DAMN LIES

An email exchange from March last year:

From: "Pugh, David"
To: "Conservatives"
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006

This is all with a view to creating effective, opposition led and dominated scrutiny as we aspire to .....demonstrate that, despite our large majority, we are prepared to be held to account by the minority opposition and effectively engage them all in council politics.

From: Geoff Lumley
Sent: 08 March 2006 19:56
To: 'David Pugh'

We would want to have TWO of your places on the currently constituted Scrutiny Committee. This would mean - 2 Tories, 2 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Indep, 3 others, Total 9.

From: Pugh, David
Sent: 09 March 2006 08:57
To: Geoff Lumley

What I would propose instead is an alternative fall-back motion if the disapplied one fails, that still increases the size of the committee, to an extent that proportionality would give the Conservatives five seats, and we could then permanently loan two of these to you.

From: Geoff Lumley
Date: 09-Mar-2006 13:36
Subject: Scrutiny
To: "Pugh, David"

A committee of ten is fine if we get two seats permanently loaned i.e. for duration of this Council.

From: Pugh, David
Sent: 16 March 2006 10:47
To: Gardiner, Deborah (Home); Geoff Lumley

Further to last night's vote to increase the size of the Scrutiny Committee to 12 elected members, I can confirm that the Conservative Group will "lend" two seats to the Labour Group for the duration of this council term, or until such time as proportionality is successfully disapplied to enable you to have these seats in your own right.

What was it Nye Bevan said about Conservatives ?

OPPOSITION SCRUTINY LOST AFTER ONE YEAR

In March last year Labour agreed to take on the near defunct role of Chair of the Scrutiny Committee provided that we were allocated two places on the committee by the Tories for the rest of this Council, and that the Tories maintained their commitment to a non-Tory majority on the committee. These were agreed in writing by the then Cabinet Secretary, and Deborah and I then agreed to put my name forward.

Since my election as Chair there have been 9 of us - 2 Labour, 1 independent, 3 co-optes, and 3 Tories (with a LibDem vacancy). A non-Tory majority of 6:3. Although a small and disparate group we have worked well together and have undertaken a number of important scrutiny enquiries of internal affairs, such as Wightcare home care, planning processes and gains, budget efficiencies, councillors allowances, loss of housing grants, use of consultants, educational attainment, 'Supporting People', and car parking policy. External partners have not been part of our brief, as shown by Health Scrutiny being with one of the Tory-controlled policy commissions.

At the March Full Council this year the Council Leader announced that he wanted the Scrutiny Committee to take on board some of the new external responsibilities promulgated in the Government's local government White Paper. I welcomed this announcement, though was privately intrigued to note that these new responsibilities were about external partners. This would be a new departure indeed for the committee.

Well the Constitution was changed at Full Council this month to reflect these changes and the pay off arrived in my Inbox today. Effectively the Tories have realised that they cannot give the lead for scrutiny of external partners to opposition members and have decided:

* to pack the Scrutiny Committee with a Tory majority

* withdraw our two places on the committee.

Consequently there will be 8 Tories, me for Labour, 1 LibDem vacancy, 2 independents and the 3 co-optees. A Tory majority of 8:7.

So in the future even scrutiny of internal affairs will be in the hands of the ruling Tories, just because they could not think of an alternative way to deal with the White Paper - an alternative that is staring them in the face, but they are too dim to see. Who polices the police ? Or is this all in fact a manoeuvre to remove me from a position where I can make very public waves ?

As a consequence I am now considering my position as Chair of Scrutiny. No final decision has been made yet, but I will decide once and for all by the time of the May committee meeting.

HOLDING THE ISLAND IN CONTEMPT ? - part two

I see my piece of 20.4.07 got coverage in the County Press.

Fascinating to learn that the responsibility for doing the Leader's Annual Report lies with someone else - another Cabinet Member. Maybe if I ask for someone to do mine next year and Deborah someone to do hers they could then appoint another 2 new Cabinet members ?

You wouldn't make it up !

WORSE THAN I IMAGINED

Just watched the double-handed LibDem appearance on Solent TV, together with some American bloke who wasn't allowed to make a real contribution even if he had one to make. The two Liberals were even passing notes to each other whilst Sutton tried to appear statesmanlike. It was quite excruciating.

Reminded me of the time (15.2.07) two Tory Cabinet members were put up against Deborah.

Best laugh - the former Liberal councillor claiming her party was 'devastated' by the Education decision - forgetting that one of their three members (Bowker) actually voted in favour of the Tory changes last Monday. No wonder they need a helping hand !

LAST HEALTH SCRUTINY MEETING

Last night was my last Policy Commission for Care, Health Scrutiny and Housing after 2 years. We had the IW NHS PCT Chief Exec along who used the word 'surplus' in his financial recovery update and talked about the extra £20m funding our Health Trust has for this year. All of this is very welcome news and rather took the wind out out of my sails. I wonder if all will be as rosy come the autumn.

So that is the end of Labour's involvement in the Policy Commissions for the next 2 years. Of course we were only ever along for the ride (and a bit of scrutiny/opposition), as unlike the LibDem group leader we don't help Tories deliver their manifesto. Instead we now have places on quasi-legal bodies like Planning and Licensing, which neither Deborah nor I are interested in at all. In fact you can hardly give them away to other councillors !

Of course we still have the Scrutiny Committee; don't we ?........................

Tory Group meeting this evening was probably fun, as reshuffle recriminations rear their heads. Wish I was a fly on the wall. Though I would probably drown from all the political blood flying around !

A BIASED BROADCASTER ?

As the IW LibDems drag out their death throes, it seems that one media outlet on the Island is determined to give them a boost at the expense of Island Labour if at all possible.

Last February just after the Council Budget Solent TV tried to restrict the Panel on their Extra Extra programme to the Tory Council Leader and the IW LibDem chairperson (who isn't even a councillor). Only complaints by me for Island Labour that it was hardly fair to cut out the ONLY opposition party that submitted an alternative Budget, secured us a slot in that edition.

Now they are deliberately cutting us out of their post 14-19 Education edition of the programme tomorrow. Complaints by both me and our party Chair, Mark Chiverton, have seen no relenting in their position.

Their bias against Labour and their pro-LibDemmery is becoming manifest.

Or perhaps the Tory Council Leader prefers an easy ride from a party who had someone voting WITH the Tories on the 14-19 Education issue last Monday......

MONDAY's NAMED VOTE

As a public service, the 35 who voted in favour of the new school system are:

Abraham, Arnold, Brown, Bulwer, Burt, Cameron, Cousins, Cunningham, Effemey, Fitzgerald-Bond, Hunter-Henderson, Joyce, Kennett, McRobert, Mosdell, Oulton, Pigot, Pugh, Scoccia, Sutton, Swan, Taylor, Ward, Webster, Wells, West, Whittaker D, Whittaker J, Williams (all Tories), Chapman, Foster, Humby, Miller, Stephens (all Independents), and Bowker (LibDem).

The 5 against were: Gardiner & Lumley (Labour), Hancock (Independent), Adams and Knowles (LibDem)

Absent were: Bishop, Churchman, Hobart, Peacey-Wilcox, Tuson, Wood (all Tories) and Price (LibDem). The Chairman did not vote

MUSINGS FROM THE FRONTLINE OF OPPOSITION

Two little stories to ponder:

1. A contentious issue has two prime protagonists, and a third party that sits almost silent on the sidelines. Is it then balanced to re-visit the issue with the silent one and just one of the main protagonists ?

2. Three people. Two are asked to do a difficult job, but fail and resign quickly. A third takes on the job and succeeds. The job is then made even more difficult; indeed un-do-able. Who commands respect - the first two, the third, or the people who change the goalposts ?

Answers gratefully received....

CHIEF EXEC RAPS COUNCIL LEADER

After last week's latest bigoted attack on me for my lack of Christian (or any?) faith, the Chief Exec has assured me that he has formally written to the Council Leader to advise him that his remarks can be construed as discriminatory.

Given that this was the third such attack on me in 7 months I have no doubt in my mind that bigotry is at the root of these attacks.

14-19 EDUCATION: STEP INTO THE UNKNOWN

A special Full Council tonight saw clear agreement to combine the 5 Island High Schools into one Trust with a single management and a single governing body; and no future choice for Island students and parents. The vote was a 'named' one, with 35 in favour (including six opposition councillors - Bowker (LibDem), and independents Stephens, Miller, Humby, Foster and Chapman) and just 5 against (Deborah and I, 2 LibDems - Adams and Knowles, and one independent - Hancock). Interestingly one in six Tories weren't present.

The Council then agreed to transfer Year 9 into Middle Schools provided certain conditions were met, by 32 votes to 7 (Bowker again with the Tories, but Stephens and Miller now against). That is what will close at least one of the 5 High School sites.

Throughout the debate on these two issues there was no LibDem contribution to the debate. Additionally the 'free vote' in the Tory group showed no difference from a 'whipped vote', demonstrating perhaps the semi-ovine characteristics of that group.

Our own motion to retain the existing school system, whilst working to improve standards and collaboration, was lost with only us 2 in favour, and everyone else against ! So much for effective opposition from the LibDems.....

HOLDING THE ISLAND IN CONTEMPT ?

With the unanimous adoption of a new Members Allowance Scheme last October came a requirement for each councillor to submit a 200 word annual report for publication on the official website by the time of the Council's annual meeting.

The annual meeting took place last Wednesday and a quick check on the official websites of each councillor shows that 20 of the 48 do not appear to have bothered to meet this simple requirement, despite two reminders in the previous weeks.

Included in this 20 are the Leader of the Council (pictured) - who benefited most from the new allowances scheme - one of the new Cabinet members who actually proposed the new allowances scheme last October when a Cabinet Secretary, the Cabinet member for 'The Customer', the chair of Planning Committee, and two of the four Policy Commissioners. Additionally not one of the 3 Ryde Liberals has bothered, nor two of the Independent Group. Guess which group met the requirement 100% !

Go to http://www.iwight.com/councillor/andysutton/
and then click on the Annual Report link......

UPDATE 25.4.07 - The Council leader and new Cabinet member are now compliant, but not the others.

UPDATE 14.5.07 - The other 18 are STILL not compliant.

GREEN REALITY GAP

I went along to a public meeting with the Green MEP for the South East last night. Apparently the Green Party are trying to re-launch on the Island after years of invisibility and I always like to keep an eye on such developments.

There were about 50 people there and they heard the usual cogent plea from the MEP for real action over climate change, with lots of criticism of mainstream parties. When some daft Marxist/Communist/Green/Whatever then made some barmy remarks about there being a Con/Lab/Lib federation running this country I had had enough.

I complimented the MEP on her environmental analysis, but then pointed out the massive gap between her analysis and stark reality. The Green Party is never going to form a government to change things (like the Liberals) or run a Council, so why don't they instead join the only party that can make a difference (Labour) if there is enough pressure from within its ranks for such change?

As fully expected I was howled down and told how effective the handful of Green MEPS and councillors are in securing amendments to policies and such like. I could sense the polluters quaking in their boots !

ON THE EDGE

Last night was Full Council. As it was the annual meeting it was mainly about back-slapping, with the election of a new Chairman and Vice Chairman and fond Tory farewells to the outgoing LibDem Chairman. Both new appointments I abstained upon as the Tories consult with all groups about these non-political positions except Labour - apparently (in the words of the bigoted Council Leader) because we don't attend Christian prayers at the start of each meeting and therefore don't deserve to be consulted. I am not making this up. I wonder if the same would apply if we were Muslim, Hindu or Sikh rather than atheist ? Of course not.

We then learnt that the outgoing Chairman will not be re-joining the LibDem group, but will now operate as a Liberal Independent !!!!!

For annual election of Council Leader, the LibDems voted against the incumbent with me, with all but one of the Independent group abstaining.

We then had a paper re-jigging the membership of committees/commissions that will serve to remove Deborah and I from areas like health scrutiny (sse my post on 16 April). The Tories tabled at that point some revised recommendations, one of which will serve to change the Assoc of Town & Parish Council representative on my Scrutiny Committee. I protested that for the second Full Council running changes to Scrutiny were being proposed by the majority group without even the courtesy of informing me, let alone consulting with me.

I advised them in the strongest terms possible that if this happens again I will have to resign as Chair of Scrutiny - a position I was then re-elected to for the next year.

As the meeting ended numerous people came to me to express their disgust at the Council Leader's religious discrimination. I then left County Hall whilst the rest of them and various civic bigwigs went to the traditional new Chairman's drinks reception.

WHAT SORT OF RELIGION IS IT........

..............that allows someone like the Council Leader to continually discriminate against those IW Councillors who have no religious faith ?

Certainly not one as represented by the decent Christian people that have spoken to me in sadness after tonight's latest attack on me by the bigot who runs this Council.

RE-ELECTED AS NEWPORT CHAIR

I was very proud tonight to be re-elected unanimously as Chair of Newport Town Management Committee for another year. Hopefully by this time next year we will be moving towards elections for a proper Newport Town Council.

KICKED OFF FOR SPEAKING OUT

Looks like I am being manoeuvred off the Health Scrutiny committee at this week's Full Council in what I can only judge is a naked attempt to deny me a platform to criticise the Health Trust's financial management.

Similarly looks like my comrade Deborah Gardiner will be manoeuvred off the Children's Policy Commission for openly opposing the proposed schools reorganisation.

Instead we are being allocated places on the Planning and Licensing committees ! Not likely...

GRASPING AND GRIPING ?

After a week away I return to find that the Tories are going to increase their Cabinet size next week by a further 2 members, making 10 in total. Given they increased it by one just last December at this rate there will be more Tories in the Cabinet than not by the summer next year.

Keeping 36 Tories happy must be proving more difficult than the Leader anticipated. Especially when their political philosophy is all about getting one over on their fellow man.......

ANOTHER FOUNDATION STONE LAID ?

Tonight saw the Cabinet in Pan, making its latest decision about how to progress the Pan development.

There is a real urgency about it now as the alternative is too grim to contemplate - loss of £11m for much needed affordable housing (2,500 on the IW housing register would like to live in Pan). Consequently they have ruled out a bypass around the outskirts of any development - from Staplers to Shide - as it would threaten the timely delivery of the whole project. It MUST start in April 2009.

My view is homes before roads, but I feel that a real opportunity has been missed and said so. Last year at a Cabinet in March I was promised they would look seriously at a bypass, something many locals would like to see, but that hasn't been done at all over the last year. Despite the MPs support. So instead there will be a traffic management review of Newport - again.

The Pan residents present asked a number of questions about the development:- who will get the affordable housing, community facilities, school capacity, flooding, and traffic, and got answers of a sort. I asked about health services - which is being looked at.

In my own opening contribution I urged them to consult properly after their decision was made and to actually LISTEN to what they hear, which in my experience was not what happened 3 years ago when the masterplan was put together. They undertook to do this in a 'walk and talk' week during June.

The Council Leader summed up the decision to agree progress as a 'foundation' stone' of the new development. I couldn't help thinking he said the same at Cabinet a year ago when a different decision on development partners was made. This change of direction has been a bit like turning an oil tanker.....

Anyway that's me signing off for a while. Having a week off. Back on 12th.

MID TERM REVIEW

Today I spent the afternoon calling on those Pan voters who I have not spoken to since 2005. I consider it important to talk with people face to face more than just every 4 years - though they hear from me by Newsletter every 3 months - and have pledged to do this 'mid-term review' over the next few weeks.

As ever it was thoroughly enjoyable. A lovely afternoon and decent people to talk to. Makes being a councillor worthwhile. Oh, and so far they think I am doing a good job !