Mr Forgetful

So let's see, this damned Council meeting and the deleted blogs.

The blogs included reference to the Estyn Inspection. I suggested that the generally good outcome was a bit of a surprise to the LEA as they were expecting just the opposite and that the outcome may have had a lot to do with the charabanc of advisors who allegedly arrived from the WLGA (a coachload of coaches) to school staff in how to pass the inspection. It wasn't all good news as the Inspectors did report that Swansea was the amongst the worst authorities for young people leaving education with no qualifications at all. (see my earlier posts about SHYP).

I referred to the debate on this item showing the incompetence and partiality of the Presiding Officer, Cllr Wendy Fitzgerald. That her lack of any detectable sense of humour or knowledge of the rules of debate (whether ours or anybody's. A Christmas present note to her family – a second-hand copy of Citrine would be very welcome) led to a cranking up of the temperature in the Chamber and simple matters turning into acrimonious major tests of will. This is not helped by Cllr F unwillingness to accept advice from officers on the few occasions that she is offered any. Although I get my share the bulk of the opprobrium descends on Rene Kinzett. The fatuous debate on his supplementary question to the Estyn Inspectors was a case in point. She prevented him, he argued and this went on for some minutes – when she gave in and allowed his question – as she should have done at the beginning. Later on in the meeting she was giving advice to councillors on when and why they should 'stand', i.e. intervene in a debate and when to put up their hands (she failed to see the irony in her offering anyone advice on procedure). However, she omitted one and I stood up, helpfully intended, to advise on this. I was met with an exasperated sigh and the most negative body language. She didn't want to let me proceed, there was some argy-bargy and the Monitoring Officer (after being drawn to the correct part of the Constitution advised by one of his staff) finally advised that I was correct. All utterly pointless.

The entries made reference to Cllr Peter May's abject performance in public & members questions when he seemed unable to answer anything without a prompt from the officers sitting behind him. And then there was the challenge by a member of the public who had the temerity to remind Cllr May of the inconsistency in his answers compared to something that he had said at some previous meeting. Ouch! Who would expect someone to remember and quote it at you in public. Ouch again!

I also described the ridiculous situation where the Council was allowed by the Monitoring Officer to vote on going straight to a vote on complicated changes to the procedures for the Pensions Panel without a presentation on the changes, despite the fact that the item was deferred from the previous Council meeting for precisely that reason. And then after the vote the Monitoring Officer said that we had to have the presentation after all! You couldn't make this stuff up. Well you wouldn't want to. It's all very wearing.

Later on the report on a radical and totally undemocratic change to the way Notices of Motion were to be dealt with was withdrawn before debate for further work. I wondered who had signed it off in the first place, if it was so flawed. (It's coming back to the Constitution Working Group this week – but there doesn't seem be any major changes. I have no idea what's going on). The changes mean that the Presiding Officer (the aforementioned Cllr Fitzgerald) would have the power to prevent any motion getting on the Agenda – she can currently kick them into the long grass by referring them to an Overview Committee which are run by her own side. The new rules would mean that embarrassing or other unwanted motions could be prevented from ever seeing the light of day. This from an Administration allegedly committed to – what was it – "Openness, transparency & democracy".

I also referred to Labour's motion on the redundancy of the Arts Co-ordinator in the Education Department and that the response to this revealed that it seemed little thought had been given to how the outstanding work that she had done in involving children (and schools) in the arts, especially from areas of deprivation, was to be continued. There have been howls of protest at this small-minded redundancy. The Administration offered to look at it again when they considered the budget for next year. It's pathetic really.

That's the best I've got. Sorry. It's not as good as the originals – but there we are. I'll try to not let it happen again.