A Public Scandal

[for fawkes sake]

So now we know.
http://www.hartlepooolpost.co.uk

[Lucy Lass-Tick]

What an appalling state of affairs ... somehow I can't imagine certain elements wriggling out of this one unscathed ...

[craig finton]

I'm a bit staggered by the complacency of all this. How long have Manor Res being going? Their management is a joke (is that the right word?) yet this sounds as if HBC is simply telling them that they have 2 months to put their house in order - it ain't going to happen.
What they should be doing is telephoning the fraud office.

[marky]

It seems obvious that all public money going into MR should now stop and bank accounts frozen or at least be taken completely out of the control of the present management. It also needs a new set of Trustees to be appointed as the present lot seem to be next to useless.
Funny, as soon as I wrote that I was immediately reminded of that report into the Phoenix Centre someone linked to on here - I think we've been here before. I think Wilcox and her clan need to be chased out and someone parachuted in to give us all a true picture of what has been going on. Only then will anyone have any real idea if it's now a totally dead duck. Certainly any thought of that new contract going to Wilcox's Who Cares should be kicked well into touch - out of the ground preferably.

[fred c]

A while ago I asked the Question in a Full Council Meeting....

Are organisations that are funded by HBC actually Audited by HBC   The answer I received was, Yes They Are.

Obviously someone was telling Porkies.

This report highlights several major causes of concern, If Cllr Wilcox as manager of MR was unaware of this (Other) bank account, who was it that actually opened & administered the account Who paid the £40,000 into it & what was the £40,000 used for

There are 5 major findings in the report; all of them are classified as being in the High Risk Category, if findings such as these came to light in a company in the Private Sector there would be several conclusions that spring to mind.

1) Those responsible for the running of the organisation are considered to be a bunch of Total Incompetents, & should be removed from their positions immediately (not in 2 months' time) this would include the whole management regime, Management Board, Board of Trustees & Management Team.

2) The police would be called in to investigate the possibility of any financial irregularities that may have taken place.

3) The recruitment & payment of staff should be investigated.

4) No further funding should be allocated to this Organisation by HBC.

I won`t hold my breath on any of these actions taking place, we have evidential facts that lend us all to believe that some members of HBC wouldn`t like a Mag-Lite shined into the Dark Corners of the Voluntary / Charity Sector in Hartlepool...... The Phoenix Centre & Rockhaven spring to mind.

The Peer Groups Review of HBC`s operations has brought this kind of situation to light & hopefully this Particular Audit Report "unexpurgated", will be brought to the attention of Mr Tom Mitchell Barrister at Law who is conducting the Public Inquiry into the Peer Group Report.

[notenoughsaid]

Draft internal report etc......Having read the report as posted by HTH..(Well done incidentally) I am horrified.   It makes bad reading for all concerned. In the recent past I believe I read on the site  a suggestion was made that it would be futile making a formal complaint to the Police/Fraud  Sq.   on  the grounds that the PCC Mr. Coppinger, a Labour man would be able to hold sway over the Chief Constable M's Cheer on a political basis.   I regret to have to remind readers of my words in the past when I quoted him prior to his election as PCC when he said "it is vital Labour secure this position" and I asked what was in his mind making a statement like that.   Perhaps  I now know what others may feel.  However the situation is not so difficult to surpass. There is no requirement to make a complaint of a crime/or any malpractice  in  that particular area and therefore a report to N.Yorks. for instance once made would be forwarded to Cleveland but can not be forgotten or overridden.  In the circumstances I feel an outside force should be called in to overcome any allegations/suspicions of political interference.
    Obviously evidence must be  available to justify an enquiry however questions  need answering.   Food for thought.

[fred c]

No wonder the comment most heard when discussions about the council & councillors come up is.......... Whats the point, most of them are at it.

Do we really want that opinion of our elected representatives of course we don`t & in truth most councillors do a good job, but by sitting back & doing nothing, by blindly following party doctrine, councillors do a disservice to their positions & to the electorate of Hartlepool.

[DRiddle]

I agree. Now, right NOW, above all other times in recent years, the situation is crying out for someone from the Labour group who's genuine (assuming such a person exists) to come forward and take on the current main leaders. I'm surprised it hasn't happened already to be honest (Brash aside).

There's a nice big allowance to be had, the 'hero' status (albeit undeserved) for cutting out the potentially rotten core and if a person(s) does step forward, they MIGHT just about save their own seat on the council.

Failure to be brave and come forward and in my mind, you're guilty by association if there is any criminal fallout from any of this.

If you do nothing.... then you're seats fair game as far i'm concerned.

[Lucy Lass-Tick]

Referring back to the second 'mystery' bank account, as Stephen Allison says, there are certain inescapable protocols involved in opening any new bank account - protocols which aim to deter money laundering.  Surely there is no way that any person or persons unknown to MRA could have set this up without Ms Wilcox's express knowledge and approval? After all, she isn't believed to be overly into delegation at the best of times.

[steveL]

Hearing that MR were at a second tribunal yesterday with a couple more yet to come. Same thing, by all accounts and interestingly, heard by the same people. No details of the outcome as yet.

[steveL]

wouldn't it be weird if they had done just that but then he had refused to sign them......and yet they still got the £680,000 contract. God, that would be soooooo weird....... Mind you, it wouldn't be as weird as if the accountant and the guy who decided to give the contract turned out to be the same person ........ that would be just silly......wouldn't it?

[steveL]

There was an audit of a different kind done on MR/Who Cares a few months ago. It was done by some council officer and was mainly concerned with the committments made on service delievery during the awarding of the contract. It essentilly followed the same format and reached similar conclusions. They were failing to deliver on most counts and essential systems and procedures were either lax or missing altogether.

Recomendations followed along similar lines i.e. it was generally sh**e, even though they were approaching the end of the initial two-year contract and the 'action plan' was simply to give MR/Who Cares more time to put things into place that should have been there from the onset. I think that, at the time, Who Cares had only a couple of months left on the initial contract.

A typical, public sector whitewash, in other words.

I think 'Public Scandal' is the right title for this thread. I reckon this is set to become the biggest scandal to hit Hartlepool for a decade.

[testing times]

In my opinion, the sub-heading on the main page' BUT WHY DID IT TAKE SO LONG TO FIND OUT' is a little mis-leading.
Surely the point is that this has all been known about for some time - years actually. Yet nobody at HBC has been prepared to tackle it. In fact, it looks very much like large contracts were awarded to this organisation when it was already well known that their management practices were seriously suspect. Is it not THAT that is the real scandal.
The real question is why such contracts were awarded, to the exclusion of all others, to an organisation with such an appalling record already well established.

[testing times]

What exactly is it going to take before someone DOES something?

[fred c]

I`m waiting for the plethora of excuses from members of "The Mob" who will be desperately scrabbling to dis-associate themselves from the "Very Naughty People" who have let the Labour Party, The Council & The People of Hartlepool down.

How long do HBC think they can sit on this report & why would they want to, by not disclosing the full facts behind this whole scandal the council would actually be bringing disrepute upon themselves, likewise any attempt to sanitize the report would attract the same condemnation.

We have seen from the problems encountered in trying to access the Phoenix Centre report, there are people within HBC who did not want the details of that unsavoury business to see the light of day, there are sitting councillors who have attempted to circumvent the F.O.I act by trying to stiffle information to the public, these individuals are obviously the people who gave cause for concern to the Peer Review Group.

They are also the people who have no place in the governance of Hartlepool & the sooner they are shown the door the better off Hartlepool will be, the "Self Serving" comments by the Peer Group are starting to look more & more like an "Understatement".