See http://uk.news.yahoo.com/31102006/344/madonna-set-appear-newsnight.html
I'm just curious about this. I sat on the Kingston Adoption Panel for about 5 years and inter-country adoptions such as this were very carefully scrutinised by the Panel (mostly lay and independent people) and professional legal, medical and social advisors. Surely this must be a legal requirement and it should have happened in this case too.
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Surbiton Hospital -latest
Meeting with CEO's of the Primary Care Trust and Kingston Hospital took place last night. It seems that Surbiton Hospital is not now expected to complete its refurbishment until 2010 or thereabouts, though plans for discussion will be around shortly. It seems the lead-in period gets longer each time I hear about it. We were talking 2008 at one time!
As reported yesterday, the CEO has got a new job elsewhere and will be leaving shortly. At the current turn over rate it will be the CEO after next who sees the job completed. Quite apart from the insane Government 'targetry' beloved of 'new' Labour, this constant changing of senior personnel can't help the cause of effective public services either - can it?
As reported yesterday, the CEO has got a new job elsewhere and will be leaving shortly. At the current turn over rate it will be the CEO after next who sees the job completed. Quite apart from the insane Government 'targetry' beloved of 'new' Labour, this constant changing of senior personnel can't help the cause of effective public services either - can it?
Monday, October 30, 2006
Hospitals
Seeing the CEO's of the Primary Care Trust and Kingston Hospital tonight. I note the CEO of the PCT is off to another job and has already got a successor. That will make (I believe) four holders of the post in about 6 years.
See www.pauljohnston.info for recent postings on the problems of Kingston Outpatients as seen through the eyes of one sufferer - this one! And feel free to add your own comments, either here or there.
See www.pauljohnston.info for recent postings on the problems of Kingston Outpatients as seen through the eyes of one sufferer - this one! And feel free to add your own comments, either here or there.
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
‘CHIP ‘N BIN’ – TORIES INTERVENE
Conservative Leader and Scrutiny Panel Chair, Cllr Howard Jones, has delayed the implementation of the Berrylands waste collection trial so that the Scrutiny Panel can check the Lib Dem Administration’s plans before they are put into effect.
We Tories were incensed that no mention of the planned trial (due to start on 6th November) was made at the detailed Scrutiny of the Waste Disposal Strategy by the Council’s Scrutiny Panel on 5th September.
Plans for such a lengthy and far-reaching trial, due to start only two months after the meeting, must have been well advanced by September 5th – yet no mention of them was made to the Panel by any of those who gave evidence, including Cllr Liz Shard and Cllr Derek Osbourne.If the plans were genuinely thrown together in haste, there’s a real risk that they haven’t been carefully thought through and that the scheme will prove an expensive failure.
The Executive decided to proceed with the trial on 3rd October. The Council’s Constitution allows any 100 citizens or three Councillors or the Chair of the Scrutiny Panel to call in any such decision within five working days of the Executive minutes being published. If the decision is not ‘called-in’ it can be proceeded with without further ado.
Howard Jones called in the decision after the 3rd October minutes were published – only to be told that resources had already been committed. His reaction? ‘I was flabbergasted to be told that Cllr Shard had evidently authorized the commitment of resources, although she must have known what the Constitution said about the decision making and implementation process. In reality she must have committed resources ahead even of the Executive’s endorsement of the action she intended to take.’
Last week Howard Jones tried many times to resolve the situation by letter and email, agreeing to scrutinise the decision without holding up its implementation on condition that Cllrs Shard and Osbourne apologise for acting ultra vires and promise not to do so again in future. He also wanted assurances that the Executive would take on board Scrutiny Panel concerns about the implementation of the trial.
In my view these might range around the micro-chipping of bins, fortnightly collections of waste and provision of adequate bins for separating out recyclable materials.
Instead of apologising for the failure to follow the Constitution, Cllr. Shard embarked on a feeble defence of her actions, trying to suggest that the trial had been discussed on 5th September after all. Howard pointed out to her, ‘If you failed to take account of (our right to scrutiny) in your planning, that is your fault and so is the possible dislocation resulting from our decision to exercise it.’
The final position, reached on Friday 20th October, was that the full Scrutiny will go ahead at the next meeting of the Panel on Tuesday 31st October and that all work on the trial will cease until that has taken place.
The Lib Dems have needlessly created a mess as a result of their arrogance. We tried honestly to help them out of it. All they had to do was to say ‘Sorry’ – but that word seems not to be in their vocabulary.
We Tories were incensed that no mention of the planned trial (due to start on 6th November) was made at the detailed Scrutiny of the Waste Disposal Strategy by the Council’s Scrutiny Panel on 5th September.
Plans for such a lengthy and far-reaching trial, due to start only two months after the meeting, must have been well advanced by September 5th – yet no mention of them was made to the Panel by any of those who gave evidence, including Cllr Liz Shard and Cllr Derek Osbourne.If the plans were genuinely thrown together in haste, there’s a real risk that they haven’t been carefully thought through and that the scheme will prove an expensive failure.
The Executive decided to proceed with the trial on 3rd October. The Council’s Constitution allows any 100 citizens or three Councillors or the Chair of the Scrutiny Panel to call in any such decision within five working days of the Executive minutes being published. If the decision is not ‘called-in’ it can be proceeded with without further ado.
Howard Jones called in the decision after the 3rd October minutes were published – only to be told that resources had already been committed. His reaction? ‘I was flabbergasted to be told that Cllr Shard had evidently authorized the commitment of resources, although she must have known what the Constitution said about the decision making and implementation process. In reality she must have committed resources ahead even of the Executive’s endorsement of the action she intended to take.’
Last week Howard Jones tried many times to resolve the situation by letter and email, agreeing to scrutinise the decision without holding up its implementation on condition that Cllrs Shard and Osbourne apologise for acting ultra vires and promise not to do so again in future. He also wanted assurances that the Executive would take on board Scrutiny Panel concerns about the implementation of the trial.
In my view these might range around the micro-chipping of bins, fortnightly collections of waste and provision of adequate bins for separating out recyclable materials.
Instead of apologising for the failure to follow the Constitution, Cllr. Shard embarked on a feeble defence of her actions, trying to suggest that the trial had been discussed on 5th September after all. Howard pointed out to her, ‘If you failed to take account of (our right to scrutiny) in your planning, that is your fault and so is the possible dislocation resulting from our decision to exercise it.’
The final position, reached on Friday 20th October, was that the full Scrutiny will go ahead at the next meeting of the Panel on Tuesday 31st October and that all work on the trial will cease until that has taken place.
The Lib Dems have needlessly created a mess as a result of their arrogance. We tried honestly to help them out of it. All they had to do was to say ‘Sorry’ – but that word seems not to be in their vocabulary.
Thursday, October 12, 2006
The perils of a slight majority
The Lib Dems got an unexpected flavour of their true predicament in the new Council on Tuesday.
They assumed that they would be able to change the Constitution at will (as per usual) as they wished to send the all-party Grants and Awards Panel into oblivion, keeping all say over major grants to the Voluntary Sector in the exclusive hands of the exclusively Liberal Democrat Executive.
One of their members didn't turn up and another went home early. The arithmetic was thus Lib Dems 23; Conservatives 21; Labour 2. The Conservatives and Labour voted together to preserve all-party involvement. One Lib Dem had a sufficiently open mind and strong conscience to abstain. So the vote was For the proposal 22; against 23; abstentions 1. And the mayor didn't even get to use her casting vote.
They assumed that they would be able to change the Constitution at will (as per usual) as they wished to send the all-party Grants and Awards Panel into oblivion, keeping all say over major grants to the Voluntary Sector in the exclusive hands of the exclusively Liberal Democrat Executive.
One of their members didn't turn up and another went home early. The arithmetic was thus Lib Dems 23; Conservatives 21; Labour 2. The Conservatives and Labour voted together to preserve all-party involvement. One Lib Dem had a sufficiently open mind and strong conscience to abstain. So the vote was For the proposal 22; against 23; abstentions 1. And the mayor didn't even get to use her casting vote.
Sorry England
I'm not one to comment over freely on football. Playing it from memory at age 35 (first time in 16 years) has left me with a badly damaged left knee which the wonderful NHS has failed conspicuously to do anything about.
However I do recall what I thought was the softest own goal of all time. It was in the 1978 'Home Internationals', Wales v Scotland, when a back pass to the Scottish keeper bobbled slowly and inexorably into the Scottish goal. Why? The fool of a fullback had failed to look where his keeper was, i.e. a good 12 metres to his right about 10 metres off his line.
People who weren't alive and/or kicking at the time may feel grateful to the two England players who contrived a near replay in giving Croatia a second goal last night.
The spirit of Sven lives on......
However I do recall what I thought was the softest own goal of all time. It was in the 1978 'Home Internationals', Wales v Scotland, when a back pass to the Scottish keeper bobbled slowly and inexorably into the Scottish goal. Why? The fool of a fullback had failed to look where his keeper was, i.e. a good 12 metres to his right about 10 metres off his line.
People who weren't alive and/or kicking at the time may feel grateful to the two England players who contrived a near replay in giving Croatia a second goal last night.
The spirit of Sven lives on......
Sunday, October 08, 2006
Straw and the Veil
Jack Straw has obviously touched on a raw nerve but he has also garnered quite a lot of support.
His comments about veiling of the face have ignited a debate about Integration vs Multiculturalism generally. The newspapers have quite a few articles on the subject today and there has been increasing concern about the growth of minority ghettoes in parts of Britain for some time.
What is remarkable about Straw is that he has been part of the government that has been most at pains to promote 'celebrating diversity' at the expense of integration for the last nine years - for four of them as Home Secretary - and he seems to see no connection between what he identifies as a problem and the policies of his own government.
I taught in a school in London which was very ethnically diverse but where the Christian religion formed a common ground among all the pupils. Attempts by some pupils to create little ethnic blocs very quickly foundered on this rock.
Don't get me wrong; I would not wish to impose a common religion on all people in Britain - that policy led to some very gruesome consequences in the past. But we must find a common ground as a society - a set of values around which all can unite to perform the same function as religion in my school. While acknowledging diversity as a fact of our national life we must not let it dominate in the way that it has. We must think more of the things that bind us together and less about our differences one from another.
His comments about veiling of the face have ignited a debate about Integration vs Multiculturalism generally. The newspapers have quite a few articles on the subject today and there has been increasing concern about the growth of minority ghettoes in parts of Britain for some time.
What is remarkable about Straw is that he has been part of the government that has been most at pains to promote 'celebrating diversity' at the expense of integration for the last nine years - for four of them as Home Secretary - and he seems to see no connection between what he identifies as a problem and the policies of his own government.
I taught in a school in London which was very ethnically diverse but where the Christian religion formed a common ground among all the pupils. Attempts by some pupils to create little ethnic blocs very quickly foundered on this rock.
Don't get me wrong; I would not wish to impose a common religion on all people in Britain - that policy led to some very gruesome consequences in the past. But we must find a common ground as a society - a set of values around which all can unite to perform the same function as religion in my school. While acknowledging diversity as a fact of our national life we must not let it dominate in the way that it has. We must think more of the things that bind us together and less about our differences one from another.
Thursday, October 05, 2006
Bournemouth 2006
Have spent the last few days in Bournemouth at the party conference. Quite a bit of the time was spent visiting the Accreditation Office. I received my pass on Sunday evening. Daphne didn't get hers until Tuesday morning. This put something of a restriction on our doings and enjoyment of the occasion. Someone has blundered BIG TIME!
This was David Cameron's first Conference as leader and there was a distinct air of difference from times past, and not only that we didn't get our passes on time this time. What's refreshing is that there is definitely more openness, a greater readiness to 'think outside the box' than at previous conferences. However some of us have been thinking outside the said receptacle for some time, taking a very pragmatic look at the problems our communities face and trying to devise ways to deal with them which are not constrained by ideological shibboleths.
The Tory Party has done this since Robert Peel was a lad. So in a sense Cameron is in an authentic Tory tradition, if this is what he is about.
But he must avoid picking up some new shibboleths of his own in his eagerness to ditch the perceived ones of the past. Let him emphasize protection of the environment, but not make a fetish of it. By all means be economically prudent, but also recognise that this government has tried tax and spend solutions to the problems of the public services to destruction and they haven't worked. Finally, Blair stands discredited as I always believed he ultimately would. Now above all is not the time to run up to him shouting 'me too!'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.0.jpg)
