"Council leader under fire over leak to local press" - The Carmarthenshire Herald

Further to my previous post, 'Carmarthenshire Council to pursue me for £190,390 libel costs', and as I ponder just what their 'opening dialogue' with me could possibly be, the Carmarthenshire Herald has dug deeper into the curious manner in which I learned of the decision.

Pic source; Carmarthenshire Herald on Facebook

As I mentioned, I didn't discover what had been decided at the closed session meeting until a reporter from the Carmarthen Journal phoned me for a comment a week later. The minutes were not published until the following afternoon.

Not only was the paper furnished with a statement from Plaid Cymru Council leader Emlyn Dole but also published specific information which could only have come from the 'exempt' report. An exempt report is rather like a classified document, not for the eyes of the press and public.

Despite being a party to the case, I had been patiently waiting for the verdict since the meeting on the 21st March having been told, by the head of legal, that I would only be notified once all 74 councillors had been informed.

The Herald asked a couple of councillors, namely Anthony Jones (Lab) and People First's Sian Caiach if they had indeed been 'informed' prior to Cllr Dole's tete a tete with the newspaper. Unsurprisingly, they hadn't heard a thing. Oh dear.

The Herald posed a series of straightforward questions to the council;
Could they have a copy the Leader's statement, and the head of legal's assessment of the prospects for recovery of the money?
Did the council think it appropriate for a member or officer to make a public statement without informing the other party to the litigation of its substance?
Could the council to confirm if, when and how all councillors were notified of the decision before Cllr Dole's leak of confidential information?
When, and how, did the legal department inform Mrs Thompson?

All questions were completely ignored, aside from the request for Cllr Dole's one line statement which had appeared in the Journal, adding "No further information will be provided".

Of course it seems like only yesterday (actually it was last June) that Plaid members took the outraged moral high ground to publicly denounce another 'leak'. Perhaps Cllr Dole has a short memory...

Some of us can also recall extensive Plaid criticism of the Labour administration for misusing the council press office and further outrage over the chief executive's long-running efforts to control the local press.

How things change.
As I mentioned here (towards the end of the post) I made a complaint to the council concerning the chief executive's statement to the Western Mail a few weeks ago. I was concerned that Mr James' use of council facilities to channel untruthful allegations about members of the public was unbecoming for a CBE-holder and impending Returning Officer, and possibly breached the Officers' Code of Conduct.

My complaint was, naturally, dismissed by the ever-loyal head of legal, Linda Rees Jones as a 'private matter' between Mr James and myself but as I'd also raised the query of compliance, or otherwise, with the Council's Press and Media Protocol, she would let the Corporate Complaints department deal with that issue.

I was rather surprised therefore to receive an email yesterday, not from 'Complaints', but from Council leader Emlyn Dole;

Dear Mrs Thompson,

I refer to your email of 14th March, 2016 in which you seek to make a complaint against the Chief Executive.

I have given this matter careful consideration and I concur with the comments made by the Head of Legal Services regarding the substantive issue raised in your email. I am firmly of the view that this is indeed a private matter between yourself and Mr James.

Furthermore, having considered the facts in this case, I am not persuaded that there has been a breach of the Council’s Press and Media Protocol and have no further comments to make on this particular matter.

Yours sincerely

Councillor Emlyn Dole – Leader of the Council

I thanked Cllr Dole for his disappointing but predictable response and asked him to pass on my thanks to whoever wrote the email...

The aim to become the 'most open and transparent council in Wales' continues to fail dismally and the steady transformation of Leader Dole into the Organ Grinder's monkey appears to be complete.

Carmarthenshire Council to pursue me for libel costs

I have learned, from today's Carmarthen Journal that the Executive Board, at it's secret meeting on the 21st March, resolved to join the queue and pursue me for the costs of the libel case from 2013, well, £190,000 of the costs.

I did not hear a thing from the council until 1pm today (30th) but had been told, on the 21st March by the head of legal, that I would be informed once all members had been notified of the decision. Whether they have been or not is not clear, but the Journal certainly has been notified, and appears, from the details within the article, to have information from the exempt reports.

However, executive leakage etc is rather by-the-by at the moment for Caebrwyn.

The email I received today at 1pm, from head of legal Linda Rees Jones merely provided me with a helpful link to the just-published minutes of the meeting and to announce that, in regards to the £190,000, they will be 'opening a dialogue' with me shortly.

As regards to the costs of the publicly funded illegal counterclaim, the Minutes state;
"That consideration of pursuing the costs awarded in the counter claim be deferred"
With the £41,000 counterclaim costs excluded, then this is not only a deliberate move to avoid a court challenge but a recognition of illegality, rendering Mr James' damages null and void. They can defer it all they like. It's been paid, it was public money and it was illegal - it's a mess.

It is not clear exactly how the council will try and enforce payment of the £190,000 cost order. They're not going to get it and are now going to spend even more good money going after zero. I'm as curious as I'm sure they are as to how they're going to do that. Perhaps they're going to bankrupt me themselves, saving Mr James the expense? The threats from his bailiffs continue. Not that that route would be productive, perhaps they'll demand blood instead.
Perhaps I should resort to fervent prayer like the Rev Dole, Mark James CBE and the rest.

I do not know what the report to the Executive Board stated or whether it was accurate. However what I do know was that in December 2011, around three months after my claim both  I and my solicitors were given to understand that a settlement had been reached which was agreeable to all sides.

Mr James had agreed to  retract his remarks and undertake not to repeat them, and he and the council had agreed to a contribution towards costs and nominal damages. I had also agreed, reluctantly, for the settlement to be confidential which was insisted upon, and which was of of paramount importance, to Mr James

For reasons which remain unknown, and to the consternation of both sets of solicitors, neither the council, nor Mr James followed through with this and shortly afterwards brought forward the counterclaim.

In my opinion, as soon as the whiff of an indemnity was in the air, the hotels and first class travel was booked and the civic limo was wheel spinning out of County Hall.

The result, for the taxpayer, was that the litigation and the costs escalated and cost hundreds of thousands pounds more than it might have done.

Mr James knew he would be indemnified - the defence and counterclaim, a complex and lengthy piece of work, was served two days after the original exec board meeting where he was given the blank cheque.

However, Plaid Cllr Dole's statement about the "interests of the public purse" don't seem to extend to Mark James' illegal counterclaim. Rather like they didn't extend to the £280,000 bung to the Scarlets to cover a debt.

Anyway, I'll let you know when I hear more.

The fight, clearly, goes on.


Recent post, March 18th; The matter of costs


Update 31st March, BBC Wales; Blogger Jacqui Thompson faces £190,000 court costs

Pembrey and Millenium Country Parks - A fine mess...

A couple of weeks ago I mentioned that a worrying internal report on the leisure facilities at Pembrey Country Park and the Millennium Coastal Park was due to be considered by the Council's Audit Committee. The committee met last Tuesday and thanks to the Carmarthenshire Herald and reporter Alan Evans we have some idea how things panned out, I'll link to the Herald article when it goes online.

The report, or, as the council likes to call these things, the 'Review', was requested by the Director of Communities, having taken over the responsibility for leisure following the departure of the previous Director, Dave Gilbert OBE (now an advisor to the Swansea Bay City Region board). 'Historic issues', whatever they were, were to be looked at.

Anyway, the 'Review', which also included Burry Port Harbour and the Ski Centre at Pembrey Country Park, found there were 'fundamental weaknesses' and a "general non-compliance with the Authorities established procedures", in other words, 'an almighty mess', action was considered to be 'urgent'. The specifics were listed thus;

Non compliance with Financial Procedure Rules (including contract and
quotation procedure rules and Transport & Engineering Unit Policy): 

1. Authority’s procurement arrangements have not been fully complied with 

2. Procedures for collecting and accounting for income need to be improved to minimise
the risk of monies being misappropriated 

3. Procedures for accounting for assets need to be improved to minimise the risk of
assets being stolen or misused, and to ensure that maintenance programmes are
adhered to 

4. The management and administration of agreements / leases for private enterprises
need to be improved / tightened to clarify responsibilities and maximise income 

5. Procedures for the use of facilities by third parties need to be improved 

Risk Management and Business Continuity Strategy: 

1. Health & safety issues have been identified that may present a risk for the Authority
and its employees; 

Employee issues: 

1. Staff working hours including TOIL [Time Off In Lieu] arrangements are not always being recorded and are not being managed at an appropriate level 

2. Employee Declaration of Interests were not being completed appropriately.

The big question which arose at the meeting, mainly from Cllr Bill Thomas (Lab), was how on earth had these findings been arrived at, where was the full report? Had there been fraud? What actually instigated the 'review'? How long had senior officers been aware of these 'historic issues'? He also suggested that an independent third party be brought in to investigate.

Even this scant two page brief makes for grave reading and the failure and reluctance to present the full findings suggested that the detail was in fact, damning.

I have been contacted over the past couple of years by anonymous sources alleging 'procedural improrieties' and even criminal activity at the parks and facilities, and so has the Herald. When the paper raised the issues with the council last year, all were denied.
Along with the rest of us, the Herald wonders just what has been swept under the "already lumpy carpets" at County Hall. As we know, blowing the whistle at Carmarthenshire Council is not easy, particularly if you value both your job and indeed your sanity.

The officers present at the meeting, Head of Leisure, Ian Jones and Head of Audit, Phil Sexton denied that fraud had been found. They talked about 'issues', 'challenges' and 'weaknesses', and areas which needed to be 'strengthened and improved' without identifying what exactly was wrong. No surprises there.

With the Plaid deputy leader Dai Jenkins vowing to leave no stone unturned, the reality was that the Committee, in their impotence, could do no more than formulate an Action Plan to monitor 'improvement', spoon-fed for the next eighteen months or so, by officers. As Cllr Thomas said, the 'Review' should be the start of a full investigation, not the end.

Let's hope for better this time, particularly as the Plaid led administration are fully behind the decision to offload the whole leisure department to a 'trust', which will, of course result in even less democratic oversight than already exists. Presumably they're also fully behind the long-running Mark and Meryl Masterplan to sell-off chunks of the Pembrey peninsular to their preferred bidders.

Personally, I'm expecting more lumpy carpets.

Also on the agenda was further evidence that the council's grant management procedures are still floundering with one report (a set of minutes from the Grants Panel) listing no less than six projects, including the Strategic Regeneration Areas at Cross Hands and Kidwelly, being subject to 'Qualification letters' from the Wales Audit Office. The minutes states that the issues with the WAO are 'being resolved' and provides no more detail than that. As per ususal.

*   *   *

For those wondering about the outcome of last Monday's exempt report entitled 'Enforcement of Costs', well, so am I.
I blogged about it prior to the meeting here; The Matter of Costs

Whatever the Executive Board decided, or didn't decide behind closed doors, rest assured I will, in due course, have plenty to say about it.
As for the Chief Executive's bailiffs, they continue to phone and I continue to tell them there's nothing doing, the cupboards are bare. Their threats appear to be escalating and, in direct proportion, so is my resolve.

The Matter of Costs

After dealing with bailiffs, instructed by Mr James to recover his damages (now £35,000 plus daily interest) for the past few weeks, Monday's (21st March) Executive Board agenda includes an exempt item titled 'Enforcement of Costs Order'. These costs are around £230,000.

As I am the party affected by the Exec Board decision on Monday I asked the Head of Law, Linda Rees Jones for sight of the report and questioned why, as all this information is in the public domain, and was a result of action in an open court, the discussion was being held in secret.

She refused to let me see the report as it contains 'Information relating to the financial affairs of any particular person' blah blah. That person being me.
Despite the title of the item, Ms Rees Jones explains that they are not looking at options for recovery but rather the principle of recovery. Ah, so that's alright then....

Aside from the fact (which I presume they are all aware) that I haven't got £230,000, this all raises several interesting points.

Should the council decide to take action for recovery, a proportion of these costs, around £41,000, relates to Mr James' counterclaim. This makes for very muddy waters for the council - this was the unlawful payment and would make for an interesting public law challenge.

It would also be interesting to see the Plaid leadership actively pursuing the effects of something they once opposed so publicly in those far off days in opposition - even if Cllr Dole is now so deeply enamoured by the Mark and Meryl Empire that he's erased all that unpleasantness from his memory.....

Mr James, concerned primarily with his own pocket rather than the taxpayer's, has already got in there first with his enforcement actions, and by trying to secure his personal damages, attempted to ensure that there was nothing left for the council. As it happens, there is nothing for him either, as I have made clear.

In my view, given the reality of my situation, the Exec Board have no option other than to waive the costs as irrecoverable, unless they're going to join with Mr James, stick the knife in and maybe make me bankrupt, a pointless and expensive exercise but one which would ensure that, as a bankrupt, I'd be unable to stand for the County Council, or even Community Council elections next year.

If I were a devotee of conspiracy theories I might even suspect that Mr James could instruct the Exec Board to waive the costs in the misguided belief that in bankruptcy, the council would be eliminated as creditors, leaving more cash for his own wallet. He'd be very disappointed.

There is an old saying that if you owe the bank a couple of hundred pounds then you worry, if you owe the bank a million, they worry. The other old saying is that you can't get blood from a stone.

My advice to the Exec Board, and the council as a whole, is to waive goodbye to these costs on Monday and, at the same time, wave goodbye to the chief executive.

* * *

By way of an update to a recent untruthful statement given by Mr James to the Western Mail a few weeks ago, I decided to make a complaint to the council. After all, the public perception of the integrity of our chief executive and Returning Officer combined, is surely very important.

In response, Ms Rees Jones, with her Monitoring Officer hat on, has decided, after three years of involving herself in every aspect of this whole saga, sitting at the chief executive's elbow for six days in court, and smoothing out his unlawful activities at every turn, that this is a private matter so she will not be involving herself in investigating anything.

This is an interesting response given that Mr James freely used the publicly funded council press office to issue his statement not to mention the very public illegal funding of the counterclaim which gave rise to the damages. 'Private' doesn't come into it.

However, as my complaint suggested a breach of the Press and Media Protocol by Mr James, apparently that aspect will, apparently, be looked at by the Corporate Complaints team...based in the chief executive's department.... I trust they will be shocked and appalled that their boss has used council facilities to defame a member of the public..again.

Less important Executive Board Members forced to take 'pay' cut? And other news

Arm-wrestling
Back in November the council's Democratic Services committee rejected a proposal from the Independent Remuneration Panel for Wales to cut some Executive Board Members' 'salaries' by around 10%.
The draft proposal was somewhat cancelled out by a recommended increase in the deputy leaders' allowances from £31,250 to £33,000 (we have no less than two deputy leaders, currently Cllrs Pam Palmer (Ind) and Plaid's Dai Jenkins), and the Leader's £48,000 was to stay the same. Those proposals were not rejected of course. Expenses would not be affected.

Unfortunately for our senior councillors, the IRPW, in its final report published last month, chose to stick with its original proposals. This means that Executive Board members, apart from Pam, Dai and Emlyn, will now have to decide who remains on £29,000 per year, and who will drop to £26,100.

The IRPW has also stipulated that allowances to Committee Chairs will also be on two levels depending on their level of self-importance, some will stay at £22,000 but some will drop to a mere £20,000.

The Democratic Services Committee will now have to make recommendations to full council, but whether it will cause upset amongst our senior councillors, who all consider themselves to be very, very important, remains to be seen.

Personally, as Executive Board meetings are now webcast, I think an arm-wrestling contest would be a far more appropriate method of resolving this tricky situation.  But please, definitely not mud wrestling.

-----------------

Governance
Some of the recommendations from the recent Wales Audit Office Assessment are also coming up for attention, and possible rejection, over the next couple of weeks and a few are worth noting.

For matters of governance, the WAO have recommended, amongst other things, that a register of all Delegated Officer Decisions should be published, what a good idea and, it turns out, already a requirement over the Severn Bridge. As is public filming and the publication of spending details. Not so in Wales where every year council budgets go out to consultation without anyone knowing what exactly is being spent, on what, and to whom.

At least with the advance of technology we now have a record of what's said in full council rather than the selective minutes. At the last meeting Councillor Jan Williams mentioned the fact that there was not one mention in the minutes of her demand for evidence, from Meryl Gravell, that local people had scuppered a lottery bid for Parc Howard when she, and Cllr Cill Thomas held evidence to the contrary.

The Chief Executive helpfully intervened to say that as it had not been an official question, they didn't record everything that was said. Not even, it seems, a direct challenge to the truthfulness of statements issued by an Executive Board portfolio holder. Fancy that. Not that the chief executive concerns himself with the truthfulness of his own statements of course.

The WAO also suggest that the council supplies the Audit Committee with all regulatory reports and that it oversees the Corporate Risk register, in fact it's whole remit should be reviewed.
The WAO continue to be concerned about the council's management of grants and have also suggested that it might be a good idea to hold, for the purposes of scrutiny, central registers of tenders and contracts - the scandals over the Supporting People and Coastal grants are testimony to that being a very good idea indeed.

As for the Council's Constitutional Review Working Group set up, you may recall, to mangle the WLGA's 39 Governance recommendations, I have been told that they may meet if any tweaks to the constitution are required in the near future. I have also asked if their agenda will include the final removal of the 'suspended' unlawful libel indemnity clause, but this has not been confirmed...and remains something of a delicate matter for the chief executive I'm sure.

---------------

In brief
At the last council meeting, in a blink-and-you'll-miss-it moment was the brief mention that a new tier, and pay grade of senior management was being introduced. I failed to detect any cost assessment or impact on future budgets, or even a mention in the current budget.

At another recent meeting a £100,000 overspend on primary school transport was mentioned, though the news it's unlikely to reach the press office. This, said the relevant officer, was due to the closure of many small schools, "This was an example of a small change having a huge financial impact" A small change? Not for all those local communities, and the financial implications seem to have come as a bit of a shock.

Caebrwyn's blog - seven years old

I feel I should mention, in passing, that this blog is seven years old today. It has had its ups and downs, to say the least, and some of it has sadly passed to the great blog burial ground in the sky. However it has stayed the course, seen others come and go, and plodded on, sometimes against the odds and currently behind the barricades.

Over the years I've been contacted by countless folk, and many council staff, who have blown whistles, or found themselves at the receiving end of that special treatment reserved for those who rock the boat. Many have been too fearful of repercussions to publicise their issues, and those that have, have had their cards marked. Long standing issues remain unresolved and the carpets in County Hall conceal many an Ombudsman report and shredded email.

After seven years of writing, and aside from an imperceptible change in political colour, the council remains under the complete control of our chief executive and his side-kick Meryl, all aided and abetted by the agreeable legal department, as it has done for far too long.

To suggest that things have improved is a standing joke, take the foray into public questions as an example. This has been patchy to say the least, starting with the Plaid deputy leader defending a bung to the Scarlets as being 'in the best interests of the residents of Carmarthenshire' to the total breakdown of the Official Script with the questions over asset transfers. It's an intrepid person indeed who embarks on the process and there haven't been many.

Councillor questions are equally unwelcome and few and far between with some rejected for no good reason and those that get through followed by a regular warning from the Chair that councillors should really think twice before raising anything at all in the Chamber...on camera. Anything.

Compare that to the latest agenda for Pembrokeshire County Council where Councillors have put forward no less than sixteen Notices of Motion and ten Councillor Questions.

This is only partly the fault of councillors though, the real blame lies with the toxic culture which has been allowed to fester and flourish since Mr James arrived from Boston fourteen years ago.

The question is, has this blog made any real difference? I think it has, it might be business as usual in our dysfunctional County Hall but at least we are all a little more aware of it. I also hope I've engendered some interest in our local authority and provided a platform for discussion.

I've shone a spotlight here and there - public exposure is the only real route to accountability - and in respect of the court case and subsequent events, I will continue to fight my corner, despite the colossal amount of money spent on trying to silence me.
And for the record, I would have no hesitation in publishing every word again, slush funds and all.

I've have no intention of calling it a day, and I look forward to the next seven years....
Thanks to all for visiting this blog. and the input.

News Round-up - Schools, Scrutiny, Salaries...and today's Herald

Schools, scrutiny, questions and filming

(Update 9th March; Given the inconsistencies in the figures supplied by the education department, the Scrutiny Committee have decided visit Llanedi School before making a recommendation to the Exec Board regarding its closure. They will also visit Bancffosfelen)

Next week's Education Scrutiny Committee (9th March) has the usual list of the latest schools up for closure, or 'reorganisation' as our council prefers. Nothing unusual in that of course as this has been a long running programme to 'remove surplus places'. Once the numbers drop to around 50% capacity the death warrant is duly signed, well, in most cases anyway.

The drop in numbers, and rural decline, has been achieved by the council itself, having started the rumours, in regular bursts, over the past ten years. The natural, and understandable, progression being for parents to then send their children to schools further away which are not up for imminent closure.

One of the schools, Bancffosfelen Primary has put forward a detailed submission to keep the school open as a community venture, and the Friends of Llanedi School have ventured into the world of 'public questions' with several direct appeals to save their school and challenging the basis for closure. This can all be read on the agenda here and I wish them well.

Llanedi

How far they'll get is anyone's guess and the appearance of the dreaded public questions will be an unwelcome hiccup in the Masterplan - with a net loss of 31 schools in the past ten years the rollercoaster has continued pretty much unabated. Some will recall the comments from Meryl Gravell a few years ago warning councillors not to show 'weakness' by listening to local campaigners...

As we have discovered with public questions at full council, unless you are there in person your question will not be read out and will be answered in writing, which challenges the whole concept of 'public engagement'.

Whether this applies to scrutiny committees is not clear but I rather suspect it will. If this is the case, and the questioners are not present, then the only record of what was said in response will be the appearance of the sanitized minutes a few weeks down the line.

This brings me on to the Standards Committee meeting listed for next Friday. Tucked away in the agenda is a reference to the Draft Local Government (Wales) Bill and specifically the role of the Standards Committee. It turns out, from the draft Bill, that this committee is actually supposed to investigate matters when 'Standards' slip, an entirely new concept for Carmarthenshire.

However, the other issue, for the committee to 'note' relates to Section 76 of the draft bill where the Welsh Government will require councils to broadcast all their open meetings, including the Standards Committee, and, of course, Scrutiny, Audit and all other meetings.

So far Carmarthenshire, after much memorable kicking and screaming now webcasts full council, Executive Board and Planning meetings, so there's some way to go yet. We'll have to wait for the minutes to know if the committee did anything more than 'note' the item.

Not mentioned in this document is section 77 of the draft bill, and the 'Explanatory Memorandum' is worth repeating in full;

"section 77 provides that by regulations, the Welsh Ministers may make provision for the filming and recording of Council meetings by the public. The prohibition of such activities puts councils at loggerheads with the norms of public life and militates against an open and transparent approach. The making of regulations under this section should reduce bureaucracy and administration for the County Council and requires the Council to think about public involvement in all its activities, leading to more joined up and effective involvement."

As we know, Carmarthenshire have had issues over public filming and, after even more kicking and screaming only agreed, in the usual blaze of control freakery, to allow the filming of meetings which are currently being webcast.

We were all able to view the webcast a couple of weeks ago when the Annual Mark James Budget slashed £16m from schools over the next three years but there's no such facility for school campaigners at next Wednesday's Scrutiny meeting who are barred from making recordings of a discussion directly affecting the heart of their community.

This is a situation which can't continue. They might not want to make recordings or film, but they should be able to if they want, as I've said just a few times before, it is the principle that matters.

Full council next week

You will, of course, be able to watch next Thursday's full council meeting which will see your council tax increased by 3.85%. (Don't forget, they've got 'Wellness centres' to fund).
Also on the agenda is the annual Pay Policy Statement which details, amongst other things, the salary ranges for the top brass.
You'll be relieved to know that the Chief Executive has had a modest pay increase, along with everyone else. I don't know how he's managed up to now. This equates to an extra £1700 for Mr James bringing his salary to a few quid under £170,000. This doesn't include expenses, perks or Returning Officer fees which should prove lucrative this year with two elections on the horizon.

You may recall that the £20,000 fees for the local elections in 2012 were paid 'in advance' of the election, before the number of contested seats were known and in the previous financial year. When the payment was queried the response was that 'the funds were available'...Ah. Following that, his pay then was inflated for a couple of years with those unlawful payments. So the actual figure presented in the Pay Policy has always been a bit of a moot point.

Also on the agenda is a question from leader of the Labour group, Cllr Jeff Edmunds, to council leader Emlyn Dole (Plaid). Cllr Edmunds seems miffed that his members, within two seat wards, have been deliberately sidelined and not informed about the latest photo opportunity or ribbon cutting session in their patch, only the Plaid members appear to have been informed.

I can understand that he's politically miffed but I'm not sure that it's really a matter of 'openness and transparency' in the public interest stakes. I would have thought a far more relevant question would be to ask Cllr Dole whether he considered it entirely appropriate for the Chief Executive (and soon-to-be Returning Officer) to lie to the national press, surely far more relevant to 'openness and transparency' and of course, integrity.

Happy Birthday Herald

Lastly for now, I must wish the Carmarthenshire and Llanelli Herald a happy first birthday. Today's edition includes a story about a mysterious case of fly-tipping on council land in Pontyberem. Interest was sparked when it became apparent that the refuse had been tipped on land immediately adjacent to farm land owned by family Dole.

The Herald makes it very clear that they are not suggesting for one moment that Cllr Dole is responsible, nor that it has anything to do with the demolished barns and clarifies that some of it appears to have been there for some time.

In that respect they asked Cllr Dole if he had noticed anyone trespassing on his land to dump the rubbish. Cllr Dole replied that the refuse was 'historic', he was 'unaware' of recent tipping and the council were now clearing it up.

The council makes much of it's determination to pursue, name, shame and prosecute fly-tippers and litter droppers and with the undoubtedly considerable cost of clearing this site, which also appears to contain asbestos, I assume they will leave no stone unturned.

Pic source; The Llanelli Herald

Finally, as the 'Wellness Centre' PR nonsense reached something of a crescendo last week, this week we are treated to a cracking Cadno opinion piece, below, which features a Reading from the 'Book of St Mark (James), CBE version';

Source; Carmarthenshire Herald (Right click on a pics, select 'Open link in new tab' to zoom and read - or if on mobile device just tap pics)

The 'Wellness Centre', and other news.

The new proposed super-dooper 'Wellness centre' for Delta Lakes, Llanelli has been getting quite a bit of press coverage recently, that's all it's had mind you, a lot of aspirational twaddle and no substance. Feel free to google. Led by Carmarthenshire Council, with numerous 'partners' in tow, glib press releases are likely to be the norm, until a few years down the line when the auditors are finally called in to try and find out where all the money went.

As the last council meeting revealed, the only people in Carmarthenshire Council who know anything about it are Mark and Meryl. If that in itself doesn't ring massive alarm bells then it's about time it did.

No matter how much this multi-million pound project is dressed up, one document, a council planning brief for Delta Lakes reveals the true intention. Planning briefs, or 'Supplementary Planning Guidance' tend to outline possible uses for an area of land, maybe residential or industrial use and may even incorporate a school or a health centre. However the Delta Lakes brief contains, unusually, a very specific use - Private Health Care.

To add to the mix, the ARCH project, a cross-border organisation of health boards also involved in the delivery of this 'Wellness Centre' (along with the equally opaque Swansea Bay City Region) aims to "break free from an outdated healthcare system designed over 50 years ago", that 'outdated system' being our NHS I assume.

So far, the Plaid Cymru administration in Carmarthenshire seem to have fallen hook, line and sinker for this project. There is nothing wrong with private healthcare as long as it is funded privately, not with public money. But Plaid, whilst critical of Welsh Labour's track record with the Welsh NHS, are in danger of committing an unknown and therefore unlimited amount of public money, (including the land itself) to private health care right here on their doorstep. Or the Plaid councillors in Carmarthenshire are anyway.

Perhaps it's time for them to step back from the clutches of Meryl and Mark and demand some detail. The Labour opposition, under the leadership of Jeff Edmunds is a lost cause, with Cllr Edmunds prefacing any challenge, about anything, with the statement "although I wholeheartedly agree with everything you say and do...."
They really need to step up to the plate - scrutiny is everything and they should never work on the assumption that they are being told the truth.

At best this project will be an unaffordable drain on the council's and the NHS budget in an area where most of us have trouble affording a bottle of aspirin, let alone waiting twelve hours in A & E to have something removed from your eye. 

At worst this vanity project will merely be jobs for the boys, lining the pockets of faceless investors and unknown entities with public money, be it in the form of EU grants or whatever, all of whom will be long gone when the inevitable poop hits the fan.

I am reminded of the tales from Boston when the taxpayer-draining PRSA stadium was conceived, the promised funding from investors never materialised and management contracts agreed with no reference to councillors, the latter leading to a multi-million pound lawsuit. All courtesy of Mr Mark James CBE of course, who then transferred his talents to lucky old Carmarthenshire and that other notorious stadium project. 

Consulting with councillors, apart from Meryl, has never been his forte, as I mentioned in another example here.

At the last council meeting Mr James, in his short speech about the wonders of the 'Wellness' project, deigned to provide a report to the Executive Board at some point in the future. Good of him to throw them a crumb. He also mentioned that none of the decisions had to go to full council. Ah.

Unless councillors (apart from the hardy handful, we know who they are) now demand detail and transparency (for I guarantee there'll be none), instead of acting like sheep and swallowing the spin, then this could well turn out to be Mr James' final disastrous legacy to local government to end all disastrous legacies.

On the subject of transparency, or lack thereof, I recently requested, through FOI, the most recent register of interests, gift, hospitality etc for senior officers of Carmarthenshire Council. The request was essentially an update to the same request I made several years ago, when I received a lengthy list of (mostly mundane, day-to-day) invitations, mostly to the chief executive and the former Director of Regneration.

This earlier request found, sprinkled amongst the school concerts and local events, most of which weren't attended, a fair few champagne lunches and international rugby fixtures which were attended as named companies and businessmen courted favour with County Hall top brass.

In total, and including the mundane, there were over 700 invitations from 2005 until 2011 for the chief executive alone, and the Director of Regeneration didn't do so badly either.
As you may imagine, I blogged about it at the time, see 'Just the Ticket'.

Things are clearly a little different nowadays and the latest response no longer names the companies or businessmen behind the invitations. In fact, in the past three years the invitations seem to have dwindled with the chief executive logging just four, none of which were attended.

There are several possible reasons for this; perhaps they're not being logged, or perhaps our most senior officer has just become deeply unpopular. Billy-no-mates. Surely not.
 Or maybe courting favour is now a little more subtle - slap-up lunches with various developers in assorted hospitality boxes don't look particularly good when they pop up in a FOI response. 

The current lack of detail can, of course, have unintended consequences, and only one gift stands out really, declared, accepted and no doubt enjoyed by the (now retired) Director of Resources;

"Received, one traditional Swiss tart"

......perks of the job eh?

CEO's libel settlement claims untrue - Carmarthenshire Herald

Update 9th March; The Herald article I referred to below is now online; CEO's libel settlement claims untrue

Pic source; Carmarthenshire Herald Facebook page

The Carmarthenshire Herald (out today, Feb 26th) has investigated the remarks made by chief executive Mark James, to Wales Online, in that I was untruthful when I said I had made offers to pay.

He said;

"Regrettably, Jacqui Thompson is once again not telling the truth unfortunately.....

"Perhaps she will share with media written proof of her offer to pay in instalments? I would be most interested to see it."

As I clarified in my previous post, this was not true and I had the correspondence to his solicitors in front of me.

The Herald asked for copies of this correspondence and in the full article, which also covers the ongoing bailiff action against me, reporter Jon Coles goes into the detail of the letters and confirms that they are indeed offers to pay by instalments.

Further to this the Herald asked the council whether Mr James' comments had been reported accurately on Wales Online. The council, by return, sent a copy of Mr James statement to the Herald and it was exactly as Wales Online had reported.

The Herald concludes;

"As both the content of the letters to Mr James' solicitors are inconsistent with his account to Wales Online and repeated to us, Mr James' position of absolute certainty that offers to settle were never made is in tatters"

...and furthermore, this week's Herald opinion piece, as always penned by Cadno, includes the following observations;

"...Recently, Mark James arranged for High Court Enforcement Officers to attend on the home of Carmarthenshire blogger Jacqui Thompson in an attempt to secure payment of damages due to him from her in respect of a libel action he won. 

Wales Online covered the story and Mrs Thompson set out to its reporter that she was unable to pay the sum and had offered instalments. 

Mr James’s response bears repeating here: 

"Regrettably, Jacqui Thompson is once again not telling the truth unfortunately. 

"She has refused point blank to pay anything. She has responded to my solicitor in writing saying she will never pay any of the damages and costs that the High Court awarded against her. 

"Had she offered to pay in instalments, this action would not have been necessary. 

"Perhaps she will share with media written proof of her offer to pay in instalments? I would be most interested to see it." 

So Cadno asked Mrs Thompson to share the proof of her offer of instalments. 

And she has: both a letter from her solicitors to Mr James’s solicitors from three years ago and a further email from 2015. 

In both letters Mrs Thompson sets out her financial status, which Cadno does not repeat here, but which is suggestive of an inability to satisfy Mr James’s claim. In addition she makes offers – plural – to make payments by instalments. 

In other words, readers, Mr James has laid down a challenge which Mrs Thompson has answered. And since Mr James says Mrs Thompson is not telling the truth – when she plainly is in relation to the offers to pay by instalments – we can but conclude one of two things, either: 

Mr James is genuinely ignorant of correspondence sent to his own solicitors; or 

He is not telling the truth himself. 

Now, it is not for a humble fox to say that the smell of burning undergarments appears to be any more prevalent around Mr James than any other person who casually bandies around statements about who is telling the truth when they have been unlawfully bankrolled by public money to fight litigation; however, we have a real difficulty with Mr James’s unequivocal statement which is outright contradicted by the facts. 

The condescending tone of "Perhaps she will share with media written proof of her offer to pay in instalments?” is deserving of nothing but our collective and complete contempt, especially in light of the fact that Mrs Thompson can prove and has proven that offers to pay in instalments were made. 

It matters not one ounce whether Mrs Thompson subsequently withdrew or amended those offers; it doesn't matter what she has subsequently said on her website. Mr James’s claim is that offers to settle did not exist in any event. Note, readers, NOT that he rejected them, but that they were NEVER made. 

We have a word for people who tell deliberate untruths, but Cadno is prepared to be generous to Carmarthenshire’s beloved, acclaimed, and charismatic leader. After all, readers, how can a man as prominent and busy as James, CBE, be expected to keep a handle on anything so mundane as an offer made in respect of a large personal debt to him? 

How can he be expected to remember every scrap of correspondence that comes to his attention as part of his busy lifestyle polishing his bike helmet at weekends and remembering to carefully adjust his Chopper’s saddle? 

How can he be expected to remember the facts? 

Yes, readers, the image of the grenadier blown to smithereens by his own explosive is a compelling one.
Hoist by his own petard, indeed.

All credits to The Carmarthenshire Herald, on Facebook, Twitter and web 

High Court Bailiffs - Article on WalesOnline

Further to my earlier post concerning the visit from High Court bailiffs, instructed by Mr Mark James on the 11th February, the Western Mail has published an article which is currently online here.

As I said, offers to pay by instalments were rejected by Mr James. He is quoted in the article as saying that no offers had been made, he goes on to say;

"Regrettably, Jacqui Thompson is once again not telling the truth unfortunately.....
"Perhaps she will share with media written proof of her offer to pay in instalments? I would be most interested to see it."

Indeed, it is interesting, as I have two pieces of correspondence in front of me, one from my solicitor, to his solicitor dated 22nd March 2013 making an offer of instalments and an email dated 22nd January 2015 from myself to his solicitor.
The 2015 email made a good faith offer of a token monthly payment and I also expressed my willingness to enter negotiations to try and resolve the matter.
Both pieces of correspondence outlined my financial situation.
Both offers were rejected on the instruction of Mr James.

I have shared this information with the 'media' but I assume, as I have now refreshed his memory, that there is now no need to share it with Mr James. He should check his files and tell the truth.

Budget Day in County Hall

The council's budget finally made it's tortuous way to the annual rubber stamp at today's gathering of our elected members.

As I have already mentioned (there are several blogposts since the proposals started simmering on the hob last November) a few concessions were made following the better-than-expected deal from Cardiff (£7.9m better) and today's offering was to save Citizens' Advice from cuts 'for the time being'.

Last year we remember Plaid's Dai Jenkins, in opposition, asking that a small amount of reserves be used to stop some of the frontline cuts, he was told, by officers, that it couldn't be done. This year it was the turn of the Labour opposition to put forward alternative proposals and to be told, by officers, that it couldn't be done. Hands always tied..

The whole thing can be seen on the webcast but perhaps the most significant decision today involved the cuts to the school budget. This amounts to over £15m over three years, having been eased slightly (by £2.1m) with some extra cash from the Welsh Government.

Labour's Jeff Edmunds proposed that this cut be deferred for a year so that the full effect could be assessed and quantified. It is an alarming amount after all. He said that many of his members were school governors and the news on the ground was that education was going to suffer. Plaid stated that many of them were also school governors and as far as they were concerned the schools were fine with it all.

Cllr Edmunds proposed 10p on the council tax and some movement from reserves to fund the education cut for this year. He also proposed that a cut of £200k from Special Educational Needs education be shelved and suggested that £200k be used to fund £10m borrowing to build 130 council homes.

Plaid responded by trotting out their recent headline strategy of creating 1000 'affordable' homes in the next five years. An admirable aim but one which is heavily reliant on private funding, as well as over-the-rate-of-inflation council rent increases for the next five years.

Disappointingly, Labour's Cllr Edmunds dallied around the question of privatisation of services, I would have expected him to be firmly opposed, even if just in principle. Instead he waffled on about the 'balance' and the council 'taking the lead'. Difficult though, I suppose, when Plaid are taking forward and embracing the privatisation agenda started by his own administration.

Anyway, the Director of Corporate Services and the chief executive were having none of it, the 'books wouldn't balance' they said, just like they said last year with Plaid's proposals. Luckily, Mr James was on hand to explain that the cut of £3.4m wasn't a cut at all, oh no, it was a 'standstill figure', the actual funding level would stay the same. Though of course, to the rest of humanity, and the schools, this is actually a cash cut in real terms. Next year it's £6m and the year after, another £6m of cuts, which aren't cuts...

Mr James warned councillors that if they voted to accept Cllr Edmunds amendments they would then be voting through an illegal budget, and he would have to instruct the Director of Corporate Services to stop them. Couldn't have an illegal budget could we? We can have illegal payments though...

The time then came to a recorded vote on Cllr Edmunds amendments which were all, to Cllr Caiach's consternation (abruptly dismissed by the Chair and chief exec)) collected together 'en bloc'. In the event the amendment was lost by 17 votes to 44 so we were denied the spectacle of Mr James dealing with illegal budget setting. The budget, as it originally stood, then went through. At least he didn't have to resort to the local press this year to dismiss the opposition budget.

The five year Capital budget was up next and, with, undoubtedly, forthcoming white elephants in mind, Cllr Caiach asked what exactly this 'Wellness centre', which they were committing themselves and lots of ££££ to, actually was.

The Executive Board Member for Social Care and Health (or dare I say 'Wellness'), Cllr Jane Tremlett duly responded and it turned out that she didn't know either...'diagnosing problems in a modern way' she mumbled.

Fortunately, again, the chief executive was there to give a little speech about this wonderful project. It was the biggest he'd ever been involved in, bigger even than Carmarthen Town centre...oddly he didn't mention the, er, Boston Stadium or the Parc y Scarlets Stadium... Anyway, not only was this the biggest project but it involved the University, Hywel Dda Health Board, Sir Terry Matthews, and of course Meryl. The plan, called the Arch project, would house research, treatment and medical facilities at a 'very very high level'

Although he couldn't say more at the moment (hush hush), a press release was already on it's way for tomorrow's papers, so he might as well say it anyhow (forget the hush hush). I'm not sure quite what the revelation was but I think it entailed funding for a scoping document backed by no less than three Ministers.

(update - the press release seemed to concentrate on the fact that this was, er, a big project, with pictures of Sir Terry and Meryl, accompanied with a video of Emlyn Dole rambling unintelligibly about internet coasts and digital power from a crib sheet)

I hope it all works out and the private funds flood in as it is clear from our ambulance queues, loss of A and E at Llanelli Hospital and our financially struggling health boards (Hywel Dda predicted to be £41m in the red this year) that 'Wellness' actually needs to start at the very very bottom.

Lastly, the decision to raise council rent by 2.97% needed to be approved. As some of this rise was to cover the Council's council house maintenance, the long running Council House Standards programme, Cllr Caiach wondered why, after so many years, some of her constituents still had cladding falling from their houses and why the cavity wall insulation was causing extensive damp problems.

This was too much for Mr James who demanded she produce a list for his officers, wondering, sarcastically, why she hadn't already done so. "It's not true" he said, 'don't bring this to council, it gives the wrong impression'. Implying, of course, and for the benefit of the webcam, that Cllr Caiach was lying.
Councillors mustn't forget the golden rule that 'impression' is everything, regardless of the truth.
We couldn't see Cllr Caiach's expression on hearing this outburst, but I'm guessing it was one of total bemusement.

Webcast here.  

In brief; Budgets, LATCs, and Meryl gets cornered

Well, moving on...

I was intending to write about last week's council meeting but became somewhat distracted after the unexpected knock at the door last Thursday, so apologies for that.


Next Tuesday (23rd) full council will meet to approve the budget. As I pointed out here, there has been some re-jigging of the figures to reflect the 'better-than-expected' share of cash from the Welsh Government, rather than reflecting any 'we've listened to you' nonsense.

Anyway, headline stuff aside, as you can see from the agenda, there are still a raft of cuts for approval, £35.4m over the next three years. By far the biggest cuts, £17.5m, are still due to be sliced off the three year school budget. I cannot see how, without a clear view of the possibly dire implications for educational standards, this can be nodded through.

We'll have to see what transpires on Tuesday, the meeting will be webcast from 10am.

------------------------------------------------------------

Big 'savings' are hoped for in the Leisure department, with the formation of a 'trust' well underway and Social Care and Housing are destined for a similar 'arms-length' arrangement.

Much of this service is currently outsourced to private companies, including the replacement of council run care homes with the privately run 'extra care' apartments but the council wishes to make the transition complete.

With the recent appointment of a specialist consultancy, Care and Health Solutions Ltd, based in Wolverhampton, it seems that a Local Authority Trading Company is on the cards. The company have already been involved in setting up several LATCs elsewhere, including Essex, Barnet and Dorset.

The benefit of a trading company, wholly owned by the council is that it can trade on a commercial basis whilst supposedly still under the control and ownership of the council.

One imagines that councillors might be present on the Board and have oversight of such matters as governance and spending, unlike that other wholly owned company, Cwm Environmental which dropped councillor representation a few years ago as superfluous to requirements.

Whilst in opposition last year the Plaid group criticised the Labour leadership for their 'obsession' for 'essentially outsourcing services and reducing democratic oversight'. It seems that the obsession for back-door privatisation was highly contagious.

Anyway, with Care and Health Solutions Ltd, believing that "this is a way to respond to the personalisation agenda and re-engineer services to fit the new reality,”, if nothing else, our less than perceptive councillors will be impressed with such splendid jargon.

Although LATCs are currently popular but some have failed and the service brought back in-house and whether the drive for profit will affect the quality of care is another concern which has been raised.
As a commercial company it can also hide its wheeling and dealings behind the cloak of commercial confidentiality.

With the council bringing in an external consultant, at unknown cost, such as Care and Health Solutions, which also manages the LATC for the first six months or so suggests that the appraisals and feasibility studies will inevitably point to the formation of a LATC as the council's 'preferred option'.

The first social care LATC was established in 2009 in Essex. In 2011 profits of £3.2m were ploughed back into the council, in 2013 the profit had dropped to £1.5m. Last year the company made a worrying pre-tax loss of £828,000.

As a precursor to its mass outsourcing to Capita Plc (see Mrs Angry's blog, Broken Barnet), Barnet Council set up a LATC 'Your Choice Barnet' in 2012. It was predicted to make a profit of £500,000 by 2015 but has run into trouble, with staff salaries now slashed by 9.5% and a damning Care Quality Commission report over its supported living service.

These 'future alternative delivery' arrangements were discussed at the Executive Board on February 1st and officers claimed that it was 'early days' and a 'very broad brush', there was no mention of the commissioning of consultants, a commission which suggest that in fact, the brush is not quite so broad, nor the days quite so early.

----------------------------------------------------

One interesting matter which arose at the end of the full council meeting last week concerned the accuracy of the executive board minutes, or rather the truthfulness of Meryl Gravell.

Over the past year or two Executive Board Member Cllr Gravell has claimed that it was local opposition to the council's plans for a car park at Parc Howard which scuppered a bid for lottery money.

I've mentioned this once or twice before, most recently after the last Executive Board meeting where not only did she add that the locals went 'behind our backs' but Plaid deputy leader Dai Jenkins joined in the attack on the troublesome locals.

Last Wednesday, those minutes were up for approval by full council and things came to a head when Labour Councillors Bill Thomas, Jeff Edmunds and Jan Williams demanded, in light of an investigation by the Lottery exonerating local people, that Meryl provide evidence of her repeated claims and that the minutes be amended to reflect the truth.

Despite attempts by the Chair Peter Hughes Griffiths to silence the debate, Meryl was pushed into responding, backtracking on her previous certainty, ducking the actual question and the request for evidence, by using that old favourite 'that was the information I was given at the time'.

With the Chair getting increasingly anxious that something resembling a debate was evolving, Monitoring Officer Linda Rees Jones came to his, and Meryl's, assistance by stating that it was only the Executive Board itself which could amend it's minutes...

The Carmarthenshire Herald reported the episode in detail and suggest that council leader Emlyn Dole makes sure, in future, that when his Executive Board members make assertions, they are backed by something akin to actual evidence.

Cllr Gravell (Ind)

High Court enforcement bailiffs

Later post 26th February; Chief executive's libel settlement claims untrue - the Carmarthenshire Herald

*   *   *

As I mentioned briefly on Twitter, I had a visit yesterday from High Court bailiffs with a writ to seize goods on behalf of council chief executive Mark James. This action is in relation to the damages, plus interest, arising from Mr James' unlawfully funded counterclaim.
Mr James also has a legal charge over my home.
All instalment offers have been rejected.

I am not certain what will happen next as the bailiffs' visit was not fruitful. I am currently seeking advice.

Further details, and my views, can be found in earlier posts, some of which are listed on the sidebar of the blog.

Signs, windows, and red tape

A local trader in Carmarthen seems to have fallen foul of Carmarthenshire council red tape. As the Carmarthen Journal reports Ms Bethan Rees opened a fancy dress shop in Guildhall Square last August (pictured below), surely at the delight of the council as it shows resource, enterprise and, more to the point, fills an empty shop. She has now been told to remove the sign, which is bilingual, above the window and replace it with a much smaller one in the gap just above the door.

She says that she was initially told the sign would be fine, but now it's not, and contravenes planning rules. Should she apply to keep the large sign, she has already been told that permission would be refused. It might be in a conservation area but as Ms Rees points out, there are other premises with much larger signs surrounding her.

The sign is bright, vibrant and attractive to shoppers and surely boosts 'footfall' and the economic vibrancy of the area..to use the council's own language.

Pic source; Carmarthen Journal

Take for example the council's own efforts to fill empty shops. Following what must have been an IT brainstorming session, a national tender went out last November for a company to supply 3D virtual reality graphics to display in the windows of a number of empty shops in Carmarthen town centre. Conservation area or no conservation area.

The objectives were to;
'Reduce the negative visual impact currently being created by the vacant properties.
'To make the units more attractive to potential tenants.
'Increase the vibrancy and economic impact in the proposed “Cultural Quarter” of Carmarthen by driving footfall and activity to the area.'

The tender which went out must have incurred considerable costs with research undertaken to identify the list of sites and properties, and the appropriate documentation gathered together.
A couple of weeks later the tender was cancelled, due to an error in the insurance documents.

Almost immediately another one went out. It was exactly the same apart from a couple of variations in the list of premises.

A few of weeks later that one was also cancelled. This time it was apparently because the council couldn't sign up enough premises and a couple of them had been let out. In other words, the plan fell apart.

Whatever the reasons, the council's attempt to create the 'Montmartre of Carmarthenshire' was an expensive waste of time and money, and Bethan Rees, with her colourful sign, achieved far more.

One person who doesn't seem to have a problem with planning red tape is council leader Emlyn Dole. You may recall the #barngate affair late last year when a retrospective application (in Mr Dole's wife's name) was approved by the committee against the officer's recommendation to refuse.

The committee had to come up with reasons why, despite it being contrary to planning policy, it was all ok. Their attempt at justification included a planning condition that wooden window frames had to be be used, this was to complement the old stone which was now required to be used to face the building;

"Condition 4. All fenestration shall be of timber construction in order to reflect the traditional historic character of the barns"

Early last month Plaid Council leader Emlyn Dole (or rather, his wife), put forward an application change the condition from wooden window frames to plastic, the justification being that there were plastic windows in the nearby farmhouse. Surprisingly, this was considered a 'minor' amendment, and approved by the planning officer within one week.

Cllr Dole is fortunate that he's not in a conservation area, nor that the 'traditional historic character' of the 400 year old barn has been taken quite so seriously. It's also fortunate that Cllr Dole, unlike Bethan Rees, is something of an expert in planning 'red tape'.

February agenda - Badgers, sewers, and another missing question

The full council agenda for February has now been published and this month there are no public questions to sully the smooth running of important council business. Neither, it appears, are there any Councillor Questions, but more on that later.

There is one Notice of Motion, from Plaid Cymru councillor Gareth Thomas, to request that the council lobbies Welsh Government to implement a cull. This is not, disappointingly, a cull of the council top brass, but of badgers;

‘An increasing number of Cattle Farms in Carmarthenshire are under bTB restrictions due to an increase in bovine tuberculosis. In light of the complete breakdown of the present - inadequate and non-scientific vaccination programme, this Council calls on the Welsh Government to support and implement a badger cull in all regions where there is a significant increase in bovine bTB.’

This is nothing to do with council policy of course but it is an emotive subject and I suspect opinions will differ...there are a lot of farmer councillors..but there's also an Assembly election in May. It will be an interesting one to watch.

No full council agenda is complete these days without a powerpoint presentation and this time there's one from Welsh Water. They've been before with their sewage and effluent but this time it's about the Rainscape Project. The idea is to create a landscape to catch rainwater and filter it harmlessly away before it joins the overburdened sewers. A good idea of course and several projects are underway in the Llanelli area.
The problem is whether this initiative will actually reduce the strain on Llanelli's sewers and prevent the pollution of the surrounding coast. As before, I suspect the story will be upbeat and, also as before, have the intended purpose of feeding into the council's planning policy to continue to grant large developments in such a sensitive area.

Back to Councillor Questions, and there was one, but it was rejected by the chief executive. Cllr Sian Caiach wanted to enquire about the small number of council bungalows built in Kidwelly and Llanelli over the past couple of years. The project was much trumpeted by the then leader Kevin Madge who never failed to remind everyone, at any opportunity, about these bungalows. which eventually went massively over-budget.

The final overspend figures are not available, hence Cllr Caiach's question, but at one point, back in 2013, the figure was just over half a million quid.

She is also asking whether the council have plans to build any more;

"We have, in recent years, built a small number of council bungalows for the elderly and disabled in Llanelli and Kidwelly. Unfortunately the project came in well over budget. Can you please tell me the exact amount the project was over budget and precisely itemise the areas where this overspend happened ? Also, have you any plans to build any future council homes?" 

Unfortunately, despite Cllr Caiach offering to withdraw one of the questions, it was rejected as she can ask no more than one and technically it contained two. Technically.

This is the second question in as many months from Cllr Caiach which has been rejected from the agenda by the chief executive. The last one was to ask when, given the current financial restraints, were negotiations in place to recover the unlawful pension and libel indemnity payments from chief executive Mr James. That question was rejected by Mr James without any reason being given, see Unlawful payments - Dole's denial.

Of course the rejections couldn't possibly have been related to the content of the questions or any sense of deja vu from a couple of years back when the chief executive blocked controversial Motions on Notice from Cllr Caiach by introducing the 'seven seconder' rule, (enthusiastically supported by Plaid's Peter Hughes Griffiths and now consigned to the bin after the WLGA review). Or even formally restricting her access to ask officers questions, also a couple of years ago. Never mind silencing her (via the Chair) when she tries to raise a controversial topic, or snooping on her emails.

Anybody would think that the chief executive had a personal dislike of Cllr Caiach, or of anyone really that asks awkward questions, a dislike which seems to habitually spill over into his professional judgement.

Of course Plaid, when in opposition, had first hand experience of spurious reasons being given to reject open debate, see here and here, even demanding ministerial intervention at one point. They seem to have gone all quiet now...

But back to the agenda, and, as promised at the last executive board meeting, 'Jeremy' from the Wales Audit Office will be there to present the corporate assessment. These are the nice, professional auditors of course, unlike those unprofessional troublesome ones which, according to Meryl, gave poor Mark such a headache some time ago...

Yesterday's Executive Board

Up for discussion at yesterday's Exec Board meeting was the recent Corporate Assessment report from the Wales Audit Office. Seen as a positive report this was an opportunity for some mutual back-slapping and grovelling gratitude expressed by the Plaid members to Meryl and Pam, and the chief executive, for steering them through this 'difficult' process...quite incredible how cosy they've all become.

What this report actually reflects is that Plaid have not taken the 'lead' but have become fully assimilated into the toxic culture at county hall. What they once opposed and fought against they are now supporting. Preferring to adopt the spin and nonsense of the notorious council press office than open all those cans of worms, which might just expose their own weakness under the previous administration. Very disturbing.
The price of power I guess. As well as an approaching election.

As I said in a comment on my previous post, I also find it quite disturbing really that the WAO were so easily convinced that there is now 'collective leadership', by which they must mean that after 13 years of damage, intimidation and control freakery Mark James has been put back in his box. If they believe that they'll believe anything. What a joke.

The significance of the report in light of the unlawful payments scandal didn't go unnoticed and Meryl couldn't resist a comment. She said that this audit team was one of the more professional she had encountered...compared to the way the poor chief executive was treated by those other auditors 'some time ago'. 

This was a direct slight on the Appointed Auditor Anthony Barratt who had been responsible for exposing the unlawful payments. Clearly quite an unprofessional chap according to all present, including Plaid, and clearly didn't have a clue what he was on about and has caused them no end of trouble with having to deal with the WLGA governance review and all that transparency malarkey.

Still, we can look forward to more trebles all round when 'Jeremy' (from the WAO audit team) present the report to full council. Good old Jeremy.

Also on the agenda was the upcoming council budget. Carmarthenshire ended up with a better than expected settlement of a 1% reduction rather than the 3.3% they forecasted. Around this time every year there is always bit of a PR opportunity for the current Exec Board to show gracious benevolence and drop some of the more controversial elements of the budget. The particular proposals are easily predicted and I identified one or two last November. Budget bingo I suppose.

This year was no exception and with the better than predicted deal from the Welsh Government Plaid had a small bonanza to help towards their Assembly campaign, including a council tax increase of 'only' 3.8% rather than 5%.
With half of Carmarthenshire under water over recent weeks it came as no surprise that the cuts to the flood defence budget were dropped, along with some highway maintenance and street cleaning cuts.

Two predictions materialised in that the decision to charge £250 for home to college transport was shelved for two years (this was also shelved last year, under the last lot) and the axe hanging over respite care and short breaks for disabled children was dropped. Very welcome of course but no surprise.

The £1 rise in the price of meals on wheels will now be phased in over three years, by which time the council should have managed to axe the service altogether, which was, and is, their original intention. Vulnerable pensioners now being charged for an array of care services which were previously free so this is nothing more than a token, paltry, gesture.

The Welsh Government has also stumped up some extra cash to help 'protect' education and social care, This means that instead of the whopping £18.2m three year cuts to schools, the figure will now be a marginally less whopping £17m. I'm already hearing that the shiny new school in Ffairfach is sourcing second-hand furniture and is devoid of lockers. We just hope it's got some teachers.

The rest of the budget, including the very, very exciting, visionary capital budget which will see a new herd of white elephants, with no money to actually run them, cropping up here and there, will be decided by full council later this month. This is Plaid's notion of an 'anti-austerity' package of regeneration, so far the only thing to be regenerated is Cllr Dole's beauty parlour.

On the subject of capital, Labour Councillor Derek Cundy asked, given Cllr Dole's promise that it would be kept in public ownership, whether some money would be put aside for the much needed maintenance of Parc Howard mansion and museum. A £1m was going to the Carmarthen museum so why not Llanelli?

After cutting through the leader's waffle it became evident that the answer was a definite no. To make matter worse, deputy leader Dai Jenkins parroted Meryl's remarks that it was the pesky people of Llanelli who had foiled a bid for lottery money a couple of years ago by having the brass neck to disagree with some of the council's plans for the Parc. Would they do it again? he demanded to know.

The council's grant to the Botanical Gardens was also discussed. The proviso that the garden improves it's use of the Welsh language seems to have been quietly forgotten although the offer to give Carmarthenshire residents a 5% reduction in membership was deemed acceptable. How many could actually afford an 'annual membership' is probably minimal. The Garden will have a decreasing grant over three years, starting at £70,000 and reducing to £30,000 by year three.

A few short months ago the Director, Dr Rosie Plummer gave a presentation to full council ahead of the deal. Now that Dr Plummer has thrown in the towel over the struggling garden it was interesting to see the executive board giving her the cold shoulder, inferring that there should be no more woolly scientific nonsense, the new director had to have a far more businesslike approach than dear Rosie with Cllr Dole wishing it could be more like Alton Towers.

There was also a brief discussion on the Council's foray's into the world of outsourcing with an item on 'alternative delivery models' for social care. The emphasis was on 'early days', 'very broad brush' and 'analysing options' but as we know the Leisure department is already well on it's way to becoming a trust.
As for social care and housing, the drive for arms length companies or trusts are also well on the way with consultants having been appointed to steer the authority through the choppy waters of back door privatisation.

(Full agenda here)

----------------------------------------

For those interested in the Police Commissioner elections, former council leader Labour's Kevin Madge is the latest to throw his hat in the Dyfed Powys ring. Current candidates are the incumbent Tory Christopher Salmon and former civilian support worker for the police, Dafydd Llewelyn, for Plaid Cymru.

One of the supposed requirements for the job is to hold chief officers to account, not something Kevin Madge excelled at at Carmarthenshire Council, quite the opposite in fact. If the requirement involves covering up corporate ineptitude and corruption, and being dangled on a string by the chief constable, then Kev's your man.

Turning a blind eye

The Welsh Assembly Petitions Committee met today to consider the petition to curb unelected power and restore local democracy. The full petition statement can be read on my earlier blog post here.

The essence of the petition, put forward last year by Mr Royston Jones, was to require the Government to step in where unelected senior officers, most notably chief executives, systematically undermined the democratic process.

Clearly Carmarthenshire stands out as a case in point.

The petition was discussed, briefly, by the committee today (19th Jan) and can be seen on Senedd TV at 10 minutes 50 seconds in.

The Minister, Leighton Andrews (Lab) was asked for his opinion and his letter to the committee can be seen here. Interestingly he denies that the Welsh Government has "'turned a blind eye' to the influence of some senior officers in certain local authorities" 

Mr Andrews goes on to say that the draft Local Government (Wales) Bill, which is currently out for consultation holds the political leadership responsible for ensuring that chief officers do not exert undue influence.

But as Mr Jones points out in his response to the Minister, the Bill does nothing more than state what should happen, there is no mechanism for intervention if it doesn't;

'..he fails to tell us what can be done when elected representatives fail to curb the interference and eventual takeover by a chief executive (invariably aided by some other senior officers and one or two leading councillors). 
In the right circumstances, with a determined and dictatorial chief executive and a compliant council, it is inevitable that we shall see further examples of the problem my petition addressed, a problem to be seen in Wales today..'

The Welsh Government does, as we know, have the power to put a council in 'special measures' but as Mr Jones points out;  "why has it not been used in obvious cases of the chief executive subverting the democratic operation of the council?"

Why indeed. In Carmarthenshire it is something of a mystery. Repeated requests for Welsh Government intervention not only in regards to the chief executive but also with issues over social care and planning have been repeatedly rejected by the Welsh Government.
The chief executive has treated the Wales Audit Office and the Ombudsman with utter contempt and regarded the WLGA Governance Review as a joke.

The Minister, and his predecessors have, let's face it, bent over backwards to 'turn a blind eye'.

The question is why. One theory is that the chief executive not only exerts undue influence over the council but this extends into the corridors of the Welsh Government where Mr James has had various advisory and directorship roles over the years.

The petition was not specific to Carmarthenshire but it might as well have been, The committee decided to close the petition, suggesting that the petitioner contribute to the consultation. However, the Ministers view seems intransigent and, as Mr Jones tells him;

"passing the buck to those who've already exposed their inability to deal with the problem is nothing less than the Welsh Government washing its hands of that problem. We have every right to expect better."

Meanwhile the farce carries on in Carmarthenshire, the latest incarnation of 'officer control' being, in my view, the statement from Council 'Leader' Emlyn Dole over the unlawful payment scandal.

Here in Carmarthenshire the 'problem' of a majority of weak/puppet councillors is compounded by a culture of vindictiveness towards anyone who challenges the officer regime.
Cllr Caiach, with first hand experience of this culture, comments on my previous post to that effect;

"..  officers really do run the council whoever is "in power". Its been going on so long that it's difficult to rectify without outside help..."

 "...This terror is real and you can't rely on those who have quivered in fear for years to support cleaning up this council's act."

It's going to take more than Mr Andrews' draft Bill to effect a change in Carmarthenshire.