And so the ultimate PR prize slips from grasp of Wirral Council as veteran whistle-blower Martin Morton turns down the tempting offer of a return to the house of fun and chooses to take the money and run.
Of course this would of been the ultimate endorsement of the “new” regime if Morton had crawled back with his tail between his legs. A trophy to be cynically displayed at every opportunity like an endangered species bagged by a big game hunter.
So this leaves us with the question of who to believe when it comes to the supposed miraculous transformation of Wirral Council – Morton (who clearly doesn’t believe a word of it) or Comrade Burgesski/Power Boy Pip and their Local Government Association lapdogs.
Based on the stories on this blog we know where we’d put our money…….
We must say we find the press reports a tad confusing – for example if there’s a secrecy clause what’s Morton doing blabbing all over the local papers again like someone with a bladder problem?
Once again we get an unnerving sense that there’s something decidedly unsavoury and unresolved we don’t know about – with Morton mentioning about writing a book and saying : “I know what is going on behind the scenes. It’s not a changed organisation….”
We can only wonder whether he’s heard the Wirralgate tape!
Bizarrely Burgesski states : “But we are pleased Martin feels the matter has been finalised.”
Really? – it doesn’t sound like it to us!
The King of Wishful Thinking v The Man Who Knew Too Much
Once again we know where our money is going……..
Wirralleaks 
What’s that noise? Its just a corporate sigh of relief from Brighton Street-for now until the book is published!
No doubt a book re no proper contracts, no proper tenders and da SS. Human nature changes so little and groups are the worst which is why protocols, contracts, proper tenders and policies are so important to chain the potential evil in Man.
It really is poor when the xhair of the ARMC refers to FOI , laws as a “load of tosh”- he just doesnt get it. Laws protect the individual from mighty organisations so we can all be free
Searched for “Load of tosh” on Google Images – got page ONE, result number ONE:
https://www.google.co.uk/search?site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1366&bih=667&q=load+of+tosh&oq=load+of+tosh&gs_l=img.12..0i24.1310.2689.0.4532.12.8.0.0.0.0.588.1152.5-2.2.0….0…1ac.1.51.img..10.2.1149.QChOuNsxHDk&gws_rd=ssl
Crabtree could go viral one day if he keeps it up…
Colas, West Kirby marina, wirralbiz, Morton, wirralgate, blank paper tenders for community grants were all “A LOAD OF TOSH!” as was Audit certificate “No Value for Money”
Cover-ups by chief Internal auditor “LOAD OF TOSH” lets wrap this meeting up NOW go watch the match
Deputy chair of audit and risk has chaired charity AGM’s blithely unaware that at AGM.s the accounts MUST be produced, auditors and accountants be present for questioning, and audience members free to ask questions at least annually about the stewardship of the charity.
Worse at that point in 2011 as the charity was in parlous financial condition and tenants at Leasowe millenium centre wanted to know whether the building would close.
Where the ***** are the independent experts on ARMC promised to the Peer Improvement Group?
We need less “LOAD OF TOSH” more
“I refer the gentleman to page 12 of the accounts and to section 393 of the companies act”
Could pne play a game of football without rules and an umpire?
In answer to your question about independent members of the AMRC. Yes, they said they would (making the change at the start of the municipal year in May 2014), but now they won’t (at least not yet).
The reason why is that provisions giving the government powers to make regulations on this in the Local Audit and Accountability Act mean that as some point in the future Wirral Council will be required to have a committee, with a majority of independent members and an independent chair to decide on matters such as who the council’s auditor will be. This committee can be a separate committee to the AMRC, or the local authority can just have one. Due to this future legal requirement, they didn’t want to appoint indepedent members to the AMRC, then possibly in the near future have to do it again.
On timescales the regulations around the above are not expected this side of Christmas 2014 and I think there has been already one consultation, with another planned. It’s disappointing in a way because it was one of the few recommendations made by the Improvement Board that was agreed. Hope that explains it as best I can! Something about not wanting to make non compliant appointments (non compliant with legislation yet to happen).