gdj

Does the £12 million include any allocation to recoup the several million already spent on the Rockfield DIY site and the deals done prior to compulsory purchase orders? Also, on the link that Denise provided (thanks) is the following little snippet: If I read that correctly - a company moving from another part of Herefordshire into the Rotherwas (Skylon) zone stops paying business rates to the council (which has at least a modicum of democratic veneer) and starts paying it to a quango (the LEP). That money could then be spent anywhere in the LEP region - which includes other counties.

I think I remember - can't be sure as I sometimes get confused between fact and fiction - that the council recruited a shiny new Chief Executive last year. It might be a false memory because I haven't seen any evidence of communication between this mythical figure and the people who pay his wages. If this person does exist perhaps he operates through trusted lieutenants - people he brings in despite them having left other councils under very dark and expensive clouds - people that know they are beholden to the one man, in the one council, who is still willing to pay them good money for a bad job. Perhaps that could explain the continuing `transformations' of dodgy managers into directors and front line workers into jobseekers. Has anyone else heard of any sightings of the Chief Executive?

The £3 million pound renovation of the £1 million pound land and building at Blackfriars that the council handed over is continuing - it should look good but to spend this much money on so few children (20 to 30 at the moment) - is questionable. As mentioned on previous threads, the Principal (headteacher) resigned in January after one term in charge and an interim from Manchester was put in charge. They advertised for a new Principal and now have announced who has been selected. It is a Mr Andrew Hubble. Coincidentally, a Mr Andrew Hubble resigned as principal of an academy in West Walsall earlier this year after it was found by ofsted to be inadequate in nearly all respects including leadership and management. I wonder if this is the same Mr Andrew Hubble. And, if so, what the kids at the school have done to deserve someone with that track record. Still, the nearby Barrs Court School appointed a principal with a very dodgy reputation and track record and has had to suspend her so it seems that some schools for vulnerable kids who can't fit into mainstream education can provide a dumping ground for failed leaders. I say `some' because I know that other special schools and Pupil Referral units have excellent leaders and they and their staff do a great job that should continue. Normally the HT would trumpet any development at the ROVS - they have been strangely quiet on the new appointment.

This might be a one off anecdote or it might be part of a bigger picture. A resident of Tupsley saw workmen arriving with grass cutting equipment and was pleased because the verges are so overgrown. She stopped to ask them and it turned out they were from the Housing Association and were going to cut the grass in front of the Housing Association houses (between the pavement and the houses) but not the grass between the pavement and the road or on the other side of the road because that was for the council/BBLP. They also said that in the past they would help each other out but now they were having to only do their own bits. I can see the situation where BBLP are in one part of the city cutting their bit of grass and ignoring the Housing Association grass across the road and in another part the reverse is happening. The marginal cost of cutting the other bit of grass would be negligible compared with the cost of getting there and providing the equipment but in this council world of complex contracts and targets it doesn't happen. Sigh.

The way it works 1. Don't build a bypass or ring road around a city with only one decent river crossing 2. Have several strategic north-south and east-west routes crossing that one bridge, converging each end of the bridge. 3. Build a large supermarket one end of the bridge and a large shopping centre the other end. 4. Wonder why traffic is so bad even though you have put in lots of traffic lights 5. Employ expensive consultants to explain it all to you in simple language. 6. For a nominal extra sum, get the consultants to back up the bypass route you want, but can't afford. 7. Job done oh, sorry, forgot. - put up an exhibition board for a couple of days in a hotel so you can claim to have `consulted stakeholders' - and hope no-one notices. Box ticked.

I fear you're right about just displacing parking problems. A lot of this is the result of a lack of joined up thinking. When bus services are scarce and expensive - people drive (if they can). When the trains are packed and expensive - people drive (if they can). When people are encouraged to shop in the centre, traffic increases. When there is congestion in the centre then you can't rely on buses getting through so people drive and find another route. When you charge a lot for schoolkids and students to use school buses - people drive. So lots of people for whom public transport is not a reliable and economic option drive into Hereford. As you point out, people going to the colleges, Hospital, station etc are bound to try to find a cheap way of parking. When the council and pfi hospital see car parking as a cash cow monopoly, people will react by parking on streets. This must be extremely frustrating for people who live on those streets but it is inevitable. Do we want the motorists whose parking causes the problem to not come to Hereford or to park on a different street. As you say, paid car parks are expensive for those on zero or limited budget. The imaginative way of dealing with the issue isn't to keep chasing the problem from street to street but to make public transport a realistic option co-ordinated with the needs of the businesses and institutions. Joined up thinking - now there's a left field idea - perhaps one day the powers that be may be tempted to try it.

I agree completely with Flamboyant. It is difficult to accept the "there is no money so what else can we do" line when there are managers getting payrises, expensive consultants being taken on for vague "transformation" advice and legal and other costs being incurred through doing things wrong. Cllr Vaughan-Powell, this is not a criticism of the community grass cutting efforts which are laudable, but do you have any opinions on front line staff being made redundant and it resulting in extra pay for managers, new senior positions created and resulting in less front line work at greater cost? Many people (including me) could give you examples.

It is a fact that local government pension liabilities are a significant cost. There are also tiresome things like sick pay, maternity leave and union negotiated pay settlements. This is what they are trying to wriggle out of. Now, which is most likely to happen: Directors and Assistant Directors remain in their current highly paid and pensioned positions and contract out the jobs of the front line staff to lower paid and worse terms and conditions (code phrase is `forward thinking and dynamic) or The senior management role is contracted out and subject to strict performance targets with accountability for decisions and spending, but that new management organisation co-ordinates and manages the council's front line staff who, being on lower pay than the top brass, can remain with decent other terms and conditions. An example of this would be, say, Barnardo's managing the council's child protection staff.

According to `companycheck' Mr Agombar seems to have set up six companies in the last 12 months so this doesn't give a strong track record. He is based in Yorkshire, Whenever I hear someone referred to by the vague word "businessman" I get suspicious. According to the company check website: http://companycheck.co.uk/director/917937630/THOMAS-JAMES-AGOMBAR/director-summary This is not Roman Abramovich and I suspect there may be more parallels with Brighton (football fans will remember) than with Manchester City in this whole mess.

According to an article in today's printed edition (quickly perused whilst queuing at petrol station), there is to be a new editor and Fiona is being sent into exile abroad (well, Newport). Does this herald a new dawn of high quality journalism, has circulation been falling? Is it just time to move on after a few years?

Bobby, I fear you may have miscalculated your rebellion. You have forgotten that far above prison on the scale of cruel punishments is "community service". You could end up wearing a high visibility bib, picking up litter in ...........the OLM! whilst Jarvis strolls around with a taser in case you make a run for it. Just think on.

My two pennorth on this Director vs democracy thing is that we actually expect too much from elected councillors. My own councillor (and it seems many others) will roll up there sleeves and get involved in the nitty gritty problems of their residents. The housing, the drains, the litter, the roads, benefits and the like. And all power to them for their efforts to support the least fortunate and to support their communities. However we also expect them to be on top of some highly technical and complex areas of public administration, made even more complex by the likes of Hoople, Balfour Beatty, Hereford Futures etc and ever changing government requirements and funding. These are completely different skills and knowledge qualities. We on here can highlight with some patient research, the conflicts of interest and the dodgy dealings of the likes of Geoff Hughes, Mike Dearing, Jo Davidson and their ilk, but in a council meeting these people control the information and councillors are not confident in challenging what they are told. The missing link is the pre-publication of what is to be put in front of councillors/cabinet/OSC etc and a method for council staff or other people who know the issue well to alert councillors to inaccuracies, hidden implications etc. Councillors need to harness the expertise of, well, experts. The prospect of real scrutiny, by the public, would quickly eliminate a a lot of the self serving control of information, of `editing' reports to make them more palatable.

Agree that as it has grown so much it should be on the same rent/rates system as competitors. It is also clear to me that to get drunk on "premium" beers and wine will give a much higher class of abusiveness than yobs getting drunk on cheap booze. I suggest that breathalysers should be able to distinguish between "premium" and "cheap" with police officers giving due deference to the former. Seriously, though, isn't there a system of awarding a licence for a probationary or trial period - say for the summer and see how it goes with the police and other traders reporting back on the general effect. It would certainly pull the centre of gravity back towards High Town on a warm Saturday afternoon.

Just another thought on the company network here. HCC has paid large sums to Ameo Ltd. Mike Dearing is not a director of Ameo Ltd. However Ameo Ltd is a member of the LLP `Ameo Professional Services'. Another member is Mike Dearing, another member is Mike Dearing's own company Ameo Consulting. LLPs share the assets between the members. It looks therefore like Mike Dearing can, in theory, benefit financially from HCC payments to Ameo Ltd. Whether he did so, and whether HCC realised this possibility is another question. Or was HCC paying for Hoople's MD off the Hoople balance sheet? That would certainly make Hoople seem more cost effective. Over to you, Hereford Times - ask some questions.

Flamboyant It was an Assistant Director - line manager was the Director. I don't know what the internal mechanism for investigations are, who controls or scrutinises these things, or what the outcome was - just that there was an investigation that people were talking about at the time and many people were surprised at the appointment to Barrs Court.

Jenny Hastings who has had contracts from Hoople is based in Somerset and makes no mention of school education on her linked in page The Jenny Hastings who inspected the school seems to be a school governor in Leicester and is an educational advisor - so I assume they are different. How about this snippet that could explain how the Dearing/Ward/Hastings triumvirate has extracted so much money from HCC: From Jenny Hastings' linked in page: Mr Johnson, look into my eyes, look into my eyes, Hoople is great, the numbers do add up, Mike Dearing is a miracle worker, sign this cheque. Good, now you're back in the room!

I just think it is a shame that the HT, aside from some quite technical pieces by Bill Tanner, seems to consider itself part of the establishment. The piece this week supporting Hoople - this must be the result of a council communication because, as we all know, no-one is allowed to see the figures in detail as it isn't subject to FoI. The HT would actually serve its readership better by challenging the authorities (which can be done professionally and politely) - ask the questions and test the answers. If it is true that HCC employees have jumped the housing queue, or even that there is an investigation, a journalist should be on the phone trying to get answers. In response to the Tony Johnson inaccuracies in his statement on road building and the HA, it needed questions and follow up questions not just the printing of a statement. I don't think it is a matter of "balance" - if allegations are made, and they are found to be true, there is no "balance" in not publishing because it is considered `moaning`. If allegations are untrue, then truth is served by publishing what the actual situation is, to put an end to rumours. There was a poster on the HT website this week who said that the Head of Barrs Court special school is or was suspended. If true, then this should be a big story - what is the reason?. That headteacher used to be an assistant director in the council and was under investigation for wrongdoing when she left there. Why is the HT ignoring the story? Why aren't journalists doing some digging? Are Councillors even aware of the situation?

I think there are two Jenny Hastings here. The Education one and the Ameo one. To summarise Ameo if I have this right: Ameo Ltd: Ben Ward and Fiona Ward (presumably related). This is the company that has received large direct payments from HCC Ameo Consulting: Mike Dearing (set up in February this year for his Swindon money to be paid into) Ameo Professional Services LLP . Set up in April this year: "members" are Ben Ward, Mike Dearing and the the two companies Ameo Ltd and Ameo Consulting) Ameo Training and Development Ltd: Set up January this year: Directors Ben Ward and Jenny Hastings So a little network of links. Well done Flamboyant. A couple of other things: Jenny Hastings has on her linked in page who she has been doing work for: This for Jenny Hastings other company Insight4 No doubt it was all open to full competitive tender and Insight4/Jenny Hastings was the best value company to help Hoople. No doubt also that when HCC signed off the money to Ameo Ltd it knew the links to Mike Dearing and Hoople And a final moan - the use by Dearing of the LLP - limited liability partnership with "members". This is a well known vehicle that was originally meant for partnerships of lawyers and accountants that is now being used by all sorts of other organisations. The give the opportunity to pay a lot less national insurance. This from the website `accounting web` http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/topic/business/limited-company-or-partnership-which-best No doubt this is irrelevant - Mr Dearing will realise he is dependent on public sector spending paid for by all our taxes - and be keen to avoid any suggestion of tax avoidance on his own behalf. edited to make clear that it is Insight4 that got Jenny Hastings the work with Hoople.

Agreed, Flamboyant. But HCC has forced out whistleblowers in the past. The appointment of Bill Norman was also a statement in that regard. On a thread in the HT several months ago, some councillors were taking part until I asked whether the council would enforce gagging clauses on whistleblowers (as regards the revealing of wrongdoing at a high level) and all the councillors melted away. Would any councillors on here say whether they are happy with the appointment of Bill Norman or Pete Robinson bearing in mind the circumstances under which they left their previous councils? Or would they make a statement that the council will not enforce confidentiality if it relates to wrongdoing of senior officers? The NHS now has a policy that protects whistleblowers who expose wrongdoing. HCC does not have that policy, and can and does use its financial muscle to silence people. It can also use the constant threat of "redundancy" to intimidate people into silence.

Paul Cardin's investigations includes a case where Bill Norman was heavily implicated in forcing out of a whistleblower in Torbay (the individual won substantial compensation). Bill Norman was then at Wirral Council allowed to leave there with a six figure sum after a period of suspension over a contract. The CEO announced there was `no case to answer' and off he trotted to Hereford. The internal investigation to this housing question might uncover who the real villain is - who the hell told Bobby!? Bobby, keep looking over your shoulder for figures in the shadows. Are strangers in the pub reading large newspapers with eye-holes cut out? Do you get an uncomfortable feeling that you're being watched closely. You must warn your contacts to stay clear and not put themselves in danger. You must scan your fishing stool for bugs. HCC has eyes and ears everywhere. That hole they're digging in Hafod Road - don't go near until it's safely filled in!

Wow Just that first link - about £20k for Mike Dearing in August last year. And also £40k for Hoople. He is certainly highly skilled at transformation. He has transformed a lot of our money into his money. On a much smaller scale, why is HCC paying the Moody Cow pub £1800. It is an expensive `gastropub' in Upton Bishop (named after a former landlord's ex-wife, I am told)`

Yes, Thanks Glenda - it seems that the system, as long as all parties act honourably, leaves a respectful period before any politics begins.

Nice find flamboyant. So HCC paid Mike Dearings private company £1650 in January 2012. I can only assume it was a personal service company at the time of a type that didn't need to be incorporated. So as well as paying Hoople enough money to cover whatever it was doing (transforming something), HCC also paid Mike Dearing directly. The company AMEO was `incorporated' in February this year, just at the time that Bobby47 was revealing Mike Dearing's impending departure and just 4 days after the Swindon council was bounced into taking him on on a large salary. The Swindon council agenda is interesting - apparently Mike Dearing had two glowing references saying he is the best in his field . I wonder who from.

AV, I suspect you're correct - but dreamland is quite a nice place - you should visit it sometime. On the other hand, there is the slight chance that one of the independent or ioc councillors who sometimes read these threads might think "You know what, that's a jolly good idea - in response to two sad deaths we will waive our chance to make political gain. It will avoid a costly by-election, save the families from seeing the campaigning to replace their loved ones and enable the residents to be immediately represented by someone who will try hard to honour the memory of those they have replaced". Although I am definitely not a Conservative, I do consider myself human.

With only about a year to go before the full council elections it seems wrong to me for a personal tragedy for two families (and for all those who knew these two councillors) to lead to a political opportunity or political change. I suspect the other political parties would have similar feelings. Is there a way for the Conservative party to just nominate a replacement for the remaining time so that the residents can continue to be represented and the other parties step aside so it can happen quickly - it might be `undemocratic` but it might also be the right thing to do in the circumstances and be a cross party acknowledgement of the work of these two gentlemen. It is a totally different scenario to Russell B Hamilton flouncing off - the HT reports indicate that they both did as much as they possibly could until very near the end.