gdj

Before anyone starts to think that the Hereford Times has gone all rebellious and alternative and done some digging on this, the FoI request was the Worcester News - they claim credit and the HT story just says `a FoI request'. Lots of comments already on the Worcester News website - seems it is still a vibrant forum. http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/11097283.Taxpayers_fork_out___3_000_for_fire_chief_s_private_back_operation/ And when the HT says "We can reveal that...." - what they mean is they have cut and pasted the Worcester News story. And the story has oddly been placed beneath several earlier stories - normally they just place the latest one at the top. I wonder who the other two councillors were - Prodger was in favour of the payment, a Cllr Udall was against it and there are allegedly 2 more involved but one denies being there.

It looks like this ipad debacle may have spurred some individuals to investigate the complex financial arrangements of this group of academies and how it pays its headteachers for `executive headship services'. Bearing in mind the apparently litigious nature of the schools, I include these links with no further comment - the FoI originator provides a clear interpretation himself in the first link https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/fees_for_consultancy_work_accrue#incoming-489261 https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/failure_to_register_related_part https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/party_related_transactions_relat The last question relates to IT services so may or may not be relevant to the ipad story. There have been a few education topics on Hereford Voice recently - this one, the Hereford Academy, the University proposal, the free school, Biomech's observation about schoolkids being around earlier and earlier - perhaps worth an `Education and schools' forum which could be county wide rather than Hereford alone.

Does the Ground get used for anything else? - surely it makes sense to combine it with other sports - rugby and football co-exist at a lot of grounds, golf driving range, hockey, lots of possibilities, the occasional outdoor music concert - share the overheads - have any of these things been explored? A football club can be a positive asset for a place - gives something to unite around, even in the traditional English way of uniting in moaning about the local club/team/manager and occasionally when it does well, it gives a boost. It is just no longer possible for a small club to exist in a stadium with just one game a fortnight and little other revenue. And, here is an idea from left field (sorry) - the county has thousands of Polish, mostly young, people in it. That community is becoming more and more settled. Football is big in Poland. Get them involved - sign a couple of Polish players, arrange a friendly against a Polish team, do some promotional stuff (Bath Rugby had a match where they gave free entry to Polish workers) - the local demographic is changing so the club could adapt and take advantage.

How about two small ones - I know that in the age of rationalisation and centralisation and `efficiency' it goes against the grain, but one south of the river which would also have rapid access to Rotherwas (where there must be a relatively high risk of fire), and areas which flood. And one North of the river to cover the city centre and other industrial areas. This would remove the risk of a traffic problem on the bridges cutting them off from half their area.

And yet we are told the HF is organisationally separate from HCC and that HCC has no right to know what HF is doing. So what right does HF have to offer an HCC building to anyone. There could be a procedural/democratic hole in this process which could help to block the whole thing. Another snippet - which might make you laugh or cry is the background of Cllr Prodger of Worcester with whom Cllr Johnson has been in cahoots. The comments underneath would never have been allowed at the HT - seems like the kindest thing that could be said about Mr Prodger is that he `divides opinion' - and that many of the transport projects he `managed' didn't turn out well. Just the chap to decide where to put a fire station. btw has anyone asked the actual firefighters where they think would be a good location? They are the ones who have to get from A to B fast to possibly save lives (or at least put out a shed fire or rescue a stranded cow/horse). They really don't want to be in a queue behind Biomech at the traffic lights.

So the "Council" has not been officially sent minutes of Hereford Futures Board meetings. However Councillors who sat on the board over the last few years must have copies of the board meeting documents for the meetings that they attended. Is Cllr Harvey saying that these individuals are refusing to provide copies to the Council whom they represented on the Board? If so, perhaps someone can name names - call them out. Also, if they claim that they are only obliged to work for the benefit of the company, not the council, when engaged on its business is this an admission that the interests of HF and HCC are not compatible? The FoI act seems to say that HF doesn't have to release documents into the public domain. It doesn't say that they must not release them. There is a choice here. There is also leverage in the council (i.e. us) funding the winding up costs, pensions and pay offs only in return for full transparency over HF's operations over the years. If `lessons are to be learned`, then facts must be available.

Thank you again Chris, That is becoming clearer - perhaps the fact that the government (with its much vaunted `localism' ethos) can confiscate a million pound asset from a local authority should have been highlighted and opposed more publicly and individuals such as the two MPs asked to give opinions and support local council tax payers a little more. I suspect that if a Labour government had done this there would have been a lot more noise made in opposition. The Hereford Times has also been careful to avoid any questioning of the situation since you put your head above the parapet and bravely opposed it in its first stages. I admit I am a little concerned by your statement that the government would `most likely' return the site to the LA if the free school no longer needs it - surely this is a defined situation. I get the impression that you, too, are slightly uneasy about that. I aslo agree that plans can change but the university plan hasn't `evolved' - it has completely changed and all preparatory work for the 2009/10 version ditched and a completely new group, funding plan and model produced. Again, this looks political - the first plan was under Labour, the new plan is under the Conservatives - the co-project leader is the Chair of the Conservative Association. I have to say the project team looks very strong, though. No comment on the role of Geoff Hughes in the fate of the Blackfriars site, which the Council fought against? Thanks again

On a lighter note - according to the documents linked by Megilleland, ESG (the first incarnation of Hereford Futures) was part of the group looking to have a higher education centre on the Blackfriars site. They have this plan on their website, of the whole area showing some of the things they fantasise about creating. Your task is to spot the Blackfriars site and the idea they have for regenerating it.

Thank you Chris Can you confirm that the Council will remain the owner of the site and buildings and that the Robert Owen group won't be able to sell it? Also, I'm confused about the proposed new university - how will it have an identity and bring any prosperity if it the students and staff aren't located here? Do you have any opinion on the director in charge of buildings and land assets being part of an organisation removing a million pound asset from the council for a use that the Council opposes? I realise that the council has to allow a free school to use a redundant building - so why not define it as 'not redundant' - it was still being used by lots of staff until it was hurriedly emptied for the free school.

I hope it's ok to cut an paste an entire letter - but Cllr Harvey posted on the HT story last night - the story is now well down the page so you may not notice but it is very illuminating. So thank you to Cllr Harvey for the detail and for taking the trouble to communicate with the public again.

Great research Megilleland. Thank you. So there have been two university development projects: In 2009 the council agreed to give/rent Blackfriars to the first university project with Geoff Hughes as the director in charge of organising it and the Robert Owen foundation part of the group of organisations supporting the project. In 2013 - 14 a completely different university project appeared and approached the council for the possible use of buildings. Again agreed by council. However by this time the Blackfriars building is no longer available because the Robert Owen Foundation (with Geoff Hughes as a senior trustee) has acquired the site for nothing for a purpose that is definitely not Higher Education. Leaving aside the lack of need for the free school and the resignation of its headteacher after a term, these questions spring into my mind: - What happened to the first university project? - When did Geoff Hughes join the Robert Owen Foundation? - At what point did the council decide to drop its commitment to reserving the Blackfriars site for Higher Education (university use) - and is this recorded anywhere? - My own opinion is that a Higher Education facility would be of great positive value to the local economy - it has been proved in many places. So why has our director for regeneration supported an alternative use (non higher education) for the site earmarked for higher education - thus blocking a major regeneration opportunity? Perhaps we'll never know as the council, its departments and arms length companies and these various other bodies combine to make the most opaque situation I can imagine - and the director in charge of education seems to be the most silent on all these education situations.

Thank you Aylestone Voice You don't happen to know when the council decided it didn't need Blackfriars, do you? Or what role Geoff Hughes had in that decision? Knowing a free school could do this, wouldn't you think they would act defensively and keep any such buildings of value in use until the school was housed somewhere else? And if the building really wasn't needed then you'd have thought the staff in there would have adequate alternative places already prepared. Is the lack of protest from the council due to bigger politics and trying not to get on the wrong side of central government? Is that also why the Hereford Times is ignoring the situation?

Whilst the HT does have a history of deleting off-message stories, there is the possibility that the correct procedures for redundancy haven't been gone through and someone has jumped the gun on this. Consultation with staff, unions etc, offers of alternatives, asking for volunteers etc. Also, if the staff themselves haven't been notified of the proposals it can be distressing, to say the least, to read it in the media.

One solution is to buy a new battery for your watch I'm sure they don't finish at 2pm - unless council cuts mean there is no longer a truant officer (Educational Welfare Officer in modern terminology) and the little darlings like to go and watch motorists sitting in traffic jams - playing `chicken` in Hereford City Centre has become very tame and safe.

I know that Jesse organised an e-vote on best shop, best pub etc in Hereford - he now seems to be promoting a similar one in Ross. Is this a laudable attempt by the local MP to promote local business off his own bat or a Tory central office wheeze in the year before an election - raise profile and get get people's email addresses. Norwich: http://www.norwichconservatives.com/news/norwich-mp-launches-great-local-shop-competition Hastings: http://amberrudd.co.uk/amber-kicks-off-small-business-saturday-with-independent-shop-competition/ Darwen and Rawtenstall: http://www.jakeberry.org/news/356/15/Jake-Berry-MP-Announces-Winners-of-Best-Independent-Shop-Competition.html I could go on, but you get the idea. As the general election is 14 months away, but campaigning not allowed until nearer the time, maybe Hereford Voice could have a special section to highlight disguised campaigning by any party.

The thing that really strikes me is the labyrinthine complexity of these contracts. Mutual suspicion and the rules for conflict are a big part of them. There can be no way that the work can be done as responsively and efficiently with so many contractual hoops to jump through and transaction costs and contract management and supervision costs to take account of. Old days: Council depot manager receives call saying an urgent repair is needed somewhere. He slots it into the schedule for one of his gangs for the day. Brave new world. Council hears of repair need - sends email to BBLP and hopes they receive it. BBLP check whether that work is included in the contract and try to prove it will require extra payment and wait for agreement before scheduling it. If they do the work they make sure that they only do that work - even if another repair close by is noticed. Forms are filled in by BBLP and a raft of BBLP and HCC managers then chew over who should pay. HCC send out someone to check the work has been done satisfactorily and put their report into the argument. Repeat every day. Workers in the `gang' receive less pay that when directly employed - BBLP managers and HCC contract managers get decidedly more. This is efficiency!

Denise I think that there is some weird rule that they claim for mileage but have to prove they bought petrol - they don't claim against the petrol receipt. This is presumably to prove that their cars don't run on fresh air. What struck me looking at Johnson's first document was that he was going to Brockington on consecutive days for very short meetings and claiming mileage for each visit. If he was using his own money he would make sure that he held several meetings per visit. For example 12/6/2012 - a 45 minute meeting with Jo Davidson who is based at Brockington, and the following day back again to meet Jarvis and Morgan. On 26th, 27th and 28th of that month - three round trips for a total of 5.5 hours of meetings - probably with pretty much the same people each time. This is not the behaviour of an individual or organisation that is really trying to economise. Perhaps one of our Hereford Voice councillors could say how time is accounted for. Would Johnson have charged for his travel time, or per visit or is there a flat rate allowance to cover all necessary meetings? Does anyone have the responsibility of ensuring meetings etc are scheduled efficiently? btw - did anyone else notice HCC's appearance in Private Eye the other week over the school transport vote fiasco - perhaps that was what led to Johnson's tirade in the Hereford Times.

I agree completely. It shouldn't need rules for councillors to not claim for their home telephone bills, sandwiches, ipads, imac air computers etc - they should be the sort of people who instinctively know what is right and wrong. If you are the sort of person who claims `everything I can get away with` you shouldn't be a councillor. Next time you hear Cllr Johnson insisting `we must only spend on the statutory minimum services` consider whether his own claims reflected the minimum possible spend and a mindset of economising.

Megilleland, I heard that Ludlow college was in dire straits financially a couple of years ago and students were deserting it. It wasn't so much merged, as rescued, by joining with HCT. It was also looking at being taken over by other West Midlands bigger colleges. Regarding the suggested university, I suspect that, as with the `shopping mall' model of regeneration, Hereford is at least 15 years too late - the market for university education has peaked and is in decline as the costs increase. What might work is an on-line one - but that doesn't need buildings, it wouldn't bring free spending students and professors to Herefordshire and would be competing with the big US universities that already run on-line course modules and the OU in this country which already has a high reputation. It would be great for youngsters in Herefordshire to have Higher Education available but not have to move away if they don't want to or are unable to - but the opportunities for having an outlying campus of established universities should be pursued first. (This should already have been done but probably hasn't). As Dippy said - the old cattle market would have been ideal - some educational buildings, some greenery and some accommodation would have provided more long term economic improvement than just shops. I would park this idea in the same area as the Ukrainian missile factory, the velodrome, a council apology for mistakes and a bypass as - yes, it would be welcome, but we wont hold our breath. gdj

One of the reasons I was banned from the HT was asking questions about the Blackfriars building. It must be of very high value and yet seems to be just being handed over to the Robert Owen foundation. It doesn't meet any real need as HCT could provide vocational education. It is a case of Hereford doesn't need a free school but Michael Gove needs there to be one. I have heard that they (the Robert Owen Foundation) are being given something like £3 million by the Dept of Education to make this happen. This year they have had about 20 pupils (target was 60 for this year). The principal (brought in from London) has resigned after one term. Many of the council staff booted out of Blackfriars to make room have no real place to work. Another HT report was that the council schools that would have educated the 20 pupils have lost the funding of 4 or 5 thousand per pupil but still the council bends over backwards to help the free school. A completely unrelated observation is that one of the trustees of the Robert Owen foundation is one Geoff Hughes. And another unrelated observation is that the council director of 'places and communities' is one Geoff Hughes. Can any of the councillors who are on this site confirm that the valuable land and building will at least stay in the ownership of the council (i.e. us) and not be available for the free school organisation to take away and sell for their own profit later? Could any councillors who were keen to justify the selling at the best possible price of council property let us know if this `asset disposal' was at the best possible price?

By jove, she's got it!

Dippy What can I say? Council maths may be beyond you but your poetry is magnificent. You are hereby awarded 10 gold stars and a merit. The secret to doing council maths is to do the sums backwards. First decide on the answer you want and only then reach for your calculator and find a way to get the "correct" answer. I will give you an example. If you want to build a new shopping centre but it would only be viable if it attracted, say, 50000 extra shoppers a year to your city who would normally shop elsewhere, would you: a). Commission consultants to find out how many extra shoppers there would actually be and make a decision based on evidence or b). Commission consultants to find a way to claim there will be 50000 extra shoppers so you can go ahead and build. You have 2 hours and an agreeable lunch in which to answer this question.

Dippy and the rest of you, I'm afraid you've got rather low marks on the test. Let me explain whilst you listen carefully and nod. a) The answer of £ 3.3 million is very simplistic. It does not take into account a range of complex and secret contractual factors and adjustments which in reality will bring down the number to a much smaller promised saving. b) The answer of just one million is again very simplistic. I would try to explain to you but you probably wouldn't understand why the actual number, due to secret adjustment factors is actually a much bigger one. c) Michael has been very passionate about delivering a range of innovative and transforming solutions to stakeholders, service users and clients and that is good enough for me. d) Christopher helped to write the promises and so already knew what to expect. The promised savings enabled a range of other valuable projects to go ahead such as the new car park by the station, payoffs to Chief Executives and the repair of several potholes. e) Yes, of course someone has been held accountable. The person who answers the phone in the office has been dispensed with to show how serious we are. Now, Dippy, I fear you are a disruptive influence and are now on a final warning. Please report for re-education. GDJ

Well done Bobby - news published first on Hereford Voice and hurriedly copied in HT later on! From the HT report Lets do the sums: due to save £33 million in 10 years. Actually (claimed) saving of £3 million in 3 years. In terms of a primary school maths test: Michael promises Christopher to give him £33 million pounds over ten years. Two years later Christopher runs away and Alistair sits in his chair. After one more year Michael says he has provided £3 million pounds and everyone says "well done". a) How many million per year has been promised? b) How many million per year has been delivered? c) Has Michael done a good job? d) Was Christopher right to believe the promises (if he actually did so)? e) Will anyone be held accountable. You have five minutes and will be given extra marks for not swearing in your answer.

Well the Ukrainian opposition certainly seems to have chased the president/dictator from power. He must wish he'd followed a different strategy when his people started to get restless. My advice would have been: 1. Claim that no-one else has any ideas of how to do things 2. Offer the opposition some seats at the cabinet so that they can share the blame as he continues his policies 3. Carry out and then ignore an on-line consultation 4. Outsource the running of the country to an opaque and shadowy "Shared Services" organisation. 5. Hand over parts of the territory to western style expensive "department stores" to give the illusion of economic progress. 6. Lots of bluster. That way he would have remained in power for ever.