Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP, Parliamentary ping-pong, “democracy dodgers” and the £556,789 in “forgotten cuts” at Wirral Council

Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP, Parliamentary ping-pong, “democracy dodgers” and the £556,789 in “forgotten cuts” at Wirral Council

Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP, Parliamentary ping-pong, “democracy dodgers” and the £556,789 in “forgotten cuts” at Wirral Council

                         

Shortly before Christmas Wirral Council had a “budget options” meeting after the What Really Matters consultation. At this meeting cuts, based on the public response to the consultation for 2014/15 were in principle agreed to. Strictly speaking it was a new budget and policy framework that was agreed to. The budget for 2014/15 is to be decided in March 2014, based on the assumption that Council Tax on Wirral would rise by 2% in 2014/15.

So just to recap, the Labour administration have ruled out a Council Tax referendum. The reason they give is that the large cost of the referendum that would fall on Wirral Council (if you can remember the amount they quoted please leave a comment about what it was and who said it). This is despite the law (The Local Authority (Referendums Relating to Council Tax Increases) (Date of Referendum) (England) Order 2013) that states a Council Tax increase referendum would have to be held on the 22nd May 2014 (the same day as the joint European & local Council elections). I’m not sure if the estimated figure a councillor quoted last year for a Council tax increase referendum took into account the reduced cost of the referendum due to holding other elections on the same day (or whether the cost quoted assumed the referendum would be held separately to other elections in which case the estimate is too high).

Labour’s budget assumption therefore assumes that Council Tax will rise by 2% (without the need for a referendum) to lessen the need for further cuts they’d have to make if the rise was any lower or Council Tax was kept the same. The Labour administration have also ruled out accepting a Council Tax Freeze grant equivalent to a 1% rise if they agreed to keep Council Tax the same as last year.

However Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP has different plans and according to an article last week in the Guardian based on leaked Cabinet letters wants to reduce the threshold to 1.5% and refers to councils that rise Council Tax by only two percent as “democracy dodgers” and “believes they need to be punished to show the government is trying to control the cost of living”. Furthermore Pickles states “he wants to stop councils or police bodies being able to exempt some spending from the cap.”

This article in the Bristol Post before Christmas also quotes the Rt Hon Eric Pickles from a statement in relation to council tax increases “as being particularly open to representations suggesting that some lower threshold be applied to councils, given the strong need to protect taxpayers wherever possible from unreasonable increases”.

So what has this got to do with Parliamentary ping-pong? Well the Local Audit and Accountability Bill is heading to its next to the last stage (starting on 21st January) called “parliamentary ping-pong” before the last stage “Royal Assent” and it becomes law. Crucially the section on Council Tax referendum calculations (s.41) comes into force (see s.49) when the act receives Royal Assent and changes the formula of how a yearly Council Tax increase is arrived at.

In future once the Local Audit and Accountability Bill becomes an Act, the calculation of Council Tax rise includes not just Wirral Council’s share of the Council Tax bill, but also (if I’ve read the bill correctly and please leave if a comment if I’m wrong) the other levying bodies that form part of Council Tax bills too. This means the yearly increase in Council Tax requirements in the budgets of the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority and the Police and Crime Commissioner for Merseyside would affect what the percentage increase would be.

It looks from the wording of the Local Audit and Accountability Bill (and a lot of recent regulations) that this will come into effect for the 2014/15 financial year. As the basis by which a Council Tax rise is calculated will change, £556,789 is my rough estimate of what changing the threshold from 2% to 1.5% will be as the true amount of extra cuts will depend on what the Merseyside Police and Crime Commissioner’s and Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority’s Council Tax requirements for 2014/15 are.

At Wirral Council’s Coordinating Committee meeting (held yesterday at the time of writing), in item 8 (policy update), councillors on the committee will have read in their papers on page 2, under Implications for the Local Audit and Accountability Bill “Budget Strategy considerations may also be impacted by the changes to the Council Tax threshold for triggering a referendum.”

Yet curiously not one of the councillors of the fifteen on the Coordinating Committee asked how much changing the Council Tax threshold for triggering a referendum would affect the budget strategy considerations or to my recollection anything at all about how a change to the Council Tax threshold would affect the 2014/15 Budget.

So is this £½ million of cuts at Wirral Council that councillors seem to be unaware of going to result in a further twelve-week consultation (or will the responses to the What Really Matters consultation be reused)? If any of these further cuts require ninety days consultation with the trade unions will this mean that they will only be realised as part-year savings in 2014/15?

There does seem to be one concession the Liberal Democrats have received though. Any regulations the Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP decides to do with council tax increase referendums has to by law be also agreed with Rt Hon Nick Clegg MP first.

So what do you dear reader think? Will Cllr Phil Davies be saying of the Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP something similar to the famous Laurel and Hardy quote “Well, here’s another nice mess you’ve gotten me into!”. With exquisite timing, Wirral Council’s Labour administration will have to agree the budget for 2014/15 around the end of February 2014 meaning these extra cuts will probably feature in the local election period in the lead up to polling day on the 22nd May.

Certainly this apparent lack of a plan B will have to be explained when the Improvement Board returns in March. As the Rt Hon Ed Balls MP (Labour’s Shadow Chancellor) said last October about Labour’s economic competence, “we are going to win based upon our experience, our track record, our credibility”.

Oh and if you think the projected underspend of £884,000 will mean a further £½ million of cuts won’t have to be made in 2014/15 you’d be wrong.

£250,000 of the underspend will probably be agreed tonight to go towards the clean up and repairs to infrastructure in New Brighton following the bad weather. A further £519,000 of the underspend has been earmarked for future restructuring costs leaving (at current estimates) only a projected underspend of £115,000 that can count towards an estimated a £½ million of cuts required if the Coalition government reduce the Council Tax increase referendum threshold to 1.5%.

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

Have improvements to make Wirral Council’s decision making better got bogged down in bureaucracy?

Have improvements to make Wirral Council’s decision making better got bogged down in bureaucracy?

Have improvements to make Wirral Council’s decision making better got bogged down in bureaucracy?

                                     

The New Year is a time of looking back to the previous year and forward to the new one. So please cast your minds back to November 2013 and a meeting of the Improvement Board held in public.

Prior to this there had been a short ten-day consultation on the Improvement Board Review report.

As the Improvement Board Review report is sixty-three pages long I will quote the sections I am referring to here about changes to the Audit and Risk Management Committee (the committee referred to in the quote from section 95 is Wirral Council’s Audit and Risk Management Committee):

20. Action Taken


20.4 It is proposed to strengthen the independent nature of the Audit and Risk Management Committee through the appointment of a majority of external members.” (page 15)

“PRIORITY 2: CORPORATE AND DECISION MAKING

95. It is proposed to strengthen the independent nature of the Committee through the appointment of a majority of external members.” (page 34)

“Next Steps

112. Compliance with the constitution will be through more rigorous challenge from Audit and Risk Management Committee. It is proposed that would be enhanced, by (subject to Council agreement) appointing a majority of independent members of the committee.” (page 37)

“SUMMARY OF NEXT STEPS FOR WIRRAL

167. A key challenge is to ensure compliance to the revised procedures. Compliance with the constitution will be through more rigorous challenge from Audit and Risk Management Committee. It is proposed that would be enhanced by (subject to Council agreement) appointing a majority of independent members of the committee. The Leader of the Council has indicated that he will develop a proposal for consideration by Councillors alongside the review of the Constitution.” (page 49)

Prior to the Improvement Board public meeting on the 15th November there were special meetings of both the Coordinating Committee and the Audit and Risk Management Committee to discuss the Improvement Board Review report.

The Coordinating Committee agreed this:

That this Committee welcomes the Report. It clearly states that the Authority is moving in the right direction.

This Committee pledges to play its full part in continuing that direction of travel.

All Members will be encouraged to engage in the next steps identified within the report.

We must not be complacent as we still need to improve in many areas identified in the report and embed positive changes.

We thank all members of the Improvement Board for their help.

We thank all employees and Members for their efforts in this journey of improvement.

We would recommend the approach adopted by the Local Government Association, in piloting sector led improvement, and would recommend it to others who find themselves in difficulties.

and the Audit and Risk Management Committee (by eight votes to one agreed):

(1) That this Committee welcomes the report of the Improvement Board, which draws attention to the significant progress Wirral has made in the last 20 months.

It recognises that there are still issues which need to be addressed but believes it is clear that Wirral is now an outward looking Authority – open to constructive criticism and willing to address problems when they occur.

We would recommend the sector-led approach to change and development to other authorities who find themselves in difficulty.

(2) That the thanks of the Committee be accorded to the Improvement Board, all staff and Members who have participated in the change process. It now remains for Members to continue to participate in their own development and not become complacent but ensure that change becomes embedded for the future.

(3) That the recommendations contained within the Review report be endorsed and that, subject to clarification as to the ownership of the steps required to support continued improvement, all Members be encouraged to engage in the work required in those areas.

Here is a transcript of the answer given to my question on this issue at the Improvement Board meeting of the 15th November 2013 on the issue of changes to the Audit and Risk Management Committee:

In the review report it states “it is proposed to strengthen the independent nature of the Audit and Risk Management Committee through the appointment of a majority of external members”. How many independent members of the Audit and Risk Management Committee will be appointed, who will they be appointed by and will the Audit and Risk Management Committee be chaired in future by one of these independent members?

You can watch Graham Burgess’s and Cllr Phil Davies’ reply to this question by following this link to footage of the Improvement Board meeting.

Graham Burgess replied, “In terms of the request to strengthen the independent nature of the Audit & Risk Management Committee. First of all I think it’s going to be proposed by the Leader of the Council that for the new municipal year, after the elections in May, that there should be a majority of independent people on the Audit and Risk Management Committee.

There’s only one other Council in the country that’s adopted this approach and the Leader may wish to speak for himself on this matter but I think it is, it’s got to be recognised I hope, the willingness of this Council to open itself up to external scrutiny by I don’t know the numbers yet because that’s going to be discussed, it will be and Phil’s agreed that it should be referred to the Council’s scrutiny committee to discuss the best way to do it, the best way to recruit them, the exact numbers, but certainly I think it’s really brave of him, the fact that this Council and the other one Council to open themselves up in this way.

And the sort of people who might be ?????, and again there’ll be discussions with scrutiny and looking at elsewhere and taking advice from audit. I suspect there’ll be a number of people with a financial background to challenge that.

There’ll be a number of people who can represent key community organisations and can represent individual voices on the Wirral. So there’ll be a mixture I suspect of professional and lay people who can judge whether this Council is actually operating well in terms of its audit responsibilities.

I think that’s another demonstration of the openness that Phil and all parties I suspect want going forward and to be challenged. So in theory and in practice in fact, the councillors can be out voted by the independent members on that panel.

Might I also say that the Council does intend, again this is not finalised to retain the Chair of that panel as a councillor. The majority will be non councillors and that’s because it’s still a Council committee and in terms of organising things we need the availability of a councillor to do that, but I don’t want to be drawn about that.”

Cllr Phil Davies: “Just a sentence to say I think it will enable kind of an ongoing challenge to be built into monitoring, reviewing how we go forward in terms of all of the issues that have been looked at by the Improvement Board over the last eighteen months.

So I think it’s just another kind of check going forward that we’ve got an external voice or external voices, not part of the Council to really scrutinise what we’re doing on our performance going forward and I welcome that.”

So just to go back to a quote from the Improvement Board review report “The Leader of the Council has indicated that he will develop a proposal for consideration by Councillors alongside the review of the Constitution.” Well on Monday 6th January 2014 at a special meeting of the Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee councillors (and the independent members of the Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee) will discuss a review of Wirral Council’s constitution and a survey of councillors. The survey itself states “This feedback will inform a full review of the Constitution that will be undertaken in January 2014” asking for councillors to return the survey by the 7th January 2014 (the 7th January 2014 is stated on the survey, but the recommendation in the accompanying report states 24th January 2014).

Yet nowhere in the thirty-six proposed amendments to Wirral Council’s constitution is there even one that refers to appointing a majority of the Audit and Risk Committee as independent members. The Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee is the Council committee that proposes and scrutinises changes to Wirral Council’s constitution. So why haven’t changes to Wirral Council’s Audit and Risk Management Committee appeared on the Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee agenda for the meeting on the 6th January?

The Improvement Board will be returning in March 2014 to see the progress Wirral Council has made, so why the delay on this matter. Does it require the matter to be referred to the fifteen councillors on the Council’s Coordinating Committee to agree things like “the exact numbers” of independent members on the Audit and Risk Management Committee? If the intention is a majority of independent members that can outvote the councillors you merely have one more independent member than councillors and remove the casting vote of the Chair?

Where is the Leader’s “proposal for consideration by Councillors alongside the review of the Constitution” and why isn’t it included in the agenda of the Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee’s meeting of the 6th January? Why delay implementation of this until after the elections in May? Surely if it’s a “demonstration of openness” this could (as was indicated in the Improvement Board review report) be included in part of the January constitutional review and these changes to the constitution agreed at the Council meeting in either February or March?

At least then when the Improvement Board returned to check on progress in March (although the independent members wouldn’t have been recruited yet) the constitutional change to the Audit and Risk Management Committee could be pointed to as evidence that Wirral Council has actually implemented one of the Improvement Board’s recommendations?

If a simple recommendation to have a majority of the Audit and Risk Management Committee made up of independent people has to go to a meeting of the Coordinating Committee to be agreed in principle (November 2013), the Audit and Risk Management Committee to agree its recommendations (November 2013), then the Coordinating Committee (again to agree the details), then the Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee (to recommend the constitutional changes to Council), then full Council (to agree the constitutional changes), is it any wonder that the Anna Klonowski Associates report referred to the “bureaucratic machinations” of Wirral Council (which seem to still be alive and kicking) and that the Wirral public (as expressed at the public meeting of the Improvement Board in November) are sceptical that there is a political will to change Wirral Council in the direction of more openness in what most people would consider a reasonable timescale?

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

Coordinating Committee (Wirral Council) 3rd September 2013 Liverpool City Region Combined Authority

A report on Wirral Council’s Coordinating Committee’s meeting of the 3rd September 2013 specifically the item on the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority

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.

Continues from Coordinating Committee (Wirral Council) 3rd September 2013 Agenda items 1,3 and 4.

Combined Authority – Cabinet Minute No 45 3:37

Joe Blott, Strategic Director for Transformation and Resources told the Coordinating Committee that the matter was referred to them by Wirral Council’s Cabinet decision of the 8th August 2013. The issue was the subject of a consultation in Wirral and the other authorities. He went into the detail of the Cabinet report of the 8th August 2013, along with appendices 1 (Strategic Governance Review Draft), 2 (Appendix 2 Potential Role for a LCR Combined Authority) and 3 (Draft Scheme for the Establishment of a Combined Authority for LCR) .

He referred to an upcoming City Region Cabinet meeting, the Council meeting of the 19th September and a deadline of the 30th September 2013 for a submission to central government. Cllr Wittingham asked if there were any questions?

Cllr Abbey referred to the timescale having been moved back from July to September, but it would give them access to “major funding”. He referred to Lord Heseltine’s work on devolving government budgets.

Cllr Fraser asked for clarification on the cost implications of the Combined Authority. Cllr Clements asked if it was neutral in cost?

Joe Blott said the Coordinating Committee wasn’t the decision-making committee for it, but as they would be combining six existing processes hopefully they would create efficiencies.

Cllr Brighouse referred to the Greater Manchester Combined Authority and incorrectly labelled Wirral Council as a separate transport authority.

Joe Blott said that Halton was a transport authority, Cllr Foulkes said that Cllr Brighouse’s statement that Wirral Council was a transport authority was not factual. Cllr Ron Abbey said that Wirral Council was a highways authority, not a transport authority. Joe Blott said that Wirral Council was a highways authority and not a transport authority.

He went on to say that the new arrangements would be more open and transparent than existing arrangements with the potential for greater decision-making and influence on the City Region.

Cllr Elderton asked about the statutory powers of a combined authority and whether this would lead to increased costs for Wirral Council? He wanted assurances that that wouldn’t happen.

Joe Blott said that if it existed it would have responsibility for regeneration projects, which may lead to the employment of specialist people or specialist contracts. Cllr Elderton asked for noting of his concerns.

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

Coordinating Committee (Wirral Council) 3rd September 2013 Agenda items 1,3 and 4

A report on the Coordinating Committee (Wirral Council) 3rd September 2013 Apologies for absence, Declarations of Interest and Minutes of the meeting of the 3rd 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.

1. Apologies for absence 0:17

Cllr David Elderton gave his apologies for Cllr Andrew Hodson (Conservative spokesperson) as he was on holiday. Cllr Andrew Hodson had appointed Cllr David Elderton Conservative spokesperson in his absence.

Shirley Hudspeth (Committee Clerk) gave apologies for Cllr Steve Williams (Conservative).

3. Declarations of interest/Whip 0:50

Cllr Ron Abbey declared an interest in agenda item 5 (Combined Authority – Cabinet Minutes No.45) as a Board Member of Merseytravel.
Cllr Steve Foulkes declared a personal interest in agenda item 5 (Combined Authority – Cabinet Minutes No.45) due to his membership of the Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority (Merseytravel).
Cllr Stuart Wittingham declared a personal interest in agenda item 5 (Combined Authority – Cabinet Minutes No.45) due to his employment (Arriva).

4. Minutes of previous meeting (3rd July 2013) 1:20

Cllr Stuart Wittingham (Chair) said he had one issue on page 2. He said that the Coordinating Committee had resolved to note the comments, not alter the minutes.

Cllr David Elderton said that the second paragraph on page 4 concluded by “He informed that he would circulate an easily understandable form of words in plain English on this matter to all Members of the Committee.” He was not quite sure what that referred to.

Surjit Tour responded that it was to do with the committee having clarity of its remit. Cllr Elderton asked if it had already been circulated as to his recollection he hadn’t received it yet? Surjit Tour replied that the note had yet to be circulated by him. Cllr Elderton asked for it to be sent out.

Cllr Stuart Wittingham asked if subject to his comment and that of Cllr David Elderton were the committee happy with the minutes of the meeting held on the 3rd July? The minutes were agreed.

Continues at Coordinating Committee (Wirral Council) 3rd September 2013 Liverpool City Region Combined Authority.

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

Coordinating Committee (Wirral Council) 3rd July 2013 | Councillors argue over minutes of LGA Conference costs call-in

A report on Wirral Council’s Coordinating Committee meeting of the 3rd July 2013 | Councillors argue over minutes of LGA Conference costs call-in

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.

Above is Part 1 of the Coordinating Committee meeting of the 3rd July 2013, which covers the first twenty-four minutes of the meeting, if you want to watch the whole meeting there is a playlist of all parts of the meeting here.

Coordinating Committee (Wirral Council) 3rd July 2013 | Councillors argue over minutes of LGA Conference costs call-in meeting

                                                                                   

Present:
Cllr David Elderton
Cllr Alan Brighouse (Liberal Democrat spokesperson)
Cllr Denise Roberts
Cllr Moira McLaughlin
Cllr Adam Sykes
Cllr Robert Gregson deputy for Cllr Ron Abbey
Cllr Stuart Wittingham (Chair)
Cllr Jean Stapleton
Cllr Andrew Hodson (Conservative spokesperson)
Cllr Steve Williams
Cllr Steve Foulkes
Cllr Bernie Mooney
Cllr Leah Fraser
Cllr Pat Glasman

The Chair, Cllr Stuart Wittingham welcomed people to the inaugural meeting of the Coordinating Committee (although the committee had already met to consider the Conservative call in of whether sending people to the Local Government Association conference was value for money. He asked for any apologies. Apologies were given for Cllr Ron Abbey.

Cllr David Elderton asked why there were no microphones for the members of the committee (other than the Chair and the officers either side of him)? The Chair said they’d find out, but in the meantime just to speak loudly. The Chair asked for any declarations of interest or party whip? Nobody made any. He then asked if people had had a chance to read the minutes of the previous Coordinating Committee meeting, which considered the call-in?

Cllr Leah Fraser said that before they approved them she wanted to make some comments. Cllr Patricia Glasman asked if they were points on the minutes of the Scrutiny Programme Board? Cllr Fraser answered they weren’t, they were to do with the minutes of the call-in meeting.

The Chair pointed out to Cllr Glasman that agenda item four was the minutes of the call-in meeting. Cllr Fraser said she would limit her comments to two or three.

Under Melissa Holt, in the second paragraph Cllr Fraser quoted that in the minutes Melissa Holt “had become aware of an invoice for the LGA Conference”, she felt the sentence was “isn’t entirely accurate” and that what Melissa Holt had said was that she first became aware that the places had been booked for the conference on the 29th May. Cllr Fraser thought the sentence should be changed around and that it was an important point.

Cllr Steve Foulkes said, “I’m certainly not happy at all, I’m unhappy with one person’s version of events being the truth.”

Cllr Leah Fraser started to reply to Cllr Steve Foulkes but was interrupted by a Labour councillor, then a number of different councillors expressed their views on the matter.