“One word says it all about you Ms Pentney, and I dare not write that on here”

“Voter, you have no understanding at all about local government. I never said I was hard done by. Where does all this nonsense come from? You ask a question and then go into a rant when you get a answer. You are voter, well so am I and I give my name. Council tax payer well so am I and I give my name. An income tax payer I am, but are you? Don't be a coward, surely an upright person like yourself has no need to hide his name?”

“Thank you, again, for your reply, Cllr Pentney.

The simple fact remains that only councillors qualify to be childrens champions, in the sense that Cllr Stocks is/was one. Ergo, it is work of a councillor. Therefore, OUR taxes are paying for it.

If you were not willing to do this work when you stood to be a councillor, then you shouldn't stand for election in the first place.

What next, demanding overtime for all those endless, boring (and useless for the most part, it seems) committee meetings?

There is a thriving and well-populated voluntary sector in the Bay (and, heaven knows, it needs it). You don't hear them - those at the Samaritans or the CAB, for example - bleating on about it being "extra" work.

If you're so hard done by, I suggest you stand down next May.”

“All champions take on extra work for which they don't get paid. If they were only interested in the money they won't take up these posts.”

“Thank you, Cllr Pentney, for that unasked for list of the splendid works you do on our behalf. Gosh, don't you work hard. It would have been more interesting if you told us exactly how effective you personally have been at each of the meetings you have attended. Without that information, a list of committees, no matter how exhaustive, is completely meaningless. Or are they mostly just talking shops?

You stated in an earlier post (28 June at 1.19pm) that Cllr Stocks and the other childrens champions do not get paid for these posts. Yes, they do. A minimum of £8k per year out of OUR pockets. Plus expenses for those who claim them.

You do Cllr Stocks no favours at all with your brand of defence of her position. Perhaps the Lib Dems should find someone else to undertake their PR on this site.”

“My, some people sound bitter....... I am appalled at the sacking of Cindy Stocks.... as one who is aware of the dirty tatics in politics I would say Cindy Stocks has been made the scapegoat.... The 2 that should have gone are Tolchard and Tozer, they are clearly NOT DOING the job they are paid to do .as for Bye and Raikes they you hang your heads in shame...... I would say to Karen, just sit on the adoption panel as I did ..think you may be surprised !!!!!”

“So person asked what 'perks' I get? None that I am aware of!”

“Sorry, I meant bleated...”

“It's the old maxim - points means prizes, isnt it?

When you consider that joining the ranks of the 'vulnerable' in society gives some desperate people the basic means to feed and house themselves, it's not surprising that the care system thrives and so many people have a vested interest in defending it.

But what kind of quality of life do you really think these children have? Many have to contend with the collaboration of their own relatives who may gain a financial advantage from any dyfunctional or dysmorphic label attached to them at a young age.

But most just suffer from life-long low self-esteem, which is institutionally reinforced by policies of subordinated inclusion. This is why so many people raised in care go on to embrace a counter-cultural existence involving drug-related crime, if only as a rejection of a mainstream society that defines them as problematic or inferior.

Martin Amis's novel The Pregnant Widow offers a useful critique of alleged neuroses and phantom handicaps which he says are just excuses for mothers and fathers to dope their children. He goes on to say that, in America, which was the future, 60% of household pets were on mood drugs.

The trouble is that in Torbay, it's been fashionably philanthropic for Liberals to bleet about Children's Services in much the same way Labour bleeted about "poor NHS nurses" when they were woefully under-paid by the Conservatives. But emotive rhetoric can throw up subjective symbols that endure in people's minds indefinitely and blind them to the reality of the present.

What's needed now is a revolution in care in the UK. And the only way to achieve that is to stop the age-old Victorian Liberal tradition Cindy unwittingly represents. That means resisting the temptation to use scientific labelling to stigmatise people who are simply poor or unwaged.”

“Ruth Pentney,

Do you ever read what has been written, I told you the wages, and you are a councillor, no wonder the place is in a mess.

Glad you told what you do in your address, it was not asked for, what are the hidden perks you get, we all know you do. You get £11,988.78 in above the board payments, what do you get under the table. Why are you an ex-director of the late Riviera Housing? And how do you fit in the time to write on here if you you are a 24/7 councillor. Guess you have your broadband paid for by us mugs that pay you through our council taxes.

I do more work for two charities than you will ever do and I do not get paid for it, one is the British Heart Foundation and the other is Help for Heroes.

Yes I am the father of Rex, who lost his arm in Afghanistan, yes he is the guy you tried to bully on here and even tried to report to his seniors through your mate Sanders, did not work did it Ruth Pentney. Rex is alive and well and now works in Torquay.”