Council Watcher
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
What has happened to the committee that was supposed to be formed from people in the community? The Council advertised for people with expertise to offer their time for free to support the management of TY Pawb- this still does not seem to have happened- is this an example of the Council not wishing to share their inner failings on this project with others.
In the Council work programme a report will be presented in September but no doubt there will be a reason why it is delayed or so watered down that it is not worth the paper it is written on.
The Council are still saying the empty units are ‘under offer’ yet that has been the case for months.
Putting up a strong defense — I take strong exception to your assertion about Councillors – “more the Councillors who represent the people of Wrexham and are paid poorly”.
If you look at attendance records and the times that some of them have even opened their mouth a third of them are totally non effective with so little input other than filling a chair at a meeting – they can’t even be bothered to fill out their annual ‘What have I done survey’ that goes against their profile on the Council site. These are the people that need to be removed from being a total waste of space and money.
I accept that there are some Councillors who are very committed to their own community but for those others that only put their head above the parapet when it is election time should be removed. They are democratically elected to fulfill a role if there is no evidence of them doing that they should be removed before the end of the usual 5-year election cycle.
Whilst peole sit back locally and allow these people to draw down their monthly wage and have their pension topped up the more the sacnadl of Loacl Govenement gravey trains will persist.
Matt – I fully agree with your assumption that the ‘rave’ reviews are being driven by those connected with Ty Pawb. Next thing is we will probably see large numbers of postings on Tripadvisor as someone within the Council buys the reviews which are a known fact about how this service works to boose a businesses ratings.
At a time of Social Media being the way to get the message out, how often are they Tweeting etc to keep the profile up — irrespective of what people think about the place their marketing officer should be working overtime to try and boost the profile…
Well it looks like Council Members a moving towards a contract termination with Kingdom — if you don’t want to take responsibility for your own actions the best form of defence is to create a committee who can then come up with the obvious solution but avoids any individual carrying the can.
The committee has been created to save the Lead Member from having to eat his own words and back peddle
Gayn – I’m sure over 25 years you must have witnessed a big change in the relationship between managers and staff – moving from friendly colleagues to ‘us and them’. Managers are more prone now to self-preservation of their own position even if it means impacting on the working environment.
What is so noticeable everytime bullying and working practices comes up there is never any comments coming from the Unions — why have they now got an attitude of keeping everything under wraps.
Thanks – so the contract is 85% Kingdom 15% Council – so the Council gained – so the Council over a year are only likely to make £68k according to my Grove Park calculator — if that is the case it is significantly less than the £200k that Conwy Council were making
Rob based on your knowledge of the contract could you give an indication of how much the Council are making based on these three months worth of payments to Kingdom
05-Jan-18 000000815394 0187013 KINGDOM LTD 20961
17-Jan-18 000000816725 0187013 KINGDOM LTD 24480
24-Jan-18 000000817460 0187013 KINGDOM LTD 14076
16-Feb-18 000000820501 0187013 KINGDOM LTD 21165
21-Mar-18 000000824701 0187013 KINGDOM LTD 17442
£98144I still think it will be Kingdom that pull the plug on the contract so that they save face by not having the contract terminated
If this is correct it is a classic case of harassment and the operative and Kingdom should be stopped from this behavior. The pensioner or family member should request under a Subject Access Request a copy of the town CCTV from the period in question to a) show their innocence and b) show the harassment. The Council is legally required to provide images of an individual that are held under a subject access. The only occasion that this could be withheld is if the person had committed a criminal offense (littering is not) then it could be held back to be part of legal proceeding evidence.
Need to act asap as the Council have a habit of deleting CCTV footage.
