The Ugly Truth

ugly-sisters

 

Do you think Frank Field was forced to eat sprouts as a child ?

We ask this as he seems to have a deep aversion to greens. First it was Wirral Council Chief Officer Dave Green ,then it was the local Green Party which brought on a funny turn and now dragging every last ounce out of the ‘Sir’ Philip Green BHS scandal Fairy Godfather Frankenfield does what he does best –  being a world class hypocrite and asking for big fines for people who – legally if not morally – have done nothing wrong.

http://www.wirralglobe.co.uk/news/14979464.Frank_Field_urges_billion_pound_fines_to_prevent_repeat_of_BHS_pensions__disaster_/

He’s big on morality is Frankenfield – as long it’s not his own and those he’s protecting. If we didn’t dislike the ugly face of capitalism ‘Sir’ Phil  so much we’d be straight on to his solicitor Schillings with the ugly truth about what Frankenfield has been up to round here.

Lest we forget this involves St. Frank of the Foodbanks trying to get council taxpayers to stump up a bung to protect his Plug ugly* political agent Cllr George Davies (see above) and prevent an highly incriminating recording ending up in the public domain.

Here’s a thought – how about the local Labour group paying the group of complainants with the Wirralgate tapes and not the long suffering local Council Taxpayers ?

We say this as apparently the Wirralgate scandal is ‘live and sensitive’. Ironically we only know this because of a Freedom of Information request on What Do They Know. Needless to say Wirral Council have denied the release of the Nick Warren investigation report that will explain fully and without undue influence what all the fuss has been about all these years – yeah , right!

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/nick_warren_investigation_report#incoming-909829

What could be the possible explanation for the ongoing delay with resolving this case?.

Here’s our guess – current Council Chief Officers Eric Robinson, Joe Blott and especially Surjit Tour and David Armstrong all must know they’ll be tainted forever if they capitulate the immoral demands of the moral crusader Frankenfield. We’ll reluctantly give former Wirral Council CEO Graham Burgess aka Burgesski his due – he wasn’t prepared to be blackmailed by Frankenfield about a £48,000 payment to his ‘special friend’ because allegedly she was bullied and harassed by the other ugly sister in this sordid scenario – Foulkesy.

Have you ever known such a sleazepit in your entire life?

It all makes ‘Sir’ Philip Green look like Mother Theresa ( who as far as we’re concerned was no saint anyway

*The Plug uglies were of course an American street gang who were referred to as a political club. We couldn’t think of a more apt description for local politicians!

A Return to Greed

Pigs 2

There’s a particularly intriguing story that keeps returning to our radar .

So we set Verity off in pursuit of  various leads in an attempt to get to the truth of the matter. First port of call was the ever informative What Do They Know website. My goodness !, there are some interesting Freedom of Information (FOI) requests concerning Wirral Council on there – but one that particularly caught our eye and appears to have disappeared under everyone’s radar was an FOI request made by perennially returning Tory councillor Ian Lewis.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/payments_to_the_returning_office

Now why would Cllr Lewis be especially interested in knowing about historical information held by Wirral Council concerning the role/responsibilities/returns of the Returning Officer ?

Could it be that his interest was piqued by a couple of posts on Wirral Leaks or does he know something we don’t?…..

https://wirralleaks.wordpress.com/2016/05/31/standard-procedures/

https://wirralleaks.wordpress.com/2016/05/04/big-returns/

There’s certainly some interesting information to be had about the role of the Returning Officer during elections. It seems to us that this role basically involves bossing council staff to do all the running round whilst the already massively remunerated council CEO picks up a big fat fee just in case there’s an electoral cock-up and the government need someone to blame.

It’s interesting to note that between 2006-2010 the Returning Officer Steve Maddox donated all Returning Officer fees that he was supposed to receive to charity. It’s just such a shame he wasn’t so charitable when it came to bullying his own staff and setting the tone for a bullying culture at Wirral Council. His successors as Returning Officer – Bill Norman, Graham Burgess and presumably the latest incumbent Eric Robinson obviously don’t believe in such generous largesse as they are seemingly some of the greediest little piggies in local government (and that’s saying something as this a particularly crowded trough).

return-to-greed-012

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/356355/response/869178/attach/4/FOI%201087924%20Councillor%20Ian%20Lewis%20Payments%20to%20the%20Returning%20Officers.pdf

The sums on offer are eye-watering and frankly in this age of austerity, absolutely obscene. This year alone the current Wirral Council CEO Eric “Feeble” Robinson has picked up just short of £30,000 on top of his £175,000 + salary for the Local, Police and Crime Commissioner elections and the EU referendum.

Verity’s forensic eye was particularly drawn to details of the Returning Officer statutory fee  of £11,362 for the 2012 Police and Crime Commissioner election , paid presumably to the then Wirral Council CEO Graham Burgess (aka Burgesski) . However she has discovered the alarming anomaly that Burgesski was also the Returning Officer for the Lancashire Police and Crime Commissioner election in 2012 !.

return-to-greed-009

https://www.blackburn.gov.uk/Lists/DownloadableDocuments/NoticeOfElectionAgentsNamesAndOffices.pdf

How curious we thought and we’re left wondering whether Burgesski  could have picked up two fees amounting to £22, 724 in one day ?.   Now that would be beyond obscene!.

I think we should be told !  – but who to ask?.

Burgesski himself ? – we suspect the Great White Shark , former union firebrand and now champagne socialist would like to put his Wirral Council  , ahem, ‘experiences’ behind him.

Internal Audit ?- or rather Infernal Audit under the guidance of Internal Chief Auditor Mark Niblock? . Are you kidding us?. This one learned his trade under his predecessor , the disgraceful David Garry.

External Audit ?- Grant Thornton and their predecessors the Audit Commission have a shameful track record of not biting the hand that feeds them and have produced more fudge than Devon in the name of protecting a lucrative income stream.

Monitoring Officer ?- I’m sure Wirral Council’s Monitoring Officer Surjit Tour would be able to clear this one up for us as he should be well versed in the legalities and correct procedures involved.  We’re sure that Tour ,in the absence Bill Norman Wirral Council’s Monitoring Officer who was suspended at the time , would have ensured that everything was above board and that those who were entitled to Returning Officer fees were paid correctly and made to the people who were properly entitled to them!………unless of course somebody knows different!.

Time and Trouble

Ethics DH Lawrence

Well,well, well – less than a week after our “Free and Frank” story https://wirralleaks.wordpress.com/2016/01/14/exclusive-free-and-frank/

Wirral Council finally see fit to disclose the Terms of Reference (TOR)  for the Nick Warren review requested by ex-Wirral Council whistleblower Martin Morton nine months ago!.

No wonder he added the annotation :

“I’m wondering whether it was the ICO Decision Notice issued on
December 15th 2015 or the article published by Wirral Leaks on
January 14th 2016 that was more effective in ensuring this
information was disclosed!.
Shameful behaviour yet again by Wirral Council.”

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/nick_warren_investigation_terms#outgoing-461140

We are particularly grateful that this document is in the public domain as we can now have a “free and frank discussion” about what is a fascinating insight into the warped world of Wirral Council.

Warren Commission

The title of the Terms of Reference for the Warren Commission  is “Review: Allegations raised by former employees of the Council concerning their treatment”  which  was compiled by Wirral Council’s Monitoring Officer Surjit Tour who makes the review sound as though it could be about prisoners released from Guantanamo Bay.

First we have “Background” (of which there is very little)  where Tour tells us :

” I appoint Nicholas Warren (R) to review the circumstances surrounding the allegation of a breach of confidence by four former employees of the Councils (“the complainants”).

What Tour’s motive for going along with this sleazy charade we can only hazard a guess as he seems to have a twisted symbiotic relationship with council leaders especially  when he is in some ways responsible for instigating this whole sordid saga in the first place.In fact we think we may have just answered our own question!.

However we are particularly grateful that he has coined a collective term for the people at the centre of this review. ” The Complainants” seems a much more accurate description than “whistleblowers”.

“The Complainants” complaining about their treatment by Wirral Council whilst their own treatment of Wirral Councillors and council officers (including Tour) is for some reason seemingly ignored.

We also learn that despite not having a legal claim for compensation (for if they did it surely have been settled by now) Wirral Council saw fit to offer them a £ 3,000 “time and trouble payment” to “The Complainants” .Bless.

We presume the three grand bung was more for trouble they could cause rather than the time the boo hoo boys spent telling everyone how badly done to they were.

However “The Complainants” knew that what they knew or rather what they had recorded on the Wirralgate tapes  was worth much more than £3,000 each.More importantly their benefactor Frank Field MP knew it was worth much more to protect himself and his political agent Cllr George Davies , who in turn was trying to protect his reckless bezzy  Cllr Steve Foulkes. Meanwhile feckless Council leader Phil “Power Boy Pip” Davies has had no choice but to go along with this scandalous scheming even though it has been alleged he too was recorded saying ” I can’t defend that” when he heard the Wirralgate tapes.

Enter : Nicholarse Warren.

The second part of the Tour’s TOR is ironically titled : “Principles governing the Review”.

Principles!!! . We wonder where various Code of Conduct principles fit in here?

Did Tour ever think when he was training to be a solicitor that he would be drafting something which reads to us like How To Legitimise Dodgy Payments to Complainants

Interesting to note that Nicholarse Warren is to consider all the circumstances of the matter relating to “The Complainants” and yet seemingly  pre-empting his findings Tour records that : “If it came to a question of expenditure Warren would have to take soundings from the District Auditor about its scale and any recommendation made by (Warren) involving expenditure by the Council must be limited to what local authority accounts rules permit ;and be within the bounds of what the District Auditor would accept as reasonable”.

Hang on didn’t Wirral council state in a previous response (see What Do They Know FOI request above) that  :” Warren has not been given any decision making powers by the Council in respect of awarding or making any compensation payments. Any decision to pay compensation would be a matter for the Council. For the avoidance of doubt, no decision has been made on whether any compensation should be paid.” 

Let’s face it the decision and the amount of compensation was expected to be a formality when  Frank Field “demanded”  £48,000 each for “The Complainants” in October 2014.That’s nearly £200,000 of public money to cover up corruption.It is of course now January 2016 and no further compensation payment has seemingly been made – so what could possibly have happened to prevent Field getting his own way?.

https://wirralleaks.wordpress.com/2014/10/23/give-a-little-whistle/

However the most troubling aspect of Tour’s TOR  is described thus :

” The Council will indemnify R (Warren) against the reasonable costs of defending any defamation action or threat of defamation action against R in his role as the R and any damages awarded against R in any such action.Any threat of or institution of such proceedings shall immediately notified to the Monitoring Officer and no liability shall be admitted by R”

This is a simply astonishing  indemnity as it seems that Warren is given carte blanche to defame anyone he chooses in his review and (once again) Wirral Council will pick up the tab  if he does so!.If we ignore as to  whether Wirral Council have the authority to indemnify someone who is not an elected member or employee of the Council we have to ask ourselves as to the dubious motive for doing so? . Could it be that this allows uncorroborated allegations made by The Complainants against former Wirral Council employees who do not have a right of reply to be included in the review report?.

Although we’ve been covering this particular story since August 2013 the threat of defamation has never occurred to us as our sources can substantiate their allegations.We can only hope that The Complainants/Warren can do  the same when it comes to their respective claims/findings.