Expense claim forms for Councillor Pat Williams 2013 to 2014

Expense claim forms for Councillor Pat Williams 2013 to 2014

Expense claim forms for Councillor Pat Williams 2013 to 2014

                                              

Councillor Pat Williams is a Liberal Democrat councillor for Oxton ward and is Deputy Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group. Her expenses claims are for attendance at meetings of Council, the Corporate Parenting Group, the Licensing Act 2003 Subcommittee, the Attainment Subcommittee, the Wirral Awards Working Party, the Oxton Conservation Society, the Licensing Panel, the Youth Parliament, the Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee, the Birkenhead Constituency Committee, the Community First Funding Panel (part of the Birkenhead Constituency Committee), meetings with officers, an Employment and Appointments Committee appointments panel, training, the Improvement Board and various briefings.

She is the last in the series of councillors expenses forms for 2013-14. I did also ask for the underlying information supporting these expenses claims such as petrol receipts, parking receipts, tunnel toll receipts, taxi receipts, train tickets, hotel expenses et cetera. Although I made this request as part of the audit back in August I’m still waiting! However for the twenty or so councillors one petrol receipt was provided!

In some cases I have not been given information for the correct financial year. It is certainly something I need to follow-up with officers, who blame it on Wirral Council’s HR department supplying incorrect information or not supplying it when requested!

Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 1
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 1
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 2
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 2
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 3
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 3
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 4
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 4
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 5
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 5
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 6
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 6
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 7
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 7
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 8
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 8
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 9
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 9
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 10
Cllr Pat Williams expenses claim 2013 2014 page 10

If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.

A professor, 2 solicitors and 3 councillors discuss alcohol sales at Westbourne Hall & filming of public meetings

A professor, 2 solicitors and 3 councillors discuss alcohol sales at Westbourne Hall & filming of public meetings

                                               

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

The Licensing Act 2003 subcommittee comprising of Cllr Steve Niblock, Cllr Denise Roberts and Cllr Louise Reecejones supposed to start at 10.00am actually started at 10.20am. Cllr Steve Niblock was chair for the meeting. Quite why meetings of the Licensing Act 2003 subcommittee never start on time is a Town Hall mystery to write about another day, but councillors were there to decide on an application for selling alcohol at Westbourne Hall in Westbourne Road, West Kirby which is now run by Westbourne Hall Community Trust.

Attending the meeting were two trustees from the Westbourne Hall Community Trust whose names were David Wade and Ray Davies. Representing them was a solicitor called Barry Holland. There were also various council officers present to take the minutes, give legal advice or answer questions about the detail of the application.

A local resident, described as a professor who lives near Westbourne Hall was objecting to the application was also present, as was myself and my wife. Normally that would be everyone, but unusually (as there were no objections to this application from Merseyside Police) Sergeant Simon Barrigan (Licensing Sergeant for Wirral) and an unknown police officer accompanying him, sat and observed the meeting in silence.

At the start of the meeting Margaret O’Donnell (Licensing Manager, Wirral Council) informed people present that two residents had contacted Wirral Council officers to say that they couldn’t attend the hearing but had emailed in their views. The solicitor representing the Westbourne Hall Community Trust, Barry Holland said that he had had a chat with the objector to straighten out some issues. The Chair, Cllr Steve Niblock read out what he does at every Licensing Act 2003 Subcommittee about what the purpose of the meeting was.

Margaret O’Donnell raised the issue of filming the meeting by saying, “Just to confirm for those who are present as well, that this particular hearing is being filmed and whether or not you wanted to give people an opportunity to comment on that.” I’ll point out here that when Pt 2 of the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014 came into effect on August 6th of this year Wirral Council is not allowed to stop filming at its public meetings. The Chair, Cllr Steve Niblock asked people present if they consented to being filmed and asked people present to confirm their consent.

As I sat there, as I’ve sat there through many discussions about filming at the start of public meetings at Wirral Council, I felt like I was in the film Groundhog Day where the same thing keeps getting said in an endless loop about filming in an effort to try my patience.

Heads were nodding around the room about the filming issue and the professor said in reply, “Well I assume I don’t even have a say in the matter, but as it’s a public meeting, usually I object to that in general but I also approve of the general principle of public meetings, so I think I don’t have any choice but to accept.”

Seemingly with a look of disappointment and a big intake of breath Cllr Steve Niblock as nobody was objecting to the filming of the meeting he asked their legal adviser Ken Abraham for “guidance on this issue”. I will point out at this point that in June, Cllr Niblock totally ignored the guidance that Ken Abraham gave him at a previous Licensing Act 2003 subcommittee meeting which led to the stop filming, that means stop now blog post back in June.

Mr Ken Abraham replied very quietly as he can hardly be heard on the video, “Well legislation has recently been passed in respect of meetings held in the past, held by the local authority which is regulations which are in force as well in relation to that. The guidance that was issued, really doesn’t touch upon the issue of individuals who object to the meeting being filmed. So there may be a pragmatic view really, if an individual did object to recording then that part of the hearing with which they were involved, you could ask for the camera to be switched off and we would have to in making that request, rely on the errm credibility and honesty of the individual filming to ensure the fact that the camera is actually put off and there would be no filming of that part.

Really to object to this filming, it would be a shame et cetera. So, councillor as I said before, Members around the table, you could attempt to do that but that is the rule.”

The professor said he didn’t want to cause any problems, followed by the solicitor for the applicant saying they would not to object to filming as it would be “churlish” as the application was being made on behalf of the community.

Margaret O’Donnell said that the purpose of the hearing was to decide on an application for a premises licence made by Westbourne Hall Community Trust and related to Westbourne Hall, in Westbourne Road, West Kirby. She said that they currently had a premises licence, which also allowed for regulated entertainment. Margaret O’Donnell read out the times they had applied for and that there were representations from residents about the application and one resident was here at the hearing.

The Chair, Cllr Steve Niblock asked the solicitor for the applicants to speak in support of their application. He said that it was not an application for a public house, sporting club or any kind of commercial venture. Westbourne Hall had operated as a community trust, originally run by Wirral Council and people from the area. Mr Davies had been associated with it since the joint panel was formed in 1994, but he had been involved before that dating back to 1991.

He went on to make it clear that it would not be a public house, there would be no stock and the application was to enable the premises to offer to people who rent it such as charities, arts groups, martial arts groups, dance groups and that it was a “genuine community venture”. Mr Holland said that the hall was rented out for wedding receptions and that the hall had had a licence since the inception of the 2003 Licensing Act.

However Westbourne Hall used its full quota of twelve temporary event notices and that there was no objection from any of the responsible authorities to this application. He said that due to the restriction the hall had lost out on potential lets and gave the example of an organisation renting the hall for rehearsals but also wanting to have an annual dance and Christmas party there. At the moment these were going to Heswall or Hoylake.

When the trust had taken over they had put a business plan together as to how they intended to run it, but they lost bookings who had gone elsewhere. He referred to the Hoylake Community Trust had done the same and it was to level the playing field. The community trust was not a commercial venture and he went into the detail as to the times.

Birthday parties for people aged 18-25 would not be permitted and he explained that they had had to make notices available about the application on the premises and in the press. If he had changed the wording of these notices to please the neighbours to explain it was not a commercial facility then it could have been argued that the statutory requirements hadn’t been complied with. He had been involved in a previous application where this had happened.

He asked for the artificial restriction of only twelve temporary event notices a year to be lifted and that the hall didn’t aim to change the relationship with its neighbours but he would happily answer any questions.

Two councillors (Cllr Louise Reecejones and Cllr Steve Niblock) asked similar questions about how they would ensure that the licensing objectives were upheld by organisations renting the hall and selling alcohol?

To be continued…

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:

Open Democracy Project Phase 1: Dates of upcoming public meetings (18th August 2014 to 19th September 2014)

Open Democracy Project Phase 1: Dates of upcoming public meetings (18th August 2014 to 19th September 2014)

Open Democracy Project Phase 1: Dates of upcoming public meetings (18th August 2014 to 19th September 2014)

                                                               
Planning Committee (Wirral Council) 20th March 2014
A Planning Committee meeting at Wirral Council (20th March 2014), an example of one of the public meetings at Wirral Council and one now covered by the filming legislation

One of the questions I sometimes get asked is when public meetings are. In fact the numbers of the public turning up to public meetings (ranging from zero to over a hundred) was talked about at the last Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee. I’m always pleased to see other members of the press or public at these meetings and I don’t mind if someone else is filming, tweeting, audio recording, photographing etc too (not that they are supposed to stop such things these days anyway).

If the press (whether that be newspapers, radio, TV, online or other) and public are able to exercise their new rights about filming however, they have to first know when and where the meetings are being held. The Wirral Council, Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority, Liverpool City Region Combined Authority, Police and Crime Panel, Mersey Port Health Committee and definitely some of the police ones do fall under the filming legislation.

Strangely (strange because other public bodies paid for through Council Tax, such as fire, police, Merseytravel, Combined Authority etc do fall under it), meetings of the Merseyside Recycling and Waste Authority don’t fall under the filming legislation, although they are public meetings. There are then a bunch of public meetings where it is “unclear” as to whether the filming legislation applies or not (something our legal department will have to look into and do some internal guidance on).

Usually public meetings are not very well advertised! Notice of them is usually published on an obscure page or two on a website (although obviously the people on the committee are told). If you really wanted to you could probably spend a lot of time going to them (although thankfully in August there are less of them). If anyone wonders if I’m going to be at them all, the answer is no (as at least two are on at the same time in different places).

As we’re halfway through August (and there are very few meetings in August so this would be a very short list) this list of public meetings also includes part of September. I have included training sessions too (although councillors would probably not appreciate it, if members of the press or public turned up to their training sessions so the location of such training meetings is not included but the titles, dates and times of the training sessions are).

Where available (at the time of writing) links to agenda & reports are included (and a brief bit about what the meeting is about if known (well there is some stuff I know about what these meetings are about but it would take too long to include here). Reports & agendas should be published (it’s a legal requirement) on the respective organisation’s website a week before the meeting is held. Room bookings however can be changed at short notice due to contingency plans. For example at Wirral Council if large numbers of people turn up and exceed the capacity of the room & overflow room, a previous meeting in the same room overruns or the situation that has happened in the past where two meetings are double-booked in the same room at the same time then the location of the meeting can change at short notice.

Meetings can be added (or cancelled) on an ad hoc basis, but in the case of the former a week of notice is usually given.

===================================================================================================================

Wirral Council (Metropolitan Borough of Wirral or Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council) (public meetings 18th August 2014 to 19th September 2014)

Thursday 21st August 2014 6pm Planning Committee, Committee Room 1, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED

agenda reports

Purpose of meeting is to decide on minutes, site visits, planning applications & AOB. Planning application for Tranmere Rovers training ground has already received some press coverage.

Friday 22nd August 2014 10am Licensing Panel, Committee Room 3, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED

Agenda Reports

Purpose: To decide on an application to register a Hackney Carriage Vehicle (GX51 OKL). Normally a decision made by officers (not councillors) but taxi failed its MOT so couldn’t be registered in time before licence expired.

Tuesday 26th August 2014 Constituency Committee – Wallasey Working Group, 7pm, Committee Room 1, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED

Wednesday 27th August 2014 Licensing Act 2003 Subcommittee, 10am, Committee Room 2, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED

Agenda Reports

To decide on an application for a premises licence for Westbourne Hall, Westbourne Road, West Kirby. To also decide on an application to vary a premises licence at KP Store, 338 Old Chester Road, Rock Ferry.

Monday 1st September 2014 Attainment Subcommittee, Committee Room 2, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED 6pm

Wednesday 3rd September 2014 Coordinating Committee, Committee Room 1, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED 6pm

Thursday 4th September 2014 Licensing Act 2003 Subcommittee, Committee Room 3, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED, 10am Agenda Reports

Application to vary a premises licence The Courtyard, 7-9 Rose Mount, Oxton.

Thursday 4th September 2014 Cabinet (Special Meeting), 6.15pm, Committee Room 1, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED

Special meeting to make decision on options following consultation on closure of Lyndale School.

Monday 8th September 2014 5.30pm Councillor Training: “Regulatory Committees and What You Need to Know

Tuesday 9th September 2014 6.00pm Families and Wellbeing Policy and Performance Committee, Committee Room 1, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED

Wednesday 10th September 2014 5.30pm Councillor Training: “Use of Social Media to Engage and Mobilise Your Community

Thursday 11th September 2014 6.15pm Cabinet, Committee Room 1, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED

Monday 15th September 2014 6.00pm Pensions Committee, Committee Room 1, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED

Tuesday 16th September 2014 6.00pm Transformation and Resources Policy and Performance Committee, Committee Room 1, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED

Wednesday 17th September 2014 6.00pm Constituency Committee – Wallasey Working Group, Committee Room 2, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED

Wednesday 17th September 2014 6.00pm Audit and Risk Management Committee, Committee Room 1, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED

Thursday 18th September 2014 6.00pm Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee, Committee Room 1, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED – NOTE CANCELLED MEETING

Thursday 18th September 2014 6.00pm Coordinating Committee, Committee Room 1, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED (Financial Monitoring call in from adjourned meeting on the 7th August 2014)

===================================================================================================================

Merseytravel (part of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority) from 18th August 2014 to 18th September 2014.

Merseytravel Committee, Thursday 4th September 2014, 2.30pm, Authority Chamber, 1st floor, Merseytravel Offices, No 1 Mann Island, Liverpool, L1 3BP

Performance and Review Sub Committee, Monday 15th September 2014 1.00pm, Authority Chamber, 1st floor, Merseytravel Offices, No 1 Mann Island, Liverpool, L1 3BP

Audit and Governance Sub- Committee, Monday 15th September 2014 3.00pm, Authority Chamber, 1st floor, Merseytravel Offices, No 1 Mann Island, Liverpool, L1 3BP

===================================================================================================================
Now for the list of Liverpool City Region Combined Authority meetings from 18th August 2014 to the 19th September 2014:

Liverpool City Region Combined Authority, 19th September 2014 11am, Authority Chamber, 1st floor, Merseytravel Offices, No 1 Mann Island, Liverpool, L1 3BP

Purpose: Business Enterprise Strategy, International Strategy, Rail Franchising and Rail North, Feedback on the Skills Show @ the IFB, Scrutiny Workplan, City Region Deal implementation update, Devolved funds implementation update, Budget monitoring

*Note I am unsure when the new overview and scrutiny committee for the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority has its first meeting or even from memory what exactly it’s called.

===================================================================================================================

Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority (18th August 2014 to 18th September 2014)

Consultation and Negotiation Sub-Committee, Tuesday 2nd September 2014 1.00pm Wirral Suite, Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service Headquarters, Bridle Road, Bootle, Merseyside, L30 4YD

Performance and Scrutiny Committee, Thursday 4th September 2014 1.00pm Wirral Suite, Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service Headquarters, Bridle Road, Bootle, Merseyside, L30 4YD

===================================================================================================================
Merseyside Police and Crime Panel (host authority Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council) 18th August 2014 to 17 September 2014

Merseyside Police and Crime Panel, Thursday 4th September 2014 10.00am Council Chamber, Municipal Buildings, Huyton

===================================================================================================================
Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Merseyside (18th August 2014 to 17th September 2014)

*note it was much easier to find out this sort of information below in the Merseyside Police Authority days, although even they made mistakes from time to time and I had to remind them to update their website (which now no longer exists)!

Tuesday 9th September 2014 Performance and Scrutiny Group (approximately three hour meeting) Room G40, Merseytravel Authority Chamber, Merseytravel Offices, No 1 Mann Island, Liverpool, L3 1BP.

Audit Committee (no meetings during time period, next one is scheduled for 6/11/14)

Merseyside Community Safety Partnership (awaiting further information)

Merseyside Criminal Justice Board (awaiting further information)

VCFSE (Voluntary, Community, Faith and Social Enterprise) Network (awaiting further information)

Business Change & Efficiency (awaiting further information)

===================================================================================================================

Merseyside Recycling and Waste Authority (18th August 2014 to 17th September 2014)

Merseyside Recycling and Waste Authority (no meetings in time period, next is scheduled for 26/9/14)

===================================================================================================================

Mersey Port Health Committee (18th August 2014 to 17th September 2014)

Mersey Port Health Committee (no meetings in time period, next is scheduled for 16/10/14 11.00am (Liverpool)). Note host authority for the Mersey Port Health Committee is Liverpool City Council.

===================================================================================================================

There are probably other pan-Merseyside public meetings, NHS meeting etc in addition to the above. Other parts of Merseyside have their own local authorities which have meeting too, such as Liverpool City Council, Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council etc. I made the above list rather Wirral-centric though, but can provide links to the other local authorities’ calenders if required. When I get further information I will update with specifics, although with people being on holiday in August it may be some time before I receive a reply! I hope this list is of use to someone! If you want any further details about what these committees do, who’s on them, please leave a comment with your query as there may be other people with the same question! Thanks.

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:

Wirral Council: It’s time for some answers over Fernbank Farm and filming!

Wirral Council: It’s time for some answers over Fernbank Farm and filming!

Wirral Council: It’s time for some answers over Fernbank Farm and filming!

                                 

Wirral Council v Kane & Woodley Particulars of Claim page 1 of 3 thumbnail

Particulars of Claim Wirral Council v Kane & Woodley Page 1 of 3

Wirral Council v Kane & Woodley Particulars of Claim page 2 of 3 thumbnail

Particulars of Claim Wirral Council v Kane & Woodley Page 2 of 3

Wirral Council v Kane & Woodley Particulars of Claim page 3 of 3 thumbnail

Particulars of Claim Wirral Council v Kane & Woodley Page 3 of 3

Jenmaleo
134 Boundary Road
Bidston
Wirral
CH43 7PH
9th June 2014

Surjit Tour
Monitoring Officer
Wallasey Town Hall
Brighton Street
Wallasey
Wirral
CH44 8ED

Dear Mr. Surjit Tour,

You are designated as the Monitoring Officer for Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council. Section 5(2)(a) and 5(2B) of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 state the following about a legal duty of the Monitoring Officer:

Subject to subsection (2B), it shall be the duty of a relevant authority’s monitoring officer, if it at any time appears to him that any proposal, decision or omission by the authority, by any committee, or sub-committee of the authority, by any person holding any office or employment under the authority or by any joint committee on which the authority are represented constitutes, has given rise to or is likely to or would give rise to—

(a) a contravention by the authority, by any committee, or sub-committee of the authority, by any person holding any office or employment under the authority or by any such joint committee of any enactment or rule of law or of any code of practice made or approved by or under any enactment; or

(b) any such maladministration or injustice as is mentioned in Part III of the Local Government Act 1974 (Local Commissioners) or Part II of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1975 (which makes corresponding provision for Scotland),to prepare a report to the authority with respect to that proposal, decision or omission.

to prepare a report to the authority with respect to that proposal, decision or omission.

(2B) Where a relevant authority are operating executive arrangements, the monitoring officer of the relevant authority shall not make a report under subsection (2) in respect of any proposal, decision or omission unless it is a proposal, decision or omission made otherwise than by or on behalf of the relevant authority’s executive.

On Friday 6th June the Chair of the Licensing Act 2003 subcommitee Councillor Steve Niblock insisted that I stop filming a public meeting of the Licensing Act 2003 subcommittee. The legal adviser to that committee insisted that he was entitled to take this action because of Regulation 25 of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005. This regulation is below:

Procedure at hearing

25. The authority may require any person attending the hearing who in their opinion is behaving in a disruptive manner to leave the hearing and may—

(a) refuse to permit that person to return, or

(b) permit him to return only on such conditions as the authority may specify,

but such a person may, before the end of the hearing, submit to the authority in writing any information which they would have been entitled to give orally had they not been required to leave.”

“authority” in this context is defined in Regulation 2 as “in relation to a hearing, the relevant licensing authority which has the duty under the Act to hold the hearing which expression includes the licensing committee or licensing sub-committee discharging the function of holding the hearing;”

At no point during the meeting was I asked to leave the room by the Chair or the subcommittee as a whole. Regulation 2 which defines authority makes is clear that persons can only be required to leave if it is the opinion of the whole subcommittee that the person/s are behaving in a disruptive manner. There were two members of the subcommittee Councillor Harry Smith and Councillor John Salter who did not express a view, therefore Regulation 25 was not engaged.

The legal adviser to that committee, Ken Abraham said, “We have rights under the regulations too, which empower them to stop a hearing proceeding if there is an issue about disrupting the meeting and the Chair took the view at that time that because it was clearly indicated that he didn’t want filming that he could have asked you to leave the room but he didn’t.” As you can see from this quote, he refers to the Chair (Councillor Steve Niblock)’s view, not the view of the whole subcommittee. It is unknown whether the other two members of the subcommittee agreed with this view or held a contrary view as they did not state their view during the meeting on this matter.

S. 6(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998 states “It is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right.” and s.3(1) states “So far as it is possible to do so, primary legislation and subordinate legislation must be read and given effect in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights.”

The Convention Right in question is article 10 which is below:

ARTICLE 10

Freedom of expression

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority
and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and
are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for
the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.”

Bearing the above in mind and your previous email of the 2nd April 2013 in which you stated “Furthermore, there no ban on filming” I would ask you to exercise your duty as Monitoring Officer to prepare a report about the above matter.

There is also another matter which I wish to draw to your attention, which may place a duty on you to write a further report about a different matter. I am sure you are aware of Wirral Council’s successful attempt to gain a possession order for the land known as Fernbank Farm in Moreton.

Section 3 of Wirral Council’s Particulars of Claim stated “On 13th July 2012 the First and Second Defendants were served with a notice in the prescribed form persuant to section 25 of the Landlord and Tenant Act the effect of which notifies them as Tenants of the intention to bring the tenancy to an end on 31st May 2013 but that the Council had no objection in the meantime to creating a new lease on certain terms.” and Section 8 of the Particulars of Claim stated “As a result the tenancy has been terminated in accordance with the law and the Claimant is therefore entitled to possession.”

At the fast track trial on 13th February 2014, Wirral Council’s expert witness David Dickinson stated (under oath) that he had been instructed by a manager not to renew the lease. In answer to District Judge Woodburn’s question to David Dickinson that his instructions were contrary to the terms of the notice, Mr Dickinson answered that his instructions were contrary to the notice. In answer to another question Mr Dickinson answered that he had been told not to engage in discussions with the tenants between November 2012 and May 2013.

Regulation 3 of The Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, Part 2 (Notices) Regulations 2004 prescribe which type of form should be used. Wirral Council used form 1 and the prescribed purpose for form 1 is defined in Schedule 1 as “Ending a tenancy to which Part 2 of the Act applies, where the landlord is not opposed to the grant of a new tenancy (notice under section 25 of the Act).”

Based on David Dickinson’s testimony under oath, Wirral Council had decided not to renew the tenancy therefore form 2 should have been used, the prescribed purpose for form 2 is defined in Schedule 1 as “Ending a tenancy to which Part 2 of the Act applies, where—

(a)the landlord is opposed to the grant of a new tenancy (notice under section 25 of the Act); and
(b)the tenant is not entitled under the 1967 Act to buy the freehold or an extended lease..”

Clearly either a number of assertions (as outlined above) made in the particulars of claim are incorrect and Mr. Dickinson was telling the truth about Wirral Council’s decision not to renew the lease or alternatively what was outlined in the particulars of claim was correct and Mr. Dickinson was not telling the truth under oath. I am sure you will understand that the possibility of either scenario is concerning.

Therefore bearing in mind the above I would request that you write a further report on this matter which is your legal duty as Monitoring Officer. In order to aid you in this, I do know that following a complaint made by one of the tenant’s spouses that a long multi-page letter was sent to him about this and other related matters.

If a report (or reports) have already been written by yourself (or others on your behalf) I would appreciate being sent a copy. If a report (or reports) on these matters are in the process of being written by someone either at Wirral Council or an external third party I would appreciate being told who they are and by what date their report is expected to be completed.

If you feel a report (or reports) on the above matters are not necessary, I would appreciate hearing from you your reasons as to why. I intend to publish any such reply I receive either from yourself (or others on your behalf) as I feel that both these matters are of concern to large numbers of citizens on the Wirral and need to be resolved.

Yours sincerely,

John Brace

If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this with other people.

Wirral Council takes the view that its rights matter more than Wirral citizen’s human rights

Wirral Council takes the view that its rights matter more than Wirral citizen’s human rights

Wirral Council takes the view that its rights matter more than Wirral citizen’s human rights

                                    

Following Friday’s blog post Wirral Council councillors ban filming at public meeting to decide on alcohol licence for Michaels of Moreton shop, there have been some reactions to what happened.

Councillor Stuart Kelly writes:

Indeed they have Councillor Kelly. As long ago as February 2011, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State Bob O’Neill MP wrote to all Council Leaders and Monitoring Officers. He states in his letter “It is essential to a healthy democracy that citizens everywhere are able to feel that their council welcomes them to observe local decision-making and through modern media tools keep others informed as to what their council is doing.” and “the mainstream media also needs to be free to provide stronger local accountability by being able to film and record in meetings without obstruction”. He goes on to write “I want to encourage all councils to take a welcoming approach to those who want to bring local news stories to a wide audience. The public should rightly expect that elected representatives who have put themselves up for public office be prepared for their decisions to be as transparent as possible and welcome a direct line of communication to their electorate.”

In the same letter, the Information Commissioner’s Office stated “In the context of photographing or filming meetings, whilst genuine concerns about being filmed should not be dismissed, the nature of the activity being filmed – elected representatives acting in the public sphere – should weigh heavily against personal objections.” Yet at Wirral Council this advice last Friday was not followed!

Former councillor Ian Lewis states on his new blog “We know most councillors have faces made for radio but their bizarre behaviour at this meeting, over a licensing application in Moreton, sets a new (low) standard”.

So why is Councillor Steve Niblock from the Chair making a unilateral decision about filming on behalf of the three person Licensing Act 2003 subcommittee? Regulation 25 referred to by Ken Abraham states “authority” (which is defined in Regulation 2 as meaning the whole subcommittee) expressing an opinion on disruption, not the Chair unilaterally expressing his opinion and expecting Regulation 25 to apply.

After the public were excluded from the Licensing Act 2003 subcommittee meeting on Friday, I had a talk with the legal adviser to the committee Ken Abraham about my concerns about it and that the public hadn’t been excluded properly from the meeting. This was a conversation in a corridor at the Town Hall in front of my wife, so I don’t think there can be any expectation of privacy!

KEN ABRAHAM (legal adviser to the Licensing Act 2003 subcommittee)
Can I speak to you after?

JOHN BRACE
I’ve had a chance to have a chat to the objector what it was about and he doesn’t have any objections to me filming. Will there be any problems with me filming the decision?

KEN ABRAHAM
Well it would be useful to find out why you’re filming.

JOHN BRACE
OK.

KEN ABRAHAM
because this is obviously you know, it’s a public Council meeting as in a public Council meeting, this is a what’s known as a public hearing, but there are people who attend who are obviously not aware that they’re going to be filmed so and…

JOHN BRACE
My point about filming, I’ll answer your question about why and then talk a bit about filming. The reason why is because there are people that can’t make it to these meetings, whether they’re at work during the day or

KEN ABRAHAM
People can have a look at the minutes.

JOHN BRACE
Yes, but the minutes aren’t published immediately.

KEN ABRAHAM
but then you could edit the filming.

JOHN BRACE
Err, clearly I could but I don’t. Anyway,

KEN ABRAHAM
The issue is that when you were asked to stop filming the other week, you still continued filming.

JOHN BRACE
No, sorry the other week when I was asked to stop filming I did and then we went out and came back in and it wasn’t clear then as to whether that carried on or not.

KEN ABRAHAM
The stopping filming?

JOHN BRACE
Yeah, because if you remember the other week, the meeting started, they were asked the question about objecting to filming. One person said yes, then we were all asked to go out, then we all came back in again and it wasn’t clear as you’ve said it’s not clear when we came back in again.

To be honest I did say things there but he [Councillor Steve Niblock] didn’t want me to speak anyway, so it’s hardly a valid reason.

KEN ABRAHAM
Well it’s not a public meeting, (at this point I link to Regulation 14 (which states it’s to take place in public), link to 100A and 100E of the Local Government Act 1972 which state otherwise to Ken’s assertion that it isn’t a public meeting. In fact earlier in the conversation he stated it was a public meeting.)

KEN ABRAHAM
and you’re not a representative or the, I I I if you want to talk in more detail I can.

JOHN BRACE
I do want to

KEN ABRAHAM
but I just need to, we’re still in the hearing,

JOHN BRACE
I just want to speak to you in more detail.

KEN ABRAHAM
Maybe if we do that after?

JOHN BRACE
The other very brief point I want to make, the first thing is any decision that a public authority makes has, due to the Human Rights Act 1998 to be compatible with the Convention on Human Rights so one of those rights is regarding freedom of expression and regarding the Article 10 right to freedom of expression there has to be a specific power the Council has in law to stop filming and it has to be for one or more of

KEN ABRAHAM
Yes, I hear you. You’re quoting the law, I know the law. We have rights under the regulations too, which empower them to stop a hearing proceeding if there is an issue about disrupting the meeting and the Chair took the view at that time that because it was clearly indicated that he didn’t want filming that he could have asked you to leave the room but he didn’t. As a filming condition to remain, to put the camera off.

JOHN BRACE
Yes, which I did.

KEN ABRAHAM
The licensing regulations are very clear and specific on that point.

JOHN BRACE
Unfortunately the licensing regulations don’t say anything about filming as such.

KEN ABRAHAM
but it talks about, it talks about the, this is why I can’t have a, I can have a discussion but not

JOHN BRACE
The other thing I wanted to say, let me say something. When the public were sent out,

KEN ABRAHAM
Yes.

JOHN BRACE
The law regarding public exclusion, I’m talking about the Local Government Act 1972, states there has to be a resolution and under the terms of [Wirral Council’s] constitution a resolution has to be proposed, seconded and voted on. That didn’t happen.

KEN ABRAHAM
This is a licensing hearing under the hearing regulations,

JOHN BRACE
Yes, but even in the regulations, the licensing regulations, it says they have to consider the public interest in favour of the public [staying] against excluding the public and they didn’t have a discussion about that.

KEN ABRAHAM
There was, there was representations by the Chair, by the individuals attending the meeting and those representations were taken on board. I’ve got to go off.

JOHN BRACE
but you understand my point about the filming issue and the point about the..

KEN ABRAHAM
Well people are entitled to object to that,

JOHN BRACE
and I pointed out I wasn’t filming that side

KEN ABRAHAM
It doesn’t matter, you’re still taking, you’re recording what individuals were saying

JOHN BRACE
Yes.

KEN ABRAHAM
and people can object to that if they’re members of the public.

JOHN BRACE
To be honest, I could just write it down

KEN ABRAHAM
exactly

JOHN BRACE
and type it up

KEN ABRAHAM
exactly, exactly. You could write it up, but at least you know, you know and that’s something that if you’re going to attend regularly, you know, the public needs to be and if it causes disruption at the hearing then we’re quite entitled to say, oh

JOHN BRACE
and can I say there’s also the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations which are going through Parliament and come into effect in a few weeks time.

KEN ABRAHAM
We’re not talking about councillors, we’re talking about members of the public.

JOHN BRACE
but we’re talking about public meetings here, not a public meeting of the full Council. In a few weeks time those regulations will come into effect and they actually prevent the Council from preventing filming at public meetings. They’re in draft form at the moment if you want to look at them.

KEN ABRAHAM
Yeah, well you don’t have to tell me word for word. The regulations are clear on the issue. It gives the Members the leeway to stop if there is a meeting that’s being filmed and the meeting could be disrupted or the hearing could be disrupted, they are entitled to take a view.

JOHN BRACE
Could you show me a copy of the particular regulation or ..

KEN ABRAHAM
Regulation 25,

JOHN BRACE
Regulation 25

KEN ABRAHAM
Licensing [Act 2003] Hearing Regulations [2005], alright and you can actually read the rule, end of story.

JOHN BRACE
OK, but it’s also a public meeting and we have a statutory right to be there.

KEN ABRAHAM
and you have the statutory right to be excluded.

JOHN BRACE
and the thing is right, if I was excluded and asked to leave, I could leave the camera running and leave.

KEN ABRAHAM
No, no, they have the right to exclude you, but the issue has if you’re going to attend these hearings, then members of the public must be aware of that, because they are not aware that you’re doing their filming and we don’t know what’s going to be done when it’s put on the website.

JOHN BRACE
And in fact if I’d answered the question about what the purpose of the filming, but the Chair wouldn’t let me answer it. When I explained it to him he said he had no objection.

KEN ABRAHAM
I said we’d have a discussion, that’s it. We’re not allowing you to have a discussion during

JOHN BRACE
But we’re having one!

KEN ABRAHAM
We’re not having one. Are you aware of the purpose of this discussion? You’re shouting at me!

JOHN BRACE
I’m not!

KEN ABRAHAM
The view that I’m going to take with you isn’t going to change. They tried to make a view on the hearing regulations and you know the people are members of the public and are going to object for whatever reason errm, Members are entitled under the regulations to take a view.

JOHN BRACE
Well actually we disagree on that.

KEN ABRAHAM
Well we’ll agree to disagree then.

Finally I include an email of Surjit Tour sent to me last year.

from: Tour, Surjit
to: john.brace@gmail.com
cc: stephengerrard@wirral.gov.uk
date: 2 April 2013 16:08
subject: RE: filming of public meetings
mailed-by: wirral.gov.uk

Dear Mr Brace

I am on annual leave until 15 April. I am somewhat surprised by your email and letter given that I have asked you a number of times to meet me to discuss this issue.

Furthermore, there no ban on filming as you and another have been filming a number of committee meetings.

I would suggest that no proceedings are issued until I have had the opportunity to respond. I therefore request an extension of time to 30 April.

I await your response.

Please can you also include Stephen Gerrard in any further response.

Yours sincerely

Surjit Tour

Sent from my HTC Touch Pro 2 on Vodafone

**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.clearswift.com
**********************************************************************

So it seems two of Wirral Council’s legal team have different views on the filming issue.

If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this with other people.