24/1/2008

Woking

Letters from January 24 2008

Take back control at the ballot box

EDITOR — I write to you with reference to the numerous letters you have received with regards to continuous misconduct by Woking Borough Council.

First off, we have the £400,000 unauthorised loan by the chief executive.

Second, we have a £1,200,000 overspend on the canopy.

And third, we have a £180,000 overspend on the town’s car parks.

It won’t take much more mismanagement until the council hits £2m in inefficient, incompetent, and inexcusable waste of Woking residents’ money. It has to stop.

The only way this is going to happen is by certain people losing their jobs or appointments. Not because job losses are needed due to budget cuts, no. Some paid people in the council need to lose their jobs, not just the chief executive. And yes, Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, they all need to go.

There are people in this town with voting rights who shouldn’t have that power. If my CEO or managing director dealt with the business of my company the way Woking’s councillors or employees deal with the town’s business, I would be unemployed.

As a child, I always loved The Muppets. I’m pleased I watched this popular TV show. It educated me to the ways of Woking Borough Council’s current councillors and a minority of its paid staff.

I struggle to decipher which of our public servants, paid or otherwise, imitate Jim Henson’s characters. Beaker in particular, could be described as a character that is unable to listen to others, perhaps through no fault of his own. Is this Ray Morgan?

I find the letter from Anne Murray, apparent ‘leader’ of the Conservatives in last week’s News and Mail, laughable. She alleges to have learnt lessons. I suggest she goes back to school.

She furthermore reminds us that she and the officers are accountable to us, the people of Woking. In that case, both she and others have to go.

And this is where the real tragedy strikes. Generally, in ward to ward in Woking, we’re lucky if  50% of people can be bothered to vote. So we, in that sense all those in Woking, are at the hands of just half of people who can be bothered to vote.

So hallelujah. Those people vote like the Muppets they elect. They vote like sheep.

Despite the massive failures demonstrated in recent months or years, half the people in Woking that can be bothered to vote, will still vote Conservative, will still vote Liberal Democrat.

And we, the people of Woking, will still be crucified by mismanagement, inefficiency and incompetency.
It’s not only in the American election crusade that the bid for change is being made. It’s right here on our doorstep in Woking.
Rob J Burberry
Goldsworth East
UK Independence Party

EDITOR — I am so incensed that I have drafted this several times. This is the final much-condensed version.

There is a worrying loss of public accountability when council officers regularly, without sanction, ask members to retrospectively rubber stamp decisions that they have taken. We seem to have inherited Sir Humphrey from Yes Minister as our chief executive (CE). No matter how strong the personality of the CE, our council should be run by the elected members.

Much has been said about the recent over-spends so I will not dwell on it. But have people forgotten about the replacement footbridge across the canal to County Hall? Is it languishing in some council depot? What about the cost of the aborted pyrolysis plant and all the associated publicity?

Our CE frequently sets grand objectives that he spectacularly fails to deliver. We have seen maladministration on a monumental scale, and it is the ratepayers of Woking who are picking up the costs.

At the next local elections I will be voting for the candidate that will wrest back control of the  council  and seek independent advice on the employment contract of the CE.

I have to ask would any of this have happened under Paul Russell?
Bill Pugh
Cheapside
Horsell

EDITOR — There are two questions I would like answered:

The £400,000 loan — would this have ever been paid back if it had not come to light by other means and has it been paid back now? 

How many other loans has Ray Morgan authorised without the council’s knowledge?

The first instance is he should not resign, he should be sacked. I notice there are no reports of overspend on services that benefit the community, just a poxy canopy that serves no purpose whatsoever.

No wonder our council tax is so high.
Colin Faldo
Bingham Drive
St John’s

EDITOR — While it would be interesting to speculate on the future employment prospects of a manager allowing the expenditure of £1.165 million without authority, the real problem occurred many years ago.

An invitation to tender was issued. How many councillors read it and how many read the tenders received? All contractors quote a low price and include get-out clauses to enable them to charge extra for variation to cover items that they excluded from the tender.

If a job overruns it should be the contractor’s problem, not the client’s. The invitation to tender should specify that the extent and positions of services is uncertain and the prospective contractor should make its own researches prior to bidding as no extra funding will be available regardless of what they uncover. The concept of charging extra to test the installed equipment, inverters, is ridiculous.

The workmanship failures, particularly the chipped concrete in Church Path, should have resulted in withholding payment until the job was done properly.

In a few months’ time Woking shareholders, council tax payers, will have the opportunity to sack the real culprits and put in place councillors who will get the job right first time.
Tim Shaw
Horsell Park
Woking

EDITOR — We would like to thank the News and Mail for publicising the  overspend of £1.2 million by the council on the Canopy. 

It’s the second incident within five months without the correct approval. The first was in August ’07 when Mr Morgan approved a loan of £400,000 for Thameswey.

The UK Community Issues Party is calling for the resignation of Ray Morgan as a chief executive as he has failed to promote the principles of leadership so that the culture of Woking Borough Council is one of accountability when making decisions and actions which protect the public interest. Further details can be found on our website www.ukcommunityissues.org.

We can be contacted by writing to the UK Community Issues Party at PO Box 365, Woking, Surrey, GU22 8XU or email at ukcommissues@aol.com.
M Osman
UK Representative and Spokesperson for Woking
UK Community Issues Party

Time for inquiry into our council

EDITOR — I would like to know who, in their turn, is in charge of those in charge of the council? Why is the executive apparently being afforded the luxury of being able not only to determine without question the future of certain employees, but indeed also whether they themselves should remain in their job?

In just recent months your newspaper has reported on at least three major events that come immediately to mind. A planning department found to be at fault by the ombudsman over a phone mast, a staggering overspend on the Canopy, and now another on the Brewery Road car park. And what else is there that we don’t know about?

All this would never be tolerated in the private sector, so why is it being allowed to continue and indeed apparently flourish when it’s the taxpayer who foots the bill?

There must surely be some higher authority above these people who are displaying such an unbelievably patronising attitude towards those who ultimately pay their salaries. Do they really think we are stupid enough to go on accepting their woefully inadequate explanations?

Who and where is this higher authority, and why aren’t they doing something?
Name and address supplied

EDITOR — There is something seriously flawed in the manner in which the affairs of our council are being run.

Cllr Murray tells us that she instructed the chief executive “to be completely open and honest in reporting all the facts”. He responds with a series of explanations that do nothing but totally condemn him as the head of an organisation that was either out of, or had lost control, and all Cllr Murray can say is “lessons have been learnt”.

If Cllr Murray wants to do something meaningful to save the reputation of Woking’s councillors in this affair then she should take steps to have the whole business looked into by the Local Authority Ombudsman or some other independent authority.
Name and address supplied

Editor’s note: The Local Government Ombudsman advises that people should initially use the council’s complaints system if they feel there is a problem.

However, if this does not result in a satisfactory outcome, residents can fill in the complaint form on the website or send a letter to the ombudsman for their area. For more information visit www.lgo.org.uk.

Morgan should not face flak alone

EDITOR — All through the News and Mail last week and the previous week there were condemnations and criticisms surrounding the monies spent over budget by Woking council.

Let me state here that such large sums of overspend are worthy of such comments. However, the specific targeting of an individual in the form of Ray Morgan is not.

As chief executive it is his place to apologise on behalf of any and all such events under the council’s operation. There are others who should be seen standing and shouldering some of the responsibility —the council leader for one.

It should also be recognised that situations are not as they always seem. I submit that the money would still have been spent. You cannot stop a build halfway through. The project met with difficulties during its completion that had to be met and dealt with.

Leaving it half finished would have been unthinkable and equally damaging to the image of the borough.

My belief is that the officer who made the decision to cover the overspend was acting in good faith, even if out of ignorance of the procedure, and of course there should still be an enquiry. But knowing Mr Morgan as I do, it will be a situation where every endeavour will be made for it not be repeated.

Ray Morgan is the easy target and residents should ask why it is that his name is always banded around over contentious issues within the borough? I will tell you, it is because he is historically the one person who will meet the residents, who will talk through the proposals of councillors and defend their decisions and who has driven this borough forward.

With that comes the risk of blame, but in most cases this is misdirected. The relocation of the football club is a prime example of councillor interference for which fans have continually blamed Mr Morgan.

But what of the huge environmental programme and the worldwide recognition we receive from it, what of the sustainable energy programme, the quality homes initiative, the town’s CCTV and let’s not forget the insight to save the council from financial ruin over the Zurich municipal debacle of the early ’90s, from which most local authorities suffered.

Ray Morgan will always stand up and be counted whatever else you may think of him, and what the public should demand is that others stand up for their actions, and in particular the politicians controlling the council.

They are the ones who will claim credit when things go right, often on the back of decisions taken by Mr Morgan and his officers.

They can hide behind the fact that procedures were in place but not followed, but then what are their portfolio holders for, but to be aware of all issues of financial and project management?
Barry Pope JP
Past mayor and councillor of Woking Borough Council

First printed in: Woking News and Mail

Related Articles Calls for Morgan's head