The latest two TV programmes about Excellence (this one and the BBC effort on "cyber-bullying" a week earlier) show an astonishing shift in Policy. Jonesy, once so prominent in swanking to broadcasters, is nowhere to be seen or heard!
One must assume that the County Council has finally seen the light, and realised that Jonesy is a total liability in the presence of a camera or a microphone. Of course, down at the Dog n' Duck we consider him to be more of a comic genius than a liability, but then, we don't have to explain to the electorate what he has been up to. At least, not with a straight face.
Unfortunately, the Councillors seem to have decided to put themselves in the firing line (well that brave chap, Sam Crabb, has been doing so). This is bad news indeed, because:
(1) Councillor Crabb has an understandable but unfortunate tendency to look embarassed when being made to clutch meaningless trophies or spout idiotically large numbers that not even Albert Einstein can understand. It's hard for the audience to laugh and cringe at the same time;
(2) Councillor Crabb appears not to have been Linguistically Programmed to insert random but relevant phrases into his speech. That is phrases like "we, of course, are a four star (the most you could get before the plus was invented) excellent council as rated by the Audit Commission"; and
(3) The landlord has placed an absolute prohibition on "Political" postings from the Dog n' Duck computer (we even got into trouble for defending the Mogg).
Luckily, before Jonesy was removed from the public eye he showered us with so much bull that we estimate that the Dog n' Duck "explaining Excellence" programme could continue for another 2.75 years purely to clear the backlog. Even if he never said anything to anyone about "Excellence" ever again.
And let's face it - that is hardly likely to happen, is it?
Showing posts with label west eye view. Show all posts
Showing posts with label west eye view. Show all posts
Tuesday, 2 December 2008
Saturday, 29 November 2008
Cyber-bullying (3) - can't get the staff?
I have to say it is a bit rotten of the County Council to accuse Mogg of making it hard for them to recruit staff, even claiming that candidates for senior posts have withdrawn their applications because of him.
You see, this sounds suspiciously like the makings of a splendid excuse for having incompetent staff, and I think it is unfair on the two latest senior appointees, both of whom seem to be doing a very good job in difficult circumstances.
Between them they have whipped the legal system into line, and brought the BBC firmly on board. This puts ITV on the back foot with their focus on sleazy CEOs and dodgy tactics.
How's that for a triumph of Excellence over expectation?
You see, this sounds suspiciously like the makings of a splendid excuse for having incompetent staff, and I think it is unfair on the two latest senior appointees, both of whom seem to be doing a very good job in difficult circumstances.
Between them they have whipped the legal system into line, and brought the BBC firmly on board. This puts ITV on the back foot with their focus on sleazy CEOs and dodgy tactics.
How's that for a triumph of Excellence over expectation?
Tuesday, 30 September 2008
Incompetence or Malice?
Another Somerset County Councillor has got into trouble, and there seems to be quite a lot of glee about it in the SomerBlogging community. It seems the chap in the slurry pit this time is one of Jonesy's mates.
But I, for one, am not interested. The thing I want to know is: how was the Buchanan issue concluded? You know, Cornwall's troublesome "question 3".
Most of us will recall how shifty Jones became when the subject of his relationship with the Standards Board came up on TV (West Eye View, 24/07/08). He was accused of using the Standards Board to get rid of Councillor Buchanan, and eventually put his hands up to it.
Somerset County Council continues to batten down the hatches on information, so as usual we will have to spell it out. Since they are obviously good at ticking boxes, perhaps these will help:
Have the complaints against Cllr Buchanan been upheld by the Standards Board?
Yes c
No c
If the answer is "yes" then we can make our sincerest apologies to Alan Jones for casting aspersions, and blame the Standards Board for not getting their fingers out. Their incompetence will have caused Jonesy a great deal of aggro.
On the other hand, if the tick goes in the "no" box ... (It is so simple isn't it? "Yes" or "No"), then the next question asks itself. Were the complaints the result of incompetence or malice?
Jonesy himself told us on TV how the complaints originated. In his own words, "evidence was gathered from people who supplied it willingly". He admitted that he himself then submitted that evidence to the Standards Board. In other words, he made the decision that the evidence gathered warranted investigation.
This decision was made by someone who costs us at least £160,000 per year (about £1 for every Council Tax payer), just to be in post. It was made by someone who also spends thousands of our pounds on legal advice every year, and who bought himself TWO new in-house lawyers this summer (a big one earning "up to £84,000" and a little one earning "up to £61,000").
So I say again: was this decision incompetent, or was it malicious?
Either way, there is a clear case for impeachment. No golden parachute. Not a penny more!
But I, for one, am not interested. The thing I want to know is: how was the Buchanan issue concluded? You know, Cornwall's troublesome "question 3".
Most of us will recall how shifty Jones became when the subject of his relationship with the Standards Board came up on TV (West Eye View, 24/07/08). He was accused of using the Standards Board to get rid of Councillor Buchanan, and eventually put his hands up to it.
Somerset County Council continues to batten down the hatches on information, so as usual we will have to spell it out. Since they are obviously good at ticking boxes, perhaps these will help:
Have the complaints against Cllr Buchanan been upheld by the Standards Board?
Yes c
No c
If the answer is "yes" then we can make our sincerest apologies to Alan Jones for casting aspersions, and blame the Standards Board for not getting their fingers out. Their incompetence will have caused Jonesy a great deal of aggro.
On the other hand, if the tick goes in the "no" box ... (It is so simple isn't it? "Yes" or "No"), then the next question asks itself. Were the complaints the result of incompetence or malice?
Jonesy himself told us on TV how the complaints originated. In his own words, "evidence was gathered from people who supplied it willingly". He admitted that he himself then submitted that evidence to the Standards Board. In other words, he made the decision that the evidence gathered warranted investigation.
This decision was made by someone who costs us at least £160,000 per year (about £1 for every Council Tax payer), just to be in post. It was made by someone who also spends thousands of our pounds on legal advice every year, and who bought himself TWO new in-house lawyers this summer (a big one earning "up to £84,000" and a little one earning "up to £61,000").
So I say again: was this decision incompetent, or was it malicious?
Either way, there is a clear case for impeachment. No golden parachute. Not a penny more!
Friday, 5 September 2008
Don't rely on Cornwall!
Sorry to put a dampener on all the excitement generated by Jonesy’s bid for the Cornwall job … but we have to be realistic.
By the Law of Unintended Consequences, all these blogs and YouTube videos, born as they were of frustration, and sharing a desperation to get Jonesy out of Somerset, may have the opposite effect.
If the Cornwall selectors do their job properly they will certainly happen upon the West Eye View programme, not to mention these blogs. They be asking questions such as the three I put to the Local Government Chronicle as being worthy of answers …
(1) Is it the case that during 2005/2006 the Manager of the ISiS Project made complaints of harassment or similar against the Chief Executive of Somerset County Council?
(2) Is it the case that, after several months' absence on sick leave, the Manager of the ISiS Project subsequently received a severance payment of an amount in the region of £140,000 from Somerset County Council?
(3) Is it the case that during 2007, and again during 2008, the Chief Executive of Somerset County Council made a number of complaints to the Standards Board about Councillor Paul Buchanan (who had been deputy leader of the ruling group prior to the first complaints), and that the Standards Board has either declined to investigate, or has investigated but failed to uphold, all of these complaints?
Neither Somerset County Council nor Jonesy himself seem to have done anything to deny or clarify any of the above, but sadly I don’t think that will be good enough for the Cornwall selectors.
And these three questions are only the beginning. They lead unhappily into the whole sorry story about misuse of public funds, dodgy management, abuse of position and what have you. In Somerset, like Liverpool before us, we have come to take these things for granted. We have also come to accept that straight questions will not get straight answers from Jonesy and his crew.
However the Cornwall selectors do not have to accept this. In fact they would run a grave risk in appointing Jonesy while there are so many unanswered questions about his conduct and competence circulating in public. Somerset’s selectors, back in 2003, could at least plead that they had no knowledge of such issues.
Another thing to remember is that Cornwall did not get to where it is today by alienating over 80% of the population.
But all is not lost! This may be the perfect opportunity to finally get some answers. And who knows, if Jonesy really wants the Cornwall job then they may turn out to good and honest answers.
By the Law of Unintended Consequences, all these blogs and YouTube videos, born as they were of frustration, and sharing a desperation to get Jonesy out of Somerset, may have the opposite effect.
If the Cornwall selectors do their job properly they will certainly happen upon the West Eye View programme, not to mention these blogs. They be asking questions such as the three I put to the Local Government Chronicle as being worthy of answers …
(1) Is it the case that during 2005/2006 the Manager of the ISiS Project made complaints of harassment or similar against the Chief Executive of Somerset County Council?
(2) Is it the case that, after several months' absence on sick leave, the Manager of the ISiS Project subsequently received a severance payment of an amount in the region of £140,000 from Somerset County Council?
(3) Is it the case that during 2007, and again during 2008, the Chief Executive of Somerset County Council made a number of complaints to the Standards Board about Councillor Paul Buchanan (who had been deputy leader of the ruling group prior to the first complaints), and that the Standards Board has either declined to investigate, or has investigated but failed to uphold, all of these complaints?
Neither Somerset County Council nor Jonesy himself seem to have done anything to deny or clarify any of the above, but sadly I don’t think that will be good enough for the Cornwall selectors.
And these three questions are only the beginning. They lead unhappily into the whole sorry story about misuse of public funds, dodgy management, abuse of position and what have you. In Somerset, like Liverpool before us, we have come to take these things for granted. We have also come to accept that straight questions will not get straight answers from Jonesy and his crew.
However the Cornwall selectors do not have to accept this. In fact they would run a grave risk in appointing Jonesy while there are so many unanswered questions about his conduct and competence circulating in public. Somerset’s selectors, back in 2003, could at least plead that they had no knowledge of such issues.
Another thing to remember is that Cornwall did not get to where it is today by alienating over 80% of the population.
But all is not lost! This may be the perfect opportunity to finally get some answers. And who knows, if Jonesy really wants the Cornwall job then they may turn out to good and honest answers.
Friday, 8 August 2008
Where chaos resides?
No, not County Hall!
I am referring to another of Jonesy's gifts to the people of Somerset, delivered via HTV (West Eye View on 24th July).
I didn't write down this quote, luckily someone used it on an excellent little video pastiche at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiklM51QRfU so I can, once again, give you the Great Man's EXACT words!
"It's like sailing a, er, sailing ship close to the wind, you know, that's where innovation lives but that's also where chaos resides."
Right Jonesy. Thanks for spelling it out. Nice one : your innovation = our chaos.
Now we're a bunch of ignorant landlubbers down at the Dog & Duck, but luckily in a couple of days Daffer will be back. He's a sailor, and will be able to explain this stuff. Poor old Daffer has been offshore since before Valentine's day, so he hasn't yet heard about the sh*tstorm that his namesake has been whipping up.
However, I can tell you now that Daffer Jones will NOT be amused.
Friday, 1 August 2008
The Somerset Inquisition?
People ask why I am indifferent to the IBM saga. It's quite simple really, I don't understand it. All I know is what they said on TV, i.e. it is going to cost us a zillion squid, but the Boss says it will save billions in the long run ("We in Somerset have a ten-year-plan"). All we need is faith in the Boss, and everything will be all right. As for IBM, well my Nan says they make really good typewriters.
It all sounded fine until they mentioned the name "Councillor Buchanan". To be honest, I had never heard of him up until that point. I knew about the Boss, and as I said last night was mightily pissed off when he accused me of worshipping the Spaghetti Monster on Valentine's day. I also knew that the regime in County Hall was harsh on employees who asked questions, raised concerns, expressed doubt, or otherwise behaved inappropriately. More about this another time, perhaps.
But a Councillor? This was taking things WAY too far. After all, these are the people we elect to represent us. I had even started writing to my own County Councillor to complain about the Spaghetti Monster and other issues. If they can be bullied, harassed and silenced, then what is the point of voting? This reminded me of Zimbabwe, and is the thing that really made me sit up and start paying attention.
It was quite clear that the Journalist was accusing the Boss of making up complaints about the Councillor who disagreed with him, and of then sending these complaints to the Standards Board (something else I'd never heard of until last week), in order to shut him up. Now I am not a shrink or a fortune cookie, but even I noticed the body language and saw the Boss literally put his hands up (both of them).
I also get suspicious when people answer a question with another question. In this case the Journalist asked the Boss why he had made "x dozen" complaints about the Councillor, and the Boss immediately replied "where did you get that figure from?" One can imagine the poor sod who revealed the figure being tarred and feathered and made to lick the floor of County Hall for the entire duration of his notice period.
The Boss did manage to calm down, and finally started talking about the complaints to the Standards Board. He spoke sternly, saying
"... evidence was gathered from people who supplied it willingly."
Those were his exact words - I wrote them down so as not to forget.
It made me wonder what would have happened to anyone who was not "willing". And why was "evidence" being "gathered" in the first place? It sounded like the Spanish Inquisition.
Monday, 28 July 2008
Why this blog?
We who live in the beautiful County of Somerset are truly blessed. Our rulers have been officially proclaimed as "excellent" by none other than the main man - Audit Commission himself. Elsewhere, paying Council Tax may be a pain in the a*se, here it is a privilege. This is something that is drummed into us every time we receive a communication from the esteemed organisation, whether by email, letter or fax.
Last week, however, a TV programme called West Eye View (HTV 24/7/08 7.30 pm) tried to shatter our comfortable illusions. Frankly the general topic didn't seem that interesting: something about the Council selling off staff to IBM. Big deal! Check it out at http://www.showofhands.co.uk/ (the Bristol Slaver, on Dark Fields), or read your history books. Selling people to the Americans is nothing new around here!
The TV programme had an innocuous title - "Public Money, Private Gain" or something like that (so what's new?). However the startling thing about the programme was not the content but the atmosphere. Spooky. While they did allow our Chief Executive to go on about excellence and even to mutter something about moving "Beyond Excellence", they also filmed an awful lot of squirming and blank expressions. Important people were seen throwing numbers around like a bunch of Zimbabwean Bankers.
The unanswered questions and "things that can't be talked about" led me to do a bit of googling. The results were truly appalling, a genuine 21st Century Cringe Comic Opera. I also discovered Google blogs, and decided to start one of my very own.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)