Golf Wars and Other Secrets

Bulwell Hall Golf Course. Anybody give a shit? Some people apparently do.

Nottgirl did a piece on it a year or so ago, basically saying that the Jack Barker Golf Co got a rather generous deal when they took over the running of the place. She mentions that a commenter on a 'Post' article also expressed concerns but the comment was later removed.

The grounds maintenance part of the agreement has recently come up for renewal recently and portfolio holder Cllr Trimble has made a decision to bypass normal financial procedures and simply agree an extension. This seems to have upset the Tories who have had the decision subjected to call-in.

So far so dull. To me, golf is just a way to spoil a nice walk in the park and the reasons for extending don't seem too suspicious. I'm not even in a position to wonder about the VFM aspects of the original agreement as I don't know the going rates for golf clubs. However, this affair does cast a bit of light on some aspects of how both the Labour and opposition councillors' respective worldviews.

In a seemingly unrelated move, NCC has just released its latest whinge about revealing financial information (explaining 'once and for all' as they put it on Twitter, like we are all a bunch of rather thick schoolchildren).

In this rather unconvincing rant NCC says -

"...that the information published by other local authorities and the Department for Communities and Local Government does not improve transparency or accountability because it doesn't let people judge value for money or the need for the expenditure."

This is of course bollocks and this particular portfolio decision shows why. You see, NCC routinely makes all financial aspects of these decisions i.e. the cost to us, the local taxpayers, confidential under sch 12A of the LGA which allows councils to withhold information -

"...relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)."

among many other things.

I'm not convinced that the purpose of this part of the act is to keep details of the amounts of money paid to contractors secret and it could of course mean that all sorts of woes are kept hidden. In fact if NCC's interpretation is correct Eric 'Buffoon' Pickles' demands to release all expenditure over £500 would be unlawful.

Could it be that JoCo and the team's fear of accountability stems from the fact that we would at last be able to make a judgment on the value for money of some of their decisions*?

The second thing this issue tells us is that the Tories on NCC care more about golf clubs than organisations such as the Council for Equalities and Human Rights Nottm and Notts cos they didn't lift a finger when Hassan Ahmed cut their funding and that has now resulted in its closure. Talk about fucked up priorities.

*In this case, somebody who knows about golf courses obviously, not me.

Collinsblog

Blimey, JoCo's got himself a blog.

Modestly titled 'Leading Nottingham', he's used his first post proper to label housing minister Grant Schapps as a 'fool' and Eric Pickles a 'buffoon'. Powerful stuff that's got the Post in a lather but is this really the sort of language that a politician who wants/expects to be taken seriously should use?

Don't get me wrong, I can't fault Collins' assessment of these two Tory twats but last time I used words which could be described as "personal, derogatory comments" about some of Collins' colleagues I got a letter from the City Council's legal department. He presumably has no problem with using council officer time "trawling the internet to find these stories" when it's used to threaten local bloggers with an implication of legal action. My subsequent complaint about this was first ignored then flatly rejected.

Anyway, it keeps him off the streets I suppose and it's probably no coincidence that the local elections are coming up. I'll add him to the blogroll so we don't miss out on any future giggles.

(Hat-tip, Ben Barton)

Update - I made a comment on the latest post this morning but, funnily enough, it has yet to make it past moderation.

Updateagain - as it's still not made it up here's my comment -

"Except of course you won’t be in the same position as FoI because you build the financial reporting into ongoing systems so it’s done routinely. You might actually save overall because fewer FoI requests will need to be made because the information is already out there.

You don’t help yourself when you’re publicly going up against one of the few ideas the Tories have had, and with your record of backroom deals (Radford Unity Complex) and secret/illegal spending (Harold Tinworth) the City Council is badly in need of more accountability."

Mayor Collins to be a Reality

OMG.

The Post is reporting an announcement from Communities Secretary Eric 'Pieface' Pickles that Nottingham WILL have a referendum as to whether to have an elected mayor, despite JoCo's 'recommendation' that we don't. This was sort of expected and the publication of the 'Localism Bill' has confirmed it.

I wonder if the Extraordinary General Meeting were told in time?

As if that's not bad enough JoCo will be made a 'Shadow Mayor' (more of a night mayor surely? Badum tish!) next summer to get us used to the idea before the referendum is held in 2012. I'm sure that JoCo is just as unhappy as I am because he's said in the past that elected mayors are a stupid idea. He may not be unhappy about being an unelected one however, even if only for a temporary period.

Of course, this temporary appointment does rely on him remaining as leader after the local elections next May and that, in turn, relies on him being re-elected as one of the councillors of St Anns.

People of St Anns, you know what to do...

For more on some of the measures in the Localism Bill see Alanadale's take on it.

And from the Dept of Communities and Local Govt.

Update - council funding settlements now released (MSExcel file). Nottingham faces overall cut of 8.44%. Ouch.