Saturday, September 15, 2007

A Democratic Disgrace

So, following on from the last entry ... the Liberal and Nationalist administration have today - using the discretion of the Lord Provost for political end (a disgrace in itself) - refused to allow a debate, amongst elected Members, about the school closure programme.

Thankfully, they did at least accept the Labour/Green motion to cancel the programme.

So, this lot have now:

... and, for good measure, just to prove their democratic credentials:

  • stopped elected Members from having an open debate about the whole sorry saga

Mind you, that was undoubtedly the point - they don't want a public debate about what has been an unholy mess from start to finish.

And, talk about it 'all being okay as we can have such a debate on Thursday 20th September' at the regular Council Meeting is nonsense - as mentioned earlier, there is NO item on the agenda about the Estate Rationalisation (school closure!) Programme. NOT A THING.

Today was a democratic disgrace.

Unfortunately, it's becoming a regular occurrence ...

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Told you ,better off with a hamster running things.

Andrew said...

Anonymous

... what can I say - you were right ;-((

Andrew

John Wallace said...

You really haven't seen or taken part in a democratic disgrace if you think today's 'meeting' was one.

Unluckily, I have and have suffered from them.

Going to war in Iraq was/is a democratic disgrace.

Craigmillar Community Council election and following meetings were/are a democratic disgrace. And that was a democratic disgrace which your administration allowed to go ahead. It continues to today where a community has been held to ransom and in abeyance because your administration never stepped in and stopped it when you had the total and complete power to do so.

Not suffered from this one but:

What has been going on in the Waterfront is a democratic disgrace.

What do you REALLY THINK was going to happen today?

Anonymous said...

Andrew
Have you taken the time to read the report on 4 month Budget position. The senior official wants no debate on the review of Community Learning and Development review. It has already been decided that Rosendale will be removing Workers out of centre with the labour groups approval. What about consultation with LOCAL PEOPLE.
YOU CREATED THIS MONSTER

John Wallace said...

Exactly right Anonymous. I am assuming you work in Children & Families. I have heard exactly the same from a reliable 'almost former' Labour source who has had enough of what is going on in C&F.

However, there is a bit more tittle tattle, when it gets out will not please our host here.

Andrew said...

John ... I'd expected (maybe naively) to be allowed a debate - nothing more.

Andrew said...

Anonymous

Thanks for your comment.

Of course I've read the paper, and I can assure you we will not be supporting the recommendations ... so I'm at a bit of a loss to understand why you think it already has Labour Group approval?

Andrew

Andrew said...

John

Thanks for your 2nd comment here - do contact me directly if you want me to respond to any 'tittle tattle'. Thanks.

Andrew

John Wallace said...

"I'd expected (maybe naively) to be allowed a debate"

Not sure about the naivety bit, but there was never going to be a debate on Saturday. I was at management committee meeting last week and the topic came up from surprisingly unpoliticial people and the bet was it would last 30 minutes tops - including shouting from the rafters and punters running on to the council chamber floor.

As far as anonymous' post is concerned, I think you will find (and anonymous will correct me if I am wrong) that Rosendale has been going around telling everyone that he has the full backing of all the labour group in anything he does, hence the papers for Thursday's meeting. He also says that Cllr Missus needs him and won't cross him.

Interestingly Item 8.1 on the agenda for the next meeting is an amazing piece of fluff and should be shredded on the floor of the council chamber in full view of all the officials present. The officials are happy to cut services to the city's residents but when we expect them to hire people capable of carrying out their job, they can't be bothered.

As mentioned before, the paper should be shredded and all senior officials earning, say in excess of 40K, should be told that they are to be re-interviewed for their jobs as per their job description. If you can't do it, or need further training to do it then you get a pay cut and that goes into the pot for services for the residents.

Andrew said...

John

What can I say - we will not be supporting the 4-month budget position report.

... and which report do you mean at 8.1 - all of them or one specific one, as there are several?

Andrew

Pam Canning said...

Andrew I have been reading through Gillian Tee's month 4 report and something has come to mind.

Did the amount that was envisaged that could be saved by the shool closure include a factor for the public convincing them that their shool,nursery or community centre was worth saving? Or were they saying that they were going to consult but at the end the amount they would save totalled all the school closures?

I am actually angrier about this that I have ever been Ms Tee's report talks about the postponement of the property review, I feel that we are in limbo just now.

What do we need to do now, should we be trying to speak to Cllr Mclaren? How influentual is Gillian Tee should we be contacting her? It was Gillian that the original letter came from.

Grateful for any assistance you can give me.

Andrew said...

Pam

Thanks for your comment.

I (unfortunately) agree, there is a bit of a state-of-limbo about all of this ... as there is still no detailed report before the Council outlining what the long-term intentions of the new Administraiton are?

I'll be at the School Council meeting next week and can update everyone on potential actions then ...

Andrew