The reasons why Wirral Council’s Lyndale School call in is being delayed

The reasons why Wirral Council’s Lyndale School call in is being delayed

The reasons why Wirral Council’s Lyndale School call in is being delayed

                                  

Labour's Cllr Tony Smith (Cabinet Member for Children and Family Services) explains at a Wirral Council Cabinet meeting why he thinks the Cabinet should agree to consultation on closure of Lyndale School
Labour’s Cllr Tony Smith (Cabinet Member for Children and Family Services) explaining at a Wirral Council Cabinet meeting why he thinks the Cabinet should agree to consultation on closure of Lyndale School (which is the decision that was called in)

I read the Wirral Globe article headlined “Town Hall bungle means Lyndale meeting called off” with interest as it was related to my earlier blog post headlined “Is the Lyndale School call in going to the wrong Wirral Council committee?”.

Basically Wirral Council is stuck (and apologies for the cliché) between a rock and a hard place. Their new constitution states call ins have to be decided by the Coordinating Committee, however a law (The Education (Parent Governor Representatives) Regulations 1999) means it has to be decided by a committee with parent governor representatives on and a previous case Transport and General Workers Union and Hilary Hollington v Wallsall Metropolitan Borough Council [2001] EWHC Admin 452 means that if they went ahead and made a decision on the Lyndale School call in by the Coordinating Committee without any parent governor representatives having a vote as part of that committee’s decision, then such a decision would almost certainly be quashed (based on that bit of case law) by a High Court Judge if any of the parents requested a judicial review.

The only committee that could legally decide the call in (that has parent governor representatives on it) is the Families and Wellbeing Committee (however for it to do so would currently be unconstitutional). There was a meeting scheduled of the Families and Wellbeing Committee for Thursday but it was mysteriously cancelled. If anybody knows what this cancelled meeting was about and if it was related to the call in please leave a comment.

So what happens next? Well the Coordinating Committee will meet on Wednesday 5th February as planned, but at the meeting will probably receive legal advice that they can’t make a decision on the call ins as they don’t have any parent governor representatives on their committee.

To progress with this matter will need a change to Wirral Council’s constitution. Such changes originate as a recommendation by the Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee first (usually on the advice of Surjit Tour), which next meets on the 24th February. A recommendation would then be made to change the constitution to Budget Council on the 25th February and presuming the change is agreed to, the call in will be decided on the 27th February by the Families and Wellbeing Policy and Performance Committee.

The quote from Cllr Leah Fraser in the Wirral Globe article of “The parents and staff of Lyndale School deserve better than this chaos” is one I agree with. Both the quotes of Cllr Phil Davies and Joe Blott leave out an important point not mentioned, which is that the parent governor representatives will have a vote in the decision over the call ins. I’m not sure if the Diocesan representatives have a vote too (it’s something I’d have to look into), but as far as I recall one of the two Diocesan representative positions on the Families and Wellbeing Policy and Performance Committee is vacant (although an appointment to it could be made at the next Council meeting).

However taking from 16th January (date of the original Cabinet decision) to 27th February (date of the proposed Families and Wellbeing Policy and Performance Committee to consider the call in) is a total of one month and eleven days. Certainly it is not ideal for the parents and staff of Lyndale School to face uncertainty over the outcome for such a prolonged length of time.

What Wirral Council’s constitution currently states on call ins is included at the end of this blog post. Changes to it will need to be made if the Lyndale School call ins are to be made by the Families and Wellbeing Policy and Performance Committee on the 27th February.

The controversial rewrite of Wirral’s constitution (which included changing the call in procedure) happened at an extraordinary meeting of Wirral Council last April.

Here are some quotes from what councillors said at the time back in April 2013 about the constitutional changes which Labour councillors voted for, but Conservative and Lib Dem councillors were opposed to.

Cllr Phil Davies (Labour’s Leader) (who recommended the constitutional changes which included changes to the call in system) said, “What are the aims of the changes we’re proposing? Well we want to clearly improve our governance and decision-making procedures.”

Cllr Jeff Green (Leader of the Conservatives) said, “One of the elements of these changes is to remove the Children and Young People’s and the Adult Social & Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committees. Given Wirral’s history …. it seems to me a backward and dangerous step to actually remove any of the scrutiny.”

Former Councillor Darren Dodd (Labour) said, “This is what the people of Wirral have been asking for, for for a very long time.”

Cllr John Hale (Conservative) said, “These proposals should be consigned to the dustbin where they belong”.

Cllr Chris Blakeley (Conservative) said, “Where will it end, what next? Will Wirral be twinned with Pyongyang?”

Cllr Tom Harney (Liberal Democrats) said, “We don’t know where we came from, we don’t know where we’re going.”

Excerpt from Wirral Council’s constitution on call ins

35. Calling in of decisions

(1) All decisions of:
(i) the Executive Board,
(ii) an individual member of the Executive Board or
(iii) a committee of the Executive Board, and
(iv) key decisions taken by an officer;
shall be published, and shall be available at the main offices of the Council normally within 2 days of being made. All members of the Council will be sent a copy of the decision.

(2) That notice will bear the date on which it is published and will specify that the decision will come into force, and may then be implemented, unless the decision is called in for scrutiny by 9a.m. on the Thursday following publication of a decision on Friday. (Adjusted by a maximum of one day in there is one or more Bank Holidays in that period)

(3) (a) During that period, the Chief Executive shall Call-In a decision for scrutiny by the Co-ordinating Committee if so requested by any six members of the Council who have given detailed reasons for the Call-In of the decision. The detailed reasons must be provided by the Lead signatory, by the Call In deadline. When a Call In is requested the Chief Executive shall liaise with the Member listed first on the Call-In schedule, to ensure there is sufficient information provided to enable the Call-In to proceed. As long as there is a clear reason given, the call-in should be allowed. He/she shall then notify the decision-taker of the Call-In. He/she shall call a meeting of the Committee on such date as he/she may determine, where possible after consultation with the Chair of the Coordinating Committee, and in any case within 7 working days of the decision to call-in.

(b) The relevant Chief Officer and all members will be notified of a call-in immediately and no action will be taken to implement the decision until the call-in procedure has been completed. A decision of the Cabinet, a committee of the Cabinet or individual Cabinet member may be called in only once.

(4) Having considered the decision, the Co-ordinating Committee may:-
(i) refer it back to the decision making person or body for reconsideration, setting out in writing the nature of its concerns or;
(ii) refer the matter to full Council. Such a referral should only be made where the Co-ordinating Committee believes that the decision is outside the policy framework or contrary to or not wholly in accordance with the budget. The procedures set out in those rules must be followed prior to any such referral.

(5) If a decision is referred back to the decision making person or body it shall be reconsidered in the light of the written concerns of the Co-ordinating Committee before a final decision is made.

(6) If following a call in, the Co-ordinating Committee does not refer the matter back to the decision making person or body and does not refer the matter to Council, the decision shall take effect on the date of the Co-ordinating Committee meeting. If the Co-ordinating Committee does not meet the decision shall take effect from the date when the Committee should have met.

(7) If the matter is referred to full Council and the Council does not object to a decision which has been made, then the decision will become effective on the date of the Council meeting.

(8) If the Council does object the Council may take a decision, which is outside the policy and budgetary framework. Otherwise the Council will refer any decision to which it objects back to the decision-making person or body, together with the Council’s views on the decision. That decision making body or person shall choose whether to amend the decision or not before reaching a final decision and implementing it. Where the decision was taken by the Executive Board as a whole or a committee of it, a meeting will be convened to reconsider within ten working days of the Council request. Where the decision was made by an individual, the individual will reconsider within ten working days of the Council request.

(9) Call-in should only be used in exceptional circumstances where members have evidence which suggests that the decision was not made in accordance with the principles of decision making in the constitution.

(10) Call-in and urgency
(a) The call-in procedure set out above shall not apply where the decision being taken by the Cabinet is urgent. A decision will be urgent if any delay is likely to be caused by the call-in process would seriously prejudice the Council’s or the public’s interest. The record of the decision and the notice by which it is made public shall state whether, in the opinion of the decision making person or body, the decision is an urgent one, and therefore not subject to call-in. The Chief Executive must agree both that the decision proposed is reasonably in all the circumstances and to it being treated as a matter of urgency. Decisions taken as a matter of urgency must be reported to the next available meeting of the Council, together with the reasons for urgency.

(b) The operation of the provisions relating to call-in and urgency shall be monitored annually, and a report submitted to Council with proposals for review if necessary.

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:

EXCLUSIVE: Letter from Cllr Phil Davies to Cllr Jeff Green about “Wirralgate”

EXCLUSIVE: Letter from Cllr Phil Davies to Cllr Jeff Green about “Wirralgate”

EXCLUSIVE: Letter from Cllr Phil Davies to Cllr Jeff Green about “Wirralgate”

                         

Wirral Council logo

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,

Cllr Phil Davies signature

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:

Response from Cllr Jeff Green on the Anna Klonowski Associates report redactions

Response from Cllr Jeff Green on the Anna Klonowski Associates report redactions

Response from Cllr Jeff Green on Improvement Board issues

                        

Following the Improvement Board meeting held in public last month, exactly a month ago I emailed Graham Burgess (Chief Executive), Cllr Phil Davies (Leader of the Labour Group), Cllr Jeff Green (Leader of the Conservative Group) and Cllr Phil Gilchrist (Leader of the Lib Dem Group) about the progress on the commitments made at that meeting.

I indicated in that email that I would publish replies (unless the author stated otherwise) so that the public know what’s happening.

Nearly two weeks ago I received a reply from Cllr Jeff Green (which is below). It made sense to wait a little longer for replies from the others so that they could all be published together. As a month has gone by and I haven’t received a reply from another of the other three, below Cllr Jeff Green’s reply I include my original email. I haven’t changed the colour used for text in Cllr Green’s email, as Leader of the Conservative Group I think it would come as no surprise to people that he writes in blue!

from: Green, Jeff E. (Councillor)
to: john.brace@gmail.com
date: 6 December 2013 14:47
subject: RE: follow up to question and answer session at Friday’s Improvement Board meeting
mailed-by: wirral.gov.uk

Dear John

Thanks for your email. Please accept my apologies for the delay in responding.

I think my record is pretty clear on this matter: I have always pushed for an un-redacted copy of the AKA report to be published and have been obstructed at every turn.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant and the sooner the light is shed on the actions of those responsible, the better.

I trust that sets my position out clearly for you.

Best wishes

Jeff Green signature

Cllr. Jeff Green
Leader of the Conservative Group
Ward Councillor for West Kirby & Thurstaston

Twitter: www.twitter.com/cllrjeffgreen
Phone: 07766725125
You can also find me on Facebook

From: John Brace [mailto:john.brace@gmail.com]
Sent: 18 November 2013 11:15
To: Burgess, Graham
Cc: Davies, Phil L. (Councillor); Green, Jeff E. (Councillor); Gilchrist, Phil N. (Councillor)
Subject: follow up to question and answer session at Friday’s Improvement Board meeting

Dear Graham Burgess, Cllr Phil Davies, Cllr Jeff Green and Cllr Phil Gilchrist,

In order that the public know the progress of the commitments made on Friday’s Improvement Board meeting I am publishing this email and will happily also publish any replies unless you indicate that you do not wish your reply to be put in the public domain.

A brief update on some progress I have made on the appendices to the Anna Klonowski Associates Limited report. Appendix B (the Equality and Human Rights Commission Letter dated 29th December 2010) has been helpfully supplied by Paul Cardin.

Appendices C (the first improvement plan) and D (the Care Quality Commission Inspection Report) I discovered at the weekend had already been published by Wirral Council as part of a Cabinet agenda from over three years ago.

Appendix G (the Standards for England decision notices) have already been published too and I am not asking for appendix L (medical information relating to Martin Morton). This just leaves appendices E, F, H, I, J, K, M, N, O, P and Q.

With regards to my supplementary question about appendix P (minutes of the DASS Monitoring and Development Sub Group Meeting), as this was the only meeting minutes referred to in the appendices list I made an error. My question should’ve referred to notes in a different appendix, which contained the notes of the Charging Policy Working Group held on the 22nd August 2005, my apologies for any confusion caused.

I would be interested in receiving an unredacted copy of the notes and accompanying table (unredacted in respect of the three councillors who were there if deleting the redaction of officer names is an insurmountable problem) of the Charging Policy Working Group. The only councillor I am able to ascertain was there so far was Cllr Pat Williams.

With regards to appendix E (charging policy for supported living services) as this was a policy I presume it was agreed by councillors. It therefore can’t be claimed that a policy falls into one of the reasons you gave on Friday for not publishing the appendices. Publishing it would help the public understand the series of events that happened and whether it was an unlawful policy implemented by officers or whether officers acted outside of an agreed policy.

I am sure you (apart from Cllr Gilchrist who couldn’t be there) remember the mood of the public at Friday’s meeting and how although Wirral Council has changed in some ways that convincing the public of that change will be a difficult challenge.

I asked the questions I did on Friday because if the public were informed fully about what actually happened, then knowing what happened and the chain of events that led to it would allow the public to decide for themselves whether the changes made since then would prevent a reoccurence in the future.

Until there is more disclosure of what went happened, despite Wirral Council’s desire to “move on” some members of the public will still want to know and the details of who, what, why, where and when which at the moment are answers that are only filled with speculation.

I hope this sets out my position and I look forward to a more detailed response about the future publication (or the reasons against publication) of the remaining appendices to the Anna Klonowski Associated Limited report and the question about removing the redactions of councillor and officer names (at Head of Service level and above) in the Martin Smith report.

Yours sincerely,
John Brace

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:

Council (Wirral Council) 2nd December 2013 Council debates the Corporate Plan

Council (Wirral Council) 2nd December 2013 Council debates the Corporate Plan

Council (Wirral Council) 2nd December 2013 Council debates the Corporate 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.

YouTube privacy policy

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

The Mayor welcomed people to the meeting and asked for any declarations of interest. No declarations of interest were made.

Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs Hodson, Sykes, Meaden, Dodd, Elderton and Muspratt.

The Mayor thanked Cllr Jim Crabtree for inviting him to the North West in Bloom awards ceremony in Southport which he had attended. He referred to the “beautiful award” to Bidston Village Green, who had been awarded both a silver medal award and had won the Best Small Village category.

He referred to the recent Youth Parliament as “one of the best that we’ve had in the years that we’ve been running those” and thanked the councillors, officers and young people who had taken part for their support.

The Mayor thanked Cllr Mike Sullivan for raising £600 for one of the Mayor’s charities by running a marathon.

He referred to various visits that he and the Deputy Mayor had made and made specific mention of a visit to Pilgrim Street Arts Centre and referred to the “brilliant music by lots of youth from the Wirral”. The Mayor wanted to put on record what a fantastic evening both he and the Mayoress had.

Moving to item three (matters requiring approval by the Council) he asked Council to consider the Corporate Plan 2014-16, which had been considered and referred to Council by Cabinet earlier that afternoon together with the feedback from councillors, Cabinet report and proposed amendments.

Cllr Jeff Green moved an amendment which was seconded by Cllr Lesley Rennie which is included below.

“Council notes the sentiments expressed in the proposed Corporate Plan 2014-2016, which it believes to be so bland as to be bordering on banal. Given the use of meaningless management jargon and this Administration’s tendency to talk to itself instead of the Wirral public it is not surprising that the proposed plan is bereft of any opportunity for Officers or Councillors to be held to account for its delivery by the public.

Council believes that any plan should have specific measures of success and is therefore disappointed but not surprised that they are missing from the Corporate Plan proposed this evening. Instead we are supposed to accept vague promises that ‘A coherent set of performance measures and targets are being developed to ensure priorities are achieved over the two year period covered by this plan’.

Council further believes that if the Administration truly want this Corporate Plan to be a blueprint for the Council’s improvement, they need to be open and honest with Wirral residents about which specific measures they are working towards before embarking on any ‘expedition’ with their money.

Council therefore defers adoption of the Corporate Plan 2014 – 2016 in its current form until a ‘coherent set of performance measures’ have been developed and discussed with elected Members for inclusion within the Corporate Plan. Council believes this approach will provide the public the opportunity of open and honest appraisal with the prospect of measuring true performance thus holding any administration to account”.

Cllr Phil Davies said, “I think it’s a shame that the Conservatives didn’t raise this last Wednesday at the all Members’ seminar. Nevertheless I would formally request given that we have a lengthy amendment that we ask for a ten minute adjournment.”

The Mayor agreed to a ten-minute adjournment.

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.

After the adjournment the Mayor invited Cllr Phil Davies to move accepting the Corporate Plan. Cllr Phil Davies rose to move accepting the Corporate Plan, together with the amendments.

He said, “Clearly this a plan that sets a long-term vision for the Council around those three key priorities of protecting vulnerable people and communities, attracting new investment for businesses and addressing the inequalities within the Borough. I’d particularly like to highlight the agenda around tackling those inequalities which you know we’ve discussed on many occasions in this Council Chamber and in our scrutiny committees, but for me we really need to redouble our efforts on this agenda around narrowing the gap over the next twelve months and beyond.

We clearly do have, as the plan sets out, tremendous opportunities around particularly the economic agenda with the investment with business next year, the return of the Open and the International Trade Centre coming on stream. We’re also beginning to punch above our weight in the City Region and I believe that the Combined Authority does give us the opportunity to grow our economy.

I think the fairness agenda I highlighted in the forward has been particularly important. I was very proud that last year this Council became a living wage Council and I extend this to our contractors, our suppliers and ultimately to private sector employers so Wirral becomes a living wage Borough. That’s a key priority for me.

Mr Mayor, last Friday we took a major step on our improvement journey when the Improvement Board agreed to move away from continuous oversight of our work as they believed that we now have the capacity to continue our own improvement and it’s really satisfying that the pace of improvement of Wirral Council has been the fastest in the country when compared to other local authorities in similar situations and I would just like to take this opportunity of thanking all our staff and elected Members who have been critical to the landmark decision last Friday.

I would like to say and I’ll address the amendment that Jeff Green has tabled in these comments. You know I think we’ve tried to change the culture of this place by offering more opportunities for elected Members to contribute to any debates like where the Council’s going. We’ve had a number of visioning events over the last twelve months and I was really keen that rather than just turn up tonight and table the Corporate Plan, we actually had an event where all elected Members could come along and contribute to the debate around the Corporate Plan. We had that meeting last Wednesday and I have to say you know I’m very disappointed that the group opposite come to the meeting tonight with an amendment, when they had ample opportunity to attend the Members’ seminar last Wednesday and I pay tribute to councillors Elderton and Clements who were the only two members from the group opposite that came along but at no point in the evening were these points to my recollection made and I think it’s a shame that somebody in the leadership of the Group opposite didn’t have the courtesy to come along and contribute to that debate and I really do think that’s a shame but really in addressing directly the amendment, there’s no way we could possibly support this amendment.

You know I think it’s been well accepted and recognised now that a Corporate Plan is the high level statement of the vision we want to move towards, our key corporate priorities and indications of what key actions we’re going to take over the next twelve months to achieve those high level priorities. The detail around performance measures and targets will appear once the Corporate Plan’s been agreed. If we’d have incorporated everything, we would have been discussed a kind of hundred and fifty, two hundred page document tonight and you know much more sensible to agree the overall direction of the Authority and then have a more detailed report to Cabinet and that that would be debated as well by the policy and performance committees which actually fleshes out these priorities which we are discussing tonight.

So frankly Mr Mayor, I think this a rather pathetic amendment I have to say with the great respect to the party opposite. It’s a shame that they don’t take advantage of the opportunities to engage, you know there’s an old saying ‘You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink’ . I honestly believe that we have tried to change the culture of this place, I will continue as Leader to go on providing opportunities for all parties to contribute to debates about where this Council’s going. It’s just sad, very sad in my view that the opposition party for whatever reason they may have are choosing not to engage and I think that’s very sad for democracy in this Council Chamber frankly Mr Mayor.

So, we won’t be supporting the amendment and I will move the Corporate Plan as tabled with the amendments as included in the supplementary report which Cabinet agreed this afternoon and I’ve taken on board Cllr Gilchrist’s additional amendments which he was kind enough to give me advance notice of this morning, so I so move Mr. Mayor.”

Cllr Phil Davies’ motion was seconded by Cllr Ann McLachlan.

Cllr Jeff Green responded as follows, “Thank you Mr. Mayor and I think in starting, I know Phil seems to have this idea that a plan should be a, seems to be saying should be a sort of high level thing that outlines a series of a direction of travel. Well in my mind a plan is something that clearly says what you’re going to do, why you want to do it and the actions you’re going to take to carry that through and to allow councillors and public whose money it is you’re spending to actually measure you or measure any administration whether it’s yours, ours or anyone else’s on whether you’ve been successful against those measures or not and the measures of success and measures of achievement are absolutely key to the plan.

Just to say we’re going ahead with a wish list of things we’re going to do and we’ll full in the detail of what that means to people later on, I’m afraid Phil simply doesn’t do it and I think maybe I think Phil has been spending too much time with officers because actually looking at this particular document it is full of management speak, you know stating the blindingly obvious, but certainly not accessible to people who you should be serving, ie not officers but the Wirral residents in terms of what it is you’re going to do.

Again, simply saying you’re going to ‘remodel early intervention and prevention services to ensure we manage demand efficiently and community based care effectively e.g. developing services, early help services’, well what exactly is that supposed to mean? What exactly are we doing tonight on voting on a sentence like that?

Why not just be absolutely clear as we did in previous plans that what we want to do is focus on some pretty key things such as protecting children, such as supporting and protecting frontline services and ensuring no part of Wirral is ignored? Mr Mayor it seems to me that there are certain key things that one could put into a document like this and it is very glossy and a lot of work’s gone on and no doubt a lot of money has been spent putting it together but there are certain key things we could have put in very straightforward measures as to their effectiveness.

Well this particular document I’m afraid is absolutely devoid of any specific measures of success. One, as I say in my amendment vague promises and lacking in a coherent set of performance measures and targets.

Mr. Mayor, the other thing I think we should all please remember is that this is the public’s money that is being spent in terms of these objectives and lists of things, wish lists that are included in this document and I think it would be well for the administration to actually understand that as they seem to think somehow that this is their money that they can spend however they see fit without really explaining to the public whether that money has been properly spent or not.

Mr Mayor, I believe that Council has to show itself in some fairly basic areas. It needs to show that that it can collect rubbish, it can clean streets, it can grit roads, it can people are entitled to safe streets with properly lit and so on to show there are certain things that the public expect the Council to provide and if you can’t do the simple things and the basic things correctly, I don’t believe that the public will have confidence that you can do complicated items or stitch together a set of performance criteria around these sets of issues you actually have in this particular document.

Mr Mayor, fundamentally I’ve a problem with this particular plan and I think it’s fair to say those views were made clear because we did take the opportunity to add onto the work which the Chief Executive to have a rethink and to discuss detail, some of it might be news to you Phil, but it won’t be news to the Chief Executive in terms of some of the things we’ve said we believe we should see in that is a plan must have measures of success.

It is for you know we’ll develop this, we’ll extend that, we might maximise the other thing, but what exactly do those things mean? Where is the detail? Mr Mayor, where is the beef because at the moment these are a set of well meaning words, none of which are particularly exceptional or not to be expected in all these documents.

The only sadness for me is, along with some of these words we don’t know what success looks like and it certainly hasn’t been identified by the administration. Mr. Mayor, as I say we note what it is that’s been done but actually I believe that it should be referred back so that we can all see what is actually proposed because it will only be when the measures are put in alongside some of these outputs we will know exactly what it is that the Council is driving at.

I know Phil likes to look back at previous sets of Cabinet minutes and so on, and I’m sure he will give credit to the previous administration which set the Council on its path for a living wage actually put the resources into the Budget to make that happen so I’m sure he will take that opportunity.

I’ll also hope he’ll take the opportunity as well to welcome Councillor Matthew Patrick to Council, as I understand it this is the first Council that he will have attended and congratulate him as I do on what was an excellent result and well fought out and I’m particularly pleased that the Conservatives increased our share of the vote but I also am prepared to, … and even if your Leader won’t welcome you for your contribution Matthew I certainly welcome you to the Council.”

13:33

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:

Improvement Board (15th November 2013) The next five minutes (a transcript)

Improvement Board (15th November 2013) The next five minutes (a transcript)

Improvement Board (15th November 2013) The next five minutes (a transcript)

                                   

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.

A previous post on this blog deals with the first five minutes of the Improvement Board meeting. Since then over roughly a week since the video of the Improvement Board meeting was uploaded to Youtube, the first part of the meeting has been viewed nearly two hundred times at the time of writing! As there was such interest in it, I thought I’d continue with a transcript of the meeting, carrying on where I left off which was five minutes and twenty-four seconds in.

Joyce Redfearn (Chair, Improvement Board): We’re going to move on in terms of making sure we get through the questions. John Brace, are you present, yeah?

John Brace: As there are quite a lot of questions and they’re in here already, I’m quite happy with you reading them out if that would be speeding things up a bit.

Joyce Redfearn (Chair, Improvement Board): I think that’s really helpful of you and thank you for submitting it in advance, because people have the script in front of them and because it’s long, I won’t actually read it out as we did in one of the other sessions if that’s alright, but we will let you come back when we’ve given the answer, unlike the other sessions, in terms of if there are supplementary questions or points that you feel we didn’t cover from your email, ok? Thank you. Graham do you want to go?

Graham Burgess (Chief Executive, Wirral Council): Just in response to the first question which relates to a whole series of appendices to the AKA report, our view is that err all the appendices actually contain very sensitive personal information and to release those appendices would be in breach of data protection and also the duty we have to individuals who gave us information in confidence, or in relation to their own personal medical or financial circumstances. Therefore it’s our view that it would be inappropriate to release those documents as they contain a whole host of sensitive information. Clearly these matters can be tested, if you wish to test our view, via FOIs and the Information Commissioner, but so far our position has been and has not been challenged in respect of those appendices. It’s our view as you can see from some of them anyway, clearly showing they do contain very sensitive personal information.

Joyce Redfearn (Chair, Improvement Board): I think that was recognised within the question, certainly in terms of one of the appendices, thank you.

Cllr Jeff Green (Leader, Conservative Group): Yeah, can I just check when the Chief Executive said ‘we decided’ who the we were?

Graham Burgess (Chief Executive, Wirral Council): Well it’s the Council, I clearly represent the Council.

John Brace: Sorry, as I’m entitled to a supplementary on that. In relation to that list, I know that there were councillors present at that one and that was used as a justification that councillors had signed off on the special charging policy, so if you released it with the other names blacked out, wouldn’t that mean people could have at least a bit of accountability as to who the people were who agreed to that?

Graham Burgess (Chief Executive, Wirral Council): Can I also say Chair that with your agreement it would be the intention of the Council to print all these questions, place all these questions on our website and all the answers to them as well so it can be available for people who couldn’t make it at this meeting so they can see what we’re saying.

In respect of that, obviously this is a question that only came in at five o’clock last night which was reasonable and obviously your supplementary has just been asked now so I’d need to probably go away and take advice on that point and we’ll give you the answer both to you John personally and put the answer on the website for everybody to see and certainly Joyce and the Improvement Board will take that into account when they write the final report.

Joyce Redfearn (Chair, Improvement Board): So thank you, for that particular question, it’s really helpful. Do you want to keep on going in terms of the series of questions because we’ve got them in front of us?

Graham Burgess (Chief Executive, Wirral Council): The next question I think refers to the Martin Smith report and again our position is the Martin Smith report was redacted as it contained personal information and the Council has a legal obligation with regards to public disclosure of that information to the individuals mentioned in that report.

The Council’s responsibility extends not only to the public, but to any person or body to which the information relates, the Council considers every case on its merits and maintains its position that disclosure is not appropriate in these circumstances. Once again there are ways of challenging the Council, via the Information Commissioner another way if you think the Council is being unreasonable and the Council has and will always respond to the Information Commissioner’s ruling.

I would say however that perhaps the most important part of that report particularly is the recommendations around our whistle blowing, grievances and bullying policies, all of which have been progressed in line with that report and all of which is referred in response to critical incidents report that’s also considered by the Audit Committee last night.

Joyce Redfearn (Chair, Improvement Board): Thank you, is there anything further as you’re present that you want to ask? Move onto the councillors point which is in the next question.

Graham Burgess: Thank you, I’ll just stay standing up, shall I?

Joyce Redfearn (Chair, Improvement Board): Yeah, I think you should, you could keep your jacket off.

Graham Burgess (Chief Executive, Wirral Council): Again it’s a similar point that the Council does have responsibilities to the individuals named in these reports and this must be considered in relation to disclosure and redaction. Full disclosure of the Martin Smith report would in the Council’s opinion contravene its legal obligations under the Data Protection Act, with regards to upper management’s control of information in its possession.

Once again there are ways of challenging the Council independently if people have a different view and I would encourage people if they don’t agree with the Council’s position to challenge us and we will state our case to the Information Commissioner or any other relevant body. We believe as well as obligations to the public as a whole, we have obligations to individual members of staff, public, service users to protect their interests and that’s why we’re acting in this way.

If however, people think we’re wrong, then it’s worth challenging our position and we welcome people challenging our position. Thank you.

Member of public heckling: You’re wrong, you welcome challenges, you’re wrong. You’re far from being open and transparent and that’s ridiculous. I apologise to you all for that.

Graham Burgess (Chief Executive, Wirral Council): Can I just say?

Joyce Redfearn (Chair, Improvement Board): That’s your view, so I, what we will do is allow further questions and comments at the end and I understand that was a heartfelt, but we’ll go through the series if that’s ok with you.

Member of public who previously heckled: Apologies about the time you take on this decision.

Graham Burgess (Chief Executive, Wirral Council): Can I just say clearly if people think we are wrong, that’s perfectly right to challenge us and there are ways of processing those and it can be challenged independently and we welcome those challenges and if we are wrong of course we will publish the documents.

12:04

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks: