VIDEO: A round-up of local Wirral and Merseyside politics by John Brace (part 1)

VIDEO: A round-up of local Wirral and Merseyside politics by John Brace (part 1)

VIDEO: A round-up of local Wirral and Merseyside politics by John Brace (part 1)

                                                            

Screenshot from Youtube video of John Brace
Screenshot from Youtube video of John Brace

Below is a transcript of a video I’ve recorded about a range of local political matters. I’ve added some extra detail which I don’t say on the video in [] brackets and of course links to more detailed stories. I realised when I finished recording that I’d been talking for nearly eighteen minutes. It’s about a variety of local political issues.

At the time of publishing this blog post the video has been uploaded to Youtube, but is still processing at Youtube’s end.

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.

John Brace on local Wirral and Merseyside politics (part 1)


JOHN BRACE: Hello, I hope you can hear me clearly. I’m John Brace and I’m going to be filming a series of videos as due to the half term holidays next week, there’s a shortage of public meetings.

So, I thought I’d start off by looking at one of the bigger stories on my blog this week.

That was about what I said at a meeting of the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority to the Chair Cllr Dave Hanratty and his response about councillors’ expenses.

I suppose I’d better briefly explain what the situation is regarding councillors’ expenses and allowances.

Councillors on the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority are entitled to claim expenses for instance for travel to public meetings and each year they’re supposed to publish a table detailing each councillors’ name and how much has been spent over the year in expenses for that particular councillor in various categories.

In fact that’s a legal requirement, a very basic level of transparency.

However unfortunately what Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service was doing was, where they received invoices directly rather than councillors claiming back expenses they’d incurred themselves, where trips were booked through Capita, train travel that kind of thing, Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service were invoiced directly but this wasn’t appearing on the actual annual lists so that about £6,000 or so of expenses were being left off. So I have been pointing this out over the past few months.

There’s also the issue that councillors get paid allowances and on this National Insurance and presumably things like income tax were paid. Now those amounts weren’t included in the annually published lists either.

I did ask Councillor Hanratty earlier, I think it was the day before yesterday whether these amounts would be included in future, didn’t get an answer.

Asked a question about this at the Birkenhead Constituency Committee, told it was a matter for Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service/Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority.

I think they don’t want to give me answers on this, I think they hope I’ll just stop writing about it and move on to other things. After all I think there are far less councillors getting a taxi from home to the public meetings now since I started publishing what these expenses were for.

Anyway, another news story that’s seems to be popular on the blog is that Merseytravel’s Chief Executive David Brown is leaving. I think he’s leaving from some time next month to become Chief Executive of Transport for the North. Obviously that’ll be news for people that work at Merseytravel and I suppose you’re wondering what Transport for the North is!

Well it’s a new kind of regional body that’s been set up regarding transport matters and eventually it’ll become like Merseytravel is and the Combined Authority a statutory body. So I wish him luck in his new job and I think the Deputy Chief Executive Frank Rogers will be Acting Chief Executive until councillors decide on who the permanent Chief Executive should be, which should come to a future meeting in the future.

Anyway, another thing I’ve written about on the blog recently is to do with the whole Lyndale School closure matter. Now for those who have been following this story this is probably going to repeat what you already know, but Wirral Council officers said the reason the school had to close was that from 2016/17 which is the next academic year, that funding that they’d get for education from the government would be based on pupil numbers rather than place numbers.

Now at the moment I think there are about forty places at Lyndale School and about must be a dozen or so pupils. So basically they were saying that from next year, there would be a shortfall in Lyndale School’s budget.

But this hasn’t happened!

The Cabinet still decided to close the School, but the funding changes haven’t happened, Wirral Council will get the same funding as they did the previous year.

However despite them getting the same funding, they have actually made cuts from the SEN budget because there is flexibility at Wirral Council in that they can move money around within the education budget. They’ve still got to spend it on education, but they can move money around from say that allocated for teaching assistants for special educational needs to something else within that education budget and one of the things that’s been causing pressures on the budget is that they have a massive contract, I think it’s about half way through thirty years or something.

I’ve read through the contract and it’d take too long to go into here, but it’s a contract with Wirral Schools Services Limited for basically to rebuild a number of schools, but as well as the payments that relate to that there are also payments of millions a year I think that the schools have to pay this private company for services to do with the schools. For instance I think school meals is part of it, possibly cleaning and maintenance.

So the situation had been that Wirral Council was getting a grant from the government for some of this, but the contract meant that the costs were rising each year for PFI.

What was happening was, this money was being funded outside the education budget by Wirral Council. But then a political decision was made [by Wirral Council councillors] not to do this, which meant that a few million had to be cut out of the education budget elsewhere.

Hence why special educational needs got a cut, but again one of the other interesting twists and turns that came out in the Lyndale School saga is that the whole issue of whether the School should be closed or not seemed to arise around the time there was a revaluation of the land and buildings.

Off the top of my head I think the valuation was about £2.4 million [it was actually £2.6 million]. I’d better make it clear at this stage this is a what they call a technical, what’s it called, depreciated replacement cost value. It’s not a they send in an estate agent and they say how much would would we get for this and how much would we get for the school playing fields and so on?

No, it’s more they have to have on their asset list, a list of how much their assets are because obviously as a Council they have liabilities, they have to offset that with their assets.

But it’s a great shame what happened regarding Lyndale School, it’s not closed yet, it’ll close at the end of the academic year, but I think it could’ve been handled a lot better.

Obviously there’ve been recent revelations come out that the person that chaired the consultation meetings on the Lyndale School closure wasn’t in fact a Wirral Council employee, but is a what do you call it, a temp, a temporary worker because they couldn’t recruit somebody to the post [for £775+VAT/day].

He’s called Phil Ward and the problem was that, there was quite a bit of criticism levelled at him for the way he chaired the consultation meetings. Now obviously you can criticise anybody for chairing high profile consultation meetings. I’m sure there were criticisms of how Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority did their consultation meetings.

But moving back to Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority, the Saughall Massie issue, it was agreed by councillors on the Fire Authority to go ahead, they’ve agreed the four or so million pounds in the capital budget and a planning application has been submitted.

Now I’ve checked on Wirral Council’s website and I can’t see a planning application there yet but obviously they have to scan it in and put it on the website for consultation so people can make their comments and so on.

The other issue is there was a vote recently on whether Wirral Council should give the land or they may get something for it I don’t know, maybe they’ll give it to them, should give this land to Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority for this new fire station in Saughall Massie.

Now, that was a five for, five against vote with one abstention so it got deferred to another meeting.

Now obviously it would be better if Wirral Council could make a decision reasonably quickly but I understand the point that councillors made at the meeting, that they felt they were only hearing one side of the argument and that they hadn’t got the information in front of them regarding the emails that had been released under Freedom of Information Act requests, they hadn’t heard the Fire and Rescue Service’s point of view because nobody had been invited along from the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service and basically better decisions are made by politicians when they have the facts in front of them and they don’t like making decisions if they’re going to be made fools of later when it turns out there’s something they should’ve known or was in the public domain.

An example of that New Brighton car parking Fort Perch Rock fiasco. Now that went out to budget consultation, was agreed by Cabinet, was agreed by Council but what wasn’t known at the time was that Wirral Council had a lease for the Marine Point complex and that lease said that if Wirral Council introduced car parking charges at Fort Perch Rock, that they could be introduced in the car parking elsewhere there and Liverpool Echo journalist I think it was Liam Murphy got in touch with the company that runs the Marine Point complex and they said yes they’d have to introduce charges because obviously if Wirral Council had introduced charges at Fort Perch Rock car park then it would’ve displaced some parking to the free parking elsewhere, so then they’d feel they’d have to introduce charges themselves, but once these matters came out then there was a U-turn done on it and they decided they’ll make up the budget shortfall somewhere else.

But that goes back to my point about politicians having the information in front of them so they can make reasonably informed decisions. Now the reports that go before officers, sorry politicians whether that’s at Wirral Council, Liverpool City Council, Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service, Merseytravel and so on are written by officers. That is employees of the particular public body that the politicians are politicians for.

But there’s a question of, officers can have a particular point of view and make a recommendation and therefore ask the councillors to approve it, but officers aren’t actually going to know everything, but where do the public fit in all this?

Because of course in an ideal world, like for instance the Planning Committee yesterday where the public gets to speak for five minutes if they’ve got a qualifying petition. In an ideal world, if you were making a decision, say a major decision about a fire station being built, well that’s two decisions really, it’s a planning decision and whether Wirral Council give them the land. When you’re making a major decision like that, then not only should you have some sort of consultation with the public and by consultation I don’t mean publishing the papers for the meeting a week before, although that does give some advance warning so people can lobby the decision makers.

I’m talking about that people who are affected by the decision should have their say at a public meeting and I know there’ve been consultation meetings, that the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service have run and that’s fine. But what I’m saying is the ball’s now in Wirral Council’s court, there has to be the usual consultation on planning applications, but it’s a very emotive issue.

And I think basically if I can sum up the positions, Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service have received a grant for some of the cost of this fire station and of course with the West Kirby and Upton fire stations being closed, they’ll receive something for the sale of those but basically they want to build it now in Saughall Massie because the site in Greasby has been withdrawn.

But the problem is that this is greenbelt land and there’s a lot of resistance from the residents regarding a fire station there.

Now in the not too distant past Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service did put in a planning application for a temporary fire station in Oxton while Birkenhead Fire Station was being rebuilt. I know that was later withdrawn but that caused a similar level of fuss and outrage and politicians saying they were against it and so on.

But the problem was that was only a temporary ~12 month arrangement, eventually they found some way round finding somewhere else. But the same issues that were brought up then, have been brought up regarding this Saughall Massie issue, you know the issues regarding sirens, traffic and so on but I think the elephant in the room really for Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service is that a number of the fire stations they’ve got are part of the PFI scheme, so they can’t close those without massive penalties.

I mean I think Birkenhead Fire Station is one example of one of the fire stations they’ve got under this PFI scheme.

So there are fire stations they can’t shut, so that leaves if they want to make any budget savings, for instance through cutting jobs and merging fire stations, they’ve only got the ones that aren’t the PFI fire stations that they can choose from.

And that’s part of the reason why Upton and West Kirby got chosen.

But I think one of the things that has currently got the public going, is that after there was pressure put regarding the Greasby site, that the offer of Greasby where there’s a library and community centre there was withdrawn and people are asking why Wirral Council isn’t doing the same thing with Saughall Massie?

Well basically these are decisions yet to be determined, it’s a party political matter because three political parties involved in the last decision on this voted three different ways, but I can see a problem because firstly Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service can’t keep Upton and West Kirby open. They just don’t have the budget for the amount of firefighters that would take.

Now one alternative is, just keep Upton open, now the downside to this according to the Chief Fire Officer is that this would increase response times to the Hoylake and West Kirby area, so that’s why they want somewhere roughly in between the two stations.

However then people raised the issue of Upton’s close to Arrowe Park Hospital, so it’ll take longer to get to there so wherever you have a fire station there’ll be people that have a quick response time and people that have a slow response time.

But the fire engines aren’t always at the fire station all the time, I mean about half the time they’ll be called out on a job, well maybe a bit more than that, they’ll be out somewhere else and that can’t really be predicted where they’d be at, whether they’d be fitting a smoke alarm or something like that.

So there are a lot of issues to do with the Saughall Massie fire station and basically I’ll be reporting on it, but at the same time I think it’s interesting seeing both the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority meetings and the Wirral Council meetings and how this issue has been dealt with at both of them.

Of course if the government hadn’t offered Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service a large grant to build a new fire station there, then I doubt this would’ve gone ahead, admittedly they could’ve borrowed the money or found the money from somewhere but I think that what’s interesting is I did make a FOI for the grant application that they made to DCLG, was told that this information would be published in the future so I couldn’t have it now and I’d have to wait till after the consultations were finished and by that they didn’t just mean the Upton and West Kirby consultations but they meant the other consultations because this grant is not just for a fire station at Saughall Massie, there are similar consultations and mergers and closures happening elsewhere across Merseyside.

So hopefully that will sum up things and I’ll point out that tonight at the Wallasey Constituency Committee, I won’t be there but I noticed because I read through the reports and the agenda, that the Motability, they have a little place in Birkenhead that hires out wheelchairs and things like that are looking to set up a place in New Brighton, so people can hire wheelchairs and that kind of thing.

So that’s a possibly positive move for New Brighton, because I know there’s been a lot of criticism at New Brighton and a large petition over the dropped car parking plans.

Anyway I’d better finish for now, but thanks for listening.

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

What are the changes to funding for special schools for the 2016/17 academic year?

What are the changes to funding for special schools for the 2016/17 academic year?

What are the changes to funding for special schools for the 2016/17 academic year?

                                        

Phil Ward (SEN Lead) who chaired the Lyndale School consultation meetings
Phil Ward (SEN Lead) who chaired the Lyndale School consultation meetings
  

A report that went to last night’s Wirral Schools Forum about funding for special schools makes for interesting reading. The report’s based on the operational guide (schools revenue funding 2016 to 2017) published in July 2015.

Those with long memories will remember that the reason given for closing Lyndale School by Wirral Council officers was that funding for special schools would change starting in the 2016-17 academic year. Officers confidently stated that instead of funding being based on place numbers it would instead be based on how many pupils were at a school. In their view this meant that Lyndale School not being financially viable as the large (and increasing) difference between pupils and places at Lyndale School would result in a shortfall in funding.

A report to yesterday’s Wirral Schools Forum states (EFA stands for Education Funding Agency) “In respect of High Needs Funding (funding for special schools, bases, non-maintained special schools, independent special schools, alternative provision, EMAP and the Hospital School) the EFA have indicated the allocation for place funding and other high needs funding will remain at the same level as 2015-16.

This was confirmed in the operational guide which states in a section on high needs funding starting on page 30, “The full year 2016 to 2017 allocation will therefore be based on the 2015 to 2016 academic year place numbers, and for the remainder of the high needs allocation there will be no change to what was allocated for 2015 to 2016.

More detailed reports about the changes for special schools funding were published in September.

Sadly this news arrives too late to make any difference to the Cabinet decision to close Lyndale School at the end of the 2015/16 academic year.

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

Work on Birkenhead North Park and Ride expansion expected to start in 2016

Work on Birkenhead North Park and Ride expansion expected to start in 2016

Work on Birkenhead North Park and Ride expansion expected to start in 2016

                                                            

Birkenhead North Park and Ride (15th October 2015)
Birkenhead North Park and Ride (15th October 2015)

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.

Merseytravel’s (part of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority) General Purposes Sub-Committee meeting on the 15th October 2015

I’ll start by declaring an interest as I use the car park at Birkenhead North Railway Station regularly.

At a public meeting today of councillors on the Merseytravel’s General Purposes Sub-Committee officers gave an update on projects including an update on what was happening to expand the Park and Ride at Birkenhead North Railway Station.

A Merseytravel officer had the following to say about this, "Birkenhead North, that’s the extended phase for the Park and Ride. Members [councillors] will remember we had some extensive investment in there over a two-year period, around £5.5 million with what was the Park and Ride interchange and the bridge as part of that scheme.

This is the land that we agreed with Wirral that we would take forward for the expansion of the Park and Ride scheme and that scheme will straddle, will commence early next year and will run through probably for about a five or six month period depending on the contractor’s programme when we receive that back."

There are 266 car parking spaces at the Park and Ride at Birkenhead North Railway Station. The work, expected to start next year to expand the Park and Ride will increase this by a further 366 car parking spaces. An increase in car parking spaces will solve the current problem of over parking.

Merseytravel is expected to ask Wirral Council in the near future for a lease of the land for the Park and Ride expansion at Birkenhead North Railway Station to go ahead.

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

Wirral councillors agree 2 new policies on attendance management and discipline

Wirral councillors agree 2 new policies on attendance management and discipline

Wirral councillors agree 2 new policies on attendance management and discipline

                                               

Councillors at Monday night’s Council meeting approved two Human Resources policies (apart from the Mayor who abstained and Cllr Pat Cleary who voted against). These were the Human Resources Policy Update (including revised Disciplinary Policy and Procedure) and the Attendance Management Policy.

Approval of the Attendance Management Policy led to this exchange between Conservative Leader Cllr Jeff Green and the Labour Chair of the Transformation and Resources Policy and Performance Committee Cllr Janette Williamson.

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.

Councillor Jeff Green asks a question about a letter from UNISON at the Wirral Council meeting on the 12th October 2015
Councillor Jeff Green asks a question about a letter from UNISON at the Wirral Council meeting on the 12th October 2015

Cllr Jeff Green: Mr Mayor, am I allowed to ask a question on that particular item? I was just wondering as UNISON have written to me about this, I just wanted to know what the current position is.

Mayor Cllr Les Rowlands: Cllr Green, would you like to ask your question now?

Cllr Jeff Green: Yes Mr Mayor, the question is relatively straightforward. I’ve been written to, probably other colleagues have been written to by UNISON around the Attendance Management Policy and so on and I just wondered whether the Chair can update us on where we are with that letter and our discussions with the trade unions?

Councillor Janette Williamson responds to a question from Cllr Jeff Green at the Wirral Council meeting of the 12th October 2015 about UNISON
Councillor Janette Williamson responds to a question from Cllr Jeff Green at the Wirral Council meeting of the 12th October 2015 about UNISON

Cllr Janette Williamson (Chair of the Transformation and Resources Policy and Performance Committee): Well, firstly Jeff you did have a chance to ask your question before but chose not to do so. You had a chance to ask a Chair’s question before but chose not to do so.

This went before the Committee and received all party approval when it went there. We did have a request from a member of UNISON beforehand to attend and for him to ask a question and he decided not to errm on the night of that. It’s been agreed by the Committee and passed by every Member.


Here are links to the new policies on Wirral Council’s website.

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

What is a Pensions Board and can it exclude the press and public from its meetings?

What is a Pensions Board and can it exclude the press and public from its meetings?

What is a Pensions Board and can it exclude the press and public from its meetings?

                                                                   

Pensions Board meeting 13th October 2015 Foreground L to R Unknown, Patrick Moloney, Mike Hornby, Paul Wiggins, John Raisin (Chair), Anne Beauchamp Background L to R Unknown, Peter Wallach (Head of Pension Fund), Joe Blott (Strategic Director for Transformation and Resources)
Pensions Board meeting 13th October 2015 Foreground L to R Unknown, Patrick Moloney, Mike Hornby, Paul Wiggins, John Raisin (Chair), Anne Beauchamp Background L to R Unknown, Peter Wallach (Head of Pension Fund), Joe Blott (Strategic Director for Transformation and Resources)

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 of the Local Pensions Board (Merseyside Pension Fund) meeting on the 12th October 2015

I attended my first meeting of Wirral Council’s Pensions Board today (although this is the second meeting of the Pensions Board). Wirral Council are the Administering Authority for the Merseyside Pension Fund.

Although the venue was listed as: Merseyside Pension Fund, 7th Floor, Castle Chambers, Liverpool L2 9SH, it was in fact held in a board room on the 4th floor at the same address.

This page on the Merseyside Pension Fund’s website states who make up the Pensions Board.

Mike Hornby (a former Wirral Council councillor for Greasby, Frankby & Irby ward) was there as a member of the the Pensions Board. He is one of the employer representatives representing Wirral Council.

Paul Wiggins (one of the Member (meaning Member of the Merseyside Pension Fund) representatives) was there to represent the pensioner members in the Merseyside Pension Fund. Also there was the Independent Chair John Raisin.

The full list of nine people that make up the Pension Board can be found on the Merseyside Pension Fund website, although not all nine were present for the meeting and I haven’t listed everyone who was at the meeting above.

However what does a Pensions Board actually do? Well it’s a relatively recent legal requirement to have one that only started in April 2015. As Wirral Council administer the Merseyside Pension Fund they’re therefore required to have one. The role of the Pensions Board is to help ensure the Merseyside Pension Fund complies with governance and administration requirements.

The terms of reference state its function as follows.

2.1 The purpose of the Board is to assist the Administering Authority in its role as a scheme manager of the Scheme. Such assistance is to:

a. secure compliance with the Regulations, any other legislation relating to the governance and administration of the Scheme and requirements imposed by the Pension Regulator in relation to the Scheme and;

b. ensure the effective and efficient governance and administration of Merseyside Pension Fund.

c. provide the Scheme Manager with such information as it requires ensuring that any member of the Pension Board or person to be appointed to the Board does not have a conflict of interest.

 

It’s now where we get to a rather strange problem. Agenda item 8 of the meeting, as you can read for yourself on Wirral Council’s website attempts to exclude any members of the press and public present for items 9, 9a and 10 which refers to the Local Government Act 1972, s.100A.

Before the meeting started I would’ve liked a chance to point out verbally to someone what I’m going to write about now, but a Wirral Council officer insisted we wait in the kitchen next door instead, oh well.

There is power to exclude the press and public from a public meeting. It comes from the Local Government Act 1972, s.100A(4) and applies to meeting of a principal council and because of Local Government Act 1972, s.100E also committees and subcommittees (as well as joint committees).

The Pensions Board was never set up as a committee (or subcommittee) of Wirral Council though. In fact its terms of reference for the Pensions Board make that extremely clear.

“1.3 The Board is not a committee constituted under Section 101 of the Local Government Act 1972 and therefore no general duties, responsibilities or powers assigned to such committees or to any sub-committees or officers under the constitution, standing orders or scheme of delegation of the Administering Authority apply to the Board unless expressly included in this document.”
 

So let me get this straight, a Pensions Board whose purpose is to “secure compliance with legislation”, assigns itself a power in law to exclude press and public from its meetings that it doesn’t have?

At the meeting itself on the 13th October 2015 the Independent Chair John Raisin proposed this resolution to exclude the press and public, it was seconded and agreed by the Pensions Board.

So who do you complain to about the Pensions Board not complying with the legislation? Why the Pension Board of course as its their role to ensure the Merseyside Pension Fund complies with the legislation!

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