Fair warning. You may find this boring! No apology for it though.

In 2015, the voters of Brantham and Stutton and Tattingstone elected me as a councillor at Babergh. I'm eternally grateful for that opportunity. It has been incredibly frustrating at times, but absolutely fascinating, and even satisfying, being able to apply my long held beliefs about what a councillor should be.

I found myself on a council with a one-party administration that I was not in sympathy with and, like many others, isolated and largely ignored. So I buckled down and I learnt. I studied how the system of local government fits together, how it actually worked and learnt how to deal with the political realities. I presented reasoned arguments and fought to achieve what was possible at the time. I talked, and listened, to people I did not always agree with but sought to find the common ground, where it was available. I made friends, and not always where I expected, and the 'opposition' influence slowly grew.

At the following election in 2019, perhaps encouraged by our work, Babergh voters elected a broader range of councillors, and from more political groups, so that no overall majority existed. After careful negotiation, a multi group administration was formed, comprising Conservative, Independent and Liberal Democrat members.

I believe it has been a much more responsive one than before, less ideological and more practical. I'm very glad that it was in place when the Covid-19 crisis took place. A multi-party approach has been very much a Babergh tradition throughout its history.

All that said, I learnt early that the influence, power and decision making of a district is somewhat limited in the face of an over-arching Government. I didn't elect or choose that Government. The country did. The entire basis of funding for all local government is under their control. Council incomes were effectively reduced by well over 40% since 2010, the highest proportion of any government department. Central Government also decreed the basis of all planning matters, requiring strict legal compliance.

The limited ability to set our own local policies was still capable of being overruled higher up. In those circumstances, a sensible council uses the existing rules to argue for and achieve local aims within the framework that exists. It's not a comfortable position to be in. I and many of my colleagues (in many places) don't agree with the basic assumptions but we have no choice but to consider them as a matter of law. Any rule set can be interpreted differently though, what I call 'wiggle room' where we might be able to be more flexible. However planning law allows applicants to challenge a decision. You soon realise that with that in mind, you'd better be giving good reasons for a decision, so the council can defend it under the law.

That singular example demonstrates something that applies across many areas. There are important areas dealt with at Suffolk County Council like highways and footpaths, that Babergh are obliged to fall in line with. They have the authority there not given to the district, even though we must deal with the effect. It's an incredibly complicated and, this being Britain, a historical system. I don't have to like any of these existing systems or agree with them. I do have to deal with them and find the best outcomes for our community that I can by using them to the best of my ability.

So, any explanation I give you is not agreement with a bad system, or 'selling out'. It is, quite simply, a recognition of reality. That reality must be dealt with. We can try to change the system though. Apart from nationally, at a local level through the application of our own policies, we can carefully press or lobby for alternative viewpoints to be considered and developed. As ever, that's an ongoing process that has applied throughout human history.

If I can't tell you what you want to hear about faults in the system, it does not mean I agree with it. I just believe you should be given the facts that my experience and study have helped me understand. Mirroring your views, or 'virtue signalling', helps nobody and changes nothing. I owe you the judgement I was elected to use.

The largest area of modern comment on my own work, that of my Babergh colleagues and that of the parish council has been Facebook. The increase in use of social media has made expression of opinion quicker and easier than ever. It's consequence free for most, but not for me. What I write or say must be carefully done. Easily misread or misunderstood, FB is a relatively simple medium, designed for the sharing of information in my view. This has been my primary approach in my own group and comments. We do not govern or decide by it. We have elections for that. You may have noted the abuse of these media forms across the world in recent years. Whatever personal opinions we may hold, it cannot be described as democratic in any way. One 'man' here doesn't have one vote, but as many posts they (or a group, or 'bots' at the extreme) can produce. And non-users, the majority, don't have any say at all.

For this reason, many of my colleagues won't use Facebook etc at all. Let's be honest, people aren't always exactly..... kind, or even fair, in their comments. Also some councillors aren't entirely comfortable with technology either. It doesn't mean they're bad people. It's not in their wheelhouse is all.

I've deliberately taken a different view. I post as much relevant information as I think might be useful to somebody in the community. If anybody gets fed up with the number of posts like that, I hold that if it reaches one person to whom it might matter, it's worth it. And it's quick and up to date, very useful at the moment where things change fast. I also follow multiple groups myself, for information and to find out what people are thinking or worried about. It helps me do my job. I respond at times to provide accurate information and perspective, measuring my comments and maybe correcting some misunderstandings. Not to do this would be to leave the field clear for opinions or comments to be simply accepted without reply or context. I think you deserve better.

Now, where complex matters are being discussed, Facebook, and the rest, really aren't capable of doing the job. We deal with documents that run to tens and hundreds of pages, with appendices! Simply put, social media is a set of tools, for simpler points, information, publicity, links, memes, dancing cat videos, a bit of human interaction, maybe some selling and even a little fun.

My aim in this, and all my work and communication, is to be the councillor I would want myself. I look to be responsive and responsible, informed and informing, transparent without betraying confidences, diligent in my work, and always look for local improvements where I can encourage and achieve them. It ain't easy.

Councillors are a target and that comes with the job. We must accept the cynicism that exists, because it does. The best way to challenge some assumptions made and show a real commitment to public service is by demonstrating integrity and honesty in our actions and dealings to deny the hatreds sometimes expressed.

I'm not perfect, heaven knows, but anybody who knows me personally will know how seriously I, and others, take our responsibilities and duties to you. As well as representing your interests to the council, we must also represent the council to you and to others, making decisions for the common good.

All of this must seem somewhat po-faced. I'd happily prefer to tell you of the hard work, humour and goodwill I've found in these last years. You can see it if you look for it. It all stands you in good stead for the future.

Thank you for your attention if you made it this far.