Topic: Giving Oral To the Special Committee

[Geoff Reid]

 
The agenda for tomorrows 'Special Committee' looks like it holds a special treat for followers of the idiocracy - an 'oral' briefing from 'x', (probably the Borough Solicitor) on the appointees to the board of the now 'standing alone' company SCS.

http://ww2.swindon.gov.uk/moderngov/ieListDocuments.asp?CId=307&MId=4197&J=2

5.   

Appointment of Directors to Swindon Commercial Services Ltd. (SCS). (Oral)

The Council's Cabinet on 9th December 2009 approved the establishment of Swindon Commercial Services Limited (SCS) as an "Arms Length Company" from 1st January 2010. (Minute 75 of the Cabinet refers).


The Council, as shareholder, is required to appoint the Chair and Directors of the Company, including one Councillor representative to serve on the new Company's Board, together with such number of officer representatives as should be agreed with the new Company, and the Special Committee is asked to make the appointments on behalf of the Council.

A list of proposals for the Company Chair and Directors will be submitted at the meeting.

The Special Committee is further requested to authorise the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, to exercise voting rights on behalf of the Council at shareholder meetings of Swindon Commercial Services Limited (SCS).

The Talkswindon leakline has been positively thrumming with traffic recently and a few words seem to crop up time and again.  I'll need an expert to explain what an 'ethical framework' is and why council officers are quietly discussing it.  Is it a 'Standards Board' for officers?

Anyway, the 'Oral Briefing' is of interest because it is unusual, (Officers are commenting on its unusualness), and there's speculation that John Hunt, (a.k.a Rikki Hunt), is to be confirmed/dropped as a non exec director of SCS or, at the other end of the rumour scale, to replace Neil Holt as candidate for the top job.

We'll have to wait and see, but just in case Rod Bluh is getting cold feet about the growing public concern of cronyism at SBC/SCS here's what councillors were, until very recently, expecting the new Board of SCS to look like. 

   

It will be interesting to see what the picture looks like after tomorrows committee, especially as Bluh's competency in scrutinising people and companies he's doing business with is about to come under increased scrutiny itself.

I hope the adver have a reporter at the meeting, but even that doesn't guarantee we'll see a printed account of the meeting any time soon. The leakline keeps turning up a persistant belief that Rod Bluh regularly demands that Adver Editor Dave King remove, change or not publish various reports on council 'business'.  Whether King actually caves in is another matter but I'm willing to bet he's had a couple of recent calls about Rod Bluh calling the chair of the Internal Audit Committee, (Cllr Michael Dickinson), a 'leaker'.

The talkswindon Leakline invites further comment on something being called the 'Rod Bluh cHarm offensive'.  Share what you know: leaks@talkswindon.org 

[AndyH]

Geoff I’m not an expert either but from wat I remember the Council's Ethical Framework is the set of rules and procedures which set out the standards of behaviour that the Council expects of its Councillors and staff.

I belive the Ethical Framework is made up of the following elements:
Functions of the Monitoring Officer
The Standards Committee
 
There is also a range of policies & rules regarding, Code of Conduc, Gifts and Hospitality Code, Planning Code, Licensing Code, Protocol for Member/Officer Relations, Register of Members Interests, Role of the Standards Board & how to complain to the Board.

Regarding oral reports, this is not unheard of and I have attended meetings where oral reports have been given. However this was usually on what some might consider low importance issues or where officers were waiting final information.

Does seem strange in the case of appointing director etc of the councils Swindon Commercial Services Limited.

[Geoff Reid]

Does seem strange in the case of appointing director etc of the councils Swindon Commercial Services Limited.

That what some officers are thinking. 

Earlier today there were 2 TS members and 23 separate guests reading this topic.   An unusually high number for a topic with such narrow interest you would imagine....

edit: just risen to 1 Member and 30 Guests are viewing this topic

What's being said in the civic chaps?, let us know: leaks@talkswindon.org

[Geoff Reid]

 
Leakline provides a comment:

We don't smile much these days, but the Only Fools And Horses picture gave us a good laugh over the weekend and 'Giving Oral To The Special Committee' title is a hilarious start to a drab looking week, thanks!.

We're not willing to speculate on the content of the post itself"

[Ringer]

Why does the special committee exist and is it open to the public? Is it one of them in other in secret lodge meetings? Sounds like more gerrymandering to me.

[sbc voice]

Ringer - this is of the SBC website . I think the hope is that meetings of the Special Committee don't attract media attention like Cabinet and so things can be snuck through! It is open to the public though like any other Committee.


Purpose of Committee

The Special Committee has delegated powers to make decisions for the Full Council on the advice of the Chief Executive on any policy or particular matters that are urgent and considered necessary in the best interests of the Council.
Committee Members

    * Councillor Roderick Bluh  (Chair)
    * Councillor Fionuala Foley  (Vice-Chair)
    * Councillor Brian Mattock   
    * Councillor David Renard   
    * Councillor Stan Pajak   
    * Councillor James Grant   
    * Councillor Derique Montaut   

[Muggins]

If this 'special committee' has delegated powers as a committee and each of them individually have delegated powers, what is left to go to the full council?

I repeat my earlier post, surely delegated powers is for 'day to day' stuff not the wifi type decisions.

[komadori]

I thought (tho' can't find it at the moment) that anything decided by the Special Committee has to be presented to the next full Council Meeting for ratification.

If these matters relating to making SCS an arms length company have become urgent, it suggests the council's made a right messing of the planning... or the leadership is attempting to shovel something through with less thorough examination than it should have.

[Geoff Reid]

Apparently the Oral was deferred to a later date.  I don't know why, perhaps the press or some members of the public inconveniently turned up to watch the show...

[Mart]

I was overtaken by an SCS van today, and I wondered, 'Who owns that?'

What does happen to all of the assets of the company, as it were? Presumably we bought them.

Is it one of those sold for £1 jobs.

[Geoff Reid]

Good point, we really ought to find out what the value of our asset, (scs), was at 23.59 hrs on the 31st December 2009. As of 00.01 hrs on the 1st Jan 2010 that information will be 'commercially sensitive' and us oiks won't be allowed to know.

[Mart]

I'm guessing lots before midnight, and very little afterwards.

Like a car tax disc and equal value for money. Mind you if you get interested in assets I suppose you also have to consider liabilities.

I bet there's all kinds of interesting strokes that could be pulled with that set up, The balance sheet version of the shells and pea game.

Commercially sensitive, short hand for 'We'll be fecked if we are telling you'.

[Richard Shaw]

I'm guessing lots before midnight, and very little afterwards.

Like a car tax disc and equal value for money. Mind you if you get interested in assets I suppose you also have to consider liabilities.

I bet there's all kinds of interesting strokes that could be pulled with that set up, The balance sheet version of the shells and pea game.

Commercially sensitive, short hand for 'We'll be fecked if we are telling you'.

You are probably quite right Mart.

[Geoff Reid]

I thought (tho' can't find it at the moment) that anything decided by the Special Committee has to be presented to the next full Council Meeting for ratification.

If these matters relating to making SCS an arms length company have become urgent, it suggests the council's made a right messing of the planning... or the leadership is attempting to shovel something through with less thorough examination than it should have.

Here's a thought - perhaps they'll try shovelling whatever it was through under the battle smoke of the budget setting meeting? 

[Muggins]

Ref, ratification at next full council. By then (and with a full agenda for one evening) whatever and how few have had input into a delegated decision is probably ignored and the full council do just that - ratify rubber stamp it.   I doubt that there is any more informed debate upon any particular subject, so if it's more than a true 'day to day' thing, that means maybe one officer and one councillor (and he may not even be properly engaged in it) make decision of some importance for us.  So I ask again, what are they putting down as delegated decisions.  Does not fill me with confidence in the democratic decision making process in SBC.

[AndyH]

Ref, ratification at next full council. By then (and with a full agenda for one evening) whatever and how few have had input into a delegated decision is probably ignored and the full council do just that - ratify rubber stamp it.   I doubt that there is any more informed debate upon any particular subject, so if it's more than a true 'day to day' thing, that means maybe one officer and one councillor (and he may not even be properly engaged in it) make decision of some importance for us.  So I ask again, what are they putting down as delegated decisions.  Does not fill me with confidence in the democratic decision making process in SBC.

Have to agree with you muggings but unfortunately it has been going on and it’s getting worse.

What’s even worse is that its claimed to be all within the council’s constitution but just look how many times the administration has used its majority to force though changes in the constitution to suit themselves.
 

[Muggins]

I remember on a certain community group that every AGM they felt that they had to make amendments to their consitution and would look around for something small to change - change for changes sake.  Is SBC the same?

If some in SBC keep forcing changes to the constitution, perhaps its high time it was looked as an whole. By now it must be so peppered with duplications and contradications to be rendered next to worthless.

I was going to call it 'their' constitution, then realised it's 'our' constitution, as the manner of the beast is an clear agreement of how things work in an organisation and a declaration of what partners/funders to that org can expect and we - are one of those partners, so I expect to be consulted! 

Review the constitution and make it fit for the 21st Century I say.

[Geoff Reid]

I remember on a certain community group that every AGM they felt that they had to make amendments to their consitution and would look around for something small to change - change for changes sake.  Is SBC the same?

No. This isn't the same, this is not 'changes for changes sake', these are deliberate and calculated politically motivated changes to the constitution designed to centralise power and marginalise what used to be the normal democratic process in the chamber.

The phrase: 'Due process has been followed' does not mean that the 'process' has been visible, properly scrutinised or 'robustly' discussed. 

The WiFi decision is a perfect example of Blairism being directly applied in our own council. Un-democratic, secretive, iil thought through, badly planned and covered in sticky stuff.  55'ish councillors first learned of the wifi deal when we did, by which time it was a fait accompli.

Bluh Labour lurks at the very heart of the Swindon Conservative Group, something the group is just starting to wake up to and which ought to make Rob Buckland, (Tory PPC for South Swindon), sit up and take notice....for reasons I'll touch in on this weeks Lamplighters bulletin 

Bluh Labour isn't the fluffy, charming and well manicured thing it pretends to be.

 

[Muggins]

No. This isn't the same, this is not 'changes for changes sake', these are deliberate and calculated politically motivated changes to the constitution designed to centralise power and marginalise what used to be the normal democratic process in the chamber.

Thanks Geoff, I really didn't think it would be the same.
Can read you chapter and verse having experienced marginalisation as only SBC can do it.  The words 'pigeon holed' and 'marginalised 'are well used throughout the community sector - with very good reason.

Trouble is, to tell you all the incidences of it would take a book not a short posting.  But don't worry sooner or later the book will come. (It's how I intend to make the groups sustainable).  I'm still here, only because I'm stubborn.

Do you feel that it's a microcosm? of whats happening nationally, funny mix of politics. 

[Mart]

Do you feel that it's a microcosm? of whats happening nationally, funny mix of politics.  

Yup.

I know it is.

They are one big blob of self serving twats who see politics as a rewarding profession, but not rewarding in the honourable sense.

There are exceptions, probably. Maybe you can find one.

In the words of the song 'It's hateful'.