MTUA accuse politicians of ‘U-turn’ on Mersey Tunnel tolls promises
MTUA accuse politicians of ‘U-turn’ on Mersey Tunnel tolls promises
For those not from Merseyside and reading this in far-flung lands, I had better first explain what the Mersey Tunnels are. Anyone local to Merseyside reading this can skip the next paragraph.
Liverpool is separated from the peninsula of the Wirral by the River Mersey and beneath the River Mersey are two road tunnels and a railway tunnel (the railway tunnel that opened in 1886 is not the focus of this article). One road tunnel connects Liverpool to the town of Birkenhead (called the Queensway Tunnel) and the other with the town of Wallasey (called the Kingsway Tunnel). The Birkenhead Tunnel opened in 1934 and the Wallasey Tunnel in 1971. Both road tunnels are tolled with the current cash toll for cars being £1.70 (different rates apply for those who pay by Fast Tag or different sizes of vehicles).
The issue of the tunnel tolls has been a long running political issue locally and each year the tunnel tolls are set by local politicians. For years the local transport body called Merseytravel (which was then eighteen councillors from the various parts of Merseyside) decided on the Mersey Tunnel tolls. As the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (LCRCA) was created in April 2014, it meant that this year the tolls decision was made by the LCRCA (on a recommendation from the Merseytravel Committee).
The LCRCA comprises the elected leaders of each Council on Merseyside, the elected Mayor of Liverpool, the Chair of the Local Enterprise Partnership and the Leader of Halton. The Chair of the Local Enterprise Partnership (as detailed in the LCRCA’s constitution) doesn’t have a vote when the Mersey Tunnel tolls are set and the Leader of Halton abstained in the vote this year because Halton’s not part of Merseyside.
Earlier this year, in the lead up to the 2015 General Election (to elect MPs) and 2015 local elections (to elect local councillors) politicians from both the Labour and Conservative parties made soothing noises to the public about the issue of tunnel tolls.
Once the running costs of the tunnels and debt repayments are paid out of the money received through tolls, there is now a surplus of around £16 million. The generally accepted position is that legislation, in this case the Mersey Tunnels Act 2004 means that any surplus tolls are only spent on transport projects that are in the Local Transport Plan.
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.
Liverpool City Region Combined Authority meeting of the 13th February 2015 which should start at agenda item 7 (2015/16 Mersey Tunnel Tolls which starts at 1h 3m 4s)
However returning to February 2015 (see video of that meeting above which should start at the right point) politicians on the LCRCA agreed to a freeze in toll charges.
Mayor of Liverpool Joe Anderson speaking on a motion on the Mersey Tunnels at a meeting of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority 13th February 2015
The Mayor of Liverpool Joe Anderson, seconded by the Chair of the LCRCA Cllr Phil Davies moved the following motion (agreed at February’s meeting of the LCRCA as you can read in the minutes):
The Combined Authority (CA) calls on:
The Chair of the CA to set up a task group to consider options open to the CA to reduce costs of tunnel tolls and its impact on infrastructure and transportation;
The Head of Paid Service of the CA to produce a report for discussion to inform the setting of tunnel tolls for 2016/17;
The CA to press for a review of the Mersey Tunnel Act in any on-going devolution negotiations.
John McGoldrick, secretary for the Mersey Tunnel Users Association (MTUA) stated,
"Assuming that the politicians meant what they said earlier this year, then it looks as if they have done a u-turn and the users of the Tunnels are to be sold down the river. Instead of stopping the profit taking and reducing tolls, it seems that the City Region’s aim is to use the tolls profits on economic development or infrastructure "across the city region". The people who voted in the May elections have been duped over what Labour’s tolls policy was.
The Conservative party also made promises about reducing or abolishing tolls. It is not yet clear what the Government is going to do and whether they will honour what the Chancellor and others said before the May elections. We urge all drivers and businesses to raise this issue with their MP and local councillors."
Each of the constituent councils in the LCRCA are Labour controlled and those that make these decisions on this matter on the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority are all Labour politicians.
It remains to be seen what the Conservative government’s response will be to the request for greater flexibility on what surplus tunnel tolls can be spent on.
However the MTUA is also against the spending of tunnel tolls on transport projects. John McGoldrick of the MTUA added "Obviously the MTUA aim is no tolls, but as a minimum we want a stop to the use of tolls for non Tunnels purposes."
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
Labour use casting vote to delay decision on Saughall Massie fire station land
Labour use casting vote to delay decision on Saughall Massie fire station land
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.
Cllr Chris Blakeley addressing Wirral Council Regeneration and Environment committee about a new fire station in Saughall Massie September 2015
Wirral Council’s Regeneration and Environment Committee meeting of the 15th September 2015 (Part 1 of 4) who discussed a notice of motion about a proposed new fire station in Saughall Massie
Now as you’re reading the same blog a week later you can read what happened next, in what’s rapidly becoming a saga. If you’ve written as much on this issue as I have, you’d find it’s become a saga longer than the epic poem Beowulf (but not as exciting). Bonus marks to those leaving comments if they can tell me who the Grendel character is in this matter. However literary references aside here’s what happened next.
Chair (Cllr Mike Sullivan, Labour): Thank you Councillor Blakeley. Is there any questions from any Members? No? No?
Cllr Steve Williams (Conservative spokesperson): Yeah, thanks Chair. As there are no questions regarding this, I’m happy to move that the three points I can only go along with to maintain the green belt, not to give, sell or lease the land and to remain to ask officers to continue to try and find an alternative solution which Councillor Blakeley’s has just said he believes that there is.
Sorry I’ll put the mike on. In view of that if I can move that the notice of motion be agreed in its entirety.
Chair (Cllr Mike Sullivan, Labour): Does anybody want to …, I’d just like to say that this is a planning issue and I think if it goes to Planning [Committee], I mean I’m not, am I correct to say that it hasn’t, there’s no plans been submitted yet to planning?
Cllr Steve Williams (Conservative spokesperson): Yeah if I can assist there Chair, yes the outcome may be a planning permission and there hasn’t been any application that we’re aware of yet but this Notice of Motion is as Cllr Blakeley said prior to that and we’re asking that these three issues be taken into place which doesn’t concern planning.
Chair (Cllr Mike Sullivan, Labour): OK Steve, I take that on board but what I’d like to suggest, just let me finish Chris and then you can come in, what I’d like to suggest is, that rather than have a Notice of Motion that Steve and Gerry has seconded, if we get the [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Service to come and explain why they’ve identified this site, as opposed to any other site.
I don’t think it’s particularly fair that we have Councillor Blakeley’s, that side of the argument, without having the fire, somebody from the [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Authority to come and explain their position.
Cllr Chris Blakeley: Why didn’t the Council invite them?
Chair (Cllr Mike Sullivan, Labour): Well hang on, I’ll take, if you can be quiet from the floor please Councillor Blakeley, err Chris? And then I’ll take Steve and then Dave.
Cllr Chris Spriggs (Labour): Thanks err Chair. I really want to concur with that, what I was going to suggest that there has been a, so called evidence brought forward there’s just been some emails that have been flipped through. Obviously, to be fair in this situation, I think it would be about having a conversation with the [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Authority and getting to the bottom of some of the remarks that were made rather than going through to this Notice of Motion.
Chair (Cllr Mike Sullivan, Labour): Steve?
Cllr Steve Williams (Conservative spokesperson): Councillor, you did point before this. Bringing the [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Service, had this been heard as a normal Notice of Motion in Council, it’s just this new constitutional method that we’re bringing it to here. The [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Service wouldn’t be there. We’re not discussing with it, we’ve had the [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Authority have had their meetings, this isn’t for that. This is purely for the three points, items one, two and three which I don’t believe the [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Service can answer those three anyway.
Chair (Cllr Mike Sullivan, Labour): Dave?
Cllr Dave Mitchell (Lib Dem spokesperson): Err, thank you Chair. Apologies for being late, I was stuck in traffic outside Cammell Lairds for forty five minutes, very unfortunate, but I.. that way. I did intend to be here on time to talk through the previous minutes. Unfortunately I missed that.
All I can say is that at the present moment, like Councillor Spriggs, I need to find out more information because stuff comes to light through emails that have been released, you talk about land deals, swaps, all sorts of things. I need to know the background of all this information prior before I make any decision at all in relation to what’s here before us.
Chair (Cllr Mike Sullivan, Labour): Thanks Dave. Rob?
Cllr Rob Gregson (Labour councillor): Thanks Chair, I mean I’m just going to reiterate what was said by comments already made. We’re talking here about response times, we’re talking about a professional judgement and really whereas I do accept the arguments about green belt and the biodiversity of the area, you know and that’s a serious issue that I take seriously Chris as well and you know I’m pleased that you’ve raised that point here but at the same time we’re talking about an emergency service that has made a decision and I really feel that they should come to us and give us the information how they’ve reached that decision and chosen one site over another. Thank you Chair.
Chair (Cllr Mike Sullivan, Labour): John?
Chair (Cllr John Hale, Conservative): I’m about to say Chairman, that I’m absolutely surprised and amazed that there was a Notice of Motion that has been in existence now for some weeks coming before this Committee and now what someone has been unable to anticipate that there would be suggestions put forward and evidence put forward which would show that the wrong site had been chosen and that’s .. I’m absolutely amazed that nobody made any attempt to bring here tonight the fire officers from the Merseyside Fire Service and Authority which would’ve shortcutted all of this.
We’ve have had a vote which has been referred to us for a vote, a thing that we were denied at Council but it’s come here tonight and I’d certainly like an explanation if not from our fire officers but from the [Merseyside] Fire [&] Rescue Authority, that if you were aware of this why you weren’t here tonight? Because they are simply delaying the right of people to have this examined by the proper body!
Chair (Cllr Mike Sullivan, Labour): OK, thanks John I take that on board. So, can we delay the recommendation tonight and we can get the fire officer to come to our next meeting and tell us and maybe the process has moved on from there, there’s no planning application been sent in as yet, so it’s not time that we lack, I think it’s due diligence and we are, I agree with Rob, we are talking about life and death here, it is a very important emotive subject and taking on board the amount of people who attended the meetings and the hostility if you like but I would like to hear from the [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Service before we send any recommendations through and we’re not pressured by time.
Cllr Chris Blakeley: Oh we are!
Cllr Adam Sykes (Conservative): Thank you Chair.
Member of the public: Sorry, Greasby was the original preferred site but that was withdrawn.
Chair (Cllr Mike Sullivan, Labour): Can I just say that this is a private meeting held in public and I would ask you not to interrupt please, just listen please?
Cllr Adam Sykes (Conservative): Thank you Chair. I think it’s importantly that we actually look at what’s being asked. I don’t think it’s beyond our remit to ask the Council to protect our green belt or to even to ask our officers to work with the [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Authority. We’re asking them to go and deal with the [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Authority, not for us to make the decision on behalf of the [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Authority. We just want our council officers to go and do that on our behalf and I think that would be something that this Committee could decide tonight.
It’s not for us to decide whether the [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Authority’s professional opinion is right or wrong, it’s just that we ask our officers to engage with them and ask them to think again, I think that’s what the spirit of the Notice of Motion is to ask them to take a look at the decision that they’ve taken and explore some alternatives and I think there’s no reason why we couldn’t make that decision without hearing the [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Authority’s views in person.
Chair (Cllr Mike Sullivan, Labour): Thanks for that, this motion stands and it is the duty of this Committee to look at these things and make recommendations but as I’ve said before, I think it would be wise of this Committee as well as listening to what Councillor Blakleley had to say, to listen to what the [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Authority have got to say and then we make a recommendation. Well it is the responsibility of this Committee to make recommendations and I think it would, it wouldn’t be in our interests or the general public’s interest, or the Council’s interest to make a decision when we’ve only heard one part of the argument.
Cllr Adam Sykes (Conservative): Sorry Chair, can I just come back on that? I don’t think …
Chair (Cllr Mike Sullivan, Labour): You can, but then I’m going to wrap it up.
Cllr Adam Sykes (Conservative): That’s fine, I don’t think I was saying that we’re not making a decision. I think what is in here this does not force a decision on the [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Authority. It would still be for the [Merseyside] Fire [& Rescue] Authority to present their planning application. That was my point.
Chair (Cllr Mike Sullivan, Labour): Right well, I’m going to wrap it up now. If you want to make just a quick comment Gerry? If you’ve made a recommendation and you’ve seconded it we could have a vote on that.
Cllr Gerry Ellis (Conservative): Well I’m sure that there’s nothing in this resolution here that’s going to stop the process of going as it is. I would think that we should definitely support this resolution.
The voting was as follows.
For the resolution (5)
Cllr Gerry Ellis (Conservative) Cllr John Hale (Conservative) Cllr Tracey Pilgrim (Conservative) Cllr Adam Sykes (Conservative) Cllr Steve Williams (Conservative spokesperson)
Against the resolution (5)
Cllr Michael Sullivan (Labour Chair) Cllr Jerry Williams (Labour) Cllr Jim Crabtree (Labour) Cllr Rob Gregson (Labour) Cllr Chris Spriggs (Labour)
Abstentions
Cllr Dave Mitchell (Liberal Democrat spokesperson)
It was therefore a tied 5:5 vote (with one abstention).
The Labour Chair was asked to use his casting vote. He stated that they would invite the head of the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service to the next meeting to listen to him before making a recommendation.
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
UPDATED: Wirral Council U-turns on secrecy of Chief Officer’s early retirement in only 26 hours!
UPDATED: Wirral Council U-turns on secrecy of Chief Officer’s early retirement in only 26 hours!
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.
Employment and Appointments Committee 21st September 2015 L to R Surjit Tour (Legal), Cllr Adrian Jones (Chair) and Tony Williams (Human Resources)
Correction/update An earlier version of this story linked the Employment and Appointments Committee decision to the departure of Malcolm Flanagan. The Employment and Appointments Committee decision was about the early retirement of another Chief Officer Strategic Director Kevin Adderley whose early retirement has been confirmed by Wirral Council.
Yesterday’s Employment and Appointments Committee meeting (see above) was another masterclass in how politicians will seemingly agree to anything that senior officers ask them to do (however nonsensical).
I asked to speak at the meeting to challenge excluding the press and public (a decision that affects me) for the early retirement item and as Mr. Tour stated during the meeting previously early retirements of chief officers (Jim Wilkie’s cost around £111k to Wirral Council) were considered in public. The request to speak was denied.
There is a slight irony to this as when Mayor Cllr Adrian Jones signed up to article 21. Article 21’s interpretation has meant that at other council’s public meetings the public get to speak … but not at Wirral Council when a decision is being made about them by the whole Committee.
I gave the Chair and Mr. Tour a bunch of public interest reasons (the high cost to Wirral Council of early retirement, the cost of recruiting to that post if it isn’t deleted, scrutiny of politicians etc) before the meeting. All ignored, the public were asked to leave and by around 7.30pm at a public meeting, after excluding the public at around 5.05pm, Wirral Council was announcing a name of a chief officer that was retiring (but not the one the Employment and Appointments Committee made an early retirement decision on). Malcolm Flanagan’s departure was announced but Kevin Adderley’s retirement was still a secret until the next day.
The Head of HR wasn’t present at the Employment and Appointments Committee meeting, she was also due to present a report on attendance management to the Transformation and Resources Committee later that evening, however she was absent from that meeting too (yes I do spot the irony in being absent from a meeting where you’re supposed to be presenting a report on why people are absent from work).
Councillor John Salter did ask the Wirral Council officer in her place at the later meeting about the “attendance management” of Emma Degg only to be told that Wirral Council don’t comment on individual cases.
This perhaps shows councillors that as far as officers are concerned they’re the ones running things and councillors can keep their nosy questions to themselves. If they do have the gall to ask them they will be brushed off. The official motto of Wirral Council is “By Faith and Foresight”.
At Wirral Council officers have been leading the Council since as long as anyone can remember (despite what the councillors may say to the contrary). Here are three examples (with the catchphrase of Churchill’s nodding dog).
Will councillors approve officer recommendations for parking charges for Fort Perch Rock car park?
Councillors: Oh yes.
Will councillors do a U-turn on parking charges for Fort Perch Rock car park?
Councillors: Oh yes.
Will councillors decide to close a much-loved special school called Lyndale?
Councillors: Oh yes.
Here are three examples when councillors or those tasked with corporate governance ask officers something.
Will you renegotiate the Schools PFI contract to save money and save having to make massive cuts to the education budget which will cut support for those with special education needs?
Officer: Oh… no.
Will you answer questions about why Emma Degg left?
Officer: Oh… no.
Will you stop using long Powerpoint presentations to deliberately take up so much public meeting time so that nobody on a scrutiny committee has time (or very little time) to ask you questions?
Officer: Oh… no.
So there you go, Wirral Council summarised concisely.
As it was pointed out to me recently by a councillor that I need to be more positive, I will end by wishing Malcolm Flanagan all the best for his retirement and point out that not all officers at Wirral Council are like those described above. Some are decent human beings that work hard in difficult jobs and don’t get nearly enough thanks from either the press, public or politicians.
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
What did Cllr Phil Davies’ PR adviser have to say about the LCRCA devolution campaign?
What did Cllr Phil Davies’ PR adviser have to say about the LCRCA devolution campaign?
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.
Liverpool City Region Combined Authority meeting of the 21st September 2015 Part 1 of 2 (devolution and Transport for the North)
Ben O’Brien of Kenyon Fraser Ltd (a PR company) speaking at the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority meeting on the 21st September 2015
Declaration of Interest – the author wishes to declare an interest in that Google (named in the piece below) has an existing contract with the author for advertising revenue from Youtube videos.
Unusually a Chief Executive of a local PR company called Kenyon Fraser Limited spoke at the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority meeting on its agenda item on devolution. Below is the exchange between Cllr Phil Davies and Ben O’Brien of Kenyon Fraser, then I go into more detail about the existing contracts that this PR company Kenyon Fraser has with Merseytravel/Liverpool City Region Combined Authority.
The Chair Cllr Phil Davies said at the end of a presentation by Ged Fitzgerald (Chief Executive, Liverpool City Council) on devolution, "With the Combined Authority being advised by Kenyon Fraser [Ltd] on this. Ben O’Brien from Kenyon Fraser has come here today, so just with your permission, I’d just like to give Ben a couple of minutes to talk about plans around public engagement, stakeholder involvement etc so Ben, do you want to just say a few words about that please? Thank you."
Ben O’Brien from PR company Kenyon Fraser said, "Chair, very briefly, as has been outlined in the presentation I think things are developing quickly and our role is to take that forward Chair.
I’m Chief Executive of Kenyon Fraser, my name’s Ben O’Brien, we’re a Liverpool based communications consultancy.
We’re very pleased to have been appointed to support taking the work forward and we’re linking in with colleagues in Knowsley in the Secretariat role in order to facilitate that.
And really given the timescales and the tasks in hand to provide additional resources to be able to do that work to a high standard in the timescales that are required of us.
So in short our role is to produce communications resources to support that better engagement with the public, with key stakeholder groups including the business community and other stakeholder groups relevant to the key policy proposal areas that are being taken forward at this time and in advance of the CSR [Comprehensive Spending Review] in the first instance.
So we’re here to provide additional resources, we’re pulling together our plans to support doing that at a city region level and at a borough level, as we’ll be required by the work that officers are undertaking at this stage and we want to take that work forward from here on in as it takes shape.
So thank you for inviting us along to introduce ourselves in the first instance."
Kenyon Fraser have a number of contracts with Merseytravel.
The first called the "Agreement for Consultancy Services relating to High Speed Rail for Liverpool Campaign development and delivery" is a contract dated 16th September 2014 for £99,500 for the work detailed below (prices have been blacked out by Merseytravel as apparently they are "commercially sensitive") .
Merseytravel Kenyon Fraser Limited contract Agreement for Consultancy Services relating to High Speed Rail for Liverpool Campaign development and delivery schedule of rates thumbnail
For those wondering what the taxpayer got for £99,500 (or find it hard to read the image above) that was the work of the Chief Executive, a named Account Director (name was removed by Merseytravel), Account Managers/Designers/Web Designers/PRs and similar & engagement staff. The services of these people are charged on an undisclosed daily rate.
The Cost Summary Schedule detailed work in the following areas:
Campaign Strategy and planning, political engagement up to launch
Design and build website inc one year hosting
PR & Media Relations inc pre launch activity, copy, video, photography, staff attendance
Branding and core materials – design and production
Public launch, engagement activity to 12th August
Ongoing PR and media relations activity including Liverpool Echo partnership, copy, photography, social media
Political engagement activity including copy, packs, events, liaison
Events programme – business, opinion former and stakeholder engagement, all supporting activity
Public engagement activity across all Local Authority areas post launch period, petition support, public events
Total £99,500 of public money spent on a campaign, which hasn’t resulted in persuading the government to extend HS2 to Liverpool.
There is also an “Agreement for Communication Support” that Kenyon Fraser Limited have (or had) with the Merseyside Passenger Transport Executive dated 12th December 2013. The brief for that one is simple and is:
To provide media support as and when required pending recruitment to the vacant posts within the Corporate Communications Team
To roll out support for the Stakeholder Engagement Plan
To provide specialist development and training support
Oh but there’s more than that! This company also has the "Framework Agreement for Consultancy Services for the Design of Travel Marketing Literature Commencing 1 January 2014 until 31 December 2015". This one is for bus posters, Google PPC advertising, Facebook advertising, other online activities, as well as quarter pages ads in the Liverpool Daily Post (although as this paper ceased publication in December 2013 I’m curious about why it’s in the contract), Southport & Formby Champion, Bootle, Crosby & Maghull Champion and Wirral Globe, advertising on the back of buses, bus stop advertising, employee engagement and PR activity such as "Mersey Summer Time", web page work, leaflets, in-car air fresheners, Meal for 2 incentives, engagement and PR activity.
It looks like this contract was extended in 2014 to 2017 and renamed "Consultancy Services Agreement for the Provision of Design Services for Travel Marketing Literature October 2013 to September 2017".
However there’s more, Kenyon Fraser Limited have a 35 page contract dated 20th May this year called the "Merseytravel Consultancy Services Framework Agreement 2015-2019 For Consultancy Services (Various Lots)" which is for PR, campaign & engagement.
I could start publishing Kenyon Fraser invoices to Merseytravel, but this is already starting to sound more like an advert for them than a serious piece of journalism. You can find one of the Kenyon Fraser invoices for £29,160 in this earlier story headlined Why did Merseytravel spend £2,775 on a “Parliamentary Reception”?
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
Who was paid a £150,707 salary by the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority?
Who was paid a £150,707 salary by the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority?
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.
Monty Python’s famous sketch about chartered accountancy (as it’s very hard to make jokes about this subject)
Councillor Phil Davies (Chair of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority) shows off the LGC award Wirral Council received for being most improved Council 12th March 2015
As it states in the video above, accountancy can be dull. However I wrote this email below (sent the day before the meeting) about a disclosure mistake in the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority accounts for 2014/15. The Liverpool City Region Combined Authority meets this morning to approve the accounts for 2014/15.
It’s quite simple really, about six years ago the law changed so that public sector employees that are paid a salary of £150,000 or more had to be named in the accounts.
For example on page 160 of the accounts for the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority approved last week Dan Stephens, the Chief Fire Officer (on a salary of £170,000) is named. In fact Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority also name the Deputy Chief Fire Officer and Deputy Chief Executive, as despite their salaries being below the £150,000 threshold it is more transparent to do so as the total they receive is over the £150,000 threshold.
The Chief Executive of Merseytravel (David Brown) on a salary of £150,707 should’ve been named in the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority’s accounts. The email below from myself details the reasons why (KPMG are the external auditors for the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority). Hopefully this will be sorted out at the meeting and corrected.
Subject: agenda item 7 (Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Final Accounts 2014/15) meeting 20th September 2015
To: Cllr Phil Davies
CC: Mayor Joe Anderson
CC: Cllr Barrie Grunewald
CC: Robert Hough
CC: Cllr Andy Moorhead
CC: Cllr Rob Polhill
CC: Cllr Ian Maher
CC: David Brown (Chief Executive/Director General, Merseytravel)
CC: Louise Outram (Monitoring Officer, Merseytravel)
CC: Angela Sanderson (Monitoring Officer, LCRCA)
CC: Stephanie Donaldson (Head of Internal Audit, Merseytravel)
CC: Tim Cutler (Partner, KPMG LLP (UK))
CC: Ian Warwick (Manager, KPMG LLP (UK))
CC: Richard Tyler (Assistant Manager, KPMG LLP (UK))
Dear all,
I am bringing this up in advance of Monday’s meeting, in the hope it can be amended. If it isn’t amended, please class this as a formal objection by a Merseyside local government elector to the accounts of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority for 2014/15.
"(c) the remuneration, set out according to the categories listed in paragraph (d), by the relevant body during the relevant financial year of—
(i) senior employees, or
(ii) relevant police officers,
in respect of their employment by the relevant body or in their capacity as a police officer, whether on a permanent or temporary basis, to be listed individually in relation to such persons who must nevertheless be identified by way of job title only (except for persons whose salary is £150,000 or more per year, who must also be identified by name)."
Clearly, the Chief Executive should’ve been explicitly named and wasn’t. I think everyone I write this email to will know he’s called David Brown, but the draft statement of accounts should be amended to state this.
It’s a basic issue of openness and transparency (which I’m sure you’d expect the press to take a viewpoint on).
Yours sincerely,
John Brace
P.S. I know Merseytravel’s accounts are audited separately to the LCRCA, has the same error been made there too?
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
