gdj

Looks like the councillors in Swindon are being bulldozed by their senior officers like happens here. Outrageous that they are order to approve this appointment without any tendering, proof of need or proof of previous high quality performance from Mr Dearing. A deal stitched up between the CEO and MD himself. Lets remind ourselves of what his job description was - then try it with all the jargon deleted (not much is left) Perhaps a `positive attitude to managing risk" means "finding another trough to put your snout in before this one is completely empty".

I think twg has been trained in council maths with this 122 million tonnes a day of cigarette butts. He'll be claiming there's 1100 people working at the OLM next. Lets say 10 million smokers plus Bobby Each ordinary smoker drops, say 20 butts a day, weighing 20 grammes each - that is a total of 4 tonnes a day. That would leave Bobby to discard 118 million tonnes. No wonder High Town is looking shabby.

They're not privately owned. They are owned and funded by the state The selling point for the new academies was that money that used to go the local authority for things like special needs support, transport, grounds maintenance, governor support and training, teacher training etc could be controlled by the school (head) to better meet the needs of pupils. A small number of heads are using the loophole to use the extra money the school receives to pay themselves more. And it isn't as if a new, higher powered and paid job was created and advertised - it is the same people doing pretty much the same jobs as before that are becoming rich - the new `fat cats'. I think I saw figures a few weeks ago that showed the average salary of a Head in an academy is higher than in non academy school and the average salary of classroom teachers is less in academies. So I don't need to be on a very high salary myself to moan that my taxes paid for the education of children is being diverted to private bank accounts.

We have our own examples right here in Herefordshire- there are FoI requests (search for PLP partnership on `What do they know.com`). Heads who were originally shared between schools with the intention that school B pays school A for the service, now getting paid directly into their own (and their wives') companies. The FoI requester has totted up a combined salary from their schools of well over £100k - possibly close to £150k each. It was the schools in the ipad controversy. Someone needs to get a grip of where education money is going. The political mantra of `free from local authority control` is actually `free from any meaningful control at all`.

I know I'm a grumpy old pedant, but the random use of capital letters in the "Remember we have Dining Please pay Before Exiting" does irritate me. If this is a Herefordshire Council operation they should pay someone literate to do some checking of published materials. And another moan: I would say that there is a quid pro quo between visitors paying HCC for parking and HCC providing city centre amenities. It is unethical to increase car parking charges and remove public toilets - there is an attitude of entitlement to take money without any obligation to provide anything in return. How long before Waitrose etc start saying that their toilets are for customers only? p.s. The chaotic letter section on the Hereford Times website has a letter from Ted Willmott thank us all for our patience - apparently there will be 1100 new jobs! The HT has given the letter the headline "Headline".

Irrespective of the price, I always prefer car parks where you get a ticket on entry and pay when you leave - it takes away at least one stress - of having to get back before you get fined - if you are delayed for some reason before you can return to the car then you just get charged for the extra time you're there rather than being fined. You don't need to guess how long you need either. This method also means you don't need to employ people to check pay and display stickers and issue fines and you also don't end up with highly stressful arguments between the shopper/motorist and the parking warden. What method is the OLM - pay and display or pay as you leave? Also, do the machines give change or is that another little earner designed into the system?

If the Highways agency were not telling the truth and Johnson was telling the truth, then don't you think that message would be issued loud and clear by Johnson rather than him sending out Philips to make a vague statement. Also, the HA seems to have given detailed written answers to HfH's written questions. Having had personal experience of HCC lying I know who I would believe.

Not sure where else this issue fits - it has hints of several others in Hereford. There is a building in Ross now called the Ryefield Centre - half of it is used by the Children's Centre (although the council has never seen fit to put any signposts up to let anyone know it's there). The other half is rooms that are rented by community groups for lots of purposes. The building is an attractive old school building. The old playing fields have been developed for housing and the Larrurpez Centre. There was consternation a few weeks ago when the weekly Luncheon club, to which isolated and lonely elderly people are brought for a meal and company - run largely by volunteers, were told they would have to stop using the premises. So far, so very Herefordshire Council. The Ross Town brass band which enlivens many community events rehearses there and stores instruments etc is also being kicked out. I assume there are others likewise affected. One of the local councillors (The Lib Dem Cllr Bartrum) has written to the Ross Gazette that he has been able to find out that there is a possible new future tenant and the Council is kicking (my words) existing tenants out to make way. He doesn't say if he knows who the new tenant might be. My suspicion is that the Council would like to declare those premises as `surplus to requirements' (i.e. surplus to council requirements rather than surplus to community requirements) and this is part of the process of being able to do so. It may or may not be connected to another Free School proposed for the area looking for possible premises - a Montessori school, - is the council again kowtowing to central conservative government at the expense of local interests? If that is the case it is scandalous to tell these groups that they must leave well in advance of any government approval for the free school. If it isn't the free school, then why be so secretive - is it just the Bramer/Hughes way of doing things? Interesting in the Harry Bramer thread that he is a former director of Age Concern in Ross - I wonder how he would justify kicking out elderly and vulnerable people from their luncheon club in order to free up an `asset'.

Tony Johnson must be very relieved that the debate has diverted onto the nature and identity of "Here for Hereford" the ins and outs of building bypasses, and the performance of the Highways Agency. The focus should be on a Council "Leader" misleading the public in a radio interview. He should be asked why he did it, what information he was using and would he now apologise and explain the true situation. The HT only managed to get a bit of vague council speak waffle from Philip Price - not any detailed response to detailed questions.

I assume the pricing (more per hour the longer you stay) is intended to encourage a fast turnover of potential customers - they want there to be available spaces all the time. However it also shows the lie of claiming that it is a regeneration that will benefit the old (historic) city centre. Anyone parked in the OLM car park, having done a bit of shopping and enjoyed some expensive fried chicken is very unlikely to put their stuff back in the car and say "While we're here, lets stroll over to the old shops in High Town and Church Street - we can leave the car here and cross the attractive shared space that used to be a congested inner ring road".

Thanks Smartieno.1 I might have anticipated that you would have been on the case! Now would this be the very same Helen Coombes who, back in December found the equivalent of £950 per day to fund a couple of suits to help her to do her job? So in one week, our Helen would hand out more to the two lucky consultants than she managed to distribute to all the folk in financial crisis in 9 months. I remember Cllr Vaughan Powell trying to get answers at the time and neither the CE or cabinet member was prepared to justify the cost of the two consultants - I wonder if they were ever recruited.

Dippy thanks I thought the story was familiar. It was in the guardian today with the gist of it being that the money was intended for grants and nationally only half was given to the needy. Herefordshire was mentioned specifically as such a small proportion had been spent here. I assume the sum from the government was calculated from knowing the welfare/benefits situation here. It seems odd that if the money is used for loans the council says it isn't used because there is no demand for it. Do councils normally have a pot for crisis loans and they are using this extra money instead? It would be interesting to see how amounts lent compare with the 377000 pounds.

This time it is the council, not the hospital. Front page story in the printed copy of the Guardian, today, Easter Monday, and in this link to the on line version. The story is about large sums provided by central government to councils to help those in dire straits due to welfare changes or problems. I think Tony Johnson's view is that they aren't all that poor and he should be able to use the money for other things. They will, of course, claim they are prioritising safeguarding the vulnerable and the money is better used for that - a claim which is being used again and again to cover up incompetence elsewhere. And a claim that is not borne out by some of their actions. So, what happened to the rest of the money? Was there any member questioning or scrutiny of any decision to divert the money elsewhere? What data was used to justify it?

It's a shame that there wasn't a public talk or lecture/appearance but I would think though that Mr Hawking needs to be able to do things in a private capacity sometimes and without a public fuss so it is understandable that his visit was kept quiet until after the event. We should respect that and hope that he enjoyed his visit enough to repeat it and was made welcome enough to consider a more public appearance next time. Perhaps I should add that I also prefer to visit Hereford without being mobbed by hordes of well wishers and fans and so far I have been able to achieve that.

From Mr Featherstone From Vogon Commander Jeltz in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy Surely our cabinet having been taking lessons from this model of transparency. Tried to paste an image of Vogon Jeltz - couldn't do it - you will have to google him yourself.

Even on a damp day like this it shows that a redbrick building can be attractive (except for the green roller door) - Thanks for alerting me to what is in front of my nose. I really should look up and around me more often rather than scurrying along in a hurry - I had never really noticed what the building looked like from that side. Shame that the new Debenhams couldn't have the same kind of detail and texture in its large brick walls. No doubt the city fathers will ensure the new cashpoint is place in an unobtrusive and sensitive way.

To whom? Is this another fait accompli to be presented by senior officers to the elected members? Another Edgar St trees situation - get it done quick because well informed people are starting to ask awkward questions and we can't be seen to back down? And any comment on the Peter Robinson/Audit information above?

I'm supporter of a different club but I really hope HUFC survive. However this fundraising is the equivalent of emergency first aid - not a cure for the ills that has led to this situation. The first aid has to be given but I hope no-one involved confuses it with a cure. The question for the years ahead is how to actually make the club viable and sustainable and unless this can be done then the emergency fundraising will happen more and more often. The situation must be even more galling for HUFC supporters when compared with the money at the top of the game - one week's wages for a Chelsea or Man City star would pay the tax bill at HUFC and the next months wages for all the staff. And, a finance question that just occurred to me. Heineken's donation is generous - no argument there - but if they make a tax deductable donation to a community effort, can that donation be used to pay a tax bill?

Although, thinking more clearly now, it must have been very uncomfortable for our senior, highly paid staff to keep meeting in the corridor or car park someone who had evidence of their dishonesty and who knew they had lied to him. It wouldn't have been fair for the senior officers to have to live with that embarrassment. My suspicion is that they came to the only reasonable solution to this problem, one that would draw a line under things and let them move on. Or maybe I'm being cynical - perhaps the FoI part of the legal department was so underworked and overstaffed that it made sense to restructure and reduce the number of posts -.

I'll bet he knows where a lot of skeletons are buried. He used to get very frustrated with the directors and other senior officers for telling him lies, which he passed on to FoI requesters in good faith , or refusing to comply with the FoI or Data Protection Act , particularly when it was he, and not them, who ended up issuing grovelling apologies or dealing with the Information Commissioners Office. Perhaps any councillors reading this could comment on whether any elected member committee or group ever runs an eye over the Council's performance in relation to Freedom of Information/Data Protection. Both in terms of promptness and accuracy/honest of replies. The theoretical position stated in this thread is that the elected council employs the officers. However I feel that in Herefordshire it is the directors and the chief exec who rule the roost - controlling the information to councillors etc.

The "facts and figures" bit caught my eye. Apparently 51% of Hereford (not Herefordshire) residents are Wealthy Achievers. Come on fellow posters, half of you are loaded, own up to your riches and your achievements. Must go, the butler has brought my coffee.

So according to the job advert found by TWG it looks like the SW Audit Partnership company is recruiting (cheap) staff for a contract they haven't been awarded yet. They must be very sure that the HCC cabinet will do what they are told by Peter Robinson. On what basis, I wonder. It would be interesting to hear from councillors how comfortable they are or were with Peter Robinson's recruitment. And Bill Norman's too, whilst on the topic of directors who left other councils under dubious and expensive circumstances.

This "South West Audit Partnership" - it wouldn't be an 'Arms Length' or 'Shared services' type of operation, would it? If so, then what could possibly go wrong? In addition, despite all the rules and regulations etc, and the flaws of the major accountancy firms, the concept of auditors being owned by, and therefore having to please, the audited (council), places a major potential conflict of interest at the heart of what should be an independent and rigorous process. I also came across this about the quality of auditing in Bristol City Council. There is a familiar name in it about our new finance director: Link: http://thebristolian.net/tag/peter-robinson/ Quote Describing an official report into financial management at Bristol City Council I wonder how Peter Robinson so impressed Herefordshire that they offered him sanctuary from all the cruel comments being made about his role in Bristol. If councillors are reading this, perhaps they could compare notes with their colleagues on Bristol City Council before making any audit decisions.

Translation: " I didn't think anyone would ever find out".

This gentleman left Bristol City Council under some very dubious circumstances - according to the Hereford Heckler. Story from last year. http://herefordheckler.co.uk/trebles-all-round-as-runaway-council-managers-trouser-a-wedge/ And a story from an independent news website in the South West http://sidmouthindependentnews.wordpress.com/2013/11/14/swat-south-west-audit-travesty/ Seems like just the sort organisation to take councils' money and in return tell councils that what they are doing is just fine and dandy.