Pete Boggs

Per Denise's post above, I'm sure the church will be happy to act in loco parentis during Mr Andrews' absence.

Denise, thank you for a timely reminder that FC's philosophy and methods mirror that of totalitarian regimes in their striving for dominance and in paricular the attempt to break up by families by driving a wedge between children and their parents. No great secret that Stalin's Russia was big on kids grassing up their mum and dad to the higher authority of the state. Clarkester, would you care to elucidate? Are you for, or against, Freedom Church? I suspect the former but I could be wrong. A little context for your post would be nice.

Colin, might I suggest that this depends on whether "we" includes any business owners who've been shaken down for the BID levy, per mj1's post above.

Maggie, I don't know if that's all true but in the past (and possibly still in the present) Freedom Church have wielded some influence on the young people's services dept due to there being a sizeable contingent of FC members or sympathisers in that section of the Council. Earlier on in this thread there's a brief discussion about a contract for children's advice services being awarded to an FC front organisation, approx 4-5 years ago. The matter was investigated by the Council's audit team (shortly before they were neutered by the previous Chief Executive) but I don't recall anyone being disciplined over it.

‘So we will claw back redundancy payments for high earners who leave and then return to the public sector within a year – and change the law so that public sector payoffs are capped at £95,000 even for the highest-paid public servants.’ You're a bit late George, Bill Norman's already had three pay offs and is, I'm told, retiring to spend more time with his money. Besides, this has got more than a touch of deja vu about it. Didn't Eric Pickles say a few years ago that he'd sort out public servant fat cat pay? Unless of course he meant he'd increase it...

The BID is an extortion racket to fund services the Council should be doing anyway.

Strategic Intelligence Team? Hilarious - do they think they're in a James Bond film or an episode of "24"? I note there's no questions about whether the Council should be bunging senior officers to leave, or should they be keeping them on to do the job they're actually employed to do?

Can be quite dangerous for the unwary crossing over from Church Street in the direction of the cathedral. I'm amazed some unfortunate tourist hasn't stepped out into the road and been hit by a car.

This kind of shambles is the inevitable result of the Council sacking all its experienced staff in favour of placemen and court favourites. I'm told that the new head of Law and Governance doesn't even have a legal qualification or any background in the work at all.

Uncalled for. Stilton Cheeswright hardly counts as the opposition just because he's pointed out that Taylor's Kronenbourg induced wibbling has accomplished very little, and may even led to a man, who might have had an arguable case purely on the facts, losing his house.

As I understand it, this is about cost. None of the three parties involved in funding the centre want the expense. We all know that budgets are tight but to just press on with their fostering plan without consultation is disgraceful. Glenda has alluded elsewhere to the Council's cavalier disregard for the law, could be this time their "we can do what ever we like" arrogance comes back to bite them somewhere painful. Of course that's probably not much consolation to the service users and families who are suffering now.

All true Glenda, plus he's no doubt responsible for some of those very things you mention.

He makes about as much sense as you'd expect from someone who drinks Kronenbourg for breakfast.

Good for you Glenda. Wishing you the best of luck. Possibly a bit late now, but is it worth enquiring why the Council thought it was a good idea to hire someone with his disgraceful history in the first place?

I'm sure there'll be quite a few people at the Council heaving a sigh of relief at Bill Norman's departure. Not least those unfortunate enough to have to work with him. I'm told even his pet lackeys in the legal department had grown weary of his “Downfall†style tirades in which he turned the air of the St Owens Street Fuhrerbunker blue with the foulest of Anglo-Saxon four letter expletives. Given that he was appointed by former deputy chief exec Dean “Bonkers†Taylor the only real mystery is why wasn't he given the push sooner?

Putting aside the asbestos situation, it seems to me that the Council's plans are a contravention of the act. How can one lacklustre central library in a county the size of Herefordshire be a comprehensive and efficient service? Still, not for the first time HDC don't give a monkey's about what the law says.

This is what m'learned friends refer to as restraint of trade. Very difficult to get away with these days unless the employer can show they've got a genuine commercial interest that needs protecting. HDC trying to stop som one working in London, no chance I reckon.

Tabloid content does not necessarily equal untruth - the popular press sometimes do a bloody good job at exposing wrongdoing of our so called betters. Anyway, nice to hear you and your colleagues are having a jolly good chuckle over things like the systematic bullying of disabled staff. Far easier than actually doing something about it. Or are you saying it didn't happen?

I'd suggest that a distinction may need to be drawn between a user name, which might well be an alias, and what I believe are called "sock puppets" - multiple identities operated by the same user, often for malign purposes like trolling. From Colin's comments I gather it's the latter phenomenon that he's investigating which strikes me as fair enough.

I'll bet that's not the only council building with asbestos. Surprised they didn't find any in Blackfriars when the free school mob were tarting it up. Perhaps they did?

As opposed to what? An I-really-like-you crime? (With apologies to Gene Hunt). Wouldn't the justice system be better concentrating its resources on nicking offenders and giving them the appropriate sentences without having to invent reasons for actually doing the job. If somebody commits a GBH they should be banged up, their motive is I would suggest largely irrelevant.

Now that Bill Tanner has gone we can expect lots of stories about cats up trees and not much else. The fact that a man who spent his career colluding in, and covering up, wrongdoing has been allowed to trouser yet another hefty bung and ride off into the sunset is nothing short of a disgrace.

He had a "career break" after being given his marching orders from Wirral. That should be suffcient to interrupt his continuity of service for redundancy purposes I'd have thought. Then again I'm no expert on employment law as practiced by HDC. I'd be willing to bet he's had a bung though - that's what he's good at (if nothing else). I can definitely feel an FOI request coming on.... Anyone know who the other five managers are who are supposed to be redundant?

Yeah Roger, I've been there once. Crap beer, crap clientele. Actually the Black Lion do a pretty decent sub-three pound pint. Did the Mirror visit there when they were conducting their survey though? Somehow I doubt it.

Where is the Mirror getting its prices from? Five years ago? I can't think of any pub in Herefordshire that charges £3.10 a pint or less, apart from Wetherspoons. When I'm in the city I often like to visit the Lichfield Vaults, which is a very nice pub, but you'll pay a damn sight more than £3.10. The South East figures seem well skew whiff as well. I've paid a fiver a pint in West London and Clapham before now. Even less trendy pubs I reckon you're talking four quid or therabouts.