Political blog, July 31: Was scrutiny of Kent TV contract inaccurate?
Comments |
It's got more twists and
turns than your average Ashes series but the saga of Kent TV and
the decision by KCC to award it a seven-month contract extension
continues.
The next instalment comes next week when the authority's cabinet
scrutiny committee will reconvene to reconsider the whole contract
affair, this time in the presence of chief executive Peter
Gilroy, KCC leader Paul Carter, deputy
leader Alex King; Tanya Oliver,
the director of strategic development and public access and
Mr M Banks, a council barrister. Quite a line up,
I'm sure you'll agree and the only surprise is that Sir Bob
Geldof who set up Ten Alps is not among the witnesses.
The
papers for the meeting make interesting reading, saying
the previous meeting (which took place without any of the above
present) was in the view of the chief executive one that led to
conclusions that were "fundamentally inaccurate"
and that the process "fell well below the standard expected
by the authority."
I don't know whether members of the committee will necessarily
agree with this view.
I was at the meeting and at no stage did any member - including
the Conservatives - suggest they probably ought to stop discussing
the contract because they felt the debate was below standard. (And
it rather opens the door to any number of additional "extraordinary
meetings" in the future.)
The report to the committee goes on to talk about the
"potentially damaging effect on the reputation of the authority and
its officers of inaccurate statements being in the public domain"
as another reason for calling the extraordinary meeting.
An interesting phrase - it stops short of saying
councillors on the committee got things seriously wrong when they
questioned, among other things, whether there could be a perception
of a conflict of interest for the chief executive in deciding to
award the contract.
The question is whether those members who raised concerns about
that possible perception of a conflict and the lack of political
involvement will be told anything that changes their
mind.
I'm not sure.
I can't see on what basis they will change their mind about the
possible perception of a conflict of interests; I can however see
them re-assessing whether there actually was a degree of
political involvement in contrast with their apparent
ignorance.
But that might lead to even more awkward questions rather than
less. Conservative members of the committee who questioned the lack
of political involvement may be wondering why they weren't told
what was going on. Whether any dare to ask such potentially
career-limiting questions like that next Wednesday remains to
be seen.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Remember that £50million KCC got
stuck in three Icelandic banks? How could you forget.
Well, there is good news of a sort.
It seems that the authority has finally got some of it back. A
cheque for £3million has landed at County Hall - well, not quite,
it's been electronically transferred - from the Heritable Bank,
which is the UK-based one.
It's not much but it's a start. Just £47million to go.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I popped over the border to Medway last night
to cover a full council meeting there for my colleague Alan
Watkins who has sadly broken his leg and is out of action.
Council meetings anywhere follow a familar pattern with
lots of political point scoring. However, Medway does one thing
that KCC might like to consider.
Members of the public are permitted to table formal questions
to any cabinet member about anything they like, followed
by a supplementary question.
It seemed to work quite well although last night was dominated
by questions about the closure of three primary schools in the
area.
Perhaps this could have been trialled at KCC's next scheduled
full council meeting due to take place on September 3. It would
certainly be an improvement on the current practice of having
member questions - used all too often for point scoring.
But as it's been cancelled due to what is described as a "lack
of business", it won't be.
Friday, July 31 2009
The KM Group does not moderate comments.
Please click here for our house rules.