we accept the accusations and insinuations that he has levelled at this council and its officers using his parliamentary privilege. Particularly as he has never attended any council meetings held in public on this subject, at which he could have made his comments.

Peterborough City Council has always been very open to all ideas regarding renewable energy and ways in which the city council can generate additional income for the benefit of all in the city.

We have met Mr Jackson on a number of occasions to brief him and discuss his plans and are due to meet again to continue our discussions. We have not put any obstacles in the way of this process whatsoever, quite the reverse.

We are perplexed that at a time when energy is one of the top issues for the country, that greater recognition has not been given to the financial burden this is also placing on local authorities and the efforts of councils such as ours to protect frontline services at a time of unprecedented financial pressure.
Mr Jackson’s speech, in Westminster, contained a number of inaccurate, misleading and inflammatory statements. It is particularly regrettable that despite providing accurate information to Mr Jackson, he has chosen to make a number of statements without checking them first or knowing them to be incorrect, inaccurate or baseless.

Mr Jackson has not raised any new issues. Nor have the points he made helped provide clarity to this extremely important topic. Almost all of the statements made by Stewart Jackson have been properly and fully answered in public over recent months.
However, in the interests of accuracy, we would like to address a number of the points that Mr Jackson made, which we hope he will be choosing to make directly to the city council, outside of Westminster, at the first available opportunity.

These are as follows:

Accusations of planning ‘sleight of hand’ 

This is untrue.There has been no sleight of hand whatsoever in the way that Peterborough City Council has dealt with its planning applications. The three sites are geographically separate; hence require three separate planning applications.
Criticisms of consultation process 

The city council chose to run a full public engagement process between June and December 2012 prior to submitting its planning applications.

The public then had a further, formal, opportunity to give comments to the Local Planning Authority. This consultation was nearly twice as long as the mandatory 21 days and was open for 43 days in order to allow for the Christmas period, so it is absolutely clear that there was no pressure placed on the LPA to rush its consultation or unduly compromise its independence. Mr Jackson is aware of this. The Secretary of State, if he was concerned about three separate applications instead of one, could have called them in but has chosen not to do so.
Criticisms of financial predictions 

The city council has always been prepared to release any and all information, bar that which is commercially confidential. This remains the case.

All financial assumptions have erred on the side of caution and been prudent throughout. Financial models and predictions are not solely those of the city council, but of its technical and financial advisors, Deloitte and Davis Langdon.

Financial predictions have been kept under review and updated figures presented to the recent Scrutiny Commission for Rural Communities.

The financial predictions have been considered by Empower Community an organisation that Mr Jackson and others introduced to the council.

A joint statement has been agreed on the projects and an extract is set out below. Mr Jackson was provided with a copy prior to making his statement in Parliament.

‘The council, its advisors and Empower Community met on 9 October 2013 to continue discussions on the above projects.
The outcome was:
1. The council shared key elements of its financial model. Empower Community was apprised of the key assumptions underpinning the model and the appropriateness of their inclusion. For example:
· The density of solar array build out on the sites due to constraints such as buffer zones and drainage
· The cost of grid connections
· The capital costs of build out
Empower Community agreed that these assumptions were prudent and that the financial model should produce a meaningful operational surplus for the council.’

The parties agreed to meet again on Friday 25 October to take this forward but Empower had to cancel the planned meeting due to other business commitments. We are meeting again on Wednesday 20 November to take the matter forward.

The outcome will be to present to Scrutiny and Cabinet an alternative set of proposals from Empower Community. This will include the appropriate level of financial data disclosure that both parties believe is commercially acceptable, and will include an update on the council’s financial projections.
It is important to recognise that the view of Empower Community on the council’s financial projections, which is set out in the joint statement, supports the council and its advisors financial projections.

Conflict of interests and ethically questionable conduct 

The city council refutes in the strongest terms the insinuations that Mr Jackson makes regarding both the leader and certain council officers. Such comments are baseless and unbefitting of a Member of Parliament and we ask that the accusations are backed up or withdrawn.

The fact that the Head of Resources is also the Managing Director of Blue Sky Peterborough (BSP) has no bearing on any conflict of interest. BSP is wholly owned by the city council and is currently dormant.
There is no conflict of interest when employees of the council are appointed to companies owned by the council. Blue Sky Peterborough is a company which is wholly owned by the council. As such the council is the sole shareholder. This means that the interest in the company is held by the council’s members. As the interests of the company and the council are aligned there is no conflict of interest.
BSP can only act on any business mandates that the council requests it to.

To deal with such perceptions in the cabinet award for the EnPC to Honeywell the report specifically considered the issue. Details of which are a matter of public record.

The Head of Resources’ marriage to the person who was, at one point, the monitoring officer, also does not, and has never, had any bearing on the project. Recognising the potential for baseless accusations such as this, the person in question delegated authority for this project and has now, in any case, left the city council.

The Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer have written 7 emails to two correspondents explaining in detail the position on this and have also offered to meet with them which both correspondents have declined to do.

Conspiracy theories

Mr Jackson’s comments descended into gossip and conjecture when he remarked about the ‘conspiracy theories’ pointing to the potential for land to be sold to property developers for housing.
The city council is proposing to use the land for solar energy for 25 years. It has no intention to sell the land.

In summary

In summary, while the city council respects Mr Jackson’s right to oppose its proposals, it is extremely disappointed by the inaccurate and misleading statements with which he has attempted to back up his arguments. We are also disappointed that such arguments have not been made in person or at any of the many public meetings, but via Westminster.

We are also disappointed that Mr Jackson’s comments have not helped in the clarity of the debate, but instead resorted to cloud the issues with insinuation and gossip, while paying scant regard to the facts.

We will be writing an open letter to Mr Jackson in due course to correct a number of his assertions directly in the hope that we may have a more accurate and meaningful debate on this issue.

On 6 Nov 2013, at 17:16, "Cllr Cereste Marco" <> wrote:
Dear Stewart
Please find attached a response to your letter.
Cllr Cav. Marco Cereste OSSI OMRI
Leader of the Council
Peterborough City Council
Tel: 01733 452481
Fax: 01733 452680
Please consider the environment before printing this email
From: JACKSON, Stewart []
Sent: 06 November 2013 11:42
To: Cllr Cereste Marco
Cc: Cllr Miners Adrian; Cllr Sylvester Ann; Cllr Shaheed Asif; Cllr Saltmarsh Bella; Cllr Rush Brian; Cllr Swift Charles OBE; Cllr Ash Chris; Cllr Harper Chris; Cllr McKean Dale; Cllr Fower Darren; Cllr Harrington David; Cllr Over David; Cllr Sanders David* (No Direct E- Mail Link); Cllr Seaton David; Cllr Lamb Diane; Cllr Murphy Ed; Cllr Elsey Gavin; Cllr Simons George; Cllr Casey Graham; Cllr Nawaz Gul* (No Direct E- Mail Link); Cllr Walsh Irene; Cllr Goodwin Janet; Cllr Johnson Jo; Cllr Fox John; Cllr Holdich John OBE; Cllr Knowles John; Cllr Peach John; Cllr Shearman John; Cllr Fox Judy; Cllr Davidson Julia; Cllr Stokes June; Cllr Sharp Keith; Cllr Forbes Lisa; Cllr Serluca Lucia; Cllr Cereste Marco; Cllr Todd Marion; Cllr Dalton Matthew; Cllr Lee Matthew; Cllr Fletcher Michael; Cllr Jamil Mohammed; Cllr Nadeem Mohammed; Cllr Shabbir Nabil; Cllr Khan Nazim MBE; Cllr Arculus Nick; Cllr Sandford Nick; Cllr Thulbourn Nick; Cllr North Nigel; Cllr Kreling Pam; Cllr Hiller Peter; Cllr Scott Sheila OBE; Cllr Lane Stephen; Cllr Martin Stuart; Cllr Allen Sue; Cllr Day Sue; Cllr Thacker Paula MBE; Cllr Fitzgerald Wayne; Cllr Maqbool Yasmeen; 'BBC Look East '; 'BBC Radio Cambridgeshire '; 'Peterborough Evening Telegraph ('; 'Heart FM '; 'Paul Stainton ('; WALKER HARRISON, Chloe; HORWOOD, Michael J
Subject: Letter from Stewart Jackson MP to Cllr Cereste

Dear Marco,

Please see the attached letter for your attention, which is self explanatory.

Kind regards,

Stewart Jackson
MP for Peterborough

LGA ANNUAL CONFERENCE & EXHIBITION MANCHESTER 2-4 JULY 2013 and misleadingly placed the following public statement in Conference literature???


Blue Sky

Peterborough Ltd

Stand B53
 [Active Company Number 07781846 ]
Blue Sky Peterborough (BSP) is a wholly owned subsidy of Peterborough City Council. It was set up to facilitate the investment and development of renewable energy generation projects and energy efficiency initiatives with the Council’s advisory team comprising of Pinsent Masons (Legal), Davis Langdon, an AECOM company (Technical) and Deloitte (Financial).
Peterborough City Council is one the few UK local authorities to set up an Energy Services Company (ESCo).

Blue Sky Peterborough, wholly owned by the council aims to be the first public micro utility in the United Kingdom which will hopefully put Peterborough one step closer to becoming the UK’s Environment Capital as well as providing income to protect front-line services in the city. The key areas for the ESCo are the implementation of an Energy Performance Contract; renewable generation; and the micro utility future.

Strategic Direction

A critical success factor has been a coherent strategy focusing on the integration between commercial considerations and the public sector’s due process in order to take advantage of either market or regulatory derived opportunities.

The Council’s advisory team, comprising of Pinsent Masons (Legal), Davis Langdon, an AECOM company (Technical) and Deloitte (Financial), had to be cognisant of the following issues: commercialization, bankability, structuring and compliance when it comes to the tactical deployment of initiatives.

Understanding how these issues interrelate and maintaining clarity of the risk interfaces is another critical success factor.

Tactical Deployment

• Compliance – Covers regulatory and development alignment of the renewable energy assets.• Structuring – Looks at the contractual arrangements underpinning the delivery of energy to end users, defining the flow of capital and revenue and the ownership of assets.• Bankability – Seeks to ensure that the majority of risk is mitigated through commercialising risk, ensuring that the project is suitably evolved and that the technology, input, output and returns contribute to a sufficiently high energy yield that will achieve an attractive internal rate of return (IRR) for investment.• Commercialisation – Involves building the business case by combining the compliance, structure and bankability outputs. These provide the evidential layer required to make informed decisions in a timely manner.

Operational Delivery

Our approach has started to deliver results:

1 megawatt of photovoltaic (PV) roof installations across Council owned commercial and school properties;• Procurement of a four year solar PV framework for deployment across the Council’s property and asset portfolio;• Procurement of an Energy Performance Contract (EnPC) for deployment of energy efficiency measures across the council’s property portfolio;• Sourcing a third-party (equity) finance partner for the EnPC contract;• Developing land assets owned by the council for a 32 megawatts onshore wind and a 16 megawatts solar farm;• Integrating BSP into major urban regeneration projects facilitating sustainable development.

This is a unique commission that has pioneered a new approach for resource constrained public sector bodies to create new revenue streams, reduce carbon emissions and embrace the forthcoming growth agenda.


Question to Cllrs Cereste & Seaton  and all members of the Audit Committee. How busy, and how much public money does Blue Sky Peterborough Ltd have spend in order to lose its Companies Act dormant status?

+++PORKIES ALERT +++  PBROTRIB believes the Company Number for Blue Sky Peterborough Limited is 07781846 and is shown at 8th November 2013 as being active. Not dissolved. Not dormant! 01733 345581 ## RSS feed: POLICE 101. Emergency 999. Crimestoppers 0800 555 111.
Post a Comment





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 independent Neighbourhood Watch Scheme.

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.


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

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)


Rights Holder Charter
Version: January 2009 v.3
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.
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