2nd Brewood Scouts

From: Alun David [alun.david@skylarksystems.co.uk]
To: eric.drinkwater@staffordshire.gov.uk

Duties of elected officials and Oversight Mechnisms

Dear Councillor Drinkwater,

We have not corresponded before, but following your advice on communication, David Short has forwarded a copy of your reply to me, which I show below, along with a copy of David Short’s original email for the benefit of parties who have not previously been involved in the issue.

You make several points in your note, which I address below.

For the avoidance of doubt, bearing mind some of your comments I should make it quite clear that copies of my letter will be forwarded to appropriate authorities which will include the relevant Secretary of State and the Local Government Ombudsman.  I would also draw your attention to Paragraph B4 of the Model Code of Conduct issued by the Secretary of State regarding accountability, in case you consider failing to reply.

Firstly, you are tired of people telling you about the values of
scouting.  That is unfortunate, because, as you should realise as a
politician, a campaign is about making sure that relevant people a)
receive your message b) understand your point and c) do something
constructive about it.  Sadly, up until this point, your response has
been to restate the original policy which is being questioned by the
electorate, rather than constructively re-examine the decision to see
if there is an alternative.  The right to legitimate protest has long
been a feature of the English legal system, as has the right to
challenge the decisions of elected officers when they conflict with the
published policies of the council and the interests of the public.
This is not simply my opinion – a senior Staffordshire police officer
recently publicly expressed his concern over the reduction of youth
facilities in staffordshire.

Secondly, you have ‘other issues to deal with regarding the council’s
Asset Management Plan’.  Quite right, I agree – you do.  I understand
that plans of this nature are made well in advance and somebody has to
implement them.  However, when new information comes to light regarding
the subject of the plan, somebody has to look at the plan and check
whether it still makes sense – if you know you’ve got a war coming you
don’t carry right on and sell one of your last three aircraft carriers
to a third world country – you take a look and think ‘Is that still
wise?’.  New information has been brought to your attention by a) the
volume of protest you have received from the affected community and b)
impartial evidence from the  business environment regarding the
collapse of the housing market.  I asked a planning consultant about
the forthcoming disposal and (being a forthright sort of chap) he
laughed and replied ‘Why on earth are they selling it now – nobody’s
buying housing land – they’ll get nothing for it.’  He went further but
I’ll paraphrase it for the sake of the sensitive. He questioned the
quality of Stewardship of any council which continued to dispose of
housing land in the current environment.  I also discussed the issue
with the MD of a house builder, explaining  that there were existing
tenants with ‘established use rights’.  His reaction was similar -
‘House builders aren’t buying land now – they won’t get anybody to buy
it at a commercial rate – they’d need to give it away.  Unless, of
course they’ve already got a buyer set up’ he added as an
afterthought.  Please confirm your position on these points explicitly,
Councillor Drinkwater, as I’ve taken on board your advice about these
decisions being driven by economics.

Thirdly, you mention that you think that most people would object to an
increase in tax to support young people facilities. Given the concern
by residents about youngsters standing around on street corners and
subsequently getting up to mischief you may be wrong – but you’re
missing the point. The Scout Hut costs you nothing.  To continue to
provide the facility will not cost the Council a penny. All you have to
do is to decide not to sell it.

Fourthly, your point about budgets is unrelated to this issue.  Budgets
are generally considered to be plans for revenue expenditure.  Capital
asset management (including both acquisition and disposal) is not
revenue expenditure, therefore budgetary constraints are irrelevant to
this issue.

Fifthly,  I’m pleased that your children had the opportunity to be part
of the Scout and guide movement.  We are working towards providing that
opportunity for our children too.  Hopefully with your help.

Sixthly, yes we do talk to each as this letter proves. It was rather
unfortunate that your frustration began to show through at this point
in your reasoned argument, but being asked to account for your
decisions can sometimes be an uncomfortable experience, so I understand
your position.

To summarise, I would ask you to do two things.

1) Please respond  explicitly to the points I raise above regarding the
economics of  the disposal and whether a buyer has already been agreed.

2) Please explain clearly what the appeal mechanism is to get this
decision reversed.  Disposal decisions are not irreversable – they
can’t be. So please let me know what the formal procedure is.

Regards
Alun David

4 Responses to “Duties of elected officials and Oversight Mechnisms”