Audit Commission criticise Merseytravel in audit report on Mann Island lease | Merseytravel (Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority) 25th October 2012 Authority Room, 1st Floor, No 1 Mann Island Liverpool


Councillors, officers and a member of the public, Merseytravel (Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority) 25th October 2012 Authority Room, 1st Floor, No 1 Mann Island LiverpoolMerseytravel (Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority) meeting of the 25th October 2012. Pictured are councillors (Cllr Ron Abbey (Labour Party, Wirral Council), Cllr Steve Foulkes (Labour Party, Wirral Council), Cllr Les Rowlands (Merseytravel Alliance Signals Good Governance (Conservative), Wirral Council), Cllr John Dodd (Merseytravel Alliance Signals Good Governance (Liberal Democrat), Sefton Council) and other councillors), various officers and a member of the public.

Audit Commission criticise Merseytravel in audit report on Mann Island lease

Unfortunately I arrived at the meeting (starting at 2.30pm) about fifteen minutes late, caused in part by an eight minute delay due to Platform 1 at nearby James Street station being close (which is run by Merseyrail in which Merseytravel have a controlling interest) and other reasons.

When I got there (and negotiated my way to the first floor using the terribly confusing system for the lifts where you have to enter your floor number and press another button before you get into the lift), the meeting had started, the agenda had already been reordered and the item I was particularly interested in (ten) had already started as unfortunately items 3-9 were being left to the end of the meeting. I had missed completely agenda items 1 (Apologies for absence) and 2 (Minutes of the last meeting), which is no big loss as the minutes can be read on Merseytravel’s website and who was absent could be ascertained by who was there.

Agenda item 10 was the Audit Commission: Completion of 2011/12 Audit which sounds dull but wasn’t. The Audit Commission were there to report on the Completion of the 2011/2012 Audit for Merseytravel (both the Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority and Merseyside Integrated Transport Executive).

The audit fees had increased by £10,140 due to an extra two and half weeks of unplanned work required by the District Auditor, Audit Manager and Principal Auditor which related to four areas:-

a) responding to queries from officers, councillors and members of the public,

b) problems with working papers, quality assurance not being robust, not all agreed improvements being made,

c) changes to accounts and disclosures

and

d) errors in the accounting treatment for the Mann Island lease (see picture below) and lease incentives.

Merseytravel (Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority) Headquarters, No. 1 Mann Island, Liverpool

About these ads

Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority – Minutes (30th January 2012) Acquisition of Wirral Tramway and Associated Assets


On the 29th March 2012, Wirral Council’s Cabinet received a report on the outcome of the Tender Exercise. Merseytravel had changed their minds about bidding on the 1st February (two days after the meeting that these are the minutes for). The reason/s behind this are partly in the resolution and in the papers and resolutions at its meeting of the 9th February 2012 as between 30th January 2012 and the 1st February 2012 Merseytravel realised how difficult a financial situation they were in, following the papers being published for the 9th February 2012 Budget meeting on the 1st February 2012.

Note: below is the official minutes of the meeting (not my own notes) from the 30/1/2012 meeting and were approved at its meeting on 9th February 2012. I wish I’d discovered that Merseytravel had started putting the minutes on a website before typing it up! Links to he report about the Wirral Tramway and Appendices on Merseytravel’s website are below.

Acquisition of Wirral Tramway and Associated Assets CX/16/12

Acquisition of Wirral Tramway and Associated Assets CX/16/12 Appendix 1

Acquisition of Wirral Tramway and Associated Assets CX/16/12 Appendix 2

Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority

Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority

30 January 2012

Present: Councillor M Dowd, Chair
Councillor A Dean, Deputy Chair

Councillors R Abbey, C Blakeley, G Friel, S Glover,
J Hanson, A Makinson, K McGlashan, M Murphy,
M Quinn, M Rasmussen, L Robinson, L Rowlands,
P Walton

Also Attended

Councillor S Foulkes – Leader Wirral Metropolitan
Borough Council,
Councillor R Round Leader Knowsley Metropolitan
Borough Council and
Councillor B Grunewald Deputy Leader St Helens
Metropolitan Borough Council

—————————————————————————————————————————-

Apologies for absence were submitted by
Councillors J Dodd, B Griffiths, J Salter, D Callan, T Elwood
C Roberts, Councillor J Anderson (Leader, Liverpool City Council)
and Councillor P Dowd (Leader, Sefton Metropolitan Borough
Council)

——————————————————————————————

78.   Local Transport Plan Delivery, Bus and Merseytram Committee

Resolved that the minutes of the Local Transport Plan Delivery, Bus and Merseytram Committee held on the 8 January 2012 be approved insofar as they require the approval of the Authority.

Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority

79.   People, Organisational Development and Governance Delivery
          Committee

Resolved that the minutes of the meeting of the People, Organisational Development and Governance Delivery Committee held on the 10 January 2012 be approved insofar as they require the approval of the Authority.

80.   Tunnels, Ferries and Visitor Economy Committee

Resolved that the minutes of the meeting of the Tunnels, Ferries and Visitor Economy Committee held on the 12 January 2012 be approved insofar as they require the approval of the Authority.

81.   Corporate Social Responsibility Committee

Resolved that the minutes of the meeting of the Corporate Social Responsibility Committee held on the 12 January 2012 be approved insofar as they require the approval of the Authority.

82.   Rail Services Committee

Resolved that the minutes of the meeting of the Rail Services Committee held on the 11 January 2012 be approved insofar as they require the approval of the Authority.

83.   Policy and Delivery – Review Committee

Resolved that the minutes of the meeting of the Policy and Delivery – Review Committee held on the 19 January 2012 be approved insofar as they require the approval of the Authority.

84.   Strategy and Finance Committee

Resolved that the minutes of the meeting of the Strategy and Finance Committee held on the 19 January 2012 be approved insofar as they require the approval of the Authority.

Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority

85.   Urgency Sub – Committee

Resolved that the minutes of the meeting of the Urgency Sub – Committee held on the 12 January 2012 be approved insofar as they require the approval of the Authority.

86.   Acquisition of Wirral Tramway and Associates Assets
(CX/16/12)

———————————————————————————————————————-
Councillors R Abbey, C Blakeley and L Rowlands together with Councillor S Foulkes (visiting Wirral Metropolitan Council Leader) all declared a personal interest as members of Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council.
———————————————————————————————————————-

The Authority considered a report of the Director of Resources regarding the Acquisition of Wirral Tramway and Associated Assets. Together with presentations from Mr Richard Mawdsley (The Peel Group) and Mr Scott McIntosh (Mott McDonald) and a verbal update from Mr. Steve Cook (Merseytravel’s Forward Planning Officer) (copies attached to these minutes).

Mr. R Mawdsley in his presentation gave a brief background history to The Peel Group as a company; its development around Salford Quays and the vision for Wirral Waters; The Mersey Waters Enterprise Zone and Peel International Trade Centre and its goal to redress the balance around local investment on both sides of the River Mersey. This was the hope that from the investment, especially with the Trade Centre, 700 jobs will be created. The Wirral Waters projects was seen as a 30 year initiative that the time line of which could not be specified however Wirral Waters and Liverpool Waters were seen as sister projects. The tramway was envisaged an exemplar part of the scheme supported by the Government which it was envisaged would assist in increasing patronage to the Rail and Ferry services as well as a Visitor Economy for the Merseytravel attractions.

Mr. Steven Cook outlined to the Authority the transport planning all aspects for the Wirral Waters and how officers from relevant departments of Merseytravel were

Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority

working together to achieve this Section 106 Agreement. The Agreement was for 25 years however the project had a number of variables and timescales were not set, therefore it was a challenge and a Steering Group consisting of Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council Officers, Peel, the Highways Agency and Merseytravel had been established.

There had been agreement on rail infrastructure development; bus service links from Birkenhead to Seacombe; park and ride; protection of railway line and a figure of £15.4 million had been reached to ensure the East Float area was sustainable. Due to the lack of a timescale the agreement was based on a time if arrangement, so as they were built monies were released.
The Authority then received a presentation by Scott Macintosh and from Mott McDonald. (Copy of presentation attached to these minutes). The key message from the presentation was that it was considered a one off business opportunity, the tram industry were excited by the prospects and there was a lot of interest, including offers of assistance of second hand equipment and some European tramway operators. The Government too were interested in the project.

Cllr Dowd thanked those who had presented and opened the floor to Members and invited Leaders for questions and comments.

Cllr Ann Murphy commented on the ‘deja vu’ aspect of the debate and previous aspirations have been dashed, disciplinary was also expressed at the lack of reference to the whole of Merseyside in the benefits of the projects as all would be contributing to the finance.

Cllr A Makinson enquired that as the current and tender was for the Heritage Tramway and the suggestion was to develop to a commuter service it must be acknowledged that the heritage trams would not meet commercial, environmental or statutory standards, so what would be the implications and the extra costs.

The Director of Resources confirmed that Officers would ensure that the trams met statutory requirements.

Councillor R Abbey commented that the previous scheme had been let down politically and a Merseywide approach

Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority

had always been taken by the Authority as shown by the support for the Liverpool/Knowsley tram project. However before commitment to the project it had been proven to be deliverable on sound financial reasoning.

Councillors G Friel welcomed the presentation however he felt it did not answer his concerns. If Government supported as suggested how did this reconcile with the reduced funding for Local Authorities, the impact of which was cuts to vital services together with the reduced finance to the Transport authorities.

Councillor J Hanson thanked those presenting and commented that Merseytravel wanted to do what it could to support Wirral and Liverpool Waters but expressed concern at the lack of timescales. There could be a 10 year buy in but nothing happening due to the 20 – 30 year nature of the project. It will be £2.5 million with nothing to show and money that Merseytravel and the District Authorities would need to find at a very challenging time. The amount was not a real issue to all lecture members. There were also a number of concerns with regard to finance and revenue commitment. More information was required he felt before any commitment or bid could be considered.

Councillor A Dean also wished to thank the presenters and felt the report came a little closer to the issues but once again fell short of all the information required before any real decision could be made. There seemed to be a change in emphasis to the Wirral Waters project. Councillor Dean had real concerns around the rolling stock and the continuing ‘make do’ for Merseytravel with someone else’s ‘cast offs’. If project does get approval the stock must be of quality he did not want hidden charges arrangements of maintenance or obsolete kit. If the tram was so key to the Wirral Waters project why was it not included in the section 106 agreement. The District were picking up the bill for the last tram project which had political support withdrawn.

The costs needed to be properly detailed and clarity was required that it was a lot of money £2.5 million pounds which the District Councils and Merseytravel could use in other areas, a decision could not be made on potential costs. Some of the comments in the presentation, re patronage had no evidence base and a failure to meet predictions would add further to the cost, he felt clarity was required.

Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority

Councillor M Quinn welcomed the report, it was a lot clearer than previous but did raise concerns. The Local Transport Plan 3 (LTP 3) was the aspirational wishes for transport, this scheme was not within the plan, if cannot match aspiration how can the authority be expected to take on new projects. From previous experience costs can escalate, more financial clarity was required. With regard to all of the offers, why? And would they be available to other bidders, so what was the value. The previous projects £70 million was still being paid for and the present scheme had no reference to revenue cost. The money may be better spent supporting the bus network and getting people to work.

Cllr L Robinson echoed Members thanks and expressed full commitment to a World Class region and world class service but signficant concerns with the business plan. There was a concerns around people having to change modes of transport, from personal experience of working the industry commuters want a point to point system and Salford to Manchester City tram patronage referred to was not great.

Councillor K. McGlashan supported Councillor J Hanson’s comments but all sat as Members of the Integrated Transport Authority and must view projects in a fresh light with the regional perspective. The Authority wished to provide a good transport system for all the people on Merseyside including trams if appropriate but needed to have the full information before any ‘leap of faith’.

Councillor L Rowlands supported Councillor K McGlashan’s comments and felt the presentation filled some of the information not previously received, however drew Members’ attention to the fact that Merseytravel had not reached its current position without being visionary and being able to take a 30 year view. It was acknowledged that more information was required however support for this project would not only be support for Wirral Waters but also Liverpool Waters. The vision could help the patronage levels for the Ferries and other Merseytravel attractions. Councillor Rowlands felt a decision should not be made until the Authority had the full details but Members should not forget how to look to the future.

Councillor C Blakeley thanked those presenting supported the comments are looking at the project with the ‘vision’ shown previously by the Authority and felt it

Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority

was sustainable and would add to the region not just Wirral Waters. Although no recommendation in the report reading the conclusion Officers would welcome opportunity to bid however all were aware that business case and cost need further work. Councilor Blakeley did not at this time wish to close the door on the opportunity to bid.

The Director of Resources confirmed that the business case did require more work it was out of date and needed testing and he would suggest than an external firm be commissioned as he did not currently have the staff resources.

Councillor S Glover drew Members attention back to the core business of the Authority to concentrate on transport. Tourism was an ‘add on’ but if appropriate then any time project should be a first class 21st century system, with new 21st century kit. If all was second hand then it followed that there would be an impact on reliability. The business case had not been completed and therefore he felt it could not go forward. However if the Authority wished to progress with the project it should have new stock and equipment; a proper business plan; commitment from national level and provide of service fit for this century. Once in place then all could look to get similar provision for the other side of the river.

Councillor B Grunewald, Deputy Leader, St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council, thanked the meeting for the invite and acknowledged that Merseytravel had a long history of taking strategic decisions, but any ‘leap of faith’ could not be taken without hard facts and on reading the papers there was amazement that Members were being asked to make decisions without all the facts and figures. Support would be difficult in light of the lack of clarity.

The District Leaders and representatives were invited if they wish to, to make comments by the Authorities.

Councillor S Foulkes, Leader Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council also thanked the Authority for the invite. Wirral welcomed all bids and recognised that the waterfronts were linked and it was customers who set their own boundaries. All were aware of Merseytravel’s bad experience in the past and the the City Region had not been recognized as one which could achieve the big projects however with the success of Liverpool One this perception had to change. There was a need to be brave

Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority

and visionary, the future job prospects of the waterfront developments were for all of Merseyside. Merseytravel did have the experience and skill set said to be a bidder. It was accepted that Members may be wary especially in these challenging times. The project sat well with Merseytravel’s other attractions at Woodside and Merseytravel was used to partnership working. Councillor Foulkes encourage the Authority to submit a bid of think big.

Councillor R Round, Leader of Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council, also thanked the Authority for the invite and opportunity to add his comments to those of the other representatives. Councillor Round had seen Peels presentations on a number of occasions and was still impressed by the project, he appreciated that the Authority was going through the same financial challenges and considerations as the District Councils. He accepted that the previous experience of Government support had been very disappointing however felt that the City Region needed to think big too and commented he would like to see the tram run the full length of the river.

It was a very difficult decision but through bidding Councillor Round felt that the Authority would show support to the regeneration of both sides of the river it would show vision, as he was sure that if successful Merseytravel would operate it well and would provide employment opportunities. Therefore he would wish to encourage the Authority to put in a bid.

The Director of Resources confirm that the Authority were already supported Wirral Waters through the Section 106 Agreement however Members needed to be confident in the business plan, good governance would require something more robust than currently available.

With regard to timescales for the bid, it was confirmed that all bids had to be submitted by 3rd of February, 2012.

Councillor M Dowd once again confirmed that Authority were totally supportive of the Wirral and Liverpool Waters schemes and it was good to hear that the project had Government support. The Authority did not want to shut doors and if the Government were serious then it may be productive to send an all party delegation to see if funding was forthcoming.

Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority

Councillor A Dean once again urged caution as there was still detail missing from the report, the business case needed to be revisited.

Region Mawdsley, Peel Holdings offered financial support of 50% towards the costs of the business case, in light of the financial challenges and Scott McIntosh, Mott McDonald, offered his personal time if required.

The Authority thanked all for their time and contribution to date.

It was felt that without the business case a bid could not be submitted at this time however so as not to shut the door completely the Chair moved the following motion viz:-

Motion by Councillor M Dowd seconded by councillor A Dean.

‘That

(a) the Authority give its in principle support to a bid subject however to a more rigorous assessment of the business case by an external firm of accountants such assessment to take into account the reservations and concerns expressed at this meeting;

(b) the offer from Peel to fund 50% of the cost, for this assessment be welcomed and accepted;

(c) the cost of any such assessment be capped at £50,000;

(d) the results of this assessment be reported if necessary to a special meeting of the Authority as soon as possible;

(e) subject to all of the above an all party delegation to government be approved to seek contributory funding for any bid which is submitted.’

The Motion was then put and carried unanimously and was Resolved Accordingly.

CHAIR

Budget Meeting (Merseytravel | Merseyside Transport Authority) 9th February 2012 Chair’s Note


I came across this Chair’s note for Merseytravel’s Budget Meeting in February, which I found interesting and explains why Cllr Mark Dowd (Labour Chair) did things the way he did at the meeting. I’m not sure if I was given it by mistake.

Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority

Budget Meeting

9 February 2012

Chair’s Note

1.       Apologies for Absence

Declaration of Interest

2.      Minutes of the Last Meeting

(Copy attached to this note).

3.      Mersey Tunnel Tolls

Chair to move the recommendation in paragraph 11 of the report.

4.      2012/2013 Budget – Financial Perspective

Chair to move the attached recommendation.

5.      Independent Review of Members Allowances

Chair to move that the Dr. Halls report be noted and comments be sought.

6.      Feedback from Members Workshop

Chair to receive, if any, from Members feedback with regard to the workshop held earlier in the day.

This information can be provided in alternative formats on request.

Mersey Tunnels question, plans to upgrade Mersey Tunnels in 2012/2013?


A reader asks, “Is there any plan to upgrade Mersey Tunnels in Merseyside in 2012/2013?”

Mersey Tunnel’s (part of Merseytravel) have a capital Budget estimate for 2012/2013 of £2.59 million on the following programs:-

Ongoing Schemes
2 Bidston Moss Contribution £160,000

ICT
1 ICT Infrastructure refresh/asset renewal/refurb £545,000
2 ICT Business Applications Provision £385,000
3 ICT Transport Systems £1.45 million
5 ICT Customer Services £50,000

The Mersey Tunnels 2012/2013 Revenue Budget of £36.948 million includes the following £6.375 million of Budget lines that may involve items that are an answer to your question as they may relate in full or in part to assets.

Premises

3 Repair and Maintenance of Building & Grounds £188,000
Supplies and Services

7 Equipment £25,000

8 Printing, Telephones etc £452,000

9 Operational Tools and Equipment £704,000

12 Asset Management, Repairs, Maintenance and Projects Recharge £5.006 million

Total £6.375 million.

So in total £8.965 million of budget lines in 2012/2013 that could relate to this question.

Source: CTTE/CB/HS Budget Papers (Green (Revenue) and Yellow (Capital))  for public meeting on 9th February 2012. There are also various savings (Pink) identified to the Mersey Tunnels Budget for 2012/13 that have been factored into the above figures.

Bidston Wrexham line electrification


There’s an interesting story in the Daily Post about how a government minister is ruling this out between now and 2015. After that she says it’s up to Wirral Council and the other local authorities along the route putting forward a value for money plan.

I must say it’s broadly in agreement with what Neil Scales said, former Chief Executive/Director General of Merseytravel at Wirral Council’s Cabinet.

The Bidston/Wrexham line covers two countries (Wales and England) which makes things even more complex as the Welsh Assembly have oversight for transport in Wales.

Licensing, Health & Safety and General Purposes Committee (Wirral Council) Part 1 19/3/2012 Agenda items 1(Declarations of Interest), 2 (Minutes), 3 (Sex Establishment fees) & 5 (Local Election fees 2012/2013)


Well on the 19th March 2012, I attended the well-attended Licensing, Health & Safety & General Purposes Committee in Committee Room 1. There were the usual people there such as taxi drivers and union reps and a few new faces from Merseytravel, as well as the committee of councillors and officers.

The committee composed of the following councillors (Cllr Ian Lewis (Conservative) was absent):-

Labour (5)
Cllr Bill Davies (Chair)
Cllr Patricia Glasman
Cllr Chris Jones
Cllr Steve Niblock
Cllr Irene Williams

Conservative (3)
Cllr Sue Taylor (Conservative spokesperson)
Cllr Kate Wood
Cllr Tom Anderson

Liberal Democrats (1)
Cllr Bob Wilkins (Lib Dem spokesperson)

The following Wirral Council officers were there to support the committee:-
Committee clerk: Anne Beauchamp
Legal adviser: Mr. Ken Abraham
Others: Margaret O’Donnell, Mr. Robert Beresford + others I don’t know the name of

The meeting started late with the Chair apologising for the wait as they were waiting for their legal team in regards to item 3 (Proposed election fees 2012/2013). He apologised again for the wait and said they would skip item 3 until Surjit Tour arrived.

He started the meeting with item 1 and asked for any declarations of interest.

Cllr Sue Taylor (Conservative spokesperson) apologised for Cllr Ian Lewis who was not present.

No declarations of interest were made, so they moved to item 2, which was the minutes of the last meeting.

Cllr Steve Niblock objected to the list of people attending the last meeting as he had not been at the last meeting due to being at the Economy and Regeneration Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting which was also held on the 8th March.

He said he couldn’t be in two places at the same time, so he had sent Cllr Salter in his place as deputy. Therefore he asked for the minutes to be changed and his name replaced with Cllr Salter. The Chair said they would make sure it was changed. With the amendment to the minutes, the minutes (item 2) were agreed and the Committee skipped item 3 to item 4 (Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licences).

The Chair explained they would also skip item 4 and deal with it at the end.

At this point a councillor’s mobile phone started ringing and the Committee moved to item 5 sex establishment fees. Margaret O’Donnell introduced this report about the licensing of sex establishments and referred to various pieces of legislation including section 27 of the “Police and Crime Act 2009″, although she actually meant the Policing and Crime Act 2009. She asked the Committee to consider what fees should be charged by Wirral Council for receiving applications. She suggested £1,200 per an application based on an estimate of what costs would be incurred.

At this point 6.15pm Surjit Tour arrived fifteen minutes late and sat down.

Cllr Niblock asked if the £1,200 was just for a new one or the same for a renewal too?

Margaret replied that yes, she suggested £1,200 for both.

Item 5 was agreed that Wirral Council would charge £1,200 for new applications and £1,200 for renewals of sex establishment licences.

The Chair asked Surjit Tour to explain to the meeting his report,item 3 (proposed election fees for 2012/2013).

Surjit Tour asked the Chair if he wanted him to go ahead so they could agree the suggestions? The Chair agreed. Surjit Tour apologised for being late, he had thought the meeting started at 6.15pm, Ed – it was supposed to start at 6.00pm, he apologised again for his late arrival.

He explained that the election fees were proposed fees and were payments made to staff by the Returning Officer. There was no specific guidance or formula used as this was a local issue. The way it had previously been arrived at by the previous Chief Executive/Returning Office Steve Maddox was a yearly increase to take into account inflation. The increase for this year was therefore 3.9%, however it was calculated on the basis of individual wards. Neighbouring authorities fees were included in the report for comparison.

The Merseyside Electoral Administration team also discussed such matters at a meeting. However because of difficulties facing staff he proposed the following changes to those figures in the report.

(a) polling station inspector increased from £190 to £565.

(b) Deputy Returning Officer fee increased from a flat fee of £459.42 (per ward)  to 50% of the Returning Officer’s fee (£5,127.98 * 50%) = £2,563.99 (per ward)

The Chair thanked him for the report. The committee agreed the recommendations and changes. He thanked Surjit Tour again.

Merseytravel 9/2/2012 2012/13 Budget Meeting Mersey Tunnels, Mersey Ferries Limited subsidy


Everyone was present, so the Chair Cllr Mark Dowd started the meeting at 2.30pm by wishing everyone a very pleasant time. He asked for declarations of interest. Cllr Chris Blakeley declared an interest as a Fast Tag holder and an interest in item 5 as a recipient of allowances from Merseytravel.

The Chair declared an interest for everyone else in item 5. He asked if the minutes were ok? They were and agreed. The Chair then wanted to move a recommendation c in respect of the item on the Mersey Tunnel tolls. Cllr Chris Blakeley said he wished to move an amendment (which is below).

—————————————————————————————————————————————————–

AMENDMENTS SHEET

MERSEYSIDE INTEGRATED TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

Authority/Committee/Sub-Committee: Integrated Transport Authority Budget Meeting

Date: 09 February, 2012

Agenda Item/Minute No: Item 3 – Mersey Tunnel Tolls

Amendment moved by: Councillor Chris Blakeley. Seconded by: Cllr Les Rowlands

11 Recommendations

Accept all recommendations and add new clause (d)

(d) The Authority asks the Interim Director General / Director of Resources to investigate the cost implications, as well as any implications to the Tunnels Act 2004 of bring forward a further discount for Fast Tag users in order to reduce the burden of tolls on regular users of the Mersey Tunnels.      The results of that investigation to be brought back to an Authority meeting in October 2012 prior to the review of the Mersey Tunnel Tolls for 2013 as per the Tunnels Act 2004.

C/MISCELL / SR / DW

23rd July 1991

—————————————————————————————————————————————————–
He said he “won’t keep us too long” as he was not calling for tunnel tolls to be removed. He was not going to shout for immediate reductions. He felt that the 2004 Act had taken away some of their powers, as they couldn’t vote against an increase, but they did have the power to discount. He had trouble with the Tunnels Act but was delighted that tolls would not increase. The small reduction he asked for Fast Tag users had been circulated.

The Chair said Cllr Blakeley’s motion was ” ill-conceived” as the Tunnels Act had been agreed by Merseytravel before going to the House of Lords. He said they should be doing this anyway, so why do what they should be doing?

Another councillor said wasn’t Cllr Blakeley up for election, therefore wasn’t this political?

Cllr Blakeley said he moved an amendment every year and there was nothing peculiar.

The Chair asked for a vote on the amendment. Five voted for the amendment (including Cllr Blakeley and Cllr Rowlands). The others voted against the amendment so the amendment was lost.

All councillors ten voted in favour of the original motion.

The Chair moved the meeting onto the 2012/13 Budget.

Jim Barclay introduced the report.

A councillor asked where the £2.985 million grant came from for the ferries?

The answer given was that Mersey Ferries Limited was a limited company, the subsidy was reduced in order to trade in line with its constitution. He was thanked.

Another councillor pointed out an error on page 31 in the 4th paragraph. Jim apologised for the error.

The councillors approved the 2012/13 Budget unanimously.

The last report on the agenda was the independent review of Members Allowances. The Chair welcomed Professor Hall and also circulated a recommendation from the Labour Group to not accept an increase in the Basic Allowance or Chair’s Allowance.

Cllr Chris Blakeley welcomed what had been moved, but asked for clarification. Were they accepting the other recommendations?

Councillor’s amounts for being on outside bodies


Following a comment on the previous post, I thought I would demonstrate how easy (or otherwise) it is to get this information and whether it’s as easy as Councillor Chris Blakeley claims because it is on the website.

Let’s start with Merseytravel. So like most people you do a search on Merseytravel’s website.

The first result is their publication scheme, which states they publish “PTA Members Allowances” and “PTA Members Allowances paid” (PTA stands for Passenger Transport Authority). This states it’s only published on paper, not electronically or on the website, but then this document was written eight years ago and not updated.

So you change the search for Members Allowances. Eventually you find this page on the website which only has the details for 2007/2008 and 2008/2009. With a bit of digging you’ll find they call the amounts for 2009/2010 “Members Year End Figures” and that you can get figures for 2010/2011 under “Members Allowance” but this only has a list of amounts and titles (no names).

As Merseytravel don’t publish online the minutes of their meeting at which they decide who does what there is no easy way to find out what Merseytravel councillors are currently being paid. My personal experience of Merseytravel is that they don’t make it easy to get information. For example this report showing how Merseytravel charged the disabled and elderly on Merseyside £48,000/year in 2007 if they lose their pass (and that was before they doubled the charge!) was subject to a “public interest test” before they would release it! Since they doubled the charge it’s now probably nearer £100,000/year. Perhaps this is how they plan to finance the hundreds of millions they’re spending on Merseytram’s “Line One to Nowhere”! The Mersey Tunnels Users Association has had similar problems getting information out of Merseytravel.

Cllr Blakeley is right, Merseytravel do publish the information, but it took me a good ten minutes to find it. Merseyside Police Authority’s is easier to find and simpler, but again has no names. They currently pay councillors ~£11,000, + ~£4,000/chair + ~£14,000 as Chair of the MPA.

Mersey Fire and Rescue Service do publish the information, in part 5 article 28, page 206 of their constitution. However once again it is a list of amounts, job titles and other allowances (travel etc) with no names

I gave up trying to find the information on the Merseyside Waste Disposal Authority site, but the above took a total of twenty minutes. There is no easy way to answer the question “What was X councillor paid for being a councillor this year”? This information is (sadly) still a secret to me and (apart from the councillors themselves and the taxman) a secret to the members of the public who pay them.

Another apology from Wirral Council… FOI request over amounts paid to councillors on outside bodies Merseytravel, Merseyside Police Authority, Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service & Merseyside Waste Disposal Authority


In an email Wirral Council apologises (“The Council apologises that it failed to collect the information“) as they weren’t complying with their own agreed policy. One only has to look at the information to guess at £120,000 worth of reasons why it took so long to release it!
It took nearly three months after the FOI request to put the information on their website! The information is 12 months out of date now anyway, but the public can now see (in the same place) how much councillors are getting for representing Wirral Council on various outside bodies for 2009-2010. They say they’ll update the start of April with the 2010-2011 figures.

Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority (Merseytravel)

Cllr Ron Abbey £12,958.64
Cllr Chris Blakeley £24,120.19
Cllr Dave Mitchell £5,942.34

Total: £43,021.17

Merseyside Police Authority

Cllr Adrian Jones £11,172
Cllr Kate Wood £15,214

Total: £26,386

Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority

Cllr Gerry Ellis £10,713.30
Cllr Steve Niblock £14,660.64
Cllr Lesley Rennie £16,508.66
Cllr Denise Roberts £8,025.75

Total: £49,908.35

Merseyside Waste Disposal Authority

Cllr JJ Salter (amount not specified)
Cllr G Gardiner (amount not paid as she is already in receipt of an Special Responsibility Allowance as Deputy Leader of the Lib Dem Group)

Total: Unknown

The above amounts are in addition to their councillors allowances which range from just over £9000 for 2009-2010 to just over £32000. These are not the only outside bodies that councillors are paid for being on but cover most of the ones covered by Council tax (and precepts) eg police, fire, Merseytravel and waste. I’m not sure if these amounts include payments that come under councillors allowances as attending meetings on outside bodies is classed as an “approved duty”. Nor does the above amount AFAIK include amounts paid for conferences & accomodation.

It’d be nice to have in one place a list of names, council allowances, amounts from outside bodies with a total. I might compile such a list later this year. After all the public should know they’re getting value for money. Just so the public know:-

Labour voted for and decided the budget for Merseytravel (which includes the amounts paid to councillors).
Labour (and independent members) voted for and decided the budget for the Merseyside Police Authority.
Labour voted for and decided the budget for the Merseyside Waste Disposal Authority.
Labour voted for and decided the budget for the Merseyside Fire & Rescue Authority.

All the cuts this year and last to police, fire, transport and other services were voted for by Labour who voted against other parties such as the Lib Dems and Tories that wanted things differently.

Merseytravel respond on Mersey Tunnels issues – Fast Tag, Disability


Prior to yesterday’s meeting at Merseytravel, I submitted some questions about certain aspects of the Mersey Tunnel Tolls changes . A Merseytravel spokesperson responded today. Their answers are below the original questions

Q1) Is the difference in price charged between Fast Tag holders and cash payers because of increased costs to Merseytravel regarding the latter?

A) No, this about marketing the convenience of this system for regular commuters.

Q2) Regarding 4.24 in the report, would this report mentioned be available on Thursday or will it only be prepared if the recommendation is passed?

A) A review of concessions will now be undertaken, after the recommendation was approved.

Q3) There are references throughout the report to the County of Merseyside Act 1980 as amended by the Mersey Tunnels Act 2004, in relation to the increases in tolls and discount structure. However it seems (at least to me) misleading to include references to the legal basis behind the other proposed recommendations, but not in 4.24. As I have pointed out in previous correspondence, the authority does this using its powers under s.92 ss.1(a) of the County of Merseyside Act 1980 as amended by the Mersey Tunnels Act 2004. It seems strange the tunnels legislation would be referenced elsewhere, but not here. Is this just an oversight?

A) This is covered by the Act. The general power to offer concessions is actually to be found at s.92C(a)(c) – the Authority has power to allow a class of traffic to use the tunnels on payment of tolls at a reduced rate, “on such occasions or in such other circumstances as it may from time to time determine”. In other words, the authority can review concessions from time to time and it would be remiss if it did not do so, as it was proposed here. Thus this recommendation is a proper one, with a firm legal basis. There is no particular need to mention this legal reference, but equally nothing sinister in its absence.

A) A review of concessions will now be undertaken, after the recommendation to investigate the issue was approved.

Q4) Have the legal implications of removing the current exemption for Blue Badge holders (and other disabled users) been thought through, regarding the authority’s legal duties under the Equalities Act 2010 and other relevant legislation?

Q5) What would be the cost implications to Merseytravel if Blue Badge holders were charged?

A) (to questions 4 and 5) These issues will be covered in the review, all considerations taken into account.

Q6) If a report is agreed reviewing this, which Merseytravel committee will it go to and when will it be considered?

A) It will be reported to the P&R committee and/or the Equalities Committee, in an appropriately timely manner to enable due consideration of all the issues concerned.

Q7) Will the Merseytravel Access Panel (public or affected disabled users of the tunnel) be consulted on any changes?

A) It will be consulted upon in an appropriate manner.

Clearly if the report recommends charging disabled users of Mersey Tunnels it’s going to be something the disability associations, charities and disabled drivers on Merseyside will have a view on. P&R refers to Merseytravel’s Policy and Resources Committee.