EXCLUSIVE: Wirral Council spent £1,009.35 on “media training” for councillors and a further £57,659.24 on legal costs over unreasonable land charges
EXCLUSIVE: Wirral Council spent £1,009.35 on “media training” for councillors and a further £57,659.24 on legal costs over unreasonable land charges
Jim Hancock invoice media training Wirral Council councillors
Wirral Council spent £1,009,35 on “media training” for councillors provided by Jim Hancock. The training was provided to councillors on the 16th March 2016, 27th April 2016 and 14th June 2016.
Part of the cost of the training were three round trips from Lymm to Wallasey (81 miles each time) charged to Wirral Council at 45 pence a mile costing £109.35.
I will declare an interest in the next part of this article as I’m currently awaiting a permission to appeal decision in relation to costs relating to an Environmental Information Regulations request (which doesn’t relate to land charges) which will be decided by the First-tier Tribunal (Information Rights).
Why was trouble brewing in the Shire about a fire station? (Lord of the Rings parody)
Why was trouble brewing in the Shire about a fire station? (Lord of the Rings parody)
This is a parody of local politics based on the Lord of the Rings. As someone referred to in it I’d better declare an interest. As a child I read the Lord of the Rings trilogy in a Wirral Council library that Wirral Council later tried to close (but the government stopped them) because of people who Wirral Council would probably label “unreasonable”.
The Shire in the Lord of the Rings as imagined in the film
In the Shire, trouble was brewing. Not only were the hobbits cross at plans to concrete over their beloved countryside with a fire station, but Men had decided (although it was now under review) to spend much of the hobbits’ money on a golf resort project too.
This story had begun some time ago.
The hobbits had decided on a representative called McVey who a group of the Men had taken a dislike to*. The Men had told the hobbits that McVey was why their fire stations must close (even though the Men had decided this). This way the Men could persuade the hobbits to ditch McVey and pick the Men’s representative instead. It was all about power!
* I’m being diplomatic.
So there were consultation meetings of the hobbits so well attended, hobbits couldn’t get in and stood outside getting cross.
At these meetings the Fire Man, who lived in the Shire, told those who actually managed to make it inside that whoever the hobbits voted for the fire stations would still close. So much for democracy!
However the Men got worried, enough of the hobbits were cross about the issue, that if the Men decided to put a new fire station in Greasby (demolishing a much-loved library and community centre in the process), McVey might win again! So the Men gave the credit for stopping the fire station plans to the Men’s candidate instead who had a very Shirey sounding name Greenwood.
Instead as a plan B, the new fire station would now be in Saughall Massie.
Around this time, a man who’d grown up in the Shire as a child and was described by some as a legend (or as the Judge described him “obstinate” and “unreasonable”*) asked the Men for the costs of this project as the Men claimed it was to save money. The arguments around this matter carried on for 1 year and 5 months (despite the law stating this information should be provided within 20 working days!)
* George Bernard Shaw: The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
Although the information was eventually provided, it turned out that the hobbits had been lied to during the consultations so that the Men could get the answers they wanted!
Oh dear!
Not only that but the Men had repeated these lies in their planning application for the fire station in Saughall Massie.
Double oh dear!
However the Judge decreed at a hearing (the Judge later admitted that he hadn’t read all the papers about this matter before the hearing took place*) that there was no “public importance” to the hobbits knowing that they’d been lied to and later ordered the man to pay the Men £500.
* thus stating more in a nutshell about justice, fairness and decision-making than the man ever could
This was despite the Men who controlled the Fire Authority having an annual budget of £62.673 million (revenue) and £20.6 million (capital). The Fire Authority had also received £297,900 (revenue) and £4.171 million (capital) in extra funds by the government for the fire stations mergers project.
The Men on the Fire Authority also had decided to pay their in-house solicitor £102,000 a year and picked this person too.
After all the Men had been saying for ages the hobbits should give them more money and the Men really disliked requests for information! This was money that the Men on the Fire Authority could then spend on taxis to public meetings, expensive dinners and stays in hotels.
The fact that the man who had grown up in the Shire had (as a result of this) told the hobbits that ~£300,000* of their money for the land would go to the very body who decided on the planning application (if the planning application was approved) was embarrassing to the Men (who had wanted to keep this a secret).
* at 2015 prices, anybody want to leave a comment on the legal implications of this?
But the legend (that was what people called him) still believed in openness and transparency.
He had realised that the Shire was in danger of being altered permanently and corrupted by greedy Men interested in power.
Not just with the fire station, but with the golf resort too.
Greed had truly corrupted the Men’s hearts.
But what would happen next?
Would the Planning Committee refuse the planning application for the fire station?
If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.
What are the changes to citizen audit for 2015/16?
An example of an invoice supplied by Wirral Council during a previous audit
This year citizen audit changes. No longer are citizen audit rights covered by part II of the Audit Commission Act 1998 and the underlying regulations as this is no longer in force.
Previously during citizen audit, public bodies could redact information about the names of their own staff, but if it was information about anyone else they had to get their auditor’s approval.
Now, public bodies can redact parts of documents or whole documents on grounds of commercial confidentiality (although a public interest test has to be carried out) and information about the names of their own staff. They are also allowed to redact information that is the name of other individuals but not if it’s the name of a sole trader.
Previously the auditor had to consider all objections (as long as a copy was sent to the public body) made by local government electors for a declaration that an item of account is unlawful, recovery of an amount not accounted, a public interest report or an immediate report.
Now, an objection can only be about a matter that the auditor could write a public interest report about or declare that an item of account is unlawful but the auditor can decide not to consider the objection if:
(a) the auditor thinks it is frivolous or vexatious, or
(b) the cost to the auditor investigating is disproportionate to the sums involved or
(c) it repeats an objection already made and considered by the auditor whether in that financial year or a previous financial year.
However the auditor won’t be able to decide not to consider an objection if it is "an objection which the auditor thinks might disclose serious concerns about how the relevant authority is managed or led".
Even if the auditor rejects an objection for one or more of the reasons above the auditor can still make a recommendation to the public body.
Previously the Audit and Account Regulations 2011 required the inspection period was 20 working days regulation 9 and also that an advertisement was published (as well as a notice on its website) 14 days before this inspection period started regulation 10.
Under the new regime, this changes. There will be a longer inspection period of thirty working days, but this period will now also be the time during which objections and questions to the auditor must be made.
