convert Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 3 hours ago, NewBiz said: The explanation for removing it is laughable. However the appalling waste of taxpayer's ie our money is far from funny, it's a disgrace Agreed, there should be a public enquiry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheffandy Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 10 hours ago, busdriver1 said: The standard reply is imminent. It wasn't our money we spent it was government money. That's ok isn't it? Oh hang on where do the government get their money from? is it us? Lol I was just thinking the exact same! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazzock Posted August 21, 2020 Share Posted August 21, 2020 15 hours ago, convert said: Agreed, there should be a public enquiry. so your answer to a waste of money is to waste even more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollingJ Posted August 21, 2020 Share Posted August 21, 2020 @Wazzock- That appears to be a standard SF response, unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest busdriver1 Posted August 21, 2020 Share Posted August 21, 2020 10 minutes ago, Wazzock said: so your answer to a waste of money is to waste even more? A very good point. Let them investigate themselves and expect a reasoned outcome? REALLY? What we need is for ALL council staff, not just the elected ones, to be accountable for their actions and if that was the case we could build trust in our councils and prevent stupid schemes like this getting off the drawing board. Only then would our councils start to take the publics thoughts into account before acting. At the minute we have full time staff quite happy to throw elected officials under the bus for following guidance given to them by those same full time staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigAl1 Posted August 21, 2020 Share Posted August 21, 2020 So let me get this straight when there were no cars using the road they decided to make a cycle lane and now that the cars are back they get rid of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJRB Posted August 21, 2020 Share Posted August 21, 2020 1 hour ago, Bigal1 said: So let me get this straight when there were no cars using the road they decided to make a cycle lane and now that the cars are back they get rid of it That’s about the size of it,but don’t forget that there has been only rare sightings of bicycles,tricycles and perhaps even a monocycle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Planner1 Posted August 21, 2020 Share Posted August 21, 2020 4 hours ago, busdriver1 said: A very good point. Let them investigate themselves and expect a reasoned outcome? REALLY? What we need is for ALL council staff, not just the elected ones, to be accountable for their actions and if that was the case we could build trust in our councils and prevent stupid schemes like this getting off the drawing board. Only then would our councils start to take the publics thoughts into account before acting. At the minute we have full time staff quite happy to throw elected officials under the bus for following guidance given to them by those same full time staff. What exactly are you wanting? A public ballot for each and every measure the council introduces? Can you provide evidence of council staff “ throwing elected officials under the bus”? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest busdriver1 Posted August 21, 2020 Share Posted August 21, 2020 27 minutes ago, Planner1 said: What exactly are you wanting? A public ballot for each and every measure the council introduces? Can you provide evidence of council staff “ throwing elected officials under the bus”? A very council reply. NO just held accountable. In the real world that means just that. Not an election for every decision to buy new pencils but accountable for their performance,. As for elected officials being thrown under the bus there are plenty examples in this thread alone. Oh no guv, I would never condone that, If you want to sort it there are elections coming along where you can get them out. That style of comment sounds just like throwing an elected official under the bus for following the guidance of a full time employee. Dont you think so? Or shall we have a consultation about it? 3 hours ago, Bigal1 said: So let me get this straight when there were no cars using the road they decided to make a cycle lane and now that the cars are back they get rid of it Thats it with spin. Basically they closed off a lane on a busy stretch of road whose purpose was to remove traffic from the city centre and at the best of times is overused vs its capacity. There were enough vehicles at the outset to cause chaos and affect businesses as they quote in their climb down document, and levels have risen since then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Planner1 Posted August 21, 2020 Share Posted August 21, 2020 (edited) 42 minutes ago, busdriver1 said: A very council reply. NO just held accountable. In the real world that means just that. Not an election for every decision to buy new pencils but accountable for their performance,. As for elected officials being thrown under the bus there are plenty examples in this thread alone. Oh no guv, I would never condone that, If you want to sort it there are elections coming along where you can get them out. That style of comment sounds just like throwing an elected official under the bus for following the guidance of a full time employee. Dont you think so? Or shall we have a consultation about it? As you will know very well and should understand, an employee is accountable to their employer ie their managers. That’s how employment law sees it and there isn’t a different law for public sector employees. The council, like every other employer, has a process for dealing with misconduct and also a process to deal with capability issues. The public can never be informed of any such proceedings taken against an employee, because those matters are confidential between employee and employer as required by law. All a complainant can be told is that the matter is being dealt with through council processes. Members of the public can make complaints about anything that an officer does or the council does. There is a formal process for investigating complaints and an appeal process if the complainant isn’t happy with the result. The local government ombudsman can also investigate complaints. So, there is accountability in place already. Councillors are more than capable of defending their own actions. They make the decisions, officers can only recommend or advise. They are also able to make official complaints if they are not happy with how officers are responding to their requests or the quality of briefings or recommendations doesn’t meet expectations. It is not uncommon for councillors to take a decision against officer advice or without consulting officers at all. That’s their prerogative. It’s they who are accountable to the electorate. No, I disagree with your statement about officers throwing elected members under the bus. As far as I’m aware, no one in this thread has claimed to be an officer of SCC, so your statement is clearly untrue. If you disagree, provide evidence. If you disagree about accountability, please do explain how you think officers could be more accountable, within current employment law. Edited August 21, 2020 by Planner1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now