Sunday 29 June 2014

Lessons From History?

In 2002 a local Council was in dire straits and The Audit Commission was forced to provide a report on Corporate Governance. Here are a few gems from the report:

11 We found significant weaknesses in Council X's corporate governance
arrangements.

12 The Council does not have a corporate vision for X and as yet has no
community strategy. There are pockets of good practice in relation to local
community involvement but no strategic approach to community consultation and
involvement. There is cynicism about council politics in X and mistrust of
local politicians.

Standards of Conduct:

25 The Council has made little progress in ensuring transparent governance and
high standards of conduct. This may have contributed to the passive approach of
officers and their acceptance of the way in which business is done in X.
Basics such as codes of conduct and descriptions of roles and responsibilities
have not been developed and procedures that exist are not used to ensure
proper practice or to challenge unacceptable conduct. The relationships between
officers and councillors are often unacceptable and the poor relationships
between councillors are not conducive to effective governance. There is a
culture of fear and mistrust at senior levels.

26 External stakeholders believe that politicians bring the Council into disrepute and
they expressed sympathy for officers trying to work in an intolerable context.

27 We saw no signs of anyone being able or willing to challenge poor conduct. No
internal plan or capacity exists to deal with these longstanding problems about
relations with councillors, decision making and standards. Without major change
the Council will continue to be held in low regard by local people and key
partners. We saw no sign of any movement to address the fundamental
underlying problems of X's political management.

Recommendations:

30 We do not have the confidence that X can address these serious issues on
its own, therefore the key recommendation of the Inspection Team is that of a
voluntary option of supervision that the Council can commit to. This is an
innovative step that seeks to develop a contract with the council to tackle the
deep-seated problems that we have found.

Report:

104 We identified a culture of fear amongst officers in the Council and were told on
several occasions that officers were afraid to question or challenge. This
behaviour towards officers by members is unacceptable and is a barrier to
effective working. Partners told us that officers have to constantly defer to

Councillors and are treated in a way that they find offensive.

105 External and internal stakeholders spoke of a culture of bullying from Members.
Despite this no priority has been given to setting standards or improving conduct.

189 The Council has made little progress in ensuring transparent governance and
high standards. The team witnessed examples of inappropriate behaviour by
members who were aggressive, bullying and insulting as well as hearing such
behaviour described by internal and external people.

190 This may have contributed to the passive approach of officers and their
acceptance of the way in which business is done in X. Basics such as
codes and descriptions of roles and responsibilities have not been developed and
procedures which exist are not used to ensure proper practice or to challenge
unacceptable conduct.

Well the Council in question was Walsall. Who was the "Head of Corporate Policy" at the time before she departed for those bright sunlit uplands of freedom, liberalism and democracy at, er, The Kremlin? Step forward one Neeraj Sharma..........

THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - A COMMUNITY BLOG

e   thesandwellskidder@gmail.com                 t   @bcrover  (Vernon Grant)

Confidential phone no: 07599 983737



No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.