Dear Sir,
Contributors to the Liverpool subCulture blog have made a number of practical suggestions about the £50million cuts which the city council could make without hurting the most vulnerable in the city.
We wanted to share their suggestions with Daily Post readers.
Amongst the most popular are to dispense with the services of the city treasurer, the chief executive and the gaggle of highly paid senior managers, since the cash crisis is their responsibility.
Other suggestions include getting back the £340,000 the city council paid the former chief executive Sir David Henshaw for retiring early, since he doesn't appear to have retired.
Scrap the hospitality budget, end the posh lunches and take away the posh cars the council pays for.
Stop paying Liverpool Direct Limited for the services they charge the Council.
Charge for the use of the purpose built shower on the third floor of Venture Place.
Demolish the pigeon loft at the back of the Municipal Buildings (saving £18,000)
Get our money back from Robyn Archer.
Scrap the neighbourhood services talking shops (controversial this one)
Halve the quangos in the city.
Put an immediate freeze on all performance related pay awards for senior managers, since they have obviously failed to perform.
Suggestions are still coming in and they will all be forwarded to the current Leader of the Council, Councillor Warren Bradley in his hour of need. We would welcome any more. Perhaps DPost readers might like to make their own suggestions?
Tony Parrish47
Liverpool subCulture
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Friday, February 23, 2007
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
LETTER OF JANUARY 19TH TO COUNCILLORS BRADLEY AND STOREY REGARDING TONY PARRISH'S QUESTIONS...
My last post concerned my Freedom of Information request to find out what questions Tony Parrish (pictured, ed) asked and the council's answers.
The council refused to comply with my request.
I then decided - in the interests of open government - to write to the current Leader of the Council, Councillor Warren Bradley and the former leader of the Council, Councillor Mike Storey to ascertain if they could shed any further light on these matters.
This is my letter of the 19th of January....(to be continued)
Dear Councillor,
Please find below a response I have received from the city council to my Freedom of Information request.
I had asked what questions Tony Parrish had asked the council and what the council's response had been.
As you will see from the reply, the council has been unable to respond with the information I requested.
In my view, there are three potential explanations for this:
1) The council's record-keeping systems and processes are so chaotic and disorganised that they simply do not know.
2) They are trying to frustrate my enquiry because it will produce information which will only embarrass them further by revealing their consistent and repeated failure to obey the law on Freedom of Information. (Presumably they don't want the council to appear in court again.)
3) They are trying to intimidate Mr Parrish with their 'ongoing investigation.'
(It is also a convenient excuse for refusing to impart such information, isn't it?)
I doubt whether 3) will work.
However both you gentlemen should be aware of an apparent "ongoing investigation".
Who authorised this?
What is its justification?
How much has it cost?
Who does it involve?
What is its purpose?
When did it begin?
When will it be concluded?
I am sure that you may wish to put these and a number of other questions to the current chief executive.
I should be interested in the answers.
As a council taxpayer, this seems to me yet more evidence of the unacceptable activities of an officer class within the city council, who are both out of control and unaccountable, as well as lacking in judgement and common sense.
It also raises yet again the intriguing question of who is actually running the city council - democratically elected politicians, or unaccountable civil servants?
I suspect the answer is fairly clear.
I can only presume that at the end of the day any "investigation" being conducted by the city council may eventually lead to councillors also being interviewed, leading to the possibility of further action.
I imagine there will be many people who will be willing to provide additional information.
Perhaps you yourselves will be able to shed further light on all these matters in order to assist Mr Hilton in his enquiries.
In the meantime, I would like answers to my questions about Mr Parrish's questions - and the council's response.
Perhaps you can use whatever influence you may have to try and resolve this matter?
regards,
AKelly
The council refused to comply with my request.
I then decided - in the interests of open government - to write to the current Leader of the Council, Councillor Warren Bradley and the former leader of the Council, Councillor Mike Storey to ascertain if they could shed any further light on these matters.
This is my letter of the 19th of January....(to be continued)
Dear Councillor,
Please find below a response I have received from the city council to my Freedom of Information request.
I had asked what questions Tony Parrish had asked the council and what the council's response had been.
As you will see from the reply, the council has been unable to respond with the information I requested.
In my view, there are three potential explanations for this:
1) The council's record-keeping systems and processes are so chaotic and disorganised that they simply do not know.
2) They are trying to frustrate my enquiry because it will produce information which will only embarrass them further by revealing their consistent and repeated failure to obey the law on Freedom of Information. (Presumably they don't want the council to appear in court again.)
3) They are trying to intimidate Mr Parrish with their 'ongoing investigation.'
(It is also a convenient excuse for refusing to impart such information, isn't it?)
I doubt whether 3) will work.
However both you gentlemen should be aware of an apparent "ongoing investigation".
Who authorised this?
What is its justification?
How much has it cost?
Who does it involve?
What is its purpose?
When did it begin?
When will it be concluded?
I am sure that you may wish to put these and a number of other questions to the current chief executive.
I should be interested in the answers.
As a council taxpayer, this seems to me yet more evidence of the unacceptable activities of an officer class within the city council, who are both out of control and unaccountable, as well as lacking in judgement and common sense.
It also raises yet again the intriguing question of who is actually running the city council - democratically elected politicians, or unaccountable civil servants?
I suspect the answer is fairly clear.
I can only presume that at the end of the day any "investigation" being conducted by the city council may eventually lead to councillors also being interviewed, leading to the possibility of further action.
I imagine there will be many people who will be willing to provide additional information.
Perhaps you yourselves will be able to shed further light on all these matters in order to assist Mr Hilton in his enquiries.
In the meantime, I would like answers to my questions about Mr Parrish's questions - and the council's response.
Perhaps you can use whatever influence you may have to try and resolve this matter?
regards,
AKelly
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
CORRESPONDENCE WITH COLIN 'COVER UP' OVER TONY PARRISH'S FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUESTS...
THIS IS A COPY OF AN EMAIL I SENT TO THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF LIVERPOOL CITY COUNCIL TOGETHER WITH THE COUNCIL'S RESPONSE.
I AM GRATEFUL TO liverpool subCulture FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THIS CORRESPONDENCE PUBLIC. THERE IS MORE TO FOLLOW...
Date: 2007/01/14 Sun PM 03:53:33 GMT
To: colin.hilton@liverpool.gov.uk
Subject: FOI request
Dear Mr Hilton,
Please consider this a request under the Freedom of Information Act.
1) Please provide copies, with dates, of all requests for information received by the city council from Mr Tony Parrish under the Freedom of Information Act.
2) Please list, and provide copies of, all of the council's responses.
3) Please list, with dates, all complaints received by the city council from Mr Tony Parrish about the council's response.
4) Please list, with dates, the council's responses to these complaints.
Yours faithfully,
A.Kelly
COUNCIL RESPONSE.....
Enquiries to: Wendy Twigge
Your Ref:
Our Ref: LA/WT/07/0733
Date: 18 January, 2007
A Kelly
a.kelly583@ntlworld.com
Dear Sir
FOI – MR TONY PARRISH
Thank you for your request for information made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
With regard to the information which you seek, we are at this time unable to comply with your request.
This information is retained by Liverpool City Council but forms part of an ongoing investigation and is, therefore, exempt by virtue of the Section 30.
To comply with the Act we have confirmed the existence of this information to you. It would have a detrimental effect on the development of any investigation.
This exemption requires that the public interest test be considered and in doing so it is felt that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in its disclosure. This has been considered and maintained as the investigation is ongoing and affects several other individuals as well as the public body itself. Disclosure of information at this time would be damaging to the investigation.
When we are unable to comply with a request made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, we are required to serve you with a Section 17 Notice. Please treat this email as such a notice.
The City Council will consider complaints about the way it has handled your request under its Have Your Say scheme. You can complete a form online on our website at http://www.liverpool.gov.uk/Feedback/Feedback_form/index.asp or you can write to us at Liverpool Direct, FREEPOST, NWW 3400A, Liverpool, L1 3ZZ. We will then deal with your complaint within two weeks, carry out a full and fair investigation within a further month if things are not resolved, and arrange for a different senior officer to review your case within a further month if you remain unhappy.
You may also apply to the Information Commissioner for a decision about whether the request for information has been dealt with in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
The Information Commissioner’s website is http://www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk/eventual.aspx and the address and telephone numbers are: Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House,Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF, Fax 01625 524 510, DX 20819, Telephone 01625 545 745, email: mail@ico.gsi.gov.uk (they advise that their e-mail is not secure).
Yours faithfully
Wendy Twigge
Information Manager
I AM GRATEFUL TO liverpool subCulture FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THIS CORRESPONDENCE PUBLIC. THERE IS MORE TO FOLLOW...
Date: 2007/01/14 Sun PM 03:53:33 GMT
To: colin.hilton@liverpool.gov.uk
Subject: FOI request
Dear Mr Hilton,
Please consider this a request under the Freedom of Information Act.
1) Please provide copies, with dates, of all requests for information received by the city council from Mr Tony Parrish under the Freedom of Information Act.
2) Please list, and provide copies of, all of the council's responses.
3) Please list, with dates, all complaints received by the city council from Mr Tony Parrish about the council's response.
4) Please list, with dates, the council's responses to these complaints.
Yours faithfully,
A.Kelly
COUNCIL RESPONSE.....
Enquiries to: Wendy Twigge
Your Ref:
Our Ref: LA/WT/07/0733
Date: 18 January, 2007
A Kelly
a.kelly583@ntlworld.com
Dear Sir
FOI – MR TONY PARRISH
Thank you for your request for information made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
With regard to the information which you seek, we are at this time unable to comply with your request.
This information is retained by Liverpool City Council but forms part of an ongoing investigation and is, therefore, exempt by virtue of the Section 30.
To comply with the Act we have confirmed the existence of this information to you. It would have a detrimental effect on the development of any investigation.
This exemption requires that the public interest test be considered and in doing so it is felt that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in its disclosure. This has been considered and maintained as the investigation is ongoing and affects several other individuals as well as the public body itself. Disclosure of information at this time would be damaging to the investigation.
When we are unable to comply with a request made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, we are required to serve you with a Section 17 Notice. Please treat this email as such a notice.
The City Council will consider complaints about the way it has handled your request under its Have Your Say scheme. You can complete a form online on our website at http://www.liverpool.gov.uk/Feedback/Feedback_form/index.asp or you can write to us at Liverpool Direct, FREEPOST, NWW 3400A, Liverpool, L1 3ZZ. We will then deal with your complaint within two weeks, carry out a full and fair investigation within a further month if things are not resolved, and arrange for a different senior officer to review your case within a further month if you remain unhappy.
You may also apply to the Information Commissioner for a decision about whether the request for information has been dealt with in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
The Information Commissioner’s website is http://www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk/eventual.aspx and the address and telephone numbers are: Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House,Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF, Fax 01625 524 510, DX 20819, Telephone 01625 545 745, email: mail@ico.gsi.gov.uk (they advise that their e-mail is not secure).
Yours faithfully
Wendy Twigge
Information Manager
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
'Deep folly all around', says Professor Stanley Unwin from beyond the graveymost
Professor Stanley Unwin said...
Dear Bloggermoles,
Too much speclio gong on, hanky panky, funny buslanes, no no, deep folly.
So just a wordytwo here to take the opportuneo to put the record straightmost.
Truth be known, tremendous gapoed municipal coffers.
Many milliowes caught short.
Poor Colonic Hiltio been accusey most new broom sweeper, Bex bissel under the carpetload.
But no, not to be. Worry Bradlio, hop on fasty boat all the way Cannes. Deep cuts much folly. Teary bye thinks, May election calamatoast. Must do something. No hesitate, fasty think feet.
Top of all this, Halitosis shiny porshe, cover most a pigeon load.
Oh no! he criedly-eyed. Birdy business much mess cleary upmost.
Hers's some cashie bags, spoke the chef executoad, cover my combustio steery wheels too, most shiny and keep off the dropping splashies all over my windelows.
Fifteen trouserpounds, they said!
Now, much thought pop the weasel cost. Tuppeny rice? No, if only.
Too much waste and Paul McCartnoad no show. Can we get Sonia? No, too busy panto rehearso. Ahh yes, Slappy thigh behind you. No it isn't. yes it is. Ha, Ha.
Much joy kiddies faces on the asbo loads. Til Billy Butload that is. Even Petey Priceright dressy up girly dame.
Do a funny turn. But not pop load, not for summer.
So, keep open the biblio? Thought Bradmoade. Many books, lots of story, funny and sad. Laughy face and teary in the eyeline. Pictures too.
Or splashy about all wet. Leisure centrepede. Not in the water though. Purpley dye widdley culprit all red faced. Wring the speedos out though. Quick rinse, never topple in the tumbelow dryer. Much shrinky male soprano load. Definite no.
Keep both open hours said Bradlio.Smiley faces deep joy.
Scrap the pop and sack of cole.
Was cream on top? May never know, finger prints all over wipey that too. Deep folly all round.
Gravy train off the rails for this year, so no more gravy, just the laughingmost stock cube. Cant blame the pidgeos for that.
But 2008 just around the crooner, Singy Frank Sinatra, ahhh no longer. Deeply sad.
But don't forget still kareoke like Sinatra, singsong words he said. "I mind it down way. No regrets just mention a few most."
Hope that's all cleary now.
Bye load nightly
Tuesday, February 13, 2007 4:00:00 AM
Thursday, February 08, 2007
HERE IS COUNCIL LEADER WARREN BRADLEY'S BUSY TIMETABLE IN THE SOUTH OF FRANCE AFTER HE MAKES £50MILLION WORTH OF CUTS - TAKEN FROM THE OFFICIAL GUIDE
THE CITY COUNCIL IS PLANNING ON MAKING £50MILLION WORTH OF CUTS TO SERVICES. AT THE SAME TIME COUNCIL LEADER WARREN BRADLEY AND COLIN 'COVER UP' HILTON ARE SWANNING OFF TO CANNES IN THE SOUTH OF FRANCE. (cost unknown)
Here is the undynamic duo's official timetable (We have drawn attention to some events of particular interest): SEE www.liverpoolmipim.co.uk FOR ALL THE DETAILS
The events programme for 2007 will include the following:-
LIVERPOOL WELCOME - Supporters Only
This is an informal event to help kick start the MIPIM week. All Liverpool @MIPIM supporters are welcome to attend.
Date: Monday 12th March from 19.00
Venue: Liverpool Yacht
Format: Informal drinks reception.
Audience: Sponsors/Partners/Associates
STAND BREAKFASTS - Supporters Welcome
This is an informal continental breakfast served each morning on the Liverpool stand. An ideal way to start the day.
Date: Daily between 9 – 10am
Venue: Liverpool Stand
Format: Continental breakfast
Audience: All welcome
MEET THE CITY - Invitation Only
Our traditional meet the city event will once again take place on the Liverpool yacht and gives supporters the opportunity to meet and network with key representatives from the city. Attendance will be restricted to the agreed supporter allocations.
Date: Thursday 15th March 12.00 – 14.30
Venue: Liverpool Yacht
Format: Buffet lunch and drinks
Audience: Sponsors/Partners/Associates (as per allocation)
LIVERPOOL TEAM DINNER - Invitation Only
The Liverpool team dinner proved to be one of the highlights of MIPIM 2006 and for 2007 we will once again be dining at the excellent La Potinier du Palais. This will be a fairly informal dinner, hosted by Cllr Warren Bradley (Leader, Liverpool City Council) and Colin Hilton (Chief Executive, Liverpool City Council). Invitations will be issued according the agreed supporter allocations.
Date: Thursday 15th March
Venue: La Potinier du Palais 13 Square Merimee (opposite the Palais des Festivals).
Time: 19.00 – 22.30
Audience: Sponsors/Partners/Associates (as per allocation)
LIVERPOOL@MORRISON’S PARTY - Restricted Access
The Liverpool@Morrison’s party is guaranteed to be the best event in town, offering the ideal opportunity to unwind with guests at the end of a busy MIPIM week. We have once again secured private access to the street and as well as live music from the Mersey Beatles, there will be bar facilities both inside and out.
Date: Thursday 15th March
Venue: Morrison’s Irish Pub
Time: 21.30 – ‘til late
Audience: All supporters plus invited guests
OUR MESSAGE TO THE CITY COUNCIL?
BAN THE
CANNES!
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
Friday, February 02, 2007
CAN YOU HELP THE CITY COUNCIL SAVE £18MILLION?
LIVERPOOL CITY COUNCIL faces an £18 million budget deficit and is thinking about selling off the family silver to make up some dosh.But you can help save the city's Municipal Offices and Capital of Culture from the axeman in this our historic birthday year.
We are appealing to all our loyal readers and to the thousands of council employees now labouring under the threat of cuts for suggestions about how the city council can save money.
No amount is too large or too small. No idea too stupid or inspired. No cut too savage or slight. (that's enough 'no's', ed).
We will send all your ideas to council leader Warren Bradley (if he is still there, ed). Then he will forget them. But we will have fun making the suggestions.
You can make comments in the usual way and we will post them here (in the now time-honoured tradition, ed)
To kick off this glorious exercise in democratic participation can we make our own suggestion about how to cut the budget deficit which has built up so unexpectedly? (You can, ed)
OUR SUGGESTION IS THIS: Why don't the council sack the smiling assassin, Phil Halsall?
After all he has been the sodding treasurer for the last seven years and it must be his bloody fault if the council is strapped for cash now.
What on earth has he been doing? 
Sack Halsall and the council would save more than £300,000 a year.
MILDRED said...
I suggest sacking Hilton, and getting the dwarf to give back all the money he stole.Dr Dog should sell his shower to the highest bidder.In fact sack most of the AED'S they do nothing useful anyway.Stop other managers wasting money on meeting rooms posh lunches,and take away the posh cars the council pays for.Selling our heritage is not the option but as usual the people of Liverpool are the ones who suffer and the staff from the council who can't even have a decent cup of water!Cuts always affect those who most need help and cannot continue to happen, it is always the front line services who suffer, if you see the budget report you will find that once again the leaders of the council want to cut services to people who most need assistance yet they don't cut their own expenses or their overpaid salary.They will get 10% bonus for cutting services and selling our heritage.Now that would be a great saving if they cut this expenditure.One of the main areas of saving money is not to pay LDL for all the services that they provide for the Council, the services belong to the people of Liverpool, not Dr Mc, slice the payments they are giving to BT for services that we already own, we would save millions
Friday, February 02, 2007 3:55:00 PM
Len said...
my suggestion is to sue Diddy for the money he blacmailed out of the city. That's another 350 grand.
Friday, February 02, 2007 6:24:00 PM
Jimbo said...
My suggestion is to charge anyone using Mcilhenny's shower. Perhaps we should charge £10 a time. It would soon mount up with all the running he is doing.
Friday, February 02, 2007 6:26:00 PM
Tommy said...
I suggest that the council scraps its hospitality budget so that it no longer has to pay for the thousands of sandwiches that are left to curl up all over the city. It's a waste and needless expense people can buy their own.
Anonymous said...
I agree - stop the butty budget!!!!
MILDRED said...
I suggest sacking Hilton, and getting the dwarf to give back all the money he stole.Dr Dog should sell his shower to the highest bidder.In fact sack most of the AED'S they do nothing useful anyway.Stop other managers wasting money on meeting rooms posh lunches,and take away the posh cars the council pays for.Selling our heritage is not the option but as usual the people of Liverpool are the ones who suffer and the staff from the council who can't even have a decent cup of water!Cuts always affect those who most need help and cannot continue to happen, it is always the front line services who suffer, if you see the budget report you will find that once again the leaders of the council want to cut services to people who most need assistance yet they don't cut their own expenses or their overpaid salary.They will get 10% bonus for cutting services and selling our heritage.Now that would be a great saving if they cut this expenditure.One of the main areas of saving money is not to pay LDL for all the services that they provide for the Council, the services belong to the people of Liverpool, not Dr Mc, slice the payments they are giving to BT for services that we already own, we would save millions
Friday, February 02, 2007 3:55:00 PM
Len said...
my suggestion is to sue Diddy for the money he blacmailed out of the city. That's another 350 grand.
Friday, February 02, 2007 6:24:00 PM
Jimbo said...
My suggestion is to charge anyone using Mcilhenny's shower. Perhaps we should charge £10 a time. It would soon mount up with all the running he is doing.
Friday, February 02, 2007 6:26:00 PM
Tommy said...
I suggest that the council scraps its hospitality budget so that it no longer has to pay for the thousands of sandwiches that are left to curl up all over the city. It's a waste and needless expense people can buy their own.
Anonymous said...
I agree - stop the butty budget!!!!
PH and DrMce said...
You'll never take our butty budget never!!
Saturday, February 03, 2007 7:26:00 PM
Anonymous said...
give back the pooh screen ?
Saturday, February 03, 2007 7:31:00 PM
Anonymous said...
Get Robbing Archer and DH and Dr Dog and the Happy Assassin to give it all back?
Saturday, February 03, 2007 7:31:00 PM
Anonymous said...
Regrade all senior Council and Capital of Culture officers so that their packages are commensurate with their ability and performance (NB this could result in a positive cashflow to the Council)
Saturday, February 03, 2007 7:32:00 PM
Anonymous said...
seriously scrap the neighbourhood services. they are the most expensive talking shops ever
Sunday, February 04, 2007 12:36:00 AM
Anonymous said...
halve the quangos in this city.
the butty budget and the expenses of transporting them from talking shop to talking shop will save a fortune also think of the benefit to the environment cos they won't be travelling into the city from sunny southport and wirral every day
Sunday, February 04, 2007 12:39:00 AM
grass roots worker said...
i agree. put an immediate freeze on all performance related pay for senior managers. that would save an absolute fortune. what about it warren?
Sunday, February 04, 2007 4:46:00 PM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
