14 November 2014 | A blog about Wirral Council, Wirral Council's councillors & officers

6 more pages of the Wirral Schools Services Limited contract with Wirral Council

Continues from The first 17 pages of Wirral Council’s contract with Wirral Schools Services Limited. This is a further six pages in the same contract.

THIS AGREEMENT is made on 27 March 2001.

BETWEEN:

(1) WIRRAL BOROUGH COUNCIL of Town Hall, Brighton Street, Wallasey, Wirral, Merseyside, CH44 8ED (the “Authority”; and

(2) WIRRAL SCHOOLS SERVICES LIMITED a company incorporated under the laws of England and Wales with registered number 41156367 whose registered office is at Frogmore Park, Watton-at-Stone, Hertford SG14 3RU (“Project Co”).

BACKGROUND:

(A) By virtue of sections 13 and 14 of the Education Act 1996, the Authority as local education authority is under statutory duties to secure that efficient primary and secondary education are available to meet the needs of the population of its area and that sufficient schools for providing such education are available for its area.

(B) By virtue of section 16 of the Education Act 1996, the Authority as local education authority may, for the purposes of fulfilling the above duties, establish and maintain primary and secondary schools.

(C) By a notice dated 17 November 1998 in the Official Journal, the Authority invited expressions of interest from appropriately qualified tenderers for the provision of accommodation and related support services for eight secondary schools and one primary school in accordance with the Government’s Private Finance Initiative.

(D) Project Co has submitted a proposal which, as negotiated through the negotiated tender process, has been agreed to by the Authority.

(E) The Authority and Project Co have agreed to work together in a spirit of co-operation to achieve the objectives of the Project. The Authority and Project Co have agreed to carry out the Project on the terms and conditions set out in this Agreement.

(F) The Project is a private finance initiative project within the meaning of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996.

IT IS AGREED as follow:

RMLIB01 #659790 v14 03/04/2001 15:25

PART 1 – INTERPRETATION

1. DEFINITIONS AND INTERPRETATION

1.1 Definitions

In this Agreement (including the Background), the following terms shall, unless the contract otherwise requires, have the following meanings:

“1999 Act” means the Local Government Act 1999;

“Academic Year” means from the first day to the last day (excluding holidays) of the school year, such period not to be more than 195 days;

“Accommodation Actual Completion Date” means, in respect of the Accommodation Works at a Site, the date on which those Accommodation Works are Complete, being either the date stated in the certificate issued persuant to Clause 14.6 (Completion) or if this date is disputed in accordance with the Fast Track Resolution Procedure, the date determined under that procedure, as being the date upon which such certificate should have been issued;

“Accommodation Completion Date” means, in relation to the Accommodation Works at a Site, the date set out in column (1) of the Schedule of Key Dates by which such Accommodation Works must be Complete;

“Accommodation Services” means the services described in the Accommodation Services Output Specifications;

“Accommodation Services Output Specifications” means the specifications contained in Schedule 5 (Accommodation Services) as may be amended by a Variation or otherwise in accordance with this Agreement;

“Accommodation Works” means the works listed in Schedule 3 Part 4A;

“Acquired Rights Directive” means Council Directive 77/187 EEC as amended;

“Act of Vandalism” means a wilful, deliberate or malicious act carried out by Authority staff or pupils, guests, visitors or other persons authorised by the Authority who are properly on the relevant Site which results in damage to the relevant Facility or Site or any Fixed and/or Moveable Equipment thereon;

“Actual Date of Completion” means:

RMLIB01 #659790 v14 03/04/2001 15:25

(a) in respect of the Initial Works at a Site, the date on which those Initial Works are Complete, being either the date stated in the certificate issued persuant to Clause 14.4 (Completion) or if this date is disputed in accordance with the Fast Track Resolution Procedure, the date determined under that procedure, as being the date upon which such certificates should have been issued; or

(b) in respect of any Variation Works, the date on which the Variation Works are Completed in accordance with the relevant Variation Report agreed or determined (as appropriate) pursuant to Clause 32 (Variations) and certified as such pursuant to Clause 14.4 (Completion);

“Adjudication” means the procedure set out in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12 (Dispute Resolution);

“Adjudicator” means an adjudicator appointed under paragraph 3 of Schedule 12 (Dispute Resolution);

“Affected Party” means a Party affected by the occurence of the events listed in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of the definition of Force Majeure;

“Agenda 21” means the action plan establishing a framework for law in the field of sustainable development known as “Agenda 21” adopted at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992;

“Agent” means Societété Générale of SG House, 41 Tower Hill, London, EC3N 4SG and its successors and assigns;

“Alternative Scheme” means one or more pensions scheme(s) each of which is approved or capable of approval under Chapter 1 Part XIV of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 or the trustees of such a scheme as the case may be;

“Amended Plans” has the meaning given in Clause 32.12 (Plans);

“Ancillary Documents” means:

(a) the Shareholder’s Agreement;

(b) Project Co’s memorandum of association and articles of association;

(d) the Support Services Management Agreement;

RMLIB01 #659790 v14 03/04/2001 15:25

(e) the Direct Agreements;

(f) the D&B Contract Performance Guarantee; and

(g) the Support Services Management Agreement Performance Guarantee;

“Annual Debt Service Cover Ratio” or “ADSCR” whilst the Initial Funding Agreements are in force shall have the meaning given to Senior Debt Service Cover Ratio in the Initial Funding Agreements and thereafter means in respect of any period for which it falls to be calculated the ratio of A:B where:

A is the aggregate of Cash Available for Debt Service for that period; and

B is the Annual Debt Service Obligations for that period;

“Annual Maintenance Programme” means the Maintenance programme agreed or determined pursuant to Clause 19.3 (Annual Maintenance Programme);

“Annual Net Third Party Profit” means Gross Third Party Revenues earned in respect of third party use during a Year less the Third Part Costs incurred in respect of third party use during that Year;

“Annual Utility Services Consumption Targets” has the meaning given in paragraph 2.1 of Part 6 (Utility Services) of Schedule 4 (Payments);

“Appeal” means all or any of the following:

(a) an appeal to the Secretary of State in accordance with Section 78 of the Planning Acts against:

(i) a conditions attached to the Full Planning Permissions or Variation Planning Approvals and/or a refusal of a planning application for Planning Approvals and/or Variation Planning Approvals; or

(ii) non-determination of a planning application for Planning Approvals and/or Variation Planning Approvals; or

(b) the reference of a planning application to the Secretary of State under Section 77 of the Planning Acts,

and the expression “to Appeal” shall be construed accordingly;

RMLIB01 #659790 v14 03/04/2001 15:25

“Approved Leased Equipment” means sanitary equipment, fire detection and prevention systems, telephone systems, photocopiers and vehicles;

“Arbitration” means the procedure set out in paragraph 4 of Schedule 12 (Dispute Resolution);

“Arbitrater” means an arbitrator appointed in accordance with paragraph 4 of Schedule 12 (Dispute Resolution);

“Asbestos” means any of the following minerals; crocidolite, amosite, chrysolite, fibrous actinolite, fibrous antthophyllite, fibrous tremolite and any mixture containing any of those minerals;

“Asset Register” means, with respect to each Facility, the asset register to be compiled by Project Co pursuant to Clause 22.18 (Asset Registers);

“Associated Company” means, in respect of a relevant company, a company which is a Subsidiary or a Holding Company of that relevant company or a company which is a Subsidiary of a Holding Company of that relevant company but not that relevant company itself and, in the case of Project Co, shall include each of the Consortium Members (the terms “Holding Company” and “Subsidiary” bearing the meanings defined in part XXXVI of the Companies Act 1985);

“Authority’s Confidential Information” has the meaning given in Clause 48.1 (The Authority’s Confidential Information);

“Authority’s D&B Contract Direct Agreement” means the direct agreement of the same date as this Agreement between the Authority, the D&B Contractor and Project Co;

“Authority’s Service Adviser” means the person appointed by the Authority (and notified to Project Co) to act pursuant to Clause 40 (Representatives);

“Authority’s Share” means the percentage figures in the fourth column of the table set out below corresponding to the amount of Cumulative Capital Expenditure at the relevant time, as shown in the first column of the table set out below:

Cumulative Capital Expenditure	Project Co’s Share	Cumulative Cost to Project Co	Authority’s Share
£0 – £0.6 million	100%	£600,000	0%
£0.6 – 1.2 million	75%	£1,050,000	25%

RMLIB01 #659790 v14 03/04/2001 15:25

£1.2 – 1.8 million	50%	£1,350,000	50%
£0.6 – 2.4 million	25%	£1,500,000	75%
Over £2.4 million	0%	£1,500,000	100%

“Authority’s Solicitors” means Rowe & Maw of 20 Black Friars Lane, London EC4V 6HD;

“Authority’s Support Services Management Direct Agreement” means the direct agreement of the same date as this Agreement between the Authority, the Support Services Manager and Project Co;

“Authority’s Works Adviser” means the person appointed by the Authority (and notified to Project Co) to act pursuant to Clause 40 (Representatives);

“Availability Deduction” has the meaning given in Part 1 (Definitions) of Schedule 4 (Payments);

“Base Case Financial Model” means the financial model as at the Effective Date setting out the basis on which the financing of the Project and the costs of and revenue from the Project have been calculated by Project Co (including the assumptions used, the cell logic network for the financial model software and any software and accompanying documentation necessary to operate the financial model) in the Agreed Form;

“Bebington” means Bebington High School;

“Bebington Asset Register” means the asset register to be compiled by Project Co pursuant to Clause 22.18 (Asset Registers);

“Bebington Headlease” means the lease between the Authority and Project Co substantially in the form set out in Part 1 (Bebington Headlease) of Schedule 1 (Land);

“Bebington Site” means the land identified in the Bebington Headlease and shown edged red on Plan B;

“Benchmarked Price” has the meaning given in paragraph 2.4 of Part 8 (Value for Money Testing) of Schedule 4 (Payments);

“Benchmarking” means subjecting a Support Service to the market price comparison procedure set out in Part 8 (Value for Money Testing) of Schedule 4 (Payments) with the aim of ensuring that the Support Service being tested is provided

RMLIB01 #659790 v14 03/04/2001 15:25

Continues at 38 more pages of the Wirral Schools Services Limited private finance initiative (PFI) contract with Wirral Council.

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

The many reasons I’m objecting to the proposed traffic regulation order for Birkenhead Market Service Road

Public notice of proposed traffic regulation order (9th July 2014) Wirral Globe Birkenhead Market Service Road

I’d better point out than along with Leonora we are both objectors to this proposed Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). This is about item three (OBJECTION: PROPOSED WAITING & LOADING RESTRICTIONS – BIRKENHEAD MARKET SERVICE ROAD, BIRKENHEAD). The report and map is already on Wirral Council’s website.

Previous articles on this matter can be read at:

Objection to Traffic Regulation Order (KO) for Birkenhead Market Service Road (25/9/14).

http://johnbrace.com/2014/09/17/a-meeting-with-2-wirral-council-officers-about-parking-behind-birkenhead-market-and-disability-issues/ (17/9/14)

The shocking tale of Wirral Council trying to scapegoat the disabled and forcing them to pay more £s for parking (8/8/14)

Below is my submission (in the interests of openness and transparency) to the Highways and Traffic Representation Panel that meets on the 21st November 2014 starting at 9.30am.

CC:
Cllr Michael Sullivan
Cllr Steve Williams
Cllr Dave Mitchell
Mark Smith
Ken Abraham
Vicky Rainsford

Subject: Agenda item 3 (OBJECTION: PROPOSED WAITING & LOADING RESTRICTIONS – BIRKENHEAD MARKET SERVICE ROAD, BIRKENHEAD) Highways and Traffic Representation Panel Friday 21st November 2014

Dear all,

As one of two objectors to the proposed TRO for Birkenhead Market Service Road, I am announcing my intention to speak at this meeting.

I have received a letter through the post detailing the date and time of the meeting. I’m also (although you may have guessed this) going to film agenda items 1, 2 and 3.

Leonora (the other objector) may wish to speak too. However as I have had time to read the report, published yesterday there were some points I wish to raise in advance of the meeting in order that officers (and councillors) are given appropriate advance notice of the points I will raise.

I refer to the original numbering of the report.

3.4 “objector’s” should read “objectors'” as there are two of us.

3.5 Although access to Birkenhead Market Service Road can travel through Birkenhead Bus Station, as you can see from the map this is one of two ways vehicles can access the Birkenhead Market Service Road. Therefore it’s misleading to imply that people in the Birkenhead Market Service Road must have come through the Birkenhead Bus Station.

It would be useful if officers could clarify which designated bays they are referring to and what specific longer observation periods they are referring to.

3.6 Both The Grange and The Pyramids (except on a Sunday) charge for parking.

Here is the detail of blue badge spaces at the other car parks referred to (total number of spaces in brackets):

Europa Square 14 blue badge (150)
Oliver Street 6 blue badge (16)
Conway Street (on street) ~6 (6)
Burlington Street unknown

Policy SPD4 (which I’m sure councillors who are currently or have been previously on Planning Committee are familiar with) state minimum numbers of spaces for vehicles carrying disabled people as follows:

1 in the first 10 spaces should be allocated for disabled people. Thereafter 1 in every 20 spaces or 6% of the total (whichever is greater).

Applied to the Europa Square car park of 150 spaces using Class A1 – Retail this is:

first ten spaces: one space
other 140 spaces: seven spaces
Total: eight

However 6% is the greater. Depending on how you calculate the 6% (whether 6% of 150 or (6% of 140)+1) it either comes out as either 9 spaces or 9.4 spaces (rounded up to 10).

However the number of blue badges issued to the Wirral population (visitors can also use their blue badges) is higher than 6% putting pressure on existing spaces in Europa Park. On the day of the site visit with officers, there were no free Blue Badge spaces available in the Europa Park car park (out of 14) and this is pretty typical of how it is during the times the shops are open.

I quote:

“Officers consider there are sufficient parking spaces within existing Council and privately owned car parks in close proximity to the Market Hall to accommodate any overspill of blue badge holder parking from Birkenhead Market Service Road.”

In order to know that you’d have to do a traffic survey of how many spaces are free in car parks in close proximity to the Market Hall, how many of those spaces are blue badge spaces and actually know how many park in the Birkenhead Market Service Road currently with a blue badge. As far as I know (although I may be wrong) this is merely based on an opinion of officers without doing a survey. Many of the “sufficient parking spaces” are unsuitable for those with disability as disabled people if they parked in the regular spaces would not have enough room around their vehicle (especially if parked adjacent to a car) to safely get in and out of their vehicle.

3.7 Of course the Birkenhead Market Hall isn’t going to object to a traffic regulation order it’s actually funding half of the cost of. Individual traders were told by officers at the site visit that the proposals wouldn’t affect their customers unloading and loading, just parking. The traders haven’t been individually consulted and unless they read the notice on the lamppost, or found out by other means they just won’t be aware of this proposed TRO. Even if they did object, they might not know how to go about it. Bear in mind the proposals weren’t available to view in the Conway Street One Stop Shop just across the road, but were a considerable distance away at Wallasey Town Hall, Seacombe.

3.8 There are various points in the Birkenhead Market Service Road (as you can see on the plan) that are much narrower than others. Cars (or other vehicles) parked there or near there (unlawfully) can be causing an obstruction to the free flow of traffic. Although Wirral’s CEOs do not have powers to remove vehicles, the police do. Wirral’s CEOs can issue tickets (which hopefully act as a deterrent).

3.9 This is an acknowledgement by officers that the draft TRO (as consulted on) cannot be decided by the Highways and Traffic Representation Panel.

It is unclear from what is put in the report exactly what modifications officers are proposing to the proposed TRO. However what is clear is that only the original TRO has been consulted on (twice) and not the modified TRO.

The requirements in regulation 9 cause a public inquiry held by an inspector to be held if the requirements in regulations 9(3) to 9(5) are met.

To summarise these are (subject to paragraphs 4 and 5) for orders if:

(3) Subject to paragraphs (4) and (5), this paragraph applies to an order if—

(a) its effect is to prohibit the loading or unloading of vehicles or vehicles of any class in a road on any day of the week–

(i) at all times;
(ii) before 07.00 hours;
(iii) between 10.00 and 16.00 hours; or
(iv) after 19.00 hours,

and an objection has been made to the order (other than one which the order making authority is satisfied is frivolous or irrelevant) and not withdrawn; or

(b) its effect is to prohibit or restrict the passage of public service vehicles along a road and an objection has been made to the order in accordance with regulation 8–
(i) in the case of a road outside Greater London, by the operator of a local service the route of which includes that road; or
(ii) in the case of a road in Greater London, by the operator of a London bus service the route of which includes that road or by London Regional Transport.

(4) For the purposes of paragraph 3(a), an order shall not be taken to have the effect of prohibiting loading at any time to the extent that it—
(a) authorises the use of part of a road as a parking place, or designates a parking place on a road, for the use of a disabled person’s vehicle as defined by section 142(1) of the 1984 Act;
(b) relates to a length of the side of a road extending 15 metres in either direction from the point where one road joins the side of another road,

unless the effect of the order taken with prohibitions already imposed is to prohibit loading and unloading by vehicles of any class at the time in question for a total distance of more than 30 metres out of 50 metres on one side of any length of road.

(5) Paragraph (3) does not apply to an order —

(a) if it is an experimental order;
(b) made under section 84 of the 1984 Act (speed limits on roads other than restricted roads); or
(c) to the extent that it relates to a road which forms part of a priority route designated by the Secretary of State pursuant to section 50 of the Road Traffic Act 1991 (designation of priority routes in London).

(6) In this regulation “public service vehicle” has the meaning given by section 1 of the Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981.

As you can see from the above, even if the loading bays in the proposed TRO are modified to apply to all vehicles and not just goods vehicles, it’s the stretches it restricts of >30m in 50m stretches around the Birkenhead Market Services Road that are the problem. Without these being also taken out of the proposed TRO the requirement for a public inquiry by an inspector still applies.

Neither the TRO consulted on, nor the changed TRO can be decided by the Highways and Traffic Representation Panel because of Regulation 9.

3.10
The exceptions referred to in officer comments in relation to vehicles driven other than by the blue badge holder for the purposes of picking up the blue badge holder don’t as far as I can see form part of the consulted on TRO.

4.1
Even if in theory a TRO was granted, without enforcement it wouldn’t result in any change. There are plenty of loading bays and plenty of time deliveries will happen and there will be a goods vehicle already in the space they wish to load or unload. Whereas it can be inconvenient for drivers of large lorries to try and drive down the Birkenhead Market Service Road, the vast majority of vehicles there are connected to the market stalls or the Pyramids/Grange. Going one way to the Birkenhead Market Service Road, the Birkenhead Bus Station provides greater challenges to the drivers of goods vehicles than the Birkenhead Market Service Road itself in my opinion.

5.1
There are options that have not been considered these are:

A) Consulting on the modified TRO. In fact consultation is a requirement of Regulation 8 (Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996). The new proposals would also have to be published in a local newspaper (Regulation 7) and there would have to be a period for objections.

What’s interesting is the modified TRO officers propose hasn’t been consulted on, therefore can’t be decided by the Highways and Traffic Representation Panel.

B) Having a public inquiry chaired by an inspector on the proposed TRO (Regulation 9, 10 & 11). Again this would require a notice in a local newspaper and 21 days notice.

Lastly I would like to request that item 3 (which is this item on the agenda) it taken ahead of item 2 as both Leonora and I planned to attend the meeting of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority starting at 11.00am.

In order to get to that meeting, we will be able to stay at a meeting of the Highways and Traffic Representation Panel no later than 10.15am. Therefore it is important that the Highways and Traffic Representation Panel starts promptly at 9.30am and that is part of the reason why I am submitting this information in advance so that agenda item 3 can be dealt with quickly.

I realise this may inconvenience the objector to agenda item 2, however I cannot see it as being possible to deal with both agenda items in 45 minutes based on previous experience of Highways and Traffic Representation Panel meetings.

Thank you for reading this,

John Brace

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

Banned video on Lyndale School restored to Youtube; Wirral Council still prevents filming at 2 public meetings

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 that Sony prevented being watch on Youtube until now.

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.

Ed – Updated 11:58 14/11/2014 to include additional information.

Well the above Youtube video of the Cabinet meeting of the 4th September 2014 (previously blocked by Youtube in Germany and unavailable for anyone to view for the last fortnight because of Sony) can now be viewed.

Sony Music Entertainment haven’t sued me, so the video has to go back. My arcane knowledge of the counter notification provision to a DMCA takedown notice in the American Digital Millenium Copyright Act paid off.

The issue was to do with the use of the music track “We bought a Zoo” [2011] by Icelandic musician Jónsi.

It means the 15 minute restriction on videos, restrictions on live broadcasts is no lifted on the main Youtube channel I use. Also the account is returned to good standing.

However in future at a public meeting, even though I can justify fair use on the grounds of news reporting, to prevent the making of false allegations of copyright infringement and this happening again, I have decided not to film videos shown during public meetings (obviously there may be exceptions to this general rule).

With regards to the Lyndale School video, the fact that Jónsi is blind adds another interesting element to the Lyndale story.

It’s not however just Sony Music Entertainment that have tried to prevent footage of Wirral Council’s public meetings being shown. Wirral Council tried it at a call in earlier this year in February (about Lyndale).

Also at a recent meeting of the Youth and Play Service Advisory Committee on the 28th October and the Youth Parliament on 11th November Wirral Council were adamant that for child protection reasons these public meetings couldn’t be filmed.

This was because at the meeting on the 28th there was a 16-year-old present and at the meeting on the 11th November, there were 11-18 year olds present in addition to councillors.

Strangely enough on that very topic the Youth Parliament, the BBC are filming (and showing on BBC Parliament today) from 11.10am-12.40pm and 1.40pm onwards the Youth Parliament debating in the House of Commons.

In fact here is a quote from one UK Youth Parliament member Ciara Brodie from Liverpool (who will be leading a debate):

“Friday 14th November will be an incredible day, not only for those sitting in the chamber, but for young people across the country. This is the day when hundreds of Members of Youth Parliament will take to the green benches of the House of Commons and debate on the issues that are most important to us. These five issues have been decided by a nationwide ballot taken part in by over 865,000 11-18 year olds. This day will be symbolic, because young people often feel excluded from politics, and like their voices are neither acknowledged nor represented in Parliament. This sitting is an incredible opportunity to engage young people from across the UK in political debate, just months before a General Election. With educational reform a hot topic and 16 and 17 year olds voting in the Scottish Referendum, there has never been a more important time to listen to young people. It is one thing to be given a voice but hopefully, as a result of this debate, young people will also be listened to. This is our chance to make our mark in the heart of Westminster.”

Here is what a Youth Parliament document states about the filming today:

“Television coverage

The debates will all be filmed. BBC Parliament will be broadcasting the debates live with a five minute time delay.
The debates will also be streamed “live” with a time delay directly to the newsrooms of the BBC, Sky, etc – so that broadcasters may use the footage that day if they want to.

It is very important that during the debates MYPs don’t say anything that is factually incorrect (i.e. slanderous), don’t swear and are careful not to damage the reputation of Parliament (e.g. call MPs liars!). We will be taking legal advice on anything that could be considered slanderous and any such statements will have to be removed.
The microphones and cameras will be on in the Chamber at all times.”

Coverage of the morning session will be broadcast on the BBC Parliament channel today (14th November 2014) starting at 8.20pm.
Coverage of the afternoon session will be broadcast on the BBC Parliament channel today (14th November 2014) starting at 9.50pm.

Coverage of the morning session will be available on BBC Iplayer at this link (1h30m).
Coverage of the afternoon session will be available on BBC Iplayer at this link (2h10m) .

That’s a total of 3h40m of footage.

The problem however is despite the House of Commons changing the law at Wirral Council, the officer/councillor requests to ban filming the public meeting of Wirral Council of the Youth Parliament earlier this week, especially as the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014 meant that from August 6th 2014 Wirral Council could no longer ban any filming at its public meetings, just looks somewhat slightly silly now, old-fashioned, possibly unlawful when the BBC are filming the Youth Parliament in the House of Commons at a public meeting to a much wider audience?

Maybe Wirral Council’s child protection policy will prevent its UK Youth Parliament members (aged between 11-18) actually being involved at all in London at the House of Commons today (which if it does that’s a shame). Mind you under their “child protection policy” the public & press have been told in the past aren’t even allowed to know even the names of who from Wirral represents the views of young people on the Youth Parliament!

In Wirral of course, with full approval from Wirral Council’s Cabinet, children’s voices are not to be heard outside of meeting rooms at public meetings on political issues. The reason given is because “they’re children” and of course Wirral isn’t known to as the “insular peninsula” for no reason. It’s however really part of a wider cultural attitude against openness and transparency and of trying to control the press.

Wirral will probably also say its for safeguarding reasons, however I would say the effect of broadcasting on national TV, online and through other broadcasters is likely to reach a much wider audience than probably the fifty or sixty views there would have been of the Youth Parliament meeting at Wirral Council.

What have Wirral Council actually got to hide when it comes to teenagers? Do they just so ever conveniently forget at time they get £millions of public money to spend on their education?

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

6 more pages of the Wirral Schools Services Limited contract with Wirral Council

Share this:

The many reasons I’m objecting to the proposed traffic regulation order for Birkenhead Market Service Road

Share this:

Banned video on Lyndale School restored to Youtube; Wirral Council still prevents filming at 2 public meetings

Share this: