So as Wirral Council has the Chief Executive’s three-month notice period (30th September 2014 to 31st December 2014) to find his replacement, what’s happened so far?
Well because the Chief Executive is a political appointment of councillors, the politicians have to decide. So a meeting of the Employment and Appointments Committee has been set up for the 27th October 2014. Graham Burgess is also currently Returning Officer (many people reading this may also know what a Returning Officer is but in simple terms it’s the head person at Wirral Council for elections), Electoral Registration Officer (another role to do with elections) and Head of Paid Service.
It is proposed that Penna PLC be paid about £15,000 for helping find a new Chief Executive and a further about £15,000 for finding a new Head of Specialist Services (who is also leaving in December 2014).
However paying out about £15k to Penna PLC to aid Wirral Council’s Human Resources department is not enough! No a “professional adviser” from the Local Government Association will also be advising the Appointments Panel.
This in fact has always struck me as a bit of an anomaly. Penna PLC and the LGA aren’t officers or councillors at Wirral Council. In the past though, they’ve remained in the meeting room after the press and public were excluded from the public meeting.
So who is the Appointments Panel going to be and what will it do? It will consist of seven councillors who will make a recommendation for the post of Chief Executive to the sixty-six councillors. It will probably be four Labour councillors, two Conservative councillors and one Lib Dem councillor. I have some guesses now below about who will make up this appointment panel for the Chief Executive. It hasn’t yet been decided yet which councillors will be on it, but below are my names along with my reasons:
Labour (4 councillors)
Cllr Adrian Jones * reason is already Chair of Employment and Appointments Committee
Cllr Phil Davies * reason is already Vice-Chair of Employment and Appointments Committee & Leader of the Council
Cllr George Davies * reason is Deputy Leader of Wirral Council, Cabinet Member and Labour councillor on Employment and Appointments Committee
Cllr Ann McLachlan * reason is Deputy Leader of Wirral Council, Cabinet Member and Labour councillor on Employment and Appointments Committee
* Note although Cllr Moira McLaughlin is a possibility, she’s unlikely for the reasons listed above
Conservative (2 councillors)
Cllr Jeff Green * reason there are only 2 Conservative councillors (apart from deputies) on Employment and Appointments Committee
Cllr Lesley Rennie * reason there are only 2 Conservative councillors (apart from deputies) on Employment and Appointments Committee
Lib Dem (1 councillor)
Cllr Phil Gilchrist * reason only Lib Dem (apart from deputies) on Employment and Appointments Committee
The seven councillors on the Appointments Panel will all be from the Employment and Appointments Committee and due to the high-profile nature of the appointment unlikely to be deputies. The Employment and Appointments Committee has eight councillors on it (plus twenty-one deputies). So the seven will come from those twenty-nine.
The Appointments Panel doesn’t actually choose the Chief Executive though. They just recommend who the Chief Executive should be to a meeting of all sixty-six councillors at Wirral Council.
From a practical perspective though, as Labour have a majority of councillors on the Appointments Panel and Wirral Council it will be down to the Labour councillors to decide who the next Chief Executive/Returning Officer/Electoral Registration Officer/Head of Paid Service is. As the process will probably be going on after Graham Burgess leaves and it’s a legal requirement to have somebody appointed to some of these roles, temporary people will have to be found before a permanent appointment is made.
Looking back to July 2012 when Graham Burgess was appointed as Chief Executive by Council, he then had to serve his period of notice before starting in post in September 2012.
If the new Chief Executive has to also serve out a period of notice, it could be as late as May 2015 before he or she starts (which if it is after General Election and local elections it will make the election side of their job easier).
Certainly it will be interesting to see who the politicians eventually recommend for this key post at Wirral Council! If anyone wishes to leave a comment comparing the appointment of Wirral Council’s Chief Executive to the complicated process of appointing a Doge of Venice, feel free.
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
A fictional conversation with our own legal department about Lyndale and other matters
A fictional conversation with our own legal department about Lyndale and other matters
Councillor Tony Smith (Cabinet Member for Children and Family Services) at the Special Cabinet Meeting of 4th September 2014 to discuss Lyndale School L to R Cllr Stuart Whittingham, Cllr Tony Smith (Cabinet Member for Children and Family Services), Cllr Bernie Mooney and Lyndzay Roberts
Legal department: Now, there you go again! Don’t you know when you stop?! We know you’re a good at what you do but there are frankly limits to this you know! What does it take to keep your mouth shut for once!? Why are you meddling in the Lyndale matter again and making waves yet again? Just let it be!
Write about bin collection and Biffa, a consultation on closing children’s centres, Birkenhead Market and the Traffic Regulation Order issue, New Brighton & Neptune, golf (there’s an awful lot you could write about golf), councillor’s expenses, job cuts, even Kevin Adderley if you have to but please anything apart from Lyndale School! Please!!!
John Brace: Because the public have a right to know! Plus there are sound commercial reasons for doing so due to the demographic makeup of our readers/viewers.
Legal department: *sighs* Well let someone else tell them then! There are some things you just shouldn’t put in the public domain or draw attention to at this stage.
Please don’t write anything more about Lyndale connected to that letter. That is the advice.
John Brace: For how long?
Legal department: Just steer clear of anything specific with regards to that letter for obvious reasons!!!
John Brace: But even if the case was “active” (which it isn’t) s.5 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 c.49 allows for “a publication made as or as part of a discussion in good faith of public affairs or other matters of general public interest” …. “if the risk of impediment or prejudice to particular legal proceedings is merely incidental to the discussion.”
Legal Department: Look you indeed wrote the policy on this about keeping your mouth shut when it comes to legal matters. It complicates things. You know the reasons why.
If you write too much before a matter is even put before a court, it tips off the other side in the case as believe it or not people involved with Wirral Council read your blog and the last thing you want to do is complicate things that are complicated enough.
John Brace: True I did. For extremely sound reasons. Thanks for reminding me. However I also wrote an editorial override in that policy which requires two people to agree.
Legal Department: Well you don’t have the approval of two people yet (thankfully). The matter has been somewhat complicated by the call in anyway as the Cabinet decision will now not be implemented until a further meeting of the Coordinating Committee.
John Brace: Who’s the lead signatory?
Legal Department: Councillor Paul Hayes. However 27 other councillors have also called it in.
John Brace: Wow must be a record, so you’re saying write about other stuff?
Legal Department: Yes, or limit yourself on Lyndale to writing just about other people or just merely reporting the facts of what’s going on, preferably facts that are already in the public domain.
John Brace: So for example starting on a transcript of the Cabinet meeting on 4th September 2014 about Lyndale School for the hard of hearing?
Legal Department: That’s ok, as we have protections under libel laws from reporting on public meetings at Wirral Council which is referred to as “qualified privilege”. Anyway there’s already been a request for that. You’ve got a bit behind with subtitling videos anyway.
John Brace: But nobody’s ever threatened us with libel over Lyndale School, just about the Chief Executive’s email about the golf (later withdrawn) but I take your point about subtitling.
Legal Department: Yes, but the impression in some quarters is that you’re putting a bunch of highly inconvenient truths out there in the public domain about Lyndale School that could be easily used for party political purposes (and have been).
John Brace: Oh come on, a politician and party members at the report produced as a result of my disciplinary panel hearing said I was writing a “little read blog” or words to that effect. I’m not really that influential.
Legal Department: Exactly, but that was three years ago. Comparing September 2014 to September 2011 is like comparing apples with pears. There are thousands of people reading this blog each month now, compared with only hundreds of people a month back in September 2011. This is party because since leaving the Lib Dems you’ve spent more time at your “day job”.
Things have changed. Politicians disliked you even back then for telling the public the truth as you saw it as to what was really happening and the Lib Dem ones ended up getting somewhat censured as a result for using Wirral Council resources for party political purposes. Remember what happened to Martin Morton? Don’t end up like him!
Understandably they wanted to bury the truth (which was tied in to a conspiracy of silence on Martin Morton/Anna Klonowski/another disability matter and corporate governance issues) and cover things up for party political reasons. Even though all but one of the things that you were actually accused of were false, therefore the suspension wasn’t legitimate but as a Lib Dem politician (and former Lib Dem politician) had said this to their fellow Lib Dems they could hardly turn round and admit that any of their former politicians told lies (even though they may say that in private) could they? As you well knew at the time, they decided it was best to keep you in the party as a way to control you, as even at that stage you knew too much and you were becoming a nuisance to those in power as how they wanted things to play out.
Yours and Leonora’s resignation from the Lib Dems in January 2012 was somewhat unexpected, but resolved an ongoing conflict of interest about reporting on Lib Dem politicians and let’s face it Labour got exactly what they wanted out of this as four months later when they got a majority on Wirral Council.
Even the version of events that everybody actually agreed upon at your disciplinary panel hearing back in September 2011 was so extremely damaging to the reputation of the Lib Dem Party itself so they understandably took the “shoot the messenger”/ “rewrite history” approach and they took it out on you (as you must have expected on some level that they would do so and if you didn’t perhaps as the youngest party member in Birkenhead you needed to “grow up” and let’s face it one of the older party members at that meeting that made the decision had referred to you as a “baby” in a previous meeting which of course is not “ageist” is it?).
Your attempts at somewhat humourous comments during that meeting (which according to their own constitution and later concluded lawsuit was indeed a flagrant breach of their own party’s constitution to even hold (as you pointed out to them at the time but they once again ignored you)) but hey they’re Lib Dems and it seems that their own rules can be twisted by themselves beyond breaking point in an abuse of power) about a dead dog and a shooting at your disciplinary panel, were in extremely poor taste considering two of the people who had been shot at were actually at the meeting itself. It’s a party that would prefer to forget Jeremy Thorpe and how much of a PR nightmare that was for them (even though he was acquitted in a court) and to be honest with you were somewhat goading them into having to explain themselves because they’d been all instructed to keep their mouths shut and stick to a “party line” when you previously had asked them questions.
Let’s face it you sued an entire party (and won) and took a politician to court (and won)! How many people ever do that? Not many! You’re unusual, even when during the meeting in June 2011 when they tried to suspend you your threats of legal action and “seeing them in court” seemed to them like bluster so one of them laughed (which is partly why you got kicked at under the table and then slapped in the face but then people can lose their cool at party political meetings) and even though you later did have the judiciary intervene, your repeated warnings fell on completely deaf ears because they had (especially the politicians) made their minds up as to what to do before the meeting even started and were going to stick to this agreed party line.
That is part of the reason why you weren’t allowed to attend your own disciplinary meeting. By deliberately starting it late, it gave a chance for the decision to be made before the meeting had even started and in a way where you’d have no influence over the outcome.
You know as well as I do that two former Lib Dem councillors were being used as proxies as part of a renewed Labour plot to blacken your name and make things up about you (because let’s face it you were fast becoming a threat to the Labour Party too and deemed to be less of a threat to them if you weren’t a member of another rival political party) Let’s face it Cllr Harry Smith had already had a right moan to both you and the party about you (including a “With Compliments” Wirral Council slip with his letter) about telling the public in a party political publication delivered to the Bidston & St. James area that he wasn’t (when he was Vice-Chair) at a Pensions Committee meeting of Wirral Council at the time when it was reported that the Pension Fund dropped by around £700 million and let’s face it if the Fund drops considerably the difference has to be made up by the taxpayer).
Cllr Harry Smith felt it was terribly unfair that people were going along to his councillor’s surgery and asking him pointed questions about why (even though he was Vice-Chair of the Pensions Committee) that the Merseyside Pension Fund had dropped by so much. Let’s face it it is a fund that affects over a hundred thousand people and even the local newspapers reported it at the time.
If Cllr Harry Smith wishes to go on holiday, miss a public meeting and not even send a deputy along to a meeting and then somewhat unfortunately get suspended as a councillor (in an unrelated matter) for a week for bullying other people, well as we all know from past experience these type of people are exactly the kind of person the Liberal Democrat Party have to take seriously because they’d rather the likes of Councillor Harry Smith were getting irked at someone else instead of at them!
This goes so far as even if it seems like they’re breaking their own party rules by pandering to another political party’s interests in that process because as we all know Lib Dems love their “due process” even if that results in an “abuse of power” or a “court case”.
John Brace: However in perhaps a flagrant breach of etiquette I will say that during that particular meeting and I won’t state who (other than it wasn’t me or Leonora) said that Councillor Harry Smith moaning about someone else for holding him to account was like “the pot calling the kettle black” and let’s face it Cllr Harry Smith has been referred to by one of his fellow Labour councillors as “royalty”.
That is partly why the renewed plot in 2011 had to be done through two Lib Dem proxies.
Let’s face it if you do anything in politics, you will attract more complaints, even fictional ones. If a party spends hours looking into every fictional complaint however trivial it is time that is not spent delivering leaflets or winning elections.
The actual politicians attracted far more complaints than I ever did (even during my brief years as a politician over in Liverpool) and although they never went so far as to suspending them from the party they did exactly the same thing to them in removing them from all committee positions and blackening their name in public. They tried to embarrass them into toeing a party line and it backfired, just look at how disastrous the libraries matter was handled and the resultant public inquiry led by Sue Charteris. It made the fromer Lib Dem politician that said in public that Wirral Council would be “vindicated” by the public inquiry look to be completely wrong.
But let’s face it if they’re taking the likes of the Labour’s Councillor Harry Smith seriously (even his own party has had concerns about him to put it mildly), it is seriously the thin end of the wedge from a party political perspective.
After all once people start getting beaten up and shot at for political reasons, it’s gone well beyond being politics and become the realms of terrorism. It’s moved well beyond merely political debate into law and order issues.
As I know myself from bitter personal experience in that court case the Lib Dems were not on the side of law and order (hence why the whole political party has a County Court court order against it), they have known links to foreign terrorism, which makes them people better not to associate with if at all possible.
This “paragon of virtue” in Councillor Harry Smith, who of course would never do things for party political purposes, is of course the kind of person the Liberal Democrats obviously have to listen seriously to, take his concerns seriously and let’s face it Cllr Harry Smith seriously wanted me out of the way.
He wanted to be reselected by his local Labour branch and complaining about me and eventually many years later persuading the Lib Dem Party to pick someone else in Bidston & Saint James who was less trouble to him (let’s face it how much trouble are you if you finish last in an election?) which they eventually they did in 2012 is all part of what led to Labour getting a majority on Wirral Council. The easiest way for them to achieve this was to destabilise the Lib Dems (which let’s face it wasn’t too hard and such tactics wouldn’t work as well on the Tories).
During that court case in 2011-2012, one of their party (Lib Dem party) employees that was someone high up in the party in fact he was Chief Executive, being paid the same salary as an MP, was around that time serving out his period of notice. Another party member working in party HQ seemed to want to scapegoat him, which I of course meddled in and prevented from happening by making an undefended application to the court and dragging a Judge in the County Court into the whole matter because to be honest by then it had gone beyond the actions of one person by then into an issue about a extremely badly run organisation. The Lib Dem Party of course want to make this former Chief Executive Chris Fox a member of the House of Lords (which let’s face it if one of the two parties of government pick you it’s pretty likely to happen)!
It’s all highly political and highly party political and perhaps a chapter of my life I’d rather forget! I do have a way of holding people to account that is somewhat unusual, highly unpredictable and not always in keeping with the demands of social and political etiquette because I have to sleep at night. It must be my background and training then.
Legal Department: Partly, but that’s still a complete mystery to us because you’re one of those odd people subject to the Official Secrets Act 1989 c.6 we don’t have access to your unredacted personnel file.
John Brace: Ha ha, indeed. Everyone has their secrets eh and you’re right there are things I’d better keep my mouth shut over (for now) after all things can snowball but it’s about time the public knew what really went on in the past but that is a story for another day. At least I got an apology later from one of the Lib Dems, but I suppose the party that extols the virtues of “freedom of speech” until somebody happens to mention something about the Lib Dem Party would accuse me of “breaching confidentiality” if wrote about which one it was! Best not to take politics too personally eh?
If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:
Graham Burgess invites Wirral Council councillors to 5 days of the Open Golf Championship
Graham Burgess invites Wirral Council councillors to 5 days of the Open Golf Championship
The new councillor for Birkenhead and Tranmere, Cllr Pat Cleary mentions on his blog in a post “Par for the course” about Wirral Council councillors being invited to a reception at the Open Golf Championship on the 16th July.
However the invites to councillors go beyond just one reception and are for five days of the Open Golf Championship as the below email sent to councillors shows:
From: Sent: 12 June 2014 11:49 Subject: Your Invitations to The Open Golf Championship
Dear Councillors,
Your Invitations to the Open Golf Championship
Following your invitation to attend the Member Reception on Wednesday 16th July, we would like to extend your invitations to the following days:
Thursday 17th – Key Business Day
Friday 18th – Off-shore Wind Business and Guests
Saturday 19th – Automotive Industry Business and Guests
Sunday 20th – Civic reception
Again, as there will be strict parking and security restrictions in and around the course, an exclusive park-and-ride facility will be provided from Egerton House in Birkenhead, to transfer you to and from the Royal Liverpool Golf Club in Hoylake.
I would be grateful if you could confirm the day/ days you can attend by emailing gailmooney@wirral.gov.uk as soon as possible.
Yours faithfully,
Graham Burgess
Chief Executive, Wirral Council
______________________________________________________________________
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager.
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.clearswift.com
**********************************************************************
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
EXCLUSIVE: Letter from Cllr Phil Davies to Cllr Jeff Green about “Wirralgate”
EXCLUSIVE: Letter from Cllr Phil Davies to Cllr Jeff Green about “Wirralgate”
Please reply to:
Councillor Philip L Davies Leader of Wirral Council
Town Hall, Brighton Street Wallasey, Wirral Merseyside, CH44 8ED Telephone: 0151-691 8539 Fax: 0151-691-2887 Email: phildavies@wirral.gov.uk Date: 17 December 2013
Councillor J Green Leader of the Conservative Group Wallasey Town Hall Brighton Street Wallasey WIRRAL CH44 8ED
my ref PD0012/DLK
Dear Jeff,
I write in response to your question at Council. I will also copy this response to all Members and ask for it to be published as an appendix to the Council minutes.
A group of individuals approached me about this matter. The individuals did not wish to make a formal complaint regarding the comments allegedly made by one of my Senior Members regarding a Senior Council Officer. However I am absolutely committed to ensuring that all matters of concern are properly investigated and so chose to immediately refer the matter to the Chief Executive.
The Chief Executive instructed the Strategic Director for Transformation and Resources, in his position as Deputy Monitoring Officer, to conduct an investigation and an Independent Investigator was appointed.
The Senior Officer concerned does not wish the investigation report to be made public, and I intend to respect their wishes. However if you would like to see a copy I will ask the Chief Executive to make it available to you. I intend to make the same offer to the Leader of the Liberal Democrats. I have been informed that you have been briefed previously regarding the outcome of that investigation however for clarity I will outline the conclusions.
The Independent Investigator wrote on two occasions to the individuals who had brought this matter to my attention, however they refused to cooperate. All other concerned parties were interviewed, with external legal advisors present. No evidence was made available to the investigation to substantiate a serious allegation regarding inappropriate language.
The Senior Member concerned did make clear that he had made adverse comment regarding a Senior Officer, comments he regrets. The Investigation therefore found there had been a breach of the Council’s Code of Conduct. It concluded that an apology to the Officer concerned and a conciliation process was appropriate. At the request of the Senior Officer the matter has been dealt with in a confidential manner.
We have discussed the issue of improving the culture of this Council and I believe that both myself as Leader, and you as Leader of the Opposition have a crucial role to play in this. I have stated publicly, at Improvement Board and elsewhere, that the number one priority for this Council over the coming months must be to address this once and for all. I do not believe this is a matter for party politics, our staff and the residents of Wirral deserve and expect us to take a lead.
I would therefore again urge you that if you have any evidence of wrong doing, or can encourage others to supply any evidence that exists of wrongdoing, that you work with me to bring this to light. I promise that if this happens a further robust investigation will take place.
Yours sincerely,
Councillor Phil Davies
If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:
Irony is alive and kicking at Wirral Council: Freedom of Information and Policy Council
Irony is alive and kicking at Wirral Council: Freedom of Information and Policy Council
I was reading through the Council’s final Annual Governance Statement which is on the agenda for Thursday’s Cabinet meeting and came across this gem in it which is about principle 4 (taking informed and transparent decisions which are subject to effective scrutiny and managing risk).
“In December 2012, the Information Commissioner’s Office announced that Wirral would be monitored for three months after concerns emerged regarding the timeliness of responses to freedom of information requests. The Council has also put in place robust processes to respond to freedom of information requests which are regularly reviewed by the Chief Executive’s Strategy Group to ensure that a timely response is provided. These improved processes are having a significant impact on the Council’s response to freedom of information requests.”
1. If the Council does have “robust processes to respond to freedom of information requests” how did this one slip the net?
2. How regularly is “regularly reviewed”? I suppose this one is also an answer to how often does the Chief Executive’s Strategy Group (or its subcommittees) meet, monthly, quarterly?
3. Why didn’t the Chief Executive’s Strategy Group make sure a “timely response was provided” to this request?
4. Does “improved processes are having a significant impact on the Council’s response to freedom of information requests” mean they’ve given the council employees involved a big book of FOI exemptions as it’s quicker to turn a request down however thin the reason for the exemption rather than spend time answering it?
Another curious paragraph I found in the same document was this:-
“An annual Policy Council meeting will take place with the first scheduled for November 2013 in order to discuss, debate and further shape the future purpose of the organisation and its response to key national and local drivers. Policy Council will play a direct role in informing the annual review of the Corporate Plan and future savings for the Council, as well as contributing to the development of a longer term vision for the borough in 2030 in partnership with other key stakeholders. A state of the borough report is being prepared as the foundation for developing this long-term vision.”
At the bottom of this document that I’ve already heavily quoted from is space for the signatures of the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive both putting their names to this following statement:
“We are aware of the implications of the review of the effectiveness of the adequacy governance framework and are absolutely committed to addressing the identified weaknesses and ensuring continuous improvement of the system is in place.
We are pleased that considerable progress has been made to address the significant governance issues identified and this is acknowledged by the Council’s recent Corporate Peer Challenge. However, it is also recognised that a number of the developments that are being put in place have recently been agreed and require implementation and
robust review.
We will take prompt actions over the coming year to ensure that all of the above matters are addressed as appropriate to enhance our governance arrangements further. Many improvement actions represent work already in progress and we are committed to increasing the pace of these actions. We are satisfied that these steps will address the need for improvements that were identified in our review of effectiveness and will monitor their implementation and operation as part of our next annual review.”
Let’s hope the “robust review” of the Council’s corporate governance arrangements result in changes rather than the “robust processes to respond to freedom of information requests” which just seem to have led to more Freedom of Information requests turned down so the Council can meet its target and tell to the Information Commissioner’s Office that things have improved.
If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:
