Do you want to know what 10 redacted legal invoices (6 on employment matters) paid by Wirral Council state?

Do you want to know what 10 redacted legal invoices (6 on employment matters) paid by Wirral Council state?

Do you want to know what 10 redacted legal invoices (6 on employment matters) paid by Wirral Council state?

                                                                         

10 invoices for legal work (6 involving HR) to Wirral Council

As had written before that I’d publish some legal invoices relating to Wirral Council’s HR function, which I requested as part of the 2013/14 audit.

====================================================================
1 Committee: HR

The first (two A4 pages) is from Sharpe Pritchard (numbered 14), transaction 202652 from 2nd May 2013 for £25,698.

It’s dated 31st March 2013 and is for legal services in the matter of:- (the rest is blacked out) in the period January to March of 2013 totalling £15,540.

It carries over to a second page where it states it’s also for Counsel’s fees of £5,875 in the (blacked out) hearing.

These two amounts total £21,415.00. VAT of £4,283.00 is then added making a grand total of £25,698.00.

Sharpe Pritchard Invoice 1 Page 1 of 2 2nd May 2013 £25698 legal services HR Wirral Council
Sharpe Pritchard Invoice 1 Page 1 of 2 2nd May 2013 £25698 legal services HR Wirral Council
Sharpe Pritchard Invoice 1 Page 2 of 2 2nd May 2013 £25698 legal services HR Wirral Council
Sharpe Pritchard Invoice 1 Page 2 of 2 2nd May 2013 £25698 legal services HR Wirral Council

====================================================================
2: Committee HR

The next is also a two A4 page invoice, this time from Tim D N Kenward of 7 Harrington Street Chambers. It was dated 19th April 2013 and Wirral Council is the defendant in the case of Gregory Eyitene v Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council. It is for £900 and relates to 19 pages of written advice and an amended draft letter (3 pages) that took 6 hours.

It also relates to a previously paid invoice of £1875.00 for an 18 pages submission on grounds of appeal, plus advice by telephone, email, perusal of documentation with regards to disciplinary proceedings.

This totals to £750 (£125/hour * 6) + VAT of £150 = £900. Colin Hughes was the solicitor at Wirral Council that dealt with this matter and the file reference is CJH/LHRAM/25270.

Tim D N Kenward Invoice 2 Page 1 of 2 7 Harrington Street Chambers 19th April 2013 Gregory Eyitene v Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council £900 written advice draft letter
Tim D N Kenward Invoice 2 Page 1 of 2 7 Harrington Street Chambers 19th April 2013 Gregory Eyitene v Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council £900 written advice draft letter
Tim D N Kenward Invoice 2 Page 2 of 2 7 Harrington Street Chambers 19th April 2013 Gregory Eyitene v Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council £900 written advice draft letter
Tim D N Kenward Invoice 2 Page 2 of 2 7 Harrington Street Chambers 19th April 2013 Gregory Eyitene v Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council £900 written advice draft letter

====================================================================
3: Committee HR

This is also a two A4 page invoice of Tim D N Kenward of 7 Harrington Street Chambers. It was dated 19th June 2013 and Wirral Council is the defendant in the case of Gregory Eyitene v Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council. It is for £3,660.00.

This is for:
Skeleton argument 5 hours preparation £750 + VAT (£150) = £900
List of authorities and paginated bundle of authorities and letter to Employment Appeal Tribunal 2 hours £300 + VAT (£60) = £360
Brief on hearing listed and prepared for preliminary hearing – Prep 10 hours, travel 4 hours, waiting 15 minutes hearing 2 hours 15 minutes £2,000 + VAT (£400) = £2,400

Total: £3,660.00.

Tim D N Kenward Invoice 3 Page 1 of 2 7 Harrington Street Chambers 19th June 2013 Gregory Eyitene v Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council £3660 skeleton argument authorities Employment Appeal Tribunal
Tim D N Kenward Invoice 3 Page 1 of 2 7 Harrington Street Chambers 19th June 2013 Gregory Eyitene v Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council £3660 skeleton argument authorities Employment Appeal Tribunal
Tim D N Kenward Invoice 3 Page 2 of 2 7 Harrington Street Chambers 19th June 2013 Gregory Eyitene v Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council £3660 skeleton argument authorities Employment Appeal Tribunal
Tim D N Kenward Invoice 3 Page 2 of 2 7 Harrington Street Chambers 19th June 2013 Gregory Eyitene v Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council £3660 skeleton argument authorities Employment Appeal Tribunal

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

4: Committee EDU

This is an invoice from Sharpe Pritchard dated 18th July 2013 for £10,080. This is for legal services from April to May 2013 in the matter of (blacked out).

Sharpe Pritchard Invoice 4 Page 1 of 1 18th July 2013 £10080 legal services April to May 2013
Sharpe Pritchard Invoice 4 Page 1 of 1 18th July 2013 £10080 legal services April to May 2013

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

5: Committee HR

This is an invoice from Jonathan Manning of Arden Chambers for £1,800 dated 26th July 2013. This is for 6 hours of advice given on the 8th March 2013 @ £250/hour (+VAT) in a “Determination of Employment” matter involving Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council. The blacked out bit of the line after DX 33016 is “CARDIFF”.

It appears a duplicate of invoice 6 but with more redaction.

Jonathan Manning Invoice 5 Page 1 of 1 Arden Chambers 26th July 2013 £1800 advice determination of employment
Jonathan Manning Invoice 5 Page 1 of 1 Arden Chambers 26th July 2013 £1800 advice determination of employment

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

6. Committee HR

This is an invoice from Jonathan Manning of Arden Chambers for £1,800 dated 26th July 2013. This is for 6 hours of advice given on the 8th March 2013 @ £250/hour (+VAT) in a “Determination of Employment” matter involving Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council.

It appears a duplicate of invoice 5 but with more redaction.

Jonathan Manning Invoice 6 Page 1 of 1 Arden Chambers 26th July 2013 £1800 advice determination of employment
Jonathan Manning Invoice 6 Page 1 of 1 Arden Chambers 26th July 2013 £1800 advice determination of employment

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

7. Committee ???

This is an interim invoice for £1,598.40 (including VAT) from Wilkin Chapman LLP. It was dated 16th October 2013 and is for advice to Wirral Council’s Monitoring Officer in August 2013.

Charges
It includes £1,190 (+VAT £238.00) total £1,428.00

Expenses
It includes an amount of £11.60 (+VAT of £2.30) total £13.80 for subsistence.
It also includes expenses for £130.50 (+VAT of £26.10) total £156.60. However the reason for this £156.60 is blacked out.

Wilkin Chapman LLP Invoice 7 Page 1 of 1 16th October 2013 advice to Monitoring Officer in August 2013 subsistence expenses £1598 40p
Wilkin Chapman LLP Invoice 7 Page 1 of 1 16th October 2013 advice to Monitoring Officer in August 2013 subsistence expenses £1598 40p

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

8. Committee ENV

This is an invoice for £607.50 from Ruth Stockley of Kings Chamber for email advice (2.25 hours). She charges £225/hour (+VAT). The invoice dated 19th November 2013 and it’s to do with a planning case.

Ruth Stockley Invoice 8 Page 1 of 1 Kings Chambers 19th November 2013 email advice planning £607 50p
Ruth Stockley Invoice 8 Page 1 of 1 Kings Chambers 19th November 2013 email advice planning £607 50p

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

9. Committee HR

This is an invoice for £2,220.00 from Tim D N Kenward of 7 Harrington Street Chambers. It was dated 7th January 2014. Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council is the defendant.

It is for the following:

9/12/13 Respondents Notice (8 pages) £350
20/12/13 Skeleton Argument (19 pages) 4 hours £750
3/1/14 Written advice (11 pages)
Notice of application (2 pages)
Draft order (2 pages)
Statement in support of application (10 pages)
Total 4 hours £750

Total £1850
VAT £370

Total Due £2,220

Tim D N Kenward Invoice 9 Page 1 of 1 Harrington Street Chambers 7th January 2014 respondent s notice skeleton argument written advice notice of application draft order statement in support of application £2220
Tim D N Kenward Invoice 9 Page 1 of 1 Harrington Street Chambers 7th January 2014 respondent s notice skeleton argument written advice notice of application draft order statement in support of application £2220

====================================================================
10.

This is an invoice for a 1 year subscription from 2/4/14 to 1/4/15 for “Law of Food & Drugs” from LexisNexis. Invoice was dated 3rd March 2014 and is for £1659.

LexisNexis Invoice 10 Page 1 of 1 Law of Food and Drugs 1 Year subscription £1659
LexisNexis Invoice 10 Page 1 of 1 Law of Food and Drugs 1 Year subscription £1659

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

2nd consultation response to Lyndale School closure consultation from Cllr Phil Gilchrist

2nd consultation response to Lyndale School closure consultation from Cllr Phil Gilchrist

2nd consultation response to Lyndale School closure consultation from Cllr Phil Gilchrist

                                                       

Councillor Tony Smith at the Special Cabinet Meeting of 4th September 2014 to discuss Lyndale School L to R Cllr Stuart Whittingham, Cllr Tony Smith, Cllr Bernie Mooney, Lyndzay Roberts
Councillor Tony Smith at the Special Cabinet Meeting of 4th September 2014 to discuss Lyndale School L to R Cllr Stuart Whittingham, Cllr Tony Smith, Cllr Bernie Mooney, Lyndzay Roberts

Further to this earlier post about the recent consultation on closure of Lyndale School which includes the first consultation response I received, I’m publishing here a second consultation response received by myself from Cllr Phil Gilchrist (a councillor for Eastham ward where Lyndale School is based).

I’m still awaiting a response to my FOI request made a week ago, but as my FOI requests get routinely sent to Wirral Council’s press office for final approval before I get a full response I’m not surprised.

Here is the second response I am publishing to the closure consultation. If you have responded to this consultation and would like me to publish your response (please tell me if you wish your published response to be anonymised) please email me at john.brace@gmail.com. I’ve linked to the Cabinet reports and Cabinet agenda item referred to by Cllr Phil Gilchrist in his consultation response for ease of reference.

From: Cllr Phil Gilchrist, 2 Gordon Avenue, Bromborough, CH62 6AL 334 1923

I object to the closure of The Lyndale School.

The Cabinet adopted funding arrangements which could be re-visited if there was a willingness to address the financial constraints imposed on the school. The report to Cabinet (Agenda Item 13 of 16th January 2014) included a number of comments that foresaw and helped create the financial straitjacket for the Lyndale School.

Section 2.5 made it clear that there was a need for any banded approach to..
‘recognise the resource intensive nature of making provision for those with the most profound and multiple difficulties ‘

The Cabinet report promised that the changes.
‘will be kept under review with regular reports to the Schools Forum’

Section 2.5 also raised the prospect that there would be.
..’a contingency fund which would be used to support specialist provision experiencing financial difficulties whilst future options are considered’

Section 2.7 described the Wirral banding model as seen by respondents to the consultation as…‘a reasonable starting point for development’

The aforementioned paragraphs suggested that there was a recognition that the authority was creating a system which needed reviewing and developing.

It was clearly reported that..
‘One respondent argued for a school specific top up significantly higher than the banding proposed because without it the school will not be financially viable next year.’ (2.7)

Instead of heeding the concerns raised the Cabinet adopted a funding arrangement which did not fully reflect the costs of providing the specialist provision valued by the parents of children at The Lyndale School..

During the consultation process covering the options for the future of The Lyndale School the parents made it clear that the school was meeting the needs of their children..

They did not wish to see the teamwork, the expertise of teaching staff and of the support staff at The Lyndale School fragmented and broken up. They made this point throughout.

There was an opportunity to ‘replicate’ the provision at The Lyndale, to plan and develop a modern unit that would have achieved this, but it was broached in a half hearted manner. The local authority seems determined to break up The Lyndale’s centre of expertise by sending the children to other schools.

The children will need the same high quality support in any new setting. The parents have remained unconvinced that this will be the case. They have put the needs of their children first and the authority should do likewise.

Cllr Phil Gilchrist 18th Nov 2014

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

Cllr Jeff Green asks if Wirral Council are looking to spend £1,000,000 on their new Chief Executive (over 5 years)?

Cllr Jeff Green asks if Wirral Council are looking to spend £1,000,000 on their new Chief Executive (over 5 years)?

Cllr Jeff Green asks if Wirral Council are looking to spend £1,000,000 on their new Chief Executive (over 5 years)?

                                                    

Employment and Appointments Panel (Chief Executive) Committee Room 3, Wallasey Town Hall, 24th November 2014 L to R Martin Denny (LGA), David Slatter (Penna PLC), Cllr Jeff Green, Cllr Lesley Rennie and Cllr Phil Gilchrist
Employment and Appointments Panel (Chief Executive) Committee Room 3, Wallasey Town Hall, 24th November 2014 L to R Martin Denny (LGA), David Slatter (Penna PLC), Cllr Jeff Green, Cllr Lesley Rennie and Cllr Phil Gilchrist

Employment and Appointments Panel (Chief Executive) Committee Room 3, Wallasey Town Hall, 24th November 2014 L to R Martin Denny (LGA), David Slatter (Penna PLC), Cllr Jeff Green, Cllr Lesley Rennie and Cllr Phil Gilchrist

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.

Video above is from the Employment and Appointments Panel (Chief Executive) public meeting held on the 24th November 2014 in Committee Room 3, Wallasey Town Hall, Seacombe

Wirral Council’s Employment and Appointments Panel (Chief Executive) met in Committee Room 3, Wallasey Town Hall, Seacombe on Monday afternoon at around 2.30pm. The councillors on the Employment and Appointments Panel (Chief Executive) which had previously been decided by the Employment and Appointments Committee on the 27th October 2014 are:

Cllr Phil Davies (Labour)
Cllr Ann McLachlan (Labour)
Cllr George Davies (Labour)
Cllr Adrian Jones (Labour)
Cllr Jeff Green (Conservative)
Cllr Lesley Rennie (Conservative)
Cllr Phil Gilchrist (Lib Dem)

1. Appointment of Chair

The meeting started with a Wirral Council officer from the Legal and Member Services section asking for nominations for Chair.

Cllr Adrian Jones (Labour) proposed Cllr Phil Davies (Labour) as Chair of the Employment and Appointments Panel (Chief Executive) meeting.
Cllr Ann McLachlan (Labour) seconded Cllr Phil Davies (Labour) as Chair of the Employment and Appointments Panel (Chief Executive) meeting.

The officer asked if there were any other nominations for Chair?

There were no other nominations for Chair so Cllr Phil Davies was appointed Chair for the meeting.

Cllr Phil Davies got up and moved to a different seat.

2. Members’ Code of Conduct – Declarations of Interest

The Chair asked if there were any declarations of interest? No councillors declared any interests.

3. Appointment of Chief Executive, Head of Paid Service (including Returning Officer and Electoral Registration Officer)

There was a report and thirteen appendices for this item.

Cllr Phil Davies asked Chris Hyams (Head of Human Resources and Organisational
Development) to take the Employment and Appointments Panel (Chief Executive) through the report and asked her to highlight the areas where they [the councillors] needed to make a decision.

She referred to the Employment and Appointments Committee meeting of the 27th October 2014 and said that the Employment and Appointments Panel was set up to appoint a Chief Executive. Chris Hyams said that the report recommends a review of the salary of the Chief Executive, the role of Returning Officer and Electoral Registration Officer, the requirements of the job and a proposed timetable for moving forward. The report also detailed interim management arrangements between the retirement of the current Chief Executive and the appointment of his replacement.

The Chair, Cllr Phil Davies referred to the recommendations on page 6 and he suggested taking each recommendation in turn and that he was happy to take questions and comments as they go on. That was agreed.

He introduced their two external advisers to the Employment and Appointments Panel (Chief Executive) who were Martin Denny from the Local Government Association and David Slatter of Penna PLC (who are paid £15,000 by Wirral Council to help with recruiting a Chief Executive).

The Chair said that the first item to discuss is salary for the new Chief Executive. The current salary range of the Chief Executive was £121,807 to £135,341. The comparative data for Chief Executive salaries and workforce size (FTE) for North West authorities was attached at Appendix 5 (2013 figures). The comparative salaries for officers that report to Chief Executives was attached at appendix 7. A comparison of the multiple between the average FTE earnings and the Chief Executive was attached at appendix 8.

The Chair started by asking the external advisers for their advice.

David Slatter of Penna PLC went first. He said that the current salary for the Chief Executive was in the lower quartile. The £155,000 to £175,000 range in his opinion would give the flexibility to make sure they got the quality of candidates and that whoever was appointed would stay.

The Chair said that that would be David’s recommendation. He asked Martin Denny from the Local Government Association next.

Martin Denny from the Local Government Association that their data was very similar [to Penna’s] and that it was important that they had a “range of characters to choose from and that they are retained as well”. He said that they needed the ability to recruit the best possible candidate and that’s what they needed to search for.

The Chair Cllr Phil Davies had said that that was the advice.

Cllr Jeff Green asked what the salary of the Prime Minister is?

As a point of information at this point, I will point out that the salary of the Prime Minister is £142,500 (April 2013 figures) [source: Parliament’s website].

Cllr Phil Davies replied with “I don’t know.”

Cllr Jeff Green said that his understanding was that it was around £140,000. He asked if they were suggesting if they get a new Chief Executive that they pay them more than the Prime Minister?

Cllr Phil Davies (Chair) said that that was what their external advisers were suggesting, yes.

Cllr Adrian Jones made some comments.

Cllr Phil Gilchrist asked about appendix 3. He referred to page 13 and asked are the proportions fixed automatically and would there be automatic increases in the Strategic Director’s salaries if the salary of the Chief Executive was increased?

Cllr Phil Davies (Chair) invited Chris Hyams to answer that question.

Chris Hyams explained that the percentages for strategic director’s salaries were shown as percentages of the current grade for the Chief Executive. She said the percentage was the current situation, however it could be altered and that the Employment and Appointment Panel (Chief Executive) had the authority to make a recommendation to Council to do so.

Cllr Phil Gilchrist to the Council’s policy to pay staff the living wage [at the time of writing £7.85/hour]. He asked for the pay differential between the lowest and highest paid member of staff?

Chris Hyams referred to an entry level of spinal column point 10, local government pay scales starting at point 5, the national pay award, but that at Wirral Council its lowest paid workers were paid more than the lowest paid workers at other councils as they pay the Living Wage.

Cllr Phil Gilchrist made a follow up comment, Chris Hyams replied referring to the ratio between the earnings of the Chief Executive and the lowest paid worker which the Council published as part of its pay policy [which was a requirement of the Localism Act 2011 c.20].

Cllr Jeff Green asked if the salary quoted included pension contributions?

Chris Hyams replied that each salary had on costs of just over 22% of each salary. The salary details shown were exclusive of on costs.

Cllr Jeff Green said that the suggested amount was £155,000 to £175,000. Taking a middle figure of £160,000 how much on top of that would Wirral Council be paying £190,000 to £200,000 once pension contributions were taken into account as Wirral Council didn’t pay the current Chief Executive’s pension?

Chris Hyams said that it was unusual not to pay an employee’s on costs. She emphasised that the data did not include on costs.

Cllr Jeff Green said that if they went with the recommended figures that it would be £200,000, which over five years would be a million pounds. He said they were looking at spending a million pounds for one person?

Continues at Labour councillors argue for increase in range of Wirral Council’s Chief Executives’ salary to between £155,000 and £175,000.

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

Merseytravel’s Head of Internal Audit brands some whistleblowing as “Mickey Mouse” & “complete nonsense”

Merseytravel’s Head of Internal Audit brands some whistleblowing as “Mickey Mouse” & “complete nonsense”

Merseytravel’s Head of Internal Audit brands some whistleblowing as “Mickey Mouse” & “complete nonsense”

                                                                 

ED 26/11/14 15:16 – Following a complaint from Merseytravel received on the 26th November 2014, the word “some” has been added to the headline for the purposes of clarity.

Declaration of Interest: The author of this piece was years ago involved as the Claimant in litigation against Merseyside Passenger Transport Authority (defendant) and Merseyside Passenger Transport Executive (defendant) that started and concluded in 2007 in the Birkenhead County Court. This was after first raising his concerns internally with its former Chief Executive Neil Scales and former Chair of Merseytravel Cllr Dowd. At this stage the matter could have been easily settled for £15 but Merseytravel chose at that stage not to.

Merseytravel’s legal costs in the matter were estimated at £thousands (which Merseytravel paid themselves and would have had to pay whether they won or lost). The increased legal costs of Merseytravel were partly because of what happened as detailed below.

During the case Merseytravel’s barrister (in my opinion a barrister is indeed slight overkill for a £15 claim in the small claims track in the county court, but I know now it’s common practice in the public sector to do this) had to (rather embarrassingly) ask for the permission from both the Claimant (myself) and the Birkenhead County Court to withdraw the first signed witness statement of their expert witness (a Merseytravel employee) after I pointed out a factual inaccuracy in their witness statement (that the witness (a Merseytravel employee) had indeed signed a statement of truth for).

Merseytravel also sought (initially but later changed their mind on that) in 2008 to withhold documents referred to from the Claimant that were referred to in their defence. If I remember correctly a Merseytravel employee stated to me at the time that such documents (which were details of their charging policy for lost Solo and Trio passes) were not for the public.

The final judgement in the case (by agreement by both Merseytravel and myself) was later modified by the Birkenhead County Court due to a factual error made by the Judge who had not taken into account an earlier application in the case and chosen to ignore me pointing this out to him at the time of the hearing.

Although the judge at the final hearing agreed with me that Merseytravel had discriminated against me three times because of a protected characteristic, the court accepted Merseytrave’s reliance on a statutory defence that discrimination on these three times was justified due to a “a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim” because of decisions by politicians.

The four councillors from Wirral Council at the time on Merseytravel (the Merseyside Passenger Transport Authority) were:

Cllr Ron Abbey (Labour)
former Cllr Denis Knowles (Labour at the time but switched to the Conservatives)

It is perhaps to be noted that as is relevant to how politicians and those in the public sector relate towards protected minorities (and this point here is obviously to do with attitudes towards a different protected minority) that Denis Knowles in 2012 later faced a Wirral Council Standards Hearing Panel hearing based on a complaint of Denis Knowles after a comment he left on Facebook about members of the LGBT community who were members of the Labour Party. He was suspended at the time from the Conservative Party.

former Cllr Jacqueline McKelvie (Conservative)
Cllr Dave Mitchell (Lib Dem)

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

A councillor asks a question about Merseytravel's whistleblowing policy at a public meeting of its Audit and Governance SubCommittee 24th November 2014
A councillor asks a question about Merseytravel’s whistleblowing policy at a public meeting of its Audit and Governance SubCommittee 24th November 2014

Cllr Steve Foulkes (Vice-Chair of Merseytravel’s Audit and Governance Sub-Committee) now part of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority sent his apologies to a public meeting to discuss Merseytravel’s whistleblowing policy and was not present.

Officers of Merseytravel were asking councillors for their comments on a draft whistleblowing policy which included such priceless paragraphs as:

“10.2 If you do take the matter outside Merseytravel, you should ensure that you do not disclose confidential information acquired during your employment unless it falls within the qualifying criteria for protected disclosures. Premature or inaccurate media exposure or adverse publicity may cause needless reputational damage, impede a proper investigation or cause unnecessary distress to individuals.”

I will translate those two sentences in the draft policy into what my interpretation of the intention behind it is and probably in much clearer English:

“10.2 If you rat on us to the press, not only will we [Merseytravel] start spinning to the press and refer to any damaging press report as “inaccurate”, we’ll go after you (despite what the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 c.23 states as we’re more bothered with our reputation and making sure that we control the flow of information about our organisation to both to the public and politicians.”

The references made during the public meeting itself to a hypothetical whistleblower as “Mickey Mouse” (whether made in jest or not) speaks volumes about cultural attitudes that still persist at Merseytravel.

However bearing in mind my unusually long declaration of interest made at the start of this piece, I had better not let how dysfunctional Merseytravel was in 2007 influence my reporting of it in 2014 as the Merseytravel politicians of 2014 are keen to put its somewhat chequered past behind it.

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.

Merseytravel’s (now part of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority’s) Audit and Governance Subcommittee public meeting of the 24th November 2014

The whistleblowing item (item 7) starts at 31m 48s into the meeting and can be watched above. The report and draft policy can be read on Merseytravel’s website.

Councillor Fulham at the meeting asked, “Thanks Chair. Errm, I appreciate that on page 48 of the agenda and at 7.4 in the policy, errm it says that this part of the that I’m looking at, I’ve found somewhere I’m looking at says this policy applies even if after investigation, disclosure is found to be incorrect or unfounded and there are statutory protections which the policy acknowledges for people who errm make a protected disclosure, that’s found out too. Well at the end of the process is found out not to be errm founded but it might be a reasonably held disclosure.

But what worries me is on page 46, where it says policy statement, under errm in chapter 4 “we will investigate all genuine and reasonable concerns”, but the way I would approach things, you can’t make an assessment whether it’s genuine or reasonable until you’ve investigated it? So it kind of precludes the investigation. So errm, why is that there?”

Stephanie Donaldson, Merseytravel’s Head of Internal Audit answered “OK, you’re absolutely right in so far as how can you tell that anything’s genuine or legitimate until you investigate it, so realistically everything will be investigated to a point.

However if something was found to be errm you know complete nonsense for want of a better word then that investigation would cease. We wouldn’t pursue investigating something which is you know completely unfounded or false then, but you’re right that there is the legislation requires that as long as it’s in the public interest it should still be investigated and that’s what the changes to the policy would fly at.

I suppose the purpose of that one in the policy statement and I will take some advice through you Chair from legal, is that errm, that if we received a complete nonsense of an allegation and it’s clearly complete nonsense from Mickey Mouse for example that we would not investigate that, there are boundaries aren’t there?

Errm, but you’re absolutely right to say that in a majority of I think all cases, it would be you have to undertake an investigation in order to assess its legitimacy.”

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

David Parr tells Liverpool City Region Combined Authority about how Mersey Gateway Bridge will cost under £600 million

David Parr tells Liverpool City Region Combined Authority about how Mersey Gateway Bridge will cost under £600 million

David Parr tells Liverpool City Region Combined Authority about how Mersey Gateway Bridge will cost under £600 million

                                                                                                          

Updated: 11:25 24/11/14 Declaration of interest: In February 1997 the author of this piece was an employee of John Moores University for a week on work experience.

The papers for last Friday morning’s public meeting of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority can be found on Knowsley Council’s website.

If you wish to watch what happened at the meeting you can do so below filmed by myself. If you want to watch me filming the meeting you can do so thanks to Knowsley Council. Also filming was somebody from Liverpool John Moores University Journalism. I think three people filming the same meeting is a record so far (considering that before August 2014 all requests to film Liverpool City Region Combined Authority meetings were refused).

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.

Liverpool City Region Combined Authority public meeting 21st November 2014

However, what actually happened? A good chunk of the meeting (around half) was a twenty-five minutes presentation (followed by questions and answers) by Halton Borough Council’s Chief Executive David Parr (pictured below) on the Mersey Gateway bridge across the River Mersey being built in Halton near to the Silver Jubilee Bridge (or Runcorn Bridge).

Liverpool City Region Combined Authority 21st November 2014 L to R David Parr Chief Executive Halton Council Angela Sanderson Monitoring Officer Jim Fogarty Treasurer Cllr Phil Davies Chair Wirral Council
Liverpool City Region Combined Authority 21st November 2014 L to R David Parr Chief Executive Halton Council Angela Sanderson Monitoring Officer Jim Fogarty Treasurer Cllr Phil Davies Chair Wirral Council

Liverpool City Region Combined Authority 21st November 2014 item 5 Mersey Gateway Progress Update L to R David Parr Chief Executive Halton Council Angela Sanderson Monitoring Officer Jim Fogarty Treasurer Cllr Phil Davies Chair Wirral Council

Agreement was also reached to amend the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority’s constitution. Last month on the 15th October 2014 West Lancashire Council decided to join the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority as an Associate Member.

However to join, first the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority had to amend its constitution. Now that’s been done, a memorandum of understanding will be sent to West Lancashire Council which will need to be signed by them. However it seems likely that by the time the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority next meets that there will be someone there representing West Lancashire Council.

The area covered by West Lancashire has a population of 111,314 (2013 estimate), which is about a third of the Wirral. Its current political composition is 26 Labour councillors and 27 Conservative councillors. It was (until recently) evenly split at 27:27 but there is now (at the time of writing) a by-election going on in Skelmersdale North due to the recent death of a Labour councillor. The results of the by-election will be known by December 12th 2014.

The rest of the meeting was largely routine. However I welcome both hearing the result of the Skelmersdale North by-election and seeing who West Lancashire Council send to the next public meeting of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority. Pictures of its Leader and Deputy Leader can be viewed on this blog which covers the West Lancashire area.

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