tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-85067956489321438252024-03-13T12:38:03.252+00:00MorleyGateDefending freedom of speech in local politicsShadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.comBlogger125125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-21024761333349790962011-11-06T20:07:00.002+00:002011-11-06T20:07:33.025+00:00The Town Council Annual Report 2010-2011After much delay, the Town Council has finally posted the 2011 annual report. So how did they solve the conundrum of the<a href="http://morleygate.blogspot.com/2010/08/where-has-all-money-gone.html"> missing figures in 2010</a>? by simply leaving out last year's figures completely!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FHIzZij30Bo/Trbo9TrZW1I/AAAAAAAADQE/0IRix8wqesA/s1600/redacted.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="150" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FHIzZij30Bo/Trbo9TrZW1I/AAAAAAAADQE/0IRix8wqesA/s320/redacted.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Of course, now that an opening balance has been published, it is a simple matter to fill in the blanks...<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eXzPX_jVXh0/Trbn8jYkdGI/AAAAAAAADP8/glOMvBtWZks/s1600/MTC+accounts+2009-2011.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="148" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eXzPX_jVXh0/Trbn8jYkdGI/AAAAAAAADP8/glOMvBtWZks/s320/MTC+accounts+2009-2011.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-74348028583037750312011-07-22T16:57:00.000+00:002011-07-22T16:57:29.644+00:00So, I finally got round to writing to the Information Commissioner...Having exhausted the Town Council's processes, I wish to refer this case to yourselves.<br />
<br />
A supporting document was omitted from a Council Meeting Agenda Pack lodged in the local library (and was not available for members of the public at the meeting).<br />
<br />
I requested a copy and was advised that I could see it during the accounts inspection window at a later date. I considered this to be unsatisfactory as the inspection opportunity commenced on a date later than the response deadline and it would of course involve considerable inconvienience to myself, including loss of annual leave time.<br />
<br />
I referred the matter for internal review and was advised that the review panel considered the document as draft and therefore not for public circulation (despite being presented at a full open Council meeting without exclusion of the public).<br />
<br />
I attach your standard form and a screen scrape of the correspondence- it can also be found at <a href="http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/missing_agm_document_in_library#incoming-195035">http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/missing_agm_document_in_library#incoming-195035</a><br />
<br />
Thank you,<br />
Ian GreyShadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-80960338133053697142010-10-22T06:44:00.000+00:002010-10-22T06:44:31.706+00:00More unlawful behaviour<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">I have sent a maladministration complaint to Morley Town Council.<br />
<br />
When Councillor Bradley died on September 30th, in law, this created a casual vacancy on the Council. It was then obliged to post up a notification, advising electors that there would be a co-option to fill the vacancy unless ten electors petitioned for a Poll. Had there been less than six months before the election, a petition would not have been possible and it would be optional whether the Town Council chose to co-opt someone or not.<br />
<br />
However, Cllr Bradley died seven months and a few days before the May 2010 elections.<br />
<br />
The statutory notice has to be displayed for 14 working days. This expired on Wednesday so the opportunity for voters to ask for a bye-election is no longer possible. The Council failed to comply with its legal obligations and has therefore acted unlawfully.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">Statutes:<a href="http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Legislation&title=Local+Government+Act&Year=1972&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=0&sortAlpha=0&TYPE=QS&PageNumber=1&NavFrom=0&parentActiveTextDocId=2431824&ActiveTextDocId=2431934&filesize=12614"> LGA 1972</a> <a href="http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Legislation&title=Local+Government+Act&Year=1972&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=0&sortAlpha=0&TYPE=QS&PageNumber=1&NavFrom=0&parentActiveTextDocId=2431824&ActiveTextDocId=2431935&filesize=12789">LGA 1972</a> <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/3305/article/5/made">SI2006/3305</a></span>Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-20702743872220777752010-10-07T10:38:00.001+00:002010-10-07T10:39:12.821+00:00Publish... and be damned?The letter to the <a href="http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/">YEP</a> was published yesterday with the above amusing caption. It isn't online so here is a snapshot-<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TK2iSy_C5QI/AAAAAAAACm8/bsoUxZljIk0/s1600/yep061010.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TK2iSy_C5QI/AAAAAAAACm8/bsoUxZljIk0/s1600/yep061010.jpg" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">Interestingly, yesterday evening I received an email from a well known Morleian who said that he had written to the Morley Obtiser on the same subject a while back but that it wasn't published...</div>Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-46180977143906877332010-10-01T19:01:00.002+00:002010-10-02T13:38:57.016+00:00Widening the net<em>As the Morley local paper continue to ignore anything not supportive of the ruling Junta, I have sent the following letter to the Yorkshire Evening Post.</em><br />
<br />
When Morley Town Council published their 2009/2010 Annual report with a censored financial statement recently, I sat up and took notice. A balance sheet without a balance? Outrageous!<br />
<br />
Local Governments are meant to be open and transparent- after all it is our money they are spending. They don't come cheap either- in the last six years Morleians have been forced to pay over a Million Pounds to run our Parish. (If you don't believe it involves force, try withholding your Council Tax.)<br />
<br />
To refuse to print how much they spent last year and how much they had left is arrogance of the highest order. We hope they spend our hard earned money wisely but how can we know that if they won't tell us? The excuses used about "confidentially issues" were entirely unjustifiable and a smokescreen to conceal their incompetence, something that has backfired spectacularly.<br />
<br />
Morley Town Council's actions are an insult to all precept payers of Morley. The Councillors who voted to accept the Annual Report should hang their heads in shame.<br />
<br />
Ian Grey<br />
<br />
(Former Morley Town Councillor 2004-2007)Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-68912298349150119462010-09-22T22:47:00.000+00:002010-09-22T22:47:50.201+00:00The simple sword of truth and the trusty shield of British fair play<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TJqHWpLYuAI/AAAAAAAACm0/cjx9Hzh2i0k/s1600/private+eye.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TJqHWpLYuAI/AAAAAAAACm0/cjx9Hzh2i0k/s640/private+eye.jpg" width="366" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.magforum.com/notprivateeye.htm">http://www.magforum.com/notprivateeye.htm</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;">Our local fourth estate doesn't seem overly interested in opposing views to the ruling Town Council Junta.</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;">I wrote a strong letter to the 'tiser two weekends ago. It didn't appear last week but they assured me it had been received and referred to the boss.</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;">Today, it didn't appear either so I can only assume it has been spiked. It was under the 350 word limit and I gave my address (but not my daytime phone number, which they could have emailed me for). There are four letters today- one about veg growers, one about thanking a Pub for a raffle and two from Chuggers.</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;">Oh- and a column from Ed Balls MP talking about the chiiiiildren.</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;">I seem to remember a few others mentioning that letters critical of the Mimbys never quite seem to make it into the paper these days (since Bob Evans retired) or if they do, they get heavily watered down.</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;">Are we seeing a pattern emerging here?</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"> </span>Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-31645191975936100702010-09-18T09:55:00.000+00:002010-09-18T09:55:29.857+00:00Whoops! It seems that no-one has done an FOI appeal before<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TJSMRtrP3iI/AAAAAAAACms/9ieesPLxmYI/s1600/appeal.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TJSMRtrP3iI/AAAAAAAACms/9ieesPLxmYI/s320/appeal.jpg" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">Perhaps it might be worth going to the next full Council meeting after all.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div>Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-24193283564173883042010-09-17T18:04:00.000+00:002010-09-17T18:04:53.194+00:00The dialogue with the auditorHere is the reply received from Mazars:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Thank you for your email of 14 September 2010.<br />
<br />
The first point I should make is that our audit opinion on the accounts for the year ended 31 March 2010 was issued on 2 August 2010 and the audit is now closed. Consequently, I have no powers to consider any matters relating to that audit year. However, to be helpful to you, I would make the following brief comments on the matters you have raised (your numbering).<br />
<br />
Point 1: I believe that the document you are referring to is an income and expenditure account included within the Council’s Annual Report - not the Annual Return which constitutes the ‘statutory accounts’ that were subject to audit. We were informed by the Council that it intended to redact certain information in its Annual Report. I understand that this decision was in response to a ruling by an employment tribunal judge that an amount of compensation paid to a former clerk of the Town Council was subject to a confidentiality agreement and that the Council was seeking to ensure it was able to comply with this ruling. It is not the role of the external auditor to provide formal advice to the Council on any action it takes and we did not do so in this instance.<br />
<br />
Point 5: This is covered by response to Point 1.<br />
<br />
Point 7: It is for the Council to determine what information is made available to members of the public who choose to exercise their rights under s15 of the Audit Commission Act 1998. Issues relating to the exercise of electors’ rights are a matter between the Council and those wishing to inspect the accounts. If someone has a concern that they are not given access to information that they consider they were entitled to see, their recourse is to complain to the Council and, ultimately, to make a challenge through the Courts.<br />
<br />
Point 8: This is not a matter for us to comment on, other than to confirm that no matters were raised with us by members of the public in relation to our audit of the accounts.<br />
<br />
Following paragraphs: I have no further comment to make on the inspection process. From my review, I am satisfied that the Council provided us with all of the information required to enable us to undertake our audit and to issue our audit opinion. The compensation payment to the former clerk was in relation to their employment (i.e. ceasing to hold office) and, as such, I am satisfied that it was appropriate to include this payment within the staff costs heading. <br />
<br />
Thank you for raising these matters with me. As I stated at the outset, I have given these comments in order to be helpful;. However, given that the accounts for the year ended 31 March 2010 are now closed, it would not be appropriate for me to comment further.</blockquote><br />
A thorough response, but I felt that there were a couple of points that needed clarifying.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Thank you for your thorough and informative reply. It is indeed helpful, which has not been the case with the Council, who have been obstructive.<br />
<br />
Thank you for the reassurances about the correct posting of settlements. It just seemed counter-intuitive to me based on the descriptive wording for box four on the return which is in present tense only.<br />
<br />
Your comments on the queries made by Council and your entirely appropriate responses are noted. However, you express the view that the confidentiality agreement was based on a tribunal judge ruling. I believe this to be incorrect, because as far as I am aware, no financial ruling had been made, the agreement was made "out of court" before the award proceedings took place which is the obvious time to apply such a ruling (which would be highly unusual in any case). On this basis, I believe that Mazars either jumped to conclusions or were misled. I will look further into this with the Tribunals Service.<br />
<br />
You will have noted that there were gaps in the sequence of questions. The other questions (which I omitted for clarity) were seeking clarification about the origin of the confidentiality agreement, which the Council has declined to answer (or more accurately, provided an evasive answer to). This is ongoing.<br />
<br />
Now none of the above needs to particularly concern yourselves as external auditors, as it isn't really audit related, as you say. However the matter of the pre-inspection report process surely must do, especially if procedural irregularities are subsequently discovered. If it is not yourselves then the responsibility must lie with the Audit Commission, it shouldn't be up to concerned citizens to pursue local authorities through the courts.<br />
<br />
I perfectly understand the idea about withholding access to specific items of financial transactions where appropriate but it is the actual Pre Audit annual return form that the Council have admitted (through gritted teeth) would have been redacted, i.e. box 7 closing balance. It is unequivocal that this would have been unlawful and I find it odd that you would play down such a matter. During the inspection window, the Annual report had not even been published so it would be dis-ingenious of the Council to claim that they had misunderstood the question. If the method of redaction had been to leave those boxes blank at inspection, then by filling them in after the inspection window that would have been altering the return which is also unlawful without permission of yourselves.<br />
<br />
One other (comparatively minor) point I would like to draw to your attention- The annual return notice of conclusion that was displayed recently was incomplete: it did not have box f completed, "Date of announcement". As the external auditor, I would expect Mazars to point out the necessity to fill in statutory forms correctly in subsequent years<br />
<br />
Anyway, thank you once again for your co-operation. If my understanding of ACA1998 S14 and SI 2003/533-2006/564 is wanting in any of the above, feel free to correct me.<br />
</blockquote><br />
However, he was not prepared to be drawn.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Dear Mr Grey<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
I acknowledge receipt of your email.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
I refer you to the response I gave in my previous email. I consider the matter to be closed and do not intend to enter into any further correspondence.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Yours sincerely </blockquote>Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-64463607579781875462010-09-15T23:43:00.000+00:002010-09-15T23:43:54.427+00:00Mazars speak outI've received a lengthly reply from Mazers, the external auditors for the Town Council. They have gone out of their way to be helpful as they could have just given me short shrift, with the accounts being closed and all.<br />
<br />
I just want to clarify some subtle detail, but to summarise, my interpretation is that they have distanced themselves from the actions of the Town Council.<br />
<br />
With a bargepole.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile, the story isn't just confined to this blog and has propagated somewhat over the blogosphere. See<a href="http://nannyknowsbest.blogspot.com/2010/08/prats-of-week-morley-town-council.html"> here</a>, <a href="http://www.annaraccoon.com/politics/ed-balls-fiefdom-and-the-chicanery-of-redacted-accounts/">here</a>, <a href="http://lpuk.blogspot.com/2010/09/is-this-strictly-legal.html">here</a> and <a href="http://iangrey.org/2010/09/14/conspiracy-or-cock-up/">here</a>.<br />
<br />
Not forgetting <a href="http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/morley_town_council">here</a> as well.Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-1080111938884552532010-09-14T23:01:00.001+00:002010-09-14T23:04:44.378+00:00Our two week opportunityHere are the audited accounts posted in public view. Spot the error...<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI_9Zve3oGI/AAAAAAAACl0/IlmyerciGfE/s1600/accounts1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI_9Zve3oGI/AAAAAAAACl0/IlmyerciGfE/s320/accounts1.jpg" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI_9o_cdYvI/AAAAAAAACl8/pKZt5BQ0BXc/s1600/accounts2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI_9o_cdYvI/AAAAAAAACl8/pKZt5BQ0BXc/s320/accounts2.jpg" /></a><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI_9sUdg54I/AAAAAAAACmE/PpHM1-oah-U/s1600/accounts3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI_9sUdg54I/AAAAAAAACmE/PpHM1-oah-U/s320/accounts3.jpg" /></a><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI_9vi1vB7I/AAAAAAAACmM/BvjJbaGjK3I/s1600/accounts4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI_9vi1vB7I/AAAAAAAACmM/BvjJbaGjK3I/s320/accounts4.jpg" /></a><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI_-Y85kD2I/AAAAAAAACmU/zauS0eFB5eE/s1600/accounts5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI_-Y85kD2I/AAAAAAAACmU/zauS0eFB5eE/s320/accounts5.jpg" /></a><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI_-fQmvG4I/AAAAAAAACmc/aE3-6cJA34Y/s1600/accounts6.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI_-fQmvG4I/AAAAAAAACmc/aE3-6cJA34Y/s320/accounts6.jpg" /></a><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI_-pbuISGI/AAAAAAAACmk/dGjV9ofym3c/s1600/accounts7.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI_-pbuISGI/AAAAAAAACmk/dGjV9ofym3c/s320/accounts7.jpg" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">Can you tell what it is yet?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div>Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-3918119803099108312010-09-13T20:06:00.000+00:002010-09-13T20:06:17.825+00:00Hidden in plain view<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: purple;"><i>Email sent to the MTC auditors, copied to MTC & the Audit Commission</i></span><br />
<br />
Dear Mr. Christopher,<br />
<br />
Whilst I have not heard from yourselves in connection with my original enquiry about Morley Town Council redacting financial figures from the annual report (although you were copied in on two emails from the audit commission), I have received a number of replies to questions from the Town Clerk which do not reflect Mazars in a good light.<br />
<br />
The relevant questions asked and responses received are as follows:<br />
-----------------<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"></span><br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">1) The balance sheet in the recently published annual report does not show a closing balance. MTC presumably sought advice on this. Which body advised that it was legal to redact the closing balance and what did they say?</div><div style="margin: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin: 0px;">The external auditors, Mazars LLP, were consulted verbally on this point.<br />
------------------<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">5) Have Mazers been consulted in the matter of redacting the Annual Report Balance Sheet? If so, what was their expressed opinion?</div><div style="margin: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="color: black; margin: 0px;">See answer to question 1 above.</div>----------------<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"></span></span><br />
<div style="margin: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">7) Had I have visited the office during the pre-audit accounts inspection window up until July 28th, would I have found that the closing balance was redacted?</span></span></div><div style="margin: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"><br />
</span></span></div><div style="margin: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">Yes.</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">----------------</span></span><br />
<div style="margin: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">8) Did any electors or interested parties inspect the accounts during the July 2010 inspection window?</span></span></div><div style="margin: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"><br />
</span></span></div><div style="margin: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">I do not see relevance in this question</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">---------------</span></span></div></div></div>The replies were under FOI and the answers are highly unhelpful (and now subject to the Council complaints procedure as I do not consider them acceptable answers). However, taking the answers at face value the implication is that Mazars have concurred with the Council (or suggested a course of action) in order to obfuscate the accounts and that callers wishing to inspect them would have been denied access to the pre-audit balance sheet, an unlawful act. Similarly, if the figures were omitted in the return during the inspection window, then the Town Council writing them in before sending them on to yourselves for audit would also be an unlawful act. Some clarity on this matter would be welcomed.<br />
<br />
On a seperate, more practical note, it would appear from the audited figures that an undisclosed sum for the former Town Clerk who won a tribunal case has been posted into the staff costs box of the return, which is nearly £30k higher than 2008 and 2009. I would not regard a settlement figure for a compromise agreement with a former employee (who resigned in 2007) post-tribunal judgement but pre-tribunal award would qualify as staff costs at all, nor any associated legal fees. The sums would surely be an extraordinary one-off payment within general expenses. Please consider this and offer a determination as to whether the accounts have been correctly submitted or not.<br />
<br />
I hasten to add that the post- audit procedure was followed to the letter- the signed off accounts and inspection notice were posted in a public place for the statutory 14 days. However, in a spirit of (lack of) openness, the actual return was positioned behind the dirtiest, most smudged, most smeared, most residually sellotaped part of the Town Council noticeboard. I think the term is hidden in plain view...<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Regards,<br />
<br />
Ian Grey<br />
Elector, Morley Parish.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI6DflKgFxI/AAAAAAAACls/XXJhwCpLbwg/s1600/transparency.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TI6DflKgFxI/AAAAAAAACls/XXJhwCpLbwg/s320/transparency.jpg" /></a></div>Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-56867543004216210902010-09-13T11:22:00.002+00:002010-09-13T11:22:58.615+00:00Unhappy with FOI responses<div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Morley Town Council,<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">FAO Town Clerk<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Response to Freedom of Information request dated 9/9/2020<o:p></o:p></span></span></u></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">(sent by email and 2<sup>nd</sup> class post)<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><o:p><span style="text-decoration: none;"><br />
</span></o:p></span></span></u></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">I wish to invoke the formal complaint procedure regarding the response to my FOI request of August 15<sup>th</sup> 2010.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The answers given in the letter of 9/9/2010 are generally uninformative, unhelpful and obstructive. Some questions are only partially answered and others not at all.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The purpose of the Freedom of Information act is to prevent the public sector unnecessarily hiding information from electors and to encourage transparency. If this is the standard approach Morley Town Council takes to FOI requests then it is a flippant approach which I regard as inappropriate.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">There also seems to be some confusion about asking questions of Morley Town Council and the Town Clerk personally as some of the answers are given based on what the Town Clerk knows rather than the collective decisions of Council. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">I reiterate that my questions are to the Town Council through the auspices of the Town Clerk.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">I am unclear as to why the last question was avoided by reference to not understanding the relevance: It is not for the Town Clerk to judge this and I could have been approached for clarification but the last sentence of the letter is dismissive . The question is clear enough- There is a statutory window of opportunity for inspection of the pre-audited accounts and I wish to know if anyone exercised their right to do this. The answer is particularly relevant given the answer to question 7 as this would mean that the Council may have acted unlawfully.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">I have heard informally from others that they have also been disappointed with answers to FOI questions. On that basis I have submitted a separate FOI request via a public resource <a href="http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/" moz-do-not-send="true">www.whatdotheyknow.com</a>.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">I am also disappointed that the response was sent on the 19<sup>th</sup> working day by 1<sup>st</sup> class post when it could easily have been sent earlier by 2<sup>nd</sup> class post. (Or even emailed).<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Please advise on the process and timescales for assessing my complaint.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Yours Sincerely,<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Ian Grey<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Elector, Topcliffe Ward</span></span></div>Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-47519182088412694832010-09-13T00:21:00.000+00:002010-09-13T00:21:16.741+00:00Letter to the Editor<i>The following has been emailed to the Morley Observer and Advertiser, otherwise known as the 'Tiser</i><br />
<br />
As a previous Member of Morley Town Council, I have observed the various goings on at the Town Hall over the last three years with a rather jaded, cynical eye. However, when the current Council published their 2009/2010 Annual report with a censored financial statement, I sat up and took notice. A balance sheet without a balance? Outrageous!<br />
<br />
Local Governments are meant to be open and transparent- after all it is our money they are spending. They don't come cheap either- in the last six years we have been forced to pay over a Million Pounds to run our Parish. (If you don't believe we are forced, try witholding your Council Tax.) Are we getting value for money?<br />
<br />
It was possible to work out the redacted numbers when they published the audited accounts, a statutory obligation. However, replies to a Freedom of Information request suggest that they may possibly have potentially acted illegally in their merry financial dance to hide from us what they had really done. (This matter is ongoing with the auditors).<br />
<br />
So, to refuse to print how much they spent last year and how much they had left is arrogance of the highest order. We hope they spend our hard earned money wisely but how can we know that if they won't tell us? The excuses used about "confidentially issues" were entirely unjustifiable.<br />
<br />
Just to add further insult to injury, the FOI questions I raised (by email) were answered in what could best be described as an unhelpful way and will be subject to the complaints procedure. They even wasted 9p by waiting until the last possible reply date then franking the letter First Class post. I have now heard about three others who have also been treated in this way and I do not consider it acceptable to fob people off with non-answers.<br />
<br />
Morley Town Council's actions are an insult to all precept payers of Morley and the Councillors who voted to accept the Annual Report should hang their heads in shame.Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-54694516322220910452010-09-12T16:08:00.001+00:002010-09-12T16:09:26.902+00:00MTC wasting our money<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;">Well, it was only 7p, but...</span><br />
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;">I notice that the FOI letter back from the Town Clerk is franked for 36p, so the response was sent first class on the 19th working day to ensure I got answers by the 20th working day (which is the statutory response).</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;">Now they obviously could have answered this a fortnight ago and sent it to me for 29p second class (or even emailed it to me for no postage cost).</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"> </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19px;">It is not even as if they can claim to have had to research the answers to the questions. I can only assume that they have a policy of stalling until the last minute...</span></div>Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-241151315640507602010-09-11T17:13:00.000+00:002010-09-11T17:13:00.015+00:00Answers from Morley Town Council<span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white;">Replies to my eight questions received in the post yesterday. I have interspersed the questions for clarity, as the reply letter just listed the answers. I've also commented in red italics.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #666666;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white;">1) The balance sheet in the recently published annual report does not show a closing balance. MTC presumably sought advice on this. Which body advised that it was legal to redact the closing balance and what did they say?</span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white;"><br />
</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white;">The external auditors, Mazars LLP, were consulted verbally on this point.</span></b></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white;"><br />
</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #cc0000;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white;">Yes, but what did they say? It might have been "We don't recommend it, but you could just leave it out of the annual report as it isn't a statutory obligation".</span></span></i></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white;"><br />
</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white;">2) The annual report claims reasons of confidentiality for redacting 2010 general administration, total expenditure and closing balance. Is this related purely to the out of court settlement with K Barrett after losing the Employment tribunal in March 2009?</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><b>The redaction of figures in the Annual Report is related to the compensation award made to Mrs K Barrett.</b></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><b><br />
</b></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #cc0000;">That was straight forward enough, but the word "solely" is not included so it is still open to interpretation.</span></i></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;">3) which party proposed that the out of court settlement be on a confidential basis- the Morley Town Council Barrister or the Solicitor representing K Barrett?</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;"><br />
</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><b>As I was not in attendance at the conclusion of the Employment Tribunal, I cannot answer this question.</b></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><b><br />
</b></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #cc0000;">But I'm not asking the Town Clerk, I'm asking Morley Town Council via the Town Clerk. The Town Clerk doesn't make decisions but is expected to record them. </span></i></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;"><br />
</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;">4) If it was MTC that proposed confidentiality in the out of court settlement, what was the justification for doing so?</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;"><br />
</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><b>See answer to question 3 above.</b></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><b><br />
</b></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><b><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #e06666;">See comment after answer 3 above!</span></i></b></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;"><br />
</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;">5) Have Mazers been consulted in the matter of redacting the Annual Report Balance Sheet? If so, what was their expressed opinion?</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;"><br />
</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"></div><div style="color: black; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><b>See answer to question 1 above.</b></div><div style="color: black; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #e06666;"><i>...and my corresponding comment!</i></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #e06666;"><i><br />
</i></span></div><br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;">6) Will the closing balance be redacted in the audited reports available later this year?</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;"><br />
</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><b>The complete Annual Return was displayed on the Town Council notice board between Friday, 20th August and Friday 3rd September.</b></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;"><br />
</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #cc0000;">Indeed it was, next to the censored Annual Report. The annual report remains, but for two weeks, Morleians were able to work out the figures.</span></i></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;"><br />
</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;">7) Had I have visited the office during the pre-audit accounts inspection window up until July 28th, would I have found that the closing balance was redacted?</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;"><br />
</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><b>Yes.</b></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;"><br />
</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #cc0000;">Interesting, that would have been breaking the law.</span></i></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #e06666;"><i><br />
</i></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;">8) Did any electors or interested parties inspect the accounts during the July 2010 inspection window?</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #999999;"><br />
</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><b>I do not see relevance in this question.</b></div><br />
<br />
<i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #cc0000;">You haven't answered it either.</span></i>Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-81591454806302363332010-08-20T00:04:00.000+00:002010-08-20T00:04:57.314+00:00Hidden in plain view<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><i><u>What Morley Town Council Censored in the 2009-2010 annual report:</u></i></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;">(2009 figure in brackets)</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;">General Administration </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: blue;">£107,204</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"> (£85,877)</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;">Total expenditure <span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: blue;">£190,630</span></span> (£169,107)</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;">Balance as at 31st March </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: blue;">£78,623</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"> (£91,660)</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;">(Accurate to within £1 due to rounding- the audit opening balance was £1 less than the annual report opening balance).</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;">This information is in the public domain and "confidentiality issues" is MTC being what a friend of mine described as being... err... <i>shifty</i>.</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;">Where did I track it down? In Morley Library, in a locked filing cabinet with a sign saying "Beware of the leopard"</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;">(Not quite that bad, but two green box files were locked away somewhere upstairs and a helpful Librarian went and fetched them after consulting with someone behind the scenes).</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;">In the box amongst a somewhat jumbled assortment of old Agendas, Minutes & Annual reports, there was the 2009/2010 internal audit report for acceptance at the May Annual general meeting. (I assume they did, the July Agenda with May Minutes hadn't made it to the filing yet).</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;">Reverse engineering the figures once the closing balance is known is of course child's play. The arrogance shown by the Council that those of us who are actually forced to pay 99.9% of the income are not allowed to know the expenditure unless we went to the AGM is nothing short of astonishing.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;">The question remains, though, as to whether those figures were available for inspection during July, or if they were censored to visitors. (If there were any).</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;">The balance sheet figures in the annual report are presented in a different way to the figures the Audit Commission wants. (e.g. the audit commission aren't interested in which committee spends what).<br />
<br />
They do ask for staff costs to be separated out though, and they define staff costs as:-<br />
<br />
"Total expenditure or payments made to and on behalf of all employees. Include salaries and wages, PAYE and NI (employees and employers), pension contributions and employment expenses".<br />
<br />
The figures for the last three years are:<br />
<br />
2008 £53,275<br />
2009 £51,986<br />
2010 </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: blue;">£81,404</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: blue;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 22px;">(The first two figures were published on the town hall noticeboard last year when the internal audit figures were posted alongside the statutory notice of accounts inspection. This year, only the statutory notice was posted, not the internal audit figures. I suspect this is redaction by accidental on purpose oversight, i.e. plausible deniability).</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;">This year has leapt up without any obvious change of staffing in the Town Council office. I also don't see how a compromise settlement with a former employee after losing a tribunal judgement fits in with the definition of Staff costs above. </span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 22px;">Let us see if Mazers agree...</span>Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-56007831571049156262010-08-16T19:04:00.000+00:002010-08-16T19:04:14.900+00:00The Audit Commission speaks<div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: 11pt;">Thank you for your email to the Audit Commission regarding the 2009/10 accounts of Morley Town Council as presented in that council’s Annual Report published online.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: 11pt;">I must stress that the accounts presented on the council’s website as part of the Annual Report are not the statutory accounts of the council. The annual report is not a statutory requirement and so is not regulated. One would hope, however, that any financial information presented in an annual report would be both complete and consistent with the audited statutory accounts of the body.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: 11pt;">The council’s statutory accounts come in the form of an Annual Return which is subject to independent external audit. The council must publicly display the annual return, which includes both accounting and annual governance statements, for 20 working days. During that time you may ask the council any question you like about the accounts or to see any detail of them. There is certainly nothing in the legislation that supports partial disclosures of income or expenditure in the Annual Return and it is, indeed, unusual. So presuming the council’s annual return is complete, you should be able to find the information you seek there. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: 11pt;">Local electors have rights in relation to the accounting statements. These include the right ‘to inspect the accounts…and all books, deeds, contracts, bills, vouchers and receipts relating to them.’ You may find the Commission’s guide – <i><span style="font-style: italic;">Councils Accounts Your Rights </span></i>– helpful in detailing your rights and how to use them. It is accessible at <a href="http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/nationalstudies/localgov/Pages/councilsaccountsyourrights03072006.aspx">http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/nationalstudies/localgov/Pages/councilsaccountsyourrights03072006.aspx</a> . <o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: 11pt;">In case of access to potentially personal information which is protected, you can also ask the external auditor (see directory at <a href="http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/aboutus/contactus/Pages/ourauditors.aspx">http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/aboutus/contactus/Pages/ourauditors.aspx</a> to find your local auditor) to determine whether the information you seek is personal information or not.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: 11pt;">You may also request to see the information you seek through your rights under Freedom of Information legislation. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: 11pt;">I am copying this response to your council’s appointed auditor and to Morley Town Council for information.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: 11pt;">I hope this is helpful.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Verdana; font-size: 11pt;">Yours sincerely<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><st1:personname w:st="on"><span style="color: grey; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: grey; font-size: 10pt;">George Wisz</span></span></st1:personname><span style="color: grey; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: grey; font-size: 10pt;"> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">|</span></b> manager limited assurance audits</span></span><span style="color: grey;"><span style="color: grey;"><br />
</span></span><span style="color: #99cc00; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: #99cc00; font-size: 10pt;">Audit Commission</span></span><span style="color: grey; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: grey; font-size: 10pt;"> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">|</span></b> First Floor <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">|</span></b> <st1:placename w:st="on">Millbank</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">Tower</st1:placetype><b><span style="font-weight: bold;"> | </span></b><st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">London</st1:place></st1:city> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">|</span></b> SW1P 4HQ <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">|</span></b> </span></span></div>Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-9929746138207538362010-08-14T22:30:00.000+00:002010-08-14T22:30:18.642+00:00Questions to Morley Town CouncilEight questions sent to the Town Clerk under FOI today:-<br />
<br />
1) The balance sheet in the recently published annual report does not show a closing balance. MTC presumably sought advice on this. Which body advised that it was legal to redact the closing balance and what did they say?<br />
<br />
2) The annual report claims reasons of confidentiality for redacting 2010 general administration, total expenditure and closing balance. Is this related purely to the out of court settlement with K Barrett after losing the Employment tribunal in March 2009?<br />
<br />
3) which party proposed that the out of court settlement be on a confidential basis- the Morley Town Council Barrister or the Solicitor representing K Barrett?<br />
<br />
4) If it was MTC that proposed confidentiality in the out of court settlement, what was the justification for doing so?<br />
<br />
5) Have Mazers been consulted in the matter of redacting the Annual Report Balance Sheet? If so, what was their expressed opinion?<br />
<br />
6) Will the closing balance be redacted in the audited reports available later this year?<br />
<br />
7) Had I have visited the office during the pre-audit accounts inspection window up until July 28th, would I have found that the closing balance was redacted?<br />
<br />
8) Did any electors or interested parties inspect the accounts during the July 2010 inspection window?<br />
<br />
Check back in twenty working days to see how I got on...Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-44475593635317123682010-08-14T12:38:00.002+00:002010-08-14T22:35:03.788+00:00Where has all the money gone?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TGaNpasQawI/AAAAAAAAClc/SqteEUonWz4/s1600/accounts.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/TGaNpasQawI/AAAAAAAAClc/SqteEUonWz4/s320/accounts.jpg" /></a></div>The latest piece of insanity from Morley Town Council is to publish the annual accounts balance sheet in the <a href="http://www.morley.gov.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=18&Itemid=20">annual report</a>- <b>WITHOUT A BALANCE.<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><br />
</span> </b><br />
<br />
I can't see <a href="http://www.mazars.co.uk/">Mazars</a> being impressed with that and await the audited accounts with interest...<br />
<br />
*edit* I couldn't wait, see the post above.Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-559173523431265472010-04-29T20:17:00.004+00:002010-04-29T20:35:59.092+00:00All shall have prizes<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/S9nq-8fxz5I/AAAAAAAACk8/hLhsoBpByx0/s1600/badge.gif"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 370px; height: 380px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/S9nq-8fxz5I/AAAAAAAACk8/hLhsoBpByx0/s400/badge.gif" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5465657989903011730" /></a><br />Morley Town Council have decided that past Town Mayors should be given a commemorative badge to reward their contribution (in addition to their name on the past Mayors board and their photograph in the Council Chamber).<br /><br />£1,000 has been allocated from the 2010 budget for this honour. Needless to say, some electors think this is a bad idea and feelings were high at the Town Meeting last night.<br /><br />Michael Gomersal writes on Facebook:<br /><br /><br /><blockquote>I wrote a letter to the Observer last week and included copies of minutes which made reference to the past mayor's badges. They didn't print it so i'll post it here so all is not lost.<br /><br />"Could a member of the Morley Borough Independent's Party please explain why, during such difficult economic times it is necessary to spend £1000 of tax payer's money on "Past Mayor's Badges".<br /><br />The funding of Ten "Past Mayor's Badges" at £100 each was finally approved by the Finance and General Purposes Committee in November 2009 following over a year of discussions of which Cllr. Derek Bradley was a driving force.<br /><br />As a resident of Morley I feel the money we pay to Morley Town Council could be much better spent on things such as school projects or help for the elderly instead of ten "Past Mayor's Badges" which will be of no benefit to the community at all.<br /><br />I have always being a supporter of the Morley Borough Independent's but such spending at a time when many families are experiencing great hardship as forced me to re-consider my position at the forth coming elections."<br /><br />I'm going to tweak it a little and send it to the YEP. Maybe I will have more luck there.</blockquote><br /><br />The reaction by the Councillors to being challenged was defensive and hostile:- they regarded it as worthy because the Town Mayors work so hard. Borough Mayors pre-1974 used to get one and it wasn't a large sum of money in the scheme of things. One Councillor told the person who raised the issue that he should be ashamed. Another one told me afterwards that if I didn't like paying the Precept that I should move somewhere else.<br /><br />Morley Town Council is stuck in a bubble of make-believe pomp and circumstance that makes do-gooders & busybodies feel important about themselves whilst most Morleians are somewhat indifferent to it, especially as the £175,000 running costs are tucked away in the domestic rates bill.Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-72447298644540715732009-06-19T19:02:00.004+00:002009-06-19T19:11:55.813+00:00Redaction in action<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redact">Redaction</a> is in the Press a lot at the moment with the censored publication of MP expenses. As well as the removal of sensitive information, it can also be a form of editing.<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">The Morley Obtiser</span> often edits letters to the editor for reasons unstated. Often it is to add clarity or for brevity; sometimes it is to avoid sensitive or controversial subjects.<br /><br />This letter written by former independent Leeds City Councillor Stewart McArdle was published on Wednesday 17th June, however the Editor omitted what Stewart considered to be the most revealing and damaging part of the letter. The paragraphs omitted are shown in bold.<br /><br /><blockquote>The recent spate of letters concerning the Annual Meeting of Morley Town Council and there being only three members of the public in attendance deserve some further comment. This may infer a number of things; such as that, members of the electorate have no interest in it, nor its relevance, or even may object to paying the precept!<br /><br />Of course, Mr. Bywater is presuming there will be a town council by the time of the next all-out elections in 2011. By this I mean that the legal case/tribunal of the former town clerk versus Morley Town Council has yet to be resolved as the council has collectively decided to contest the decision made against them by an Independent Panel. So there is a strong likelihood that more money will be incurred in further legal costs with the legal profession being the only winner.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Latest figures released for expenditure are attributed to the civic year 2007/8 and show a rise of £47,000 against the coding of General Administration. This is not broken down but, in all probability a significant amount is due to legal costs. I also understand that the reserves of Morley Town Council diminished by almost £34,000 and added together, is a significant portion of the Annual Budget and more importantly, your precept money.<br /><br />The former town clerk did not leave the post until Christmas 2007 so that is an awful lot to spend on legal costs in twelve weeks but, everyone knows that barristers do not come cheap!</span><br /><br />As the tribunal did not take place till October 2008, the figures for 2008/9 should make interesting reading when released. Will there be enough in the council pot by then?<br /><br />Yours sincerely<br /><br />via e-mail<br /><br />Stewart McArdle</blockquote>Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-84345978403798191492009-05-16T11:55:00.007+00:002009-05-18T16:52:08.269+00:00How long does it take to read a file?10 months, according to the CPS, who have finally decided that Walter Volks "will not be prosecuted over allegations of electoral malpractice"<br /><br />The story is here (<a href="http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/Leeds-councillor-will-not-be.5271531.jp">http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/Leeds-councillor-will-not-be.5271531.jp</a>) and here (<a href="http://www.morleyobserver.co.uk/news/Morley-councillor-cleared-of-breaching.5272680.jp">http://www.morleyobserver.co.uk/news/Morley-councillor-cleared-of-breaching.5272680.jp</a>)<br /><br />May I make a few observations?<br /><br />"Coun Finnigan said today: "I am delighted that these entirely bogus allegations have been dumped"<br /><br />It took 10 months of investigation to decide there is "insufficient evidence to prosecute" these "entirely bogus allegations". Hmmm.<br /><br />Plus of course, as sure as the Moon rises, we are treated to the inevitable "malicious", "spiteful", "vicious" and "political axe to grind" tirade.<br /><br />However, maybe this should be pointed out;<br /><p>People seem to be concentrating on the address aspect, which although it is unusual - apparently he is still on the electoral roll in Morley, although admitting to the YEP he doesn't actually live here. Which means he is able to:</p><ul><li>vote for Morley's political representatives even though by his own admission he doesn't actually live in the area.</li><li>be eligible to stand for LCC next time around (you are eligible if you are registered to vote in the area or if you have lived, <strong><em>had as your main or principle place of work</em></strong>, or owned property in the area <strong><em>for at least 12 months</em></strong> before an election.) [my highlights]</li><li>meet the qualifications to be a town councillor, as one has to, at least, live within 3 miles of the town council boundary to be eligible to stand. And I suspect that Liversedge is very much on the cusp of that. Either way, a local address looks much better on the ballot paper, even if it is the registered HQ of a local political party</li></ul><p>However, this all misses the fact that Walter claimed eligibility to stand in the election, and has said as much to the press, by ticking the box against the work criteria conditions.</p><p>Now it is all very well stating that he was no longer employed by Kirklees council when he signed his nomination papers in April 2008 - but he only left there in March 2008 after being charged with Gross Misconduct by his employers (again, this was in the local press)<br /><br />So, was he was cheating his employers ("gross misconduct"?) or has the decision been based on on the amount of brass he has received from both councils, or has he managed to produce timesheets accounting for how much time outside work he has spent being an LCC councillor? Or is there some other reason, in which case I'm sure we would be grateful to know.<br /><br />Anyway, IMHO;</p><p>It stinks. </p><p><br /><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-51564144508000437342009-03-03T21:41:00.004+00:002009-03-03T21:55:41.563+00:00Pumpkingate<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/Sa2k5xcyt3I/AAAAAAAACjQ/9d23Uh4ge9w/s1600-h/pinata.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/Sa2k5xcyt3I/AAAAAAAACjQ/9d23Uh4ge9w/s400/pinata.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5309080848173283186" /></a><br />It seems that our Morley Borough Independents just can't keep out of the papers, although probably not for the reasons they would like. Today's Yorkshire Evening Post has a front page story about Morley's Deputy Mayor, accused of <a href="http://http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/Morley-councillor-accused-of-theft.5030970.jp">stealing a Pinata.</a>.<br /><br />Meanwhile, we wait further news of the former Town Clerk's successful case for unfair dismissal, what compensation she will receive and the acid test- whether she gets awarded costs. (<a href="http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/Town-clerk-unfairly-dismissed-by.5017936.jp">YEP story here</a>).<br /><br />The forthcoming Leeds Mayormaking will be a stormy night, Cllr Finnigan explains why <a href="http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/letters-to-the-editor/New-twist--in-mayor.4885108.jp">Labour aren't happy</a>.<br /><br />It has all gone quiet on the <span style="font-weight:bold;">Walter Volks affair</span>, the Crown Prosecution Service still don't appear to have made their mind up. Faster than a speeding snail...Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-61606511969431621142009-03-01T12:42:00.001+00:002009-03-01T12:45:04.015+00:00What's the story with Morley Town Council?Last week, the Yorkshire Post reported that the former clerk to Morley Town Council, which is now 100% controlled by the Morley Borough Independent political party (they do not let the sole opposition councillor sit on committees) had won a tribunal case of constructive dismissal against the council.<br /><br />This report, in my opinion, concentrated on the pieces of the judgement which the town councillors would prefer to be highlighted, namely that the tribunal could find no evidence of bullying or harassment against her.<br /><br />Now, I declare an interest in this as some of the events occurred while I was on MTC, and chaired the committee which dealt with staffing matters. I understand that since the MBIs took total control, they have established a Staffing sub-committee chaired by one Paul Cook, of whom I had never heard of or had dealings with previously. However, I agreed to be a witness for the clerk based on my recollections of events whilst I was on the council, and my understanding of subsequent ones.<br /><br />So please bear with me while I state a few facts. I will deal with the tribunal statements in another post later, but as a starter:<br /><br />In March 2006 I wrote to the then mayor, Brian Judge, and deputy mayor, Robert Gettings. It was rather a lengthy letter so I will not reproduce it in total. But I will reproduce some points:<br /><br />“I feel I must take the unusual step of writing to the Mayor and the Deputy Mayor to set out some very real concerns I (and I know I am not alone in this) have regarding the conduct and attitude of certain members of Morley Town Council towards an employee of the Council.”<br /><br />· “My main point concerns the attitude and conduct of three members of the Morley Borough Independent political grouping towards the Town Clerk. You are of course aware that the Town Council is the corporate employer, and as such its employees report to the Council as a whole, not any individual member; but it does seem that these three members have taken a decision, either as individuals or as a “group within a group” , to make the Clerk’s employment terms and conditions, as well as the duties she carries out and the way her time is spent, their personal concern despite the fact that the vast majority of councillors are satisfied with the way the office runs and the support received from our staff.”<br /><br />· “…but the impression given was that certain members are not satisfied with either committee decisions regarding employment matters unless it coincides with their own agenda, or the service provided by the Town Clerk”<br /><br />· “What is, of course, really worrying about this incident is that it is the latest in a series reaching back to July last year. In my opinion (and others) it appears increasingly apparent that certain members of this Council are intent on undermining our Town Clerk, although as they have never made their concerns official it is uncertain as to the outcome they would prefer”<br /><br />· “I am concerned as to the effect the “whispering campaign” and general attitude toward her is having on her health”<br /><br />· “I am concerned that these people, and more importantly Morley Town Council, could find themselves involved in very negative public action; actions which in my opinion the Council and certain members have been fortunate to avoid in the past when an employee resigned her position – a position the Council was subsequently unable to fill.”<br /><br />And lastly<br /><br />· “Action by the Council could clear up any concerns these members may wish to make or merely remind them of the existence of employment tribunals and the Standards Board as referral to these bodies could well be instigated if the current attitude does not cease. Such action would in my opinion bring this Council into disrepute.”<br /><br />The mayor did indeed set up a meeting to deal with this matter. Bob Gettings did not attend citing illness. It quickly became apparent that my letter, which was marked “PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL” had been shown/ copied to the members concerned in advance. As I said in my statement, I believe Mr Gettings did this.<br /><br />More later….Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8506795648932143825.post-33513322091189220222009-02-01T22:08:00.001+00:002009-02-05T08:41:16.168+00:00Inspecting Local Authority AccountsUPDATE- egg on face for this, the notice correctly confirms a different stage in the audit cycle, i.e. post audit report inspection rather than pre audit inspection. The Town Council have clarified. The inspection window was during August 2008.<br /><br />My apologies for the confusion. I'll leave the post in-situ as it is still worthwhile being aware of the right to inspect.<br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />There is a little known entitlement for any elector to inspect their local authority accounts, as posted by the <a href="http://thejournal.parker-joseph.co.uk/blog/_archives/2008/7/6/3779232.html">PJC Journal last Summer</a>.<br /><br />Our local Town Council put up the statutory notices earlier in January on their notice board and they were removed at some point last week. Looking at the actual announcement though, it isn't terribly helpful, even allowing for the crayon and the sellotape on the plastic window of the noticeboard. Take a look...<br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/SYYTppMypuI/AAAAAAAACjI/voFi-Er3S9A/s1600-h/inspect.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 388px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_VJ3hKzPm0S8/SYYTppMypuI/AAAAAAAACjI/voFi-Er3S9A/s400/inspect.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5297943617803036386" /></a><br />The question is- when are they available for inspection? Monday to Friday, of course, between 9am and Noon. But what dates? It doesn't actually say.<br /><br />The law does though.<br /><br /><blockquote>SI 2003/533<br /><br />Notice of public rights<br /><br /> 16. - (1) Not later than 14 days before the commencement of the period during which the accounts and other documents are made available in pursuance of regulation 14, a relevant body to which regulation 11(2) applies, or in the case of a parish meeting, the chairman of the meeting, shall give notice by advertisement of the matters set out in paragraph (2).<br /><br /> (2) The matters referred to in paragraph (1) are - <br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">(a) the period during which the accounts and other documents referred to in paragraph (1) will be available for inspection in accordance with regulation 14;</span><br /><br />(b) the place at which, and the hours during which, they will be so available;<br /><br />(c) the name and address of the auditor;<br /><br />(d) the provisions contained in section 15 and section 16 of the 1998 Act; and<br /><br />(e) the date appointed under regulation 13.<br /></blockquote><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">(My emphasis)</span><br /><br />This document doesn't do that. Indeed it only implies that the public can only inspect the annual return, a somewhat short summary document.<br /><br />So, this document was dated January 7th, so the books would have opened no less than 14 days later, on the 21st of January.<br /><br />How long are the books open for inspection? Four weeks.<br /><br /><blockquote>Public inspection of accounts<br /> 14. - (1) Subject to paragraph (2), the relevant body or, as the case may be, the chairman, notified under regulation 13, shall make the accounts and other documents mentioned in section 15 of the 1998 Act available for public inspection for 20 working days before the date appointed by the auditor under that regulation. </blockquote><br /><br />That should mean in this case that the books remain open until February 18th.<br /><br />Now I'm not a lawyer, but I've read through the Act and the two subsequent Statutory Instruments. I don't see that a Parish Council is exempt from full compliance with the inspection regime. I will be querying the dates with the Council office tomorrow to hear what they say.<br /><br />A more interesting question, however, is why Morley Town Council took nine months to do their internal audit, most Local Authorities have their inspection window 3-4 months after book closure.<br /><br />A quote from the very helpful <a href="http://www.orchardnews.com/accounts.htm">ONB website</a>:<br /><br /><blockquote>Orchard News Bureau Ltd specialises in obtaining information and financial data from reluctant public bodies.<br /><br />Some persist in hiding or censoring information which voters, residents and taxpayers have a legal right to see.<br /><br />But this company has a proven track record of challenging a sub-culture of excessive and unjustified secrecy within Town Halls and Constabulary authorities.<br /><br />(...)<br />It is an unfortunate fact of life (the world over) that politicians and civil servants are freer to engage in corruption wherever and whenever editors and journalists abdicate their watchdog roles.<span style="font-style:italic;"></span></blockquote>Shadeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07777836927500400430noreply@blogger.com2