TOWN Hall scrutiny chiefs at Warrington will tomorrow (Tuesday) decide whether Liberal Democrat and Conservative councillors have made a valid case for “calling in” a decision by the borough council’s executive board to set up a Trust to run the borough’s leisure and culture services.
Members of the economy and resources overview and scrutiny committee will hear evidence from opposition councillors who are claiming the decision was not taken in accordance with the principles of decision-making as set out in the council’s constitution.
The call-in was originally initiated by Liberal Democrat culture and leisure spokesman Cllr Kevin Reynolds (right) supported by one Conservative and four Liberal Democrat councillors, following the executive board’s decision on October 17.
At the time, Cllr Reynolds said: “We have done this because we don’t think there has been proper consultation with the unions over this proposed transfer.
“It was quite clear from their reaction after the board meeting and their comments to the press afterwards that the unions are extremely unhappy with the way the Labour Group has handled the whole issue.
“The unions are reported as saying that, ‘to suggest consultation has taken place is a blatant disregard of the truth’.”
The council cannot implement the executive’s decision until the “call in” has been considered.
Tomorrow, Cllr Reynolds, or his representative, and witnesses will be able to give evidence regarding the reasons for calling-in the decision and their reason for suggesting the decision was taken properly.
They can then be questioned by the committee before members decide whether or not the call in is valid.
If the committee decides the call in is not valid, it will be dismissed and the orginal decision – to set up a Trust – can be implemented.
If, however, the call in is considered valid the executive board for leisure, community and culture, Cllr Kate Hannon, will able to respond to the call-in and can also be questioned.
The committee will then have three options – to offer no advice, in which case the original executive board decision may be implemented – to offer advice to the executive or, in exceptional cases, to refer the matter to full council.
Overview and scrutiny chiefs have no power to overturn an executive decision, or to substitute their own decision in place of the original decision.
Scrutiny chiefs to rule on call in
33 Comments
Share.
About Author
Gary Skentelbery
Experienced journalist for more than 40 years. Managing Director of magazine publishing group with three in-house titles and on-line daily newspaper for Warrington. Experienced writer, photographer, PR consultant and media expert having written for local, regional and national newspapers. Specialties: PR, media, social networking, photographer, networking, advertising, sales, media crisis management. Chair of Warrington Healthwatch Director Warrington Chamber of Commerce Patron Tim Parry Johnathan Ball Foundation for Peace. Trustee Warrington Disability Partnership. Former Chairman of Warrington Town FC.
3 Comments
Well, fancy that! Talk about keep it in the family. It is now clear that, yet again, against the wishes of residents, WBC are to sell off the family silver. How much more are they going to get rid of? Any scrutiny of this decision must be taken by an independent panel who have not been been previously involved in the decision. Why are WBC so scared of putting their decision out to public scrutiny? It is simply not good enough to look at this decision “in house”.
If you read it, then you would see that nothing is being “sold off”! This is about setting up a Trust to run it, all of the assets will remain owned by WBC. And this was a plan put forward by the previous Lib Dem/Tory administration – Cllr Reynolds is raising the issue of staff/union consultation, not arguing about the Trust as a principle.
Is it against the wishes of residents, in the case of leisure centres, many have voted with their feet and joined private leisure centres. Maybe given the dire economic straights that we are in, there needs to be a root and branch rethink of what a local authority does and does not provide. Whilst clearly some people care very passionately about particular services, and much credit to them, many, unless they are directly involved, have other things to concern themselves with. Sadly as is often the way with family silver, unless it is regularly polished it tarnishes very rapidly, and the resources or motivation to buff it back up no longer exist. With regards to an independent panel, wouldn’t that be costly, and who would actually be on it and what does independent really mean.