24plusnews.co.uk Rotating Header Image

Hull City Council

Oslo Trip

Nov 22nd, 2011
by Andrew Allison.
Comments are off for this post

Fact finding missions have long been the butt of many jokes. You name the subject, and it seems an elected or unelected official has been forced into arduous foreign travel to get that final piece of information to complete the jigsaw. In our report earlier this month, we highlighted the foreign jaunts council taxpayers in the Midlands have had to pay for, and now another one has come across my radar.

The recycling rate in Hull is currently at 50%. This is above the target 45%, and residents of the city are regularly told to ‘Recycle for Hull.’ Not content with this, some councillors recently went on a fact-finding mission to Oslo to see how Norwegians dispose of their rubbish. They have already visited Rotherham, Sheffield and Swindon to see how its done there.

This had angered Cllr John Fareham, the leader of the Conservative Group, as the councillors who travelled to Norway are a sub-committee of the environment scrutiny commission. This means they can only recommend. They cannot make decisions.

The cost of the trip was under £1000, but to defend it as cheap (as a councillor has done) is missing the point.

A group of councillors and officials drove to Stansted Airport, stayed overnight, then flew to and from Oslo in the same day, and then drove back to Hull. The people who can make decisions about this were not present. It has to be asked what did they find out that they couldn’t find out by research on the Internet, and a conference call on Skype?

If councillors spent our money in the same way they would spend their own, trips like this would not happen. All it achieves is two things. It makes councillors the butt of jokes, and gives the impression they have their snouts in the trough. I know that’s not true of the majority of councillors. If they don’t want to give the public that impression, they know what to do next time.

Armchair auditing in Hull

Oct 18th, 2011
by Andrew Allison.
Comments are off for this post

Transparency in government spending is something we have been campaigning about for many years. Councils publishing their spending above £500 was a major policy victory for us, but it does have to be said that looking through hundreds of pages of council spending on your computer could be made easier.

A new website has just been launched that does just that for residents in Hull. With a few clicks of the mouse, you can find spending details in areas that most interest you. This makes the job of an armchair auditor much easier. Let me give you two practical examples. 

In April, I wrote about the demise of ‘Hull in Print’ – Hull City Council’s newspaper. Using this website, in under a minute I found out that from March to August, taxpayers funded this newspaper by £45,048.

With a few clicks of a mouse, I found out that from 1 March – 31 August this year, the council made a total of 2014 payments totalling £1,197,927 in council tax computer refunds. Why this is, I don’t know, but it’s very easy for me to send a freedom of information request to find out. Without this website, it would have been much more difficult to spot this information, never mind collate all the figures.

The website has nothing to do with Hull City Council, although the council must be congratulated for publishing all spending online – not just spending above £500. It has been created by a member of the public called Adam Jennison. Adam is to be congratulated for doing this. It is a valuable tool for taxpayers who can easily find out how their money is spent. It is also useful for the council itself, as well as local businesses who may be able to spot an opening in the market and deliver services at a better rate.

As this program can be adapted for use across the country, all councils can be covered. If this was so, all of us would be in a better position to scrutinise them more effectively.

The hidden perks inside Hull City Council

Oct 14th, 2011
by Andrew Allison.
Comments are off for this post

In a report earlier this year, we revealed that many councils pay mileage rates to staff well above the HMRC recommended rate of 45p per mile. Hull was one of those councils.

In a report in the Yorkshire Post this week, it was revealed that not only are staff benefiting from generous rates of 65p per mile, but staff can also claim a petrol allowance on top of the mileage allowance of up to 11.3p per mile. This was news to me, and to the journalist I spoke to about it. I described it as another of the hidden perks inside Hull City Council, and something that needs to be rectified. Scrapping this allowance and reducing the mileage rate to 45p per mile will bring considerable savings to the council’s budget.

It was also revealed that officers on Grade 12 or higher benefit from 33 days annual leave. Those on lower grades receive 25 days, rising to 26 after ten years service. The council also award two extra days leave to all staff in addition to the statutory public holidays. This means those earning above £42,066 a year are not only benefiting from hugely generous mileage rates when they travel on council business, they also receive 35 days holiday every year.

It is impossible to work out exactly how many officers there are benefiting from these additional days, as the council’s accounts only list those earning above £50k. Instead of providing two lists of teaching and non-teaching staff (which many councils do), Hull does not list them separately. There are, however, over 300 staff listed in the accounts (page 61) who earn in excess of £50k. We can easily add many more who will be earning above £42,066. It is therefore safe to assume that the council would not need as many managers as it currently employs if only the amount of annual leave was reduced.

I’m pleased to say that the leader of the council, Cllr Steve Brady, is negotiating with the unions on these matters. However, this is not a guarantee that these perks will end, or that other perks won’t be substituted for them. Hopefully everyone will see sense and realise that by reducing the mileage rates paid and reducing the amount of annual leave many officers receive, a significant contribution can be made towards balancing the books.

I would love to know if there are similar hidden perks in your council. If you know, please e-mail me. If you don’t know, you can always send a freedom of information (FoI) request to find out. If you would like me to send you a FoI template, please do get in touch.

£6 million overspend in Hull

Sep 23rd, 2011
by Andrew Allison.
Comments are off for this post

In June, I wrote how Hull City Council was storing up problems for the future. I said then it looked like there was going to be a £6 million overspend that would need to be plugged. Figures out this week have proved I was correct.

The latest forecasts indicate the council could be overspent by £6.68 million at the end of this financial year, however Labour’s finance portfolio holder, Cllr Phil Webster, says he is confident the books will be balanced. When I heard this yesterday, I was intrigued how they plan to do it. The previous response, as far as I could see, was to bury their heads in the sand and collectively sing a chorus of “Things can only get better!”

In a report in today’s Yorkshire Post, Cllr Webster claims he has not only found the money, but it was there all the time. He said they had set aside £6.5 million from their original budget as a contingency. “If we can hold onto that £6.5m, then we have already closed the gap on the Medium Term Financial Plan. If we have to spend it we have to spend it and look at what’s down the line in forthcoming years”, he said.

The problem is no-one seems to have heard of this £6.5 million before. Liberal Democrat deputy leader, Cllr Mike Ross, said this was the first they had heard of it. I’m with him. In all the documents I have read, I have not seen this figure anywhere, nor have I heard Cllr Webster, or the leader, Cllr Brady, talk about it.

Meanwhile, the council is still in talks with the unions about mileage rates paid to members of staff. In a report earlier this year, we revealed that Hull City Council was paying staff 65p per mile, rather than the HMRC standard 40p (which increased to 45p in April) per mile. This is a simple cost cutting measure, and no-one can complain if they are paid the recommended HMRC rate.

It does seem though that when UNISON stated after the elections in May they were in power, they meant it, as they don’t seem to want to give up this particular perk.

My best guess is come next April, there will be a massive overspend, and either council tax will increase, or front-line services will be cut. Yet if the council adopts simple measures like reducing mileage costs, and not reducing the cost of primary school meals by 50p, it can find money to help plug the gap.

Will they do it? Personally, I don’t think they will.

Hull’s 10% parking increase

Sep 12th, 2011
by Andrew Allison.
Comments are off for this post

A few weeks ago, I wrote about a petition I have set up calling on Hull City Council to abolish on-street parking charges in the city centre on Sundays.

Last week it was announced that on-street parking charges will be abolished on Sundays during November and December, however – even though few people currently park in those spaces because of the charges – Hull City Council has decided to pay for its scheme and will be permanently increasing charges by 10% from January.

Cllr Hale, left, with Cllr Steve Brady, leader of Hull City Council

The deputy leader of the council, Daren Hale, had this to say about the decision:

“This increase was actually approved by the previous Lib Dem council leader, but delayed until after the local elections. That delay has not helped our financial situation. While we regret having to make an increase, it would be typically hypocritical for the Liberal Democrats who approved this increase to criticise us for implementing it.”

I spoke to the previous Lib Dem leader of the council and asked him for his comments. He denied the accusation that he had approved an increase in charges, but that really isn’t the point. The new administration did not have to vote for these increases, especially after a recent report revealing that a quarter of the city’s shops are standing empty. One contributing factor is the high parking charges, and it’s not just shopkeepers complaining. In the Hull Daily Mail today, a member of the public had this to say:

“Quite a few people will choose to shop out of town. People will just go to places like St Andrew’s Quay and Kingswood because most of the things you need, you can get there. If the council makes parking cheaper or free, rather than more expensive, then more people will come into town.”

She is right. St Andrew’s Quay and Kingswood have retail parks where you can park for free, and it is very difficult to find a parking space there on weekends – especially Sundays. In comparison, the city centre is empty.

I understand the council has to balance its books and has to make some difficult decisions, but increasing parking charges at a time when businesses are saying they are already too high is not the way to do it. It will be counter productive, and could easily put more people out of business.

If you live, work, or study in Hull, you can sign my online petition, and if you would like a paper copy of the petition to pass around your place of work, please get in touch. The petition was set up before this decision was announced, but please rest assured I will be campaigning against these proposed increases too. Anyone who lives in Hull wants to see the city centre flourish, and the council needs to work with businesses, not against them.

Parking charges are reduced in North Lincolnshire

Sep 2nd, 2011
by Andrew Allison.
Comments are off for this post

After all the stories I have commented on in recent months about car parking charges, it is refreshing to hear about a council that has decided to make it cheaper for residents and visitors to park. From yesterday, North Lincolnshire Council has scrapped parking charges for the first two hours in Brigg, and one hour’s free parking will also be introduced in Scunthorpe and Ashby in the next few weeks.

Cllr Nigel Sherwood, the cabinet member responsible for highways and neighbourhoods had this to say:

“We are making it easier and cheaper for people to visit the town centres and I hope this will lead to an upturn in trade.”

I hope it will too, because as we have seen in places like Salisbury, where the council has treated motorists as cash cows, shoppers have left town and city centres in droves in order to avoid high parking charges.

Two hours free parking!

This news will be particularly welcome for independent shopkeepers – the lifeblood of local economies the length and breadth of the country. They are already struggling thanks to the economic problems we are all facing, and the crippling high business rates they are forced to pay the government. Anything that encourages more shoppers to park-up and spend their money with them, is good news.

I hope Hull City Council takes note of what is happening across the Humber, and takes up my suggestion of introducing free on-street parking in the city centre on Sundays. This is another way of encouraging visitors and shoppers, rather than turning them away.

If you live, work, or study in Hull, please sign my parking petition, and help local businesses.

Abolish on-street parking charges on Sundays in Hull

Aug 11th, 2011
by Andrew Allison.
Comments are off for this post

At the end of last year, one of my concerns was councils would try and raise extra revenue by increasing parking charges. It concerned me because I knew it would have a detrimental impact on local shopkeepers. The sheer amount of stories there have been this year has proved my fears were not unfounded.

Last week, I was talking to a cafe owner in Hull City Centre regarding on-street parking charges on Sundays. Although there are free car parks in the city centre on Sundays, the council still charges for on-street parking at the full rate of £1.30 an hour, up to a maximum of £2.60 for a two hour stay. Unsurprisingly, most of the parking spaces remain empty. 

Traders tell me that if Hull had free on-street parking on Sundays it would encourage people to park-up, and have a coffee or lunch in one of the city’s many cafes and restaurants. This argument makes sense. If you don’t have to pay to park, you are more likely to pop into a couple of shops and then have something to eat or drink. If you are pushed for time, you don’t want to park in a multi storey car park, and then walk into the city centre. You want to park somewhere that’s convenient and easy. It’s not that the council will lose out on much revenue either. As I’ve already stated, very few people currently park their cars in the on-street spaces. 

I have therefore set-up a petition on Hull City Council’s website calling for the abolition of on-street parking charges in the city centre on Sundays. If you live, work, or study in Hull, you are eligible to sign the petition. If you don’t live in the city, but have friends or relations who do, please send them the link. No-one wants to see boarded-up shops, and businesses going to the wall. This is one way we can all do something to help prevent this happening.  

How to plug a black hole

Jul 22nd, 2011
by Andrew Allison.
Comments are off for this post

Full council meetings can be very boring affairs. When I attended a full meeting of the East Riding of Yorkshire Council a few months ago, I was told by a journalist that it starts with prayers and doesn’t get any more exciting than that!

Yesterday afternoon, I sat in the public gallery at the Guildhall in Hull. Hull City Council meetings are usually lively affairs, and the animosity between councillors (usually those in the same party) is in full public display. The reason I attended was because of the following opposition motion:

Council welcomes the projected under spend by the authority for 2010/11 and balanced budget delivered by the previous Liberal Democrat administration.

Council hopes that a balanced budget can be maintained in future years to maintain the confidence of local people and businesses.

Council therefore expects that the current Labour administration give details as to how it will deal with the projected overspend of £6m in the Council’s 2012/13 budget.

I have written before about what I regard as the new administration’s ‘head in the sand’ position when it comes to the council’s finances. After yesterday’s meeting, I have not been given a reason to change my mind. The leader, Cllr Steve Brady, said he has been talking to the unions and has insisted sickness absences must be reduced from the current 6%, to 3%. His language was tough, and I agree with him. This is something that requires urgent action. The deputy leader, Cllr Darren Hale, spoke about a reduction in mileage claims, which will save the authority £1.4 million. Great I thought, we may be getting somewhere.

Hull City Council chamber

Next came the leader of the Conservative Group, Cllr John Fareham. (When I say group, as there are only two Conservative councillors serving on the council, their group meetings are rather short!) He spoke about the sloppy, lackadaisical way we look after public money in Hull.  All good stuff, but despite the hyperbole, I didn’t hear any practical suggestions.

Then came speeches from Lib Dem, Cllr Claire Thomas, who ominously spoke about the black hole in council finances. Then the other half of the Tory group, John Abbott said promises will rebound. Cllr Bell, leader of the opposition Lib Dems, said the council will have to use reserves to plug the black hole. This prompted a rather emotional speech from the finance portfolio holder, Cllr Phil Webster, accusing the previous Lib Dem administration of taking money out of reserves. I’m not sure if anything he said made any sense, but with his raised voice and paper waving gesticulations, he certainly meant it!

So what did I glean? In a nutshell, the savings outlined were already factored in to Labour’s draft budget before the elections, so we still have a £6 million potential overspend next year. To plug the gap, the council will once again dip into its reserves (how long these reserves will last, I do not know), and raise money through the back door, as in this story reported by Big Brother Watch yesterday.

The council will still continue to reduce the cost of school meals for primary school children, which will cost taxpayers £500K a year. It will still continue to fund trade union activities, including a building owned by the council which is used as office space. It will still continue to think it’s really saving money by not making redundancy payments, forgetting the salaries of those staff who opted to take voluntary redundancy, will still have to be paid.

Perhaps the best comment of the day was one not made on the floor of the council chamber. Instead it was sent to me on Twitter. One Labour councillor said to me, “You have picked a good day to hear lots of dribble.” I couldn’t have put it better myself!

Southampton’s wave of strikes

Jul 18th, 2011
by Andrew Allison.
Comments are off for this post

Last month John Henvest, our coordinator in Hampshire, wrote about taxpayers being taken for a ride in Southampton. Many council workers were hiring taxis, rather than using their own vehicles because the council reduced the mileage rate paid from a very generous 54p per mile to the HMRC recommended 45p. At a time when the council is trying to reduce its costs, some workers deliberately wasted our money in a futile bid to get generous perks reintroduced.

The problems in Southampton, however, have not just been restricted to taxi rides. Southampton City Council have decided to introduce new pay and conditions for its workers, and want them to accept a pay reduction of between 2% and 5.5%. No-one wants a reduction in pay, but at a time when many in the private sector are losing their jobs through forced redundancies, and are also having to accept pay cuts to keep themselves in work, council workers have to accept the economic realities of life.

Southampton's refuse collectors are currently on strike

Instead, a wave of strikes have taken place. In an attempt to hold the council to ransom, bin men have walked out, leaving over a million bin bags to litter the city’s streets. If many of the workers at your council took a month off work at the same time, you probably wouldn’t notice the difference. Bin men go on strike and everyone notices, as rubbish is piled high and vermin starts increasing.

On Wednesday last week, more than 600 workers went on strike, and a protest march and rally took place. To compound the council’s problems,  unions have also launched a £12 million legal battle. In scenes reminiscent of the 1970s, the lives of ordinary council taxpayers have been left a misery, yet despite the continuing strike action, around 90% of employees have signed new contracts in order to protect their jobs, and the council estimates reducing salary costs will protect 400 jobs.

A similar proposal was put forward by the Labour group on Hull City Council before the elections in May. It felt by asking the unions to accept a 5% pay cut, jobs would be protected. Surely union leaders want as many of their members in employment as possible? Compared to the private sector, a job in the public sector is still relatively safe, better paid, and even after proposed government reforms, will still have generous pension entitlements.

This is something the unions and those striking in Southampton need to think about, and in the meantime get back to work.

Hull’s Lord Mayor to wine and dine fellow councillors

Jul 12th, 2011
by Andrew Allison.
Comments are off for this post

The current Lord Mayor of Hull, Cllr Colin Inglis, is a very colourful figure to say the least. A former leader of the city council, and a former chairman of Humberside Police Authority, he made it clear a few weeks ago he fully intends to use his term as Lord Mayor as a platform in his bid to become Humberside’s first Police and Crime Commissioner.

When it comes to wasting money, he is no stranger to controversy. Under his leadership the council spent £650K on a big screen very few wanted. The decision was made by him without public consultation and the screen was eventually removed at the beginning of last year. This is a man who shamelessly wastes our money, and isn’t bothered in the least if we don’t like it.

Last week I was sent a copy of an invitation he has sent out to newly elected councillors and two of the city’s MPs. He plans to wine and dine them at our expense. This is what Cllr Inglis had to say:

“Hosting dinners is what the Lord Mayor does. As it happens, in the six weeks since my installation we haven’t even had one dinner. I have invited Karl Turner because he is a new MP and Diana Johnson MP because she has never previously been invited to a dinner by any Lord Mayor”

You have to feel sorry for him. He has been Lord Mayor for six weeks and he hasn’t hosted one dinner! Not that any of the plebs will be invited to one of his soirées. We just pick-up the tab. Liberal Democrat, Cllr Craig Woolmer has this to say about the event:

“No member of our group is attending on the grounds that they believe it’s a waste of money. The reason being given for the dinner is that it will give new councillors an opportunity to see the Lord Mayor’s Parlour.

At a time when the council is having to make cuts, it is hypocritical to have councillors wining and dining like this at taxpayers’ expense.”

Not enough dinners, apparently.

I couldn’t agree more. As elected councillors, I’m sure any one of them can meet the Lord Mayor in his parlour when they visit the Guildhall on council business. They don’t need a three course meal with all the trimmings to be given the opportunity of saying hello.

It seems Cllr Inglis will make sure he lives the high life during his term of office, and no doubt will do what all other civic dignitaries do – eat, drink and be merry at as many official knees-ups in the area as possible.

At a time when the council is having problems balancing the books, the last thing it needs is a profligate Lord Mayor.

Senior officer in Hull walks away with £77K

Jul 7th, 2011
by Andrew Allison.
Comments are off for this post

Councils are apparently the most efficient of all public sector organisations. I have always thought this was more a reflection of the state of government departments and Quangos, rather than saying councils are efficient. All too often we see examples of wasteful council largesse, and this story is no exception.

Until recently, Susan de Val was the chief legal officer for Hull City Council. The legal department has had more of its fair share of problems in the last few years, and she is the second chief legal officer to resign in the last four years. When I say resign, I mean she jumped before she was pushed. In recent months the advice from the legal department has not been of the highest quality. This has left egg on the faces of some senior councillors and senior officers, therefore a change at the top was needed.

Thanks for the money!

What happened next is a classic example of someone in the public sector being rewarded for failure. Ms De Val, who has only been working for the authority for two years, has walked away with £77k. The council’s reasoning is it would have had to appoint an independent advisor to investigate Ms De Val’s conduct, and would have also had to suspend her on full pay. Paying her off was seen as the cheapest option, and she will also have waived her right to take the council to an employment tribunal.

She has now freely walked away from Hull City Council with an officially unblemished record. The council cannot give her a bad reference. As matters have not been properly investigated, anything anyone says about her is hearsay. I have no doubt all she will do is take a short holiday, and then pick-up another council job, probably on an interim basis on an inflated salary, until the dust settles and a permanent job becomes available.

This is what will happen to Andrea Hill, the chief executive of Suffolk County Council who walked away with £218k this week. There seems to be a council merry-go-round, where you get paid off, walk into another job, get paid off again, and then walk into yet another. Taxpayers lose out as these people get wealthy at our expense. When you ask some of these high-earning officers to take a voluntary pay cut, most will laugh in your face.

While no one wants a lengthy and expensive disciplinary process, at the same time no one should benefit financially as a result of their incompetence. This is what appears to have happened in this case. I have already written about some of the spending decisions of Hull City Council. Since the new administration took over in May, £500k has been spent on reducing the cost of school meals for all primary school children in the city, irrespective of whether their parents are on high incomes and do not need a subsidy. Start adding these figures together, along with news today that the council failed to collect nearly £3 million in council tax last year, and you get over £3.5 million that could have been used to fund front line services and perhaps reduce the tax burden for the city’s residents.

A few years ago Hull City Council was at the bottom of the pile. It was one of the worst performing councils in the country. Wasting money in the ways I have outlined does not fill me with hope for the future. The council needs to pull its socks up and collect the council tax due, not waste it on subsidising school meals for those who can easily afford to pay the full rate, and certianly not reward senior officers for failure.

Hull & East Riding round-up

Jun 3rd, 2011
by Andrew Allison.
Comments are off for this post

On Tuesday, Liam Billington wrote about the taxpayer funding of unions in Tameside, Greater Manchester. In Hull, it is no different. You can see by looking at the photograph taken in Hull’s Guildhall, that after the recent elections, UNISON feels it is in power, rather than the councillors elected by the people.

Who is in charge in Hull?

In our report last year, we highlighted how much of our money is paid to full-time union officials, who instead of doing the jobs we pay them for, work full-time for their unions. When we sent a Freedom of Information request to Hull City Council, we got an unusable response, so – as yet – I do not know how much of my council tax goes on paying full-time union reps. I will try again though, as this information should be in the public domain.

In the East Riding of Yorkshire, the figure is £124,585. If you think this is wrong, and want your money spent on front-line services, then write to your MP and tell them. This is an issue parliament should legislate on, and it’s only by putting pressure on MPs that we can get the change required.

 

Talking about wasting taxpayers’ money, it has been revealed this week that more of our hard earned cash is going to senior officers in Humberside Fire and Rescue.

Due to the chief fire officer retiring, a number of changes have been made. The deputy and assistant fire officers have been promoted, and two officers have seen their salaries almost double, but just temporarily for two months, as they become assistant chief fire officers. As both of those officers are eligible for retirement next year, they will also see their pensions double as a result of just two months on a higher pay grade. Here is what one firefighter had to say:

“Our pensions are based on your best salary during your last three years of service, so for two months work these people will be retiring on double the money.

“I can’t believe the fire authority have sanctioned this when they are trying to save money. The people they are cutting are at the sharp end.

“It’s like they are making these cuts to fund their pensions. It’s a disgrace.

“The senior officers have put forward these proposals about cuts, but they won’t be here this time next year.”

This is a disgrace, and once again shows why public sector pensions need reforming. Those who make these decisions should also be ashamed of themselves. They should have realised the implications of their decision to promote these two officers. The chairman of the Fire Authority is John Briggs. Why not e-mail him, and let him know what you think?

 

 

Switch to our mobile site