Folkestone & Hythe District Council are misleading elected Cllrs and the public.
It is not just Cllrs who believe they have been misled at the very least by Folkestone & Hythe District Council. From published evidence they are also misleading the public as well.
Regarding the Cllrs, it all begins with the minutes of the Audit & Governance (A & G)Committee from the 30th July 2019. The minutes had come before the A & G Committee for sign off on the 18th Sept as a correct record. However, Cllr Prater, ever the pedant, had spotted in the 30th July minutes, item eight which states:
-
East Kent Housing Audit Plan for 2018-19 included contract management which was a new review added to the plan. Tenants’ health, safety (including fire safety) features regularly in the overall strategic plan, and were currently a work in progress close to being finalised, the results of which will be brought forward to a future meeting of this committee.
Cllr Tim Prater (Lib Dem) noticed the EKH Tenants’ Health & Safety report had been published on the 18/07/2019 and by shared with officers in our Council.
As such the report was in the hands of the council 11 days before the 30th July A & G Committee meeting, so could not be a “work in progress” as stated, because as everybody knows the eighteenth day comes before the 30th day in eleven out of 12 months of the year.
As such Cllr Prater (pictured centre) laid the claim that he and Cllrs Field (Lab) (pictured left) and Whybrow (Green) (pictured right) had been misled and asked for the minutes to note the fact.
It is clear from the video, the exchange between Cllrs Field, Prater & Whybrow caused some distinct uncomfortableness for the F&HDC officers present – including the Monitoring Officer.
But being misled does NOT end there.
Our public face in an FoI request asked the Council for the following information:
-
The amounts paid to each Recruitment Agency for 2018/19 and 2019 to present.
The information they provided is set out below:
The Council each month publish their payment to suppliers. This data – the payment to suppliers data – does not correspond with what the Council have sent our public face, whichever way you carve up the information, Gross or Net over the given period.
He also asked for:
-
The names of the Recruitment Agencies F&HDC use for Temporary Staff
This does not surprise me one bit. In my time at the Council junior officers were too scared to go against senior officers even when they knew the evidence was wrong. There was always the white elephant in the room, that being be careful or your next out the door.
As a previously elected Cllr, they did this all the time and then would find a suitable excuse. As I saw it there were three agendas. The Council, the Tories and the opposition all competing and all to often the Council’s agenda won through.
As somebody who works in the building, I wouldn’t trust most of the senior management. All too frequently we are put in difficult positions because of their ineptitude.
Is wilfully and knowingly misleading not lying, and is lying to that degree and in the circumstances described not gross misconduct in a public office, Which unless I’m mistaken is a criminal offence?
Having watched that whole video it is evident they were buying time for their misdeeds. I think chumbawumba sum it up perfectly. That’s some Council officers for you
It would seem to me that Ms Upton again tried the old sack your deputy trick to save her career when she marched Mark Anderson from the building but you can only get away with it so many times, Cllr Prater at least had the gumption to ask her to her face why she has not resigned, it’s a shame none of the others charged with policing her ineptitude have the sense of public duty to demand she does so?