It seems yesterday's comments hit a nerve at the council. John Staples insisted its press release was crystal clear: the webpage would "publish the full press statements it has given to the media on specific stories if they have subsequently been chopped or altered and their meaning substantially changed when broadcast or published.

"....residents will be able to compare what was reported, or broadcast, with what was issued by Medway Council on controversial topics.
It would be updated on an ad hoc basis.Which means that residents will only get to learn what the council wants them to learn.

Mr Staples also insists that I never asked about asbestos checks. I assure you I did on at least two occasions.I quote his written response as received:

"Our records show that your enquiry was about the issue around caretakers (there was an enforecment notice after two school's site managers had not undergone proper training) and that you have not asked us if the HSE was carrying out an emergency audit following Woodlands - something that did not happen."

Their records might not show it. I did ask - formally - twice.

It is clear we are not going to agree on this.

The key issue remains that staff were exposed to asbestos at Woodlands, along with contractors' personnel. In some cases personal records will have to be kept for 40 years (the period which coincidentally seems to be when asbestosis and mesothelioma develops).

It is also a fact recorded in the papers from the auditors that 106 schools in Medway were to be inspected in a three month period following the failure of Woodlands to protect those people. It was "a tough target". Following those inspections all head teachers were required to undergo specialist training (something with Mr Fiddaman apparently objected to, but subsequently undertook).

It is also a fact that there was no sealing of the work areas, no protective gear, clothing was not changed following work and before mixing with other people, that cleaners moved from dirty areas to classrooms, that children were in school while the work was going on, and that none of the workforce was CRB-checked.

Deborah Upton, the council's legal eagle, housing chief and monitoring officer, said in her covering report: "The Council holds a legal duty to effectively manage asbestos in schools, and this duty cannot be delegated to others i.e. the Council ultimately retains

responsibility. However Health and Safety training and briefings are available to

all schools to ensure that they know what their responsibilities are in respect

of asbestos, and the Council has a Health & Safety officer dedicated to

schools.

"I am not satisfied that any enquiries were made of the School, or

that proper procedures were put in place to ensure that the school

appropriately met its health and safety responsibilities for asbestos, fire of [sic] other

health and safety matters in relation to the building works."

As the auditor's report comments: "A school can opt out of using the Council [for] delivery of a capital project. Who controls the school if they opt out?"

Even the government has a responsibility for Woodlands school that appears to be lacking.

As for the issue that sparked the debate, Mr Staples' colleagues continue to ignore the fears and worries that villagersw at Grain have arising from National Grid's LNG terminal at the bottom of their gardens.

Turn your back for one moment and something always happens at Medway Council.

The latest is an extraordinary announcement that it is publishing a webpage giving its answers to media questions.

It follows a disagreement with both the Medway Messenger and BBC South East over their reporting of the concerns raised by Jack Hope, a resident of the Isle of Grain. He has been mounting a vitriolic campaign against virtually everyone in authority (councillors, National Grid, MPs et al) over the failure of the any of them to advise what is the escape plan if there is a catastrophe at the LNG terminal. There has to be a plan if (heaven forbid) if there is a massive fireball at the terminal, along the pipe which crosses under the only roadway out of the Isle or aboard one of the 130,000 tonnes-liquid gas carrying tankers which now regularly dock next door to the village. (It's a good site they chose, between the laden wrecks of the munition-carrier Robert Montgomery and the minelayer Princess Irene.)

You would think the residents would know what to do They don't.

It is because there is an issue of national security (so those in authority maintain).

What seems to have upset Medway Council's press baron, John Staples, is that no one has reported that Mr Hope is demanding that National Grid buys his property. It is now blighted by its overbearing neighbours presence - along with everyone else on the tip of the Hoo peninsula.

The real issue is whether residents are safe living at the end of the A228 when they have millions of tonnes of gas stored in a near-frozen compressed state at the end of their gardens.

Mr Staples is a former reporter. He lives an uncomfortable life trying to balance the politicial pressures, officers; defensiveness and the ferrety inquisitiveness of the local media. I should know: I've done the same job.

What his decision means (and I suspect there are at least two politicians pushing this move) is that the confidentiality of press enquiries is going to be blown apart.

Let me explain the system employed by Mr Staples and his team.

A reporter phones in with a simple query. Let's say I ask: "How many staff does Medway Council employ?"

Mr Staples emails a query to HR with a deadline for a response, and asks the same question.

Someone in the HR department then responds. Let's say the answer is: "There are 8,000 full time and 2,200 part-time staff employed by the council."

An email is then sent to the reporter saying "Alan Watkins has asked how many staff does Medway Council employ. The answer is 8,000 full time and 2,200 part-time staff are employed by the council."

That simple enquiry will now find itself on the web. It won't mean very much to the general public. It might, however, mean something to a rival newspaper, broadcaster or whatever.

Mr Staples' bosses have really stirred an explosive mixture.

Their annoyance (did someone suggest petulance?) has led to the unprecedented step of revealing to other journalists what lines of investigation other reporters are following.

That's fine with innocuous enquiries (not that the general public will be interested). But what if it is asking about the asbestos crisis that is building in Medway's schools?

Would they have published the inquiries that I made a year ago when I first reported the spending and chaos that is the Woodlands School extension? I don't think so. They did everything they could to hide the answers I was seeking.

Would they have published the enquiry I made about asbestos examinations of more than 100 local schools? They strongly denied that there was any foundation in the story. In fact, the audit papers that were published earlier this month reveal that it was conducted in a three month spell, and that was a difficult target for the council to meet. But the council press office denied there was any foundation in the story.

Would they care to say how many council houses and flats have asbestos today, and what advice they have given their tenants?

Dogs eat dogs. When one of those hounds takes thousands of pounds of the money we lawful taxpayers reluctantly give them for their high salaries, shoddy schooling, tatty buildings and one-time pop stars he deserves to get bitten.

Medway Council should pull back - or expect a bit more than a bite.