Apply within...

[Lucy Lass-Tick]

Would it not be wiser to await the outcome of November's mayoral referendum before appointing a new CEO?  Maybe I'm being too simplistic, but how can the role be properly defined when the organisational structure is yet to be determined?

http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/chief-executive-arrangements-agreed-1-4805018

[The Great Dictator]

Good point.

[mk1]

Yes but if you want to give one of your 'mates' a whacking great pay rise then best do it now to make it impossible to reverse!

[fred c]

I think we all know common sense comes a distant second to self indulgence in the ruling parties mindset.

Personnaly i think it is a good time to revise downwards the Salary Boundaries with regards to the CEO`s salary, never mind national rates, just who is it that decides these rates ? i seem to remember a group of CEO`s formed a group/company to advise councils what to pay chief executives...... not exactly turkeys voting for christmas then.

The old chesnut that you need to pay the best, to get the best theory has been blown right out of the water in the last few years, Hartlepool still comes near the bottom of all of the stastistics on poverty, employment & health criteria.

Hartlepool has paid over the odds for it`s CEO`s for a number of years now, has it substantially improved the performance of services & amenities to the towns residents ?, i would suggest not.

[steveL]

What a disgraceful episode this was.

Even The Mail stories now constantly remind us that Walker always intended to retire at 60 and so, when all the fuss over his salary increase erupted, he himself had always intended to quit months later. It was nothing more than a cynical move to inflate the terms of his final salary pension and I'm sure those surrounding the issue knew this all too well.

Now he's gone and the salary is dropped back to where it was before his mates did him the favour. A perfect example of how local Government really operates in the UK. 

[christine blakey]

And it is highlighted as a positive as if, we are benefiting from a reduction of nearly £20,000 when really we are now going to be stuck with an irreversible decision to have a CEO when we have not even looked at the decision of the electorate on the Mayor and the Commissioner!

We all know what will happen, it is simply a waste of money advertising!

[rabbit]

Well according to this press release, (for the referendum on the Mayoral post) and issued a few days before the 6th August,

http://www.hartlepool.gov.uk/news/article/3838/date_set_for_referendum

Hartlepool Council is run by the Mayor.

Definite!! Proven!! (and on a much lower salary than the CEO).

quote:

How would you like Hartlepool Council to be run?

By a mayor who is elected by voters. This is how the council is run now

By one or more committees made up of elected councillors. This would be a change from how the council is run now


So do we really need a Chief Executive?

[christine blakey]

Absolutely Rabbit, and with or without an elected Mayor. 

If people want to get elected, then they should be supported but they should do the whole job and nothing but the job!

So enough of this adding on extra responsibility, just a Mayor or Leader who leads and others follow.  We should not need such a confusion as a CEO and Mayor when they are both really supposed to be doing the same thing.

However, I wonder if they say that an Officer (CEO) must be the one to report to Full Council?  Again, it is playing with words, and we should at this time be doing everything at the top to save money at the top and jobs on the ground.  We have lost enough!

[The Great Dictator]

You need a chief to understand the pallets of government paperwork that arrive.
The mayor or leader we have are nowhere near clever enough to take on such a job.
There is more to that job than meets the eye believe me.
I'm glad to see that the salary has dropped slightly.

[Lucy Lass-Tick]

The mayor or leader we have are nowhere near clever enough to take on such a job.

Maybe we should be a bit more particular about who we elect!

[fred c]

One thing for certain............ "We Don`t Need" a proliferation of "Committees & Chairs" to milk the council tax payers yet again, the objective of the ruling group is to have a "Scrutiny Committee that will end up having the ultimate Yea or Nay on what the policies are & how they will be implemented, the addition of a chair for this committee & a chair for that committee will end up being more expensive than drummond has proven to be.

We have numerous examples of policy being decided on the "QT"... pink papers are a means of keeping the information from the public domain, the least number of people who know about things, the more open to abuse the system becomes.

We should be looking at a Leader of the Council, we employ a CEO at enormous cost so why not implement that role with that of the Leader of the Council..... at least if they make a complete balls of things they could be sacked by the elected chamber.

We should expect proffesional decisions to be made by  proffesional people, we have had 10 years of poor management & ill thought out schemes that have done nothing for the greater benefit of Hartlepool.

We have "One" chance to get this right, i hope to goodness the ultimate decision isn`t made by a bunch of sycophantic Labour drones who would jump on the shovel if madge shouted S**t

[christine blakey]

Absolutely Lucy!

Then, yes if we have a flying and skilled CEO, then why so many additional allowances for others,

Don't mind if necessary but these are times like no other!

[rabbit]

The Ballot Paper states clearly that the Council is run by the Mayor.

Are they trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the voters?