The Venomous Christine Fraser - A 'Taster'

Below is a copy of an email sent to Susan Lawrence, Chair Exeter Parks Watch (EPW) by Christine Fraser (CF) (Committee member of St.David’s Neighbourhood Partnership and Exeter Parks Watch) and copied to me. The mail refers to Lower St.David's residents and speaks volumes about SDNP's true attitude/opinions of those it claims to represent. I have edited out the names of the St.David’s residents that the email refers to, and also references to specific Exeter City Council and Devon & Cornwall Constabulary representatives.

To reiterate, I have been informed by what I believe is a reliable source, that CF was originally ‘employed’ as a (paid) adviser re the setup of Exeter Parks Watch. CF decided to ‘continue in the role' when the funding ended. To all intents and purposes CF runs and controls EPW in our community and this can easily be confirmed by other attendees at meetings. In my opinion, based upon my own, and others, personal experiences, there is a definite ‘conflict of interest’ that exists between CFs controlling influence of EPW and SDNP’s anticipated take-over of Exeter St.David’s Community Centre. Unfortunately, EPW is ‘entrenched’ within the City, (EPW is an ‘offshoot’ of Devon and Cornwall Community Watch Association (DaCCWA). I have expressed my concerns via email to the current Chair of DaCCWA and she didn’t even have the courtesy to reply.

I have responded to the email below in another document (further up this Blog). The concerns expressed by users of the Community Centre, often featured in the Express & Echo, in my opinion, are totally justified. SDNP may ‘bleat the mantra of consultation’ but the reality is that they (SDNP) have their own agenda and any consultation will be nothing more than ‘lip service’ to achieve their own ends irrespective of public opinion. Whilst I firmly believe that the Centre is a valuable community asset, I’m equally convinced that SDNP, or any of its immediate representatives, are not suitable re the running of the centre based upon my own experiences and those of other residents. SDNP, again in my opinion, view their control of the Community Centre as nothing more than a self-interest exercise for themselves. CF was heard to comment, at an SDNP meeting that, “It was about time she was paid for her contribution to the ‘takeover’ of the Community Centre”. CF also commented that she anticipated that, “£120 per hour for her future ‘voluntary contribution’ would not be unreasonable”.So much for ‘voluntary work’ on behalf of the community!

Email begins -

Hi Sue (Lawrence)
Just to say that I met XXXX and his wife XXXX. I'm not sure that either of them works or does much around the house. The ashtray outside their house is always overflowing...
When I met them they were extremely brusque and 'mouthy'. I know how to deal with these people and just let it ride etc. etc. They clearly think they own the area. Other residents (the less ragged end) had previously told me that XXXX (the power behind the throne) and XXXX were stumbling blocks to getting anything done and a real obstacle when it came to organising things for the kids.
They complain bitterly about their own (very unprepossessing) children being bullied. They complain that they have not had information (I put at least 2 questionnaires through their letterbox IN PERSON): what they really mean is that they want to be 'in control'. Named ECC representative has now elevated them by taking them to XXXXXX and they are really swaggering around - and telling the other residents that they are going to get £1,000.
Named ECC representative has not helped the situation. I had a meeting with Inspector XXXXX (which I'll tell you about) and he mentioned how frustrating it had been getting the trouble-makers evicted (stop-start etc). And they do know all the issues down there. For my part I think it needs real 'community' policing and a regular/constant presence rather than the arrival of cars with sirens responding to (and therefore adding to the excitement of) another incident.

If I were chairing the meeting on Friday, Sue, I would welcome Named ECC representative and say that, as this is the first meeting of Park Watch he has been to this year (!!!) I hope we can bring him up to speed!! I'd say how much we had missed him at meetings etc. etc. and glad that he has now returned. Make a show of welcoming him - and making it clear that he has been absent at the same time!! It would be good to have that Minuted, perhaps? (Clearly, items can be added to the EPW Minutes when it suits CF and SL). Attendance: fortunately, XXX will be there. I would suggest that, as a further counterweight, you might like to invite (or get me to invite) XXXX (the large lady who came to the March open meeting). She is a toughie (but positive) and should be able to help keep things in balance. (This lady never attended another EPW meeting). She could be invited on the grounds that she attended the March meeting and made a strong contribution - unlike XXXX and XXXX who probably ignored the leaflet or lost it amidst the detritus of their hallway (or what I saw of it) or just couldn't be bothered.

It will be an interesting mix but very good to have the main players round the table. I hope you won't mind but I'm going to bcc this to XXX as a courtesy so that he is fully in the picture. XXX is preparing the Questionnaire analysis which no doubt XXX and XXXX will rubbish....?
(Many of the people I talked to in collecting the questionnaires - or having to fill them in on the doorstep - said that it would be good to have the park upgraded but it would be trashed by the Looe Road 'thugs' in no time. Clearly the deeper issues have to be addressed. Be interesting to know just who is responsible for co-ordinating all the agencies and addressing the problems. It can't be Named ECC representative, surely? A good question for Exeter City Council, perhaps.
Email ends.

Meetings - How to Get What You Want From Them

An easy one this, and a strategy used by SDNP and EPW on a regular basis.

1. Crush any 'dissenter' at the earliest possible opportunity and let these 'upstarts' know precisely who is running things. It is, however, important not to discourage the 'rebels' too much, after all, 'cannon fodder' is essential in any battle, as is the necessity to present the 'token gesture of community representation/involvement'.

2. Organise meetings but don't actually tell anyone but the 'inner circle'.

3. Requests to arrange meetings, so that crucial contributors can be present, must be ignored, particularly if they are failing to follow the EPW/SDNP ' mission'. Exclusion must extend to Councillors and representatives of relevant Exeter City Council departments or any other organisation that might question the 'mission statement' or the behaviour of those that seek its implementation.

4. With particular reference to Exeter Parks Watch - Refuse to acknowledge any complaints re the way they conduct themselves, even if this means excluding written statements from the 'disenchanted', that are specifically requested to be included in the minutes of the meetings. Shame on you EPW and SDNP, so much support offered that was little more than 'lip-service'.
5. Discourage any personal initiatives. The only good ideas have to come from the Chair or their 'allies'.

Initially I felt some sympathy for Susan Lawrences' (Chair EPW) situation. It appeared to me and other community reps that she had reluctantly become involved in Looe Road Park and would subsequently suffer the 'fallout' from the actions of, specifically, Christine Fraser and, generally, St.David's Neighbourhood Partnership.

However, any sympathy that I was experiencing soon disappeared following Susan's visit to my home to discuss my 'concerns' and a 'satisfactory resolution'.

Tsk! Tsk! Susan Lawrence, browbeating and threats, and in my own home, shame on you! You said, basically, " Toe the line, or else". How disrepectful and irresponsible. It turned out that your threats were not 'idle' ones. If by chance you read this Blog it will become clear that your actions, and inactions, will be exposed.

Do you recall the 'Film Shows in the Park' that EPW claim were such a success? Your failure to satisfactorily engage/consult with our community regarding the choice of films? Oh dear, not quite the success that you are happy to have everyone believe, was it? I will be subsequently posting more information re this event. You even have the audacity to list this fiasco as an EPW achievement.

A 'Very Important Person!' All Part of the 'Master Plan'.

A V.I.P. Yes! That was me! Not only did I attend regular meetings of Exter Parks Watch, but also some (minimal) SDNP meetings. It soon became obvious that the only opinions that really counted were those of the 'chosen' few, heaven forbid that anyone outside the 'inner circle' would dare use any initiative without approval from 'on high'. I also became a Committee Member of St.David's Neighbourhood Partnership and rose to the 'dizzy heights' of SDNP's 'Membership Secretary', how impressive isn't that? It soon became clear why SDNP meetings were so poorly attended, the only opinion that really mattered was if it related to improving their (SDNPs) chances of taking control of the community centre.

My 'role' as Membership Secretary involved, or was supposed to involve, maintenance of SDNP's membership database and collection of subscriptions. Frequent requests to the Chair of SDNP, Hannah Reynolds, for the details of existing membership (and prospective new members), were always ignored and were never received. I soon realised that this was the 'norm', both for SDNP and EPW. Whilst both organisations 'welcome' voluntary contribution of time and resources, it has to be on their terms. As a 'foot soldier' you are 'permitted' to participate but, whatever you do, 'toe the party line or else', it's their way, or 'no way!

Naively, at this time, I still hoped that SDNP and EPW's remit was 'community focussed'. This very rapidly changed and I soon began to realise that EPW's involvement in Looe Road Park, and specifically that of Christine Fraser, was a 'damage limitation exercise' to improve SDNP's image as a 'caring/sharing' community organisation. SDNP's focus was on taking control of the Community Centre, whilst effectively ignoring the remainder of their 'community'. This attitude I believe, led to their (SDNP's) past failures in gaining funding for their proposed take over and refurbishment of the Community Centre.

As previously mentioned, appeals from various organisations for a wider community participation by SDNP were constantly refused. SDNP, at this time, had no involvement with social housing within their catchment area, despite previous frequent requests, from Exeter City Council, to widen their 'community perspective'. In fact, SDNP were very selective about who would or, more importantly, wouldn't be part of their activities, and this included many streets/roads on their own 'doorstep'. Suddenly the 'penny dropped', and SDNP realised that it was imperative that they became involved in community matters that didn't revolve around their taking control of the Community Centre if they were to improve their chances of obtaining funding. Suddenly, all of the community organisations that formed the basis for most of SDNP's complaints were 'welcomed' into the SDNP 'fold'.

SDNP - A Caring/Sharing Partnership? You decide

SDNP had been 'taken to task' several times due to their reluctance to seriously involve themselves in 'community issues'. Several approaches by an Exeter City Council representative, requesting SDNP's support and a more inclusive attitude in addressing a 'wider variety of community matters' were always rejected. A local Housing Association, the tenants of which were the subject of frequent complaints from SDNP, were also refused any support. SDNP's focus has always been to take control of St.David's Community Centre, purely in the 'interests' of the community, you understand. Both the ECC representative and the Housing Association gave up trying to engage with SDNP

Given the considerable amounts of finance/funding required for the Trust's anticipated refurbishment of the Community Centre it soon became obvious that SDNP needed to implement a radical change in their approach if they were to be successful with any funding applications.

A Little More Re Exeter Parks Watch and SDNP.

Exeter Parks Watch (EPW) is, to all intents and purposes, 'run' by Christine Fraser (CF) who also, at the same time, was a committee member of St.David's Neighbourhood Partnership (no conflict of interest there then. My understanding is that CF is now a 'shadow trustee' of the trust that has been formed to takeover St.David's Community Centre. Whilst Susan Lawrence is the 'Chair' of EPW, she is nothing more than one of several 'puppets' of Christine Fraser. CF commented to me that, "Susan Lawrence had made it clear to her that she was not very keen to take on Looe Road Park", believing that EPW were already sufficiently committed to other parks in Exeter. Susan Lawrence submitted to pressure from CF to add Looe Road Park to the EPW 'portfolio'. This pressure was probably applied to Susan Lawrence purely for altruistic reasons. Yeah! Right! Of course it was.

Paul Faulkner, Exeter City Council's 'Manager of Parks and Open Spaces' also sat on the committe of EPW although, to quote CF, "Not that he really wants to participate but he has been ordered to by his 'Lords and Masters'!". There will be more revelations re Paul and his departments contribution in further posts.

A Stroke of Luck

I had chance meeting with Christine Fraser (Committee Member of SDNP and EPW) and she invited me to participate in EPW's recently started involvement in Looe Road Park. I expressed a little concern and reluctance, never having been previously involved in community matters. CF reassured me that she would, "Show me how the games was played", or at least the way she played it! I finally agreed and attended my first meeting at the St.David's Community Centre (SDCC).

At the second EPW meeting, again at SDCC, I was asked by CF to fill some kettles with water for tea/coffee making. I was unfamiliar with the building and wandered around until I found a member of staff to show me where I could fill the kettles. The staff member asked who it was for and when I told her that it was for an EPW meeting she informed me that a meeting was a meeting booked for SDNP not EPW. SDNP had themselves decided that they should not pay for room hire because of their ongoing intention to take control of SDCC and, "Didn't see why they should have to pay for room-hire". CF claimed that these two meetings were for SDNP discussions when in fact they were for EPW. Frequent requests, from the Centre for EPW's contact details to allow a room-hire invoice to be issued were always ignored. Clearly SDNP and EPW thought it acceptable to deprive SDCC of deperately needed revenue. CF told me, "Keep your mouth shut and keep it zipped in future". What a charmless and manipulative character CF really is, and this was only a taster of what was to follow.

Exeter Parks Watch and St.David's Neighbourhood Partnership - A Very Convenient Arrangement

There will be many references to Exeter Parks Watch (EPW) throughout this Blog, particularly referring to specific individuals and their disgraceful behaviour, most of which can be supported by personal comment from other community representatives involved and also documentary evidence. Various emails will be copied to this Blog to expose these charlatans in their 'true colours', but first, a bit of 'background' re EPW.

EPW was originally formed to operate along similar principles to Neighbourhood Watch, the concept being that members of the public, living near or overlooking Parks, would report 'anti-social' incidents' to the Council or the police. EPW 'falls under the umbrella' of Devon and Cornwall Community Watch Association ( DaCCWA). Susan Lawrence, currently the Chair of EPW, was the Chair of DaCCWA until 'handing this position over' to the current Chair, Julie Dowton.
EPW extended their remit to implementing? improvements in Park facilities (well, some parks at least).

My understanding is that Christine Fraser (CF) (EPW/SDNP ) was originally paid by Exeter City Council to advise in the 'setting up' of EPW and, when the funding ended, she (CF) decided to continue her contibution on a voluntary basis. Christine Fraser has commented to me that, "She anticipates being paid £120.00 per hour for her 'voluntary' contribution towards the running of St.David's Community Centre if the newly formed, by SDNP, 'trust' gain control".

How reassuring to know that Christine Fraser and her ilk truly have the interests of the community driving them on.

St.David's Residents and Business Association AKA...

.....St.David's Neighbourhood Partnership (SDNP). Unfortunately, I was getting nowhere in attempts to implement changes within my community. Clearly, as an individual, I had insufficient 'clout' to make any significant improvements, so I decided to request the support of the then St.David's Residents and Business Association (SDRBA), believing that they could add some 'weight' to my cause. How wrong I was! Several requests for support, made to Hannah Reynolds, the Chair, were refused. However, she did condescend to, "Consider our community for affiliation if I formed a Community Association". Such generosity!

I must confess to a degree of naivety in community matters at this time and, due to pressures of work, I 'gave up' any hopes of making significant changes.

Several years later, by pure chance, it was my misfortune to become involved with Exeter Parks Watch (EPW) and the 'transformed/renamed/rebranded St.David's Neighbourhood Partnership. More specifically, Christine Fraser (SDNP Committee) and Susan Lawrence (Chair of EPW).