Tag: openness

Cllr Simon Mountney “There are major issues happening in this Council that are still being covered up”

Cllr Simon Mountney “There are major issues happening in this Council that are still being covered up”

Cllr Simon Mountney “There are major issues happening in this Council that are still being covered up”

                                   

Last Thursday as part of the consultation into the future of the Improvement Board, Wirral Council’s Audit and Risk Management Committee met. Whereas all councillors voted in favour of the motion on the report on Wirral Council’s response to critical reports 2010/2013, Cllr Simon Mountney voted against the earlier motion about the Improvement Board Review, this motion contained the phrase “it is clear that Wirral is now an outward looking Authority – open to constructive criticism and willing to address problems when they occur”.

I thought (for those who weren’t at the meeting) it would be interesting to report Cllr Simon Mountney’s comments here as from his comments it’s clear that not all Wirral councillors agree on the way forward. His comments start at 8:56 in the video below.

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.

Cllr Simon Mountney said, “OK, politically are we ready, perhaps we are today Chair, are we ready post the elections should things change this year or the year after, I’m not sure and I don’t think we’re politically savvy or grown up enough yet to ensure that if that and when that change comes that we are politically grown up enough to make sure that that is the case.

I think there are elements of the Council that perhaps don’t want that to change and whether we are politically grown up enough or savvy enough to make sure that that happens, I’ll reflect on the answer to that.

Strategically are we grown up enough? No, I don’t think we are. This report is historic but clearly it’s about things that have happened, all true. The first point here that says it was the Council that was perceived as having a silo culture and a lack of corporate and strategic thinking.

You know when the Chief Exec sits in front of us and says the last two budgets have been fire fighting budgets because we’ve got other things to think about that demonstrates to me that we haven’t been planning operations strategically, we’ve had too many other things to think about and all we’ve been doing is fire fighting.

So, yes moving forward, we might develop and grow, but historically this document doesn’t reflect what’s happened and I’ll pick one area, FOI requests.

The number of FOI requests that this Council receive, I believe gives a really good indication of how open and transparent and therefore you could use the argument, I would, as to whether good means a Council we are.

There are still major issues that I know of and I’m working very hard to get the evidence and as soon as I do I’ll bring it to you. There are major issues happening in this Council that are still being covered up and you know it’s wrong and I don’t understand why as a Council we persist with that type of attitude and ethos.

This Council is only ashamed of the ethos changes and the culture changes that as yet I see no evidence that that has changed. I’m aware of three or four incidents that should appear in this final second report but don’t and they don’t as yet, because they will, they don’t as yet because they’ve been covered up, they’ve been kept from me!

Now why that is I don’t know, but I will find out and I’ll let people know but based on that alone, this report doesn’t reflect the Council that I currently see.

Yes we are some way down the road, yes we are improving, yes there is improvement and yes there are policies in place and politicians in place that are making a difference but there is some and there is the ethos and culture that persists from where we came from and until that changes I’m afraid this report doesn’t quite reflect the Council that I see.”

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

Health and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee 14th January 2012 Part 1

Health and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee 14th January 2012 Part 1 Labour councillors vote to ban filming again

Well, the Health and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee started with the Chair starting a discussion by the Committee over whether they should allow filming.

The Chair started speaking but the proceedings were interrupted by a serial heckler going by the name of Cllr Harry Smith (Labour), who after walking twice in both directions in front of the camera loudly shouted “Chuck them out” before storming out himself. The doors slammed loudly behind him, while an atmosphere of calm returned to the meeting with the Chair temporarily lost for words at Cllr Smith’s interruption.

Ironically, the meeting wasn’t being filmed while this was taking place, but for a rundown along with links to the Youtube videos of the three times this previously happened you can read Paul Cardin’s blog as each time is broadly similar with Labour councillors moaning about it the filming they thought was taking place (but wasn’t).

I also notice from Paul Cardin’s blog that one of those voting against filming at this Health and Wellbeing meeting (Cllr Bernie Moonie) was quoted at the last meeting as saying “just for this meeting”.

So who voted for and who voted against?

Against filming 4
Cllr Bernie Mooney (Labour)
Cllr Tony Norbury (Labour)
Cllr Denise Roberts (Labour)
Cllr Anita Leech (Labour)

For filming 4
Cllr Alan Brighouse (Lib Dem)
Cllr Eddie Boult (Conservative)
Cllr Mike Hornby (Conservative)
Brian Donaldson (Carer’s representative)

The Chair (Cllr Simon Mountney, Conservative) having abstained on the vote then decided to use his vote to vote with the Labour councillors.

During the discussion Cllr Bernie Mooney referred to the previous Planning Committee and how in her view there was no policy on the filming of meetings.

Cllr Mooney must have completely forgotten about voting for the Council policy entitled “Lights, Camera, Action” in December 2011, that the Standards Committee of 26th January 2011 resolved that “in the interests of openness and transparency it was decided that no further restrictions would be placed on the use of recording media in Council buildings.”.

As a footnote to the above at the last Council meeting, instead of settling the matter at the end of last year, Labour councillors insisted on calling for a review of filming meetings to the Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee which next meets on 23rd January 2012, but sadly the Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee’s agenda (all five items of it!) doesn’t include this review.

Personally I think the “review” is a “red herring” and as the next Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee after the one on the 23rd January is the 20th March, I have little option but to follow through on my letter of the 19th December 2012 and file for judicial review at the Administrative Court (High Courts of Justice) of Wirral Council’s decisions.