Degrees in Twitology

Brian Coleman recently observed that "Twitter is for twits" and to prove the point, Birmingham City University has just announced that it is launching a Masters degree in 'Social Media' covering social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter, and will cost over £4,000.

Jon Hickman, who put the course together, said: “During the course we will consider what people can do on Facebook and Twitter, and how they can be used for communication and marketing purposes.”

However, Birmingham based student Jamie Waterman told the Daily Telegraph: “Virtually all of the content of this course is so basic it can be self taught. In fact most people know all this stuff already. I think it's a complete waste of university resources.”

Trivial degrees just serve to prove how far the university system has been devalued by Labour.

I am sure Barnet Council wouldn’t be so stupid as to waste taxpayers money sending any officers on this course.

Today is the last day to save the warden service

As readers will know from previous posts, Barnet Council is considering a £950,000 cost cutting exercise which will leave many vulnerable residents in sheltered accommodation without the warden service they have come to rely on.

The council’s on-line consultation for residents to give their views can be found at: http://snaponline.snapsurveys.com/surveylogin.asp?k=123494868473

Please note that the closing date for the on-line consultation is 5pm today, 31st March 2009.

You will be invited to propose alternative savings which the council could make. Frankly, that is what officers are paid to do, but here are a few suggestions anyway.

Scrapping the wardens is Cllr Lynne Hillan’s big idea. In the clip below, she attempts to justify her actions.

Don’t leave it to others! Let the council know what you think of these proposals.

100 - Not Out!

This is my 100th blog and I hope, dear readers, you will allow me this brief self indulgent retrospective. I started blogging in July 2008 in response to the Barnet Times cancelling Rog T’s blog. I won’t bore you with the details again - the full story can be found here in the archives.

Originally, the blog was called “Not The Barnet Times” which was intended as a tongue in cheek response to Rog’s predicament, but it soon became clear that there was a pressing need to report important local political stories which were not being carried by the two main newspaper groups serving the Borough. Not The Barnet Times, was duly transformed into Barnet Council Watch.

Over the last 8 months, I have published several scoops. It was this blog which broke the story about the Leader of the Council using taxpayers money to fly business class to America. This blog was the first to reveal that the council spent £14,000 of your money buying wide screen TVs for five chief officers.

You read it here first about the offensive video posted by the council on YouTube.

I reported on the £2,000 lunch expenses claimed by two chief officers in just one year and that one of those officers also spent another £2,000 travelling to the South of France on a junket.

Then there was the shameful story about Brian Coleman increasing the burial charges for children under 3. Most recently, Barnet Council Watch was first to report the news that there are shortly to be two by-elections in the Borough.

In addition to these scoops I have, along with fellow bloggers Rog T and Statler & Waldorf, reported in depth about councillors’ allowances, the Icelandic banking scandal and the proposal to scrap the warden service. All of these topics are important to local residents, much as the council would prefer them swept under the carpet.

My critics responded to the blog by using false names to post derogatory comments about my mother. A few impressionable Conservative councillors were instructed not to speak to me and, shamefully, those who were more interested in keeping their allowances or climbing the greasy pole, complied. But it has had no affect on my blog. If anything, it has only served to confirm that my articles have been hitting home and that there is a continuing need to scrutinise and report the actions of the council.

I am extremely grateful for all the messages of support I have received since starting this blog, not just from my growing army of readers, but from the many loyal party members who understand my motivation for writing and share my frustration with those characters who seek to undermine the concept of democratic accountability which is under threat in Barnet.

Here’s to the next 100!

Barnet’s Psychological Assessment

Regular readers will recall that last July, this blog was the first to report that former Chief Executive Leo Boland was looking for another job.

In another exclusive scoop, Barnet Council Watch can now reveal that the cost of recruiting Nick Walkley as his replacement was a trifling £49,395 - inclusive of £3,500 for a psychological assessment.

It is obviously very important for an employer to carry out an assessment of someone who already works for them, and lest anyone thinks this is yet another example of the council wasting taxpayers’ money, I have managed to obtain a copy of the secret assessment that Mr Walkley was required to complete so readers can judge for themselves.

"Accountability breeds responsibility"

These are the wise words of Dr Stephen Covey, the international best selling author of management books. I was reminded of this quotation after reading Cllr Duncan Macdonald’s latest blog on the Icelandic banking scandal, which has put £27.4million of Barnet taxpayers’ money at risk.

Cllr Macdonald is a member of the Working Group scrutiny committee which recently discovered that the council had been ignoring its own investment criteria, resulting in huge sums of public money being recklessly deposited in failing Icelandic banks.

Last night, the committee presented its draft findings to the Resources, Performance and Partnerships Overview & Scrutiny Committee, but despite the fact that its remit was to review the council’s Treasury Management strategy, treasury officers present at the meeting were actually proposing amendments to the report! This blatant conflict of interest should have been obvious to the experienced committee Chairman.

Cllr Macdonald believes the committee acted unconstitutionally, and there is certainly a prohibition in the constitution which prevents officers investigating matters in which they were involved. But if you can ignore your own investment criteria, I suppose you can ignore the constitution as well.

Cllr Macdonald also believes that the Conservatives were under instructions to water the report down. It is really quite incredible that the same Conservative councillors who agreed the draft report, then amended it at the committee stage and vote the original down.

The council now appears to be engaged in an orchestrated buck passing exercise. Nobody is to be held accountable. No senior figure is to be held responsible. Just like the Underhill scandal, the council has found one middle ranking officer to pin the whole shebang on, and everyone else is absolved. New Chief Executive Nick Walkley cleared Mike Freer of blame before the promised investigation has even started!

It is not credible to suggest that the former Treasury Manager, who resigned two weeks ago, was solely responsible for £27.4 million worth of investments. Rules were broken, but of all of the mistakes the council has made, the biggest is to think that the public are stupid. We are told there will be an independent investigation. What are the odds that we will just end up with this?

Where is Oliver Cromwell when you need him?

As our democratic institutions are ever more debased by those elected to serve us, it is worth reminding ourselves of the speech given to the House of Commons by England’s most famous Republican, Oliver Cromwell, on the dissolution of the Long Parliament on 20th April, 1653.

“It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonoured by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.

Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess?

Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter'd your conscience for bribes?

Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?

Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil'd this sacred place, and turn'd the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices?

Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress'd, are yourselves gone!

So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. In the name of God, go!”

For the avoidance of doubt, Barnet Council Watch does not support the concept of beheading or removing our trusty and well beloved Monarch!

Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas!

LibDem Leader, Cllr Jack Cohen has a blog on the Barnet Times. In his latest article, he reports that the Government, in its infinite wisdom, has decided that from 2010, Councils will have to choose whether to have a directly elected Mayor or stick with the existing system.

Unsurprisingly, the Constitutional Review Committee opted to retain the status quo. The last thing councillors want is for the people to directly elect a leader because that person would have legitimate democratic authority to run the council. Councillors much prefer the existing system because it allows them to hold the leader to ransom, in return for juicy fat allowances to line their troughs with.

Brian Coleman warned of the problems with the current cabinet system in his excellent article in the New Statesman. He said that council leaders win or lose their positions “…on the strength of who they had promised well paid jobs to. And I fear getting to form an administration in local government has more to do with how all the allowances are distributed than which councillor is best for which job.”

Quite so. An elected Mayor, however, would go some way to undoing the damage caused by the Local Government Act 2000 because he/she would not be beholden to councillors to remain in office. The Mayor could select a cabinet based purely on a councillor’s ability to do the job. Imagine that! In theory the Mayor could form a coalition cabinet of all the talents. Outrageous!

An elected Mayor would put an end to the system where blind loyalty to the leader, rather than talent, determined how far up the greasy pole a councillor progressed. Councillors would actually have to prove their worth in order to advance.

The Government’s proposal represents a monumental change in the way we are governed but, like the Local Government Act before it, is being introduced without any democratic consultation or mandate.

The decision whether to have an elected Mayor should be taken by the electorate in a referendum, and not by councillors with their vested interests. Turkeys do not generally vote for Christmas!

Post Script: At the last full council elections, 216,717 Barnet residents were registered to vote. The turnout was 41.65% which means that 90,262 people voted, the majority of whom voted Conservative thinking that Brian Salinger was going to be Leader of the Council.

Mr Salinger, however, was ruthlessly dumped immediately after securing the Conservatives their biggest win for 12 years and was replaced by Mike Freer at the behest of just 21 councillors. So much for democracy!

Is there a lawyer in the house?

Two little birdies have told me that this blog is very popular with the legal profession, so perhaps a learned reader could help answer a question.

Earlier this year, representatives from Barnet Council and Kent County Council met with the Administrator of the Icelandic banks to discuss our frozen investments. However, neither council will publicly discuss that meeting. According to a council spokeswoman quoted in the Barnet Press:

“Discussions are still ongoing with creditors in Iceland. We are pleased with the progress made so far and are optimistic that our deposits will be returned. The council has signed a confidentiality agreement that prevents it sharing information about its financial standing. We have access to privileged commercial information that, if we were to divulge it, could be detrimental to the position of every creditor, not just local authorities, and could potentially lay the council open to legal action.”

It appears that one creditor, or rather a group of creditors, has been allowed access to information that other creditors have not. In the UK, when a company goes into Administration, all creditors are entitled to receive the same information irrespective of the amount owed.

There are many charitable and non profit organisations who have funds deposited in Iceland and they would all like to know what is going on. Council Tax payers and other creditors are surely entitled to be given a realistic estimate of the amount of money they can expect to be returned and when this is likely to happen?

So my question for the legal profession is simply this. Is it lawful for Barnet and Kent Councils to be given information that has been denied to other creditors?

The question for taxpayers is, do we even want Barnet council representing local authorities in this matter, now that it has admitted that it deliberately broke its own investment rules?

UPDATE:

In response to the question posed on this blog, I received a very helpful e-mail explaining that when the Icelandic banks collapsed, emergency legislation was passed allowing the Icelandic Financial Services Authority to appoint ‘Resolution Committees’ to replace the Boards of Directors. These committees are not ‘Administrators’, even though the media and the councils seem to refer to them as such, which is why they have been able to enter into confidentiality agreements.

Notwithstanding this, the failed banks held open creditor meetings in Reykjavik last month and, following a ruling by the District Court, updated information is placed on their respective web sites every 4-6 weeks.

My second question posted above remains unanswered!

You have just 10 days to save the wardens service

Regular readers of Barnet Council Watch will know that Cllr Lynne Hillan is proposing to save £950,000 a year by slashing the resident warden service. This will have a devastating affect on some of the most vulnerable members of society living in sheltered accommodation.

The council has commissioned an on-line survey for residents to give their views. This survey can be found at: http://snaponline.snapsurveys.com/surveylogin.asp?k=123494868473

One of the questions invites residents to give alternative suggestions as to how the council can make the required savings. These are my suggestions based on financial information provided in various council reports.


I support this council’s desire to cut waste and bureaucracy - but not at the expense of our elderly residents.

Please note that the closing date for the on-line consultation is 5pm on 31st March 2009.

Who's The Daddy?

Are we witnessing a power struggle at Barnet Council? Just over a week ago, Council Leader Mike Freer issued a public statement acknowledging that the public had not been told the truth about the £27.4 million invested in Iceland. Mr Freer said he had been misled by officers and promised an external investigation.

Today, new Chief Executive Nick Walkley told the Barnet Press that he was launching an internal investigation.

Well, which is it to be?

Are we to have a fully independent external investigation that will examine in detail every document and interview every person who was involved in devising and implementing the council’s treasury management strategy, that will leave no stone unturned so that we can get to the truth? Or are we going to have an internal review under the auspices of the officer who was Executive Director for Resources at the time the money was deposited?


For the sake of Barnet’s taxpayers, let us hope that that Mr Walkley does not get his way.