17/1/2008

Woking

Letters from January 17 2008

Council chief should go over Canopy calamity

EDITOR — Well, well, so now we know. The ludicrous Canopy has cost much more than originally estimated. Surprise, surprise.

I have never read a more damning indictment of local government incompetence (News and Mail, January 10).

Indeed, incompetence may not be the correct term to describe the events of past months. How dare a public servant authorise the expenditure of immense sums of taxpayers’ money without references to their elected representatives.

Chief executive officer Ray Morgan OBE candidly admits doing this and that the council was kept in ignorance of  his and his department’s blunders. We get the usual paltry excuses — “an administrative process error”, “nobody has acted  inappropriately”. Nobody, not even him?

Incredibly he assumes that an apology is all he needs to make — “I just have to apologise”, he says. He should, if he had the slightest feelings of shame (and he accepts full responsibilty for what has taken place) offer his resignation. Better still, he should be sacked but I fear he would then be the recipient of a golden handshake.

Nothing succeeds in this country nowadays so much as a failure.

What about the council? Cllr Goldenberg correctly describes the events as “a financial scandal”. But why did he never enquire about the progress and cost of construction, or any of his colleagues for that matter?

Typically, he is concerned only with making political capital out of these disgraceful affairs. The Conservatives, if they blame the council officers, are right to do so. The latter admit it.

It was obvious to the most casual observer that a building project that was well overdue for completion, and seemed to go on day after day without any sign of nearing completion, was going to cost considerably more than the original estimate. After all, nobody does “owt for nowt” these days, especially in the building trade.

The councillors have no excuse for their seeming unwillingness to take and keep control of the construction which they authorised and intend to pay for with our money.

Woking Borough Council is keen on recycling — in fact it seems to be the only thing it cares about. The time has now come for much of the dead wood in the council chamber to be recycled. Let us make a start in the next elections due in 2008.
David Atkinson
Horsell Rise
Horsell

EDITOR — Once again we read in your paper of an unauthorised expenditure being made by Mr Morgan, the council’s chief executive.

The last one was for £400,000 and his excuse was “a change in council procedures”. This time it is for £1.2m for over-budget costs in relation to the Canopy, which no one I know wanted. How many more are there to be?

How can there be an overspend of 50% on this project? The only explanation I can come to is total incompetence on the part of the project manager, compounded by underhand attempts to cover up this incompetence by the chief executive.

I wonder how many people know about the overspend on budget by the council for the refurbishment of the car parks. This time the overspend is £2.37m. This must again be due to incompetence by council officials and represents about 50% of the original cost.

The total waste of council taxpayers’ money is now running at £4m. This situation cannot be tolerated.

Those responsible for this incompetence, together with the chief executive, who is ultimately responsible for the actions of all council officers, should lose their jobs and their pensions in order to claw back some of the £4m wastage.

An apology by Mr Morgan is just not good enough.
Robert Shatwell
Lime Grove
Woking

EDITOR — I was absolutely appalled to read your article regarding the £1.2m overspend on the Canopy.

In my opinion the chief executive’s position is untenable. This is the second financial mismanagement by him in less than six months and the executive committee should ask for his resignation.

This is public money and the financial department of Woking Borough Council should bear this in mind. The chief executive appears to be a law unto himself. Why are councillors who are appointed by the residents of Woking allowing this to happen? It is totally irresponsible!

It is not enough for the chief executive to apologise for this overspend. His apologies are meaningless in view of the fact that it is less than six months since he had to apologise for approving the sum of £400,000 to Thameswey without authorisation and then went ahead with the overspend on the Canopy.

Is this the tip of the iceberg? It is to be hoped that the council executive will in future keep a tighter rein on the financial situation. Perhaps an apology to the people of Woking whose money is being spent indiscriminately would be in order.
Mrs Bobby Peakall
Hawthorn Road
Barnsbury

Editor  — We now read of a further financial blunder, but this time to the magnitude of £1.2 million which to date in the year 2007/2008 makes a grand total £1.6m.

This total sum represents 20% of council taxpayers’ money paid for Woking Borough Council services for the current financial year.

I also note that Ray Morgan, the chief executive of Woking Borough Council, has said: “We have put arrangements in place so this will not happen again”. Did we not hear similar wording in the previous £400,000 affair?

I would suggest that Ray Morgan should consider his position and do the honourable act and tender his resignation as Paul Gray the former chairman of HM Revenue and Customs did when his department lost the computer disc with 25 million customers’ personal financial details.
John Gillam
Whopshott Drive
Horsell

Give us our cash back

EDITOR — I read with interest your article regarding the overspend on the Albion Square Canopy project (News and Mail, January 10).
Why has it taken so long for somebody to admit this?
All of the local shop traders who lost thousands of pounds in revenue and people who had to put up with 18 months of what can only be described as shambolic torture could have told the council that months ago
You only had to witness some of the pathetic attempts at looking busy during the course of its construction to have realised that not only would it not finish on time but costs would also run over.
So what are we left with. I’ve heard it being described as a big umbrella, a very expensive bicycle rack, an absolute monstrosity and of course other things, which would be far too rude to print.
I gather most of the irrigation equipment has been vandalised, half the plants were dead before they were planted anyway, the traffic lights don’t work half the time, the contractors were called back to rectify some of the uneven paving, two buses cannot even pass each other because it’s too narrow and who had the bright idea to locate a bus stop in this narrowing, right on top of the pedestrian crossing?
By the way, the word “canopy” translates “to cover” —  more like a COVER UP.
Has anybody thought of asking for their money back?
Name and addressed supplied

This apologetic waffle is adding insult to injury

EDITOR — For the first time in my life I have felt the need to write to a newspaper in response to your article regarding the Canopy overspend.

I am appalled at the complete waste of money for Woking’s new Canopy, which I feel sure is something that the residents of Woking neither asked for nor wanted.

However, to add insult to injury I am incensed that Ray Morgan simply apologises and all is forgiven.

Is he not to be disciplined in any way or does the council feel that it is acceptable for Mr Morgan to agree to overspends on this project,  not just once but twice, without gaining the correct authorisation?

I have no doubt that our council tax will be rising above the inflation rates again this year, and why you may ask yourself?

The answer is simple, not only for the above but also to fund the grotesque Lightbox venture (I have yet to meet someone who does not think of it as hideous and expensive, and most refer to it as the ‘shoebox’) and the Peacocks’ car park scheme (how can it possibly cost so much?).
Mrs K Reynolds
Goldsworth Park
Woking

EDITOR — You report that the Albion Square Canopy has incurred a £1.2m overspend — that would be bad enough.

But as you report, the original contract was for £2.5m and the eventual cost was £4,039000, then clearly the overspend total was £1,539000  — a discrepancy of £2,89000.

In the meantime, Woking Borough Council runs around like a headless chicken trying to get members of its staff to retire, cannot afford to maintain its housing, and is putting up the price of its plastic bags.

We elect our councillors to run the affairs of the town prudently and not to authorise expensive projects no one needs. As I understand the matter, the proposal to build this structure came from the council’s officers, and at an estimated cost of £2.5m it should never have been entertained by our councillors for one minute.

One might guess its inspiration had more to do with the light cells on its roof than anything else, all very green of course. But I seem to remember the council’s chief executive got an OBE for that. I am sure he thinks it was a very good idea, perhaps he even proposed it.

To claim now among other things that the costs were inflated by the presence of unknown services under the road is to insult our intelligence. Every experienced contractor knows the hazards of digging up mature roads.

Quite clearly the contract was lacking in control and the manner in which it was given in the first place should be looked at closely.

For the council’s chief executive to talk about the lack of lines of communication and similar, is again insulting waffle, and so too is Cllr Smith’s comment. His action is normally referred to as shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.

The council’s chief executive apologises, not for the first time in recent months and clearly hopes that will draw a line under the matter. I think the whole business should be looked into by an independent body, possibly the local authority ombudsman.

As for our councillors, they should remember that they are elected to represent the taxpayers as thinking individuals. They should pay more attention to what is put before them by council officials and above all else stop playing party politics. It is doing our town no good whatsoever and at the same time bringing them into disrepute.
Alan Blackburn
The Grove
Horsell

Entitled to know more

EDITOR — With regard to the farcical £1.2m overspend on the Woking Canopy, surely the taxpayers of the borough are entitled to a far more explicit explanation than the bland remarks made so far by the borough’s chief executive.

On a previous occasion the chief executive himself allowed a borough payment to be made of almost half a million pounds to which he had no authority.

Either he knew he was not authorised to do so and ignored standing orders or he did not know and was, therefore, incompetent.

Now we are told that on making further unauthorised payments of £1.2m, employees of the borough have not acted “inappropriately”.

If they have ignored council standing orders for financial controls then, of course, they have acted inappropriately.
If they were unaware of any such restrictions then the financial controls are woefully inadequate and this is the responsibility of the chief executive.
Name and address supplied

We have learned lessons

EDITOR — Your report on the Canopy project highlights a number of issues. 

Last year when it was discovered that the cost of the project was substantially beyond that originally authorised, the deputy leader, Cllr Michael Smith, and I immediately wrote to the chief executive to ask for the matter to be formally investigated.

I also instructed the chief executive to be completely open and honest in reporting all of the facts. After all, both as officers and councillors, we are accountable to all the residents of Woking.

Findings from the investigation were presented to the executive committee last Thursday and are publicly available.  Remedial action has been taken and assurances have been given that in future financial accountability for council procedures, already firmly strengthened by the present executive, will always be followed.

It is quite clear that errors were made.  It is essential to recognise that lessons have been learnt and that there is a confident expectation that the action taken will ensure that such a situation will never occur again.
Cllr Anne Murray
Leader of the executive
Woking Borough Council

Mixing fans was a recipe for trouble

EDITOR — Those of us who went to the second round Carlsberg Trophy game at Kingfield last Saturday, and paid our £15 to sit in the Leslie Gosden stand, were surprised to find our Aldershot friends mixing with us.

Many Woking fans had to move from their normal seats and for the rest of the afternoon had to endure standing, swearing and abusive opposition fans.

I cannot understand the logic of segregating the standing opposition fans — covered by a strong police presence, even a helicopter hovering above — while allowing anybody into the main seating stand.

The stewardship and organisation was poor and trouble always not far away. Come on Woking Football Club — get your act together.
B Chapman
Hillside
Woking

First printed in: Woking News and Mail

Related Articles £1.2m Canopy overspend Car parks revamp another budget-buster Calls for Morgan's head