WrexhamUser
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Wrexview, you make a good point. These forums have often mentioned the lack of influence the majority of councillors have on decision-making due to the executive model of local government. Furthermore, modern technology has altered the way councillors, and their constituents communicate with each other. Most communication is now through email, social media and such rather than a face-to-face meeting. Because of such changes, councillors can cover larger constituencies than in the past. I understand a small minority of people for various reasons do not use such technology, but due to the low numbers, face-to-face meetings with them remains feasible. I suspect the majority of face-to-face contact with local councillors is around the period a constituency during contested elections!
A different approach to reducing council tax bills is to consider the effectiveness of the local community councils more carefully. The local community councils have minimal powers. Community councils lack influence in local government decision making. A community council will often rely on that of the elected county borough councillor that already holds a seat at that level of local government. I accept that the amount of funding of community councils is lower than that of the county borough, but they do incur expenses, administrations costs, and need to employ a clerk. Removing all the community councils would lead to significant year-on-year savings.
I am frequently annoyed that increasingly the local community councils increased their council tax precept. They do not use it for administering and paying for few services under its jurisdiction. Instead, they provide donations to charities, sometimes tenuously linked to their wards, and grants to local organisations. I should not be forced to pay tax to support these donations and grants; it should be my decision if I want to contribute to them. I sometimes suspect that the photo opportunity influences community councils decisions to make such gifts. Historically, generous local representatives would make such gestures out of their pockets rather than enforcing tax-payers to do so by paying their community tax.
This is far from a new problem. For many years we have been warned that the number of doctors wanting to enter general practice resulting in a reduced supply of new GPs. Furthermore, the problem has been amplified by the issue that the current cohort of GPs are nearer to retirement age and are retiring. The number of new GPs does not meet current, yet increasing demand.
The doctors who have spent a great deal of money on their university degree, quite rightly, can decide where they want to work and what specialism they wish to follow. I understand that this creates quite a few difficulties elsewhere in the U.K. so are not unique to Wrexham. Some places are more popular than others, and others provide greater opportunities to progress their career. Many doctors do not want to enter the specialism of general practice due to the nature of the work. GP surgeries are not run by the NHS, and they are private businesses that the local health board contracts to provide a certain level of service. It does not appear to be an appealing personal financial investment when you consider the challenging funding situation due to the Welsh Assembly’s, often inappropriate, division of its resources to other matters.
Betsi Cadwaladr creates a significant problem. Some of our GPs enter training for that specialism after being junior doctors practising within the health board hospitals. The potential for recruiting junior doctors to our local hospitals is a problem as many specialisms are contracted out to other health authorities, so it is not worth them coming to our local hospitals. A doctors reputation is essential for career progression, so coming to a health authority that remains in special measures is not very attractive. Furthermore, with all the complaints about waiting lists, insufficient resources et cetra, why would any doctor choose work in this health board?
In addition to the UK problems about recruiting GPs, we must look at the additional problems caused by Betsi Cadwaladr. Furthermore, the Welsh Assembly who has the devolved responsibility for health that has failed continuously to resolve the poor performance of Betsi Cadwaladr.
My concern is not so much as what was said, but how the council have dealt with it. I always thought that going back to official recordings, film footage of events, and photographs of things later considered politically questionable, and subsequently amending and deleting parts of them to make it wholly acceptable to those in power was only used during the era of Stalin’s tyranny in the Soviet Union.
As we know from the Wrexham town centre footfall counter the Wrexham County Borough Council’s research methodology tends to be pretty poor. I do wonder how they have constructed these figures. Unless they have a counter all day and every day on every route of entry and exit, the figures must be based on a statistical sample and model. Only after their research methodology is confirmed as robust, and the reliability of the statistics accepted is it worth contemplated why the figures have altered.
It is incredible the amount of self-promotion that goes on in North Wales Police, even though they tend to press the send button without reflecting on what the public might think about it!
T/Supt Mark Armstong, a senior officer, liked the tweet, so the question is, does he know how to manage his resources effectively? And, as T/Supt Armstong liked the tweet, it would be interesting to know the thoughts of the Police Crime Commissioner on the force’s senior officers use of its budget, and if he also thinks it acceptable. I expect we will never find out, as the Police Crime Commissioner does not like to publicise his impotence at scrutinising the force, it is far easier just to ask us taxpayers for more money
Councillor Bithell’s viewpoints lead me to have two extra thoughts on the issue of littering to those initially made when I started this thread
(1) What has happened to democracy in Wrexham? The problems around Kingdom and littering policy evidence the viewpoint that the council is over-influenced and managed by a cabal of unrepresentative councillors in an executive. The transparency of becoming an executive member is lacking, and it seems that the majority of elected members can do little to either challenge the executive’s policies. They are unable or unwilling to remove an executive member with whom they seriously disagree. The full council of elected members could change this undemocratic model of local government but so far not had the will to do so.
(2) Since the beginning of public policing in the early 19th century the principle of policing in England and Wales was policing by consent of the public. Failing to keep to this traditional principle undermines policing as it will cause conflicts between it and the public; additionally, the police will not receive the public’s support. As we move towards ‘private policing’ it is worth bearing in mind our traditional policing principles. We could head toward a different policing model, such as on continental Europe, where policing is imposed on the public by the power of the state. However, if we wish to change policing by consent, I argue that more significant discussion and thought is needed than accepting the current dictates of Cllr Bithell.
[quote quote=146523]As reported on here previously regarding Kingdom , the Lead Member has been clear: ‘We are not following DEFRA guidance, we are following legislation’.[/quote]
While accepting that is the opinion of the lead member, they must comply with their obligations. An obligation is that the local authority shall have and publish an enforcement strategy. I am unsure if their viewpoint corresponds with that document.
Contradictions exist between the lead members viewpoint and the document. The introduction mentions that any enforcement action is taken only after consideration of the enforcement strategy, which emphasises proportionate, sensible action, and a focus on prevention. While not wanting to reiterate the whole Wrexham County Borough enforcement strategy, as people will make their own subjective interpretation of it, two stark difference appears to exist between the policy and the lead members viewpoint. Section 2 ‘Our Approach’ clearly states they will adhere, ‘to the latest national guidelines and best practice’. The various parts of section 4 ‘Regulatory Enforcement Sanctions’, also states the council will when taking the step of ‘Formal Enforcement Action’, in which it includes fixed penalty notices, will be ‘in accordance with statutory guidelines, relevant codes of practice and any professional guidance’. I shall leave it to other’s to decide if the lead officer’s viewpoints comply with the enforcement strategy document.
If anybody from the council happens to read this post, have a look at Section 4.2 (Step 3). When the updated 2017 policy document was introduced, anti-social behaviour orders (ASBOs) had already been abolished three years previously due to the introduction of the Anti-Social Behaviour Crime and Policing act 2014!
Just to be clear, I have not been caught littering, but the enforcement policy adopted by the council does seem fraught with problems.
[quote quote=137376]The Cabinet style is not mandatory and different Councils across Wales have different strictures to maintain democracy. You are correct that if the correct number of Councillors put a proposal forward then the Constitution could be changed at an Annual Meeting.
The concern I have at present is the lack of engagement that a very large number of Council Members elected in May are undertaking. It is a disgrace that they were elected to represent their constituents yet they don’t even turn up to meetings. I would urge every elector in Wrexham to track down their local Council member and ask them about what they have been doing since being elected and drawing down their monthly allowance.
If YOUR Councillor is not engaging then it does not matter whether there is a Cabinet style or open Council system it will remain democratically ineffective.
[/quote]
It appears that changes are possible, but it depends on the will of our councillors. I was unaware that some councillors were failing in their duty to represent their constituents, that is unacceptable and agree that they need to be held to account for their absences at meetings. However, I do wonder if this lack of engagement might not result from the current executive model; Is the lack if engagement pure apathy, or are councillors becoming quickly disillusioned when they realise the amount of influence they have within the WCBC?
I know childcare is expensive, my child goes full-time to a different private nursery, but it is my choice!
The council are willing to spend a fortune on their art centre that has cost a fortune, and they have put aside a greater sum to subsidise its predicted losses in the first few years, that they predict to be higher than the subsidy for the nursery. It is very likely that subsidy per head for visitors to the art centre will be higher than the per head subsidy at the nursery.
This is not about money but how the council wants to spend it. What I think is perverse is that the council does not want to spend money on the children who will be disrupted, confused and upset as they leave a familiar setting, staff and friends. Instead, they want to protect their grandiose art centre scheme that gives certain councillors a ‘legacy’, and children do not vote!
