Saturday 26 May 2007

PETER KILFOYLE ASKS WHAT CAN GOVERNMENT DO TO STOP THE LIKES OF HENSHAW AND MCELHINNEY AGAIN???

Peter Kilfoyle (Liverpool, Walton, Labour) | Hansard source

As you know, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I have long been a strong advocate of the city of Liverpool, and tonight will be no exception. Even though I take issue with the conduct and procedures of Liverpool city council, I wish to place on the record the fact that Liverpool as a city is making tremendous progress in its regeneration, which is due in no small measure to initiatives emanating from this House and the present Government. That is to its credit. I also give credit—[Interruption.]

Photo of Michael Lord Michael Lord (Central Suffolk & North Ipswich, Deputy-Speaker) | Hansard source

Order. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. Gentleman, but will all hon. Members who are not taking part in the debate please leave the Chamber now, quickly and quietly? We must listen to the debate.

Photo of Peter Kilfoyle Peter Kilfoyle (Liverpool, Walton, Labour) | Hansard source

I pay credit to the many local businesses and organisations that have taken advantage of the opportunities presented by Government initiatives and our status as an objective 1 area to reinvent themselves and turn the city's image and substance around over the past 20 years so that it is now a 21st-century city that, to use a cliché, is meeting all the challenges of a modern economy. The House may therefore wish to know why I have taken issue with the city council. I have many reasons for doing so, but I am particularly concerned about the way in which it conducts itself. While it is doing very good work in some areas—no one can take that away from it—it is manifestly failing the people of Liverpool in other areas. I shall give a few examples, focusing on people who most need the city council's help, including the poor, the homeless, council tenants, and voluntary sector organisations that depend on the council's assistance.

There is a litany of mismanagement so that, in local eyes, the city has changed from a city of culture—a role that Liverpool will officially play under the present Administration in 2008—into a city about which the council could not care less. That tendency is particularly marked in the areas that I have the privilege to represent. I wish to put it on the record that two of the most deprived SOAs—super output areas—in the matrix of indices of deprivation produced by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister are in my constituency. The whole constituency is in the top 1 per cent. of combined deprivation indicators, and it relies extremely heavily on council intervention and Government initiatives to ensure that the people there can share in the opportunities enjoyed by many people in Liverpool and on Merseyside as a whole.

The council continues to treat shabbily the people who most need its help. I shall give a few categories of people it ought to target, and pick out one or two recent examples to demonstrate the way in which they have been treated. This week, we learned of the classic case of Mrs. Janet Whalley, a badly disabled lady who dropped off her severely disabled son outside an after-school club—an initiative that the Government are rightly promoting. Because of a technical dispute over her blue-badge entitlement to disabled parking she was hauled before the courts. The magistrates were outraged, and threw the case out, saying that it should never have been brought. Mrs. Whalley was awarded £500 costs. That was not good enough for the council, which sacked her for gross misconduct—behaviour which no one in their right mind would attribute to a fair-minded employer.

I came across the even better example of Nicola Foster, whose case falls into the homeless category. The homeless are always under pressure, but they are under particular pressure in Liverpool because of the city's regeneration, including new build and the Pathfinder project. The city is going through a period of transition, so we need to deal sensitively with cases at the margins or at the extremes that deserve help. Nicola Foster, unbelievably in modern times, has nine children. For two and a half years, she lived in a hostel near Sefton park. The council offered to rehouse the family in a hostel in Inverness. It wanted to deport a father, a mother and nine children to Inverness, because for two and a half years it had failed miserably to fulfil its duty of care towards those children. By the way, one of the children was offered a place at a local school where my wife used to teach, St. Finbar's, but because of the domestic situation the child has not been to school for two years. We should not be surprised at the indifference of Liverpool city council towards the child's schooling.

Another area in which the council abuses the sensible procedures set up by central Government is in the statementing of children with special needs. Each Liverpool MP has a caseload that would stretch from one side of the Chamber to the other concerning people who cannot get a statement of their child's special needs. What makes the situation even more pernicious is that the council argues that there is no demand for special needs places in special schools, and closes down special schools so that it can realise the capital assets. The Government's policy has always been that children with special needs ought to be catered for in a setting appropriate to them. If inclusion is appropriate, that option should be chosen and we would not dissent from it. But if a special needs place in a special school is the appropriate setting, that is what should be offered.

Many of our children are not getting that. I am dealing with the case of the child of a drug addict brought up by the grandmother, who got him into a secondary school. Because of his special needs, the school could not handle him—not that he was a bad kid, but he was hyperactive. That kid is now in a pupil referral unit for two hours a day, so not only is he not getting help from the very people to whom he ought to look for help, but his condition is being worsened daily by their neglect.

I mentioned council tenants when I referred to Nicola Foster's case. Sometimes I despair of a city council that fails lamentably to look after its own stock and fiddles its figures by transferring the stock out and then claiming great success in upgrading the homes in its council stock. Government policies were designed to encourage more tenant involvement. No doubt the Minister would agree that we all want tenants to have—metaphorically, if not literally—a sense of ownership of the changes going on around them. We had a longstanding Liverpool Federation of Council Tenants and Residents Associations, which sent out a letter—I assume to my colleagues, as well as to me—on 17 June. The letter announces the closure of the federation and states:

"This is a serious decision taken by our tenant members and tenant management board as it considered that tenant participation is currently so gravely undervalued by our city council that it severely impacts upon the wellbeing and functioning of a vibrant, independent tenant federation."

The letter goes on to list the manifold problems that the federation has faced. It continues:

"A strong, vibrant, informed and independent tenants movement is an asset to any city"—

I say amen to that. However, the letter goes on:

"The climate in this city does not foster a spirit of empowerment but relies upon a culture of repeated rhetoric of 'intentions' without ever considering the means by which 'intentions' are merely the first step of the organic process of change".

That is eloquently put. That ought to be the case but, sadly, it is not so under Liverpool city council.

The council has done some good things and there have been some good investments. There have also been some terrible failures, from the millennium centre on Chavasse park to the King's dock project to the Fourth Grace. Everywhere that the dead hand of the Liberal Democrat city council rests itself, one can guarantee that there will be confusion leading to failure. My great fear, which is shared by people in Liverpool, including business leaders, is that that will bring about the stagnation of ongoing projects.

Indeed, only today, a newspaper headline read "Paradise 'Delayed'". It refers to the Paradise street project, which is the biggest of its kind in the country. It is a regeneration scheme into which Grosvenor—no mean operator in its own right—is putting £920 million. However, the man in charge of Grosvenor is now asking, "How can you deal with a council that repeatedly obfuscates and delays?" Those are the sentiments of a developer who has put a massive amount of money into the city.

To show how far the city has come, I say in passing that I recall the Duke of Westminster commenting that he was happy for his daughters to go on a night out in Liverpool because he felt that they were safe there. That is another nail in the coffin of the myths about Liverpool that prevailed for many years. Happily, we have disposed of them. Liverpool is a relatively safe city. It is a good city for business to invest in and it is a prosperous city, which is evolving rapidly. However, the council is acting as a brake on such progress.

That brake is felt most keenly in the areas where the good citizens of Liverpool who are least able to look after themselves could, in the past, turn to the council for succour. I wanted to be objective about the matter and I examined Liverpool city council's document "Improving performance—leading to excellence". It is subtitled "Achievements in 2004/05 against the corporate plan published in June 2004".

I do not want to say that none of the objectives was met. Many of the council's objectives—not mine or the Government's—have been achieved. However, I have been through page after page headed "Well services, safe and sustainable neighbourhoods with optimum local accountability and influence over service management". That is the interface between council services and an efficient, well run council.

The first example reads:

"We did not achieve our target."

The second example states:

"We did not achieve our target."

The third example contains a little bit of spin:

"We have shown significant improvements in delays and narrowly missed our target."

The fourth example reads:

"We did not achieve our target".

The fifth example states:

"We marginally failed our target".

The sixth example also involves spin:

"Although we have significantly improved the actual numbers of carers who received a carer's assessment . . . the improvement has not been as pronounced."

In other words, they failed. The final example reads:

"We have not increased the take-up in the short-term break schemes."

Social services had damning reports on the sort of social provision that they should make as opposed to the provision that they make.

Alone, that might simply be another record of a poor council, whose position should be resolved at the ballot box. The citizens of Liverpool will have the opportunity to turn those people out—as they undoubtedly will—for their ineptitude in many aspects of their alleged competence. However, there is another phenomenon, on which the Minister, I hope, can throw some light.

There was an extraordinary turn of events, involving the publication of a dossier, which the chief executive compiled on the manoeuvrings of the leader of the council and one of his spin doctors to force out the chief executive. It is an extraordinary document. In all my long time in politics, I have never known such an obvious conspiracy to force somebody out. The leader of the council made a de facto admission by reporting to the Standards Board. His actions were completely out of order.

In the past week, the chief executive and the leader of the council have publicly kissed and made up. However, anyone who thinks that that is more than an Elastoplast on a rupture at the top of the council is much mistaken. My concern is not about those two people falling out but about the outcomes for the people and city of Liverpool. How can the matter be resolved? How can we ensure that the city council is operating according to the rules, and according to expectations, not only of the people as citizens, but those that the Government rightly hold of a council?

I am mindful of the fact that, more than 20 years ago—I never thought I would hear myself say this—49 councillors were debarred and surcharged for the notional loss of £106,000. That became something of a cause célèbre at the time. Yet here we have a council wasting money by the bucketload on a daily basis, and whose two leading lights cannot agree on anything in the public arena. This is letting down the people of Liverpool, and I want to find out from the Minister what redress we have, through central Government, to ensure that it stops.

Thursday 24 May 2007

Will the New Standards Committee make a difference?




IN TIMES OF BLATANT CORRUPTION ONE WONDERS IF THIS NEW GROUPING OF THE STANDARDS COMMITTEE WILL ACTUALLY MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE AT ALL?



TAKEN FROM THE NEWS UPDATE OF LIVERPOOL CITY COUNCIL HOMEPAGE, THE REPORT BELOW INFORMS US OF A NEW INDEPENDANT MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE AND IS ALSO THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE.

IF ONE CAN BE OPTIMISTIC WE WOULD HOPE THIS COMMITTEE WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND ENSURE OFFICERS AND COUNCILLORS ACT IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE LIVERPOOL COUNCIL TAX PAYERS.

HOWEVER, THIS IS NOT A NEW COMMITTEE, IT JUST HAS NEW MEMBERS, WHAT DID THE FORMER MEMBERS AND THE REMAING MEMBERS DO ABOUT THE EVIL CABAL??

WE COULD ALSO ASK WHO THE OTHER TWO INDEPENDANT MEMBERS ACTUALLY ARE?

PAMELA BROWN, WORKS FOR LIVERPOOL DIRECT LIMITED!

SEE BELOW FOR COUNCIL REPORT



23/05/2007

Standards committee gets more independence

LIVERPOOL City Council's standards watchdog is to have an independent chair for the next year.

And for the first time since the Standards Committee - which was established in 2000 - there will be a majority of independent members compared with councillors.

The Committee promotes and maintains appropriate standards of conduct for councillors and officers in the city council. It also deals with reports of an ethical nature, oversees the whistle-blowing policy and overviews the handing of complaints and ombudsman investigations.

A review of ethical standards in the city council by the Audit Commission suggested that in the "interests of open and accountability the committee should be chaired by an independent member."

Following a public advertisement and recruitment process, Howard Winik has been appointed be chair of the Committee. His appointment was confirmed at the Council's Annual meeting.

Mr Winik graduated in dental surgery at the University of Liverpool and worked as a dentist in the area for a number of years. He became a magistrate in 1990 and serves in both the adult and youth courts.

He is currently Chairman of the Bench and also serves as a mentor and appraiser for new magistrates. He has occupied positions on the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster's Advisory Committee for Justices of the Peace, the Merseyside Area Judicial Forum, the Court of the University of Liverpool, has served as chairman and member of several tribunals including the fields of health , education and other issues. He is also an 08 ambassador for the city.

He said: "High ethical standards and absolute integrity are essential if the community is to have trust and confidence in their local politicians.

"I hope that the new standards committee will be able to work positively and constructively with all members of the city council to ensure these qualities are not only practised, but are seen to be practised.

"I think this would be to everyone's benefit"

The other new committee member is Kim Lumberg who, after graduating, embarked on a business management career spanning some 25 years with the John Lewis Partnership and has specialised in training, human resources and customer services.

She has been a magistrate, a member of the Young Musician of the Year Committee and a Red Cross volunteer. She has been a recruitment Manager for a local company and is currently a Manager for Jonathan Kay. She has experience of employment hearings and the application of an ethical framework in the workplace.

They will join the other two independent members, Pamela Brown and Hugh Thompson along with city councillors Stuart Monkcom and Gideon Ben-Tovim on the committee for 2007/8.

ENDS

Sunday 13 May 2007

LIVERPOOL HISTORY 2005


Is a new leader in waiting here?

Mar 18 2005

City Editor Larry Neild looks at the top 10 names to take Liverpool up to Capital of Culture year

Daily Post


The top 10 names to take Liverpool up to Capital of Culture year, from top left, Brenda Smith, Colin Hilton, Phil Halsall, Thomas O'Brien, Sir Howard Bernstein, from bottom left, Steve Broomhead, Jim Gill, Carole Hudson, John Flamson, Frances Done

INTERNATIONAL headhunters were paid £75,000 to search for a new captain to steer Liverpool out of troubled waters in 1999.

However, their search stopped at nearby Knowsley Council whose then chief executive left to take up the top job in Merseyside's largest local authority.

Now the hunt is back on to find a new steward for the city, someone who will lead it into Capital of Culture Year in 2008.

The outgoing Sir David Henshaw has been credited as one of the key architects in the transformation of Liverpool.

However, his intention to leave his Dale Street office sooner rather than later opens up the prospect of a key job in local government being up for offers. And, with a salary worth at least £180,000, it offers the successful applicant the chance to shine as Liverpool focuses on becoming one of Euope's major city destinations.

Undoubtedly, this will lead to a number of high-quality candidates jockeying for the number one position in the forthcoming months.

Top 10 names in the frame are:

* John Flamson, head of Merseyside Objective 1 Programme. His current task is ensuring the £2bn European-backed programme is wisely managed. He is seen as a tough talking civil servant with the gentle touch.

* Carole Hudson, chief executive of St Helens council. The glass town has seen its profile raised dramatically thanks to Ms Hudson who has put it firmly on the regeneration map.

* Jim Gill, chief executive of Liverpool Vision. Seen as a nononsense talker who heads the public-private company charged with regenerating the city centre. Some say releasing Gill from the 'shackles' of a second tier body overseen by the council executive will show an unseen executive capable of high delivery.

* Frances Done, former Rochdale council chief executive who headed the Manchester Commonwealth Games company. Now a high flyer with the Audit Commission.

* Steve Broomhead, one time Warrington council chief and now chief executive of the North West Development Agency. His job is to delicately balance the interests of a massive area stretching from Cheshire to the Lake District while making sure rivals big city Liverpool and Manchester get their fair shares.

* Sir Howard Bernstein, chief executive of Manchester city council. Veteran local government go-getter who has over-seen the transformation of Manchester.

* Tom O'Brien, chief executive of The Mersey Partnership. A local boy, "done good", who reached the dizzy heights of the World Bank in Washington before being 'loaned' to Merseyside.

* Phil Halsall, Liverpool's executive director for resources. Former chief executive of South Ribble who is credited with transforming Liverpool's financial situation.

* Colin Hilton, executive director for Lifelong Learning at Liverpool. Like Halsall, was one of the five super-directors hired under the Henshaw regime. Education in Liverpool has been transformed.

* Brenda Smith, former MD of Granada and now managing director of another media empire. Former Merchant Taylors girl Ms Smith is also on the board of the NWDA, and, in 2003, was named North West Businesswoman of the Year.

Whatever the choice, though, the man, or woman, picked as chief executive will be at the helm during the 800th birthday celebrations in 2007 and, perhaps more importantly, in 2008.

larryneild@dailypost.co.uk

Hunt is on for outstanding ambassador

LIVERPOOL needs a chief executive who can act as an ambassador to the city during a crucial period in its history.

The Merseyside area has been undergoing something of a renaissance in recent years and this will no doubt intensify as Capital of Culture Year, in 2008, comes closer. So one of the main criteria when considering who to choose for the post will be a person's ability to shine as Liverpool looms larger on the European stage.

The chief executive will receive a salary of £180,000.

Another role will be meeting VIP visitors as well as Royalty, and to be involved in complex talks about key projects.

The person must also be a mover and shaker, as well as the most senior paid ambassador for the city around the country and abroad.

The chief executive is also the chief advisor to the council cabinet, or executive board.

Top Top

Print this article Close window

Chris Paul: Labour of Love: UK-elections-2007: Liverpool Meltdown for Lib Dems

Another fine Blogger exposing the Lib Dem Idiots.

However Chris you must not encourage the Storey Teller to come back.

Joe Anderson and the rest of Liverpool Labour will take them down to size next May 08.

That would be a truly wonderful event for the Capital of Culture!




Chris Paul: Labour of Love: UK-elections-2007: Liverpool Meltdown for Lib Dems

Thursday 10 May 2007

City of the Dead*: ANDERSON DEMANDS STANDARDS BOARD PROBE INTO CLUCAS AND THE IRISH CENTRE

Utter scandal as information is revealed that Liberal Democrat Councillor Flo Clucas has broken the Law in not declaring an interest in her own Company when applying for and in supplying of grants and compulsory purchase orders, in her role of Liverpool City Councillor, voted by and on behalf of the people of Liverpool.

Councillor Joe Anderson Liverpool Labour Group Leader, has demanded an enquiery into this outrage.

Follow link to Liverpool subCulture City of the dead

Or read on this page

City of the Dead*: ANDERSON DEMANDS STANDARDS BOARD PROBE INTO CLUCAS AND THE IRISH CENTRE


Wednesday, May 09, 2007

ANDERSON DEMANDS STANDARDS BOARD PROBE INTO CLUCAS AND THE IRISH CENTRE


LABOUR Leader Joe Anderson has called for a full-scale investigation into Flo Clucas trying to waltz off with the former Irish Centre on Mount Pleasant. (see Liverpool subCulture, ed)
Anderson has written to the Standards Board protesting that Clucas's actions breach the national Code of Conduct for councillors.
The Standards Board can fine or suspend Clucas from office if they find her guilty (some chance of that, ed)
Anderson tells how Clucas 'intervened strongly' at a meeting with planning officials on 19 December to promote Dance Liverpool's crackpot scheme to takeover the Centre, which is a Grade 2* listed building.
He says Clucas also offered/promoted:

  • Objective 1 European funding for the Centre

  • city council support for the scheme and/or

  • to slap a CPO on the Centre.
Anderson says Clucas failed to declare an interest - she is a Director of Dance Liverpool, according to Companies House records.
The Labour Leader poses six separate questions about Clucas's conduct, including:
  • Has Cllr Flo Clucas used her position as an Executive Member to promote a scheme in respect of which she has interest? (of course, ed)

  • Was the City Council’s recommendation to reject the (owner's) Planning Application in 2006 as a result of pressure to support the “Dance Liverpool” proposal from Cllr Flo Clucas? (very probably, ed)

  • Was there any reasonable evidence to suggest that the alternative “Dance Liverpool” proposal had any realistic prospect of delivery (the report... clearly identifies a lack of funding...for the scheme) (none at all, ed)

Anderson also asks if it was appropriate for Clucas to "promise/promote that Liverpool City Council would bear the costs of any CPO enquiry (as you will be aware developers normally bear such costs)?" (highly irregular, ed)

and

"Promising/promoting that acquisition costs would be funded by ERDS (Objective 1 European Funding) before any application or approval for such funding has been obtained?"(well, she is Chair of the Committee which doles out the Euro dosh, so presumably she should know whether she was going to give herself the money? ed)

Anderson adds: "You will note from the handwritten notes from a meeting, that Cllr Flo Clucas had explored ways in which pressure could be put on the existing owner (which would have the result of encouraging him to surrender the leasehold interest) and in particular, investigating the condition of the fire safety system and demanding that Liverpool City Council serve a schedule of dilapidations on the leasehold owner."

(This one will run and run, ed)

Monday 7 May 2007

LABOUR PARTY OF LIVERPOOL MAKE GAINS IN LOCAL ELECTIONS 2007

LIVERPOOL IN A MESS?

LIBERAL DEMOCRATS LOSE 5 SEATS IN THIS YEARS
LOCAL ELECTIONS WITH LIVERPOOL LABOUR PARTY
TAKING 4 OF THOSE FOR THEMSELVES.



IS THIS A SIGN OF HOPE FOR THE FUTURE, IS
LIVERPOOL IN A MESS, OR CAN IT BE SAVED IN TIME
FOR OUR YEAR OF CULTURE, WHEN THE REST OF
EUROPE IS LOOKING DIRECTLY AT US?



SEE BELOW FOR DAILY POST REPORT


Elections 2007: Big guns already firing for 2008
Big guns already firing for 2008


May 5 2007

Daily Post City Editor Larry Neild offers his analysis of Liverpool’s political map following Thursday’s local elections

by Larry Neild, Liverpool Daily Post


LIVERPOOL’S political masters are to launch their “Plan B” to re-engage inner city communities after the Liberal Democrats lost four seats to Labour in the town hall elections.

Leader Warren Bradley wants his B for Bradley plan to carefully look at housing renewal schemes that have left many communities devastated by boarded-up homes.

He is leading the council into its 10th year of Lib-Dem rule with a double-digit margin that has reduced from a peak of 40 seats in 2002 to today’s slimmed-down 12.

It was 2002 that saw the Lib-Dems, then led by Mike Storey, holding 70 of the then 99 council chamber seats, its highest ever tally. In the same year, Labour was reduced to its lowest ever count for generations, only 20 councillors.

The council has meanwhile shrunk to 90 members, but Labour’s Joe Anderson has nibbled away at the Lib-Dems’ grip, with the Lib-Dems holding 51 seats to Labour’s 35.

The big question today is what will happen next May when Liverpool’s 324,000 voters decide who should rule the roost during European Capital of Culture year.

Cllr Anderson is confident that Labour will make one big push to re-take the town hall hot seat, while Cllr Bradley argues that his team will stay in power for some years to come.

To gain overall control, the Labour group need to hold on to the seats they defend next year, and make 11 gains to reach the vital 46 to guarantee control.

Last year, Labour won three and this year ended up with four gains at the expense of the Lib-Dems. Even if they went one better next year and bagged five gains, it would still leave the Lib-Dems with that magical 46. It would make life at the town hall nail-biting, and would see councillors dragged from their sick-beds for key votes.

If Labour supporters in Liverpool continue to buck the national trend and support the party locally, it seems likely that the best they can hope for is a hung council.

THAT could still see Warren Bradley running the show if the four minor-party councillors agreed a deal.

It could even see Lib-Dem defector John Coyne, the council’s only Green member, becoming a critical power-broker.

Political pundits believe that Labour’s task will be daunting. Next year, Labour will be defending 10 of their 35 seats. The Liberal Democrats will defend 19 seats, with Liberal leader Steve Radford likely to retain his seat.

If Labour lose Croxteth, as they did this year, it will make the task even harder. The Lib-Dems will be defending some of their fortress seats, such as Allerton and Hunts Cross, Childwall, Church, County, Cressington, Greenbank, Woolton.

Cllr Bradley is also up for re-election in Wavertree.

Vulnerable seats could be Kensington where veteran Frank Doran faces tough competition after the defeat of ward colleague Richard Marbrow and this year’s Lord Mayor, Joan Lang, in Warbreck, which also fell to Labour on Thursday.

With no elections taking place in 2009, it means that an unsuccessful assault next year will guarantee Lib-Dem rule for some years.

CLLR Bradley said: “The one thing you can say about people in Liverpool is that they take politics very seriously. The people of our city should take credit for the interest and intelligence they show.

“Labour’s predictions of gaining control in a year are premature and, as far as I am concerned, it is business as usual.

“I accept that, despite the progress we have made in Liverpool, there remain challenges, particularly in the inner-city areas. We have got to get something done quick- ly about our housing renewal initiatives. It is something we must re-visit urgently and get on with the job of providing decent homes for people. I would like to see the process speeded up.”

Cllr Anderson refuses to accept that a massive swing is impossible.

“Look at the likes of Greenbank and Picton and we are well in with a chance. Our post-election leaflet will carry the headline ‘You’ve been had’ because we want the people of this city to know about the mismanagement of the Lib-Dems.

“When citizens hear more about the cost of Capital of Culture and the changes to care home provisions and the care service I am sure they will say enough is enough, and they will send the Lib-Dems packing.”

The Conservatives failed to make much impact in Liverpool with Steve Fitzsimmons, their best hope, coming second in Woolton in what was a repeat of last year. His vote of 742 was far short of Barbara Mace’s 2,019 for the Lib-Dems.

They came third or fourth in most wards, though in Anfield only 26 of the Tory faithful voted for them, putting the Conservatives last in a field of five.

THE BNP contested nine seats in Liverpool and in total received 1,667 votes, just half of one per cent of the electorate. They came second in Norris Green and Kirkdale.

Alec McFadden, president of the Merseyside Coalition Against Racism and Fascism, said: “Merseyside continues to be a fascist free zone.”

ADDITIONAL reporting by Jennifer Thomas.

RESULTS ROUND-UP: P8-9

larryneild




Sunday 6 May 2007

LIVERPOOL LABOUR PARTY GAIN 5 SEATS IN LOCAL ELECTIONS 2007

CELEBRATIONS AS LIVERPOOL LABOUR GROUP GAIN 5 SEATS FROM THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS.
celebration as Anne takes Warbreck.

JUBILATION AS KENSINGTON WARD COMES HOME TO LABOUR.

Richard Marbrow HAS BEEN DISMISSED FROM HIS DUTIES BY THE
LIVERPOOL COUNCIL TAX PAYERS.



City Labour group defies national trend
May 4 2007
by Larry Neild, Liverpool Daily Post

LABOUR gained five valuable seats in Liverpool, with just over half the results in, in what was hailed as a successful night by their leader, Joe Anderson.
The party won Yewtree, Belle Vale, Speke Garston and Warbreck from the ruling Liberal Democrats, and in perhaps the biggest result of the night, took cabinet member Richard Marbrow’s seat in Kensington.
In another blow for Lib-Dem leader Warren Bradley, defector John Coyne, who joined the Green Party earlier this year, defended his seat in St Michael’s with a comfort-able majority.
The success in Speke Garston means that Labour now hold all three seats, completely overturning a Lib- Dem hold in the council chamber in that area.
Labour’s assault last year took their first gain, then earlier this year, Labour won a by-election, and now they have gained the final seat.
Mr Anderson said: “It’s a fantastic night for Labour.
“We’re on the road back to taking control of the city next year. I predicted we would do this well because the people of Liverpool are fed up with mismanagement at the hands of the Lib-Dems. We want to build on this success and prepare ourselves for taking over the running of the city council in a year’s time.
“The Lib-Dems are on the run.”
BUT Cllr Bradley was far from downhearted at the results. In the traditional Liberal Democrat strongholds, his councillors were winning by comfortable margins.
Former Lib-Dem leader Mike Storey said: “It’s an acceptable result tonight. We’re going into our 10th year of power and Tony Blair has been in power for 10 years and he has been wiped out and we’ve had a minor hiccup but we still have a big majority in the council chamber.
“This result means we will still have a Lib-Dem council running the city for the next five years.”
Culture and leisure executive member Berni Turner held on in Old Swan.
The minority Liberal Party was celebrating the re-election of Hazel Williams in Tuebrook and Stoneycroft.
Cllr Williams romped home with a majority of more than 1,200.
In Warbreck Ward, long- serving councillor Richard Roberts was beaten by Labour in what was essentially a two- way fight.
The majority was just 194 in what was one of the biggest turn-outs, 34%.
Earlier in the day, Labour election managers had been predicting around four wins and they were delighted that they hit their minimum target.
Analysts said Labour needed to win at least five to have any chance of making a final assault for council chamber rule in next year’s elections.
The Liberal Democrats went into the election holding 55 of the 90 seats.
With results still to come in, they were down to 51, while Labour narrowed the margin by increasing their foothold at the Town Hall to 35.
The biggest shock of the night was in Kensington and Fairfield where Council Cabinet member Richard Marbrow was defeated by Labour.
The seat had been on Labour’s wish list, but it was touch and go in what was a very close fight.
The result became known shortly after 1.30am when a loud cheer erupted from the Labour camp.
The majority is thought to have been as narrow as 50 votes.
But Labour were bracing themselves for a loss in Croxteth Ward where a recount was taking place early this morning.
Returning officer Colin Hilton had to call police to the recount after pushing and shoving as the count intensified.
FOR more news from the Liverpool Daily Post


Wednesday 2 May 2007

I'M MORE SEXY THAN YOUR MUM

SEXY REXY FREEMAN OF OUR FAIR CITY, WAS SNUBBED RECENTLY BY LIVERPOOL CITY COUNCIL, AS HE WAS NOT INVITED TO THE GRAND REOPENING OF ST GEORGES HALL BY PRINCE CHARLES. COLIN HILTON'S MUM WENT INSTEAD! WHAT DOES THAT SAY TO MR MAKIN?
who stood up for Matty?




SEE BELOW FOR REPORT FROM DAILY POST


Rex Makin in new attack over Prince's visit 'snub'

May 1 2007


by Jessica Shaughnessy, Liverpool Daily Post


FREEMAN of Liverpool Rex Makin has criticised council chief executive Colin Hilton for taking his mother to lunch with Prince Charles.

Mr Makin claims he was snubbed during the Royal’s visit to Liverpool last week.

He initially lodged a complaint with organisers the Liverpool Culture Company because he was not put in the line-up of VIPs introduced to the Prince on the St George’s Day visit.

Last night, he revealed he had repeated that complaint and referred it to Mr Hilton, saying he was dis-satisfied with a response from Culture Company chief executive Jason Harborow.

Last night, Mr Hilton refused to comment on Mr Makin’s attack, but a council spokesman insisted the city’s best-known lawyer was not overlooked.

Mr Harborow says the Culture Company adhered to protocol and were asked by Clarence House to be selective on who could meet the Prince and have lunch with him at the St George’s Hall event.

It is understood around 30 people were invited to the lunch, including Mr Hilton, who it is understood took his mother, Mr Harborow and his guest, the Lord Mayor and the Royal party.

Mr Makin complained that not only was he not invited to the VIP lunch, but he was also prevented from sitting with his wife Shirley during the official visit.

Mr Makin said last night: “If they had to be selective, why was the council chief executive’s mother allowed to attend the lunch?”

Meanwhile, last night broadcaster Anne Robinson renewed her support for Mr Makin.

In a letter to the Daily Post, the Weakest Link presenter likened the situation to leaving George Bush off the invitation list if the Queen were to visit Washington.

She highlighted Mr Makin’s charitable contributions to the city, and said: “The irony is that His Royal Highness . . . missed out on being entertained by one of Liverpool's most engaging and colourful citizens.”

In a letter to Mr Hilton yesterday Mr Makin wrote: “I enclose a copy of a letter I sent to Jason Harborow following his inappropriate communication to me in which he does not appear to recognise civic protocol nor what does he write accord with the facts that I know of, including your mother’s luncheon visit.

“I reiterate my complaint. I hope you will deal with this in accordance with the established procedure.”

The high-profile solicitor claims as a Freeman of the city and St George’s Hall trustee he should have been among the first in line to meet the Prince, who delivered one of Liverpool John Moores University’s Roscoe lectures, which Mr Makin founded.

He said last night: “There would have been no lecture for the Prince to deliver had I not founded the Roscoe Lectures.

“At other events in the city, I have been included.”

Liverpool City Council and the Liverpool Culture Company declined to comment further.

jessicashaughnessy@dailypost.co.uk

Top


Graham Burgess, Saviour of Liverpool City Council?

IF ANY COUNCIL WORKERS FROM THE 80'S AND 90'S READ THIS ARTICLE THEY WILL WONDER IF THIS IS THE SAME GRAHAM BURGESS WHO SOLD HIS MEMBERS OUT?
ASK UNISON, THEY WILL HAVE DIFFERENT MEMORIES.

THIS IS THE MAN WHO GAVE DOCTOR DOG OF MISADVENTURE PALACE ALL HIS IDEAS AND TIPS ON HOW TO PICK UP BLONDE WOMEN

GRAHAM, YOU MAKE BE A SCOUSER, BUT YOUR MEMORY IS SELECTIVE TO SAY THE LEAST.

SEE DAILY POST ARTICLE BELOW









The man who helped bring down Militant

May 1 2007

David Higgerson meets one of the union leaders whose fight against redundancies brought political change to Liverpool

by David Higgerson, Liverpool Daily Post


Graham Burgess in front of Liverpool Town Hall

AS REFERENCES from an employer go, being named in an autobiography as one of two people who effectively triggered the end of a political administration hardly seems a helpful one when pursuing a career in local government.

But it doesn’t appear to have done Graham Burgess much harm. Those who know the affable 54-year-old Liverpudlian as the chief executive of a Lancashire Council raise an eyebrow when they hear what Derek Hatton, deputy leader of the militants in the 1980s, had to say about him in his auto-biography.

“He basically names me, and another man, Peter Cresswell, as a couple of the main reasons why things ended how they did for the militants in Liverpool,” says Graham, a father-of-two who grew up in Norris Green and still lives in the city, now in Allerton.

Graham’s role in the 1980s political circus which consumed Liverpool also surprises those who only know him as the man who helped transform the old mill town of Blackburn with regeneration projects now being copied in America: he was a leading trade unionist.

A case of poacher turned gamekeeper at some point? “No, I don’t think so,” says Graham, who attended Ellergreen High School after passing the 11-plus.

“Ever since I left school I have wanted to do a job which helps give people chances to improve their lives. I trained to be a teacher, actually worked as a social worker, then became heavily involved in the union before returning to social work, and moving to regeneration when I came to Blackburn with Darwen. All the jobs I have had, I hope, have helped people.

“I didn’t go straight into teaching after finishing my training because I wanted to get a bit of life experience away from the classroom.”

And that’s certainly what he got. The union Graham mentions was Nalgo, now part of Unison. And it was as one of the key leaders in Nalgo that he gained his place in Hatton’s memoirs.

In 1984, a broad coalition – including support from the unions – had demanded extra cash from government to help fund the city council. The minister responsible, Patrick Jenkin, agreed after meeting a delegation in London. The Conservative government had hoped the deal would be underplayed by the delegation, led by, among others, Hatton.

“Instead, it was heralded very publicly as a victory for Liverpool,” remembers Graham.

“Patrick Jenkin, when he talked about the triumphant announcements from people like Derek Hatton, talks about them dancing on his political grave. That pretty much meant that, when we asked for more the next year, the government wasn’t going to budge.”

And when that duly happened, the Militants’ solution to creating a legal budget – issuing 90-day redundancy notices to all 30,000 staff – immediately put the political leadership on collision course with unions.

Graham says: “They would say to us, ‘It’s just a piece of paper, of course we’ll re-employ everybody’ but from a union point of view, we couldn’t accept that because there was no guarantee.

“Liverpool at this time was, in many ways, in a desperate state. Hundreds of jobs were being lost at the big employers every week. The council was the employer of last resort, so we couldn’t let that happen.”

SUPPORTERS of the Milit-ants claimed the 90-day redundancy notices were meant to serve as breathing space during which time they would mount a fresh campaign to get the money from government, but they withdrew the redundancy notices idea when an all-out strike among council staff looked likely.

Which is where Graham’s place in Hatton’s version of events was secured: “The Militants wanted an all-out strike to put pressure on the Government to act, but not all the unions were supporting the action, because there was no guarantee of success.

“We were one of the largest unions and when we put it to the vote among our members, they said no, we won’t support the strike action. That meant it couldn’t go ahead in the way they wanted.”

Even the Militant supporters argue in retrospect that the redundancy notices idea was a bad one because it meant they lost the workers – up until that point, their biggest supporters.

And when the strike idea fell by the wayside, the redundancy notices re-appeared.

Graham says: “Our offices for the union were in what is now the Sir Thomas Hotel. I remem-ber being in there one day and people started coming in, looking very upset and waving papers at me. The redundancy notices had been sent out. We had to do something, and we told people to get on the phones and round up as many people as possible, we were going to protest.

“Later that day, about 3,000 people gathered and we marched to the Town Hall, on to Exchange Flags to oppose the redundancies. I remember standing on the statue in the middle of the Flags to address people, to tell them that we wouldn’t let this happen. Quite how it was going to end, we didn’t know, but hindsight means that I know the Government was very close to taking over the council itself to sort things out.”

The national outcry at a Labour council threatening to make 30,000 redundant served to further distance the national Labour leadership from the militants. A resolution was opened up when Maurice Stonefrost was sent in by Labour to find a way through.

“He proved that it was possible to produce a legal budget without laying off the entire workforce, and that led to a resolution, but up until that point, we had no idea how it was going to end,” Graham recalls.

“In many ways, it was a terrifying time. I was threatened on more than one occasion, as were my family, and my friends. But there was nothing else we could do. It wasn’t a situation I ever envisaged being involved when I first become a union rep.”

Graham’s career with the union went on to take him to the very top of the Nalgo tree at a national level, before he returned to social work in Liverpool, again working with young people.

He rose steadily through the social services department at Liverpool to become assistant director, before moving to Blackburn with Darwen as executive director for regeneration, and then being promoted to chief executive of the council last autumn.

Yet he still has incredibly fond memories of being on the frontline of social services, in what most would agree were – and still are for his successors – very hard circumstances.

‘THERE is a real sense of achievement when you work with a young person, who needs social services help, and they come on in leaps and bounds, thanks, in part, to your help,” he says. “It is that sense of achievement that I originally thought I’d get from teaching, but instead came from being a social worker.”

The threats, the harassment and the bitter acrimony of 1985 aren’t what Graham thinks of when asked to mention his lowest moment working in Liverpool. He instead goes back to the typists’ strike, which, for many, has simply been forgotten.

He says: “We’d been through a social services strike in the late 1970s when departments across the UK went out for nearly six months, and in the end we got many concessions which improved the working lives of social workers.

“We were promised similar support for a group of typists who wanted a better deal. They were poorly paid, and we hoped to do something for them. That support from elsewhere never came, and in the end, after several months, they had to go back. They didn’t get much more, certainly not enough to cover what they’d lost. That was a bitter disappointment for me because they didn’t get what they deserved.”

At Blackburn, he is at the helm of an authority which has scooped all the top accolades and badges which can be awarded to authorities by the Government – and Graham is quick to add, a constructive relationship with the unions, including Unison.

That point is illustrated by the fact he was invited to speak at Unison’s last conference, and he adds: “I’m still a member.”

davidhiggerson@dailypost.co.uk

A heart full of Merseypride >>>

A heart full of Merseypride

GRAHAM, left, is very proud of what has been achieved in Blackburn, an area which, like Liverpool, has suffered at the hands of a manufacturing exodus in recent years, but which is regenerating itself.

“There is a lot to be proud of here, but we know we have our work to do in the future, too,” he says. “But I’m also very proud of being from Liverpool and of what it is achieving.

“Simply winning Capital of Culture shows how far the city has come, and I hope that I do my bit to sell the city to people who perhaps still think of stereotypes when thinking about Liverpool.

“I was showing a man from a Merseyside authority around some of our regeneration projects a few years ago and the first thing he said when he got in my car was: ‘Don’t worry, I’m not from Liverpool’. I felt like chucking him out there and then.

“People sometimes ask why I don’t move from Liverpool to the Blackburn area, and there are lovely areas to live in. I just tell them that I lived through Liverpool at a time when you thought it couldn’t get any worse, and at a time when events like the Toxteth riots were greeted with headlines like ‘Liverpool is burning’.

“I lived in the city then, and I want to enjoy living in the city now, in a city where my children know they can stay and find work because it really has turned itself around.”


Top Top

Print this article Close window


NADIA GETS TO USE MACCAS GOLDEN SHOWER

NADIA GETS TO USE MACCAS GOLDEN SHOWER

QUOTE OF THE YEAR 2007

Council leader Warren Bradley said that some individual councillors’ behaviour was “appalling” and not fitting of a democratic society.

FULL STORY

BUMBLING BRADLEY

FIREMAN'S INTERVIEW WITH ROGER PHILLIPS, AFTER COUNCIL RANKED THE WORST FINANCIALLY RUN

Roger: This is not a good report for us is it Warren?
Fireman:Well Roger we’ve got to put it into perspective really haven’t we and remember where Liverpool was and that’s not thinking back 10 years. Liverpool has come an awful long way. The people of Liverpool were asking for lower Council Tax and the Liberal Democrats have delivered that and they also wanted better services and you look at the services that are now delivered by Liverpool City Council. If we look at the most vulnerable either elderly or the Children’s Services the social care we are now delivering at a level that Liverpool has never delivered before. We also look at the bread and butter your schools, your sports centres, your libraries, One Stop Shops in communities, our parks, we’ve got 13 green flag parks. It’s like a new home to me when you get an old dilapidated derelict building you’ve got to bring it up to a standard and I think Liverpool City Council under the Liberal Democrats have certainly done that and I am certain if we did a survey of people in the City do you want Liverpool City Council to sit on £20m worth of reserves or do you want the City Council delivering front line services that affect the most vulnerable and people’s lives in the City. I think that they would vote with their feet and say that we support the policies of Liverpool City Council. We’ve got to look at the financial regulations put in by Government and if you want my opinion about this Roger it is purely political.
Roger: Well come on, you know the Audit Commission is not a political body
Fireman: Well with respect Roger and I would beg to differ on that
Roger: Well how can it be a political, it’s an independent organisation?
Fireman: We can say everything is independent to a certain extent but you know you look at what we’ve got at the moment in Liverpool and we’re delivering top quality services.
Roger: But the problem with this is that you’ve got an overall score rating of 2 which was adequate performance into 05, overall score in 06 was 2 which is adequate performance.
This year it is down to 1 below minimum requirements inadequate performance.
Fireman: Based around financial regulations…
Roger: Yes I’m talking about the financial…..
Fireman: Laid down by government. I mean that’s what you’ve got to remember. Don’t try and muddy the waters and say oh this is about Liverpool City Council and their overall performance. It’s not. You look at the issue that we’ve done about achievements. Liverpool scoring 3-4 on achievement at the moment through the Audit Commission.
Roger: I didn’t know that.
(EDs: Pitiful, just pitiful.)
Fireman: And we do seem to always go to the negatives when we’re looking for something like this.
Roger: The District Auditor was pretty negative about you wasn’t he and…
Fireman: No, I have got to say Roger I would love to have £50m in reserves. I would also love not to have to put additions of £7m into adult social care and £2-3m into children’s social care. The facts are we have got to do that because of the pressures that are on Liverpool at the moment.
Roger: So are other Councils….
Fireman: I’m not willing as Leader of this Council to take away care to the most vulnerable to allow it to sit in reserve. I am not willing to do that and I will go to the stake on that the people of the City. Liverpool now is only one of a handful of Councils up and down the country that is providing moderate care to the most vulnerable people in the City. Now to give people an idea of what moderate care is that is home care. These people who’ve got no family to support them and require a visit in the morning or a visit in the evening to make sure they’re ok to help them to take the pills, to make sure that they’ve got the food. Most Councils up and down this country have removed that care. Liverpool City Council is still allowing our most vulnerable people our sort of care. Now is that wrong, is that wrong?
Roger: Now no one would argue that’s wrong but everyone. But many people are affected by housing. Housing is really poor isn’t it. I mean you are so poor you’ve had to hand it over to a different group to run it.
Fireman: Well with respect Roger, with respect, you’ve got to know what the Housing Corporation have done and in partnership with the Government again it’s easy to say it’s the Council, in partnership with the Government we’ve tackled head on through the Pathfinder areas of the inner core of the City some of the housing inefficiencies of the City. That hasn’t happened over the last five years that’s happened over 30 or 40 years. The problems in Norris Green in housing were prevalent 30 or 40 years ago and weren’t tackled. As an Authority we’ve challenged what wasn’t tackled and we’ve challenged it head on and I opened a couple of weeks ago with Flo Clucas and Marilyn Fielding with Cobalt Housing the first phase of Norris Green. We’ve transformed that area and its got houses for sale and social housing in Norris Green that people are seeking to live in now. We’ve got in a core Edge Hill, Kensington, Kirkdale the same issues that have been there for 30 or 40 years that we’re tackling now hand in hand with the Government. I’m not taking the credit for it and the Government isn’t. We’ve got a schools’ programme that is second to none. Liverpool’s young people are now achieving at the national average. I want it higher than national average to give new opportunity but again I’ll say I’m not going to suit accountants’ financial regulations in London and leave £millions sitting in reserve while we have still got the challenges Liverpool has got and I think people you know.
Roger: Do you think it was a mistake to keep Council Tax down or freeze it over the past few years?
Fireman: Well isn’t it ironic Roger how last week John Healey said how Liverpool is charging £101 a head...
Roger: Because its inefficiencies….
Fireman: Well we have taken £150m worth of inefficiencies out of our budget over the last 10 years. We’ve kept Council tax down which is exactly what Government policy is and is exactly what John Healey is saying. Councillor Joe Anderson is saying something completely different to the people of Liverpool that he will put taxes up to build reserves to put in reserve well again this administration this Lib Dem administration is not going to tax for the sake of taxing to leave money sitting in reserve. We will build up the reserves over a period of years and then we will be able to tackle some of the other issues that we’ve got to do. We recognise the health inequalities. To improve health inequalities we’ve got to have a real stable economy offering real opportunity and raising the aspirations in them poorer communities. You cannot do that leaving millions and millions of pounds laying in reserves and this administration will continue the robust financial management that we’ve done. We’ll carry on delivering…
Roger: If it was that robust we wouldn’t have this problem of £20m overdrawn on Capital of Culture.
Fireman: Roger, lets put things into hindsight. We are still delivering front line services. We are still…
Roger: It’s about £20m overall that we’re short this year – now that’s not robust management
Fireman: But Roger we are going through a budget setting process. Every Local Authority up and down the country is in the same process as us. I remember reading about Wirral being £50m short. Other Local Authorities. I meet the core city leaders who are £40-£50m short exactly the same as Liverpool . And let’s not forget I haven’t come on here to knock the Government I’ve come on here to say that I believe we’ve got a robust financial programme in place that is going to deal with the shortfall. We’ve delivered year on year but I’ll say again I am not going to allow millions and millions of pounds to lay in reserve. Cut front line services to the most vulnerable and then say that’s acceptable. Nor as Leader of this Council am I going to allow Council Tax to go through the roof again which will drive the inability to bring further investment into this City. While the Lib Dems have been in control we’ve brought Council Tax down, we’ve brought renewed confidence and we’ve brought real investment that will bring opportunities to the most vulnerable and I think that is the most important and I think the people of this City will stand full square with us on that. I’m proud of what we’ve delivered in this City over the last 10 years and Capital of Culture is part of that."