An independent investigator will be immediately appointed following last week's decision by Cheshire East Council's Audit and Governance Committee, regarding Lyme Green.
A review of the Council's proposal to build a recycling station at Lyme Green Depot in Macclesfield, published on June 7th, revealed that the aborted plans have cost Cheshire East taxpayers over £800,000.
The report also confirmed that planning rules were broken, as the main contractor commenced work on the site three weeks prior to a planning application being submitted, officers did not comply with EU Procurement Regulations or ensure there was effective reporting to members of the council.
They also spent beyond the approved budget on the scheme breaking Finance and Contract Procedure Rules. The approved capital budget for the scheme was £650,000 but the total anticipated spend for the Lyme Green scheme at mid-May was £810,000.
Michael Jones, Leader of the Council, today announced that he has sent to all members of the Staffing Committee, the CVs of four independent candidates to instigate investigations into staff behaviour. He has also issued instructions that in the absence of the Chief Executive, who remains off work, ill, the terms of reference will be set by the full cross-party Staffing Committee and that those terms of reference will be published.
Councillor Jones said "The investigator, once appointed will be encouraged to meet with all the staff mentioned in the report, Members, Cabinet Members and their support Members and any other appropriate witness."
The decisions were taken at an extraordinary informal Cabinet meeting, convened to respond to the recommendations made by the Audit and Governance Committee.
Councillor Jones continued: "This issue is so important to me and the Members of my Cabinet, I felt it was essential that actions must be taken and made public with the utmost urgency. This issue is too important and I feel it is necessary to move things along as quickly as possible. It is inconceivable to me that any member of the Council will question this line of action but it is necessary that everything we do regarding Lyme Green is open and transparent.
"The Council's reputation is being seriously undermined and I want to assure every resident that the fullest independent investigation will take place to review the conduct of staff mentioned in the report into Lyme Green.
"Many changes have already been introduced to prevent any reoccurrence of such a failure of the processes of the Council. However, it is only after the independent investigation has been concluded that the Council will be in a position to address some of the potential cultural and constitutional changes that I, and I am sure, other Members envisage being necessary.
"The draft recommendation reads: 'The Council, in accordance with its staffing policies, instigate an immediate independent review of the conduct of staff mentioned in the report and consider whether there is a case for appropriate disciplinary or other action to be pursued, the review to include consideration of whether the public or any Members were misled and an examination of the nature of the Council's communication with the public'.
"I wish to applaud all the members of the Audit and Governance Committee, in particular the chairman, John Hammond, and the officers involved in putting the report together, for the thoroughness and impartiality they showed in examining the details surrounding the events concerning Lyme Green.
"It was essential that this report was discussed fully, in public, so that every resident, especially those who live near the Lyme Green site, could be assured nothing was being hidden. The only way we can now deal with this regrettable position is by showing openness at every stage."
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
Wigan Council have been trying to pull the wool over residents eyes to get a recycling plant built on an SSSI
- the land has been cleared before the plans have been agreed
- the residents most affected didn't receive notification of the build until after the closing date of objection
- the change of land use from flood plain to an area which could be built on was not passed on to the residents most affected
- the contractor has already been to Germany to buy the equipment, even though the plans haven't been approved
- there is local objection to the amount of extra lorries (24 hours a day) that it will bring to an already busy "clean" industrial site
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Keep-Greenfold-Way-green/322170991162031
1. A key consideration is who was responsible for designing and managing this project, Cheshire East Council’s in-house engineers or external consultants.
2. I find it very difficult to believe that the Council’s own engineers or external consultants would simply forget to apply for Planning. Doing so would doubtless be considered by the courts to be a clear case of negligence. In which case, if external consultants were involved, the Council would have a strong case for compensation.
3. As Clive Bassil has correctly pointed out, the contractor also has an obligation within the contract to satisfy himself that Planning has been obtained prior to commencing work on site. If the contractor had proceeded without Planning and was in breach of contract, again the Council would have a strong case for compensation.
4. From my experience, this sort of fiasco just doesn’t happen when a professional design and construction team are involved, irrespective of whether in-house designers or external consultants are involved. My guess is that the only way that it could happen is if Cheshire East Council had instructed the design team and contractor to proceed without Planning. After all, if either the design team or contractor were at fault, why has the Council not mentioned the possibility of claiming compensation? The fact that it hasn’t suggests to me that somewhere down the line Cheshire East Council authorised this project to proceed without Planning.
And where are all these other people who should be standing up to be counted (or investigated?). People who are elected to protect council taxpayers' interests like Wesley Fitzgerald, who was the Council Leader while all this was going on. Come on Wesley, speak up, you're still a councillor with responsibilities, and you always had plenty to say before.
People who are receive vast remuneration packages (oh no, let's not go there again!) like Erika Wenzel, who was still functioning as CEO and not off on her extended sick leave at that time. (By the way, she was obviously feeling much better last week because she was spotted at a major social event. Does this mean that she will be well enough to return to work and face the waste transfer music with her colleagues.) After all, one of the most senior people alleged to have played a major part in this is John Nicholson, Deputy CEO and Strategic Director of Places. Surely Ms Wenzel must have spotted what was allegedly going on with her immediate deputy..
And the Head of Finance, together with the Borough Solicitor/Monitoring Officer. They're pretty senior, how come no-one noticed their alleged involvement either?
And, finally, but most strangely, Michael Jones, the recently elected Leader, who has spent some weeks beating his chest and telling us that he's appalled at what has been going on and that he relishes the opportunity to put it all right. But from September 2011, he was the Portfolio Holder for Resources (including finance). He seems to have only just noticed that he might have had some kind of responsibility for what was going on, and now tells us that he must declare an interest because of his former role. Confidently though, he adds that he thinks he will have more questions to ask than to answer. I've got a question. If you were the Portfolio Holder for Resources, why didn't you notice what the officers were doing? Weren't you paying attention? Did they try to conceal from you what they were doing? Or did you, apparently like them, follow the usual culture of CEC and think that no-one would notice and you could just get away with it?. Ooops, that's three questions.
Oh no, I'm sorry, I'm being boring and going on and on again. It's just so staggering that the culture in this organisation, which is supposed to serve the community, is, apparently, so arrogant and untruthful to those they are meant to support that, once again, they've squandered a huge amount of your money.
Personally, i cannot understand the sense in building yet another supermarket, particularly one on the outskirts of the town when one of the objectives of the Wilmslow Vision is to regenerate the town centre. Doing so would only attract shoppers away from the town centre.
Presumably all of the above will be included within the Wilmslow Vision for the town centre.
Where's Mary Portas when you need her? Regeneration of failing town centres, exciting new ideas to encourage people back in the traditional areas of the town. The artisan market is a great idea, actually quite simple but with a significant impact. Would the founding members of this like to take on the management of Cheshire East Council. An innovative and successful idea at a relatively low cost? When did the Council last come up with one of those?
I would like to think that after the extensive protests, following the Vision, their tactic was to avoid futher confrontation with an already enraged public, at that time, and hope that the more normal behaviour of Wilmslow folk would return i.e. apathy.
CEC have made a mistake if they believe that. The resolve to remove the threats to The Rectory Playing Fields, The Leisure Centre and The Library are undiminished and when CEC finally come clean and show their hand the Protest groups will show theirs. But for it to be a fair public participation debate CEC will be asked to allow adequate time. They have had over two years to prepare their case. We are not going to be satisfied with a couple of weeks.
Whatever the outcome of this forthcoming debate it must be that the wishes of the public of Wilmslow that decide and not the undemocratic wish of Councillor Jones and others at Sandbach.We have seen what damage they can do when lkeft to their own devices.
The CEO also has a resposibility to ensure procedural compliance
So does the Council Leader, Portfolio holder and involved Councillors, Whilst not employees per see, they are currently entitled to basic allowance of £11200, special resp allowances, travel/subsistence etc. I believe the Council Leader can currently claim >£42,000.
A footballer can be financially financially penalised for on-pitch behaviour, bringing the club/game into disrepute, even to the pont of criminal charges.
I suggest Councillors watch the unfolding bank liabilities & shareholders ability to set remuneration, with trepidation.
CEC is up for re-election in under 3 yrs. By then, Cllr Jones' investiagtion may have implicated various Cllrs. Unsuitable for re-election?
It would be nice to have a cinema/theatre in Wilmslow again since the demise of Rex many years ago, but given that private enterprise couldn't keep that enterprise going, I wonder what research the council has done on population size to the viability of a theatre/cinema. My fear is that we will build a black hole that constantly sucks funds from council tax payers. Given that CE had a consultation on buses to reduce the costs by £1.8 million I do wonder at priorities
I went to the stakeholder panels for Vision Wilmslow, Broadway malyon, identified key points in the town, one was Sainsbury's and the other Waitrose. If the suggestion was that Waitrose was involved in a site swap for the leisure centre and that apartments were built on Church Street, this would almost kill passing trade for the few shops on the street. Wilmslow is virtually flat with the exception of Church Street running down to the Bollin, if retirement apartments were built here as increasing infirmity set in wouldn't those living on the street be condemn to being house bound?
The planning should not be only for the next few years but for at least 20 years, will we still have large supermarkets at that time or will the increase in online shopping be another death knell for the current high street. We have to remember that Wilmslow now can't even support an Argos store!
Whilst Cheshire East has grandiose scheme what was said at the stakeholder meeting was that the area from Tesco Express/Post Office down by St Ann's House did not give a good impression to visitors to the town and indeed if you look at Barclays Bank it is showing signs that the outside needs some refurbishment.
There is a charge of malfeasance in public office - I do hope it is used and the one who loves the sound of his own voice is first on the list!!!!!
I think that Statutory Sick Pay is currently £85.85 per week, but is common for employment contracts to contain an agreement to top that up to full or part pay. I believe that the Cheshire East Council contract for staff with five years' service agrees to full pay for the first six months of sickness absence, followed by a further six months of half-pay. Erika Wenzel worked for the previous local authority and so, although CEC has only been in existence for about three years, she has the required aggregated length of service to qualify for this level of sick pay.. I think that is for all staff, not just senior levels.
I was wondering if someone who is almost certain to be investigated by the enquiry (or, if not, certainly should be) and who holds a position as a magistrate should be suspended without prejudice from acting in that role until a resolution is reached. It doesn't seem quite right to have a person who holds an office with power to impose legal penalties continuing to act whilst he may be under investigation himself. It certainly calls the legitimacy of the magistracy into question.
To find out the ownership details of the Rectory Fields could one not apply under a Feedom of Information request to CEC to tell all? Similarly I believe there could be special circumstances regarding the exact nature of the ownership of The Wilmslow Leisure centre. Was it not during the period of Local Government when Wilmslow had its earlier Council (prior to disbanding) that it came into being. It is my inderstanding that it is without mortgage and was paid for by the Local ratepayers.Such questions could be asked under the same heading,could they not?
I haven't heard any rumours that would suggest that The Rectory is likely to be knocked down as part of "The Grand Plan" (known only to a few at CEC) but then............................
"The land was purchased on 29 March 1972 for the sum of £122,893. There are no restrictive covenants attached to the land so far as we know. Victoria Simpson, Property Information"
Surely it is time to reign in all these amateurs and incompetents from our local councils all the way up to the charlatans running the EU.
It certainly seems like time to take some serious action about these people. I've never really recovered from the occasion when the Council couldn't manage to decide when and where to hold one of their meetings, so they split it into two and held it at different places on different days - with duplicated expenses, no doubt.
And WHERE is Wesley Fitzgerald who always had so much to say in the past? He was the Council Leader and head of the Cabinet when all the waste transfer stuff was going on. just as Erika Wenzel was the CEO. He is no longer Council Leader, but he remains a Councillor and, of course, Ms Wenzel is still a (very well-paid) employee of the Council. Will they be part of this investigation alongside Michael Jones and all the others?
Maybe we should be grateful that CEC only has a covered hole in the ground for half the cost?