Labour accused of blatantly obstructing challenges to financial and governance decisions

6

AN opposition Tory Cllr. has accused Labour members and senior council officers of blocking proper examination and full openness of the Council’s finances at the Council’s key Audit and Corporate Governance Committee.

Cllr Mark Jervis says he has been shocked by recent events at meetings accusing the controlling Labour group of blatantly obstructing and resisting timely and open challenge of their financial and governance decisions, leaving him wondering what they have to hide.

The Committee is tasked with overseeing financial and governance decisions made by the Labour Cabinet and the council’s delegated Council Officers.
At the last two meetings of the Committee, the Conservative representative says he has faced various obstacles in seeking to ensure the Committee fulfils its important role. These obstacles have included:
-the Council Deputy Chief Executive temporarily walking out of the February meeting thereby curtailing debate on the Council’s dubious and apparently failing £10m investment in the Mailbox building in Birmingham.
-Labour and Liberal Democrat Councillors blocking a proposed Conservative amendment to the minutes of the February meeting seeking to properly reflect these events. This meant that the minutes of the February meeting were approved despite incorrectly stating that the Committee noted a report on the Mailbox investment which it did not.
-Labour and Senior Officers respectively preventing and resisting debate on the Mailbox investment at the next meeting in April.
-Labour Councillors preventing detailed Conservative questions on the Council’s Treasury Management Practices.
-Labour withholding a Chartered Institute for Public Finance (CIPFA) report from Committee members. The report, which was requested by the Committee, was tasked to examine the effectiveness of the Audit Committee. It was withheld from Committee Members at the meeting despite Officers having been given sight of the report with the opportunity to comment. Only the Labour Committee Chair has seen the report.

Cllr Mark Jervis was the Conservative representative at the March meeting of the Committee. He commented: “I was truly shocked by the events at the meeting. The Council is a significant outlier amongst local authorities in England with £1.8Billion of Council Debt, nearly 6 years of accounts yet to be signed off by the External Auditor and a number of failed and dubious investments such as Together Energy, Redwood Bank, Altana Corporate Bond and Mailbox.”
“Over the last few years, we have seen the Council Leadership resist Conservative calls to learn the lessons from its investment failures. It is therefore a real concern for every resident in Warrington that Labour and Senior Officers appear to want to limit proper and timely oversight of their financial and governance decisions at the very committee established to provide proper checks and balances.”
“I was further dismayed when Labour and the Liberal Democrat representative failed to ensure the Minutes provided an accurate record of the Mailbox-related events at the February 2024 Audit and Corporate Governance Committee meeting. Too often Liberal Democrats provide no effective challenge or opposition to Labour.”
“Overall, my experience at the March Audit Committee meeting leaves me wondering what the Labour-run administration want to hide when they so blatantly obstruct and resist timely and open challenge of their financial and governance decisions.”

In response, Cllr Stephen Rydzkowski, Chair, Audit and Governance Committee hit back stating: “As chair of the Audit and Governance Committee I feel I have to respond to Councillor Jervis’ recent press release criticising the committee.
“The Audit and Governance Committee operates in an open and transparent manner and constructive challenge is always welcome. The Conservatives engage in this but refuse to accept that there is any other outcome except that they are always right. This approach is not being constructive but obstructive.
“They mention the lack of scrutiny over Mailbox by the committee. Yet at the February meeting we had a presentation by Richard Croft of M7/Martley Capital (Mailbox) and a question and answer session at which all members of the committee could ask any question on any subject associated with the investment.
“With regard to the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) report referred to by Councillor Jervis, this was a report requested by the committee itself as to how CIPFA could help us function better as a committee. This report has taken around nine months to compile by this outside organisation. The author of the report will present it to the committee at a future meeting and committee members will receive a copy of this report well in advance of this meeting. This is the same approach as reports presented to any other committee not just of this council but in any other organisation.
“Councillor Jervis and his Conservative counterparts may be happy to play politics with the Audit and Governance Committee but the rest of us on the committee are purely focused on making it work.”

Meanwhile, Cllr Denis Matthews, Cabinet Member for Corporate Finance added: “The Labour Administration continue to be committed to the open and transparent conduct of our town’s finances, and the Council’s 2024/25 Treasury Management Strategy was agreed by the Audit & Corporate Governance Committee (A&CGC) and Full Council in February 2024.
“It is a matter for individual members of the A&CGC as to whether they support the recommendations put forward by Conservative members after considering the merits of their proposals. Conservative members are obviously free to propose, make comment, and ask questions but that does not mean others are obligated to agree. Minutes of a meeting are agreed by a majority decision of the committee, and are a broad reflection of decisions made rather than a word for word transcript of the debate. These meetings are open to the public, and the agenda and reports to be considered are published on the WBC website for all to view.
“I am always happy to speak with Cllr Jervis should he have positive ideas that he feels would be to the benefit of the residents of Warrington.
“I understand that we have entered an election period, but it is my opinion that the people of Warrington expect all councillors to seek to genuinely work together to deliver positive good on their behalf.”

Labour rebuff Tory claims council heading towards bankruptcy


6 Comments
Share.

About Author

Experienced journalist for more than 40 years. Managing Director of magazine publishing group with three in-house titles and on-line daily newspaper for Warrington. Experienced writer, photographer, PR consultant and media expert having written for local, regional and national newspapers. Specialties: PR, media, social networking, photographer, networking, advertising, sales, media crisis management. Chair of Warrington Healthwatch Director Warrington Chamber of Commerce Patron Tim Parry Johnathan Ball Foundation for Peace. Trustee Warrington Disability Partnership. Former Chairman of Warrington Town FC.

6 Comments

  1. Once again the Labour councillor s burying their heads in the sand.
    Refusing to be open and transparent in their financial dealings.
    Roll on the 2nd May 2024 let’s get these inept councillors out of this town

  2. There is little doubt the people of Warrington were ill served by the then (Labour) council’s decision to change the previous format of our local elections from some councillors being elected midway through an administration’s term in office, to all the councillors being elected and serving the full five year term together of an administration. We were told and “sold” the full term all together option would be less costly; a claim that was and has proved to be misleading, particularly so when one party has an overwhelming majority. Without mid term elections, the people of Warrington have been denied any electorate mid term influence on the party in power’s action’s, that it previously had. As for the alleged cost savings, they have been thoroughly overwhelmed by the unacceptable debt levels incurred by this and the previous Bowden administration’s investment follies.

    • Exactly labour manipulated the position to their own advantage.
      It’s time we go back to the former format ? All councillors up for re election at the same time
      Then we get an honest and true opinion of people’s views

      • Either I have not explained my view properly or you have misunderstood what I am advocating. Namely the previous format of some councillors up for election mid way through the five year term.

        • I agree we should return to election by thirds, where one third of councillors are caused to stand for re-election in three out of each four year period. This is the alternative to all out elections permitted by law. It has the beneficial effect of the public never being more than two years away from sending a message to the council.

        • Sorry I misinterpreted your findings
          Yes I agree that councillors should be voted in at different intervals because if they are not up to the job then we can vote them out .
          A 2:year period is an optical timescale to make our assessments of the council whether they are up to the job or not !

Leave A Comment