Sunday, 9th March, 2014
Voting variations
In addition to the the voting records I uploaded on my previous post for the three votes of no confidence at Thursday’s county council meeting, another recorded vote took place on Thursday which went the opposition’s way.
We’ll come to that in a minute, but first, back to the no confidence votes.
When Cllr. Sue Perkins got up to speak in support of the chief executive, she was quick to reveal that he wasn’t her ‘favourite person,’ but tried to justify her position on the basis that she had happily voted for no confidence in him at the previous time the opportunity was presented, and had wished to lay down another motion of no confidence herself ‘a couple of years later’ but didn’t find enough support.
Old Grumpy got the measure of Cllr. Perkins, and has revealed all in an interesting post on his website (it was bound to happen sooner or later.)
Cllr. Perkins was a Labour party councillor of over fifteen years’ standing before she joined the ruling independent party in exchange for her safeguarding cabinet post, or, rather, to safeguard her cabinet post.
Referring to her as ‘was red now blue Sue,’ Old Grumpy points out that she had in fact voted against no confidence in the chief executive on the previous occasion she referred to, and her claim that she wanted to lay down a no confidence vote a couple of years after that was highly improbable because by that time she was already sitting in the cabinet class carriage of the PCC gravy train.
Much has been said on Facebook, Twitter and other websites by Pembrokeshire folk scrutinising the way their councillors voted. Many of the comments are vicious and extremely unsavoury, and far too crude to post on these here pages.
Some of the more publishable ones go along the lines of “Cllr. X can whistle if they want my vote at the next election,” and “I look forward to slamming the door in Cllr. X’s face come the next election.”
Councillors whose constituents believe they have failed to represent their views can rightly expect to receive backlash, that’s democracy for you, because their constituents will know which way they voted, or if they abstained.
But in addition, and entirely thanks to the webcasting facility, constituents can now see not only how their elected members vote, but how they contribute to debates that matter to them.
During Thursday’s debate over the chief executive, Cllr. Perkins’ contribution can be watched back and be seen to register somewhat low on the truthful stakes, and Cllr. Huw George’s efforts can be seen to reveal another god-given talent.
In addition to his mathematical genius, we now know of his grasp of Newtonian physics. What next, rocket science?!
A lot of analysis can go on with the the voting record and the webcast video. For instance, the list below contains the names of all councillors who spoke out for the no confidence motion on the chief executive:
Bob Kilmister, Phil Baker, Tony Wilcox, Gwilym Price, David Bryan, Pat Davies, Paul Miller, Guy Woodham, Viv Stoddart, Alison Lee, Tony Brinsden, Jonathan Nutting, Mike Stoddart, me, Tom Tudor, David Lloyd, Reg Owens, Michael Williams and Stephen Joseph.
All of these councillors went on to vote in support of the no confidence motion. It doesn’t take long to realise that, apart from Cllrs. Reg Owens and Stephen Joseph from the ruling party, all come from the opposition benches.
The list of those who spoke out in clear opposition to the motion was restricted to Cllrs. Sue Perkins, Huw George, Jamie Adams and Ken Rowlands.
Not only are they all linked by virtue of membership of the ruling party, but they are all highly-remunerated cabinet members to boot.
Then there were the non-committal types of speeches from Cllrs. Peter Stock, Mike Evans and David Howlett – all opposition members who went on to abstain, along with Michael John and Pearl Llewellyn – ruling group councillors who went on to vote against after speaking on the topic.
Those named so far are the councillors who chose to speak before casting their vote, whereas most present only voted. Of the 30 votes against no confidence in the chief executive, they were all from the ruling group apart from: Cllrs. Stan Hudson (Conservative,) Owen James and Phil Kidney (both unaffiliated) none of whom chose to speak in the debate.
The highest profile abstainer was former leader Cllr. John Davies, who as the then leader, chaired the senior staff committee meeting in September 2011 that brought the unlawful pension payments scheme into existence.
He also made no contribution to the debate before voting to abstain, and neither did Cllr. Lyn Jenkins, the only other independent group councillor who abstained.
The vote of no confidence in the monitoring officer, for setting up the ambush of councillors at the infamous Valentine’s Day Massacre (and here) and providing other unsound advice, resulted in the strongest display of support of all three, receiving the backing of 20 councillors with 34 against and one abstention.
It was the vote of no confidence in Cllr. David Pugh which was the closest-run, not only because his bacon was saved by two votes, but also because there were eight abstentions.
Cllr. Pugh may be able to pick himself up and dust himself down, but he will forever be known as the man who lied his way out of trouble when he was put into a corner by Cllr. Mike Stoddart.
Much like the way his party leader, Cllr. Jamie Adams, will forever be known as the man who submitted and was paid for back-dated travelling expense claims going back four years.
Some of their fellow councillors may have it within them to forgive and forget, but the Pembrokeshire public they claim to represent appear to care a great deal more about honesty and integrity than they do.
Cllr. Pugh’s only accountability so far appears limited to the conditional apology he sent out by email when faced with no other option, and also the revelation on Thursday that he will be stripped (though I think the word ‘relieved’ is more appropriate) of his grant scheme cabinet portfolio responsibilities.
Then we come to the first recorded vote which was held just after 12pm at Thursday’s meeting.
It was, in the eyes of those in charge, a controversial amendment laid down by Cllr. Paul Miller.
Controversial for no other reason than it hacked away at unelected officers’ delegated powers and gave more powers back to full council – the elected ones.
The county council is required to approve an annual ‘pay statement.’ These things are normally waved through as a formality, but Cllr. Miller presented an amendment to the effect that when a senior vacancy arises in the authority, instead of allowing it to be advertised straight away on the pre-exisiting or newly-drafted terms and conditions of employment, it must first be approved by full council.
Very little debate ensued on this rather straight-forward matter. The best leader Cllr. Jamie Adams could come up with, when confronted with the unexpected move towards openness and accountability from Cllr. Miller, was that he was “slightly worried” about providing “bespoke solutions” which could lead into “dangerous territory.”
The result was a 32-25 victory for the amendment.
The ruling group’s bloc-vote came unstuck with rebellions from Cllrs. Paul Harries, Lyn Jenkins, Michael John, Stephen Joseph, Peter Morgan, Reg Owens and David Rees.
I’ll leave you to decide if there’s any link between this rash of non-conformism and the fact that the amendment was not known of at the time of the ruling party’s secret pre-meeting earlier in the week.
As the only opposition member to vote against, independent group sympathiser Cllr. Owen James offered no helpful assistance to the ruling clique. Not even his suggestion that this should be batted off to an overview and scrutiny committee could avert disaster.
It appears at first glance as though this victory could come with quite devastating consequences, and believe me, the prospect of members of the cabinet arguing over salary levels for new chief officers and their benefits and perks should be something to look forward to.
It’s anybody’s guess which senior staff appointment’s terms will be the first to come in front of full council for approval, but when it does, I’m looking forward to what Cllr. Sue Perkins might say from the cabinet benches.
“This would never have come before full council had I not courageously brought the idea forward as an amendment back in March 2014. It was one of my proudest moments as leader of the Labour party…”
The recorded vote for this matter appears below:
Unaffiliated
Phil Baker
Tony Brinsden
Mike Evans
Tessa Hodgson
David Lloyd
Mike Stoddart
Vivien Stoddart
Jacob Williams
Plaid Cymru
Rod Bowen
Jonathan Preston
Rhys Sinnett
Michael Williams
Conservative
David Bryan
David Howlett
Stan Hudson
Labour
Pat Davies
Alison Lee
Paul Miller
Gwilym Price
Tom Tudor
Tony Wilcox
Guy Woodham
Pembrokeshire Alliance
Bob Kilmister
Jonathan Nutting
Peter Stock
Independent Plus
Paul Harries
Lyn Jenkins
Michael John
Stephen Joseph
Peter Morgan
Reg Owens
David Rees
32
Independent Plus
Jamie Adams
John Allen-Mirehouse
Daphne Bush
John Davies
Mark Edwards
Wynne Evans
Lyndon Frayling
Huw George
Brian Hall
Umelda Havard
Mike James
Keith Lewis
Rob Lewis
Pearl Llewellyn
Elwyn Morse
David Neale
Sue Perkins
David Pugh
Tom Richards
Ken Rowlands
David Simpson
Rob Summons
Arwyn Williams
Steve Yelland
Jamie Adams
John Allen-Mirehouse
Daphne Bush
John Davies
Mark Edwards
Wynne Evans
Lyndon Frayling
Huw George
Brian Hall
Umelda Havard
Mike James
Keith Lewis
Rob Lewis
Pearl Llewellyn
Elwyn Morse
David Neale
Sue Perkins
David Pugh
Tom Richards
Ken Rowlands
David Simpson
Rob Summons
Arwyn Williams
Steve Yelland
Unaffiliated
Owen James
25
No abstentions.
0
38 Comments...
Have your say...
Check out and 'like' my Facebook page ↴
Recent posts…
Jacob, unfortunately I think you have let yourself down with your numbers.
32 votes for, 25 against, no abstainers and 2 apologies = 59.
Mr Bean may be missing.
Nope, it’s correct. Phil Kidney was not present. 60−1 = 59!
I think Councillor George meant Newton’s third law of Motion rather than, as he stated, Physics. If you are going to use science to back up statements it may be better if you use the correct terminology. I find it somewhat ironic that a man of the cloth should use science when it flies in the face of his religious beliefs.
As for Sue Perkins, words fail me. What a wonderful thing it must be to have such a selective memory. Her chastisement of former colleagues conveniently forgotten as she rushed at breakneck speed to board the IPPG gravy train. Clearly a woman without honour. Hopefully her electorate will not have such a selective memory if she seeks re-election.
Congratulations, clear explanations of complicated situations, much appreciated.
Yes. Sue ‘Righteous Indignation’ Perkins is a wonder to behold. Every time I hear her speak, an image of Dick Emery’s character Mandy springs to mind. ‘Ooh, you are awful and I DON’T like you’!
An excellent exposure by Old Grumpy. Don’t worry Sue love, just keep on rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. You won’t have a seat before long.
I agree with Llangwm Lass who commented on the other post.
Mike Evans, Lyn Jenkins, Paul Harries, Stan Hudson, Michael John, Phil Kidney and Peter Stock’s votes were disappointing.
As for the rest of that lot who voted down County Hall, well I haven’t got any good expectations from them, but I was expecting something more from the six above.
Maybe the pressure got to them.
Reflection is a wonderful tool and I’ll admit as a watchful member of the public it’s been useful to me since Thursday’s meeting. Our elected members had an opportunity to call the CEO to task or at least rein him in. Accountability, as he remains in post to justify £190k a year, is paramount now and much easier than him being on gardening leave. I’d like to think the members will closely monitor his role, through the Cabinet, Scrutiny Committee and at full council meetings. Watch this space!
However, previous comments I have uploaded have obviously gone unnoticed by the elected members who have a judgement that differs from mine in wanting the best for Pembrokeshire. I’ll let you the readers decide whose opinion to follow, but suffice to say I’m happy with my morals, ethics when dealing with people, common sense and of course the small matter of the truth to sleep easy at night.
The people of Pembrokeshire must now rely on the outcome of any police investigation to instigate further discussion, after Farmer Adams bleated for a harmonious chamber which was akin to the gleeful preachings I imagine Huw George gives to his flocks appealing for celestial offerings each Sunday.
The non political pre meeting called by the IPPG last week may have been infiltrated by moles but how many of them canvassed their constituents on their thoughts with local surgeries/meetings? Their reliance on the musings of Farmer Adams obviously holds more sway than our opinions although to me he’s spent too much time shovelling manure on his farm to understand it’s intrinsically linked to his current ramblings. Informal chats amongst the rugby throng or at a Masonic meeting does not give a true reflection of the Pembrokeshire feeling on the way our Council is currently led.
Why no IPPG member has challenged the leadership of Farmer Adams and his Cabinet cronies beggars belief. Do they believe Dave Putrid Pugh is a figure to follow and how shallow they must be if they consider Farmer Adams’ reshuffle of Pugh’s Cabinet responsibility as the answer to our growing problems relating to grant awards, safeguarding, Social Services, and an Estyn inspection. Lambs to the slaughter comes to mind? ‘Was-red-now-blue’ Sue could feel the wrath of a tiger’s tail at the education meetings this week to discuss Haverfordwest schools, where will she run for cover without the protective arm of the Cabinet?
It is also quite unbelievable that the Council have supported Putrid Pugh’s mocking of Mike Stoddart in the Chamber of Horrors by voting against the motion of no confidence. I’ve no time for abstainers in these pressing matters of no confidence and reflection is needed especially by the likes of Peter Splinters Stock, Lyn Jenkins, Paul Harries, Stan Hudson, Michael John, Phil Kidney and Mike Evans.
I liked Mike Evans’ deliberations at the meeting but he lost my confidence when he felt it was more important to keep Putrid Pugh onside to ensure Tenby gets the next windfall of support. Gutless, not clueless, and unlike his rugby he didn’t have the dog in him when it came to the crunch to stand up and fight for the rights of Pembrokeshire people.
I’m waiting with eagerness for Stodds to get the opportunity to present his full findings on the Pembroke Dock scandal; coupled with a police report I hope to find a number of the IPPG members running for cover like ‘was-red-now-blue’ Sue. I hear the distant wails of air raid sirens getting louder and clearer.
Since Thursday I’ve not heard much on the budget. That says a lot!
Picking up on the non-budget lament, some simple analysis of the revised budget for the current year, that is the estimated out turn, it appears that despite an approved reduction in Gross revenue expenditure of £1.6m, officers of the council will overspend the Gross approved budget by some £6m.
Don’t worry though, this overspend is to be met by increased income so everything ends up in balance. Strong financial control as ever.
You might ask how this unauthorised overspend by officers incurred on providing services has been approved by council. This is accomplished by the formal approval of the revised budget in the 2014/15 budget decisions of the Council.
Councillors may be forgiven for blind rubber stamping a seemingly minor part of the budget, their attention was not drawn to it and it escaped the notice of the new improved overview and scrutiny as proclaimed by the Leader. These sad committees are not presented with any detailed meaningful financial information on the services within their remit. As these spending decisions are incurred under officers’ delegated powers they also escape formal scrutiny by councillors.
What a wonderful financial system these councillors have, uninvolved, unaccountable, not responsible and oblivious, the majority quite content to leave matters in officers’ hands for their £14k a year. What was the point of them approving a cut of £1.6m for 2013/14 when officers overspend by £6m?
What was the Auditor’s comment, some years ago, about members not being fully or properly informed by officers? Has anything improved?
Looking at events, perhaps it’s time all the opposition groups considered a coalition?
Whilst small, the Alliance group have noble aims, which quite honestly all councillors should be able to sign up to.
They possibly have the capacity to poach IPG members, especially if they signed up to power sharing – after all there are possible contradictions in an independent group forming a ruling party, as Pembs CC is finding out.
Current IPG members can then have the very potent threat that the coalition candidate facing them is backed by all the main parties, with a coalition fielding its jointly strongest candidates for each ward.
Time also for the Conservatives to enter elections as Conservatives, rather than “independents”. Pembs has shown it can elect two Tory MPs and two Tory AMs.
Besides a united front in council, every IPG member could be in the uncomfortable position of having his or her “understudy” scrutinising their conduct.
With the very serious issues affecting our County, running down of services, downgrading of hospitals, closure of police stations etcetera, I find it hard to justify the amount of time opposition Councillors are spending in going on and on with these issues.
Is there nothing else going on in the County that is worthy of your attention? What productive actions are opposition Councillors doing that will benefit now the people of Pembrokeshire? (And don’t just say trying to get rid of JA, BPJ etc.) It seems that you are obsessed with the goings on of the IPPG group, and yes their actions are deplorable but we need to also consider issues that are affecting people day to day NOW.
I think the electorate would also like to know what YOU would do differently. It is one thing criticising and trying to bring people down but what is the alternative? What are YOUR manifesto pledges? What are your priorities? There is more to being a Councillor than posting blogs about all the ins and outs of everyone else’s voting habits.
John, the issues in our county are directly related to the IPG decisions. Had they not allowed the unlawful payments in lieu of pension payment there would now be an extra £50,000 in the pot. That would run a few buses for a while, a service which has recently been given the axe.
BPJ wouldn’t have wanted that money paid into his fat pension pot because 1, he would have lost his protected elevated lifetime allowance from the year he left the LGPS and 2 he’d have been heavily penalised by HMRC for then being over the limit. Penalties are 55% for every £1 over the limit on his lump sum and 25% on pension payments. He should be happy with a £1m+ pot and take the tax penalties rather than trying to avoid that tax by using an unlawful payment alternative!!!
I think it’s unfair not to recognise the other efforts of councillors. All the major decisions are made by cabinet and the others struggle for their constituents. For example, Paul Miller has secured £25,000 funding for play/park areas in Neyland which parents of young people are very happy about. Those same parents aren’t very enthralled with the IPPG cabinet’s introduction of fortnightly collection of black bin bags.
There’s a lot of waste at the council and incompetence and I’m sure true democracy when it comes to decision making, along with a more honest and competent Chief Executive, would yield greater benefits.
John, you make a valid point, however Jacob and Old Grumpy perform a very necessary task in highlighting the poor governance at our Council. Without them there would be little pressure for any change.
Only one group within the Council has any sort of manifesto. The Pembrokeshire Alliance has clear objectives which are available on our new website http://www.pembrokeshirealliance.org.uk and I would urge you to take a look and comment via that site.
The IPG has only one policy, keeping council tax low. It relies on officers making all the decisions and it cannot grasp the concept of open, transparent governance.
We need people with some sort of moral compass running our Council who are not afraid of admitting their mistakes and learning from them.
Then let’s stick with properly constituted parties who live and die by the sword, not the Alliance fence sitters who think they know what’s best for Pembrokeshire. Talk is cheap as we’ve found out from the IPPG.
The reality is that the voters of Pembrokeshire have always rejected the idea of national party politics at local government level. The Pembrokeshire Alliance offers them a chance to vote for an organisation that is focussed on providing Pembrokeshire with quality local governance that has already published its aims and values and is answerable only to the voters of Pembrokeshire. Bring it on.
We do not know what the other political parties want for Pembrokeshire as they have not got any manifestos.
Really, Bob?
Labour has published a manifesto each Pembrokeshire election since 1995; as the co ordinator of some of them I find your comment rather odd.
Incidentally, did the Lib Dems for whom you stood last time have a Pembrokeshire manifesto?
Party politics aren’t so important in local government is my feeling. Kevin Madge, the council leader in Carmarthenshire heads up a coalition who has backed their CEO to the hilt…and he’s LABOUR!!!
One of the benefits of the webcast is that I can now hear Bob Kilmister’s dulcet Brummie tones in my head when I read his comments.
I have to agree with some other comments about the Pembrokeshire Alliance. I’m afraid that, although Bob comes across as genuine and a decent orator, Peter Stock did not instil confidence and even on the last vote there wasn’t a consensus of opinion on a very important issue.
At least we know where we stand with a national party. I used to agree that national parties had no place in Pembrokeshire but since the gravy train councillor came to the table we’ve been shown up as a laughing stock.
Perhaps all these independents need to fly their national colours. Then we can have an administration which isn’t frightened of the officers and will challenge them on behalf of Pembrokeshire.
Dave Edwards, I have never seen a Labour manifesto for just Pembrokeshire. Where can we read it? Please let us know as I would be fascinated to see what it says. The Liberal Democrats did not have a manifesto but we only had four candidates.
I apologise to Martin for my Brummie accent, which I would happily lose tomorrow. I have always thought that content was more important than the way you say it.
I meant it in a nice way Bob, I agree with most of what you say. I was just saying it’s different when you can put a voice to written comments when you read them.
If John Hudson is correct about a £6m “black hole” in the budget, that equates to about £140 per Band D council tax payer. (Sooner or later.)
This is an authority that has traded on a myth that it is cost effective and efficient, when it appears the reality is that costs and liabilities are simply avoided.
And huge reserves accumulated for purposes which are arguably neither current nor clear.
The basis for the budget could be challenged in my view due to lack of clarity over the Council’s intentions for its ‘back pocket (s)’.
The rainy days have come and gone and the money is still there. 😕
Here’s an interesting thought from my point of view, Cllr Kilmister spoke very well when I watched the webcasts, as did Cllr Paul Miller and Cllr Jacob Williams and others…now when I say well, I mean that what they said made good sense.
Their comments seemed to be based on common sense, including a keen sense of ‘right and wrong’ and represented sound challenges added to the debates. None of their comments were adversely coloured by their local political alliances (sic) or independence in Jacob’s case.
Some earlier comments here seem to imply to me that councillors will be more likely to do the right things only if they have the cover or support or umbrella of a wider (national) political affiliation? What patent nonsense… I hope I’ve misunderstood…
Nev,
Not cover or support. Guidance and an aptitude to ensure it’s accountable. The IPPG gravy train has none, lurching from disaster to disaster. They can’t deliver – country hicks who bleat about ‘the best for Pembrokeshire’ and look what we have.
If it’s a Plaid Cymru (for example) administration that leads the council then we know where they will head as regards policy etc for our Council within a national agenda. At least it’s upfront and will be consistent, instead of the current ‘roll the dice’ officer-led claptrap we have now.
In commenting on this blog I’m looking at the challenge to the current administration. The lemmings follow Farmer Adams and it can’t be stopped. 2017 is a long way off for change; where will we end up between then and now? That’s why I ask the current IPPG councillors to consider their true colours and then follow that route. It may end up being a coalition administration but I reiterate let’s have accountability.
Bob, there is nothing wrong with your accent, I could understand every word you said and I thought it was an excellent speech which summed up the situation perfectly. In fact if Councillors voted on the basis of fact rather than their own predetermined views, the motion against the CE would have have been carried with a big majority.
Just a few headline figures from the 2014/15 budget report illustrating the Council’s budget requirement to be met by Revenue Support Grant, Non Domestic Rates and Council Tax:-
It will be seen that the £6.3m gross expenditure “overspend” in 2013/14 (adjusted to Revised) is broadly matched by a £6.3 increase in direct income, while the Net Budget requirement remains in the band at £211,800 to £211, 900 “in balance”.
As the Council’s attention is drawn to the Net in balance level, councillors are unaware of the underlying gross and income positions.
Does this matter? I guess it depends on your point of view and whether you think councillors should know, or at least be aware of how our money is being spent and at the very least deserve to be informed, as do we.
Jon Boy Jovi, I have never sat on any fence. I have the courage of my convictions. My energy is focused on Pembroke and Pembrokeshire. I have a very strong sense of right and wrong. I am able to listen and make my own decisions on what I feel is right for the people I represent.
You seem to talk the talk yourself. The worst sort of fence sitter is the one who moans but never does anything about it. Put your money where your mouth is, join us 😉
If you attended one of our O&S committee meetings you would see why it is important to keep Pembrokeshire mainstream politics free. They are starting to work really well. Everyone is concentrating on the issues. There is very little party infighting, the members do what they individually think is right. This does not happen much in other authorities where the political parties rule O&S with a rod of iron.
Jon Boy…interesting points.
A problem I have with the clamour for “true” independence by the way is that, within our current system, it represents a form of political anarchy. This could then lead to total inertia in policy development and service delivery improvement, which we have now anyway.
A political ‘umbrella’ as represented by a party and its “manifesto” may help provide a framework or guidance for those in the theoretical majority to operate within BUT, and this was my point really, it does not assure that the individuals act with integrity. Or even if it purports to do so, it will be integrity as defined by that political umbrella, not that which the majority of us would recognise.
Our systems of both national and local (in particular) government have run their course. There is no longer an effective case for the status quo and a more fundamental question needs to be asked and answered before we blindly “reorganise” the deck chairs yet again.
In my opinion, it is simply what do our elected Councillors actually do? HOW do they demonstrate that they represent and safeguard their electorate’s interests/views/wishes, WHAT can they point to that WOULD NOT get done if they didn’t exist in their current roles?
WHAT EXACTLY does local government achieve that central government cannot, given the historic and continuous blurring of the lines between local delivery of services, central delivery of services, local accountability through scrutiny (joke!) and central accountability, often through audit and regulation.
I don’t know the answers but what I suspect is that no one has a clue anymore, politicians included, and what makes this worse is that this confusion is accompanied or maybe even exploited by the disappointing lack of ethical integrity in many parts of the existing system.
Nev,
I think we both have the same outlook and requirements. Cllr. Nutting does a fine job in Pembroke propping up his constituency against the IPPG but there is always a wasp sting attached to the current council. Local parties don’t work and unfortunately the Pembrokeshire Alliance won’t change what occurs under Farmer Adams.
Trawling around selling flags for charity is noble and a thankless job but it’s a million miles from standing firm and moving our council in the right direction. I was challenged by Cllr. Nutting but nothing can happen until after 2017. Until then the current crop of lemmings must reflect and respond to their current constituents’ feelings. They must have thick skins or the the gravy train has too much of a pull.
If the IPPG feel they have a mandate to govern, all except Rob Rumpole Summons should have the strength to resign and seek immediate re-election under the IPPG banner, an exercise I can’t see happening. Perhaps costly in these times of austerity but a route by which they may well get a mandate to lead and govern.
The Alliance make a claim to want a candidate in every ward. It will be interesting to watch them name such people in the lead up to the 2017 election. I can’t see a lot changing until there is a more focused national overview in Pembrokeshire. Sadly we can see only the vegetables in the gravy and no meat by supporting independents in their rugby and masonic party.
Three years will go quickly. The Alliance has much to do to beat the cynicism such as yours. Join us, this is the formative period when people can have a major say in the direction we will travel. Sometimes it is better to encourage. Not all councillors are corrupt. Some of us are idealistic and aim to do our best to walk the walk.
Mainstream party politics will never work well in Pembrokeshire. Be careful what you wish for. I have a nasty feeling in this instance the grass will not be greener on the other side of the hill.
At least the other side of the hill has grass on it. Remember the points you were coached as a prop in rugby: face down a**e up. You decide who wins a game and the backs by how many. The Alliance will be no better than the IPPG. Farmer Adams against an over the hill Splinters Stock in 2017. At this present time I’m firmly behind a national led political group.
I’ve challenged the IPPG to call a by election if they think they can get the mandate to govern. Likewise to your good selves. I can see there being a split Council in 2017 due to the good intentions but poor vision of independent rugby loving masons.
I wouldn’t waste your time and energy, just throw your hat in the ring through a properly formed and led national party. If you don’t I fear many fallow years of a greenless environment on the hills of Pembrokeshire.
So following on from the Jon and Jonathan responses, what exactly is the case for local elected members then? I think we should start with justifying that as a premise before worrying about manifestos, policy, frameworks, scrutiny and all the other rubbish as, before any of that can matter, the raison d’etre must be established. From that ‘form will follow function’ what ever that/they is/are…
Simple questions I would have thought but a devilishly difficult one to answer objectively I feel.
I cannot recall ever being given the opportunity to vote for a national political party in a Pembrokeshire County Council election, or even having a manifesto shoved through the letterbox. Perhaps I have been living in the wrong places.
It would however be an improvement to have the opportunity to vote for an independent candidate who declared his/her intention to join a political grouping before an election, with even the barest outline of a policy.
The IPG has never disclosed what their policy intentions have been and always has been a grouping formed, for whatever reason, after the election when jobs (SRAs) have been shared out.
It is unfortunate that, in order to play the required numbers game of political group allocation of seats on committees, the proper independent councillors (those who are unaligned/unaffiliated) are disadvantaged.
So what next following these failed votes of no confidence?
The council continues to fail in delivering its responsibilities. Tasker Milward school has failed yet another standards inspection. Letting down those pupils and my daughter in particular.
Who is responsible? Who needs to go? The head teacher, the governors, the director of education, the chief executive, ‘was red now blue’ Sue or the whole cabinet as they bleat collective responsibility, or all of the above?
Tell me, I’d love to know. Then get on and do it quickly please.
‘John’ who commented on Wednesday…hello? Are you on the same planet as the rest of us? This has done more to highlight the way our so called ‘independent’ councillors represent us more than anything I can ever remember in Pembrokeshire.
The voting intentions (and what is now quite clear are the voting habits) of our elected representatives are paramount to a democracy and therefore so is knowledge of them. It has never been so relevant on a local level, not even in the dying days of Maurice Hughes’ leadership or when Brian Hall was about to face a vote of no confidence before he fell on his sword and resigned.
Had it not been for this site I wouldn’t have known so soon afterwards which way my councillor (Morse) had voted, and I now notice that the Pembrokeshire Herald ran a piece on Friday setting out all of the councillors who voted against the motion referred to as “the dirty thirty”!
If that vote had taken place during the 2004-08 or 2008-12 council administrations under the leadership of John Davies they would probably have been known as “the naughty forty”!
That’s progress for you!
The whole of this IPPG independent debate is based around the fact they are voting on block like a political led group (ie pre meetings held) without being overseen. The Cabinet system we have has become a celestial haven for farmers, with no regard for the people of Pembrokeshire.
Cllr. Nutting is clinging onto an ideal which simply doesn’t work. Jobs for the boys through SRAs dished out in the committee rooms. If councillors are elected on an independent ticket and subsequently join the IPPG they should hold constituency meetings to explain their views and block voting. Likewise those fence sitters like Cllr. Stock should follow suit.
I feel the pressure cooker atmosphere is building again. It can’t be long before Mike Stoddart reveals his hand on the Pembroke Dock grant schemes (after the Deputy Leader’s Ombudsman hearing I’m sure) and now the Tasker Milward debate is live. I for one wasn’t aware they had failed yet another standards inspection, I thought that wasn’t until May.
Interesting that Farmer Adams is on the Tasker Milward Governing Body so he’s overseeing yet another Pembrokeshire failure. If in farming language he was a mad cow with BSE it might mean then that the whole herd would have to be destroyed as well. We live in hope that they may even go out to grass on the green hill Cllr. Nutting seems to know so much about!
As a dictionary-owning independent, it seems to me that voters have two choices.
They can vote for a candidate standing for a manifesto-toting political party – whose views they generally support – in the full knowledge that that member will occasionally have to toe the party line, or they can vote for someone truly independent who will look at each issue as it arises and vote according to what they believe will result in the best outcome.
Clearly, if you are, say, a Labour party supporter, you will vote for a Labour candidate because, if elected, their general direction of travel will likely suit your own political agenda.
If you have no strong ideological preferences, you may decide to vote for an independent who you trust to use their judgement to arrive at a conclusion which serves the common good.
My view has always been that there is no halfway house.
Being elected as an independent and then signing up for a political group that votes as a block, is a contradiction in terms. Not to put too fine a point on it, candidates who stand as independents and then join a political group after the votes are counted, are guilty of deception.
This is especially so if they conceal their membership, or potential membership, of a political group/party from the electorate.
Democracy is based on the principle that government is carried out with the consent of the people.
Clearly, people can’t consent to something that they are not told about until after they have voted.
Dirty Thirty,
Yes I am on the same planet. I also live in Pembrokeshire and pay Council tax, use the services etc.
Yes it’s good that all these things have been brought out and slowly things will move forward.
My point was that there are also other things that need talking about rather than in-depth analysis that this person voted this way on this and that way on that etcetera.
Bob Kilmister makes a very good point about the manifesto of the new Pembrokeshire Alliance, and I note with interest the other comments on the national parties.
What I was also trying to get at was whilst some Councillors are good at bringing to our attention what others are doing wrong I was trying to tease out how things would be done if they were in charge, albeit perhaps as part of a coalition. Whatever happens at the next election, and whoever is returned, I think we can probably be sure that some will undoubtedly get together to try to form a majority?
The other point as mentioned by John Hudson is that the very important issue of the budget and other things are carrying on, and are not receiving anywhere near the sort of attention that the shenanigans of the IPPG group and BPJ are getting. These are the important issues that also need attention. The issues that are affecting our electorate today, whilst some opposition and IPPG politicians/Councillors I’m afraid I feel are paying too much attention to playing politics?
Stodds says what a lot of people feel. What I can’t get my head around is that councillors who generally wish to stand as independents do so in the knowledge that they will not hold a seat of governance on the Council…unless they’re in Pembrokeshire.
The electorate deserves a chance to speak out on this formally, either as I’ve suggested through a constituency open forum, through an elected independent seeking re-election or more drastically the WG getting involved – either in overseeing the Council chamber or forcing its dissolution (not sure if they can?).
Whichever route, something has to happen. We’ve had WG involvement in education, social services and safeguarding: an auditor’s report highlighting poor practice, a police investigation is underway and a high profile cabinet member investigated and proven as acting improperly wrong by the Ombudsman: and possibly Tasker Milward in special measures come May?
One common factor – Farmer Adams, whose manure shovelling has an influence on us all in some way. A pity for those young people educated at Tasker Milward as they have little knowledge and understanding from such a prominent role model. Something needs to happen in real terms and in real time and not be wasted on independent groups who talk the talk on Pembrokeshire but clearly don’t, can’t and never will deliver.