Tag: peterborough city council
Is Peterborough City Council’s executive pay award ultra vires or not?
Last night full council refused to discuss the executive pay award which Cllr Ed Murphy (LAB) raised as a comment on the minutes. Ed claims the award has a dating problem and could therefore have been made ultra vires.
I was so stunned by the way this was handled by the new mayor (legal advice or comment was not even sought) that I missed the exact words of the dismissal, but it was dismissed in about four words. Could have been “You can’t have that.” Over so quickly.
Basically from the Spectators Gallery our council appeared not interested last night in defending itself in public against a charge it may have acted “beyond its powers”, i.e. unconstitutionally. Not only that, but on one of the most politically contentious areas of its responsibility: executive pay being a marker for escalating levels of inequality in society and in our organisations.
Whereas various councillors sprang to support Harrington’s dismissed second motion (which by then was history), not a single councillor supported Ed Murphy’s assertion (either properly at the time or subsequently by way of solidarity or rhetorical effect – both options being wide open to them).
It seems to me that there are at least three possible explanations:
Which is it? Or is there another?
So glad I’m not the minutes secretary!
Collecting Ideas for a First Green Party Manifesto for Peterborough
is an event happening between now and 16th April 2014
If you live in Peterborough your local Green Party is collecting ideas
You can post an idea or a policy for inclusion in the Manifesto by adding it as a comment to this post.
What “NOT VOTING” sounds like in Peterborough
Last night I arrived at Council too late to catch the whole debate on the council’s plan to make a £1.2M annual saving by cutting the services it currently provides to Peterborough’s children.
But I was in time for the recorded vote. Our local newspaper has already published this story but has not (so far) provided a list of who voted which way. I suppose this information will eventually be published in the council’s very own minutes, but who ever reads those?
So, since several people have asked for a breakdown, here are my gleanings from the Spectators Gallery:
CON Arculus, Nick ABSTAIN West
CON Casey, Graham ABSTAIN Orton Longueville
CON Lee, Matthew ABSTAIN Fletton
CON Maqbool, Yasmeen ABSTAIN West
CON Simons, George ABSTAIN Paston
CON Sanders, David name heard but unable to hear response Eye & Thorney
CON Allen, Sue name not heard Orton Waterville
CON Cereste Marco name not heard Stanground Central
CON McKean, Dale name not heard Eye & Thorney
CON Walsh, Irene name not heard Stanground Central
CON Dalton, Matthew NOT VOTING West
CON Day, Sue NOT VOTING Paston
CON Elsey, Gavin NOT VOTING Orton Waterville
CON Fitzgerald, Wayne NOT VOTING Bretton North
CON Goodwin, Janet NOT VOTING Orton Longueville
CON Harper, Chris NOT VOTING Stanground East
CON Hiller, Peter NOT VOTING Northborough
CON Holdich, John (OBE) NOT VOTING Ghinton & Wittering
CON Kreling, Pam NOT VOTING Park
CON Lamb, Diane NOT VOTING Glinton & Wittering
CON Nadeem, Mohammed NOT VOTING Central
CON Nawaz, Gul NOT VOTING Ravensthorpe
CON North, Nigel NOT VOTING Orton with Hampton
CON Peach, John NOT VOTING Park
CON Rush, Brian NOT VOTING Stanground Central
CON Scott, Sheila NOT VOTING Orton with Hampton
CON Seaton, David NOT VOTING Orton with Hampton
CON Serluca, Lucia NOT VOTING Fletton
CON Stokes, June NOT VOTING Orton Waterville
CON Thacker, Paula NOT VOTING Werrington South
CON Todd, Marion NOT VOTING East
CON Over, David NOT VOTING Barnack
LAB Forbes, Lisa FOR Orton Longueville
LAB Jamil, Mohammed FOR Central
LAB Johnson, Jo FOR East
LAB Khan, Nazim (MBE) FOR Central
LAB Knowles, John FOR Paston
LAB Martin, Stuart FOR Bretton North
LAB Shabbir, Nabil FOR East
LAB Shearman, John FOR Park
LAB Thulbourn, Nick FOR Fletton & Woodston
LAB Murphy, Ed FOR Ravensthorpe
LAB Sylvester, Ann FOR Bretton North
LD Fower, Darren FOR Werrington South
LD Sandford, Nick FOR Walton
LD Shaheed, Asif FOR Walton
LD Davidson, Julia name heard but unable to hear response Werrington South
PIF Miners, Adrian declared interest, so unable to vote Dogsthorpe
PIF Ash, Christopher FOR Dogsthorpe PIF Fletcher, Michael FOR Bretton South
PIF Fox, John FOR Werrington North
PIF Fox, Judith FOR Werrington North
PIF Harrington, David FOR Newborough
PIF Saltmarsh, Christabel FOR Dogsthorpe
PIF Sharp, Keith FOR North
PIF Swift, Charles (OBE) FOR “but confused” North
PIF Lane, Stephen name not heard Werrington North
I found it very difficult indeed to pick up the voices of the Conservative councillors last night. It was a very muffled vote. I was unaware that “NOT VOTING” was an available option. I wonder whether or not the Conservatives on the council understand what “ABSTAIN” means? If they do, then why did they choose to say “NOT VOTING”? The Chair announced that 23 people voted FOR and that 29 people abstained and that nobody voted against the motion.
I haven’t caught everyone’s response so I know there are errors and some omissions in this list. Please feel free to correct or explain these if you can (comments are open). The sound system available to councillors is so bad that many struggle to make it work properly. People in a meeting may feel confident to signal their vote to the chair, especially if their views are already very well known.
According to the newspaper “a motion to defer closing the centres so that alternative proposals can be considered was carried following a vote and the issue will now be decided at the next meeting of the council’s cabinet.” But the motion, as I understand it, was proposed by Cllr John Shearman (LAB) and he made a point, immediately prior to the vote, that the motion was to “recommend that Cabinet defer any decision until alternative proposals are proposed, considered and consulted on.”
Well done Peterborough’s opposition. Last night “spectators” had the pleasure of witnessing over a quarter of Peterborough’s councillors actually holding the executive to account. I have never seen this before.
This is what it looked like to another observer: http://parkfarmneighbourhoodwatch.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/childrens-centres-first-for.html
Here is a photo of the opposition standing up to demand a recorded vote: http://terry-harris.photoshelter.com/gallery-image/Full-Council-Childrens-Centre-Closures/G0000xzhmtuMp.a4/I0000UNVajRUjfiU
But the big question now is will Cabinet pay any attention at all to the wishes of Council when it meets on Monday at 10am?
#solardebate “with all sides taking part” @PaulStainton
I happily accepted an invitation to join a “participating audience” tonight and gave away my ticket for the James Galway concert in Ely Cathedral.
I turned up at the Copeland Community Centre to listen to Stewart Jackson MP (Conservative) challenge the solar voltaic project planned for Newborough and which has been vocally and enthusiastically led by Cllr Marco Cereste (Conservative), Leader of Peterborough City Council (Conservative) who believes it presents the answer to what he (Conservative) describes as “the black hole” created by the ConDem (but mainly Conservative) government of which Stewart Jackson MP (Conservative) is an elected representative. They were both on the panel alongside Chris Foulds and Bob Lawrence.
The organiser was the BBC and the Chair was Paul Stainton of Cambridgeshire’s Bigger Breakfast.
Cllr Cereste (Conservative) was invited to set out his stall. He is very keen that Peterborough City Council (Conservative) become a power generator and sell power to “our residents”. He thinks this would “give them some stability” and “we can control those prices”. He is fairly convinced that there isn’t much choice because otherwise “what are we going to do?” and it is the “duty of each councillor and council officer to get the best return..” He spent all of ten seconds on “£21M” and “£175M”. The first is “solar” and the other is the “entire project”.
Richard Olive tried to explain that the projected figures didn’t add up. He wasn’t allowed to finish. It has to be said that Richard Olive is a firm believer in the interrupt and trample theory of communication. There is one problem with his approach though: although the assertion gets expressed and a familiar voice goes on air absolutely nothing then happens to what is said. In the lordly procession of chairman to the person next in his narrative it is a sort of burp. The possibility that he might be right or that it might be worth looking at the figures isn’t allowed to even hang suspended in space for a moment. The panel (50% Conservative) escapes scrutiny with the assistance of the BBC.
Paul Stainton stands up, wandering about, while the “participating audience” sits down. Perhaps Richard Olive should have stood up and claimed a bit of space on a level with the Chair? It is after all difficult to trample from a sitting position.
As a veteran of the incinerator (anti) campaign and an observer of the hospital PFI fiasco it astounds me that anyone on Peterborough City Council can still get away with that phrase “commercial confidentiality”. If the council is the company (or effectively) where is the competition, where is the tender, where is the process? What could possibly be confidential?
Nobody asked. Something has to be very seriously wrong: when nobody
- understands the process
- bothers to explain it
- knows what it is or
- why it is there
Why does nobody ever challenge this preposterous pile of garbage? If someone fly-tipped vomit soaked nappies all over Cllr Nick Sandford (Liberal Democrat), would he actually mind? I think he would just say something Sandfordianly phlegmatic, smile and drift on.
How many more millions of pounds does the city council have to lose before Jo Public barges in? We know another massive financial blunder (or worse) is underway but everyone is determined to leave the curtain hanging up there. We need a little boy.
Why don’t other people feel their intelligence has been insulted by Cllr Cereste (Conservative) in particular? And patronised to the point of jaw on floor? “I do know that what’s on the table will secure him and his family for a long time to come.” Cllr Cereste (Conservative) knows much better than the sleepless farmer does what is best for the sleepless farmer.
How does this phenomenon get away with it? He hasn’t always been like that. Has he? Why isn’t he pursued by dung laden tractors?
Cllr Cereste (Conservative) spent another unchallenged (by Stewart Jackson MP Conservative) moment in the sun (lets be honest it is a Conservative sun, isn’t it) talking about £7M income per year and how that was a “very positive thing to do”.
Nobody pointed out that the residents of Peterborough might be being held to ransom over this. Or that there might be a conflict of interest for the council, (Conservative) or for Cllr Cereste (Conservative) or that all this lovely millions of money and tempting energy security from a terrifying nightmare of high prices (Conservatives role in creating said nightmare includes closing UK mines, privatising energy companies and selling the national grid) might be being laid out before us suckers “our residents” (Conservative) in the run up to an election.
Stewart Jackson MP (Conservative) then proceeded to list the procedural gaffes committed by the Peterborough City Council (Conservative).
He alleged
- lack of transparency (no figures available to the residents of Peterborough and – because I couldn’t ask my second question the audience was able to rest secure in the assumption – to Stewart Jackson MP (Conservative) himself.
- treatment of farmers (I’ll expand for him here: the council’s first communication to 18 farmers was to warn them that they would be evicted if the plan went ahead)
- risk of a change in the subsidy regime: no safety plan if the government (Conservative with a little bit of Dem) changes the regime governing ROCs (again no discussion: no explanation)
- no contingency fund if the sums are wrong
- conflict with government (Conservative with a little bit of Dem) policy on renewables (this was not explained at all)
- has no plan B (if I may expand any decent proposal presents alternatives, preferably a well thought out range of options)
- didn’t even know which brownfield sites it owned
Bob Lawrence was brilliant: a great relief talking about actual food production and the role of a tenant farm although Farming Today (which I often listen to) recently did a bit on how councils across the country are flogging them off or developing them and how much damage this could do to farming, small farms and new entrants to farming.
What sadly didn’t get said at this point is that some councils are refusing to do this. I think Peterborough should be enthusiastically refusing to reduce its tenanted farm land holdings.
Once Paul Stainton said they were starting to wind up and I still hadn’t succeeding in asking any of my questions I decided that since I wasn’t actually required as a speaking participant, as I had expected, I wasn’t going to be part of any awful preorganised tedious windbag wind up. So I left and expressed my feelings as clearly as I possibly could (being at that point absolutely livid) to David Murray, radio editor.
So what questions would I have asked? I had two: the first was in response to Cllr Marco Cereste (Conservative). I wanted to ask him (and I’ll be honest I really wanted to ask this in front of a rolling TV camera):
- Can you explain why you are not sure exactly how much income the solar voltaic array on the Freemans building is bringing in and why should anyone trust your figures if you are in the slightest bit uncertain on this point?
And the other one was to Stewart Jackson. I wanted to ask him:
- Whether or not public authorities (including Peterborough City Council) don’t have to disclose to our elected representative in parliament whatever information is requested of them and to confirm that he does actually have all the figures because he has asked the city council for them and they have been obliged to disclose them.
Please go to @PaulStainton or https://twitter.com/PaulStainton for more and use hashtag #solardebate
Please comment here if you don’t tweet or want more space
