EXCLUSIVE: Three new 'super directors' tasked with turning around Wirral Council's fortunes - at a cost of £365,000 a year (From Wirral Globe)

I hope these new 'superpersons' will have 'golden handcuffs' and not jump ship after a year with a mega payoff!

A bold move and worthy of serious consideration - no knee-jerk reactions please.

One would assume that if they are advertising for new posts that the old directors have either been let go or fired by the Council. If this is the case then the Globe needs to find out!. Otherwise this isnt really an issue as those sacked directors were probably already on this sort of money!.

We need answers has Dave Green etc been sacked? if so on what terms/when!.

Not sacked, still on suspension, could be 12 to 18 months until the investigations are completed. Two of the positions can not be permanently until the suspensions are resolved.

Then its simple how can you employ 3 new directors when the costs will be huge?

So the freeze on spending decided at cabinet last week does not apply to recruiting 3 highly paid executives then.

I also hope they will be new appointments, and not "promotions from the ranks" who will bring nothing new to the table !!

Not sure I like being told how to react by Mr Beaconsfield. Who made him head teacher?

But anyway, how can they even propose these new roles while the directors remain suspended?

If I was their legal representatives I'd see this is a basis to sue for constructive dismissal - and the whopping pay offs that will needless to say go with it, rather than disciplinary action and dismissal if the reasons for their suspensions are found to be true.

Sorry, Cheesy Peas. I stand corrected. If you wish to jerk your knee, it is your inalienable right so to do.

I'll send myself to stand in the corner for ten minutes to reflect on my misdeeds.

I'm glad you raised this with BB Cheesy .

On another Globe post I sighed heavily when I read the comment: " This thread is is danger of becoming sensible".

I'm glad you raised this with BB Cheesy .

On another Globe post I sighed heavily when I read the comment: " This thread is is danger of becoming sensible".

This is a very bold move and should be congratulated. I'm sure Mr Burgess will want to bring some fresh ideas to the council and whilst the salaries may be high they are not as high as some councils including Liverpool. We seem to be seeing some light at the end of what has been a very long and dark tunnel.

Cheesy Peas wrote:
Not sure I like being told how to react by Mr Beaconsfield. Who made him head teacher?

But anyway, how can they even propose these new roles while the directors remain suspended?

If I was their legal representatives I'd see this is a basis to sue for constructive dismissal - and the whopping pay offs that will needless to say go with it, rather than disciplinary action and dismissal if the reasons for their suspensions are found to be true.

Why would these be constructive dismissal? I'm assuming these roles are more senior than those who are suspended. You certainly can't accuse the new chief of hanging around!

I am obviously a voice in the wilderness.
Until we see the AKA full report we will not know who was involved in this 'skullduggery' Why can't this be published council tax payers money paid for the report .
Today's announcement that WBC councillors want an iPad.or tablet beggars belief.' 66 councillors @ £400 each equates to £24'000 they obviously don't understand the limitations of an iPad but it's not their money....it's ours.
Mr. Burgess get a real grip.

Did n't the old ones cost the same anyway?

I would like to "thank" Mr Burgess for putting a freeze on all of the applications made to the Neighbourhood Fund (previously the Area Forum funding). I got my letter this morning !! But funnily enough there is no mention of this decision in the draft cabinet minutes last week.

The Council should be supporting the Voluntary community groups, who give a lot of their time to their areas, and the opportunity to apply for this funding is vital in helping them to progress.

Is this the Big Society - let's pay ourselves & other service providers lots of money & then get community volunteers to do all the work for nothing & then we'll claim all the credit.

Well done, let's hit the community groups where it hurts most .... financially. I am sure there are a lot of angry volunteers in the Wirral today who wasted their time applying to the fund like I did.

I'm so looking forward to having my say at the forthcoming consultation !!

Not that anything we say will make the slightest difference to decisions which have already been made behind closed doors.

I wish Mr.Burgess every success in is efforts to re-invigotate this moribund Council; trusting of course that he will appoint excellent people into the newly created roles.

It is essential that he appoint people not tainted with the scandal that has characterised the previous regime.
.
It is critical that he does not appoint 'journeymen' or refugees from the consequences of failure in their previous employment.

I would also welcome the appointment of people with wider experience of commerce and business.

Closing down community funding is a very bad idea. Low flying local heroes who do so much for those in need in our communities can make a small grant really go along way to making a real difference in people's lives.

It is also the case that by helping for example isolated elders, the disabled and our youth, at low or no cost, that voluntary and community groups generate direct and indirect savings to the local authority.

I agree with woodyres2 and would
urge Mr. Burgess to think again on this policy as it has been clearly misjudged.

Perhaps its the fact the the council has no designated lead officer or councillor to champion the voluntary sector that made cutting small grants such a soft target.


As for the 'consultation' its methodology is flawed. It presents us with a series of false dichotomies masquerading as choices.

It is either a well intentioned but misdirected and very badly constructed consultation exercise.

Or it is a mock 'you said and we did' style participation stunt designed to provide Councillors with a political alibi for the cuts about to come.

Either way the consultation exercise is a complete and utter waste of money.

Money that for example could have been better spent on small grants for active citizens..oh sorry I forgot Mr Burgess has just cut their grants.

Hon wrote:
One would assume that if they are advertising for new posts that the old directors have either been let go or fired by the Council. If this is the case then the Globe needs to find out!. Otherwise this isnt really an issue as those sacked directors were probably already on this sort of money!.

We need answers has Dave Green etc been sacked? if so on what terms/when!.

This has not happened. That is why this move is premature. Two of the jobs will go to insiders already leading current departments. Burgess had this set up in his last job so thinks it will work here too. He should be shipping people out not in. I can smell more compromise agreements coming!

woodyres2 wrote:
So the freeze on spending decided at cabinet last week does not apply to recruiting 3 highly paid executives then.

I also hope they will be new appointments, and not "promotions from the ranks" who will bring nothing new to the table !!

Woody, see earlier post. Couple of jobs tied up already from inside. One of them worked with Burgess in last job!

saraharrowsmith wrote:
This is a very bold move and should be congratulated. I'm sure Mr Burgess will want to bring some fresh ideas to the council and whilst the salaries may be high they are not as high as some councils including Liverpool. We seem to be seeing some light at the end of what has been a very long and dark tunnel.

Umm, my hope is quickly diminishing. Is this the Burgess love child we have before us!

woodyres2 wrote:
I would like to "thank" Mr Burgess for putting a freeze on all of the applications made to the Neighbourhood Fund (previously the Area Forum funding). I got my letter this morning !! But funnily enough there is no mention of this decision in the draft cabinet minutes last week.

The Council should be supporting the Voluntary community groups, who give a lot of their time to their areas, and the opportunity to apply for this funding is vital in helping them to progress.

Is this the Big Society - let's pay ourselves & other service providers lots of money & then get community volunteers to do all the work for nothing & then we'll claim all the credit.

Well done, let's hit the community groups where it hurts most .... financially. I am sure there are a lot of angry volunteers in the Wirral today who wasted their time applying to the fund like I did.

I'm so looking forward to having my say at the forthcoming consultation !!

Not that anything we say will make the slightest difference to decisions which have already been made behind closed doors.

It's a stitch up Woody. I would turn up with your volunteers to the Area Forum ad have your say. They can spend money on iPads for themselves eh? It's not right.

antisthenes wrote:
I wish Mr.Burgess every success in is efforts to re-invigotate this moribund Council; trusting of course that he will appoint excellent people into the newly created roles.

It is essential that he appoint people not tainted with the scandal that has characterised the previous regime.
.
It is critical that he does not appoint 'journeymen' or refugees from the consequences of failure in their previous employment.

I would also welcome the appointment of people with wider experience of commerce and business.

Closing down community funding is a very bad idea. Low flying local heroes who do so much for those in need in our communities can make a small grant really go along way to making a real difference in people's lives.

It is also the case that by helping for example isolated elders, the disabled and our youth, at low or no cost, that voluntary and community groups generate direct and indirect savings to the local authority.

I agree with woodyres2 and would
urge Mr. Burgess to think again on this policy as it has been clearly misjudged.

Perhaps its the fact the the council has no designated lead officer or councillor to champion the voluntary sector that made cutting small grants such a soft target.


As for the 'consultation' its methodology is flawed. It presents us with a series of false dichotomies masquerading as choices.

It is either a well intentioned but misdirected and very badly constructed consultation exercise.

Or it is a mock 'you said and we did' style participation stunt designed to provide Councillors with a political alibi for the cuts about to come.

Either way the consultation exercise is a complete and utter waste of money.

Money that for example could have been better spent on small grants for active citizens..oh sorry I forgot Mr Burgess has just cut their grants.

I would like to make two points. The Council did have a voluntary sector lead but for for some unknown reason he and his post disappeared and so any dialogue has gone so we now have no-one to liaise with whenwe have problems. Secondly, this consultation is just as bad as the highly criticised Your Wirral-Be a part of it. Same approach, same leading questions and the same person leading it. Result: same old rubbish!

council officer wrote:

woodyres2 wrote: I would like to "thank" Mr Burgess for putting a freeze on all of the applications made to the Neighbourhood Fund (previously the Area Forum funding). I got my letter this morning !! But funnily enough there is no mention of this decision in the draft cabinet minutes last week. The Council should be supporting the Voluntary community groups, who give a lot of their time to their areas, and the opportunity to apply for this funding is vital in helping them to progress. Is this the Big Society - let's pay ourselves & other service providers lots of money & then get community volunteers to do all the work for nothing & then we'll claim all the credit. Well done, let's hit the community groups where it hurts most .... financially. I am sure there are a lot of angry volunteers in the Wirral today who wasted their time applying to the fund like I did. I'm so looking forward to having my say at the forthcoming consultation !! Not that anything we say will make the slightest difference to decisions which have already been made behind closed doors.

It's a stitch up Woody. I would turn up with your volunteers to the Area Forum ad have your say. They can spend money on iPads for themselves eh? It's not right.

Oh yes, believe me there are already plans afoot !! We will have our say.

council officer wrote:

antisthenes wrote: I wish Mr.Burgess every success in is efforts to re-invigotate this moribund Council; trusting of course that he will appoint excellent people into the newly created roles. It is essential that he appoint people not tainted with the scandal that has characterised the previous regime. . It is critical that he does not appoint 'journeymen' or refugees from the consequences of failure in their previous employment. I would also welcome the appointment of people with wider experience of commerce and business. Closing down community funding is a very bad idea. Low flying local heroes who do so much for those in need in our communities can make a small grant really go along way to making a real difference in people's lives. It is also the case that by helping for example isolated elders, the disabled and our youth, at low or no cost, that voluntary and community groups generate direct and indirect savings to the local authority. I agree with woodyres2 and would urge Mr. Burgess to think again on this policy as it has been clearly misjudged. Perhaps its the fact the the council has no designated lead officer or councillor to champion the voluntary sector that made cutting small grants such a soft target. As for the 'consultation' its methodology is flawed. It presents us with a series of false dichotomies masquerading as choices. It is either a well intentioned but misdirected and very badly constructed consultation exercise. Or it is a mock 'you said and we did' style participation stunt designed to provide Councillors with a political alibi for the cuts about to come. Either way the consultation exercise is a complete and utter waste of money. Money that for example could have been better spent on small grants for active citizens..oh sorry I forgot Mr Burgess has just cut their grants.

I would like to make two points. The Council did have a voluntary sector lead but for for some unknown reason he and his post disappeared and so any dialogue has gone so we now have no-one to liaise with whenwe have problems. Secondly, this consultation is just as bad as the highly criticised Your Wirral-Be a part of it. Same approach, same leading questions and the same person leading it. Result: same old rubbish!

Spot on there CO !!

council officer wrote:

woodyres2 wrote: So the freeze on spending decided at cabinet last week does not apply to recruiting 3 highly paid executives then. I also hope they will be new appointments, and not "promotions from the ranks" who will bring nothing new to the table !!

Woody, see earlier post. Couple of jobs tied up already from inside. One of them worked with Burgess in last job!

Good grief, will it never end.

I despair at all that is happening, I and other Woodchurch Residents who do a lot of voluntary work to try to improve things on our estate, we are seriously wondering why we are bothering ....

antisthenes wrote:
I wish Mr.Burgess every success in is efforts to re-invigotate this moribund Council; trusting of course that he will appoint excellent people into the newly created roles. It is essential that he appoint people not tainted with the scandal that has characterised the previous regime. . It is critical that he does not appoint 'journeymen' or refugees from the consequences of failure in their previous employment. I would also welcome the appointment of people with wider experience of commerce and business. Closing down community funding is a very bad idea. Low flying local heroes who do so much for those in need in our communities can make a small grant really go along way to making a real difference in people's lives. It is also the case that by helping for example isolated elders, the disabled and our youth, at low or no cost, that voluntary and community groups generate direct and indirect savings to the local authority. I agree with woodyres2 and would urge Mr. Burgess to think again on this policy as it has been clearly misjudged. Perhaps its the fact the the council has no designated lead officer or councillor to champion the voluntary sector that made cutting small grants such a soft target. As for the 'consultation' its methodology is flawed. It presents us with a series of false dichotomies masquerading as choices. It is either a well intentioned but misdirected and very badly constructed consultation exercise. Or it is a mock 'you said and we did' style participation stunt designed to provide Councillors with a political alibi for the cuts about to come. Either way the consultation exercise is a complete and utter waste of money. Money that for example could have been better spent on small grants for active citizens..oh sorry I forgot Mr Burgess has just cut their grants.

Thanks for that !!

I would like to urge the Wirral Globe to start asking some serious questions about the cutting of the neighbourhood funding.

At all the Area Forums & meetings we've been to over the years, it is obvious the Council do not listen to the Public, but the very fact that we are there at all, is in fact "ticking the boxes" to prove they are engaging with the community.

Maybe a bit more publicity about this latest news would raise the issue, and force them to re-instate the fund.

Our Local Councillors did not even know this was happening, so that is another mystery in my humble opinion !!

I'm delighted all the councillors are getting iPads..... not.

Note not a single one of them has piped up so it's a completely daft idea, not least as they all already have council-provided laptops.

There is no cost saving in this whatsoever. And what happens when the latest iPad version comes out?

Still, at least Harry Smith can get going on Angry Birds.

These so called super posts should be subject to a simple referendum, and each of the successful apointees sign an agreement that they resign if they fail to dramtically re-organise and reform the whole process of local governance to the benefit of the local population in a given time.

And no enhanced or special benefits upon their departure other than straight forward general workforce conditions like one months salary for every year of service, full stop.

council officer wrote:

woodyres2 wrote: So the freeze on spending decided at cabinet last week does not apply to recruiting 3 highly paid executives then. I also hope they will be new appointments, and not "promotions from the ranks" who will bring nothing new to the table !!

Woody, see earlier post. Couple of jobs tied up already from inside. One of them worked with Burgess in last job!

Spot on again with your comments. Few questions to ask if a freeze was put on all spending (non essential) then why buy ipads for the members? Most have them already, so are they now paying for upgrades? Most have laptops as well, and broadband paid for by the council. Stop the lease cars a % of which is paid for by the council, they earn enough money to buy cars! Why fund the above and stop the Vol Grants to communities? That's just a smack in the eye to all those who depended on these grants.
Councillors first public second! Are the council still paying those people suspended their full salaries? if so how long will this go on for?
Instead of appointing anymore people and spending £250k lets get the potholes fixed with that money.How much has the council paid out in compensation for damaged wheels & tyres? What's the point in appointing highly paid executives from within, call it what you will promotion, re grades,whatever, its just re arranging the deck chairs, the same people who have 'tainted' the council are still there-look at Martin Morton what happened to him was the worst form of bullying, and as it was proved he 'was not a bit mad'. Where is the full AKA report? Why has that not been released in full? Why has the new CEO not got rid of or addressed the problems/issues? instead he's creating jobs for them! Talk about all in it together, NO Mr. Burgess we are not all in it together, take a long hard look at what you are planning to do, and ask yourself what where you told at the roadshows you held? Any names crop up all the time? Have you listened? What was the point of that expensive exercise if you have not listened to staff. I suggest you take a long look at all the back copies of the Globe, and see the bad press, the unrest, and downright disillusionment of staff, & public in the council. Wirral council tax payers pay your salary and vote councillors into office, role on the next election and lets hope the people of Wirral will
not vote for any of the current councillors and then we will force the government to act, as its clear you and Phil Davies the leader of the council are in it together but are you acting in the best interests of staff & council taxpayers? I think not.

Most of what is being discussed will be irrelevant within 3 years. 100 million pound savings over the next 3 years will mean only those services the Council are legally bound to provide will be funded. All other services will be cut, never to return. Garden waste collections being cut, how long before all waste collections follow suit? Street cleansing will be cut, road repairs will be worse than they currently are. Wirral will soon look like a third world country. Whilst local politicians must shoulder some of the blame, the cuts in funding from central government are the real reason we are in this mess. Remember this at the next general election before Arrowe Park hospital is reduced to providing basic services.

daggers drawn wrote:

council officer wrote:

woodyres2 wrote: So the freeze on spending decided at cabinet last week does not apply to recruiting 3 highly paid executives then. I also hope they will be new appointments, and not "promotions from the ranks" who will bring nothing new to the table !!

Woody, see earlier post. Couple of jobs tied up already from inside. One of them worked with Burgess in last job!

Spot on again with your comments. Few questions to ask if a freeze was put on all spending (non essential) then why buy ipads for the members? Most have them already, so are they now paying for upgrades? Most have laptops as well, and broadband paid for by the council. Stop the lease cars a % of which is paid for by the council, they earn enough money to buy cars! Why fund the above and stop the Vol Grants to communities? That's just a smack in the eye to all those who depended on these grants.
Councillors first public second! Are the council still paying those people suspended their full salaries? if so how long will this go on for?
Instead of appointing anymore people and spending £250k lets get the potholes fixed with that money.How much has the council paid out in compensation for damaged wheels & tyres? What's the point in appointing highly paid executives from within, call it what you will promotion, re grades,whatever, its just re arranging the deck chairs, the same people who have 'tainted' the council are still there-look at Martin Morton what happened to him was the worst form of bullying, and as it was proved he 'was not a bit mad'. Where is the full AKA report? Why has that not been released in full? Why has the new CEO not got rid of or addressed the problems/issues? instead he's creating jobs for them! Talk about all in it together, NO Mr. Burgess we are not all in it together, take a long hard look at what you are planning to do, and ask yourself what where you told at the roadshows you held? Any names crop up all the time? Have you listened? What was the point of that expensive exercise if you have not listened to staff. I suggest you take a long look at all the back copies of the Globe, and see the bad press, the unrest, and downright disillusionment of staff, & public in the council. Wirral council tax payers pay your salary and vote councillors into office, role on the next election and lets hope the people of Wirral will
not vote for any of the current councillors and then we will force the government to act, as its clear you and Phil Davies the leader of the council are in it together but are you acting in the best interests of staff & council taxpayers? I think not.

I work for the council and was not told about these so called roadshows. Was the attendees cherry picked by the communication and engagement team? Communication in this organisation is horrendous. If you don't work at Wallasey Town Hall then forget it.

woodyres2 wrote:

antisthenes wrote:
I wish Mr.Burgess every success in is efforts to re-invigotate this moribund Council; trusting of course that he will appoint excellent people into the newly created roles. It is essential that he appoint people not tainted with the scandal that has characterised the previous regime. . It is critical that he does not appoint 'journeymen' or refugees from the consequences of failure in their previous employment. I would also welcome the appointment of people with wider experience of commerce and business. Closing down community funding is a very bad idea. Low flying local heroes who do so much for those in need in our communities can make a small grant really go along way to making a real difference in people's lives. It is also the case that by helping for example isolated elders, the disabled and our youth, at low or no cost, that voluntary and community groups generate direct and indirect savings to the local authority. I agree with woodyres2 and would urge Mr. Burgess to think again on this policy as it has been clearly misjudged. Perhaps its the fact the the council has no designated lead officer or councillor to champion the voluntary sector that made cutting small grants such a soft target. As for the 'consultation' its methodology is flawed. It presents us with a series of false dichotomies masquerading as choices. It is either a well intentioned but misdirected and very badly constructed consultation exercise. Or it is a mock 'you said and we did' style participation stunt designed to provide Councillors with a political alibi for the cuts about to come. Either way the consultation exercise is a complete and utter waste of money. Money that for example could have been better spent on small grants for active citizens..oh sorry I forgot Mr Burgess has just cut their grants.

Thanks for that !!

I would like to urge the Wirral Globe to start asking some serious questions about the cutting of the neighbourhood funding.

At all the Area Forums & meetings we've been to over the years, it is obvious the Council do not listen to the Public, but the very fact that we are there at all, is in fact "ticking the boxes" to prove they are engaging with the community.

Maybe a bit more publicity about this latest news would raise the issue, and force them to re-instate the fund.

Our Local Councillors did not even know this was happening, so that is another mystery in my humble opinion !!

It has been well known inside the council that area forums don't work. Sometimes there is more council workers than community members present. Unfortunately, the head of coms cannot think of anything better, so they go on. Area forums tick a massive box for the council and the resources required to deliver them is considerable. Keeping the forums was an empire building exercise for one of the senior officers, simple as that. Lose the forums and let the staff lose as community development workers in the areas instead. Then they can work with communites on their own patches and build up relationships.

Council Officer, the staff who attended were put forward by section managers. You know the score, if you are likely to ask too difficult a question you don't get asked. Surprised?

Is it just me but does Graham Burgess look like Leslie Neilsen from the movie Airplane! " stop calling me Shirley " ha ha.

Now if the new chief exec brings in people from his previous council would we be surprised? Nah! It seems to be the done thing – look at Cheshire West where their new chief exec has brought in 6 from his old stomping patch. To be honest I’d be more worried about some current directors at Wirral being promoted into those jobs. I have a sealed envelope with 3 names in it and have bet my friends that at least 2 will get the jobs.

It really is disgraceful that the council continues to waste money on stuff like ipads and cuts grants to community groups. I’ve attended area forums at Wirral and other councils and agree with CO that often (although in my experience some councils do get it right) they are a box ticking, brownie points gaining exercise run for the benefit of the councils rather than the residents. They write a strategic plan, including a resident engagement strategy that has X number of meetings per year in it, then - hold the meetings, tick the box, get a pat on the back and funding for them, while all the time steamrollering residents into the council’s agenda. As CO says the money would be better spent on community development workers drawn from the community and working with residents on what they want to progress.

We the tax payers demand to see the AKA report.

ordinary personn writes:-

"They write a strategic plan, including a resident engagement strategy that has X number of meetings per year in it, then - hold the meetings, tick the box, get a pat on the back and funding for them, while all the time steamrollering residents into the council’s agenda."

And yet the then Tory Deputy Leader of the Council admitted at one of their rare pre-May Cabinet meetings in charge that these Area Forums were very poorly attended, implying that they were a waste of time and money.

If councillors recognise that to be the case (the remarks went unchallenged by other councillors present, incidentally) then why continue the charade, except as an expensive PR exercise?

Yes, box-ticking rules. If councils don't do this stuff as prescribed they will be in trouble. Talk of localism or devolving power is phoney, with nearly everything that local government does now set by Westminster and in turn by Brussels.

From the UKIP 2012 local election manifesto they would:
Ÿ Cut councillors’ allowances and expenses.
Ÿ Slash fat-cat pay deals for senior council staff.
Ÿ Limit the number of high-paid council employees.
Ÿ Restrict councils’ advertising and
self-promotion budgets.
Ÿ Sell surplus council land.
Ÿ Abolish non-essential and ‘politically-corre
ct’ services.
Ÿ Leave the EU to save £50m a day for local services
Ÿ Drop the EU Landfill Directive, which adds at least £50 to every household’s council tax bill.
Ÿ Control immigration and ease the burden on local services

Ben Beaconsfield wrote:
ordinary personn writes:-

"They write a strategic plan, including a resident engagement strategy that has X number of meetings per year in it, then - hold the meetings, tick the box, get a pat on the back and funding for them, while all the time steamrollering residents into the council’s agenda."

And yet the then Tory Deputy Leader of the Council admitted at one of their rare pre-May Cabinet meetings in charge that these Area Forums were very poorly attended, implying that they were a waste of time and money.

If councillors recognise that to be the case (the remarks went unchallenged by other councillors present, incidentally) then why continue the charade, except as an expensive PR exercise?

When Jeff Green took over it was rumoured that the council was going to scrap AFs and find a less expensive way to engage and consult with its communities. The only time the Community Engagement team actually does any engagement work is via the AFs. Unfortunately, this is not an effective use of resources. How can you engage when you sit at your desk every day. I would let the staff loose in the areas they are responsible for and let them do some real community engagement work. The same old people turn up at AFs with the same old issues like dog s##t. The only way to find out what the community wants is to get out of the Town Hall and speak to people on their on patch.

Oh they don't want to do that.
They might catch something fatal- like integrity,truth and honesty.

If they do the job correctly it could work
out that they are under payed

Positive Thinker - you are a comic genius (but a poor speller).

David Scott wrote:
Yes, box-ticking rules. If councils don't do this stuff as prescribed they will be in trouble. Talk of localism or devolving power is phoney, with nearly everything that local government does now set by Westminster and in turn by Brussels.

From the UKIP 2012 local election manifesto they would:
Ÿ Cut councillors’ allowances and expenses.
Ÿ Slash fat-cat pay deals for senior council staff.
Ÿ Limit the number of high-paid council employees.
Ÿ Restrict councils’ advertising and
self-promotion budgets.
Ÿ Sell surplus council land.
Ÿ Abolish non-essential and ‘politically-corre

ct’ services.
Ÿ Leave the EU to save £50m a day for local services
Ÿ Drop the EU Landfill Directive, which adds at least £50 to every household’s council tax bill.
Ÿ Control immigration and ease the burden on local services

Some mistake here, surely, David Scott?

Isn't UKIP just a 'one issue party'?

Oh, sorry, that's what its now-fearful political opponents used to say, isn't it?

For me, UKIP is about all aspects of the kind of Britain we want to live in. Despite the daily sounds of squabbling in Westminster and local councils, the old parties believe in almost the same. It is becoming clear to more and more that they simply do not offer a credible basis for future national prosperity and hope.

Because Ben it does not matter how many residents turn up to the meetings - what matters is that the council can tick a box and say they held them. That is how they draw down money and justify things they do. In fact, call me a cynic, but I’d say that councils are probably delighted if very few people turn up as that means they can advance their own agenda without having to take much notice of residents and if anybody asks why certain things went ahead they can say, “well we tried to engage with them but they can’t be bothered – its not our fault" etc. etc.

I’ve been to meetings that comprised mainly of “officials” e.g various parts of a council such as regeneration, social services, Street Scene, housing benefits plus the NHS, DWP, colleges and schools and a handful of residents. (Although I feel differently about “the same old people” turning up than CO seems to – at least they turn up and have their say – sometimes, if a council is concerned that a resident will make a fuss or go to the press, the resident may even manage to ensure that the council can’t just do what they want). One thing to remember is that officials get paid to attend meetings; residents have to fit them in around their lives and other obligations.

I have also seen “officials” use jargon that excludes residents (they don’t like it if you ask them to stop using jargon and explain what they mean so everyone can understand) and handle meetings in such a way that they are put off attending again. And if that doesn’t work, another way of ensuring that few residents turn up is to arrange meetings at certain times e.g. during the day – effectively excluding people who work and at the start and end of the school day – effectively excluding people who have to do the school run. Cynical? Moi? Oui!

woodyres2 wrote:

council officer wrote:

antisthenes wrote: I wish Mr.Burgess every success in is efforts to re-invigotate this moribund Council; trusting of course that he will appoint excellent people into the newly created roles. It is essential that he appoint people not tainted with the scandal that has characterised the previous regime. . It is critical that he does not appoint 'journeymen' or refugees from the consequences of failure in their previous employment. I would also welcome the appointment of people with wider experience of commerce and business. Closing down community funding is a very bad idea. Low flying local heroes who do so much for those in need in our communities can make a small grant really go along way to making a real difference in people's lives. It is also the case that by helping for example isolated elders, the disabled and our youth, at low or no cost, that voluntary and community groups generate direct and indirect savings to the local authority. I agree with woodyres2 and would urge Mr. Burgess to think again on this policy as it has been clearly misjudged. Perhaps its the fact the the council has no designated lead officer or councillor to champion the voluntary sector that made cutting small grants such a soft target. As for the 'consultation' its methodology is flawed. It presents us with a series of false dichotomies masquerading as choices. It is either a well intentioned but misdirected and very badly constructed consultation exercise. Or it is a mock 'you said and we did' style participation stunt designed to provide Councillors with a political alibi for the cuts about to come. Either way the consultation exercise is a complete and utter waste of money. Money that for example could have been better spent on small grants for active citizens..oh sorry I forgot Mr Burgess has just cut their grants.

I would like to make two points. The Council did have a voluntary sector lead but for for some unknown reason he and his post disappeared and so any dialogue has gone so we now have no-one to liaise with whenwe have problems. Secondly, this consultation is just as bad as the highly criticised Your Wirral-Be a part of it. Same approach, same leading questions and the same person leading it. Result: same old rubbish!

Spot on there CO !!

Why should people listen to you? Sniping and griping from behind a mask. This really is very sad.

Witch Finder General 2 wrote:
I am obviously a voice in the wilderness.
Until we see the AKA full report we will not know who was involved in this 'skullduggery' Why can't this be published council tax payers money paid for the report .
Today's announcement that WBC councillors want an iPad.or tablet beggars belief.' 66 councillors @ £400 each equates to £24'000 they obviously don't understand the limitations of an iPad but it's not their money....it's ours.
Mr. Burgess get a real grip.

Short sightedness again. Whether it is an ipad or any other technology, £400 to get a councillor more accessible to the people they serve at a time convenient to the constituent is good investment. You stick to contacting your constituent by smoke signal from the safety of your cave.

council officer wrote:

Hon wrote:
One would assume that if they are advertising for new posts that the old directors have either been let go or fired by the Council. If this is the case then the Globe needs to find out!. Otherwise this isnt really an issue as those sacked directors were probably already on this sort of money!.

We need answers has Dave Green etc been sacked? if so on what terms/when!.

This has not happened. That is why this move is premature. Two of the jobs will go to insiders already leading current departments. Burgess had this set up in his last job so thinks it will work here too. He should be shipping people out not in. I can smell more compromise agreements coming!

Sounds like the voice of someone miffed they are not in line for a promotion. Why do you think you are owed a promotion? Most of us will earn it.

woodyres2 wrote:

council officer wrote:

woodyres2 wrote: So the freeze on spending decided at cabinet last week does not apply to recruiting 3 highly paid executives then. I also hope they will be new appointments, and not "promotions from the ranks" who will bring nothing new to the table !!

Woody, see earlier post. Couple of jobs tied up already from inside. One of them worked with Burgess in last job!

Good grief, will it never end.

I despair at all that is happening, I and other Woodchurch Residents who do a lot of voluntary work to try to improve things on our estate, we are seriously wondering why we are bothering ....

Can't you see your own contradications. You want change yet when it happens you criticise it. I'm so glad I don't work for a council if this is what you get subjected to.

Hugo2009 wrote:
These so called super posts should be subject to a simple referendum, and each of the successful apointees sign an agreement that they resign if they fail to dramtically re-organise and reform the whole process of local governance to the benefit of the local population in a given time.

And no enhanced or special benefits upon their departure other than straight forward general workforce conditions like one months salary for every year of service, full stop.

Oh that would work... the problem the council has at the moment is too many opinionated people claiming themselves to speak for the majority when they don't. Bog the council down by endless referendums with 30% turnout? What a joke of a idea. Hoew about giving us a vote on the logic of your posts and then allowing us to delete it! Go back to bed.

council officer wrote:
Is it just me but does Graham Burgess look like Leslie Neilsen from the movie Airplane! " stop calling me Shirley " ha ha.

Hilarious, Let me see what do you look like? oh hang on.....

Phew, rants over. I really should learn not to log onto this site.

eh? Who gets paid for attending AFs?
Ps I think I love you Sarah.

There's nothing "bold" about hiring more managers on large salaries; at least not until you get rid of the old ones, a process that could take years.
The very idea that plucking another set of shining stars from the managerial constellation is going to make things right on Wirral is ludicrous and depressing in equal measure. How predictable--given the precedent in other areas of local authority responsibility, such as the fire service-- that the first instinct of a new chief officer is to want to surround himself with trusted allies and placemen. I'm sure he already has a list of names, and given the parlous state of Wirral's current political leadership, I wouldn't bet a pound to a pinch of the extensive collection of dogdirt on Wirral's streets against him being able to get exactly the team that he wants; NOT the team that WE need.
The last thing Wirral needs right now is a managerial dynasty whose loyalty to each other is a more powerful bond than any sense of duty to council taxpayers.

No disrespect @saraharrowsmith - I think that councillors already have access to technology paid for by the public. Plus, I’d guess a good number of the people they represent don’t have access to any technology, making the purchase of more for councillors i.e. the ipads in question redundant, and therefore a waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere. Furthermore, if there was a need for councillors to have more technology paid for by us perhaps it would have been better value to purchase a cheaper alternative to ipads.

In support of woodyres2, from their previous posts they have been involved in voluntary work on their estate for a long time and I would say that they have a right to be frustrated that the financial rug has been pulled out from under communities while money is being spent on ipads.

saraharrowsmith wrote:
Phew, rants over. I really should learn not to log onto this site.

Well that's the one comment you've made that I agree with, the rest of your "rants" I consider to be ill informed and just plain rude !!

ordinary personn wrote:
No disrespect @saraharrowsmith - I think that councillors already have access to technology paid for by the public. Plus, I’d guess a good number of the people they represent don’t have access to any technology, making the purchase of more for councillors i.e. the ipads in question redundant, and therefore a waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere. Furthermore, if there was a need for councillors to have more technology paid for by us perhaps it would have been better value to purchase a cheaper alternative to ipads. In support of woodyres2, from their previous posts they have been involved in voluntary work on their estate for a long time and I would say that they have a right to be frustrated that the financial rug has been pulled out from under communities while money is being spent on ipads.

Thank you OP, agree with all you say.

As volunteers we are frustrated and we do feel we should be supported by our council for our efforts, but at the moment it feels as if they don't want us to succeed, and in fact are doing their utmost to stop us at every turn.

We feel a certain local football club may have something to do with that !!

Sadly the fundamentals have still not been looked at - the AKA report diagnoses the ills that were afoot, but the report has still not been made public and therefore the unacceptable distasteful culture continues amongst the senior staff/directors. Until Mr Burgerss adrresses these issues we will still have a senior management team that is unfit for purpose and we the Council Taxpayers will remain the losers whilst the " fat cats" get richer at our expense whilst failing to give any sort of value for money or indeed being accountable.

Let's put things into perspective here. The £365,000 a year it is going to cost us put-upon Wirral Community Charge payers is around ONE THIRD it costs us to pay our councillors each year in 'allowances' and perks.

What is likely to be better value for money? That remains to be seen, but my money will not be on the councillors, even though they outnumber these three 'super directors' 22:1.

saraharrowsmith wrote:

Witch Finder General 2 wrote:
I am obviously a voice in the wilderness.
Until we see the AKA full report we will not know who was involved in this 'skullduggery' Why can't this be published council tax payers money paid for the report .
Today's announcement that WBC councillors want an iPad.or tablet beggars belief.' 66 councillors @ £400 each equates to £24'000 they obviously don't understand the limitations of an iPad but it's not their money....it's ours.
Mr. Burgess get a real grip.

Short sightedness again. Whether it is an ipad or any other technology, £400 to get a councillor more accessible to the people they serve at a time convenient to the constituent is good investment. You stick to contacting your constituent by smoke signal from the safety of your cave.

For once, I agree that investing in IT is beneficial to the Councillors who can use them! Tbh, iPads are not the be all either. Also, wouldn't it help if the staff didn't have to use outdated equipment? My pc takes 15 mins to boot up every day that's per an hour a week. In a year that's a week of waiting.

I think IT gives the public the opportunity to access councillors much more easily at a time convenient to us. Nothing wrong with that. There is nothing worse than poor councillors getting back in power on the party ticket. They should be accessible all the time.

briandrummond wrote:
I think IT gives the public the opportunity to access councillors much more easily at a time convenient to us. Nothing wrong with that. There is nothing worse than poor councillors getting back in power on the party ticket. They should be accessible all the time.

What's the point in them being 'accessible all the time' if they are 'poor councillors getting back in power on the party ticket'?

Former Tory Prime Minister Arthur Balfour once said:- I'd rather take advice from my valet than from the Conservative Party Conference" - an opinion the spirit of which could well be applied to the tiny-minded views of most of our councillors today.

Incidentally, somebody should video a back-bench Wirral councillor struggling to come to terms with the new I-Pad technology - even after going on a council-sponsored training course (more expense) - and post it on t'internet. Hilarious.

Saraharrowsmith really should heed he
own advice and not log onto this site, if his/ her main aim is to ridicule others who wish to express an opinion, with his/ her, pompous "rants" and overbearing,smug views.
Whoever this person is, They clearly have little or no knowledge of matters concerning the people of Wirral and their need to have these matters discussed openly, in the hope they might, just might be listened to.

montague1 wrote:
Saraharrowsmith really should heed he
own advice and not log onto this site, if his/ her main aim is to ridicule others who wish to express an opinion, with his/ her, pompous "rants" and overbearing,smug views.
Whoever this person is, They clearly have little or no knowledge of matters concerning the people of Wirral and their need to have these matters discussed openly, in the hope they might, just might be listened to.

Agreed. The last thing this website needs is yet another troll; and the worst kind of smart-alec troll at that.

WBC is fast turning into an absolute gift for exponents of privatisation.

Saraharrowsmith must be a joy to work with,in that fuzzy perfect world he /she inhabits.
Opinions have to be his /her way or the highway.
That light at the end of his/her tunnel just might have been a very fast train!
Actually reminds me someone working in DASS!
mm!

Apologies, that shoul read, "reminds me OF someone workining in DASS" !.
Trojan horses and all that!.
Nothing would surprise me.

Some say "Saraharrowesmith says" is non other than "Ugg Boots" in another guise, I wonder could that be so.

Main thing are any changes in the manner that the top brass in WBC carry out their management duties actually begining to take place.

I get the impression that maybe some stones have been turned over to reveal the slugs that lie beneath, I do hope a liberal scattering of salt has taken place, when the stones are turned over.

Lets face the reality of the whole situation we have an improvement board that has shown little improvement, who had the author of the AKA report as a member. A report that still has not been made public although council tax-payers funded it, we have councillors who have proved weak and inept, pparty leaders who have "fiddled" whilst Wirral burned, we have had senior directors and chief execuives who have nicely feathered their own nests before departing with handsome pay offs despite spectactularly failing the residents of Wirral, doesn't this all consititute fraud and corruption on a grand scale? Alas is there anyone in a position od authority who is prepared to bring the weak and inept to account for their preposterous actions that have cost Wirral residents so dearly. I SAY BRING IN THE COMMISSIONERS - THE REALITY IS NOTHING IS GENUINELY IMPROVING.

I've resisted the urge to post up 'til now, and finally given in...

Good old senior officers have given us some perspective, some context, a reminder; and as usual it makes for rather depressing reading:

http://tinyurl.com/9
8e84rv

http://tinyurl.com/9
nr9ogp

Or... Google "Wirral Freebies"

Just read Wirral Freebies and agree it does make depressing reading.
I know of a situation where a member of DASS staff was given flowers and chocolates by an appreciative family, for help given at what was a difficult time for them.
Manager rightly advised both gifts could remain in the office and shared by the Team.
A day later when the chocolates remained untouched , the manager stated that as it appeared no one wanted them, she was taking them home!.

Here we go again, with another consultation, after only a year. Why Oh Why do we keep electing these fellows as they clearly are of no use to the borough. May be it is about time we elected a brand new council from other parties instead of the main three. Because the main three keep failing us in every way. When times are tough the first thing that gets stopped is recruitment, yet here we are about to recruit three more expensive directors. When there is no need, all they have to do is share out 50% of the salaries between the guys and gals that are already in those offices and save the other 50% to reduce the debt this borough is in. Because if something is not done this situation will happen every year. Council tax receipts are suppose to be for the services the borough supplies, not the fat wage checks of unelected officers.