A blog about Wirral Council, Wirral Council's councillors & officers
A blog about Wirral Council's public meetings, Wirral Council's councillors, Bidston & St. James ward and other public bodies on Merseyside
Councillors defer decision on 2 planning applications for site visits and approve 7 others I’m going to try to return to brief reports on public meetings of Wirral Council starting with the Planning Committee meeting held on the 20th April 2016 starting at 6.01pm in Committee Rooms 1 & 2, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton … Continue reading “Councillors defer decision on 2 planning applications for site visits and approve 7 others”
I’m going to try to return to brief reports on public meetings of Wirral Council starting with the Planning Committee meeting held on the 20th April 2016 starting at 6.01pm in Committee Rooms 1 & 2, Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED. Timings next to agenda items are for the two video clips of the meeting.
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.
The first part of the debate on Girtrell Court can be watched in the video above (starting at the 22 minutes 21 seconds point)
Councillors at yesterday evening’s meeting of Wirral Council debated a notice of motion on Girtrell Court proposed by Conservative Cllr Chris Blakeley. He asked councillors to agree that the decision on the future of Girtrell Court should be taken during a public meeting rather than behind closed doors.
The Labour councillors (in an amendment proposed by Cllr Phil Davies) disagreed with this and instead restated their previous position. Their view was that a decision on the future of Girtrell Court should be made behind closed doors by the Cabinet Member Cllr Chris Jones and the Director of Adult Social Services Graham Hodkinson.
The Lib Dem councillors (in an amendment proposed by Cllr Phil Gilchrist) agreed with the original motion, but called for all the background and supporting material to be published when Cllr Chris Jones makes her decision.
The Lib Dem amendment didn’t receive enough votes to be agreed as it was only supported by the four Lib Dem councillors. Labour’s amendment received 36 votes for, 24 votes against with one abstention.
It was also announced during the debate that bookings for Girtrell Court will be extended to the end of August 2016.
The following was agreed yesterday evening by councillors:
Council believes that it is important to offer service users and their families a choice of respite care provision. People want the ability to choose the type of care and support which is right for them. At present they are unable to do this. This is not about a building or provider, it’s about the person.
Council notes that the Leader of the Council has previously stated that he wants his Administration to be open, transparent and fair with the people of Wirral. Council welcomes this approach.
Council notes that a detailed debate on Girtrell Court took place at Budget Council on the 3rd March and a clear way forward was agreed. This involves statutory consultation with service users and their families followed by a clear new service offer and events for carers and cared for people to meet potential new providers. Services will be commissioned to meet all of the identified needs at that stage. Authority will be delegated to the Director, in conjunction with the Cabinet Member, to make decisions in order to avoid undue delays which would prolong uncertainty. We are not imposing deadlines on when this process will be complete and, in the meantime, Girtrell Court will remain open.
Council further believes that the families of those using Girtrell Court, the staff, trade unions and residents and users must be given every opportunity to influence the future of Girtrell Court through a clear and transparent decision-making process.
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
In a surprise twist, the debate on a notice of motion on Girtrell Court has become like the thought experiment Schrödinger’s cat.
The reason the debate might not be heard is because of Standing Order 17(1) in Wirral Council’s constitution (see page 162:
However standing order 17, doesn’t apply to debates on large petitions, which are dealt with according to Wirral Council’s petitions scheme.
In the case of a petition of at the time of writing 6,593 signatures the petition scheme states “Petitions that must be considered by the Council – these must be signed by at least 3,000 people who live in the Borough”.
So in order for there to be a debate on Girtrell Court tonight either:
(a) Councillors could decide to suspend standing order 17 to allow the debate on Girtrell Court to go ahead, or
(b) Bernard Halley submits his large petition which triggers a fifteen minute debate as debates on petitions aren’t subject to standing order 17 or
(c) Councillor Blakeley finds fifteen other councillors to sign his notice of motion and therefore the debate goes ahead.
Tonight’s public meeting of Wirral Council will start at 6.00pm in the Council Chamber at Wallasey Town Hall, Brighton Street, Seacombe, CH44 8ED.
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
What does the LGA Peer Review of Wirral Council state on overspending, agency staff, morale, consultation and leadership?
To very little fanfare, Wirral Council have published the 12 page peer review conducted by the Local Government Association last year. This was accompanied by a press release which glosses over some of the criticism in the peer review.
Here are some quotes from the peer review (followed by my comments in italics):
In past years the council has been overspending in some directorate revenue budgets and using its reserves to balance the revenue budget. This issue was reflected in the previous peer challenge in 2012 and the council needs to develop the 2016/17 budget and not divert from it. It is currently anticipating a £9.2m slippage on this year’s savings target of £38m.
Political leadership
The Leader’s role as Chair of the Merseyside City Region is seen as recognition of the important role that the Wirral is playing in the development of the city region.”
Well shortly after this peer review, Cllr Phil Davies resigned as Chair and Mayor Anderson is now Chair of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority.
If I hadn’t written Why has Wirral Council spent £6,003,273.07 on temporary staff over the past 10 months? around a year ago, would this have even been mentioned in the peer review?
The council and its partner agencies recognise that they want to form a different relationship with residents in the future. There is general recognition that relationships with local communities has been negatively impacted by the past challenges the council has had to deal with. The new relationship will be based on a clearer Wirral narrative, a greater ability to listen to resident’s issues, making better use of the data and intelligence the council gathers across the Wirral and greater use of channels use as digital and social media.”
Ahh, listening to residents’ issues such as over 6,000 signing a petition against closure of Girtrell Court but you go ahead and decide to delegate closure to the Cabinet Member anyway? Or is this all part of listening to residents then doing the opposite of what they want?
There is evidence of community involvement in the council’s budget processes, although more limited evidence that this has influenced decision-making.”
So, this seems to imply that when Wirral Council have a budget consultation, the consultation has a limited effect on the decision after the consultation?
Despite reading this a few times, I’m a little unsure what this means? Anyone care to hazard a guess? I thought the constituency committees were supposed to do community engagement?
Delivering significant change must take account of some instances of low staff morale generated by the perception of indiscriminate universal cuts in service provision in recent years.”
In other words Labour councillors constantly going on about government cuts nearly every public meeting is damaging staff morale at Wirral Council.
In other words, there’s going to be a senior management restructure and some managers are going to be leaving.
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
Which Wirral Council councillor made 38 taxi journeys in 6 months?
Yesterday Wirral Council responded to my FOI request for the more recent invoices from Eye Cab Limited for taxi journeys by councillors.
These don’t include taxi journeys where councillors have paid for the taxi themselves and then claimed back the cost.
Sadly, due to a lot of missing pages (curiously always the ones with councillors’ names on them), plus a number of pages scanned at such low quality making them very difficult to read, I’ve requested an internal review.
There was an £85 taxi journey listed on page 5. By the price list published on my blog here it comes to a taxi journey of around 67 and a half miles.
Sadly the second page of the invoice that invoice from May 2015 that would state who undertook this unusually long journey is not supplied. The invoice itself is of such low quality it’s hard to read how far this journey was. However if you’re going on a journey that far why not take the train instead?
In fact if the journey was by a councillor then Wirral Council’s constitution states (members means councillors):
“8. Travel and Subsistence
Travel Costs
8.1 Travel costs incurred by members in performing “approved duties” as specified in Schedule 2 to this Scheme shall be reimbursed at the prevailing public transport rates, provided that the use of taxis or members’ private motor vehicles may be permitted where public transport is either not available, or the journey by public transport would be likely to result in unreasonable delay.”
Sadly as Wirral Council didn’t respond properly to this FOI request it’s impossible to tell whether a councillor took this journey or not!
However over the 6 months of invoices where names were supplied, here are how many taxi journeys were undertaken by each councillor at the taxpayers’ expense. For shared journeys I’ve counted it as one journey for each councillor sharing the taxi:
Cllr Moira McLaughlin (38)
Cllr Steve Niblock (23)
Cllr Bill Davies (13)
Cllr Irene Williams (5)
Cllr Pat Williams (2)
Cllr Kathy Hodson (1)
Cllr Denise Roberts (1)
Cllr Phil Davies (1)
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
