Tag: Graham Hodkinson

Labour councillors vote to hold Girtrell Court closure decision behind closed doors

Labour councillors vote to hold Girtrell Court closure decision behind closed doors                                                        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 … Continue reading “Labour councillors vote to hold Girtrell Court closure decision behind closed doors”

Labour councillors vote to hold Girtrell Court closure decision behind closed doors

                                                      

Cllr Chris Blakeley explaining his notice of motion on Girtrell Court to Wirral Council councillors at a public meeting 14th March 2016
Cllr Chris Blakeley explaining his notice of motion on Girtrell Court to Wirral Council councillors at a public meeting 14th March 2016

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 first part of the debate on Girtrell Court can be watched in the video above (starting at the 22 minutes 21 seconds point)

Councillors at yesterday evening’s meeting of Wirral Council debated a notice of motion on Girtrell Court proposed by Conservative Cllr Chris Blakeley. He asked councillors to agree that the decision on the future of Girtrell Court should be taken during a public meeting rather than behind closed doors.

The Labour councillors (in an amendment proposed by Cllr Phil Davies) disagreed with this and instead restated their previous position. Their view was that a decision on the future of Girtrell Court should be made behind closed doors by the Cabinet Member Cllr Chris Jones and the Director of Adult Social Services Graham Hodkinson.

The Lib Dem councillors (in an amendment proposed by Cllr Phil Gilchrist) agreed with the original motion, but called for all the background and supporting material to be published when Cllr Chris Jones makes her decision.

The Lib Dem amendment didn’t receive enough votes to be agreed as it was only supported by the four Lib Dem councillors. Labour’s amendment received 36 votes for, 24 votes against with one abstention.

It was also announced during the debate that bookings for Girtrell Court will be extended to the end of August 2016.

The following was agreed yesterday evening by councillors:

Girtrell Court

Council believes that it is important to offer service users and their families a choice of respite care provision. People want the ability to choose the type of care and support which is right for them. At present they are unable to do this. This is not about a building or provider, it’s about the person.

Council notes that the Leader of the Council has previously stated that he wants his Administration to be open, transparent and fair with the people of Wirral. Council welcomes this approach.

Council notes that a detailed debate on Girtrell Court took place at Budget Council on the 3rd March and a clear way forward was agreed. This involves statutory consultation with service users and their families followed by a clear new service offer and events for carers and cared for people to meet potential new providers. Services will be commissioned to meet all of the identified needs at that stage. Authority will be delegated to the Director, in conjunction with the Cabinet Member, to make decisions in order to avoid undue delays which would prolong uncertainty. We are not imposing deadlines on when this process will be complete and, in the meantime, Girtrell Court will remain open.

Council further believes that the families of those using Girtrell Court, the staff, trade unions and residents and users must be given every opportunity to influence the future of Girtrell Court through a clear and transparent decision-making process.

 

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

Petition against closure of Girtrell Court reaches over 5,000 signatures!

Petition against closure of Girtrell Court reaches over 5,000 signatures!

                                                 

A petition against the closure of Girtrell Court started by Bernard Halley (pictured below), who is a carer for his son who attends Girtrell Court has attracted over 5,000 signatures.

Bernard Halley (left) talking about Girtrell Court at the Wirral West Constituency Committee 11th February 2016 L to R (foreground) Bernard Halley, David L to R (background) Graham Hodkinson, Cllr Matthew Patrick
Bernard Halley (left) talking about Girtrell Court at the Wirral West Constituency Committee 11th February 2016 L to R (foreground) Bernard Halley, David L to R (background) Graham Hodkinson, Cllr Matthew Patrick

Next Monday evening, starting at 6.00pm in the Council Chamber at Wallasey Town Hall there is a public meeting of all Wirral Council councillors.

One of the items to be debated at that meeting is a notice of motion on Girtrell Court (the text of the notice of motion is below). The notice of motion calls for any decision on closure of Girtrell Court to be made in public, rather than behind closed doors by the Cabinet Member Cllr Chris Jones and the Director of Adult Social Services Graham Hodkinson.

3. GIRTRELL COURT (to be debated)

Proposed by Cllr Chris Blakeley
Seconded by Cllr Bruce Berry

Council notes that the Leader of the Council has previously stated that he wants his Administration to be open, transparent and fair with the people of Wirral. Council welcomes this approach.

Council therefore believes that the future of Girtrell Court must be decided in public and not under delegation to the portfolio holder, in conjunction with the Director of Adult Social Services.

Council further believes that the families of those using Girtrell Court, the staff, trade unions and residents and users must be given every opportunity to influence the future of Girtrell Court through a clear and transparent decision making process.

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

Labour councillors vote to close Girtrell Court

Labour councillors vote to close Girtrell Court

                                                          

Protest outside Wallasey Town Hall about Girtrell Court 3rd March 2016 thumbnail
Protest outside Wallasey Town Hall about Girtrell Court 3rd March 2016 thumbnail

It is hard to know where to begin when writing about last night’s Council meeting of Wirral Council at Wallasey Town Hall to decide on the budget. Above is a photo of the demonstration outside the main entrance to Wallasey Town Hall protesting about Girtrell Court being closed.

Realising that councillors were bypassing this entrance and using the door by Committee Room 3, there was another protest outside that way in too.

The meeting started and within the first few minutes the petition item was reached. The Mayor asked Bernard Halley (pictured below with his son David) to present his petitions opposing the closure of Girtrell Court. His e-petition had 1,200 signatures (of those nearly a thousand were Wirral residents). There was also a linked paper petition with over six hundred signatories opposed too.

Bernard Halley said, “Both petitions begged this Council to keep Girtrell Court running until proper alternatives are established, costed, evaluated, consulted upon and proven to be adequate.”

Bernard Halley and his son David present a petition opposing the closure of Girtrell Court to a budget meeting of Wirral Council 3rd March 2016
Bernard Halley and his son David present a petition opposing the closure of Girtrell Court to a budget meeting of Wirral Council 3rd March 2016

There was a larger petition opposing the closure of Girtrell Court of 3,054 signatures. As this petition was of over 3,000 signatures, it gave the lead petitioner Paddy Cleary of UNISON five minutes to speak.

He gave a similar speech to the one he had made at the Cabinet meeting. Mr Cleary felt closing Girtrell Court was contrary to one of the 2020 pledges to protect the vulnerable and his opinion was that the proposed saving through closure would not save Wirral Council money but cost more money. Reference was also made by him to a proposal in 2011 proposed by Cllr Steve Foulkes and seconded by Cllr Phil Davies to stop the closure of Council-run care homes.

He expressed concern about the quality of care in the private sector and added, “At a time when users, their families, the public and staff see press stories of the frivolous use of taxpayers’ money, we implore you to look in the mirror, look into the eyes of those people in the balcony upstairs and tell them hand on heart how there is better provision out there.

We know you can’t do that and as such we urge you to fully drop this proposal. Thank you for your time.”

Although petitions of over 3,000 signatures can be debated for fifteen minutes, a decision was made to debate Girtrell Court during the budget debate instead.

Each of the political parties on Wirral Council with more than one councillor had a slightly different policy in their budget about Girtrell Court.

The Labour budget proposed closing it, subject to a later decision of the Cabinet Member Cllr Chris Jones and Director of Adult Social Services Graham Hodkinson.

The Conservative budget removed the need to close Girtrell Court by finding savings elsewhere instead. Three of the proposed areas for savings (amongst others) the Conservatives proposed were removing the free taxi service for councillors to and from the Town Hall, deleting the Executive Support Officer post held by Martin Liptrot and reducing the Council’s press, marketing and destination management team from fourteen posts to eleven and a half.

The Lib Dem budget stated this on Girtrell Court, “Council believes that the closure of the Lyndale School and the anguished debate about the re-provision of services at Girtrell Court underline the need to work closely with service users and their families. Council has a duty of care to ensure their concerns are fully addressed.

In the case of Girtrell Court, Council requests that the Director of Adult Social Services and the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Public Health produce regular reports to Members. These must set out how a range of sufficient quality alternative services is to be achieved. Members would be failing in their duty if they were not to seek assurance about the quality, availability and capacity of the
alternatives.”

You can read each party’s budget in the supplementary agenda (Labour’s is pages 12-24, Conservative’s is pages 25-35 and the Lib Dem budget is pages 37-40).

Around three hours after the meeting had started, despite many heartfelt pleas about reversing their proposed closure of Girtrell Court, there was a vote on Labour’s budget and the amendments proposed by the Conservatives and Lib Dems.

The amendments proposed by the Conservatives and Lib Dems were lost (due to Labour councillors voting against them). The Labour budget was agreed (due to the majority of Labour councillors on Wirral Council).

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

Wirral West Constituency Committee asks Wirral Council’s Cabinet to decide not to close Girtrell Court

Wirral West Constituency Committee asks Wirral Council’s Cabinet to decide not to close Girtrell Court

                                                                 

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.

Wirral West Constituency Committee 11th February 2016 Part 1 of 6 starting at agenda item 8 (Community Question Time)

The question time item at the last Wirral West Constituency Committee was dominated by questions about Girtrell Court. Girtrell Court is a respite centre run by Wirral Council in Saughall Massie. On the 17th December 2015, Wirral Council’s Cabinet agreed to consult on closing Girtrell Court (the consultation ran from 17th December 2015 to the 29th January 2016).

The Chair (Cllr Jeff Green) took a number of questions from those connected with Girtrell Court. A transcript of some of the questions, followed by the answers Graham Hodkinson (Director of Adult Social Services) gave at the meeting are below.

Cllr Jeff Green (Chair)Is there somebody from errm please the carers and users? Is there someone here? Is there someone who’d like to start off or ask a public question about that? Errm, yes, the young man at the far side there and there’s someone will find you with a microphone.

Member of public asking question at Wirral West Constituency Committee about Girtrell Court 11th February 2016
Member of public asking question at Wirral West Constituency Committee about Girtrell Court 11th February 2016

Continue reading “Wirral West Constituency Committee asks Wirral Council’s Cabinet to decide not to close Girtrell Court”

Incredible: FOI reveals “the Council are seeking to draw a line under matters in relation to Mr Morton”

Incredible: FOI reveals “the Council are seeking to draw a line under matters in relation to Mr Morton”

Incredible: FOI reveals “the Council are seeking to draw a line under matters in relation to Mr Morton”

                                                       

Families and Wellbeing Policy and Performance Committee Wirral Council 3rd November 2014 L to R Legal adviser who was missing Cllr Moira McLaughlin (Chair), Clare Fish and Graham Hodkinson
Families and Wellbeing Policy and Performance Committee Wirral Council 3rd November 2014 L to R Legal adviser who was missing Cllr Moira McLaughlin (Chair), Clare Fish and Graham Hodkinson
“Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations” (George Orwell)
 

There are many areas of journalism the public sector wished I hadn’t written about. For example claiming an email from Graham Burgess inviting some councillors to the Open Golf Championship was fraudulent, then 5 minutes later executing a screeching U-turn.

Or as Mr. Tour put it before the U-turn, “This is clearly a serious matter and I formally request that you immediately remove the email and the associated commentary concerning this subject matter from your blog.” Yes it seems even Mr. Tour can get quite cross!

The Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service press office repeatedly phoned asking me to remove this multi-million pound PFI contract. Merseytravel’s press office were horrified at my reporting of their Head of Internal Audit stating at a public meeting that some whistleblowing was “Mickey Mouse” & “complete nonsense”.

And of course after the story INCREDIBLE: £2,877.35 spent by Wirral Council last year in previously hidden payments on taxis for Labour councillors! Wirral Council decided to just downright ignore my FOI requests.

This is the public sector, I’m writing news that falls within the George Orwell quote above, news that from a public relations perspective “they” don’t want the public to know.

I think if I could be paid off with a generous pension and a large six-figure redundancy payment and a confidentiality agreement, they’d have tried it by now!

So it’s time for some more public interest journalism. Something that falls within the George Orwell quote above.

This is an email which sums Wirral Council up, but I’d better explain. Emma Degg was the head of the press office, Surjit refers to Surjit Tour (Monitoring Officer/Head of their Legal Department), Joe Blott has responsibility for industrial relations and is Surjit Tour’s line manager, Graham Burgess was Chief Executive and Joe Blott’s line manager.

Graham Hodkinson is in charge of Adult Social Services (you can read the war of words between him and Cllr Blakleley over Girtrell Court elsewhere in the press) and Rob Vickers, well I don’t like to spoil the surprise (but he’s not the famous rugby player of the same name).

This response to a FOI request was made through whatdotheyknow.com, but Wirral Council felt the information was so embarrassing that they didn’t want it published there.

So here it is, it falls within the George Orwell quote above, it’s something that someone else does not want printed here. Enjoy! Strangely Mr. Hodkinson doesn’t take on board Emma Degg’s advice about oversight and scrutiny, but have a read for yourself. You can read the Anna Klonowski Associates report on Wirral Council’s website and the appendices to the AKA report on this blog (they were never published by Wirral Council). However in order to understand the report please also read the key which shows that Service Provider 3 (referred to below) was Salisbury Independent Living (SIL) who sued Wirral Council for £3 million.

From: Vickers, Rob
Sent: 18 June 2013 08:09
To: Hodkinson, Graham R.
Subject: FW: Financial Liability

Hi Graham, I have now discussed this matter with Emma Degg, still no response from Surjit, Emma has advised that we should respond to Mr Morton as we would respond to anyone else and that our reply should be concise and cover the following – thank him for his Email, note his continuing oversight and scrutiny of the matters referenced and reinforce that the matter is subject to due process. The response should be in letter form and we should share letter with Joe Blott and Graham Burgess, due to wider matters relating to Mr Morton – the Council are seeking to draw a line under matters in relation to Mr Morton. Given the advice the letter would be as follows –

Dear Mr Morton

I write to acknowledge receipt of your Email dated 5th June 2013 and note your continued oversight and scrutiny of the matters you referenced allied to the AKA Report and specifically Service Provider 3. I can confirm that these matters are subject to due process and that we are seeking to bring matters to a conclusion.

Yours Sincerely

Robert Vickers

Graham, such a response is blunt but captures the advice provided, what do you think.

Rob

From: Hodkinson, Graham R.
Sent: 18 June 2013 12:52
To: Vickers, Rob
Subject: RE: Financial Liability

I would refer to continued interest as a citizen rather than scrutiny/oversight as below :

Dear Mr Morton

I write to acknowledge receipt of your Email dated 5th June 2013. Thank you for taking the time to write, setting out your views in relation to matters relating to a former care provider. I note your continued interest as a concerned citizen into the matters you referenced allied to the AKA Report and specifically Service Provider 3. I can confirm at this stage that these matters are subject to due process and that we are seeking to bring matters to a conclusion.

Yours Sincerely

Robert Vickers

Graham Hodkinson
Director of Adult Social Services
Five ways to add years to your life:
Connect • Be Active • Take Notice • Keep Learning • Give
Wirral Council
Please save paper and only print out what is necessary

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