Why did 2 missing words from the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority 2014/15 accounts end up costing YOU £4,755?

Why did 2 missing words from the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority 2014/15 accounts end up costing YOU £4,755?

Why did 2 missing words from the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority 2014/15 accounts end up costing YOU £4,755?

                                                  

Councillor Phil Davies (Chair) at a meeting earlier this year of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority

In the interests of openness and transparency here is an email I’ve just written. We’ll see what happens tomorrow morning. You can read the objection that led to the KPMG (the external auditors for the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority) increasing their bill by £4,755 here.


To
Councillor Anthony Carr (Chair) anthony.carr@councillors.sefton.gov.uk
Councillor Nina Killen (Deputy Chair) nina.killen@councillors.sefton.gov.uk
Councillor Andy Moorhead andy.moorhead@knowsley.gov.uk
Councillor Rob Polhill rob.polhill@halton.gov.uk
Councillor Mike Sullivan mikesullivan@wirral.gov.uk
Councillor Pam Thomas pamela.thomas@liverpool.gov.uk

Subject: Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Audit Committee meeting (3rd November 2015) item 6 LCRCA Final Accounts 2014/15

Dear all,

I have read the reports for tomorrow’s meeting and as you are the people on the Audit Committee there to represent the people of Merseyside I wish to make the following points to you.

If you wish me to explain at the public meeting itself why I made the objection I am happy to do so, but as you will understand in this email what I stated in the objection is the tip of a larger iceberg.

Firstly, the same error was also made in the Merseytravel accounts (I think since Merseytravel’s Audit and Governance Sub-Committee was disbanded you are also responsible for Merseytravel’s accounts too). I know someone else made an objection to the Merseytravel accounts (I didn’t), but had I made the same objection to the Merseytravel accounts too as this would’ve added an extra ~£5k to your audit costs.

As it’s never been made clear to me if the same error in Merseytravel’s accounts was also corrected, I would appreciate an answer to that point.

There are other points about the accounts that I did not raise in my objection, that you as the Audit Committee should be made aware of.

The accounts for 2014/15 and accompanying reports refer to the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015. However the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015 only apply to financial years from 2015/16 onwards, therefore this is another error.

Finally, I am concerned that the system of internal controls at the LCRCA, the external auditor or the councillors approving the accounts did not spot this or the matters relating to my objection.

I hope at the meeting tomorrow you will exercise some scrutiny as to what happened and why and put into place controls to prevent it happening in the future.

Yours sincerely,

John Brace

P.S. I will clarify what it stated on page 11 of the auditor’s report.

The accounts in their original form didn’t comply with legal requirements. It’s been acknowledged by the auditors and officers they were wrong. The point about the external auditors applying to the court for a declaration that the accounts are unlawful is therefore moot as they’ve been changed.

However it is important that councillors consider the reasons behind the objection in a public interest report, otherwise the people tasked with corporate governance will be in the dark as to what was wrong, why it had to be changed and be aware to check for this next year. I hope I have made this clear.

P.P.S On another audit related note, as the LCRCA now has a website, the Local Government (Transparency Requirements) (England) Regulations 2015 make it a legal requirement that certain information is published on its website (such as payments over £500 for example the payment to the auditors).

Currently this is being done on Merseytravel’s website, which makes it very hard to find the LCRCA payments amongst the Merseytravel ones. I would like the Audit Committee to please find out why this information isn’t published on the LCRCA website as it would aid with better openness and transparency about what the LCRCA is doing.

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

Wirral Council’s Cabinet to decide on whether to have public meetings on Monday mornings from 2016

Wirral Council’s Cabinet to decide on whether to have public meetings on Monday mornings from 2016

Wirral Council’s Cabinet to decide on whether to have public meetings on Monday mornings from 2016

                                               

Councillor Phil Davies at a Cabinet meeting earlier this year
Councillor Phil Davies (Leader of Wirral Council) at a Cabinet meeting earlier this year

There are many decisions on the agenda of Thursday’s Cabinet meeting and many are about changing how Wirral Council does things to be more like how they’re done at Liverpool City Council.

I’m going to write about one proposed change that could be described that way and explain the problems it might cause.

Item 9 with the exceedingly dull title of Executive Arrangements and Pledge Champions (the latter doesn’t mean some councillors are pledging to stop drinking alcohol) proposes that from next year instead of Cabinet meeting in the evening, Cabinet meetings will be on Monday mornings at 10.00am.

From a public relations perspective I can see why they’d do this. For example each year for the past years I can remember, a rabble rousing trade union representative has turned up to a Cabinet meeting with a lot of supporters (I think one year so many it had to switch to the Civic Hall) which would be nigh impossible to do if your trade union members were at work on a Monday morning.

If Cabinet meetings had been on Monday mornings when a decision was made about Lyndale School, that would’ve meant the staff (including the headteacher) or the children affected couldn’t attend the meeting where politicians decided about their school.

On the plus side, public transport during the day means councillors would able to get to and from meetings without relying on taxis, but that’s not the point as strictly speaking public meetings are for the public not for the councillors.

Essentially having a Cabinet meeting on Monday mornings will rule out the public turning up or at least the ones with jobs. Of course some councillors have jobs too, but their employers have to give them paid time off work for this sort of thing.

Now the decision states that the Leader can decide to change the time of the meeting away from Monday morning. However if the agenda is published, the date and time of the meeting is set, then a topic on the agenda kicks up a fuss with large numbers of Wirral residents, how will it be possible to change the time of the meeting without confusing people as to when the meeting is?

Of course going back to public relations, a meeting on Monday evening would mean reports of Cabinet decisions could make the next edition of the Wirral Globe. I would be interested to hear people’s thoughts on changing Cabinet meetings to Monday mornings as there may be issues with this change that I haven’t thought of.

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

SATIRE: What do Star Wars and elected mayors have in common?

SATIRE: What do Star Wars and elected mayors have in common?

SATIRE: What do Star Wars and elected mayors have in common?

                                                       

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.

George Lucas imagines a fictional meeting of politicians

Star Wars gives a vision of what elected Mayors will be like
Star Wars gives a vision of what elected Mayors will be like

The following is parody/satire protected by this legislation. Star Wars is of course owned by Disney.

(dramatic music)

Tagge: Until Wirral Council is fully operational, we are vulnerable! The opposition parties are too well equipped. They’re more dangerous than you realise!

Motti: Dangerous to your political party, not to Wirral Council!

Tagge: The tax credits rebellion will continue to gain support in the House of Lords!

Elected Mayor: The House of Lords will no longer be of any concern to us. I have just received word that Prime Minister Cameron has dissolved the House of Lords permanently. The last remnants of the old democracy have been swept away.

Tagge: But that’s impossible! How will Prime Minister Cameron maintain control without the bureaucracy?

Elected Mayor: The elected Mayors now have direct control over their territories. Fear will keep the locals in line, fear of Wirral Council.

Tagge: And what of the rebellion? If the rebels have obtained a complete technical readout of Wirral Council, it is possible however unlikely that they might find a weakness and exploit it!

Lord Vader: The plans you refer to will soon be back in our hands.

Motti: Any attack made by the opposition parties against Wirral Council would be a useless gesture, no matter what technical data they’ve obtained.

Wirral Council is now the ultimate power in the universe! I suggest we use it!

Lord Vader: Don’t be too proud of this Wirral Council you’ve constructed. The ability to collect council tax is insignificant next to the power of politics.

Motti: Don’t try to frighten us with your sorcerer’s ways, Lord Vader. Your sad devotion to politics has not helped you conjure up the stolen plans, or given you enough clairvoyance to find the rebels’ hidden fortress…

[Lord Vader makes a pinching motion and he starts choking]

Lord Vader: I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Elected Mayor: Enough of this! Vader, release him!

Lord Vader: As you wish.

[He does]

Elected Mayor: This bickering is pointless. Now Lord Vader will provide us with the location of the stolen plans by the time Wirral Council is operational. We will then crush the opposition parties with one swift stroke.

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

Is the whole price/prize point about Merseyside’s Mayor actually a load of rubbish?

Is the whole price/prize point about Merseyside’s Mayor actually a load of rubbish?

Is the whole price/prize point about Merseyside’s Mayor actually a load of rubbish?

                                                  

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 Scrutiny Panel 28th October 2015 Part 1 of 2

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 Scrutiny Panel 28th October 2015 Part 2 of 2

Ged Fitzgerald (Chief Executive, Liverpool City Council) tries to explain devolution to a meeting of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Scrutiny Panel 28th October 2015
Ged Fitzgerald (Chief Executive, Liverpool City Council) tries to explain devolution to a meeting of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Scrutiny Panel 28th October 2015

You can view what was said at a public meeting earlier this week on the subject of devolution for Merseyside above. It’s openly admitted however that the communications/engagement/public relations side of this has been pretty poor.

I will disagree with something that’s been said throughout this process since it doesn’t make sense (although from press reports Cllr Phil Davies has done a U-turn in favour of a Merseyside Mayor).

It’s been stated (in the video above by Ged Fitzgerald, Liverpool City Council Chief Executive and Mayor Joe Anderson before) and again and again that the price of devolution is a Merseyside Mayor. This whole process based on the Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill which is wending its way through parliament.

I realise legislation does get amended, but as it’s on its 8th parliamentary stage out of ten it’s going to be eventually (especially as it’s a government bill) mainly in the form it’s now in.

Here’s the section on an elected Mayor.

It modifies the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 to state:

107A 15 Power to provide for election of mayor

(1) The Secretary of State may by order provide for there to be a mayor for the area of a combined authority.
(2) An order under subsection (1) shall not be used as a condition for agreeing to the transfer of local authority or public authority functions.”

In other words what is repeatedly repeated (and perhaps why they’re so bad at communications) doesn’t make sense. The government can’t say we’ll give you this if you have an elected Mayor and the price/prize thing is a load of rubbish. The government can’t do that as the legislation that will underpin this (which has to come into force to trigger the next stage which would result in devolution) makes that unlawful.

With me so far?

The government knows this is going on and I’m sure that it doesn’t make them look favourably on Liverpool when these sorts of political shenanigans to make them look bad, are being played out amongst Merseyside’s more ambitious Labour politicians.

So why would this have got started?

My best educated guess (as trying to make sense about what’s going on with the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority with its poor public relations is like wading through treacle) is a certain Labour politician wants (again) to blame something unpopular in some quarters on a Tory government (even if it isn’t entirely true).

Add to this the ambition in some quarters to actually be Merseyside’s Mayor (because once it’s a done deal all they’ll need is the Labour nomination) gives a motive.

So that’s my opinion. The whole price/prize thing is a politician’s way of deflecting the blame knowing that generally the media won’t inquire too deeply and I think readers of this blog can make a jolly good guess as to who wants to be Merseyside’s Mayor.

Once again Labour are blaming something they want (a Merseyside Mayor) on the government, stating an untruth (that it’s a condition of the devolution deal which it’s not because the legislation would make that unlawful) and hoping everyone will believe it?

Well who do you believe? I’ve outlined above the consistent line that they’re trying to spoon feed the Merseyside public and the press whilst deflecting any attempt at scrutiny by politicians by openly refusing to state how the negotiations are going?

There will be an extraordinary public meeting of all Wirral Council councillors (as well as public meetings of councillors in the other areas of Merseyside and Halton) to discuss the devolution deal. Wirral’s will be held on the 19th November starting at 6.00pm in the Council Chamber at Wallasey Town Hall.

Isn’t it about time the public were told the truth?

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

For The Small Price Of A Lightbulb

For The Small Price Of A Lightbulb

For The Small Price Of A Lightbulb

Bam Nuttall contract drawings of one of the twenty different designs for wiring for one of Wirral Council's streetlights thumbnail
Bam Nuttall contract drawings of one of the twenty different designs for wiring for one of Wirral Council’s streetlights thumbnail

One of my favourite authors, Isaac Asimov when editing books of science fiction stories (or even his own stories) used to add an introduction to each story. This is an introduction to a piece by a guest blogger (in future these introductions will probably be shorter).

Many moons ago, I started and ran a video games website (single-handed) that had more readers each month than the Wirral Globe has now. Just in case anyone considers that a “hobby”, I was paid for it, just as I earn money from writing this blog.

Visitors to that website used to submit content (there was a forum too) and believe me having to edit a submission from a teenager who completely ignores any of the rules of grammar and doesn’t use full stops was a stretch.

For a while I’ve been thinking of a new feature on this blog similar to the letters page of the newspapers where users can submit content. After all (apart from a submission by Leonora who I’ve tried to gently encourage to write again) readers of this blog have had to put up with me for the last five years!

I have asked a number of people to write a guest post, however Nick Lauro has been the first to thankfully say yes!

Compared to the experience above, editing Nick Lauro’s submission has been a dream by comparison. I have only made one very minor edit!

His piece is about something that I’ll refer to as a “bread and butter” issue of political activists or a politician and reminds me of a similar problem I tried to sort out once on the Beechwood estate. Writing any more than that about it would spoil the surprise.


By Nick Lauro

Is it really too much to ask? It’s not as though I’m asking for the air fare and the accommodation costs for a trip to China, it’s just a couple of street lamps that need fixing! So began my speculation, as I pondered in the dark about exactly how much of Wirral council taxpayers’ money it costs to send a van and a couple of engineers out to repair a street lamp or two.

It all started around the end of September when unusually, my little cul­-de-­sac was plunged into darkness by the simultaneous failure of not one, but two lamp posts. Not the end of the world, maybe a bit on the Victor Meldrew side of petty but nevertheless, a valid security risk to my fellow neighbours whose houses sit next to the shrouded, wooded scrubland that provides an obvious getaway/hiding place, for even the most feckless burglar. It’s not the first time a street light has failed over the 11 years I’ve lived in the road, and has always been an easy problem to rectify; contact council, report faulty light, wait a few days, light fixed.

Reporting a faulty street light is as simple as visiting the Wirral council website and filling in an online form that rewards you with a message of acknowledgement ­much preferable to hanging on the end of a telephone waiting to speak to an overworked, underpaid, first­ line support employee from an understaffed department. After you’ve completed the reporting process, you sit and wait for the lights to come back on again ­or in this case, not… four ­plus weeks and two ignored Tweets later, darkness still prevails when the sun goes down and my train of thought drifts toward ideas of austerity, cuts and a local authority so fiscally challenged, they can no longer provide the same level of service for our most basic of urban requirements. But wait; there is much talk in the local press about my locality being saved from oblivion by the universal panacea for all cash­ strapped local authorities ­a ‘Golf Resort’. We have a white knight upon his steed, bringing us promise of regeneration and our council coffers once again, overflowing with bullion ­surely enough to restore Wirral’s street ­furniture to working order for years to come?

Alas, our saviour and two of his executive salaried colleagues have departed in what looks to be a strategically planned exit, taking between them, some £500,000 of council taxpayers’ money in remunerations. Who will save us now, from further fiscal disaster? Who can keep the dream alive for ‘Wirral Waters’? Will the money to fix two dodgy street lamps down my road ever be found?

Seriously folks, when an organisation funded by money from the public purse ­our money ­can seemingly see fit to play the sort of boardroom games more in keeping with the style of premier league football managers, it is easy to feel bitterly short-changed. The recent monetary machinations carried out by our most highly paid public servants, only serves to cast suspicion and doubt on their ability to even find the money to change a light bulb.

© Nick Lauro 2015

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

Privacy Preference Center

Necessary

Advertising

Analytics

Other