Mayor of Wirral Cllr Mitchell “I’m like a good quality pair of curtains, I like to pull myself together very quickly”
Mayor of Wirral Cllr Mitchell “I’m like a good quality pair of curtains, I like to pull myself together very quickly”
Left to right newly elected Mayor of Wirral Councillor Steve Foulkes, former Mayor of Wirral Councillor Dave Mitchell
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.
If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.
There were plenty of interesting things said at the Annual Meeting of Wirral Council held at the Floral Pavilion. The Wirral Globe article and Liverpool Echo both concentrate on the voting by councillors on Councillor Steve Foulkes’ nomination for Mayor by the Cabinet.
Below is a transcript starting at the start of the meeting.
CIVIC MAYOR’S ATTENDANT
High Sheriff, ladies and gentlemen, will you please be upstanding for the Mayor of Wirral Councillor Dave Mitchell?
MAYOR OF WIRRAL COUNCILLOR DAVE MITCHELL
Please be seated, thank you.
As part of the agenda for tonight’s meeting, are there any declarations of interest?
Are there any apologies for absence?
COUNCILLOR BILL DAVIES
Yes, Mr Mayor. Two apologies for absence, Councillor ??? and Councillor ??? ???.
MAYOR OF WIRRAL COUNCILLOR DAVE MITCHELL
Thank you for that. The first business is the election of the Mayor. I’ve preempted myself, I’m awfully sorry. This is, it’s a year and a little bit since I’ve started my Mayoralty and we’ve changed the constitution, literally thinking thirty years being a councillor I’ll be able to do this, it’s going to be easy but well the Council has decided to change the way we organise and do things. So, I’ll move on. Move on again. It is. Thank you.
I will now ask the assembled Members and visitors to join me in standing and holding a minutes silence in memory of late Alderman Councillor Kate Wood. I’d like everybody to stand.
Thank you very much indeed, please be seated. New business (laughs) I got one bit right anyway. Yes, good evening ladies and gentlemen, elected Members, new Members. We’ll be doing that part in the Council in the second part which is next week.
In my final address as the Mayor, I would like to say good evening to everyone of course and then start off by saying I’m like a good quality pair of curtains, I like to pull myself together very quickly. You will notice, those Members that were here and those visitors that were here last year I became very emotional in my acceptance speech as Mayor. I lost the plot a few times during that evening and I’ve continued on the same vein this evening.
Hopefully from now on it’ll all be downhill but what I would like to say is it’s been an absolute honour to represent the Wirral for this last year. Sue and I (the Mayoress) have really, really fully enjoyed every aspect of it and so much so that we’ve actually attended approximately over five hundred and forty-one engagements as Mayor and Mayoress and we were delighted to see the varied aspects that we have on the Wirral.
It was amazing to see so many wonderful people doing so many wonderful things and that is people working in the communities, charities and we were really heartened by the wealth and support given by so many people to our communities and charities. The skills and the nature of such diversity acquired in all aspects of life, they really came to the fore. I am really proud, Sue and I, we’ve said this for a few times throughout the year about how proud we are to be the [Mayor and] Mayoress of Wirral. The people that we meet on the peninsula are just absolutely fantastic.
We should and I’m sure you will agree with us be proud of the amazing talents that we have here on the Wirral. These include all sorts of things including sports, art, acting, music and can we also thank the parents and guardians of lots of our young people and students in the Wirral? Sue and I had the great opportunity to invite many young groups of people into the Council to give them an insight what we actually do and what we are and I was delighted to bring some of the young people into the Town Hall and see what we’re all about. A big thank you to parents and guardians and helpers in bringing those children into the Town Hall.
I’d also like to thank the support we’ve received from so many members of the council staff and elected Members in our year. They really have shown their loyalty to the Mayoralty in helping at many of the events that have taken place in front and behind the scenes. Their hard works given that’s been so much appreciated by Sue and I. Our charities would never have had the possibility to receive so much money without the dedication and work that was done by so many.
I’d like to thank people but in no particular order, everybody deserves the highest honour that I can possibly thank them for, they really do work very well for us. I will start with our secretary Sue Carroll. Thank you to Sue and Sonja for all their hard work. Also to Barbara Margaret, and Margaret, a special thanks to Carol Jackson who unfortunately can’t be here this evening. She absolutely works her socks off for the Mayoralty, I’m really, really impressed by the amount of work that she does.
We’ve also been greatly helped, especially with our charities by all those people and as I said members of the group. I’ve got to say George Davies thanks very much, George who we all mentioned has been absolutely wonderful in helping the Mayoralty in many ways this year. A personal thanks from Sue and I to you. Thank you very much George.
I’d also like to thank Beth Glover who’s been my chaplain this year and this is where I pause because the one thing I would like to do is to thank our cadet of the year and who started as Sergeant Charlotte Steel. I’m pleased to say is now the rank of what?
CADET OF THE YEAR
Flight Sergeant.
MAYOR OF WIRRAL COUNCILLOR DAVE MITCHELL
Yes, absolutely. She’s now Flight Sergeant Steel. Sue and I were really impressed by the courtesy you gave us and the hard work that you put in supporting us through our year. So can I ask you to come up and receive an award for it?
Thank you very much. I think she’s going to take a picture of us both.
Mayor of Wirral Cllr Dave Mitchell awards the Cadet of the Year Award (2014)
Excellent, thank you very much, if you could go and sit down. Thank you.
Sue and I started our mayoralty on a really top-notch event. We were very fortunate to start our mayoralty the year, the weekend of the commemoration of the Battle of the Atlantic. It was an absolutely wonderful occasion, a beautiful weekend. I’m very proud to say that the sponsor of that weekend was one of our major companies Cammell Lairds and a great big thank you to them. It really was a wonderful event. I can’t go on and say how many things that we’ve done, I’ve already said we’ve done over five hundred. It’s been absolutely wonderful.
Of those five hundred, I can say I only asked for three. That was to visit my old school and a friend of mine and to visit two of our charities that we’ve supported this year. The rest, the general public and the good people of the Wirral support the mayoralty and they asked the Mayor to be over from the Mayor’s department and I’m really supportive and I’m thankful to those people. I can’t leave out Nick. Nick, Carl and Paul who’ve been the Mayor’s attendants throughout that year. They’ve done an absolutely wonderful job in supporting us.
I know Nick and Paul’s been here for a while, it’s a temporary part and Carl’s just come in and done it for a short while. Nick I would like to thank you for all the great work that you’ve done for Sue and I in supporting us throughout this year. We’ve been to many, many occasions, many events and like everybody when you come into a role, you just don’t know what it’s about and you need a little bit of guidance and help and Nick has been the stalwart in that in helping us throughout our year making sure we address the right people (I get that wrong sometimes) in the right manner. Dame Morgan will not forget me for calling her the Lord High Sheriff but there we are.
Yes, Nick’s guidance it goes beyond just the normal thing of taking us to events and getting us there at the right time, it’s the ability to move us in the right direction, to talk to the people that need to be spoken to and it’s also the guidance in taking us away from the people that actually you don’t need to talk to and finally Steve and Les you’ll find that out when your year comes. There are some very lovely people on the Wirral peninsula who once they get the ear of the Mayor will not stop talking so that’s beneficial in both ways.
So Sue and I would like to thank you Nick, you really are the stalwart in what you’ve done for us. So much so in the conversation with the Lord Lieutenant Dame Lorna Muirhead only a few weeks back she remarked on, “How would you manage without him?” and that’s it. “I’m sure you’ll find somebody to replace him but for the time being there’s no one as good as you.” So Nick thank you very much.
I’d also like as I said last but not least as I mention in my column every week in the newspaper, I always say about the people that we meet, the wonderful things that we’ve done but the one thing that’s really stood out for Sue and I this year is the amount of work that’s done by so many young people on the Wirral and the press is not very good. There are all sorts of news story, it never gives a good news story and we’ve been absolutely astounded in the main by the amount of work that’s been done by the young people on this peninsula.
Thousands and thousands of pounds have been raised by different groups each year and without any need for publicity in any way. They just get on and do the job. We were really amazed and we are absolutely delighted and we believe the peninsula is in safe hands with all those wonderful young people that we’ve got on our peninsula.
I’ve mentioned the mayoralty and the one thing that it is, is once you get into the role of being the Mayor, you realise how important it is to our communities and our communities really do love the Mayor. I’m repeating myself and I know I’ve already said it, five hundred plus engagements where our communities want the Mayoralty to be involved. I hope it is not diminished in any way in future years.
I would like to say in passing that I wish my predecessor, oh no the incoming Mayor and Mayoress. My predecessor Gerry I’m delighted to see you here. At the end of your Mayoral year you weren’t too well health wise but I’m delighted to see how well you are at the moment, I’m really delighted to see you here, but no the incoming Mayor and Mayoress Steve and Elaine I wish you all the joy and success. I know you will enjoy it as much as Sue and I have done. Ladies and gentlemen thank you very much.
Now I’ll turn the page and actually get on to it. The first business is the election of the Civic Mayor. May I have the nominations for the office of Civic Mayor for the Metropolitan Borough of Wirral?
Public meetings for Wirral Council, Merseytravel and a HoC select committee on how much Chief Officers are paid
Public meetings for Wirral Council, Merseytravel and a HoC select committee on how much Chief Officers are paid
Below is a list of upcoming public meetings & other matters involving local government happening this week. Most are local, but the House of Common’s Communities and Local Government Select Committee on Chief Officer’s pay in local government should be available to watch live on Parliament’s website.
=======================================================================================================
Date:Monday 2nd June 2014
Time: 7.00pm
Public Body/Committee: Wirral Council
Venue: Floral Pavilion, Marine Promenade, New Brighton, Wirral, Merseyside, CH45 2JS
Type of meeting (Annual Meeting of the Council Part 1) Agenda
1. Declarations of Interest
2. Civic Mayor’s Announcements
3. Election of Civic Mayor 2014/15 (the Cabinet’s recommendation is Cllr Steve Foulkes)
4. Appoint a Deputy Civic Mayor 2014/15 (the Cabinet’s recommendation is Cllr Les Rowlands)
5. Adjournment to 6.15pm on Monday 9th June 2014
Date: Wednesday 4th June 2014
Time: 2.00pm
Public Body/Committee: Merseytravel Committee of Liverpool City Region Combined Authority
Venue: Authority Chamber, Merseytravel Offices, No 1. Mann Island, Liverpool, L3 1BP Agenda & reports
1. Apologies for Absence
2. Declarations of Interest
3. Minutes of the last meeting
4. High Speed 2 Action Plan June 2014 Update
5. Rail Devolution Update
6. Liverpool City Region: Long Term Rail Strategy
Date: Wednesday 4th June 2014
Time: 4:15pm
Public Body/Committee: Communities and Local Government Select Committee/House of Commons
Venue: The Thatcher Room, Portcullis House
Subject: Local Government Chief Officers’ remuneration
Witnesses: Graham Farrant, Chief Executive of Thurrock Council and London Borough of Barking & Dagenham and Maggie Rae, Corporate Director, Wiltshire Council; Mike Cooke, Chief Executive, London Borough of Camden, Councillor Sarah Hayward, Leader, London Borough of Camden, Paul Martin, Chief Executive, London Borough of Wandsworth and Councillor Ravi Govindia, Leader, London Borough of Wandsworth; Martin Tucker, Joint Managing Partner, Gatenby Sanderson and Peter Smith, Director, Hay Group
Date: Thursday 5th June 2014
Time: 10am
Venue: Birkenhead County Court, 76 Hamilton St, Birkenhead CH41 5EN
Irving -v- Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (Fast Track Trial)
Case number: 3YQ53624
*Note sometimes parties reach an out of court settlement before a trial in which case the trial doesn’t go ahead.
Date: Friday 6th June 2014
Time: 10.00am
Public Body/Committee: Licensing Act 2003 subcommittee of Wirral Council Agenda and reports
1. Appointment of Chair
2. Declarations of Interest
3. Application for a Premises Licence – Michaels of Moreton
4. Any other business
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
EXCLUSIVE: £1,800 “confidential” report clears Councillor Chris Blakeley after allegation of Cllr Foulkes that comments in Liverpool Echo were disrespectful
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.
If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.
Aretha Franklin – Respect [1967]
Cheshire West and Chester invoice for £1800 for investigating a standards complaint (you can click on the thumbnail for a more high resolution version)
EXCLUSIVE: £1,800 "confidential" report clears Councillor Chris Blakeley after allegation of Cllr Foulkes that comments in Liverpool Echo were disrespectful
It was a long time ago (19th March) when I first made a Freedom of Information Act request for the external investigation report (and the invoice) for the standards complaint that Councillor Steve Foulkes had made about Councillor Chris Blakeley. Not surprisingly with such a politically sensitive request, my Freedom of Information request was ignored, so on the 17th April I requested an internal review.
On the 24th April Wirral Council supplied the report itself, an appendix and the invoice from Chester West and Chester Council (for £1,800) for the investigation. On the same day this was released, solicitors that work in Wirral Council’s legal department and the officers that take the minutes at public meetings had a meeting in Committee Room 1, the subject of which was “values and culture change”. The fact that only two lines are redacted in the investigation report and Wirral Council hasn’t claimed an Freedom of Information Act exemption applies to the report and appendix A is one example of how the culture has changed at Wirral Council.
Due to the redaction of two lines on page nine, the seventeen page report is an image, therefore it can’t be spidered properly by search engines. Therefore I’ll be including the seventeen page report below this so it can be properly spidered. The report itself explains who Councillor Blakeley and Councillor Foulkes are so I won’t repeat what is in the report itself. It does however give an interesting insight into Wirral’s politics. Appendix A to the report can be downloaded from this blog. I’ve used a series of equals signs to show where individual pages start and end in the report.
Where legislation or individual cases are referred to I have tried to provide a link where possible in case you want to find out more about the legislation or judgements referred to. If you wish to read the original report as a pdf file you can. The two witness statements referred to in the report as Appendix B (the witness statement of Councillor Foulkes) and Appendix C (the witness statement of Councillor Blakeley) haven’t been supplied in response to the Freedom of Information Act request, but I’ve requested an internal review regarding these. In the report below I have not corrected any spelling mistakes or grammatical errors but left these as they appear in the report.
Report of an investigation by Trudie Odaka acting as investigating officer, appointed by Surjit Tour Monitoring Officer for Wirral Borough Council into allegations concerning Councillor Chris Blakeley.
This report is submitted to the Monitoring Officer for Wirral Borough Council, Surjit Tour.
FINAL REPORT
10th March 2014
1 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
======================================================================================================= CONTENTS
1. Executive Summary
2. The relevant legislation and protocols
3. The Evidence Gathered
4. Nomination for the Office of Mayor
5. The Allegations by the Complainant
6. Account by Councillor Foulkes
7. The Liverpool Echo article dated 13th May 2013
8. Response from Councillor Blakeley
9. Summary of the material facts
10.Case Law
11.Reasoning as to whether there has been a failure to comply with the Wirral Borough Council Code of Conduct
12.Finding
Appendix A – Schedule of Documents
Appendix B – Statement of Councillor Foulkes
Appendix C – Statement of Councillor Blakeley
2 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
=======================================================================================================
Executive Summary
1.1 I have been asked to conduct an investigation in respect of a complaint made by Councillor Steve Foulkes regarding the conduct of Councillor Chris Blakeley.
1.2 The Allegation
An allegation has been made by Councillor Steve Foulkes that Councillor Chris Blakeley failed to comply with the Members’ Code of Conduct for Wirral Borough Council by failing to treat him with respect. The allegation made by Councillor Foulkes is that in an article that appeared in the Liverpool Echo on Monday 13th May 2013, when referring to Councillor Foulkes’ nomination as for Deputy Mayor, Councillor Blakeley indicated that he would be voting against the nomination. The complaint contains the quote "I truly believe that for labour to nominate such a controversial character as Steve Foulkes threatens the position of mayor and the need for impartiality. Having sat on the benches opposite calling for his resignation because he was not fit to lead the council, how can I now say that he is fit to be the deputy mayor this year and the mayor next year? I would be a total hypocrite. I fully respect the mayoralty; however I have no respect for Cllr Foulkes and that is why I will be voting against him".
1.3 I have investigated whether Councillor Chris Blakeley failed to comply with paragraphs 1.1of the Members’ Code of Conduct for Wirral Borough Council.
Investigation Outcome
1.4 I have investigated Councillor Blakeley’s conduct and in so doing I have considered the article published in the Liverpool Echo on 13th May 2013 which was appended to the complaint. I have taken into account the article as a whole, in order to set the context of any quotes or information contained within it. Whilst concentrating principally on this Liverpool Echo article; I have also considered other articles relating to Councillor Foulkes’ nomination for deputy mayor, articles that appeared in the local press and on the internet. This has enabled me to better understand the background to the complaint, the context of the statement made by Councillor Blakeley and this has allowed me to review the comments made by other members of Wirral Borough Council; members that are not the subject of this complaint but who nonetheless commented publically about the nomination of Councillor Foulkes for the position of Deputy Mayor.
3 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
=======================================================================================================
1.5 I have considered the quotes attributed to the subject member Councillor Blakeley and I have investigated – whether the quotes were made by him and if made; the context.
1.6 I have considered the comments contained within the complaint and I have interviewed both Councillor Foulkes and Councillor Blakeley to listen to their account of events. Through interviewing each member separately; I have paid particular attention to what each of them has said and taken into account how the comments were perceived by them including the intention of the subject member Councillor Blakeley. I have also taken into account the public forum in which the comments were made; being publication of the comments within a newspaper.
1.7 Whilst concentrating the investigation upon the Liverpool Echo article and the conduct of Councillor Blakeley; in reaching a conclusion, I have taken into account the political context at the time by reviewing the press and other public forums where the nomination was mentioned, although the information found is relevant for setting context (as it revealed that others made comments about the nomination) I have not repeated what I have found within this report as it does not relate to the exact detail of this complaint. Copies are contained in the list of documents at appendix A.
1.8 I have investigated whether or not the conduct complained of was directed at Councillor Foulkes as an individual or his personal characteristics.
1.9 I conclude that when quoted in the Liverpool Echo article on 13th May 2013, Councillor Blakeley was acting in his official capacity as a councillor of Wirral Borough Council.
1.10 I conclude that there has been no failure by Councillor Blakeley to comply with paragraph 1.1 of the Code of Conduct for Wirral Borough Council in that, the quotes in the Liverpool Echo article constituted the legitimate expression of Councillor Blakeley made in response to a nomination by the council’s cabinet for the position of deputy mayor; the quotes related to a matter within his legitimate concern as a councillor namely the proposed next incumbent for the position of deputy mayor. In making the statements Councillor Blakeley appears to have been seeking to explain the reason why he would be voting against the nomination of Councillor Foulkes for deputy mayor; against the Wirral Council’s established tradition of members not challenging nominations made for the positions of mayor and deputy mayor. Councillor Blakeley is quoted as saying "Having sat on the benches opposite calling for his resignation because he was not fit to lead the council, how can I now say that he is fit to be the deputy mayor this year and the mayor next year?" Taking into account all the material facts, I do not find that the quotes
4 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
=======================================================================================================
were expressions of personal malice/anger or personal abuse/attack directed at the Complainant Councillor Foulkes.
1.11 In reaching my conclusion, I have taken into account the fact that Wirral Borough Council being a public body is under a duty to act in a way that is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights; this includes the consideration of possible breaches of the Member’s Code of Conduct. Article 10 is a European Convention Right that gives protection to the right of freedom of expression, a right which the courts have strongly upheld in cases involving the expression of political opinion, and as such, Councillor Blakeley’s comments to the Liverpool Echo are protected by Article 10.
1.12 I find that there has been no failure to comply with the Wirral Borough Council Code of Conduct.
2. The Relevant Legislation, Code and Protocols
The Code of Conduct
2.1 Wirral Borough Council adopted a Code of Conduct with effect from 1st July 2012 in accordance with the provisions of the Localism Act 2011.
2.2 The Wirral Borough Council Code of Conduct imposes a general obligation on all its councillors, that when acting in their role as a member of the council they will treat others with respect.
2.3 Relevant paragraphs of the Code of Conduct
Paragraph 1.1 of the Code states –
(1) when acting in your role as a Member of the Council;
1.1 DO treat others with respect
Relevant legislation
2.4 Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) provides:
Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic
5 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
=======================================================================================================
society, in the interests of…the protection of the reputation or rights of others."
2.5 Section 1 of the Human Rights Act 1998 identifies the rights under the European Convention of Human Rights which have effect for the purposes of that Act. They include Articles 6 and 10 of the ECHR.
Section 3(1) of the 1998 Act provides that so far as it is possible to do so subordinate legislation must be read and given effect in a way which is compatible with the convention rights.
(1) It is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a convention right. (In light of this provision I have taken into account the provisions of the ECHR when conducting this investigation).
(2) Disapplies the section in certain very limited circumstances concerning primary legislation. (This does not apply to the present case)
3. The Evidence Gathered
3.1 I have interviewed –
The Complainant Councillor Steve Foulkes
The subject member Councillor Chris Blakeley
3.2 I have spoken to Surjit Tour, the Council’s Monitoring Officer.
3.3 I have been given a copy of Wirral Council’s Members’ Code of Conduct.
3.4 I have been given a copy of Wirral Council’s Member’s Code of Conduct protocol.
3.5 I have obtained copies of other articles within the press relating to the nomination of Councillor Foulkes as deputy mayor found as a result of a speculative search of the internet. Copies of these are contained within Appendix A
4 Nomination for the Office of Mayor
4.1 Both Councillor Foulkes and Councillor Blakeley have explained the process for mayor making to me. My understanding is that in essence nominations to
6 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
=======================================================================================================
the offices of mayor and deputy mayor are made by the Wirral Council Cabinet. All three parties take a rotational turn to put forward their nomination for the role. In 2013 the rotational turn belonged to the Labour Group. I am told by Councillor Foulkes that the selection of the Labour Group nomination is based upon seniority due to length of service.
4.2 In accordance with custom and practice the role of deputy mayor is normally followed a year later by the holder’s nomination to the position of mayor. My understanding is that the naming of a mayor and deputy mayor is not normally controversial in Wirral.
4.3 The nomination to the mayoralty and deputy mayoralty is traditionally unopposed by any of the parties as the position is considered apolitical.
5 The Allegations by the Complainant
5.1 The complaint stems from a statement which appeared in the a Liverpool Echo article dated 13th May 2013 and a quote attributed to the subject member Councillor Blakeley, words taken from the article of :
"I truly believe that for labour to nominate such a controversial character as Steve Foulkes threatens the position of mayor and the need for impartiality."
"Having sat on the benches opposite calling for his resignation because he was not fit to to lead the council, how can I now say that he is fit to be the deputy mayor this year and the mayor next year? I would be a total hypocrite. I fully respect the mayoralty; however I have no respect for Cllr Foulkes and that is why I will be voting against him."
5.2 Within his complaint Councillor Foulkes explains "I have a proud record of public service over 22 years. During that time I have never been found guilty of being unfit to hold public office. By questioning by fitness to hold the offices of Council Leader, Deputy Mayor and Mayor, Cllr Blakeley is in clear breach of one of the key elements of the Members Protocol, i.e. ‘failing to treat people with respect."
6 Account by Councillor Foulkes
6.1 Councillor Foulkes is an elected Councillor of Wirral Borough Council and following his nomination to the office, he became the Deputy Mayor of Wirral Borough Council.
7 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
=======================================================================================================
6.2 Councillor Foulkes made the complaint on 17th May 2013 following the article that appeared in the Liverpool Echo on 13th May 2013.
6.3 Councillor Foulkes has complained about the comments attributed to Councillor Blakeley within the Liverpool Echo explaining that he took exception to the word ‘unfit’ saying "The use of the word ‘unfit’ implies things, gives connotations that there is criminality involved with your character or malpractice. For this to be true ‘he’ would need evidence. That is what is required to say a holder of a drinks licence or a taxi licence is unfit – you need to explain what makes a person ‘unfit’."
6.4 When interviewed Councillor Foulkes differentiated the comments made by Councillor Blakeley from the other comments contained within the article "The first comment that I found mildly offensive was the comment ‘divisive’ I did not take action about this." "… people are allowed poetic licence even though it was not a great comment; people say many things in political tit for tat. I did not take action over this."
6.5 Councillor Foulkes explained the effect of the quotes on:
him as an individual, "The statements made have had an effect on me as an individual. First it made life difficult for me" "People who read it associated it with criminality or malpractice. I was very concerned that this was what people were thinking of me." "I have to survive in the real world. I have a career. If people associate my name with being ‘unfit’ or ‘divisive’ it will discourage people from taking the role of politician if that sort of language continues"
him as a politician, "Understanding the local people, I knew the phase ‘unfit’ could be interpreted in a whole host of ways. It took me aback that Councillor Blakeley though he knew something that would show me as unfit. Leaders of Council’s are accountable. This is right and correct. This however was an attack on my character."
his family and friends "it has clearly created tension for my friends and family" "I received comments from friends and people that I met "what’s he got on you to call you ‘unfit’?" As I said, normally the use of the word ‘unfit is connected to criminality e.g. in the context of licensing. What have I done? I have never done
8 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
=======================================================================================================
anything. If Councillor Blakeley thought that I was unfit on those grounds then he should have made it clearer.”
6.6 Councillor Foulkes explained why he took exception to the quotes attributed to Councillor Blakeley "I would never say that I don’t have respect for someone. I feel that by saying this Councillor Blakeley has gone beyond the normal attacks that occur." "Where Councillor Blakeley says I was unfit it shows a lack of respect this is made worse when his comments are then emblazoned in the press."
6.7 Quoting directly from Councillor Foulkes’ statement he said "Lots of others called for my resignation, others spoke in support. It doesn’t mean that someone who has been the Leader cannot be Mayor. I have done the job as Leader to the best of my ability. I have made mistakes but I do not think that I have done anything to warrant me being called ‘unfit’. This is personalised attack on my character not based on anything I might have done or anything that he believes that I have done."
"At this point in time there is not a blemish on my character. I would say that as a politician I have made mistakes. I made decisions with the best interests of Wirral and the Council I never knowingly did anything that would breach decent behaviour or any Code of Conduct."
7 The Liverpool Echo Article dated 13th May 2013
7.1 The Article which is the subject of this complaint appeared in the Liverpool Echo on Monday 13th May 2013 under the title "Rivals in row over choice of Deputy Mayor" by Liam Murphy.
7.2 The article is introduced with the editorial "A long-standing tradition of not making mayoralty a political issue looks set to be shattered in Wirral tonight"
7.3 The editorial continues "Former council leader, Labour’s Steve Foulkes, is being put forward as deputy mayor; but a leading Tory has said he will vote against him Cllr Foulkes and other members of the Conservative party are expected to join him or abstain."
7.4 The article sets out the context of the mayor making process explaining "the three parties in Wirral council take turns nominating a councillor to the
9 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
======================================================================================================= mayoralty seen as a non-political role which raises thousands of pounds for chosen charities."
7.5 Within the article Tory Leader Councillor Jeff Green has a quote attributed to him, ‘he was surprised by the decision to nominate such a "divisive figure"’
7.6 The editorial commentary introduces Councillor Blakeley’s quote with "ahead of night’s meeting to nominate the new mayor and his deputy, Tory chief whip Cllr Chris Blakeley said he would be voting against Cllr Foulkes"
7.7 Councillor Blakeley is then quoted as having said "I truly believe that for labour to nominate such a controversial character as Steve Foulkes threatens the position of mayor and the need for impartiality."
"Having sat on the benches opposite calling for his resignation because he was not fit to lead the council, how can I now say that he is fit to be the deputy mayor this year and the mayor next year? I would be a total hypocrite. I fully respect the mayoralty; however I have no respect for Cllr Foulkes and that is why I will be voting against him."
7.8 The article ends with a commentary from the complainant Councillor Foulkes "I think the reality is that the conservatives are becoming increasingly desperate to gain some attention for themselves" . "If they have chosen to show what is considered bad manners, politicising the mayoralty, it says more about them than anyone else."
8 Response from Councillor Blakeley
8.1 During my interview with Councillor Blakeley he explained that he felt the complaint was a tit for tat complaint made by the complainant.
8.2 Councillor Blakeley was and is unhappy with the process followed in the handling of this complaint.
8.3 When interviewed Councillor Blakeley described the council as "factionalised politically".
8.4 In relation to the quotes attributed to him, Councillor Blakeley did not remember the exact words used however he did not dispute the words quoted "When I saw the article I was not shocked by what it said. But I
10 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
=======================================================================================================
can’t say if what they printed was correct because I can’t recall word for word what was actually said".
8.5 Councillor Blakeley explained "I am extremely proud that I voted against Councillor Foulkes as Deputy Mayor along with my colleagues who also voted against and those in the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Group who also did not support Cllr Foulkes nomination by abstaining."
8.6 When referring to the mayor making process Councillor Blakeley explained "The traditional view is that the Mayor Making is a non-political event. No vote is taken on either role and it is all done with niceties and everyone is pleasant".
8.7 With reference to the nomination of Councillor Foulkes for the position of deputy mayor Councillor Blakeley explained "The selection of Councillor Foulkes made it a political event. When Labour nominated Councillor Foulkes, the Labour Group knew what they were doing, sticking two fingers up to the Council and to the people of Wirral. As explained by Councillor Jeff Green’s comment "he was surprised by the decision to nominate such ‘a divisive figure’." If you knew and understood the history of politics in Wirral you would understand that".
8.8 In relation to the use of the wording ‘unfit’ Councillor Blakeley explained "Councillor Foulkes was voted out as Leader of the Council in 2011 because of a vote of no confidence. I voted against Councillor Foulkes when he was leader. I vote against him because we all believed he was no longer fit to lead this Council. We need a majority of Councillors to carry a vote of no confidence, clearly that majority was achieved. It wasn’t my words that he wasn’t ‘fit’ it was the Council motion".
8.9 Councillor Blakeley explained the context of his statements "Wirral Borough Council is a ‘bear put’ of a political arena. Since Councillor Davies took over as Leader of the Council there have been calls for him to resign. If the shoe was on the other foot; I am sure that he would be calling for the Conservative or Liberal Democrat Leader to resign. Calling on Leaders to resign is not unusual in Wirral, regardless of which political party it is, that is the confrontational nature of politics that exists in Wirral".
8.10 Councillor Blakeley went on to explain "Wirral Council is exceptionally political." "..I am sure that both he and I and others have said far
11 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
=======================================================================================================
worse in the Council Chamber than is printed on that newspaper page".
8.11 In conclusion Councillor Blakeley said "Looking at the seven principles in public life that are in the Schedule to the Members Code of Conduct, I have been honest in what I have said. I have been accountable about what I have said".
9 Summary of the material facts
9.1 The comments published in the Liverpool Echo on 13th May 2013 complained about are attributed to Councillor Blakeley.
9.2 The article and all the quotes contained within it including those attributed to the Councillor Blakeley "I fully respect the mayoralty; however I have no respect for Cllr Foulkes and that is why I will be voting against him." all relate to the nomination of Councillor Foulkes for deputy mayor.
9.3 It is clear that the comments are connected to the intended departure from a long established tradition of nominations relating to the mayoralty being apolitical "I think the reality is that the conservatives are becoming increasingly desperate to gain some attention for themselves". "If they have chosen to show what is considered bad manners, politicising the mayoralty, it says more about them than anyone else."
9.4 The nomination of councillor Foulkes for the position of deputy mayor led to comments being made publicly about the nomination from a number of Wirral Borough Councillors.
9.5 I note that in relation to the ‘unfit’ comment Councillor Foulkes explained to his employer "that is was just political stuff" I also note that Councillor Foulkes’ response to the comments contained within the article is also quoted (paragraph 7.8 above refers).
10 Case Law
In coming to a conclusion over whether or not there has been a breach of the Wirral Code of Conduct, I have taken into account case law concerning the freedom of expression, in particular political expression and the application of the article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Freedom of Expression) to complaints under the Code of Conduct. Including the most recent high court cases of R (Dennehy) v London Borough of Ealing [2013]
12 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
=======================================================================================================
"The recognition of the importance of expression in the political sphere and the limits of acceptable criticism are wider in the case of politicians acting in their public capacity than they are in the case of private individuals… This recognition involves both a higher level of protection ("enhanced protection") for statements in the political sphere and the expectation that if the subjects of such statements are politicians acting in their public capacity, they lay themselves open to close scrutiny of their words and deeds and are expected to possess a thicker skin and greater tolerance than ordinary members of the public … Although the protection of Article 10(2) extends to politicians, the Strasbourg Court has stated that where a politician seeks to rely on it, "the requirements have to be weighed in relation to the open discussion of political issues".
10.2 In Sanders v Steven Kingston Wilkie J considered the relationship between Article 10 and paragraph 2(b) of the then Code of Conduct. The provision equates to paragraphs 1.1 of the Wirral Council’s new Code with which this investigation is concerned. In paragraph 69 of his judgement, Wilkie J reviewed a number of authorities. In my view the paragraphs taken from the judgement are relevant to this investigation as they relate to the freedom of expression and political expression in particular.
10.3 In Lingens v Austria Wilkie J noted [at para.69] that the following was said:
"In this connection the court has to recall that freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and one of the basic conditions for its progress and for each individual’s self fulfilment. Subject to paragraph 2, it is applicable not only to "information or ideas" that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to
13 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
=======================================================================================================
those that offend shock or disturb. Such are the demands of pluralism, tolerance and broad mindedness without which there is no democratic society. More generally freedom of political debate is at the very core of the concept of a democratic society which prevails throughout the convention… In such cases the requirements of such protection have to be weighed in relation to the interests of open discussion of political issues."
10.4 From R v Central Independent Television plc (1994) Fam 192 Wilkie J set out the following passage from the speech of Lord Justice Hoffman:
"Publication may cause needless pain, distress and damage to individuals or harm to other aspects of the public interest. But a freedom which is restricted to what judges think to be responsible or in the public interest is no freedom. Freedom means the right to publish things which government and judges, however well motivated, think should not be published. It means the right to say things which "right thinking people" regard as dangerous or irresponsible. This freedom is subject only to clearly defined exceptions laid down by common law or statute. It cannot be too strongly emphasised that outside the established exceptions, there is no question of balancing freedom of speech against other interests. It is a trump card which always wins."
"Members of Councils are politicians and their actions as such are often political actions. An obvious example is when they are speaking in Council meetings where robust political debate may reflect lack of respect for political opponents or may result in views being expressed which many might regard as offensive. It cannot be the case, in my judgement, that the sole source of obligation in that context is the code of conduct unmediated by consideration of Article 10."
"The burden is on [the Adjudication Panel for England] to justify interference with freedom of speech. However offensive and undeserving of protection the appellant’s outburst may have appeared to some, it is important that any individual knows that he can say what he likes, provided it is not unlawful, unless there are clear and satisfactory reasons within the terms of Article 10(2) to render him liable to sanctions.”
14 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
=======================================================================================================
11 Reasoning as to whether there has been failure to comply with the Code of Conduct
11.1 Two matters fall for determination on the basis of the facts as found:
Whether when quoted in the Liverpool Echo on 13th May 2014, Councillor Blakeley was acting in his role as a member of the Council and
Whether Councillor Blakeley’s conduct was such that he failed to treat others with respect.
Failure to Treat Others with Respect
11.2 Failure to treat others with respect will occur when unfair, unreasonable or demeaning behaviour is directed by one person against another. The circumstances in which the behaviour occurred are relevant in assessing whether the behaviour is disrespectful. The circumstances include the place where the behaviour occurred, who observed the behaviour, the behaviour itself and its proportionality to the circumstances, the character and relationship of the people involved and the behaviour of anyone who prompted the alleged disrespect.
11.3 It is recognised that in politics rival groupings are common and, within this context it is expected that each will campaign for their ideas, and they may also seek to discredit the policies and actions of their opponents. It is very clear from case law that ideas and policies can be robustly criticised, but individuals should not be subject to unreasonable or excessive personal attack, it is also clear from case law that the right to freedom of expression is a crucially important right that can only be interfered with where there are convincing and compelling reasons within article 10(2) to justify that interference "It cannot be too strongly emphasised that outside the established exceptions, there is no question of balancing freedom of speech against other interests. It is a trump card which always wins" (paragraph 10.4 above refers).
11.4 Councillor Blakeley does not deny making the quotes contained in the Liverpool Echo article.
11.5 There is agreement by the complainant and the subject member that the quotes contained within the article were as a direct response to the nomination of Councillor Foulkes for the position of deputy mayor.
11.6 I find that the quotes in the article related to a matter within Councillor Blakeley’s legitimate concern as a councillor. I consider that the right of Councillor Blakeley as a democratically elected member of a public authority to free speech is engaged. I find that in making the statements he was
15 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
=======================================================================================================
seeking to explain why he would be voting against the nomination of Councillor Foulkes as deputy mayor "I truly believe that for labour to nominate such a controversial character as Steve Foulkes threatens the position of mayor and the need for impartiality." This appears to have been said by way of explanation against the accepted Wirral tradition that when such nominations are made by a party for the position of deputy mayor, the nominations are accepted without opposition from any of the other parties’ members "I fully respect the mayoralty; however I have no respect for Cllr Foulkes and that is why I will be voting against him.".
11.7 Personal Attack or Malice
In relation to the article, I have also considered whether or not there was a personal attack against Councillor Foulkes contained within the quotes made. I have concentrated in particular on the use of the wording ‘unfit’ and taking into account Councillor Foulkes’ views when he said "I believe Councillor Blakeley used the words ‘unfit’ for effect. Perhaps politicians think in a different way." I have also taken into account Councillor Foulkes’ own account of the use of the wording "’unfit’ in his explanation to his employer "I explained to them that it was just political stuff.
11.8 I have taken into account that the complainant is directly referred to and is singled out as the subject of the article however I have balanced this with the fact that the article and the comments contained within it relate to a nomination to the very public position of deputy mayor. I have taken the view that in being nominated and agreeing to be put out for nomination the complainant accepted that fellow elected members may or may not approve of the nomination and as a result may voice their support or opposition to the proposed nomination publically using the various media forums available to them. This by the nature of the political arena in which it is set was a direct possibility despite the fact that within Wirral, tradition tended to show that nominations for mayoralty positions are dealt with unopposed.
11.9 The quotes appear to be an explanation of the voting direction Councillor Blakeley intended to take. I am not satisfied that the quotes in the Liverpool Echo amount to any more than political commentary following a group nomination to the position of deputy mayor.
11.10 I do not find that the quotes were expressions of personal malice /anger, or personal abuse directed at the complainant Councillor Foulkes.
16 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
=======================================================================================================
11.11 On the basis that the quotes in the article constituted the legitimate expression of a political view by Councillor Blakeley which is afforded the highest level of protection under article 10 and the fact that the quotes related to a matter within his legitimate concern as a councillor; I conclude that there has been no failure by Councillor Blakeley to comply with paragraph 1.1 of the Code of Conduct for Wirral Borough Council.
12 Finding
Official Capacity
12.1 I find that Councillor Blakeley was acting in his official capacity when quoted in the Liverpool Echo on 13th May 2013, he spoke in his capacity as a councillor about the nomination for the office of deputy mayor and he spoke of his intention to vote at the mayor making council meeting.
Failure to Treat Others with Respect
12.2 I conclude that there has been no failure by Councillor Foulkes to comply with paragraph 1.1 of the Code of Conduct for Wirral Borough Council in that the quotes in the Liverpool Echo article constituted the legitimate expression of Councillor Blakeley; quotes relating to a matter within his legitimate concern as a councillor. I do not find that the quotes were expressions of personal malice/anger or personal abuse directed at the Complainant.
Code of Conduct
12.3 My finding is that there has been no failure to comply with the Code of Conduct of Wirral Borough Council.
Trudie Odaka
Investigator
10th March 2014
17 | Not for distribution. This report is confidential and must not be disclosed
=======================================================================================================
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
Planning Committee approves planning application for houses in Irby by seven votes to five
Planning Committee approves planning application for houses in Irby by seven votes to five
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.
If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.
Video of Wirral Council’s Planning Committee meeting of the 16th April 2014
The Planning Committee meeting started as usual with her usual spiel about who were sitting around the tables (which considering that everyone had name plates seems a little unnecessary). She said that to her left was the solicitor (Rosemary Lyons) to “make sure everything is done legally” and that the officers (of which there were four) to her left where there to “guide us through our decisions and make sure everything is done appropriately with planning legislation”.
If the Chair thinks the role of the officers to her left is to make sure that decisions about planning applications are made according to planning legislation, then what’s the purpose of having a solicitor too? When every other committee at Wirral Council manages to cope with one legal adviser why does the Planning Committee need five to advise it on such matters?
She then went on to recap the rules on speaking for petitioners and applicants. The only change to usual is that she said, “A ward councillor can come forward and talk upon any item in their ward and they can speak for longer than five minutes but everybody only gets a chance to address the Planning Committee once.”
Until recently ward councillors were under the impression they could address the Planning Committee at any time when a planning application concerning their ward was being discussed. The Code of conduct for Planning Committee meetings and Wirral Council’s constitution have nothing in them about ward councillors talking at Planning Committee meetings. Certainly in the recent past at least one councillor thought they could speak at any time but the Chair told them they couldn’t. The only reference in the constitution to councillors and Planning Committees is that ward councillors can decide that they want a planning application to be decided by the Planning Committee rather than by officers.
The constitution states that any councillor can decide that a planning application is decided by the Planning Committee. The fact this isn’t limited to councillors in the ward the planning application relates to has been misused in the past. With fictional names I’ll give an example.
Mrs Smith is standing as the Labour candidate in Puddleton (a made up ward that doesn’t exist on the Wirral). Unfortunately for Mrs Smith Puddleton has three councillors from a different political party who know she is the Labour candidate in Puddleton. Mrs Smith spots a planning application that she thinks she can get a large petition of residents against it and gain votes of local residents affected by it. As the lead petitioner she will also get to speak against it for five minutes, if a councillor takes it out of officer’s hands and makes sure it is decided by the Planning Committee.
Unfortunately for Mrs Smith it’s over a minor matter and wouldn’t usually be decided by the Planning Committee. The planning officer wants to approve the planning application. Mrs Smith asks a Labour councillor (who doesn’t represent Puddleton) to make sure that it will be decided by the Planning Committee, therefore ensuring it is decided nearer the election and that there will be more media coverage of Mrs Smith’s campaign. The Labour councillor makes sure that this happens, thus making the residents think that Mrs Smith is influential and when the application is turned down a better choice than the existing councillor (also a candidate) which didn’t want it to be decided by the Planning Committee as he/she knew it was part of a party political ploy by Mrs. Smith to gain votes from local residents.
Councillor Wendy Clements said that had Tony Cox not resigned as a councillor that he would’ve attended the Planning Committee meeting and detailed the concerns of local residents. She talked about trees, British standards and asked planning officers about a tree survey.
Matthew Davies replied that there had been a tree survey with the application and it had also been assessed by the Council’s arboricultural officer. He pointed out that some of the trees mentioned by Cllr Wendy Clements were not part of the planning application and that they couldn’t impose conditions on trees outside of the boundary. He said that if trees were damaged outside of the boundary it was a civil matter.
Councillor Wendy Clements said that that was difficult to understand as the existing standard referred to trees on or adjacent to the site. She referred to appearance and amenity issues but accepted that whether it was unacceptable harm was a matter of opinion, but she felt that the way officers had written the report it implied that some harm would result. Cllr Clements passed around photos to show the effect on light on neighbouring properties. She referred to policy HS4 and how the scale of what was proposed fitted into the surrounding area.
Councillor Elderton asked to see the plan, but he pointed out that as it was an outline planning application that the position of the houses was only indicative at this stage. He thought different positions of the houses would be more suitable but stated that it couldn’t be turned down based on the indicative positions as they were only indicative. He asked officers for advice as he was not happy with the proposed development.
Matthew Davies said that as it was an outline planning application that all matters would be reserved and that the plan was only for indicative purposes. He said that if the application was approved then Wirral Council would have significant control over the scale, site, appearance and where the properties were sited.
Councillor Wendy Clements moved refusal on the basis that it would result in a development that was cramped, overdeveloped and that the two dwelling would cause a detrimental change to the area contrary to the guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework and policy HS4 of the Unitary Development Plan.
Councillor Steve Foulkes said that he felt three was feasible on the plot, he asked what the average plot size was for surrounding properties? Matthew Davies replied that the officers felt it was possible to have three dwellings on the plot. Although plot sizes were similar on one site of the application site, they were different to what was proposed on another. Therefore in his opinion it was up to councillors to make a judgement as to whether three could be accommodated taking into account the detail that would be decided at the reserved matters stage.
Councillor Geoffrey Watt seconded Councillor Wendy Clements motion for refusal.
For refusal: Councillor Wendy Clements (proposer), Councillor Geoffrey Watt (seconder), Councillor Simon Mountney, Councillor Eddie Boult, Councillor David Elderton and Councillor Philip Brightmore (6)
Against refusal: Councillor Stuart Kelly, Councillor Bernie Mooney, Councillor Denise Realey, Councillor Steve Foulkes, Councillor Joe Walsh, Councillor Irene Williams (6)
The motion for refusal was 6 votes to 6. The Chair didn’t say how she used her casting vote. However she deemed the motion for refusal to be lost.
There was then a vote on the officer’s recommendation for approval. This was proposed by Cllr Denise Realey and seconded by Councillor Steve Foulkes.
For approval: Councillor Stuart Kelly, Councillor Bernie Mooney, Councillor Denise Realey, Councillor Steve Foulkes, Councillor Joe Walsh, Councillor Irene Williams and Councillor Philip Brightmore (7)
Against approval: Councillor Wendy Clements (proposer), Councillor Geoffrey Watt (seconder), Councillor Simon Mountney, Councillor Eddie Boult and Councillor David Elderton (5)
The motion for approval was won by 7 votes to 5 so the application was approved.
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
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.
If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.
For Whom the Tunnel Tolls
Mersey Tunnel tolls have been decided annually by Merseytravel (Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority), however the Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority ceased to exist at the start of this month and was replaced by the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (also known by its legal name which is the Halton, Knowsley, Liverpool, St Helens, Sefton and Wirral Combined Authority). The existing Merseytravel representatives from Wirral Council (along with representatives from the other Merseyside Councils) sit on the Merseytravel Committee of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority with the addition of two representatives from Halton.
Wirral Council’s Regeneration and Environment Policy and Performance Committee discussed a motion about the Mersey Tunnel tolls, which had been referred to it by the Mayor at the Wirral Council meeting of the 10th March 2014. Prior to recent changes to Wirral Council’s constitution such policy motions were discussed and voted on by a meeting of all of Wirral’s councillors (of which there are sixty-six). The Regeneration and Environment Committee has only fifteen Wirral Council councillors on it.
The motion about the Mersey Tunnel tolls was proposed by Councillor Les Rowlands (a Conservative councillor for Heswall ward whose term of office ends this year and will probably be standing soon for reelection). Councillor Les Rowlands is also one of four Wirral Council representatives on Merseytravel (the others representing Wirral Council are Councillor Steve Foulkes, Councillor Ron Abbey and Councillor John Salter). The motion was seconded by Councillor Andrew Hodson (who is also a Conservative councillor in Heswall ward) and a copy is below.
(1) Council regrets the recent tunnel toll increases for all toll classes forced through by the Labour-led Integrated Transport Authority.
(2) Council notes that since the introduction of the 2004 Mersey Tunnels Act, sponsored by former Labour MP Claire Curtis-Thomas and supported by Labour Members throughout its passage through Parliament, Merseytravel has accrued over £40 million in surpluses which have been used on their pet transport schemes and vanity projects.
(3) Council also notes that Merseytravel have squandered large amounts of money as can be evidenced by the £70 million failed tram scheme colloquially known as ‘Line 1 to Nowhere’ and its extravagance in occupying a half empty building at No 1 Mann Island.
Therefore Council believes
(a) The consistent increases year on year is damaging Wirral’s economy putting further pressure on motorists and businesses.
(b) Council recognises such increases place a greater strain on tunnel users who have to travel to and from work placing an unfair tax burden on Wirral residents.
(c) Council recognises discount toll schemes/free crossings for local residents already exist in other parts of the country and while recognising that fast tag users benefit from a discount, Council believes that regular users should be rewarded with a local discount scheme over and above that afforded by use of the fast tag such as that announced for the Mersey Gateway Bridge of a “local user discount scheme” with up to 300 free journeys per year.
Council therefore requests the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive to write to the Chief Executive/Director General of Merseytravel requesting an urgent meeting to discuss: if and how the Mersey Tunnels can be reinstated back into the national road network and Tunnel Tolls abolished.
If that is not possible how a ‘local user discount scheme’ over and above that which already exists through the Fast Tag can be implemented to ease the burden on the hard pressed motorists of Wirral.
Video of the first twenty-five minutes of the meeting can be watched above.
The meeting started with Councillor Steve Foulkes asking for legal advice from the “Borough Solicitor” (who is Surjit Tour who wasn’t present but Colin Hughes was present to offer legal advice to committee members) on whether he should declare just a personal interest in the Mersey Tunnel tolls agenda item as a member of the Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority*.
Councillor Steve Foulkes also pointed out that Councillor Les Rowlands was also a member of Merseytravel and that he “did state he [Councillor Les Rowlands] could take part in the debate”** and asked for clarification over the nature of the interest.
* The Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority had in fact ceased to exist as it had been abolished eight days previously by s.6 of The Halton, Knowsley, Liverpool, St Helens, Sefton and Wirral Combined Authority Order 2014. What Councillor Steve Foulkes probably meant instead was an interest arising as he is a member of the Merseytravel Committee of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority.
** Whether Councillor Les Rowlands took part isn’t a decision for Councillor Steve Foulkes to make. Councillor Les Rowlands isn’t part of the Regeneration and Environment Policy and Performance Committee but as the proposer of the motion Standing Order 7(6) applies which states “A member of the Council who has moved a motion which has been referred to any committee shall be given notice of the meeting at which it is to be considered. The member shall have the right to attend the meeting and an opportunity of explaining the motion.”
Colin Hughes who forgot to turn on his microphone when replying said, “Yes, I’d declare that if I was you I’d do that.” However Colin Hughes didn’t state whether it was a personal or prejudicial interest, just that Councillor Foulkes had to declare an interest.
The Chair asked if anyone was subject to a party whip (no one replied that they were). The Chair then said the next item was “minutes of the last meeting which was held on the 10th March”.*
The Chair said they would change the order slightly and have the second notice of motion (on the Mersey Tunnel Tolls) first. He then said (in relation to Cllr Les Rowlands), “I think I’m right, he was here but he’s not here now but Councillor Les Rowlands doesn’t wish to speak to that.” Other councillors drew Cllr Alan Brighouse’s attention to the fact that Councillor Les Rowlands was in fact sitting on the front row with cries of “He’s here” to which Councillor Alan Brighouse replied, “He’s here is he? I can’t see him!”.
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
