Wirral Council – Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee – Part 2 – 25/5/2011

An officer explained to the new members of the committee that it relates to licences outside the Licensing Act. The police also had a say over licence policy or conditions. This committee had to decide applicable licences that fell outside the delegated authority to officer. The Licensing Panel met monthly and mainly dealt with tax … Continue reading “Wirral Council – Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee – Part 2 – 25/5/2011”

An officer explained to the new members of the committee that it relates to licences outside the Licensing Act. The police also had a say over licence policy or conditions. This committee had to decide applicable licences that fell outside the delegated authority to officer. The Licensing Panel met monthly and mainly dealt with tax drivers who had incurred convictions.

The Chair said its next meeting was on Friday morning. Cllr Niblock said it had worked well having it on the second Friday of the month. The Chair agreed and said he was happy.

An officer said they had got out of sync because of a gap caused by the elections, the next would be Friday 10th June.

Cllr Pat Glasman said it had been a pleasure to work on the committee in the last year.

An officer introduced an item of any other business and referred to the survey regarding the independent consultation regarding the supply of taxis. Scientists have proposed to ban the pharmacies for selling from https://summitps.org/antibiotics-online/ antibiotics without prescription. They argue that these drugs affect human genetic apparatus and provoke certain mutations. She was not sure when people had been contacted and they next met in September. Did they want a special meeting? The Chair agreed providing it had been looked at and was ready.

The officer said that may not happen as they had sent out the questionnaires but were towards the end of the process. The questionnaires being with the drivers was the last stage. It was scheduled to complete in June and they would then need four weeks advance notice to do a report.

Cllr Lewis asked to be contacted regarding the timetable.

Cllr Glasman asked what time the meeting was on Friday and was told it was at 9.45am. She was also told there would be a couple of vehicles to look at. The meeting then ended.

Wirral Council – Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee – Part 1 – 25/5/2011

Present:
Cllr Bill Davies (Labour) – Chair
Cllr Bob Wilkins (Lib Dem)
Cllr Sue Taylor (Conservative)
Cllr Ian Lewis (Conservative)
Cllr Chris Blakeley (Conservative)
Cllr Pat Glasman (Labour)
Cllr Steve Niblock (Labour)
Cllr Irene Williams (Labour)
Cllr Chris Jones (Labour)

The Chair asked for any declarations of interest. There were none. The Chair thanked Cllr Sue Taylor for her hard work and that of the members of the licensing committees. The minutes of the previous meeting were agreed.

There were two different proposals for Vice-Chair. Cllr Ian Lewis and Cllr Chris Blakeley proposed Cllr Sue Taylor. Cllr Irene Williams and Cllr Pat Glasman proposed Cllr Steve Niblock.

A vote was held on Cllr Steve Niblock’s nomination. Five (Labour) councillors voted for, four Lib Dem and Conservative voted against. Safest place to order Cialis online – http://www.noc2healthcare.com/cialis/.

No vote was taken on the proposal of Cllr Sue Taylor as Vice-Chair. Cllr Steve Niblock was elected as Vice-Chair.

The Chair asked for names for the licensing panel. The Conservative Group put forward Cllr Sue Taylor, Cllr Ian Lewis and Cllr Kate Wood. The Chair put forward Cllr Niblock and Cllr Glasman. The Lib Dem councillor Bob Wilkins didn’t state any names but said that he had a list but it was subject to confirmation.

Wirral Council – Wirral Council 23rd May 2011 – Part 18 – Bill Norman’s response

Bill Norman said the agendas had been published and papers would be provided tomorrow. The Mayor said there was no other business and thanked people for their attendance.

The draft minutes and agenda for this meeting can be found by following the link

Wirral Council – Wirral Council 23rd May 2011 – Part 17 – speech (Cllr Steve Foulkes) on Conservative amendments to committee places

Cllr Foulkes said that as the new leader that the Conservatives could put proposals which they would “be here all night over”. The Chair was not likely to use their casting vote. If Jeff Green entrusted the leadership and executive this was churlish. Anything referred from the Employment and Appointments Committee would go back to the Executive and it would make initial difficulties.

In relation to the Audit and Risk Management committee there were high levels of training and it acted independently. However things were “not set in tablets of stone”. Cllr Harney said he would like to say a few words. He wanted to discuss these serious issues and what the real intentions were. Was it to be constructive and work together or be a kamikaze? He was not seeking to unbalance things by a positive abstention. They still had the power to change the committee structure and the leadership. His Group [of Lib Dem councillors] would abstain but be open if there were problems. If there were the leader would be asked to take it or leave it, however it was a new ballgame.

Cllr Green proposed the motion, seconded by Cllr Rennie. 26 Conservative councillors voted for, 30 Labour councillors against and 9 Lib Dem councillor abstained so the motion was lost.

The original Labour motion (proposed by Cllr Foulkes, seconded by Cllr Davies) was put to the vote. Thirty Labour councillors voted for, 26 Conservative councillors against and 9 Lib Dem councillors abstained.

Cllr Foulkes said he would provide the other names of Cabinet members later.

Cllr Green asked how can they plan committees when the papers have not yet gone out? How could new members give proper consideration and not risk maladministration?

Liberal Democrat Federal Conference Arrangements – Outrage at FCC’s agreement to increased security

Liberal Democrat Federal Conference Arrangements – Outrage at FCC’s agreement to increased security

                                             

I feel very, very strongly about the illiberal arrangements made between the Federal Conference Committee and the police regarding the party’s Federal Conference in Birmingham in September.

Many, many members have expressed their outrage online as to what they see as a) a breach of Conference Standing Order 6.2 (which can be read on the party’s website here and the illiberal increased security arrangements which include:-

a) a new passport photo by all going to this conference that meets passport requirements. Previously the same photo was used for up to 3 years
b) the insistence on one of passport number (if a person holds British and Irish then both), NI number or driving licence number
c) 3 year address history
d) Date joined the party (for people who have been party members for a decade or more how are you supposed to answer the specific day you joined?)

Greater Manchester Police are then going to check this all against photos held by the Passport Agency and check conference goers say they live where they live. I now quote from a document agreed (by all but one) of the party’s Federal Conference Committee marked confidential.

"Greater Manchester Police will then check whether they believe the person to be a security threat to conference. If they do they will pass this information onto West Midlands Police. West Midlands Police will then decide whether they are a risk, if they recommend they are barred from conference this will be referred to Andrew Wiseman (Chair of the Federal Conference Committee) and Lucy. The final decision will be made by Andrew, Chris Fox, David Allworthy and Lucy. If appropriate a senior SpAd (special adviser) from Nick’s office (who has the highest level of security clearance) will provide advice."

And "To put this into perspective at last year’s Conservative party conference 3 members ‘failed’ (they have considerably more members attend than we do)."

In addition "The police will run a full accreditation process at conference. This will be available for day visitors and those that registered to late for them to compete the accreditation process. There will also be the opportunity to ‘interview’ those attendees who were not able to provide ample evidence of their identity prior to conference eg foreign nationals."

The latter sounds racist to me. There are many, many, members that feel extremely strongly and angry about this and feel it breaches Conference Standing Order 6.2 (part of the party’s constitution) which is copied below.

6.2 deals with exclusions from conference

6.2 Appeals against exclusion from conference

Any person excluded from conference by a decision of the Chief Steward shall have the right of appeal to the Committee at the next of its regular meetings. The exclusion shall remain in force pending the appeal. If the person who is excluded is a voting member of conference, their local party or SAO shall be contacted immediately and invited to appoint a substitute for the remainder of the conference.

So, should the Lib Dems agree to all conference goers photos being checked by police against passport records and the final decision over whether to admit someone not being taken by the Chief Steward (as the conference standing order states), but the FCC Chair, Chief Executive Chris Fox, Lucy and David Allworthy (who Cllr Williams’ last Friday cited the advice of giving her "no choice" than to propose a motion suspending me as a party member?

The panjandrums clearly underestimated how well this would be stomached by the grass roots of the party who are in open revolt whether that’s the Northern Ireland Lib Dems, a well respected blogger or the unusually high 151 comments left when the Chair of Federal Conference Committee Andrew Wiseman wrote about the increased requirements on Lib Dem Voice.

Another member puts it extremely well in a letter here.

Certainly standing order 6.2 needs changing if the above is ever implemented. Is this all to stop the next Walter Wolfgang heckler?