27 February 2011

Am I being unfair....

Further to my rather critical comments about Phil Dolan and his 'golden goodbye' it has been pointed out that this is pretty much 'standard issue' in government. Managers at all levels are compensated, in part, as a measure of their level of responsibility and a major factor in that consideration is the number of people for whom they are responsible. So, as far as management goes, the greater the number of bodies in the office, the better the salary and pension prospects of the managers. Put another way, obesity in government is incentivised.

The Daily Racist and the other tabloids yap on about 'lazy council workers' and 'jobs for the boys or girls' but, as far as I know, Council employees, in common with all employees in local and national government, apply for and accept jobs that are offered to them. People don't turn up at Council offices or government departments brandishing guns and demanding that they be given a job. No, for the most part they respond to job opportunities that are created by management. Which is exactly why Phil's 'Golden P45' is so galling. At a time when the footsoldiers are being told that their jobs are disappearing, that the economy is in recession so their employment prospects are poor, at exactly the same time people like Phil Dolan swan out the door dragging a sack of loot behind them.

And its people like Phil Dolan who 'managed' the economy into the mess that almost destroyed it in 2008. And its people like Phil Dolan who benefited from the employee numbers because those numbers made Phils 'Golden P45' all the bigger.

I wonder if David Cameron would like to apply slash and burn to government management locally, regionally and nationally? I doubt that he's got the balls for it because the civil service would fillet him. But I'd at least like to see him try.

Till next time, I'm still Niall Connolly

PS I missed this programme but the synopsis looks interesting. Extreme? Probably. Worrying? Definitely.

24 February 2011

Shake the money tree.....






Last week, the Daily Telegraph headlined SSDC's payout to the ex-Chief Exec Phil Dolan and some of his (ex) colleagues. The numbers are quite eye-watering, especially when rate and taxpayers within SSDC's administrative area are facing draconian cuts imposed by Conservative Central Office. At the same time, very clever people, like Phil 'smug git' Dolan, are running off with truck-loads of cash and Councillors within SSDC sit silently as if it has nothing to do with them. Their silence, their willingness to be complicit in this sort of corporate mugging and their willingness to implement draconian cuts shows them to be the shallow hypocrits that we all suspect they were in the first place.
Its also worth mentioning that two of Somerton's 'resigners', Beale and Canvin, remain as members of SSDC so we can guess what sort of accountability they pursue there.

But returning to 'smug git', its interesting to read that, being a fully paid up member of the 'revolving door society' Phil just missed out on the top job as chief exec of Cherwell District Council and South Northamptonshire Council. I'm sure that Phil applied for that job because he had honed his corporate mugging skills at SSDC and wanted to try the same stunt twice.

In the meantime, SSDC have published a 'rebuttal' of the Telegraph story on the front page of the SSDC website. What is interesting is that the SSDC rebuttal doesn't take issue with any of the numbers. In fact, the SSDC story confirms the Telegraph's numbers but seems to complain that the numbers that were published are being misrepresented. The thrust of the SSDC 'rebuttal' is that all the dosh that Phil ran off with was just his due. How nice for him. Going to bed on a pillow stuffed with the taxpayer's money must be very very comforting.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, many people will be affected in very real ways by the cuts in services being imposed upon then because the government chose to bail out the bankers who almost destroyed our economy. The ConDems keep on saying, at every opportunity, that they inherited the mess from the previous government and I suppose, if they say that often enough, they themselves might just believe it. But the truth is that the cuts that we face are being imposed because the bankers screwed us and we were forced to bail them out to the tune of £Billions.

Amazingly, for reasons that quite escape me, the bankers remain at the helm (assisted by Cameron and Clegg, who stay out of their way) and continue to run off with truck loads of cash. So Phil 'smug git' Dolan is a man of his time. He does nothing that his friends in other high places aren't doing and our elected representatives at SSDC remain silent. Benghazi, Cairo, Tunis .............. Yeovil? I don't think so.

Till next time, I'm still Niall Connolly

22 February 2011

The badger's back

Another planning application has been received by SSDC relating to the land at Badger's Cross owned (I understand) by the ex-Vice Chair of Somerton Town Council, Tony Canvin.

The site has something of a controversial history having first sprung to prominence as a proposed Household Waste Recycling Centre. That project, sponsored by Mr Canvin and promoted by then County Councillor Pauline Clarke, ran into a storm of opposition when it was finally made public in 2009. It was also one of the catalysts for the mass resignation of the Town Council in October 2009 as it was the focus of calls for a Town referendum on the HWRC which would have forced the delinquent Council of that time to listen to the wider community.

Since that time Mr canvin has made a number of attempts to gain planning consent for the industrial use of the land, something which, given Mr Canvin's involvement at the Bancombe Road Trading Estate, would be the precursor to his development of Bancombe mk2.

The latest attempt is to seek planning consent under the guise of what is called a 'certificate of lawfulness'. You can get more information about this developer's wheeze here but there are two thrusts to such an application. The application can either seek to have a particular use or activity deemed lawful or have a proposed use or activity deemed lawful. The point being that the applicant is seeking to circumvent the planning process and avoiding actually seeking specific consent for the actual or proposed use. (Canvin's colleague ex-Cllr 'invisible' Dave Smith pulled a similar stunt at Badgers Cross with his timber chalet which he erected without planning consent.)

This approach raises a number of issues which may have an impact upon South Somerset District Council (already in the news because of Phil 'loadsamoney' Dolan's golden payoff) and might raise the spectre of liability.

Firstly, there is the awkward issue (for the applicant that is) of the planning opinion written by the applicant's planning consultant, Matt Frost, in 2004 whilst he was in the employ of SSDC. That opinion, sought by an agent acting for the then owner, was quite specific in there being no extant B2 use on the site and I am sure that opinion influenced the manner in which the land was marketed and sold. Were the Planning Authority now to agree that there was such a use then the original vendor might have a claim against the Authority for compensation.

Then there is the matter of the absence of enforcement action against the activity on the land since the applicant became the owner. These activities have been the subject of serial complaints to SSDC's planning enforcement team yet no action has been taken by SSDC. Were the Planning Authority to grant a CoL they would, in effect, be aiding and abetting the previous activity on the site for which there was no planning consent. Furthermore, the Planning Authority would be giving comfort to such actions and, in so doing, encouraging others to do likewise.

All in all, its a sorry tale and reflects badly on District Councillors like Mr Canvin who, as elected representatives, should be seen to obey both the letter and the spirit of the law. But, as ever, accountability seems to stop short of our elected representatives at all levels.

Till next application, I'm still Niall Connolly

18 February 2011


17 February 2011


15 February 2011


13 February 2011


12 February 2011


10 February 2011



5 February 2011

A moment of contemplation......

The LibDems have just delivered their latest comic and the front page caught my eye. A very fine photograph of Cllr Pauline Clarke looking wistfully over a wall at Northfields, the site of a possible large scale housing development in Somerton. But it wasn't the thoughtful pose that attracted my attention, it was the caption. Maybe Cllr Clarke has turned over a new leaf since her shabby promotion of the Canvin scheme at Badger's Cross.

On the back of the same comic was a piece featuring Cllr 'Dave' Harrison holding the door open at the Tin Dunny. In the piece, 'Dave' explains that Somerton had difficulty in finding a site for the hall and I find that a very curious statement. Somerton did own the Etsome Terrace site which was bought specifically as the site for a Community Hall. But instead of building a hall at Etsome, the Keenan/Canvin administration, which included 'Dave', managed to flog the site off and buy the Tin Dunny instead. Nice one 'Dave'.

Till next time, I'm still Niall Connolly

1 February 2011

 
Over the last months Somerton has been in receipt of some interesting and anonymous literature and the most recent effort was shown to me this morning. Its a rather deceitful document and the timing of its publication is worthy of comment. 

Somerton Town Council is beginning to discuss the future of Edgar's Hall (aka the Tin Dunny) and part of that discussion will, inevitably, cover the issue of whether the town should keep it or sell it. Hopefully, this is a decision that will be put to the community in some sort of referendum and that, in itself, will stand in stark contrast to the shabby manner in which the old Town Council nodded the deal through without any reference to the community.

However, were the Town to vote and vote in favour of selling the Tin Dunny, a new and more interesting problem would arise. Selling the Tin Dunny would reveal its market value and quite a few people, notably the old Town Council, would have something of an interest in how much the Town could get for the Tin Dunny. Anything less than the Keenan & Canvin administration's valuation of £1.3million would leave a few people with egg on their faces.

So its no wonder that this sad little document scuttles into the daylight at this juncture. Its just a pity that the authors of the document don't have the courage to put their names to it. But that's the old guard for you. Gutless to the last.

Till next time, I'm still Niall Connolly