Following the Court Order of 18th April 2012 and a Lib Dem smear: My response

Following the Birkenhead County Court order of 18th April 2012 naming Cllr Alan Brighouse on behalf of the Birkenhead Liberal Democrats granted by Deputy District Judge Ireland following the court hearing of the 4th April 2012, the Lib Dems have finally coughed up the original complaint (not shared with me until now 12 months later, … Continue reading “Following the Court Order of 18th April 2012 and a Lib Dem smear: My response”

Following the Birkenhead County Court order of 18th April 2012 naming Cllr Alan Brighouse on behalf of the Birkenhead Liberal Democrats granted by Deputy District Judge Ireland following the court hearing of the 4th April 2012, the Lib Dems have finally coughed up the original complaint (not shared with me until now 12 months later, despite their constitution stating 10 weeks) made about me by Simon Holbrook in May 2011 (after he lost his seat). I’ve sought advice and am making parts of it public (as there’s a public interest to at least parts of it being made public), along with my version of events (which seems far closer to reality than his complaint, my comments are in italics). Here’s section 1:-

“1. Smearing of Sitting Councillors

In an email to Cllr Gilchrist dated 19 May 2011 at 09:59, John Brace did link the Standards investigation into Cllr Williams’ and Cllr Bridson’s part in the “special charging policy” with that of the recent investigation into the way in which Martin Morton was treated, despite the fact these are two separate matters.

Cllr Williams and Cllr Bridson are not and were not under investigation into the alleged bullying of Martin Morton. This investigation, which was instigated by former Cllr Holbrook has now concluded and reported. It never was and never had been a matter for the Standards Board for England.”

As is detailed here it was considered twice by the Standards Board for England, as initially the complaint about Cllr Bridson hadn’t been sent to them. The complaint (or complaints as a second was submitted) were made by Martin Morton and had already been reported in the Wirral Globe under the headline Town hall blunder: Wrong paperwork sent to local government watchdog inquiry prior to Simon’s complaint about me.

One of these two councillors had been on the charging policy working group in 2005 that led to the overcharging policy, the other had been Cabinet Member for Social Care and Inclusion (which covers Social Services) during part of the period that the overcharging occurred.

The report referred to, the Martin Smith report, was reported to Cabinet on 14th April 2011, however it was not made public until the following year due to the Labour administration’s attempts to delay both its publication and the AKA report.

The relevant section of my email of 19th May to Cllr Gilchrist (and Cllrs Williams, Brighouse, Kelly, Bridson, Harney, Gilchrist, Mitchell and two other party members), is quoted below.

“Morale in the party is extremely low, the Chair and the Vice-Chair of the local party are currently (according to the Wirral Globe) under investigation on standards grounds following a decision by Wirral Council’s Independent Assessment Panel to refer the matter to Standards for England regarding their roles in the Social Services “special charging policy” and how Martin Morton was treated. This independent report (by now read by councillors but currently exempt) will be published within 2-5 months and will lead to a public discussion of their roles in this saga. Both are likely to be candidates in 2012 and the full reasons how and why they did things will have to be made clear to the public and party in the spirit of openness and accountability if we are to move on.”

Lastly Simon Holbrook refers to himself in the third person, which generally wouldn’t be the case if as claimed he was the author of the complaint. However it’s clear by the way it was written that somebody wanted me to stop asking questions by the way flat out denials were made regarding the standards complaints.

The decision notice of Standards Board for England with regards to Cllr Williams and Cllr Bridson back me up as to what the complaint was about. As it was re referred back to Standards for England following the paperwork mixup, there are earlier decision notices regarding Cllr Williams, Roberts and McLaughlin too.

Council (Wirral Council) 12/12/2011 Part 3 Agenda Item 2 (Declarations of Interest)

Agenda Item 2: Declarations of Interest

Cllr Bill Davies asked a question of Bill Norman for advice on whether councillors had to declare trade union membership as an interest and if so what type.

Bill Norman said in his opinion, it was a personal interest, (and therefore needed to be declared) unless it affected a councillor’s decision-making of deciding the public interest in such a significant way, that it became a prejudicial interest. If it became the latter the councillor would have to declare it as a prejudicial interest.

Various interests were then declared by councillors including:-

Cllr Steve Foulkes said something about safety and press inference. He declared an interest in Notice of Motion 14 (FAIRNESS, NOT FAVOURS) because of his membership of USDAW.
Cllr Phil Davies declared an interest in Notice of Motion 14 (FAIRNESS, NOT FAVOURS) because of his membership of UNISON.
??? declared declared an interest in ??? because of his/her membership of UNISON.
Cllr George Davies declared an interest in ??? with respect to ???.
Cllr Ann McLachlan declared an interest in Notice of Motion 14 (FAIRNESS, NOT FAVOURS) with respect to her membership of UNITE.
Cllr Brian Kenny declared an interest in Notice of Motion 14 (FAIRNESS, NOT FAVOURS) because of membership of UNISON.
Cllr ????, declared an interest in Notice of Motion 14 (FAIRNESS, NOT FAVOURS) because of membership of UNITE and UNISON.
Cllr Adrian Jones declared an interest in Notice of Motion 14 (FAIRNESS, NOT FAVOURS) because of membership of two trade unions.
Cllr Jeff Green declared an interest in Notice of Motion 14 (FAIRNESS, NOT FAVOURS) because of membership of PROSPECT.
Cllr ?? declared an interest in Notice of Motion 14 (FAIRNESS, NOT FAVOURS) because of membership of EQUITY.
Cllr Ian Lewis declared an interest.
Cllr Paul Doughty declared an interest in Notice of Motion 14 (FAIRNESS, NOT FAVOURS) with respect to his trade union membership.
Cllr Pat Glasman declared an interest.
Cllr ??? declared an interest in Notice of Motion 14 (FAIRNESS, NOT FAVOURS) because of his/her membership of UNISON.
Cllr Bernie Mooney declared an interest in Notice of Motion 14 (FAIRNESS, NOT FAVOURS) because of her membership of UNITE.
Cllr John Salter, declared an interest/s because of ???
Cllr Lesley Rennie, declared a personal interest in Notice of Motion 16 (CUTS TO LOCAL TRANSPORT PLAN) due to her membership of Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority.
Cllr Ian Lewis, declared an interest/s because of….
Cllr Sheila Clarke declared an interest/s because of…
Cllr ?? declared an interest in Notice of Motion 14 (FAIRNESS, NOT FAVOURS) because of their membership of UNISON.

There may have been other declarations of interest, but unfortunately the pen I was using was running out and from where I was sitting in the Council Chamber behind the Labour councillors also very difficult to hear those councillors who were far away.

Council (Wirral Council) 12/12/2011 Part 4 Agenda Item 3 (Petitions), Agenda Item 4 (Minutes), Agenda Item 5 (Leader’s Announcements)

Corporate Governance Committee 16/11/2011 (Wirral Council) Part 3 Work Program, Progress and Associated Issues

Cllr Steve Foulkes said that the terms of reference for [this] committee were clear and he would like to “make progress” and move onto item 3.

Jim Wilkie, Chief Executive referred to the ten key lines of enquiry (KLOE) as well as further discussion on the involvement of councillors. He said the report sets out who the lead officers are. He said he would pause to check the names of the officers were in line with the committee’s wishes.

Cllr Jeff Green said he was “surprised”. He referred to an email and said that the briefing looked like predetermination. He said the changes to the procurement rules were “not fantastic” and that he had had no time to read them. He continued by saying that Conservative Party councillors had spoken to him with suggestions and that he was not clear about the role of Lead Members. Cllr Green went into detail explaining his views on what Lead Members should be. He also said that the briefing was “not well handled”.

Cllr Steve Foulkes said that this had stemmed from a criticism that councillor involvement had not been enough, so key members had been established at the briefing. He said these lead members would be the conduit or champion and that it was the job of these to reflect views back. He explained that it wouldn’t be anything more than that. On accountability, he said councillors say it’s officer’s job, “just letting officers do it”, however he wanted to “get councillors involved at every level”. He appealed to councillors and referred to a letter from Cllr Phil Gilchrist about scrutiny.

Council Excellence Overview and Scrutiny Committee (Wirral Council) 17th November 2011 Early Voluntary Retirement/Voluntary Severance and Organisational Change Part 3

Chris Hyams continued by saying that the restructures had gone to the Employment & Appointments Committee and in the Finance department there had been a number of new posts since the Early Voluntary Redundancy program started.

She referred councillors to paragraph 7.1 as there was an error in the number given for new posts. Chris Hyams said the report states 100, but it should be 104 due to the 4 posts in the Law, Human Resources and Asset Management department.

Another error was also highlighted by Chris Hyams as a 3 should read 7. She did point out that some new posts are not related to Early Voluntary Redundancy/Voluntary Severance and out of the 104 new posts, 81 were related to the Early Voluntary Redundancy/Voluntary Severance program.

Chris Hyams said that the posts had been advertised internally, with “strict vacancy controls”. Once they had tried internal recruitment, then they would go externally. The Finance Department had a mix of internal and external advertising as there were risks in failure to appointing to positions such as service provision being put at risk. There was a process of remodelling which explains why posts had been vacated, but then filled.

Cllr Phil Gilchrist asked about Metro, referred to in 6.2 (paragraph 2) and a meeting in September. He said he’d also like a response to further questions, an update over the deleted posts and why some people had left when they oughtn’t to while their job was still there?

Chris Hyams said yes the post was required, but they were let go at their request. Metro provided a service to schools and worked differently. There had been a review of the service and requirements which had led to employees being replaced and less temporary staff.