Extraordinary? Not Really. But Shirebrook Opposition Finally Hits Back.

On 26th August, the Miners’ Welfare Club hosted a community meeting. Attendance was surprisingly high — around 70 residents by my count, plus seven STC councillors, County Councillor Sarah Reaney, and BDC Council Leader Jane Yates (who had earlier refused an interview with Shirebrook247).

OPPOSITION BENCH
From left to right sat Cllr Tony Burns, Cllr Martin Barber, Cllr Sarah Brooks, Cllr Nicola Smith (I’m not sure- I don’t know her well), Cllr Dale Smith, Cllr Shaun Cheeseman, and Cllr Jennifer Wilson.

There were apologies noted, though I didn’t catch from whom. What I did catch was that neither the Leader nor the Deputy Leader of STC even bothered to send apologies. To me, that felt like a slap in the face. But after years of dealing with STC, I’m used to it.

EXTRAORDINARY OR NOT?
From where I sat, the opposition had correctly called an Extraordinary Meeting under the Local Government Act 1972 and STC Standing Orders. But to the current STC leadership, the law has always been just a suggestion — something to be bent and abused for their own benefit. So they moved the time, place, and date. Another slap in the face.

The opposition looked confused – they’re not used to being slapped around. Still, credit where it’s due: their persistence means there will now be an “official” Extraordinary Meeting. Folks — this is historic. I honestly can’t remember the last time an Extraordinary Meeting was held, so big congratulations to the opposition.

I’ll try to get into this “official” EM, but you know how it works — you need luck just to get through the door. It’s almost as if STC prefers to conduct its business far away from the eyes of residents. I wonder why.

QUORUM – YES, THEY HAD IT. PERIOD
Yes — the opposition had a quorum. Enough councillors to make binding decisions if it were a formal meeting. That’s huge. By my calculations, they’re only two, maybe three votes away from a majority. Politically, this is the moment to test the waters with something substantial. Something that looked impossible just a year ago. Perhaps… an audit of the pellet system?

AUDIT: MY TRIGGER WORD
I hadn’t planned to speak. But halfway through, a resident mentioned my trigger word: AUDIT. I couldn’t stop myself. Unprepared, unrehearsed, hot-headed, I asked to join the queue of residents wanting to speak. When my time came…

I told the room: we can meet as much as we want, talk as much as we like, and nothing will change. If we want change, we need action to follow the words. For example, three weeks ago I published an open letter to a councillor, asking him to resign. You can do the same. Send an email. Pick up the phone. Give councillors a piece of your mind so they feel the pressure.

ANY ACTION IS TEN TIMES STRONGER THAN THE STRONGEST WORDED LETTER
Then I turned to the councillors. I reminded them: for years, I’ve been pushing for an independent audit of the pellet heating system and the Leisure Centre. (The solar panel contract should have landed on a lawyer’s desk years ago.) Back when I was a councillor, I even put a legal consultation for an audit on the agenda. What did the STC Leader do? Cancelled the meeting. A slap in the face. You know the drill.

But this time is different. I told them: I appreciate your effort, but I want to see action. Table a motion for an independent audit of the pellet system at the next full council. Even if you expect to lose, I don’t mind losing a few battles if I win the war. The only way to test your opponent is to challenge him. Let’s see how many of the “old guard” vote against transparency.

And again, I demanded action in the form of an official request for a registered vote, so residents can see who supports transparency, and who prefers to block scrutiny over serious questions of oversight, missing documents, and possible abuse. I’ve been trying to obtain pellet records from 2013–2015, but I’ve been slapped with refusal after refusal. Either the data in them is so damning they don’t want residents to see it — or the documents simply don’t exist anymore. And if they don’t exist, we need to ask: why? Who destroyed them? When? How? All of those questions can only be answered by an audit — or a full investigation.

When I started talking about the pellet scandal, I noticed a few faces with that familiar expression: “Oh no, he’s on about it again. Get some new material, man.” But far more faces showed interest — even support.

These were people who had seen the documents I published before, who had read my words and agreed. They saw the same thing I did: something is seriously wrong with the numbers, the statements, and the whole setup.

From where I stood making that short speech, I could see it in people’s faces — overwhelming support for finally launching a pellet contract audit. And then I caught one face laughing. Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but when I speak publicly, I jump from face to face, reading the vibe of the room. And at one point, my eyes landed on the group around BDC leader Jane Yates. She laughed.

DID I GET TO THEM?
I’m 99% sure the opposition will try. If not, I will put more and more pressure on it, or I will try to win a seat on STC and do it myself. But I have a strong feeling that opposition is on it now. And why wouldn’t they?

We’ve had an “automated system” ordering pellets three times in one month, without anyone raising an eyebrow. In a single warm spring month, more pellets were “burned” than in December, January, and February COMBINED — and no one blinked. No red flags. Nothing. And that was just one winter out of 20 they signed a contract for. And on top of that, we once paid a £5,000 penalty for burning less fuel than a private company ORDERED us to burn. Total amount of “penalty fine” for years 2017-2022 is… 16,034.29 pounds. How much since I lost my seat at STC? Only the Town Clerk knows. And probably her brother. Document screenshot just to confirm my calculations:

STC signed a net-zero “deal”, and now we are paying a fine for not polluting the planet. That’s net zero: zero profit, net loss — plus a bit more CO₂ on the side. Contract signed allegedly for 20 years! (STC refused to show it to me- even when I was a councillor).

So yes, the opposition needs to try to bring it to the finish line. And yes, STC will most likely try to block them. It will be another slap in the face. But they’ll get used to it. It will harden them. It will give them the will to fight back. I’m sure of that.

VINDICATION
There is overwhelming public support for an audit. When I finished and sat back in my seat, a lovely lady sitting near me mentioned that I had once offered to pay for an audit. And she was right. I’d forgotten to tell about that in the heat of the moment — so here it is again: I’m ready to cover the cost of an independent audit of the Leisure Centre pellet system. I stated that officially in an STC meeting. All I need is the green light from STC- a well-phrased resolution.

And then it hit me: I had called on residents to act. I had called on councillors to act. But I hadn’t said what action I’m taking myself. Let me fix that blunder.

HOLD ON! THERE IS MORE?
I was about to act — days away from hitting “publish” on an article about my latest investigation — when unexpected news landed: the councillor I had written my open letter to finally replied with action. He resigned. That triggered the promise I made in that letter. Two promises, actually. One: I won’t run for his seat. Two: I won’t talk about him anymore.

So I’m walking away from him, leaving him in the past. Relieved. Hopefully, the truth I have in my article will come out anyway. The ball is already rolling, pushed by someone else, and I was just about to report on it. Now, it’s in someone else’s hands.

So… let’s move on to the following subject of the meeting.

HMOs: THE REAL LOCUST SWARM
Another big subject: HMOs. Numbers float around Facebook, but the last one I saw left me floored. Out of 38 registered HMOs in the Bolsover District, 36 are in Shirebrook. Thirty-six! I can’t believe it. It can’t be true. God, I hope it’s not true. (I need to check it out, because I also heard the number was 20.)

But whether it’s 20 or 36, the story is the same: BDC has betrayed us. Past leaders, current leaders — both from here — let this happen. Too many HMOs in Shirebrook have become hotspots for crime, drugs, and antisocial behaviour. They drag down house prices and wreck neighbourhoods. Residents lined up to speak about it.

I always thought Shirebrook had five, maybe ten HMOs. Twenty or thirty-six? I want the map. I want to hear from everyone living next to one. Straight onto my to-do list.

HAVOC NEAR THE LIBRARY
This was actually the first issue raised at the meeting, but it was overlooked in the editing process. Still, people need to know. Issue of “asylum dispersal.” The government and BDC have turned our area into a dumping ground.

Troublemakers from elsewhere are shipped here, and the results are chaos: harassment, drug use in the street, begging, crime — especially around the library. One gentleman told of women being harassed and asked why nothing is being done. Good question.

Was there a vote in BDC on this “dispersal status”? How did “our” chosen ones vote on it? I’ll be sniffing around, straight on my to-do list.

4000 NEW HOUSES
Another bombshell. BDC plans 4,000 new houses in Shirebrook. Residents voted against it in consultation. Doesn’t matter. BDC knows better. On average, in our District, there are 2.3 people per home; that’s 9,200 new residents. Plus their cars. The 2021 census put Shirebrook’s population at 13,300. They want to almost double it — without new schools, new dentists, new GPs, new roads. Just houses.

Cllr Tony Burns is fighting it. Support him if you can (email him, send a message on Facebook — he needs our help). But I fear BDC will slap him in the face with the same old line: “there is nothing we can do.”

JANE YATES AT THE MEETING
Yes, Jane Yates, the BDC leader who earlier refused an interview with me, was there. Her excuse for inaction on HMOs? “People don’t report crimes.” Does she even watch the news? People don’t report because they don’t feel that the police are on their side. We live under a two-tier system: two-tier policing, two-tier justice. Residents believe that if you report immigrant crime, you risk getting yourself in trouble instead.

Just recently, I was reminded of that infamous video where a man was arrested outside a mosque after chanting, “We love bacon.” Police said it fell under public order offences. And Yates thinks people will report REAL crime? People know, people feel like the police protect the wrong side. They appear paralysed by political correctness and government pressure — protecting those accused of crimes over victims and residents. Yates pretending otherwise proves she’s out of touch.

For now, I’ll let her off the hook — she is, after all, trying to clean up the mess left by previous ‘management’ in BDC.

CIC SCANDAL
And then, the CIC scandal. Cllr Shaun Cheeseman stood up and said it plainly: no business plan, no financial forecast, no vote. Yet the business is already registered in the Village Hall. Another slap in the face.

I’ve seen him angry before. Even then, he stays polite and balanced, but you can feel the frustration bubbling under the surface — waving documents, talking about mismanagement, lack of transparency, and dodgy procedures. This rather well-mannered man was visibly… cheesed off. The last time that happened, his persistence forced a land audit. Will he win again with this CIC saga? I hope so.

He’s right: this was supposed to be a community company. Yet there was no public consultation, no budget, no plan, no community involvement. At all. For me, it felt like a thunderbolt from the blue: “Boom! We’re leasing the Village Hall. Don’t like it? Too late — it’s already done.”

It reeks of the old STC style — forced through without openness or proper process. Responsibility for that sits with the leadership. The saddest part? The CIC itself wasn’t a bad idea. However, if we’re going to do it, it must be done properly: with transparency, a plan, forecasts, and community backing. Not this.

PROPER CONDUCT AND POLITENESS
Cllr Sarah Brooks chaired the meeting, and there wasn’t a single moment when people were refused the right to speak. There was no aggression. No swearing. No cutting off. The queue to speak was clearly upheld. The meeting ran smoothly and was in a friendly atmosphere. In a few moments, emotions run high, but only because people were passionate about what they were speaking of. For me, it was refreshing, and I agree with Cllr Sarah Brooks- this event should be in the calendar for good. Maybe not monthly, but once every three months? Once every half year?

LET ME SLAP SOME SENSE INTO YOU
There was more, much more. If you weren’t there, you missed something great. Next time the opposition calls a meeting — come. Change doesn’t happen on its own. It needs people to show up.

Slap after slap after slap. The difference is this time the opposition isn’t taking it passively — they’re finally hitting back.

Sylwester Zwierzynski info@shirebrook247.com
Lead picture: made with Midjourney