This is a bit rich coming from Mr Stubbs. Has he forgotten that the initial Press Release from HBC on the Peer Group findings was so sanitised that The Mail headed up the story 'Report Highlights Civic Strengths'?. Has he also forgotten that it took a FOI Request to get the report released when the Peer Group itself had specifically requested that its findngs should 'be widely and quickly distributed?'
He's complaining now that people may focus too much on the negatives when the Council did everything possible that everyone only heard about the positives.
There are plenty of positives, particularly highlighting the way that council officers have kept the ship afloat when the crew on the bridge succumbed to Mad Cow disease, but one of the biggest negatives was the secrecy, misinformation and lack of transparency under which HBC operates - something that Mr Stubbs now demonstrates is continuing unfettered.
http://www.hartlepoolpost.co.uk/index.php/columnists/black-cat/114-bc
One of the f**ty Belchers was quoted as saying he would dispel all the 'myths' about grant money going to sitting councillors. We can assume he is going to stand on his hind legs and tell us all off for doubting their dedication to 'charidee'!
I reckon that will come back to haunt him one day
When the Mayoral post disappears, there'll only be one captain on the bridge, no confusion over responsibility for steering the ship then .....?
Quote from: mk1 on December 01, 2012, 08: PM
One of the f**ty Belchers was quoted as saying he would dispel all the 'myths' about grant money going to sitting councillors. We can assume he is going to stand on his hind legs and tell us all off for doubting their dedication to 'charidee'!
I am lead to believe that a question about the Peer Groups Report was submitted to HBC for next weeks council meeting, it was not accepted for consideration because a question on a similar theme was asked at the November meeting.
The supposition by the Peer Group concerning the conduct of some councillors obviously requires an investigation, in the public interest that investigation should "not" be conducted by Councillors.
If any councillor thinks he can "Dispel" rumours about what goes on within organisations that receieve Grant monies from HBC by giving an explanation in the mail he is very much mistaken.
The Register of interest of HBC gives no information at all about any monies earned by Councillors or their families from HBC Grant aided organisations, it just lists the organisation a particular Councillor has connections with.
In the public interest it would be benificial if any such Councillors, in the interest of openess, transparency & accountability listed the actual amounts they receive from the public purse.
Will the Chairman of the Council implement any such "Open, Transparent & Accountable list of earnings by Councillors, from Grant Aided organisations ????
I don`t think it would be a good idea for any of us to hold our breath whilst we await such a list.
Very odd this because I recently received a variation on 'the six month rule', namely that you are not allowed to refer to a previous question asked in the council chamber once six months have passed.
We've already been told that the present arrangement over the declaration of interests 'meets the requirements' irrespective of what the Peer Group said. Yes it's on the agenda, but I see no appetite to amend the present arrangements. It's the Chairman, i.e. SAB, who decides which questions to accept.
Constant references to the Peer Group being 'a snapshot' and dubious grant funding being 'a myth' make clear that those in power have no intention of taking any notice of the findings of the Peer Group. The obvious escape route now is that, with the abolition of the elected Mayor system, things have now changed and the Peer Group findings are therefore of no relevance.
Its not the "Positives" being lost that worries me.........its the "Negatives" being lost. ( swept under the rug )
"The Mob" will be very keen to acentuate the positives, a bit like they did when backing the The Mayors figures over the Tall Stories, The Transport Interchange & the CEO payrise.
It was only months after the events above that they came out from under a rock & made any criticisms of what went on, so i won`t be expecting much remidial action to be announced at the 6th of December Council meeting.
As mentioned on various threads & by various users, the only way that any change will come is if some Labour Councillors act in the best interests of the town & not in what passes for the Labour Party in Hartlepool.
I agree with Steve. We are about to witness a concerted attempt to rubbish the Peer Group Report by telling us that because we're now switching to a new way of doing things the findings are no longer relevant. How does it go again? "We have already put systems and procedures in place to ensure these sort of events don't happen again."
Yea, right
Hartlepool has more chance of coming under a Zepplin attack then "The Mob" holding an independent Inquiry.
When you're faced with people prepared to tell blatant lies to defend the very people the peer group were talking about then what hope is there?
BOOM BOOM!
Ah Zeppelins......seen one you've seen them all.
Anyone going to the next council meeting? I'm hearing there's going to be a pigs fly-pass.
Quote from: steveL on December 06, 2012, 11: PM
Ah Zeppelins......seen one you've seen them all.
Zepplin?
Something with a large girth and full of hot air?
Sounds like the Labour ruling clique.
Actually, you're a bit out of date. Ms James has lost a lot of weight recently and looked distinctly smart at tonight's council meeting. She's never going to get much praise on here but credit due etc. It takes a lot of willpower to lose weight as my diabetes nurse is constantly reminding me.
Perhaps HTH should follow the lead of the ailing Mail and run a 'Bonnie Councillor' poll.
I was unable to make it last night for one reason or another & i have to say i am sooooooooooo disappointed, i know its the Christmas Season but i never dreamt that a box of Baubles would be found in the council chamber.
Can anyone supply the details of the Proposal & any Amendment..... It would also be interesting to know, who voted for what.
Quote from: perseus on December 07, 2012, 10: AM
I believe steve was there and might know specifically? I think this has the makings of a front page HTH issue to keep it (as much as possible) on the radar of the council and the general public. But that's just an opinion.
The important thing is any enquiry MUST stay true to the original proposal and be FULL and INDEPENDENT and not connected to council or anyone with it in any way, it also, as was suggested by Geoff, should go back at least 5 years.
What must not be allowed to happen is Owton Manors version of Henry Kissinger comes in a concludes that everything is ok.
In my opinion, anyone who initially spoke AGAINST the proposal of an inquiry (in its original form) is the fist place any inquiry should start looking.
When you shine a light on something, we all know the first things that run for cover and try to keep out of the way of the light.... cockroaches.
The Peer Group came to their conclusion in 4 Days, a comprehensive in depth look at the specific areas of concern raised by their report could well prove to be a lot more illuminating.