Category: Wirral Council

Licensing Act 2003 Subcommittee Wirral Council 22/2/2012 Part 1 Appointment of Chair, Lifestyle 82-84 Town Meadow Lane, Moreton, CH46 7TB

Panel: Cllr Bob Wilkins (Chair) Cllr Eddie Boult Cllr Steve Niblock The papers for this meeting can be found here. Agenda Item 1: Appointment of Chair Cllr Bob Wilkins said he was the Chair of the panel and that on either side of him was a councillor, who were also on the panel of three. … Continue reading “Licensing Act 2003 Subcommittee Wirral Council 22/2/2012 Part 1 Appointment of Chair, Lifestyle 82-84 Town Meadow Lane, Moreton, CH46 7TB”

Panel:

Cllr Bob Wilkins (Chair)
Cllr Eddie Boult
Cllr Steve Niblock

The papers for this meeting can be found here.

Agenda Item 1: Appointment of Chair

Cllr Bob Wilkins said he was the Chair of the panel and that on either side of him was a councillor, who were also on the panel of three.

He asked councillors, committee officers, the police and those present to introduce themselves (slowly).

The following people gave their names:-

Anne Beauchamp (Committee Clerk)
Ken Abraham (Legal adviser)
Margaret O’Donnell (Licensing)
Richard Leyland (Licensing Team Leader)
Unknown
Sergeant ??? (Merseyside Police)
Constable Paula ???? (Merseyside Police)
Unknown (solicitor?)
Unknown male
Unknown male

Agenda item 3: Lifestyle, 82-84 Town Meadow Lane, Moreton, CH46 7TB

The Chair, Cllr Bob Wilkins asked if the appropriate notices and information had been sent out? Margaret O’Donnell said there had been additional paperwork on Monday and yesterday as well. Those documents would be referenced today. She said there were no additional further details for consideration.

Cllr Bob Wilkins asked if there would be any additional witnesses. He asked the applicant if they had provided all the document they wishes the panel to see?

The police answered no (to both questions).

Cllr Bob Wilkins explained the procedure he would be following. He said he would give the applicant time to present his case, questions coud be asked. Once that was over those from the licenced premises would have a chance to put their case, and an opportunity given to ask questions of them.

He said they would also be considering advice issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 and the four licensing objectives which were:-

prevention of crime and disorder,
public safety,
the prevention of public nuisance and
the protection of children from harm.

Merseyside Police Authority 20/2/12 12/13 Budget Meeting Pt 2 – Police Authority agree to raise Council Tax police precept by 3% and refuse Council Tax Freeze Grant

The members of the Merseyside Police Authority met to decide on the 2012/2013 Budget after their meeting last Thursday had been adjourned.

There were two options to decide between. The first option was whether to accept a one-off Council Tax Freeze grant for 2012/2013 which equated to what they would have gained from a 3 percent rise in the police precept on the Council Tax bills for Merseyside residents. The second option was to reject the Council Tax Freeze grant and increase the Council Tax precept by 3 percent for Merseyside residents.

Neither option made any difference to the 2012/2013 budget, but did to budgets from 2013/2014 onwards.

The Chair welcomed people to the reconvened meeting. He said they wouldn’t go through the whole report again. He asked for a proposal.

It was proposed to reject the Council Tax Freeze grant for 2012/2013 and increase the Merseyside Council Tax police precept by 3 percent compared to its 2011/2012 level.

It was moved as an amendment to accept the Council Tax freeze grant for 2012/2013 and not increase the Merseyside Council Tax police precept for 2012/2013 compared to its 2011/2012 level.

A councillor spoke for the amendment and against the motion. Cllr Kate Wood spoke for the amendment and against the motion. The Chair commented that the Merseyside Police Authority sets the precept independently of the Merseyside local authorities who collected the Council Tax on their behalf.

Janet referred to a story on the BBC website. She had asked for a copy of the press release and felt the BBC had mixed it up as they had used a figure of £2 million instead of £1.865 million. She also didn’t understand the BBC article suggested there would be a loss of forty officers, which made out there would be a deficit when the revenue Budget for 2012/2013 was neutral between the two options.

She had an issue with the survey using survey monkey that the Police Authority had done. She said it was biased as option 1 was for putting up the Council Tax precept and that people could vote in it as many times as they liked, she herself had voted three times. She said although the proposed increase was small,would some residents would have to cut their heating bill to afford the increased Council Tax.

The Chair asked the Chief Executive to clarify.

The Chief Executive referred people to table 14 on page 45. He pointed out the issue was with the 2013/2014 Budget, not 2012/2013. He explained that the issue was never 2012/2013. The issue was what happened after 2012/2013 to the one year Council Tax Freeze grant.

He continued by pointing out in 2013/2014 if the Council Tax Freeze grant was accepted, then it led to a £2 million gap, as the grant would be dropped out of the Budget for 2013/2014. This meant the Council Tax base for 2013/2014 would be reduced [compared to increasing the precept for 2012/2013] and the effect of the Council Tax Freeze Grant was close to £2 million.

Referring to the survey, Paul Johnson explained that it had been sent out to libraries and they had made it so that more that each person could vote more than once. He said they had been criticised on Thursday for reorganising a meeting so quickly, which gave little opportunity to the public of Merseyside. They had achieved some helpful information, but if Authority members thought it was not up to scratch they were at “liberty to ignore” it.

The Chair said he was not going to give a summay out unless he was asked for it. In the short period of time he only intended to introduce it if there was another stalemate. It had been raised, but it did have limitations.

An Authority Member referred to a “lot of misunderstanding”. They then referred to Liverpool City Council deciding on the Council Tax levels and the effect on them of receiving or refusing the Council Tax Freeze Grant. The Member thought the effect over five years for the Police Budget could come to Ł9 million.

The Member referred to the “poorly paid on benefits” who had faced “Housing Benefit cuts” when “nobody gave a monkeys”. He then went onto refer to Working Tax Credit cuts and Winter Fuel Allowance reductions from Ł250 to Ł150.

He was arguing that the 3% rise would not lead to greater numbers of officers on the frontline as in previous years. However it would allow injured and ill officers to be tacken off their backroom jobs and made redundant, which would lead to a longterm saving.

This could lead to [approximately] forty new officers. If they were not going to recruit now then in a couple of years there would be a big gap and experienced officers who needed to pass their skills and advice on would have left Merseyside Police.

A series of popular Youtube videos of adjourned meetings at Wirral Council.

First we have the ever popular Health and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting of the 6th February 2012 which was (after recording stopped due to running out of tape adjourned). Now with subtitles it has been viewed (at the time of writing) 228 times, has been embedded in an article on Wirral Leaks and a blog post here.

The Chair herself of the Health and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee, Cllr Patricia Glasman even talked to me about it on the 13th February 2012! After she’d talked to me I realised I needed to put subtitles on it.

Now with subtitles, this video has been viewed by many viewers in the UK and a viewer from Finland who watched it twice! Speakers in it are Cllr Patricia Glasman, Cllr Cherry Povall, Cllr Simon R Mountney and Bill Norman.

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

Secondly another adjourned meeting on the same subject (although this time the entire meeting and not just a segment). This one is the Council meeting from Monday 13th February, again on the AKA report.

The Council meeting from Monday 13th February is adjourned to Monday 20th February at 7pm.
The Health and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee from Monday 6th February is adjourned to (date unknown to be decided by Chair and spokespersons).

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

Wirral Council meeting (13th February 2012) Leader Cllr Foulkes loses second no confidence vote

There was drama and excitement last night as Cllr Foulkes tried to persuade the Tory and Lib Dem councillors to let him stay on as Leader of Wirral Council.

A debate on the HESPE report and AKA report was adjourned partly due to the HESPE report not being ready (despite an earlier assurance it would be) and councillors grumbling over all the blacked out sections of the AKA report that they hadn’t been allowed to see.

Cllr Foulkes felt this wasn’t fair. He said he was worried about justice and claimed he would be sacked before getting a chance to debate the report [Ed – it’s an office he held, not employment so he can’t be “sacked” just voted out].

He wanted the whole thing adjourned to the 20th February and that he would be “seeking independent legal advice”. The Mayor decided to hear the no confidence motions in him anyway. Cllr Harney and Cllr Green both outlined why they wanted Cllr Foulkes to go.

Cllr Phil Davies gave an impassioned defence of Cllr Foulkes, stating that he “doesn’t believe it’s right or just to place the entire blame on Steve Foulkes”. He pointed out how the issues dated back to 1997, through three different leaders, two chief executives and various Directors of Adult Social Services. He said there was a strong argument that all political parties on the Council should take the blame as to why they didn’t take action or ask questions.

He said the “nasty, personal attacks on Steve” were “bang out of order” and that Labour would not take part in a three party Cabinet leaving the Tories and Lib Dems to run it as a Coalition or collaboration.

Cllr John Hale finished his speech by saying, “You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately … Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!” which sums up a lot of what the Conservative councillors had to say.

Impassioned speeches were made in defence of Cllr Foulkes, Cllr Kenny pleaded with them to wait until the May elections. Cllr Steve Williams compared Cllr Foulkes to an incompetent surgeon who needed to be removed before he does any more harm. Cllr Adam Sykes’ speech was interrupted by the Mayor, keen that he used the word alleged in respect of things alleged in the AKA report.

Cllr Foulkes said he was not in it to seek personal gain but wanted to point out what had been done. He apologised again to Martin Morton and anybody who had suffered a detriment in the past. He said they had got it “horribly wrong on Fairer Charging” and got heckled by someone from the public gallery shouting “he hasn’t got his job back”.

The Mayor gave a stern warning to the public gallery and said it was the last warning that if there was any further disruption she would order it cleared.

Cllr Foulkes referred to an unspecified “disgraceful blog” and said he was sorry if sticking ruthlessly to Anna’s recommendations had been misinterpreted by Cllr Tom Harney as lack of involvement. He wanted to make it clear to people in the public gallery that he had apologised and pointed out he had disbanded the Corporate Governance Committee and set up an Improvement Board. Cllr Foulkes said he tried to do things in an open and honest fashion, but that he couldn’t trust Cllr Green [Leader of the Tories] as far as he could throw him.

There were harsh words between the Mayor and Cllr Foulkes who finished by saying he was “not begging for my job”.

Cllr Green said he was not one for Standards Board complaints, but that Cllr Foulkes had called his trustworthiness into question. Cllr Foulkes was forced to apologise.

Cllr Stuart Kelly mentioned the senior officers who had been implicated had left under the cover of a compromise agreement, did this contain a gagging clause? He said “the cover up continues” and compared it to Watergate. He did acknowledge that Cllr Foulkes had “been badly advised” but that not to pay a price and resign diminished him.

Various other councillors spoke either for or against Cllr Foulkes’ removal as Leader. After all the speeches the meeting was adjourned. The Lib Dem motion of no confidence was combined with the Tory motion and went to the vote.

In favour to remove Cllr Foulkes were 36 councillors, against were 30, so he was removed as Leader of Wirral Council. After another adjournment there was a vote as to whether Cllr Phil Davies should be Leader. Thirty voted for and 36 voted against.

There was then a vote on Cllr Jeff Green as Leader, and he was elected Leader by 36 votes to 30. The Mayor asked Cllr Green to make an acceptance speech.

Cllr Green thanked Council for the confidence placed in him and that he wouldn’t name his Cabinet now. He hoped for an all party Cabinet and thought it was “genuinely important to find ways of working together”. He wanted the trust to be regained in Wirral Council and was going to defer Budget Cabinet from the 20th February to the 21st February. He would also send the Budget to the Council Excellence Overview and Scrutiny Committee to allow it to be scrutinised. Cllr Green wanted to accelerate the work of the Local Democracy Working Party.

He wanted a pause to reflect if the new management model for the Department of Adult Social Services was the best model. Cllr Green also wanted the Audit and Risk Management Committee to “be more activist”.

Cllr Green then answered a question from myself on the redacted parts of the AKA report. He said he wanted the maximum amount of information shown in public, but that he had to be responsible and speak to Bill Norman.

There were then a series of votes on the motions and the meeting finished soon after.

Merseytravel 9/2/2012 2012/13 Budget Meeting Mersey Tunnels, Mersey Ferries Limited subsidy

Everyone was present, so the Chair Cllr Mark Dowd started the meeting at 2.30pm by wishing everyone a very pleasant time. He asked for declarations of interest. Cllr Chris Blakeley declared an interest as a Fast Tag holder and an interest in item 5 as a recipient of allowances from Merseytravel.

The Chair declared an interest for everyone else in item 5. He asked if the minutes were ok? They were and agreed. The Chair then wanted to move a recommendation c in respect of the item on the Mersey Tunnel tolls. Cllr Chris Blakeley said he wished to move an amendment (which is below).

—————————————————————————————————————————————————–

AMENDMENTS SHEET

MERSEYSIDE INTEGRATED TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

Authority/Committee/Sub-Committee: Integrated Transport Authority Budget Meeting

Date: 09 February, 2012

Agenda Item/Minute No: Item 3 – Mersey Tunnel Tolls

Amendment moved by: Councillor Chris Blakeley. Seconded by: Cllr Les Rowlands

11 Recommendations

Accept all recommendations and add new clause (d)

(d) The Authority asks the Interim Director General / Director of Resources to investigate the cost implications, as well as any implications to the Tunnels Act 2004 of bring forward a further discount for Fast Tag users in order to reduce the burden of tolls on regular users of the Mersey Tunnels.      The results of that investigation to be brought back to an Authority meeting in October 2012 prior to the review of the Mersey Tunnel Tolls for 2013 as per the Tunnels Act 2004.

C/MISCELL / SR / DW

23rd July 1991

—————————————————————————————————————————————————–
He said he “won’t keep us too long” as he was not calling for tunnel tolls to be removed. He was not going to shout for immediate reductions. He felt that the 2004 Act had taken away some of their powers, as they couldn’t vote against an increase, but they did have the power to discount. He had trouble with the Tunnels Act but was delighted that tolls would not increase. The small reduction he asked for Fast Tag users had been circulated.

The Chair said Cllr Blakeley’s motion was ” ill-conceived” as the Tunnels Act had been agreed by Merseytravel before going to the House of Lords. He said they should be doing this anyway, so why do what they should be doing?

Another councillor said wasn’t Cllr Blakeley up for election, therefore wasn’t this political?

Cllr Blakeley said he moved an amendment every year and there was nothing peculiar.

The Chair asked for a vote on the amendment. Five voted for the amendment (including Cllr Blakeley and Cllr Rowlands). The others voted against the amendment so the amendment was lost.

All councillors ten voted in favour of the original motion.

The Chair moved the meeting onto the 2012/13 Budget.

Jim Barclay introduced the report.

A councillor asked where the £2.985 million grant came from for the ferries?

The answer given was that Mersey Ferries Limited was a limited company, the subsidy was reduced in order to trade in line with its constitution. He was thanked.

Another councillor pointed out an error on page 31 in the 4th paragraph. Jim apologised for the error.

The councillors approved the 2012/13 Budget unanimously.

The last report on the agenda was the independent review of Members Allowances. The Chair welcomed Professor Hall and also circulated a recommendation from the Labour Group to not accept an increase in the Basic Allowance or Chair’s Allowance.

Cllr Chris Blakeley welcomed what had been moved, but asked for clarification. Were they accepting the other recommendations?