There is no doubt Councillors have a huge amount of information to deal with, however, that workload depends on how it is presented. Documents should be clear, concise and contain all the relevant information on which to base a sound decision. That is easily done if one desired, it is how business, the military and many other organisations have to work to be highly efficient.
My experience from being a Councillor is that this is one of the single greatest failings. Reports are often scant in information; they are written in unclear formats; often it just refers to background information rather than presenting it; occasionally there are mistakes and misleading statements; sometimes there is no information as required at all. This all leads to increasing the workload of diligent Councillors, who then find themselves having to research the information; or to write to ask for further explanation; or to seek clarification of those mistakes and errors; or to unravel what is actually being reported.
For example the accounts are a moving sand, they are shifted around constantly making it nigh on impossible to track or understand what is going on, one person described it to me as like “knitting treacle”, no matter how hard you try, you can never follow a strand. Yet the accounts could and, to my mind, should be produced in the most clear and simple format that any child could understand, so why aren’t they? Instead, Councillors are forever being told it is all very complicated, it is like “rocket science”, as far as I am concerned that is only because it has been made that way.
This is not helped if there is then prevarication or obstruction in answering relatively simple questions, or in seeking relevant and necessary information, or in asking for the background papers.
On Rutland Council, this is exacerbated by the insistence it will not send hard copy papers to Councillors or send such information through to one’s own private email address. I personally like hard copy for use in meetings, it is easy to refer to and one can make comments and notes alongside. It is ridiculous to expect Councillors, who have to give up enormous amounts of time, to have to sit at home, log in; search for; access the relevant information; then print it off and put it all together. Not only is this time consuming it is more expensive, it requires a computer and printer in every Councillors house whilst the Council leases expensive much faster and cheaper industrial machines. You will start to realise that much of what happens does not enable Councillors instead it obstructs them. You only have to look to see that much of the information churned out to Councillors often serves to do nothing more than bog them down in trivia, whilst the major and far reaching important issues slip by unnoticed, without any form of effective scrutiny and without debate.
One should remember though, that Councillors sit effectively as the Board of Directors, with the electorate as shareholders, it is their money. You would not expect the Board of Directors to find information was withheld; questions not answered; relevant background information missing; reports not thorough; flimsy one-sided business plans or no business plan at all; with the Board having to do the research themselves. Let alone having to then go to all the trouble of logging on, find the information, download it and then print it off. No Member of the Board would accept that and neither would the shareholders.
In the next few Blogs we will start to reveal the extent of the problem we have had as Councillors and allow the public to judge for themselves where the problems lie. This is not about openness and transparency with easy access to documents and information, it is about the complete opposite.
Ask yourselves? Is it right that the Ward Member, asking to be allowed to attend the meetings regarding the single biggest housing development planned to go ahead in his Ward, is refused? Is it right that the Ward Member, then asking to be sent the Minutes and Record of Meetings, is refused? Is it right that the Ward Member, therefore asking to be able to come in and inspect the files, as is his statutory right by law as a Councillor, is refused? What would any reasonable member of the public conclude? I would suggest they would say, “What have they got to hide?” This is only one example of many, as we make you aware of all the other examples you will be able to see if you draw the same conclusion and ask; “What have they got to hide?”.
One of the main problems with Local Government is that the majority of Councillors, regardless of what they might say, are not thorough; they often do not read the Reports; look at background information or understand the subject on which they have to make a far reaching decision. Time and again I have heard Councillors declare they do not understand what is in front of them, one Councillor, some time ago, even said “Can I not just vote on trust?” and that was to sign off the annual accounts! That Councillor should have stepped down, that is not what the electorate expect or vote for.
In all honesty, in many ways I do not feel one should find them guilty for this, Councillors should have the information in a clear, concise and easily understandable format with all the relevant information. However, I do find them guilty for making decisions when they do so without knowing or understanding the facts. They have an opportunity to abstain; defer the decision; they can refuse to accept what has been presented; they can ask for a better and more understandable presentation, sadly, few do. It is easier to accept the status quo, to merely go along with the majority, after all there is far less hassle if one just sticks ones hand up at the right time. Just look what happens if you do not, look what happens if you diligently ask for further information, if you seek clarification or if you ask to inspect files. Do not dare have the audacity or temerity to ask where an expensive kitchen may have disappeared? No, instead you must accept that you have been told you will not be told. Just who is running the show?
Hopefully, in the next few blogs you can decide who is right, not those who withhold the information and make false statements in some farce of a Kangaroo Court, merely in an attempt to stifle openness and transparency, the very essence of democracy.
