Tag: Cllr Wendy Clements

23 Wirral councillors to be elected after Tony Cox resigns; Graham Burgess fires starting gun in local election race

23 Wirral councillors to be elected after Tony Cox resigns; Graham Burgess fires starting gun in local election race

23 Wirral councillors to be elected after Tony Cox resigns; Graham Burgess fires starting gun in local election race

                                

On Monday Wirral Council’s Returning Officer started the election process by publishing the Notice of Election (a copy of it is below). Each ward in Wirral will be electing one councillor, except voters in Greasby, Franky & Irby ward who will be electing two councillors and therefore have two votes in the upcoming local elections.

The reason for this is that Tony Cox has resigned. As Tony Cox was less than two years through a four year term of office you may wonder why? The reason is that he’s been picked as the Conservative candidate for the General Election in Newcastle-under-Lyme and he felt that he couldn’t put his full energies into that without resigning as a councillor for Greasby, Frankby & Irby ward. The two Conservative candidates in Greasby, Frankby & Irby ward this year will be Councillor Wendy Clements and Tom Anderson. Tom Anderson was previously a councillor in Upton ward from 2008 to 2012 (with the lowest majority I remember in recent years of only four votes).

The full notice of election is below.

METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF WIRRAL

ELECTION OF COUNCILLORS

NOTICE OF ELECTION

For the Wards listed below

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:

1. Elections are to be held for COUNCILLORS of the under mentioned Wards.

2. The number of COUNCILLORS to be elected is as shown in the Table hereunder:

Name of ward No. of COUNCILLORS to be elected Name of ward No. of COUNCILLORS to be elected
BEBINGTON 1 LISCARD 1
BIDSTON & ST JAMES 1 MORETON WEST & SAUGHALL MASSIE 1
BIRKENHEAD & TRANMERE 1 NEW BRIGHTON 1
BROMBOROUGH 1 OXTON 1
CLATTERBRIDGE 1 PENSBY & THINGWALL 1
CLAUGHTON 1 PRENTON 1
EASTHAM 1 ROCK FERRY 1
GREASBY, FRANKBY & IRBY 2 SEACOMBE 1
HESWALL 1 UPTON 1
HOYLAKE & MEOLS 1 WALLASEY 1
LEASOWE & MORETON EAST 1 WEST KIRBY & THURSTATON 1

                    
3. Nomination papers must be delivered to the Electoral Services Office, Ground Floor, Town Hall, Wallasey, during normal office hours, from Tuesday, 15th April 2014 to Thursday, 17th April 2014 and during normal office hours, from Tuesday, 22nd April 2014 to 4pm on Thursday, 24th April 2014. Forms of nomination papers may also be obtained at that place, during those times.

4. If the Elections are contested, the poll will take place on Thursday, 22nd MAY 2014.

5. Applications to be included in the register of electors must reach the Electoral Registration Officer at the Town Hall, Wallasey by Tuesday, 6th May 2014, if they are to be effective for the election.

6. Applications, amendments or cancellations of postal votes and changes to proxy voting arrangements, must reach the Electoral Registration Officer at the Town Hall, Wallasey by 5pm on Wednesday, 7th May 2014, if they are to be effective for this election.

7. All new applications to vote by proxy (except those applied for on relevant emergency grounds) must reach the Electoral Registration Officer at the Town Hall, Wallasey by 5pm on Wednesday, 14th May 2014, if they are to be effective for the election.

8. All applications to vote by proxy on relevant emergency grounds (disability occurring after 5pm on Wednesday, 14th May 2014; grounds relating to applicant’s occupation, service or employment where the applicant became aware of those grounds after 5pm on Wednesday, 14th May 2014; or detention under civil powers as a mental health patient) must reach the Electoral Registration Officer at the Town Hall, Wallasey by 5pm on Thursday, 22nd May 2014, if they are to be effective for the election.

DATED: Monday, 14th April
2014

Graham Burgess

LOCAL RETURNING OFFICER

Printed and Published by the Local Returning Officer, Town Hall, Wallasey, Wirral, 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.

Was the Wirral Council Cabinet decision to consult on closing Lyndale School lawful?

Was the Wirral Council Cabinet decision to consult on closing Lyndale School lawful?

Was the Wirral Council Cabinet decision to consult on closing Lyndale School lawful?

                                          

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

Unless you’ve been on holiday or don’t read the papers you can’t fail to have heard about the decision by Wirral Council’s Cabinet last Thursday to start a consultation on the closure of a primary school called Lyndale School in Eastham for children with special educational needs. This was reported on this blog and in the Wirral Globe. There is also a large petition against closure that had attracted over five thousand signatures before the decision at the Cabinet meeting.

Over a year ago (on 10th September 2012) a law came into effect called The Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 which changed the way Wirral Council’s Cabinet made decisions and introduced some further requirements as well as checks and balances.

The report seeking approval to consult on the closure of Lyndale School deems this decision to be classed as a “key decision”. There are four regulations in The Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 which relate to key decisions.

Regulation 8 merely defines what a key decision is.

Regulation 9 states the following (decision maker refers to the Cabinet and is defined here):

9. (1) Where a decision maker intends to make a key decision, that decision must not be made until a document has been published in accordance with paragraph (2), which states—

(a) that a key decision is to be made on behalf of the relevant local authority;
(b) the matter in respect of which the decision is to be made;
(c) where the decision maker is an individual, that individual’s name, and title if any and, where the decision maker is a decision-making body, its name and a list of its members;
(d) the date on which, or the period within which, the decision is to be made;
(e) a list of the documents submitted to the decision maker for consideration in relation to the matter in respect of which the key decision is to be made;
(f) the address from which, subject to any prohibition or restriction on their disclosure, copies of, or extracts from, any document listed is available;
(g) that other documents relevant to those matters may be submitted to the decision maker; and
(h) the procedure for requesting details of those documents (if any) as they become available.

(2) At least 28 clear days before a key decision is made, the document referred to in paragraph (1) must be made available for inspection by the public—

(a) at the offices of the relevant local authority; and
(b) on the relevant local authority’s website, if it has one.

(3) Where, in relation to any matter—

(a) the public may be excluded under regulation 4(2) from the meeting at which the matter is to be discussed; or
(b) documents relating to the decision need not, because of regulation 20(3), be disclosed to the public, the document referred to in paragraph (1) must contain particulars of the matter but may not contain any confidential, exempt information or particulars of the advice of a political adviser or assistant.

As you can see from the above, the decision “must not be made” until a document has been published containing the information specified in (a) to (h) above at least 28 clear days before the meeting on Wirral Council’s website.

I emailed the Chair of the Families and Wellbeing Committee Cllr Wendy Clements and she pointed out in her reply that the Forward Plan listed the item Permission to Consult on an Option for Change at Lyndale School on 18th December 2013.

Yes, this entry on the Forward Plan complies with regulation 9(1)(a) and 9(1)(b).

However does it comply with 9(1)(c) and include “where the decision maker is an individual, that individual’s name, and title if any and, where the decision maker is a decision-making body, its name and a list of its members”? No it just states “Decision due: January 2014 by Cabinet”, with no list of who the individuals that make up the Cabinet are.

Yes, regulation 9(1)(d) is complied with, however 9(1)(e) is not. Although there is a link now to the Cabinet report, this report was published on the 9th January 2014 therefore wouldn’t have been in existence on 18th December 2013. When this item was published on the Forward Plan this document wasn’t listed. Nor did it state the address from which copies of it could be obtained (Regulation 9(1)(f)).

Also as this report was submitted to the Cabinet, in contravention of Regulation 9(1)(g) this entry in the Forward Plan did not state that “other documents relevant to those matters may be submitted to the decision maker” or how to obtain these (Regulation 9(1)(h)).

There is provision within regulation 10 and regulation 11 for a decision to be made without following the notice requirements in Regulation 9, however this is only with the permission of the Chair of the relevant overview and scrutiny committee (in this case the Chair of the Families and Wellbeing Policy and Performance Committee) Cllr Wendy Clements. I emailed Cllr Wendy Clements asking her was she asked and did she give her permission, her reply was “In response to your specific questions; no, I was not asked, and no I did not give permission.”

The School Organisation (Prescribed Alterations to Maintained Schools) (England) Regulations 2007

Moving onto another legal requirement, regulation 8 of the The School Organisation (Prescribed Alterations to Maintained Schools) (England) Regulations 2007 which states

8. Any governing body, local education authority or adjudicator (where applicable) when—

(a) consulting on proposals;
(b) considering or determining proposals;
(c) considering what are related proposals;
(d) making decisions on matters relating to implementation
must have regard to any guidance given from time to time by the Secretary of State.

This is the fifty-seven page guidance issued by the Secretary of State. Was this guidance that Wirral Council “must have regard to” included as an appendix to the report? No it wasn’t.

Had this guidance been read by Cabinet prior to making the decision to proceed to consultation they would’ve read things like this:

“The Special Educational Needs Improvement Test (Paragraph 4.55)

When considering any reorganisation of provision that would be recognised by the LA as reserved for pupils with special educational needs, including that which might lead to some children being displaced through closures or alterations, LAs, and all other proposers for new schools or new provision, will need to demonstrate to parents, the local community and Decision Makers how the proposed alternative arrangements are likely to lead to improvements in the standard, quality and/or range of educational provision for children with special educational needs. All consultation documents and reorganisation plans that LAs publish and all relevant documentation LAs and other proposers submit to Decision Makers should show how the key factors set out in paragraphs 4.59 to 4.62 below have been taken into account by applying the SEN improvement test. Proposals which do not credibly meet these requirements should not be approved and Decision Makers should take proper account of parental or independent representations which question the LA’s own assessment in this regard. ”

and

“4.59 Decision Makers will need to be satisfied that the evidence with which they are provided shows that LAs and/or other proposers have taken account of the initial considerations and all the key factors in their planning and commissioning in order to meet the requirement to demonstrate that the reorganisation or new provision is likely to result in improvements to SEN provision. ”

So bearing the above in mind, I’m starting two polls on this blog.

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

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) 26th September 2013 Minutes, Declarations of Interest and Site Visits

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) 26th September 2013 Minutes, Declarations of Interest and Site Visits

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.

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) 26th September 2013 Minutes, Declarations of Interest and Site Visits

                         

After the blurb given by the Chair at the start of the meeting and the minutes of the meeting held on the 22nd August 2013 were agreed, the Planning Committee got to declarations of interest.

Cllr Christina Muspratt declared an interest in item 4 (APP/13/01021: The Cottage, REST HILL ROAD, STORETON, CH63 6HL – Proposed alterations/extensions to existing cottage with associated external works – Amendment to APP/12/00848) and item 15 (APP/13/01005: Safe Harbour Nursing Home, 1 ABBOTS DRIVE, BEBINGTON, CH63 – Two storey extension and layout of alternative parking provisions). Quite what the nature and type of the interest was I really don’t know as despite sitting on the second row underneath one of the speakers I couldn’t hear clearly what she said.

The Chair, Cllr Bernie Mooney declared a prejudicial interest in item 6 (OUT/13/00551: Unused Land, VALLEY ROAD, BIDSTON – Outline application for the construction of indoor skate park with associated facilities including offices, café, flexible learning spaces, business support for young entrepreneurs and car parking) as one of the directors of Rampworx Youth Village 2000 Limited is married to her niece.

There were four requests for site visits, Cllr Wendy Clements requested a site visit for
OUT/13/00826: Paddock, KINLOSS ROAD, GREASBY, CH49 3PS – Outline application for development of 4 residential units, and the provision of amenity open space, Cllr David Elderton requested a site visit for APP/13/00811: Land at 37 OLDFIELD DRIVE, HESWALL, CH60 6SS – Erection of a 2 storey residential property together with new access to Oldfield Drive and an attached garage and Cllr Irene Williams requested a site visit for APP/13/01021: The Cottage, REST HILL ROAD, STORETON, CH63 6HL – Proposed alterations/extensions to existing cottage with associated external works – Amendment to APP/12/00848 and APP/13/01005: Safe Harbour Nursing Home, 1 ABBOTS DRIVE, BEBINGTON, CH63 – Two storey extension and layout of alternative parking provisions. All four site visits were agreed and the people who were here just for those items left.

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

Families and Wellbeing Policy and Performance Committee (Wirral Council) 9th July 2013

A report on the Families and Wellbeing Committee held in Committee Room 1, Wallasey Town Hall on the 9th July 2013

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.

Video footage of the first meeting of Wirral Council’s Families and Wellbeing Committee (that replaces both the Health and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee and its Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee) can be watched above with a playlist of all parts here. If you’d like to be notified each time I upload a video, simply subscribe to my Youtube channel.

The agenda and reports for the meeting are as usual on Wirral Council’s website. In a meeting that lasted over two hours what was actually decided? Well they agreed the minutes of the previous two meetings of the Health and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the previous meeting of the Children and Young Peoples Committee.

They noted a report and presentation on their terms of reference (which had previously been agreed at the last Extraordinary Council meeting back in April). They noted (and received a report on) the policy and performance procedure rules (which had already been agreed with minor amendments by the Coordinating Committee a week ago). All this (which along with a few interests being declared at the start of the meeting) took a staggeringly long thirteen minutes. These last two reports were something the Committee have no say over as it falls outside their terms of reference.

Then they went onto discuss the role of co-optees. There are ten co-optees on this Committee, some required by law, others were transferred over from the Families and Wellbeing Committee’s predecessor committees. Curiously none of the ten co-optees had been invited along to the meeting where their very existence was debated. I’ll point out here that who the co-optees are is decided by Council, not the Families and Wellbeing Committee. After much umming and ahhing as well as correction by Fiona Johnstone of the mistaken belief by one councillor (who shall remain nameless) that the Chief Executive of Arrowe Park Hospital and a doctor from the Clinical Commissioning Group had been co-optees of the former Health and Wellbeing Committee, Cllrs Moira McLaughlin, Denise Roberts, Mike Hornby and Pat Williams decided to meet in a task and finish group to mull over the co-optees’ future.

So after twenty minutes of noting reports and discussing things that fell outside their remit, did they finally at agenda item seven get to something within their committee’s remit and that it was worthwhile having fifteen councillors (plus two Cabinet Members) and about a dozen senior officers present for? Item seven was another Powerpoint presentation on the “Directorate Plan” given by Claire Fish, Julia Hassall and Chris Begya (in place of Graham Hodkinson).

The slides went on and on, the jargon and management phrases flowing seamlessly from senior officer’s lips. “We’re operating in a challenging fiscal environment” was said instead of the simpler “We’re making cuts”, “synergies” was used instead of cuts, “commissioning approach” instead of privatisation. Julia Hassall told councillors that that they had been “imagining where they’ll be in 2016” and invited them into her “vision of the future”. She then got onto slides about pyramids. You may think Ancient Egypt is way, way outside the remit of the Committee, but these weren’t Powerpoint slides about crumbling relics, these were “pyramids of need”.

Words cannot express how mind-numbingly dull it was watching the admittedly enthusiastic Julia Hassall explaining which children went where on each level of her “pyramids of need”. However it was, yes you’ve guessed it, more code for cuts as confirmed at the end by her saying that they had a balanced budget and were well on track to finding £11.4 million of cuts.

Cllr Williams complained that it was difficult to take in the information from the Powerpoint slides and could they have copies? Cllr McLaughlin also asked this (as well as a question about educational outcomes). Whilst Cllr McLaughlin was asking Julia Hassall a long question, Julia Hassall stood there nodding, seemingly doing a good impression of the Churchill insurance dog but without the “Oh yes”. When she wasn’t nodding, she had her head tilted to one side as if she was a teacher being asked a question by a pupil who hadn’t been paying attention. In a long answer with many, many, many hand gestures that really should’ve had their own accompanying music, Julia Hassall mentioned the Corporate Parenting Group and agreed in response to a question of Cllr McLaughlin that she would circulate the minutes of its last meeting to councillors (which was the subject of a recent FOI request of mine that was refused by Wirral Council on the basis it would take too long). Various other councillors asked questions or made comments, then Chris Begya of the Department of Adult Social Services gave her presentation.

This again was jargon heavy, “safeguarding peer challenge”, “Care Quality Commission” and “national sector led improvement organisation” peppered her talk which again was basically along the theme of the previous one, a hundred and one way to mention cuts without actually using the word. Bad budgets were mentioned, so were savings, so was a “more transparent leadership” and on that final point the Director of Adult Social Services was so transparent he wasn’t even there! As before councillors made comments and asked questions finishing with the Chair thanking Claire Fish, Julia Hassall and Chris Begya.

Claire Fish briefly (yes senior officers can actually be brief) talked about item eight, the Families and Wellbeing dashboard, but spent a lot longer fielding questions from councillors on it. A large print version of item nine (public health dashboard) was circulated to councillors, with a long summary from Fiona Johnstone, which again attracted questions from councillors (along with some very long answers).

Moving to item ten, the end was almost in sight! Cllr Povall gave a brief summary as to where the Task and Finish Group on the Francis Report had got to, there was a long discussion on the work program (eventually they agreed that the Chair and spokespersons would meet up to decide it), there were no questions on item twelve and finally after just over two hours in the sweltering heat of Committee Room 1 the meeting finished.

Corporate Governance Committee (Wirral Council) Questionnaire to Councillors (2011)

H:Corporate ServicesHuman ResourcesO DElected Member TrainingMTSG MeetingsCorporate Governance CommitteeBackground Reports & Action PlanSurveyv6 Elected Member Questionnaire.doc

V6 DRAFT

Wirral Council Members Questionnaire

Dear Councillor,

We are all aware of the AKA Governance report. Almost all of us were present at a presentation by Anna Klonowski recently.

One if the areas for action identified by Anna Klonowski in her report was that of Councillor Development and Training.

The Corporate Governance Committee has agreed that myself, with the other members of the Member Training Strategy Group, Cllr Wendy Clements and Cllr Pat Glasman, will co-ordinate activity in this area.

We plan to provide opportunities for us all to reflect on the issues raised by Anna Klonowski, together with appropriate training.

We have in mind to focus on -:

• the roles and responsibilities of Members and Officers
• our roles as individuals and as members of various Committees, including Cabinet.
• our role when holding the Executive and Officers to account.

We do however need to include the needs of everyone. Please could you help by filling in the attached questionnaire. There is of course a vast range of experience amongst Members both inside and outside the Council. Let us know how we can best use this in our programme.

We will keep you informed but in the meanwhile if you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact myself or Pat or Wendy.

Cllr Tom Harney

Instructions

The Questionnaire has two parts:-

Part One is a series of scenarios that ask you to consider how you would respond in certain situations.
Part Two asks questions about your skills and knowledge and how you like to learn.

Please complete the following questions and return your response either by e-mail to melissaholt@wirral.gov.uk or directly to Melissa Holt who is supporting the process at the Organisational Development Team, South Annex, Wallasey, CH44 8ED

Please respond by return but at the very latest by the 16th December in order for the results to be used to inform a Development Programme ready to commence in the New Year.

Part One – Scenarios

Step 1

Please consider the scenarios below and the possible actions available to you.

Step 2

Once you have considered your response, rank them in preference order by placing a number 1, 2 or 3 next to each of them.

1 = this would be the most appropriate response
2 = this would be the next most appropriate response
3 = this would be the least appropriate response

Step 3
Add any alternative actions that you would take. Also please include any comments you would like to make on the scenario.

1) Some reports were due for a Scrutiny Committee. There is a briefing before the meeting and the papers are not available. This is the 3rd time this sort of event has happened.

What action would you take?

a) Talk to the Chairman in advance of the meeting asking that the report be deferred on the basis that it is not available for the briefing. In addition, agree with the Chairman that he/she will write to the Chief Executive cc the Cabinet Member asking for an explanation for the recent failures and remedial action that will be taken?
b) Talk to the Chairman in advance of the meeting asking that the report be deferred on the basis that it is not available for the briefing. Agree with the Chairman that he will raise the issue with the Chief Officer in the briefing seeking an explanation of the continued failures. If this explanation is unacceptable, agree with the Chairman that he/she will write to the Chief Executive cc the Cabinet Member asking for an explanation for the recent failures and remedial action that will be taken?
c) Write to the Chief Executive cc the Cabinet Portfolio holder asking for an explanation and seeking details of the action he/she proposes?

Other actions taken and your comments

2) The Key Performance Indicators reported for a particular Department show that in the 3rd quarter they have under performed but, states that they will have recovered the situation by the 4th quarter. It’s now the end of February (half way through the 4th quarter).

What action would you take?

a) Accept the report

b) Ask the Chief Officer attending the Committee to explain whether performance as of today’s date proves that they will achieve the outturn performance as per the report to the previous committee
c) On receipt of the report agree with the Chairman that he will write to the Chief Officer asking for updated performance information to be submitted in writing to the Committee if necessary on the night to prove that the performance promised in the 3rd quarter will be achieved by the end of the 4th quarter.

Other actions taken and your comments

3) A Chief Officer has submitted an improvement programme. Monthly reports appear to suggest everything in on track but from some feedback at local surgeries, members of the public do not appear to recognise the improvements and are still raising concerns.

How would you react?

a) Write to the Chief Officer detailing the concerns of the members of the public and asking for their response.
b) Write to the Chief Officer cc the relevant Cabinet detailing the concerns of the members of the public and asking for their response)
c) As for (b) but ask to meet the Portfolio Holder seeking proposals as to external verification of the delivery of the inputs, outputs and outcomes from the improvement programme.

Other actions taken and your comments

4) You are conducting a surgery when you are approached by a member of the public who happens to be an employee at Wirral Council. They ask if what they tell you can be kept confidential but then continue to relate a story regarding fraudulent behaviour within the team in which they work.

How would you respond?

a) Listen but tell the individual that this outside of your remit and that they should report it to Internal Audit
b) Tell the individual you intend to discuss the allegation with the Monitoring Officer maintaining their confidentiality as far as possible.
c) Take the issue up personally with the Director of Finance

Other actions taken and your comments

5) In a Committee meeting a fellow Elected Member becomes frustrated by the Officer’s answers to their questions. The Elected Member begins to shout and make unreasonable requests for further information.

How would you deal with this situation?

a) Leave the situation to the Chair as it is their role to manage this kind of thing
b) Propose to the Chair a 5 min cooling off period explaining the Officer’s role

c) Nothing – the situation is indeed very frustrating and venting a little emotion is acceptable

Other actions taken and your comments

6) At a Committee meeting an unexpected report is handed out by an Officer.

What would you do?

a) Look to the Chair to approve the report as urgent and accept the report on the Officer’s recommendation that it is a “good news story”

b) Request an adjournment to understand the detailed and controversial information the report
c) Recommend that the Chair refuses to accept the report and articulate this strongly because you feel due process has not been followed.

Other actions taken and your comments

Part Two – Questions

7) What skills or knowledge could you bring to the work being done by the Council on the topic of Corporate Governance?

8) What are the key skills and areas of knowledge you think you need as a Councillor to practice in a way that shows good corporate governance?

9) Are there any other training or development needs that you have at present?

10) How do you like to learn?

E-Learning

Workshops/ face to face sessions

Reading materials

One to one coaching/ mentoring

11) Do you have any further observations or comments?

Thank you for your time.