Monday, 11th March, 2013
Behind the times
The corners and depths into which my moles prod and delve, never ceases to tickle me. I’m always grateful to them for their efforts, no matter how fortuitously or laboriously they came by their discoveries.
My latest tip-off was found in a PCC job description produced last December when the council was hiring an ‘Independent Reviewing Officer’ for child protection and looked-after children. The document not only describes the role, but gives a summary of the authority’s structure on an official level and on a political one.
The bit that took my mole by surprise was a reference to the political control of the council. During the four years following the 2008 elections this statement would have been an accurate representation, but Pembrokeshire’s voters who took to the 2012 polls made some decisive choices which resulted in a noticeable change to the council’s membership:
With such an out-dated reference, I suspect this section was either copied and pasted from a pre-2012 job description template, or the author sourced the information from the county council’s Wikipedia page (see Independent Freemasons to understand that one!)
The sensitivity of this role is put into context with references to the council’s child safeguarding issues uncovered over recent years through unfavourable inspection reports.
I rarely criticise my moles, but I think this one’s missed a trick. Arguably the most misleading inaccuracy contained within this document can be found in the Chief Executive’s preface, where it states: “The Council has responded positively to these reports and the service is in a period of transition.”
Quotes, attributed to “recent reports,” are also included:
I’m not entirely sure which “recent” WAO report is being referred to, but I’ve searched through its December 2012 follow-up report and supporting releases, and I’ve been unable to find a match to the quoted sentences. As the deadline for completed job descriptions was January 7th 2013, I thought it was possible that the follow-ups had not yet been released into the public domain by the time this job description was produced, so I searched through the original 2011 joint Estyn and CSSIW report and found no match there, or in Estyn’s 2012 year-end follow-up either.
There may well be other reports I am not aware of, but the conclusions of the December 2012 follow-ups were both extremely critical of the council’s slowness to respond, and the effective waste of a whole year without progress.
Estyn’s prognosis was categoric: ‘unsatisfactory’ – “Corporate leaders and senior elected members have been too slow to recognise key issues in safeguarding and to change the culture in, and improve, education services; leadership at directorate and service level is weak; elected members have found it difficult to scrutinise decisions adequately and hold services to account; the authority has made limited progress in addressing recommendations from previous inspections; performance management arrangements in the education directorate are not robust enough to sustain and drive improvement; self-evaluation arrangements lack rigour and do not identify accurately areas in need of further improvement.”
Burton ‘vaccancy’
The pedantry inspiration for this post has brought out the hair-splitter in me; so whilst I’m at it: last week I spotted a splash on the council’s website announcing that there was a ‘By Election Vaccancy’ [sic] in the Burton ward. It’s wrong on a number of levels, but the most obvious – the spelling error – has since been corrected, and I don’t doubt that I’m probably one of the only people who even stumbled upon it, let alone noticed it.
Speaking of Burton by-election news that nobody is likely to read, the author of that other website has put up a stop-press announcement which purports to reveal the identity of the Conservative party’s candidate fighting for the seat.
A wine-trader called Robin Wilson, accordingly.
Not to be out-done, I am able to reveal that the Labour candidate vying for votes in the by-election is Robin Howells, who was, at least in 2011 and possibly might still be, the Preseli Pembrokeshire Labour Party press officer.
This letter he published in the Western Telegraph in 2011 is still very relevant today, if not more so. The final paragraph hints at just how important this election will be for the council’s ruling Independent Political Group, which has been in charge since the authority was formed in 1995.
If the Burton voters return a party candidate or an independent who sticks to their word and refuses to throw in their lot with the leading Independent Political Group, the council will be, for the very first time, out of the overall control of “Pembrokeshire’s non-political political party.”
Before David Wildman’s resignation, this anti-democratic outfit clung on to a 31-29 hold over the council, which is a big comedown from the 39-21 choke-hold it had going into the 2012 county-wide polls; so it will be very interesting to see how much effort IPG members put into this hard campaign, in their quest to buck their downward trend, and cling onto power.
If you’re reading this website, then it’s more than likely that you’ll know the Independent Political Group for being the formidable, experienced political party that it has so strenuously denied – even in the face of compelling evidence.
The big question is: does the Burton electorate know?
Coming up
Coming up this week on jacobwilliams.com: a scoop on the Hywel Dda Health Board’s consultation exercise, ‘Your Health, Your Future.’
12 Comments...
Have your say...
Check out and 'like' my Facebook page ↴
Recent posts…
I googled the text you quoted from the job description and still found it up on the PCC web site at:
https://secure1.pembrokeshire.gov.uk/jobsnew/uploads/%7BCF077357-9D4D-435C-973E-CF779FEB3258%7D_Independent%20Reviewing%20Officer%20Dec%202012.pdf
My favourite is “This Council has never chased the headlines, so you might not have read too much about us in the local government press. We think actions speak louder than words”!!!
I’ll help you out here then, the WAO report from which the quotes are lifted is the Special Inspection Report issued in January 2012. Not difficult to find or particularly obscure on the WAO website. As you seem to think my eyesight may be less than reliable, perhaps you could check the references for me, just to avoid more embarrassment.
Paragraph 8, first bullet.
Paragraph 8, second bullet.
Paragraph 6, last sentence.
I pass no comment on the validity of the statements I hasten to add.
I’d hate to think that my comment yesterday had been ‘lost’ somehow but just in case…
The report you are looking for which contains the ‘recent report’ quotes about the Council is simply the WAO Special Investigation Report of January 2012. It isn’t hidden or difficult to find. The quotes are lifted from:
Paragraph 8, first bullet point, sub para 2
Parapraph 8, second bullet point, sub para 1 and
Paragraph 6, final sentence.
http://www.wao.gov.uk/assets/englishdocuments/PembCC_Special_Inspection_Report_Final.pdf
As before, I pass no observation on the validity of the statements.
Have been reliably informed that there is indeed a (genuine) independent candidate contesting the Burton by election.
Interesting, Tony.
We have identities for the Tory, Labour and IPG candidates, what about your ‘proper’ independent? Not an ex-councillor by any chance?
I’m hearing now that Plaid Cymru were unable to find a candidate to field, so not sure if they’ll contest it, despite earlier indications that they intended to.
Comments are published once Jacob has checked them for profanities etc. after posting a comment it says “your comment is awaiting moderation”…you obviously haven’t sussed that yet. So intent that people read your wise your words you post them twice! We thank you for that…
Clearly, the formal registered true political parties find it difficult to engender support in Pembrokeshire constituencies, and we are reliant on candidates/members who are true independent unaffiliated or those that prefer the cosier climate of being a member of a political group with no declared policies.
This group has been described as “the officers’ party”, as it blindly supports recommended proposals without seeming to engage with any “independent” judgement or thought.
The December 2012 WAO special investigation report commented that in June 2012 the Leader gave evidence that, in his view, demonstrated the council was making good progress including the strengthening of scrutiny and challenge by members.
The WAO found that these assertions were misplaced and identified a need for ALL members to be more challenging when presented with information by officers.
Further, the WAO report identified that members demonstrating an active interest in driving improvement are in a minority.
Undoubtedly it is easier for officers if they can rely on unconditional support from an unquestioning majority, and far more difficult if they have to convince an independently minded group of unaffiliated members, who, in the words of the WAO report, have got the high degree of motivation to challenge reports and require officers to provide them with sufficient and RELIABLE information that allows them to evaluate service provision and challenge ways of working.
At the last Council meeting, most members were keen to continue with the meeting, but were informed that some councillors had agreed to go off to Brawdy. It seems that the Chairman, however, had also been booked to attend the St David’s Day celebrations at the 50 plus forum’s Eisteddfod.
Attendance at these events by some councillors could not be cancelled and were deemed more important, by the Leader and the Chairman, as advised by the CEO, than allowing members, who had been hitherto kept in the dark about the pay and grading review, to question and challenge this significant issue.
(At the meeting, if the Chairman had stayed, I understand it was confirmed that the council would still have a quorum and the meeting could have continued).
The Leader bemoaned the fact that members had dared to submit questions to be answered in public, no doubt preferring to go back to the informal secret days where questions and the answers were kept out of the public arena.
The un-mandated majority political group are kept in power (and allowances) by officers, who in turn are given an easy ride by members, who in the word of WAO, demonstrate a lack of motivation or capacity to evaluate information put before them by officers.
If a minority of non-independent group members are now beginning to question and challenge, so that Council and O&S meetings now overrun the allotted allowed time, is it time for more frequent meetings or a rule that no other meetings or functions are timetabled to follow scheduled formal meetings?
PR, you’re very welcome. Just practising in anticipation of the next ‘scoop’. It’s just a shame that some of the blog isn’t checked for profoundness by the author as much as profanity by the observers.
Profoundness? I’d have gone for profundity, Wally.
By the way, do you fancy using these divination skills to tell me who’s going to win the Burton by-election?
Bad news for you closet Tories, I fear red smoke will emerge. Or does your question have something to do with water? Where’s PR when he can be useful for once?
The winner will be Summons by approximately 35 votes.
Well if that’s the case PR, what a load of hot air all this independence stuff will have been, it might be argued. Let’s hope your crystal ball was malfunctioning at the time. Anyway, how do we tell if the ‘true’ independents are indeed ‘dictionary’? What measures can we use to assure ourselves that they themselves are not hiding their true political leanings? Perhaps Cllr Stoddart could suggest a robust performance measure?