Connected Care Contract

Started by steveL, July 10, 2013, 08: PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mr Mister


So looking at health watch we are simply watching the council take the money off one ex councillor and giving it to a current councillor , this council takes taking the p**s out of its electorate to a whole new level, and the sooner there are credible alternatives to labour the better, but since its conception PHF hasn't exactly stepped up to the plate has it, and the Tories or lib dems well why waste a vote.


Spot on No6

no6bus

Unfair asking riddler5 the question as it was a quote from my post.
But to answer your question, nothing. I am not affiliated to any political party as I feel they are all looking after their own interests. No councillor should have any business interests in a group or company receiving funding from the council. As a council tax payer who pays full council tax and does not receive any benefits I take an interest in how this council is squandering my hard earned money, and providing free buses to the swimming baths thereby taking money away from my employers does not exactly endear me to our leaders.

marky

I'll opt for the people who are trying to do something over people who not prepared to do anything any day.

fred c

Doing anything is better than doing nothing ???? i suppose it is, if someone has 10 ideas & only 1 of them is viable, but they go ahead & ask it..... for me that is better than someone having 10 brilliant ideas, but not bothering to ask any of them.

I believe no6bus mentions that a councillor should not be able to earn any monies from being involved in grant funded organisations, well i think most of us also think along those lines, that point was very well made to Mr T Mitchell at the public inquiry.

We have the situation now of HBC deciding to ditch Who Cares in favour of an organisation that has an Ex Board member of Who Cares working for it, is that right ??? there are far to many coincidences in where our money goes.

A fundamental change in how Council Tax money is dished out to the Voluntary / Charity Sector is required, & an annual & fully audited set of accounts should be available to the public, no accounts, no cash.

Ohhhh BTW the accounts should not be signed off by a sitting councillor.

Inspector Knacker

What am I doing......? I am a citizen asking questions. So please don't adress me like a commissar.
I am politically neutral.
What can be asserted without proof,
can be dismissed without proof.


steveL

#36
"Labour councillor Kevin Cranney, chairman of Who Cares (NE), said the company had a service level agreement with MRA to provide the administration, including pay roll and said new systems had been put in place."

Given that 'the service' provided by MRA has been shown to be a complete sham, you would wonder how Who Cares(NE) didn't manage to notice this for over two years. The answer is that the management/Direcorships of MR and Who Cares(NE) are so iter-mingled they amount to the same thing.

Keep flogging away Cranney, but the light is finally being shone on your public money leeching little scams. The game is up.
Diplomacy is the ability to tell someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip.

fred c

I defo heard a member of "The Mob" say during a full council meeting........ MRA & Who Cares N/E are 2 seperate entities & are not connected in any way.

The following is a Quote from the Mail

Who Cares (NE) is based at Manor Residents' Association (MRA), which itself was subject to a damning audit report.

Labour councillor Kevin Cranney, chairman of Who Cares (NE), "said the company had a service level agreement with MRA to provide the administration, including pay roll and said new systems had been put in place".


So someone was telling Lies..... Not unusual under the present regime.


fred c

Quote from: perseus on July 17, 2013, 06: PM
This is a verbatim transcript of the statement made by the councillor in the meeting Fred's referring to.

QuoteMember of the public: "Do you think (which is a question) it was appropriate that a serving Labour Councillor has significant input into the awarding of a contract worth over £600,000 technically given to two other serving Labour Councillors, especially given the fact that he also acted as an accountant for the 'Manor Residents association', which is widely perceived as the parent company. So my question is, to specify, is that not a blatant conflict of interest Mr Mayor"?


Councillor: "Chairman I must object on the grounds of misinformation"

Stephen Akers-Belcher: "Would you stand up please councillor?"

Councillor: "I certainly will Chairman. I must object on the grounds of some counts misinformation which was included in the question. The first one was the contract was awarded to a brand new company, Who Cares North East, and the fact is that was not a company that was in the control of two Labour Councillors. They are a completely independent company where completely new governance arrangements had been implemented, and the second question, the second point of misinformation was that at no time, under no circumstances was I ever the accountant for Who Cares North East and the fact that another organisation had previously had responsibility for certain connected care matters before the new company was formed is an absolute irrelevance...

Member of the public: "I never said you were"...

Stephen Akers-Belcher: "Please don't interject....

I have very good memory for detail.

Councillor Kevin Cranney is described in todays mail as "The Chairman of Who Cares NE"... Wilcox, to my understanding was the manager. Are the Chairman and manager not "In control" of the company?

GREEN = my understanding is £680,000 contracts are not supposed to be given to "brand new companies".

RED = yes it was

YELLOW = Really? It's "an absolute irrelevance"?

This one isn't going to go away.


Yep.......... i was certain that i had heard correctly, i am also fairly certain...hang on a mo...  I`ll re-phrase that, i am absolutely certain that the above response to the member of the publics question resulted in "The Mob" removing the democratic right of members of the public to actually ask questions at Full Council Meetings.

Democracy in Action........ Hartlepool Style