The pen (or it’s modern day equivalent the printer) has been busy today with a couple of letters are soon going to be winging their way to the Gazette for publication. The draft texts are included below (the final versions wont change that much) merely to give the issues a little bit more publicity.
Dear Sir
GAZETTE ARTICLE SATURDAY 2ND June 2007
HEADLINE: HOME REPAIRS HALTED AS FUNDING BID FAILS
I feel sorry the people of who live within the boundary of East Shields Community Area Forum (Gazette 02.06.07 “Home Repairs halted as funding bid fails”) When South Tyneside Homes (STH) were only granted a poor 1 star rating by the Audit Commission, they not only lost the chance of being awarded £167 million grant, but they let down the people who live in this Borough. Instead of having use of this money to improve Council homes to a “decent” level, they will now only be able to spend £1.9 million, a ridiculous 1% of what they intended to invest. The people of the “Wedge” estate claim that very little has been done to their homes since the 1930’s. If this is indeed true, then the executives at STH should be ashamed. Their incompetence in only achieving the basic grade has cost these residents and many others like them dearly. If this were a national government department there would be demands for a public enquiry and heads would roll. Councillor Rob Dix’ virtual unquestioning acceptance of the situation is therefore a travesty.
So where are the voices of descent and the demands for accountability from the Labour members and opposition leaders on the Council? Either they’re very quite, or put it this way, they don’t exist.
The gap between councillors and full time officials within South Tyneside Council is becoming increasingly blurred and eroded. Whilst this cosy relationship may be acceptable to those within the “clique”, it does nothing for democracy or accountability.
I can only conclude with the question; who runs this Council and who holds it accountable? On the evidence of South Tyneside Homes, it isn’t our councillors. If they no longer are prepared to take on this roll, I believe that the public should take the mantle and start asking the questions.
Yours faithfully
Peter Shaw
Dear Sir
“PERFORMING TOGETHER” 2007 EVENT TEMPLE PARK 21ST APRIL 2007
SOUTH TYNESIDE COUNCIL
In April South Tyneside Council organised and held an event at Temple Park Leisure Centre under the banner “Performing Together”. In attendance were a cross section of colleagues from the Council, partners, external guests, suppliers and trade union officials. The event had been organised to acknowledge performance management and is staged annually.
Through the use of the Freedom of Information Act, it has emerged that the financial sponsors of the event i.e. the people who actually paid for it, were 11 national companies ranging from auditors, lawyers, computer suppliers and estate management companies, all of who have substantial financial contracts with the council.
By allowing contractors to wine and dine them, the council’s executives have shown a complete lack of integrity and left themselves open to accusations of accepting corporate hospitality from companies in whose interests it is to keep them happy. What will happen now when contracts are awarded for future business; who gets the custom, a company who provided financial assistance re Temple Park or the one that did not? A good example of this is the £300,000 paid out by the Council in consultant’s fees for PFI advice on lighting issues. Was one of the companies involved in providing financial assistance also in receipt of this contract?
South Tyneside Council’s executives have shown a complete lack of business or political judgement in allowing themselves to be placed in the position whereby the integrity of any future contract awards will now be questioned. These are the people who we have a right to assume are spending our money wisely.
No doubt Irene Lucas as Chief Executive of the Council will deny that any impropriety is nonsense. However, the sad thing is that the council have placed themselves in the position where the denial has to be made. Nobody has had the sense to realize that this annual practise of “back slapping” is fraught with danger, innuendo and accusation.
Yours faithfully
Peter Shaw
No comments:
Post a Comment