21 January 2022
Follow me @LindaDerrick1
Facebook Linda Derrick for Ridgeway East
Where on earth do I start with last week’s Full Council - all 46 items and 37 appendices of it?
Well, to start with, I found it hard work.
It took me a long time to prepare for the Council - the papers were out of order because of a software malfunction (and that was no fun with 37 Appendices). Then the really important paper - the revised draft budget for next year - only arrived at the meeting.
It took me a long time to check that other agreed changes had been made to the financial papers (and I found that some of them hadn't been corrected involving thousands of pounds).
And then there was the sheer volume of the papers to be read.
This is no way to do business.
And I found it hard work at the meeting. Only 5 councillors were able to attend (just a quorum) and two of the councillors who did attend said hardly a word. For many of the items I was the only one who had any comments to make.
Three residents have applied to be co-opted onto the Council. I am so looking forward to that.
So, what did Council do? Did it discuss any of the things I think are important and urgent?
Well, the Council did spend considerable time discussing and agreeing the budget for 2022/3 and the precept (the taxes it takes from residents). However, one of the critical pieces of information needed to make sense of the budget was not available and I am still waiting to receive it. I will have to come back to this.
There was nothing about HPC's poor performance in delivering services to the community, although the Council did approve a replacement bus shelter in Hughenden Valley knocked down about 18 months ago.
There was nothing about filling the 8 vacancies on the council. Nothing about the arrangements for filling the vacancy for the Clerk and the transition arrangements. On this, I pointed out that, once again, the Council was being left in the dark.
Nothing about progress on transferring the allotments to the Hughenden Community Support Trust (although Council was asked to authorise a payment of £31,000 to HCST for rent). I'll come back to that too.
Council retrospectively authorised payments to BP Collins, the firm of solicitors who have been handling the proposed transfer on behalf of the Council.
Council had to retrospectively authorise the payments because it had failed to authorise payments in the past in compliance with its Financial Regulations. I agreed to the retrospective authorisation on condition that an investigation is carried out into how these payments were seemingly approved in the past and that the investigation reports back to the February Council meeting. Council agreed to this condition.
There was a resolution from the Finance and Policy Committee to implement the first of the 17 recommendations of the internal auditor. This was a resolution for a councillor to verify the reconciliation of the accounts.
I have been repeatedly asking for this to be done since I became a councillor; it was Council’s failure to do this about 10 years ago that allowed the Clerk to defraud the Council. I was pleased that, at last, Council was being asked to appoint a councillor to do the verification.
However, the Clerk, inexplicably and with no prior warning, had made a recommendation to decline this resolution. In the end, to my relief, Council agreed the resolution.
All the other recommendations from the internal auditor were referred back to Finance and Policy Committee (having been referred to Council by the Committee as it did not have time to consider the recommendations at its Committee meeting). I know, it’s just like a merry-go-round.
There was no discussion on why requests for information have increased to the point where the Clerk says Council officers can respond to no other work. In fact, after the meeting the Council realised it had become inquorate at this point as I declared an interest leaving only four councillors. (I was unclear from the papers if I did have an interest but I thought I ought to declare an interest just in case). During these items, I just sat back and did not speak and no-one noticed the meeting was inquorate.
Confused? So was I.
So, apart from that, what did Council actually do?
Well, it approved 12 policies. Here they are:-
- Investment Policy
- Grant Policy
- Grant Application form
- Dignity at Work Policy
- Street Furniture Policy
- Child Protection Policy
- Certifying Documents
- Lone Working Policy
- LGPS Discretionary Policy
- Communications Policy
- Delegation
- Financial Reserves Policy
Each one of these is a substantive document requiring proper consideration.
One of these policies, the Financial Reserves Policy, had been discussed the evening before by Finance and Policy Committee. The Committee had agreed that the paper provided incorrect guidance as to how much HPC was required to keep in its reserves. So that policy was not approved.
I did not have time to read the rest before the meeting.
Some of the policies had been considered by Finance and Policy Committee in October. I really couldn't remember whether I had had any concerns then and whether these had been resolved. The policies should have come to Council in November. I gave these policies the benefit of the doubt and voted to approve them.
Some policies had been approved before I became a councillor. When I checked, I realised the policies were only being put to Council because they were required to be reviewed once a year. There was no way Council could review these policies in the time allowed. And it didn’t; this was a rubber-stamping exercise. I voted against these policies.
It took me considerable time to refer to past meetings to work out which ones I had seen before and which not. I wasn't helped by a new system of numbering resolutions/recommendations which had been introduced without explanation to Council or residents.
Council also renewed four maintenance contracts for a sixth year. I have argued repeatedly for a review of these contracts to ensure they comply with HPC's Financial Regulations and the law and that they provide value for money. In the end, Council agreed to carry out such a review by September and I voted for the extension as it was too late to do anything else.
Council also voted to renew its contract with Bucks Council for HPC to carry out maintenance services which are the responsibility of Bucks Council. I have consistently argued against renewing this contract because:-
- BC provide insufficient money to do the job properly i.e. £11k:,
- HPC then proposes to subside the work to the tune of £19k;
- Council was provided with insufficient information on whether HPC becoming a sub-contractor was value for money for residents;
- BC should be able to get a better deal than we do as it has more commercial clout; and
- This is double taxation.
The Council approved a grant to Widmer End Village Hall Committee for renewing playground equipment and approved a Duke of Edinburgh Scheme to be run by Cllr Gieler (for which I thanked him).
What else? Well, there were lots of draft minutes to note and what I would call clutter. And that was that.
So, all in all, Council wasted a lot of time (including mine) ploughing through paperwork while ignoring the critical issues that it faces.
But that’s what you expect now from Hughenden Parish Council.