UPDATED: More cash for vulnerable adults overcharged by council (From Wirral Globe)
Send us news by text, start your message Globe News and your send photos and videos to 80360
UPDATED: More cash for vulnerable adults overcharged by council
7:10pm Friday 24th August 2012 in News By Leigh Marles
Martin Morton
Repayments to vulnerable adults who were systematically overcharged for their council accommodation are to be massively increased.
A further £440,000 will be added to a £245,000 package of payments which the town hall was forced to concede two years ago should be returned to the residents.
The move is revealed in a document from Wirral Council adult social services director Graham Hodkinson and broadly follows recommendations made in an inquiry report published earlier this year by consultant Anna Klonowski.
It further vindicates whistleblower Martin Morton, who has claimed all along that the sum needed to repay residents was far above the £245,000 agreed in 2010.
Mr Morton said today: "Despite being disappointed that an overdue Freedom of Information request I made about the reimbursements has yet to be answered, this is indeed momentous news.
"The rightful decisions which have been finally reached as to the amount of the reimbursements that should be made to disabled people who were unlawfully charged was the main outcome I wanted from the Klonowski report.
"Despite Ms Klonowski not fully investigating the unlawful charging concerns I had about disabled tenants at Balls Road due to time constraints imposed on the publication of the independent review, I am doubly gratified that, finally, my allegations have been vindicated here also.
"However, I do feel that it is both tragic and unnecessary that this case should have taken 12 years to resolve - especially considering my career has been destroyed and there has been a catastrophic financial and reputational impact on the council."
Extra repayments totalling £320,000 will be made to 17 residents in properties in Curlew Way, Edgehill Road and Bermuda Road in Moreton, and will be backdated to 1997.
Thirteen tenants at accommodation in Balls Road, Birkenhead, were overcharged and reimbursement will amount to £30,000.
And at a home in North Road, Birkenhead, all nine tenants were overcharged and will be repaid £90,000.
Any tenants who were undercharged will not be required to repay the difference.
The repayments centre around a “special charging policy” which first came to light when Mr Morton, who was at the time a social services manager, repeatedly attempted to point out to senior executives in the department that it was unfair and probably illegal.
As a last resort, Mr Morton decided to invoke the council's official whistleblower policy, but was to find this only served to provoke yet more intransigence from those in management positions above him.
He was eventually paid £45,000 under a "compromise agreement" to leave the service and keep quiet.
Instead, in November of 2008, he approached the Globe and since then we have helped him tell his story.
An internal audit to examine Mr Morton's claims was eventually ordered and presented its findings in 2009.
It ruled that people living in three homes under so-called "special charging" conditions had paid too much and that the policy was in fact unlawful.
But Mr Morton’s shocking claims of abuse, malpractice and cover-ups were to have even more serious consequences for the council when they led to an investigation by independent consultant Anna Klonowski.
The Klonowski inquiry was commissioned by the then-leader of the council, Cllr Jeff Green, and took more than six months to complete at a cost to taxpayers of £250,000.
Ms Klonowski's highly-critical corporate governance review found that practices other authorities would consider abnormal had become commonplace in Wirral.
The chief executive at the time, Jim Wilkie, said Ms Klonowski’s findings represented the most serious challenge the council had faced.
But Mr Wilkie's determination to lead the response to the challenges presented by Klonowski was not to be, and after a prolonged period of sick leave he opted for early retirement.
Concern about Wirral was so acute that officials from the Local Government Association, which acts as the nationally-recognised "voice" of local authorities, have been sent in to oversee a major programme of change.
In a statement, Cllr Ann McLachlan, cabinet member for improvement and governance, said this week: “One of the major commitments we have made as we strive to become a better council is to act on all the recommendations made in Anna Klonowski’s report.
“As a result, we took the decision to approve these further reimbursements in line with her recommendations.”
Two senior social services managers to whom Mr Morton initially voiced his concerns about the "special charging policy" were suspended from work in 2008 following the Globe's exclusive reports.
They were later exonerated by the council of any wrong-doing and returned to their posts.
Both left the employment of the authority this year under compromise agreements immediately prior to the publication of Ms Klonowski's investigation.
***************************
What is a "compromise agreement"?
Compromise agreements are used a means of resolving workplace issues.
The advantage for the employer is that they are able to draw a line under an employee's departure or complaint and are protected from future claims.
The advantage for the employee is that the consideration, such as a financial sum, is received in return provided by a legally-binding contract.
The agreement provides for a severance payment, in return for which employees agree not to pursue any claim or grievance they may have in an employment tribunal.
Employers have for many years now increasingly used compromise agreements as a mechanism for preventing possible future complaints to a tribunal.
Comments(49)
red devil
says...
2:12pm Wed 22 Aug 12
PaulCa
says...
2:12pm Wed 22 Aug 12
1. Hiding the full extent of the disabled abuse within compromise agreements - the contents of which only become viewable when challenged by a public inquiry or a High Court order.
2. Preventing the guilty (and the compromise agreement issuing body) from discussing the circumstances leading to signatories' departure with a gagging clause.
3. Paying off the abusers with an as yet undisclosed, but widely thought to be six figure sum of council tax payers' money.
4. Allowing those responsible for disabled abuse to conceal their sins and rebuild a career elsewhere, potentially with new responsibility for the wellbeing of scores of vulnerable and disabled people in the future.
Anna Klonowski's organisation AKA Associates no longer has any ties to Wirral Council. As yet, the Wirral public don't know why. More on this subject here:
http://tinyurl.com/c
qywbhu
Natasha Eubank
says...
2:46pm Wed 22 Aug 12
Also, does anyone have any (non-speculative) insight into why Anna K has resigned from the Improvement board?
unbeleivable
says...
3:11pm Wed 22 Aug 12
ArdalMcFardle
says...
4:06pm Wed 22 Aug 12
red devil wrote:So you'd give up your entire career for a years salary. Go away you fatuous, inane buffoon. 45 K for being bullied for ten years and having your career ruined for simply doing what ALL those involved in Social care should have done is an insult when compared to the 200k paid to two senior mangers for cover ups and incompetence. Grow up and say something constructive.
If councils would like me to 'keep quiet' I will take £45k and no longer post in here - ok?
spamfiend
says...
7:17pm Wed 22 Aug 12
unbeleivable wrote:Totally agree
Well done again to Martin Moreton. And it still goes on and on.
WirralAl
says...
8:08am Thu 23 Aug 12
Not one person has been sacked, not a single legal charge brought, millions paid out.
The stupidity is only exceeded by the Gaul of these public employees in being able to just sweep the whole seedy events under the table.
Time to tell us the truth. Face up to the issues and then start doing the job right.
Absolute disgrace!
Salt of the earth
says...
8:18am Thu 23 Aug 12
antisthenes
says...
9:37am Thu 23 Aug 12
And your response?
Grant them amnesty!
In other words further reward their abuse with absolution from any future consequences; no matter what the damage they have done to local individuals and institutions.
People will not 'move on' untill the Council deals with this matter in a just manner. Justice that is not restricted to refunding monies that were defrauded from people and calling it 'compensation'.
It is the Council's cover up culture and failure to do the right thing which is keeping the issue at the forefront of local concern.
MX
says...
12:06pm Thu 23 Aug 12
“Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it” ...
unbeleivable
says...
1:47pm Thu 23 Aug 12
Ben Beaconsfield
says...
4:04pm Thu 23 Aug 12
The usual political-speak is "We now need to draw a line under this."
This expression is often used by culpable politicians (in our case, local Wirral councillors) to get themselves out of an embarrassing position by appearing to look both reasonable and conciliatory whilst at the same time admitting absolutely no liability whatsoever.
In support of this, readers should note that at no time does Cllr Ann McLachlan's statement include the words "we councillors were wrong."
PaulCa
says...
4:40pm Thu 23 Aug 12
With the benefit of hindsight, here's a link to somebody who was wrong....and how! Speaking in November 2009:
http://tinyurl.com/c
qxxkon
WirralAl
says...
10:34pm Thu 23 Aug 12
Salt of the earth wrote:Salt of the earth? Your comments are frankly so stupid they are unbelievable. How can anybody move on when no viewable action has been taken and not a single person has faced up to the complete and utter failure of this council. They need to admit what they did and then they can start to move forwards. Are you employed by the council ?
I think part of the problem here is that people need to move on. Yes the scandal has come out and now more compensation is being paid but do we really need to keep going over and over the same issue? If the council is not allowed to move forward more residents will continue to suffer as a result.
johnbrace
says...
1:48am Fri 24 Aug 12
Salt of the earth wrote:In answer to your question, unfortunately yes the issue was never properly sorted out years ago. How can the Council move forward when some of the people involved (whether they be councillors or employees) are still doing exactly the same things that led to this happening? Bear in mind overcharging and undercharging was rife in Social Services and private companies milked the taxpayer dry of money they weren't entitled to too. In the end the solution to this financial mismangement was to overcharge the service users!!! There was massive misuse of taxpayer's money, a lack of leadership from the councillors and mistakes were made by all three major political party's councillors. Residents need to know (for sure) that when they get a bill from the Council whether for Council Tax or something else it is correct first time as it takes a lot of hastle (that people aren't compensated for) to sort things out after the money has been taken.
I think part of the problem here is that people need to move on. Yes the scandal has come out and now more compensation is being paid but do we really need to keep going over and over the same issue? If the council is not allowed to move forward more residents will continue to suffer as a result.
PaulCa
says...
10:49am Fri 24 Aug 12
I wonder if Anna Klonowski Associates' prior connection to the council (from 2006, delivering training to councillors and senior officers in "Corporate Governance" - later found to be abnormal) had any influence on the decision that there "wasn't time" to investigate Balls Road.
From AKA Report: "Despite the time taken to deliver the review it has not been possible to conclude on all matters, in particular the charging regime at Balls Road and some other supported living establishments."
"In relation to Balls Road and other similar properties, the consultant has not within the time available been able to categorically conclude the nature of the charges here."
Spiffy
says...
1:49pm Fri 24 Aug 12
...
In January 2010 the following was printed in the Globe: " ...the council's director of law, Bill Norman...said residents on means-tested benefits may encounter unexpected difficulties if they suddenly come into a substantial sum of money.
He wrote in the report: "There is the potential impact upon each affected individual’s current financial position.
"The impact of the reimbursement of a significant sum of money, when combined with any capital resources an individual may already have, may have wider implications that may not be initially appreciated by those in receipt of means-tested benefits.
"The regulations for such benefits are framed in such a way as to preclude individuals or those acting on their behalf from taking such actions, in any way, which may be regarded as an evasion of benefit regulations."
...
I wonder....did the council and the DWP dare ?
RL 1952
says...
4:45pm Fri 24 Aug 12
antisthenes wrote:Very well said, the totally distasteful and unacceptable culture remains and those responsible are still in post to carry out further failures, the vulnerable of Wirral deserve better and until there is a radical shake up from the top down porr providers will still be protected and porr employees granted amenesties.
Salt of the earth their are individuals out there who have not been made accountable for their actions; who have in fact benefited financially from the abuse of the most vulnerable people in our community.
And your response?
Grant them amnesty!
In other words further reward their abuse with absolution from any future consequences; no matter what the damage they have done to local individuals and institutions.
People will not 'move on' untill the Council deals with this matter in a just manner. Justice that is not restricted to refunding monies that were defrauded from people and calling it 'compensation'.
It is the Council's cover up culture and failure to do the right thing which is keeping the issue at the forefront of local concern.
unbeleivable
says...
10:24pm Fri 24 Aug 12
montague1
says...
2:33pm Sat 25 Aug 12
They only echo the attitude and approach the Council, and some Senior officers in the Social Services Department of Wirral continue to adopt,
which is "Sweep it under the carpet" cover that carpet with more lies and deceit, and then their version of "Moving on" is to cover THAT CARPET
with more of the same!.
Carpet Fitters must have a permanent contract with the Council !!
Until such time as some SUPER VAC'
is employed to dislodge the deeply ingrained dirt lodged in the pile, then
, Salt of the Earth", "MOVING ON" IS NOT AN OPTION.
Hugo2009
says...
11:11am Mon 27 Aug 12
The deep cleaning excercise to root out the evil in the management structure must be seen to be done.
And it is the duty of every one of the electorate to hold to account the number of Councilors that allowed this disgrace and scandal to continue for over a decade.
stevenharper
says...
5:10pm Mon 27 Aug 12
montague1 wrote:Judging by the reaction of the readers above to salt of the earth's perfectly valid response is clearly the vested interests people talk about are evident above. What everyone wants is a witch hunt which does no one any good - not the council, it's staff or any local residents. Sadly the poison that the Globe has so professionally reported in the past is evident amongst many of its online contributors above. Paying compensation to those who have been affected is the logical response and the one being taken. Starting a kangaroo court style witch hunt is what the vested interests want - probably in the hope that a few new job opportunities arise for them to apply for. This story is sounding like a broken record that many of the contributors above want to keep playing over and over again. No I don't work for the council or have any link to it before I get accused by the 'vested interests' of being part of a conspiracy. I live in the area and what a fresh start and to start reading something else every time I buy a copy of the newspaper.
Comments by Salt of the Earth are at best, quite unseemly, not to mention untimely.
They only echo the attitude and approach the Council, and some Senior officers in the Social Services Department of Wirral continue to adopt,
which is "Sweep it under the carpet" cover that carpet with more lies and deceit, and then their version of "Moving on" is to cover THAT CARPET
with more of the same!.
Carpet Fitters must have a permanent contract with the Council !!
Until such time as some SUPER VAC'
is employed to dislodge the deeply ingrained dirt lodged in the pile, then
, Salt of the Earth", "MOVING ON" IS NOT AN OPTION.
stevenharper
says...
5:13pm Mon 27 Aug 12
montague1 wrote:Montague1 being a classic example - wants vast numbers of staff sacked no doubt so he/she can either get a job with the council or if they work for them get a promotion. We don't need people like you my friend, we need rational people to work for our council.
Comments by Salt of the Earth are at best, quite unseemly, not to mention untimely.
They only echo the attitude and approach the Council, and some Senior officers in the Social Services Department of Wirral continue to adopt,
which is "Sweep it under the carpet" cover that carpet with more lies and deceit, and then their version of "Moving on" is to cover THAT CARPET
with more of the same!.
Carpet Fitters must have a permanent contract with the Council !!
Until such time as some SUPER VAC'
is employed to dislodge the deeply ingrained dirt lodged in the pile, then
, Salt of the Earth", "MOVING ON" IS NOT AN OPTION.
stevenharper
says...
5:17pm Mon 27 Aug 12
RL 1952 wrote:Better processes - audited externally via a trusted source are what the council needs - not lass sackings followed by recruitment of new people only for the system to start all over again. If the right governance is in place any unscrupulous staff will not be able to get away with indiscretions in future.
antisthenes wrote:Very well said, the totally distasteful and unacceptable culture remains and those responsible are still in post to carry out further failures, the vulnerable of Wirral deserve better and until there is a radical shake up from the top down porr providers will still be protected and porr employees granted amenesties.
Salt of the earth their are individuals out there who have not been made accountable for their actions; who have in fact benefited financially from the abuse of the most vulnerable people in our community.
And your response?
Grant them amnesty!
In other words further reward their abuse with absolution from any future consequences; no matter what the damage they have done to local individuals and institutions.
People will not 'move on' untill the Council deals with this matter in a just manner. Justice that is not restricted to refunding monies that were defrauded from people and calling it 'compensation'.
It is the Council's cover up culture and failure to do the right thing which is keeping the issue at the forefront of local concern.
PaulCa
says...
7:58pm Mon 27 Aug 12
Are you a banker?
unbeleivable
says...
8:00pm Mon 27 Aug 12
Hugo2009
says...
8:38am Tue 28 Aug 12
I like many others may not always agree with the comments made, but respect the chance to make them, long may the Wirral Globe continue to be a true reflection of whats right, fair and just in this world.
Spiffy
says...
10:46am Tue 28 Aug 12
...
"Buy" ??
...
May I draw your attention to this beautiful bridge I have For Sale...
Ben Beaconsfield
says...
11:56am Tue 28 Aug 12
Others with more inside knowledge of Wirral Borough Council – and in particular its Adult Social Services Department – have quite rightly focused here on the failings of its senior staff. I have tended to concentrate more on the shortcomings of elected councillors and in particular their failure to recognise what was going on, to hold local officials to account or to acknowledge that, as councillors, they have consistently refused to admit any specific responsibility whatsoever for what has gone on; hence my earlier criticism of Cllr McLachlan.
The “nothing to do with me” mindset is so typical of people in elected office nowadays. Consider a very recent Twitter exchange in the public domain on a Wirral councillor’s Twitter site. The councillor was criticizing the appointment of an MP’s partner to a local body. He described the person as being“ married to a Labour MP in the most marginal WARD" (my emphasis).
Another regular contributor to this Wirral Globe forum immediately responded “Which ward are you referring to?” to which the councillor replied: ”If you don't know which is the most marginal constituency in Wirral is....”
Our fellow poster then tweeted: “Well constituency is Wirral West, but you wrote ward which implies local government.”
With breathtaking arrogance, the councillor concerned then tweeted: “Just checked tweets, no mention of ward from me, you just assumed.”
As readers can see, he did indeed write “most marginal WARD” right at the beginning of these exchanges. Now it may well have been a mistake, but if so, why not simply admit it? We all make mistakes every day, and many of us have been humble enough to admit so on these threads.
But no – this person has been elected and is apparently, in his eyes at least, incapable of fault, as are any of his other 65 colleagues on Wirral Council.
Until that mindset changes in Wirral and elsewhere, nothing else will.
johnbrace
says...
1:25pm Tue 28 Aug 12
johnbrace
says...
1:42pm Tue 28 Aug 12
Cllr McLachlan is my local councillor representing Bidston and St. James, she lives in Greasby (last month it was New Brighton) and works in Liverpool.
Another of my councillors, Cllr Harry Smith, represents Bidston and St. James but lives in Oxton.
The only one of the three that actually lives in Bidston & St. James ward that's within walking distance of the residents he represents is Cllr Crabtree, but who works in Wallasey.
However the Labour Party locally tries to help them out with what's going on here in Bidston & St. James.
As to mindset, they each have their own strengths and weaknesses. Politicians are limited by the fact they have to work within the system of local government rather than outside it. Local councillors don't get the numbers of staff helping them that MPs do and many have full time jobs, families and outside interests. I was many moons ago, for two one-year terms of office a political office-holder in Liverpool in local government (not Liverpool City council) in the higher education area. It opened my eyes up to how the intricacies of how things work (or don't) on a party political basis.
johnbrace
says...
1:50pm Tue 28 Aug 12
unbeleivable wrote:Part of the problem with Supporting People funding is that Wirral Council didn't seem to understand how it should be applied to residents as the calculations were done internally by Social Services before a big fuss was kicked up by Internal Audit and the function was taken out of the Department of Adult Social Services and put in its more logical place of the Department of Finance. Before this happened though there were incorrect amounts going to landlords (people living in sheltered accommodation etc). If the amounts were incorrect (or the landlord put their charges up), the Wirral tenants were being asked by the landlord to pay the difference of Wirral Council's mistake. Basically it was a mess and took me a long time to even understand. I'm not even sure if the system is better now, it's just different.
mmmm heard through grapevine something about supporting people funding not being right, wonder what that cld be.
unbeleivable
says...
2:47pm Tue 28 Aug 12
Ben Beaconsfield
says...
6:43pm Tue 28 Aug 12
johnbrace wrote:John: Thanks for 'naming names'. Some local councillors are so litigious that I thought I would err on the side of caution.
Oh dear, that was between me and Cllr Chris Blakeley. I will however hold my hand up high and admit that I've made mistakes in Tweets and what I've written online. I even get tempted sometimes to delete Tweets that have a typo in them. Some I spot myself and correct, in other cases I'm happy to apologise and issue a correction. To be fair to Cllr Blakeley though, he is a local councillor and he works for the Wirral West MP Esther McVey. If I had the kind of workload he had, my accuracy would suffer too.
The point I was making was not that he made a mistake which you pointed out and which he still denied. It was that if a councillor is not prepared to 'fess up to a tiny mistake, how much less is he likely to admit to a bigger one?
Ben Beaconsfield
says...
6:51pm Tue 28 Aug 12
johnbrace wrote:John: Additionally, thanks for tugging at my heartstrings with regard to Cllr Blakeley's workload.
Oh dear, that was between me and Cllr Chris Blakeley. I will however hold my hand up high and admit that I've made mistakes in Tweets and what I've written online. I even get tempted sometimes to delete Tweets that have a typo in them. Some I spot myself and correct, in other cases I'm happy to apologise and issue a correction. To be fair to Cllr Blakeley though, he is a local councillor and he works for the Wirral West MP Esther McVey. If I had the kind of workload he had, my accuracy would suffer too.
You have you finger on the pulse with regard to how the system works. Would you care to remind readers how much he is paid each year for (a) being a councillor; (b) for his work on outside bodies (specifically Merseyside Police Authority) and (c) as Esther's right-hand man (you can guess at this one as it is probably not in the public domain), and how much he was paid for being Wirral's representatives to Merseytravel over the years he was on that body?
Nobody put a gun to his head and said "You will be a councillor or else" so don't feel too sorry for this councillor or others.
stevenharper
says...
9:52pm Tue 28 Aug 12
PaulCa wrote:Ha ha no I'm not. I run a small business in Bootle selling electrical supplies. Does that disqualify me for having an opinion just because I don't follow the rest of the sheep in asking for council staff to be hung drawn and quartered? Move on people.
stevenharper - your contributions are not worth a response, but just one question:
Are you a banker?
Salt of the earth
says...
10:00pm Tue 28 Aug 12
briandrummond
says...
10:16pm Tue 28 Aug 12
briandrummond
says...
10:20pm Tue 28 Aug 12
PaulCa wrote:I rest my case 'your contributions are not worth a resonse' said from a position of anonymity PaulCa. I would say Steven Harper's comments are worth far more than yours given he dared to strike out at the vested interests on these pages from a public position rather than partial or full anonymity.
stevenharper - your contributions are not worth a response, but just one question:
Are you a banker?
briandrummond
says...
10:21pm Tue 28 Aug 12
PaulCa wrote:I rest my case 'your contributions are not worth a resonse' said from a position of anonymity PaulCa. I would say Steven Harper's comments are worth far more than yours given he dared to strike out at the vested interests on these pages from a public position rather than partial or full anonymity.
stevenharper - your contributions are not worth a response, but just one question:
Are you a banker?
Natasha Eubank
says...
2:12pm Wed 29 Aug 12
johnbrace wrote:Sorry John, but I still don't think you understand as your information is wholly incorrect in this instance. Supporting People funding has always sat within the Department of Regen, previously Housing & Environmental Protection. It has NEVER sat within DASS or Finance. As for your description of how Supporting People funding is 'applied' to tenants....It isn't......Supportin
unbeleivable wrote:Part of the problem with Supporting People funding is that Wirral Council didn't seem to understand how it should be applied to residents as the calculations were done internally by Social Services before a big fuss was kicked up by Internal Audit and the function was taken out of the Department of Adult Social Services and put in its more logical place of the Department of Finance. Before this happened though there were incorrect amounts going to landlords (people living in sheltered accommodation etc). If the amounts were incorrect (or the landlord put their charges up), the Wirral tenants were being asked by the landlord to pay the difference of Wirral Council's mistake. Basically it was a mess and took me a long time to even understand. I'm not even sure if the system is better now, it's just different.
mmmm heard through grapevine something about supporting people funding not being right, wonder what that cld be.
g People funding isn't awarded to Tenants, it is paid directly to the organisation providing the 'bed-space'. In the case of sheltered housing tenants, very few pay for the support they receive as entitlement to Housing Benefit means they qualify for full subsidy in terms of their support charges.
With respect, your post concerns me as you are putting forward your 'understanding' of this funding regime, as a definitive explanation.
As you comment on a wide range of issues relating to Wirral Council, I would hope that your research is somewhat better than that which has been displayed in this instance.
unbeleivable
says...
9:43pm Fri 31 Aug 12
briandrummond
says...
10:10pm Fri 31 Aug 12
unbeleivable wrote:That maybe so but to start a witch hunt only serves to damage the council and subsequently its ability to run services.
Never mind what you all think, Martin Moreton should be applauded for what he has done for the people with learning disabilities on the wirral, instead of giving your remarks on here, contact wbc and tell them how disgraceful their behaviour has been.
PaulCa
says...
12:26am Sat 1 Sep 12
It looks like those concerned could be free to get jobs elsewhere with a clean bill of health. And that was all done quite deliberately and the payments made with our money.
And I've called in Angela Eagle to look at disability discrimination and fair do's to her, she has written and sent the letters that are needed.
I repeat, anybody saying "draw a line under all this and move on" with regard to Wirral Council, doesn't have a clue what is actually going on and needs to read up on the last 12 years. Or to speak to somebody on the inside who they can trust. Every instance, every cynical twist and every sordid turn was planned and calculated. Done to cover their backsides at all costs. That's what happens in such broken organisations with corrupt upper echelons. A fish rots from the head down.
I know Messrs. Harper, Drummond and Earth haven't researched the subject they're spouting forth on, because if they had, they just would not even dream about making such ill-judged comments.
That's what sets them apart from the Globe's "vested interest" contributors - lack of k n o w l e d g e.
Ben Beaconsfield
says...
9:26am Sat 1 Sep 12
" I repeat, anybody saying "draw a line under all this and move on" with regard to Wirral Council, doesn't have a clue what is actually going on and needs to read up on the last 12 years.Or to speak to somebody on the inside who they can trust. Every instance, every cynical twist and every sordid turn was planned and calculated. Done to cover their backsides at all costs. That's what happens in such broken organisations with corrupt upper echelons. A fish rots from the head down. "
Well said.
unbeleivable
says...
10:47am Sat 1 Sep 12
briandrummond wrote:It is not a witch hunt, it is FACT.
unbeleivable wrote:That maybe so but to start a witch hunt only serves to damage the council and subsequently its ability to run services.
Never mind what you all think, Martin Moreton should be applauded for what he has done for the people with learning disabilities on the wirral, instead of giving your remarks on here, contact wbc and tell them how disgraceful their behaviour has been.
contempt of court
says...
5:45pm Sun 2 Sep 12
I would like to draw your attention to the Department of Children's Services and their corruption.
I cannot reveal my name for fear of reprisals.
If you all think the happenings within Adult Services were disgraceful, you will be amazed and shocked at what now lies beneath within this Department.
I intend to expose quite soon the happenings of this Department which I can assure you will lead to even more revelations of Watergates, cover-ups, and down right corruption!!
Watch this space !!!!!
Ben Beaconsfield
says...
6:45pm Sun 2 Sep 12
Ben Beaconsfield wrote:And if anybody cares to click on to 'Chris Blakeley Twitter' they will be able to read an excruciating embarrassing hour by hour posting of how he is spending these payments during his current holiday abroad.
johnbrace wrote:John: Additionally, thanks for tugging at my heartstrings with regard to Cllr Blakeley's workload.
Oh dear, that was between me and Cllr Chris Blakeley. I will however hold my hand up high and admit that I've made mistakes in Tweets and what I've written online. I even get tempted sometimes to delete Tweets that have a typo in them. Some I spot myself and correct, in other cases I'm happy to apologise and issue a correction. To be fair to Cllr Blakeley though, he is a local councillor and he works for the Wirral West MP Esther McVey. If I had the kind of workload he had, my accuracy would suffer too.
You have you finger on the pulse with regard to how the system works. Would you care to remind readers how much he is paid each year for (a) being a councillor; (b) for his work on outside bodies (specifically Merseyside Police Authority) and (c) as Esther's right-hand man (you can guess at this one as it is probably not in the public domain), and how much he was paid for being Wirral's representatives to Merseytravel over the years he was on that body?
Nobody put a gun to his head and said "You will be a councillor or else" so don't feel too sorry for this councillor or others.
bigfoot says...
1:56pm Wed 22 Aug 12