Pro forma Assembly Complaint...North West Councils

Your name and address

To:The Monitoring Officer

Your councils name and address
………………………………
………………………………

Dear…………………,

As you may be aware, there have been a number of reports in the press and media concerning the behaviour of the North East Assembly in the past, which led to censure by the District Auditor for breaches of Section 19 of Local Authority Guidelines on Publicity.

It appears however, that the regardless of the decision in last year’s referendum in the North East, and regardless of the referendum postponement in the North West, the regional agenda continues.

My concern, and that of many others, is therefore drawn to what appear to be some very serious misuses of public money.

There are a number of questions that I wish to have answered, and information I am requesting under the Freedom of Information Act 2000:

1. Can you confirm that ......................... Council is aware that the NWRA is an ‘unincorporated association’ and thereby have no legal personality?
2. Can you please provide details of all the amounts paid by ...................... Council to NWRA since its inception?
3. Can you please provide details of all the .......................... Council’s representatives of the NWRA over the period this money was paid and whether they were present at council meetings when this payment, the ‘voluntary subscription,’ was agreed in the budget?
4. Can you confirm that at all times the Members’ Interest Book had up to date details of membership of NWRA? If not, can you advise as to when and where the breaches were noted and the date they were corrected?
5. Had the members indicated in the Member’s Interest Book that they had a personal, pecuniary or prejudicial interest in the NWRA? If not, had you, as the Monitoring Officer, advised them otherwise?
6. Were they ever advised by yourself as Monitoring Officer, or the Council Solicitor, or any other official of the Local Authority that membership of an ‘unincorporated association’ whose members are ‘jointly and severally’ liable may have personal financial consequences? (In the North East, North Tyneside Council have given such advice to its members…reported Newcastle Journal July 5th 2005)
7. Is NWRA recognised or registered as an employer under Section 122 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992?
8. If they are not, who is responsible for the contracts of employment, and is it lawful for a local authority to underwrite liabilities for an outside body?
9. It appears from recent press reports that the ‘unincorporated association,’ known as the North West Assembly is considering changing its name and is planning to incorporate.Can you please supply (under the Freedom of Information Act 2000) details of communications between the Council and the Assembly on this matter?
10. Can you confirm that under the Companies Act 1985:

Pre-incorporation contracts, deeds and obligations.

36C.-(1) A contract which purports to be made by or on behalf of a company at a time when the company has not been formed has effect, subject to any agreement to the contrary, as one made with the person purporting to act for the company or as agent for it, and he is personally liable on the contract accordingly.

(2) Subsection (1) applies-(a) to the making of a deed under the law of England and Wales, and(b) to the undertaking of an obligation under the law of Scotland, as it applies to the making of a contract.

And that incorporation will not protect members from potential liabilities arising from contracts agreed before incorporation?

THE COMPLAINT

The complaint which I will initially ask you to respond to, which may subsequently require further investigation by outside bodies, dependent on your response is as follows:-

I wish to make a formal complaint, which I will ask you to make available to the District Auditor because of the potential ‘knock-on’ implications for other local authority councillors and possible future legal action.

The complaint is as follows:-

1. Relates to the Code of Conduct of councillors.

From Part 2.8 (1) of The Local Authorities (Model Code of Conduct) (England) Order 2001,

“A member must regard himself as having a personal interest in any matter if the matter relates to an interest in respect of which notification must be given in paragraph 14 and 15 below, or if a decision upon it might reasonably be regarded as affecting to a greater extent than other council tax payers, ratepayers or inhabitants of the authority’s area, the well-being or financial position of himself, a relative or a friend …”

Can you confirm that .......................... Members of NWRA have recorded in the Members’ Interest Book the fact that they are only ‘members’ of the organisations (you will be confirming whether they have all done this…question 4 above).

Can you confirm that they have not registered a ‘personal,’ ‘pecuniary’ or ‘prejudicial’ interest?The members’ financial interest arises because as ‘unincorporated association’ it is the members of NWRA who are ‘jointly and severally’ liable.

Therefore, if, as it appears, NWRA is not registered as an employer under the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 then it is the members of NWRA who have the legal responsibility for contracts entered into by that body.

The liability of the contracts of employment amounts to many hundreds of thousands of pounds and possibly millions.

Therefore, if Local Authorities ceased to pay ‘voluntary subscriptions’ or there was a change of government whereby these bodies were abolished (or both) the liabilities of the members would become immediate and apparent.

Therefore, for the members of NWRA, sitting as councillors and approving .................................. Council’s budget and voluntary subscriptions there is a serious breach of Local Government Act 1972 Section 94 (1) as well as breaches of the Members Code of Conduct.

Section 94 (1) states,“Subject to the provisions of section 97 below, if a member of a local authority has any pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in any contract, proposed contract or other matter, and is present at a meeting of the local authority at which the contract or other matter is the subject of consideration, he shall at the meeting and as soon as practicable after its commencement disclose the fact and shall not take part in the consideration or discussion of the contract or other matter or vote on any question with respect to it.”

(The disability could not be removed by Section 97 (5) of the same Act because the ‘influence’ of senior members of the ruling group could hardly be classed as ‘insignificant').

Therefore, under Section 94 (2) of the Local Government Act 1972 it appears that an offence / offences have been committed.

Please also advise the date ............................. Council legally adopted the Model Code of Conduct, in order to determine under which act the offences / breaches occurred,

If it is the case that any local authority is underwriting or guaranteeing the contracts of employment can you confirm which local authority and whether you have taken advice as to the legality of this action?

I will await your response before deciding on my next course of action, but by return could you please supply copies of the council’s complaints procedure and details of the complaints procedure to the ombudsman.Dependent on your response it may be necessary for you to refer the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation, as it is in the public interest to do so, especially due to the seriousness of the allegations.

I trust that you will treat this complaint with the seriousness that it merits and I will receive a full and thorough response addressing all of the points raised in order for the complaint to be taken to the next stage of proceedings.

Yours sincerely,

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

European Constitution...We did tell you!

An occasional euro-briefng from Daniel Hannan MEP:

The Constitution is in force

You may have got the impression that the European Constitution was dead: that the French had felled it, and the Dutch pounded a stake through its heart. If so, think again. The constitution is being brought in, clause by clause, as if those two countries had voted “Yes”.

You’d be amazed how many EU leaders believe the constitution can still be ratified in its current form. Three countries – Cyprus, Malta and Luxembourg – have endorsed it since the two “No” votes. All right, these may not be the mightiest nations in the EU, but their approval means that 13 out of 25 states have now said “Yes”.

“This is a strong signal that a majority of the member states thinks that the constitution correlates to their expectations”, said the Commission President, José Manuel Barroso as the result came in from Luxembourg. “The constitution is not dead”, added the Grand Duchy’s comical Prime Minister, Jean-Claude Juncker. The European Parliament has duly set up a committee to examine how to proceed with implementation.

The view that the constitution can be salvaged tout entier is, admittedly, a minority one. Most European leaders accept that it is no longer possible to proceed with formal ratification. So they have come up with an alternative wheeze: they are simply behaving as though the constitution were already in force. Numerous institutions that have no legal basis outside the constitution have been, or are being, established regardless. These include:

· The Fundamental Rights Agency, a Vienna-based institution charged with monitoring racism, xenophobia and discrimination across the EU.

· The European External Action Service, an EU diplomatic force with representation in third countries and in international organisations.

· The European Space Programme.

· The European Defence Agency, whose remit is harmonise arms procurement.

· An EU criminal code, accompanied by a European prosecuting magistracy called Eurojust.

· A mutual defence clause, which arguably makes redundant the cornerstone of the Nato alliance.

· A common European asylum policy based on harmonised rules on the assessment of claims and the rights of refugees.

· EU politico-military structures, and the deployment of uniformed EU troops in Macedonia, the Congo and Bosnia.

· An External Border Agency to monitor the Union’s “external frontiers” (as opposed to the borders between its members, now considered “internal frontiers”).

· A Foreign Minister: the silky Spanish socialist Javier Solana.

· The Charter of Fundamental Rights, which has no binding force outside the constitution, but which Euro-judges are already treating as justiciable.

Every time such a proposal comes before my parliamentary committee, I ask: “Where in the existing treaties does it say we can do this?” “Where does it say we can’t” reply my colleagues, giggling at their own cleverness like Mr Toad in Wind in the Willows.

Thus has the EU got to where it is. It extends its jurisdiction on the basis of summit communiqués, Council resolutions and Commission press statements. Several years can pass before it gets around to regularising these power-grabs in a treaty.

True, there are one or two aspects of the constitution that cannot be brought in through the existing legal framework, notably the new voting system an end to the rotating presidency. But these things can easily be rushed through in a miniature intergovernmental conference: all 25 governments have, after all, already agreed to them.

How do the Eurocrats justify going ahead in defiance of public opinion? By telling themselves that the referendums don’t count. The French and Dutch, I keep hearing, did not really vote against the constitution, but against something else: Chirac, or Turkey, or Anglo-Saxon liberalism. It is a variant of the Marxist idea of “false consciousness”. The people plainly misunderstood their true interests. They must be brought to see why the constitution is desirable. And, in the mean time, the project must continue.

It is in this context that we should understand those who claim, with Mr Juncker, that “the French and Dutch did not truly vote against the EU constitution”. We may find such statements hilarious. We may howl and retch with mirth at the collective act of hallucination taking place in Brussels. But, when the laughing stops, the constitution will be in place.

If you know anyone else who would like to receive these mailings, please send their email address to dhannan@europarl.eu.int

Many joining the fight to kick Ass

Since the Booker article in the Sunday Telegraph regarding the alleged unlawful activities by assembly members I have been deluged with requests for the questions to raise to the individual councils...including many from councillors concerned for their personal positions.

I have also had a number of interesting e-mails from people who have also been following our line and raising questions. One in particular...

6 April 2005

Mr x xxxxxxx

The people who work for the Assembly are in fact employed by the host authority and the Assembly does not employ anyone directly. I have fully advised the Leader that it is my view that there has been no breaches of any statutory requirements or code of conduct and if you wish to take the matter further then you must refer the matter to the director of public prosecutions yourself.

Yours sincerely

N J L Fardon

Borough Solicitor
Allerdale Borough Council
cc Mr J Musgrave - Leader
Mr M Phillips Acting Chief Executive

Therefore, if the host authority is employing the assembly staff then they are also responsible for the contracts of employment and redundancy and pension obligations. According to the District Auditor in the North East this could be unlawful and the burden cannot be placed on one authority's ratepayers...a burden for 50+ staff running into the millions.

First question must be,
"Who is the host authority?"
Second question,
"Where, when and by whom was it agreed to underwrite the contracts of employment of the assembly?"
Third question,
"Were any of the councillors who were present at the above assembly members at the time?"

This is now getting serious. In the North East they have always said that the Assembly is the employer. I hope that that is the case otherwise there have been some serious porkies told.

Police may have to clean up Prescott's Ass'

Christopher Booker
Sunday Telegraph
17th July 2005

Prescott's regional scheme is well and truly hoist on its own petard

An extraordinary impasse has arisen in the North-East, following the referendum last November in which voters threw out John Prescott's plan for an elected regional assembly by an overwhelming margin of four-to-one. Last week the unelected North-East Assembly, made up of councillors and representatives of local bodies, announced that it was to set itself up as a limited company under a new name. The reason publicly given for this by the Assembly's chairman, Alex Watson, was that they wished "to engage with the public better than we have done".

What Mr Watson did not reveal was the real reason for this new policy. It is now more than a year since Neil Herron, the leader of the campaign against an elected North-East Assembly, uncovered the embarrassing fact that, since the unelected assembly was an unincorporated body, its members were personally responsible for all its financial obligations, including the contracts and pension rights of its employees. Between them they had thus unwittingly taken on liabilities amounting to millions of pounds.

Initially the assembly tried to deny this, but Mr Herron's point was subsequently confirmed by lawyers, including those for North Tyneside council. Since this unfortunate fact came to light, the assembly has been seeking to set itself up as a limited company, in the hope of relieving its members of this burden of personal liability. But when they tried to set up the North-East Assembly as a company, they found that Mr Herron had got there first. He had already registered that name.
Worse was to come, because Mr Herron then pointed out that, under the 1985 Companies Act, for them to set up such a company would not absolve them of their existing obligations. And then Mr Herron produced his trump card. Since the councillors who were members had voted for their councils to provide the assembly with funds, they were in breach of the 1972 Local Government Act, because they had voted to give public money to a body in which they themselves had a financial interest.

So it appears that the councillors on the North-East Assembly have not only taken on a personal liability from which it is impossible for them to extricate themselves, but Mr Herron is now asking the police to investigate evidence that they also have been acting in clear breach of the law. Since it appears that similar breaches of the law have taken place in other English regions, he is also making available a set of searching questions (via here)for voters to put to their own councils.

When Mr Prescott sought to impose by stealth his scheme for elected regional governments, he could hardly have foreseen the tangled web in which it would end up being ensnared.

Spotlight of Scrutiny to shine on 'Double- Speak' Foote Wood

A response to Mr. 'Double-Speak' who calls the unelected North East Assembly the 'indirectly-elected' assembly.
The members are appointed Mr. FW.

Northern Echo
8th July 2005
REGIONAL ASSEMBLY
CHRIS Foote-Wood's letter (HAS, July 6) is the most astonishing piece of blind misrepresentation imaginable.Mr Foote-Wood and his colleagues on the North East Regional Assembly simply do not understand what a 78 per cent No to regional government really means.No matter how well intentioned he and his colleagues are regarding the welfare of the North-East, the electorate do not want local politicians elevated beyond the role to which they were elected within their local authority.As a director of the North East No Campaign, I heard this over and over again at more than 50 meetings throughout the region.There is more than enough elected representation, Parliamentary and otherwise, to promote the needs of the North-East. The regional assemblies installed in all UK regions were simply established for political reasons. After the November vote they have no legitimate right to exist. Can Mr Foote-Wood and his friends not grasp this fact?The inescapable fact is that the assembly is a talking shop with a minority of the members doing the talking, and all at the expense of the taxpayers of the North-East's 25 councils. - Colin Moran, former director North East No Campaign), Sunderland.

The Identity Project

In the shadow of our thoughts for those involved in the London atrocities, a sobering reminder of the ID Card issue.

The Identity Project
an assessment of the UK Identity Cards Bill and its implications

Credits
Advisory Group

Professor Ian Angell, Convenor of the Department of Information Systems, LSE

Professor Christine Chinkin, Law Department, LSE

Professor Frank Cowell, Economics Department, LSE

Professor Keith Dowding, Government Department, LSE

Professor Patrick Dunleavy, Government Department, LSE

Professor George Gaskell, Director, Methodology Institute, LSE

Professor Christopher Greenwood QC, Convenor of the Law Department, LSE

Professor Christopher Hood, Centre for Analysis of Risk & Regulation, LSE

Professor Mary Kaldor, Centre for the Study of Global Governance, LSE

Professor Frank Land, Department of Information Systems, LSE

Professor Robin Mansell, Department of Media & Communications, LSE

Professor Tim Newburn, Social Policy Department, LSE


Professor David Piachaud, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE

Professor Robert Reiner, Law Department, LSE

Research Group, Contributors, Advisors and Reviewers

Research coordinator: Dr Edgar Whitley, Reader in Information Systems. Professor Ross Anderson, Cambridge. Adrian Beck, University of Leicester. Ralf Bendrath, University of Bremen. Kristin Boa, University of Toronto. Nicholas Bohm Daniel Boos, Switzerland. Dr Stefan Brands, McGill University. Dr Ian Brown. Tony Bunyan, Statewatch. Dr Nadia Caidi, University of Toronto. Marco A. Calamari, Italy. Shami Chakrabarti, Liberty. Professor Roger Clarke, Australia. Professor Andrew Clement, Canada. Dan Cooper, Covington and Burling. Mike Cushman, LSE. Ian Dowty. Terri Dowty. Mark Dzięcielewski. Alberto Escudero-Pascual, Sweden. Joseph Ferenbok, University of Toronto. Federico Ferretti, University of Leeds. Jens Franz, SOAS. Teresa Hackett, Ireland. Kathrin Gerst, Germany. Marc Gilman. Dr Brian Gladman. Andrea Glorioso, Italy. Wendy Grossman. William Heath, Kable. Rikke Frank Jorgensen, Denmark. Jeegar Kakkad. Philippe Martin, Kable. Meryem Marzouki, France. Ariosto Matus-Perez. Dr Eileen Munro, LSE. Sjoera Nas, The Netherlands. Dr Peter Neumann, SRI International. Professor Toshimaru Ogura. Joe Organ, Oxford Internet Institute. Nicholas Pauro. Daniele Pica, LSE. Dr Chris Pounder, Pinsent Masons. Professor Angela Sasse, UCL. Bruce Schneier, Counterpane Systems. Dr Susan Scott, LSE. Dr Barbara Simons. Dr Steve Smithson, LSE. Nina Somera, Philippines. Jay Stanley, ACLU. Barry Steinhardt, ACLU. Toby Stevens, Enterprise Privacy Group. Peter Szyszko, Covington and Burling. Gohsuke Takama, Japan. Sarah Thatcher, LSE. Prodromos Tsiavos, LSE. Rosemary Walsh. Jeremy Wickins, University of Sheffield. Johan Wilhelmsson, Swedish Ministry of Justice. Derek Wong.

---------------------------------------------
Summary of Conclusions

The Report concludes that the establishment of a secure national identity system has the potential to create significant, though limited, benefits for society. However, the proposals currently being considered by Parliament are neither safe nor appropriate.

There was an overwhelming view expressed by stakeholders involved in this Report that the proposals are too complex, technically unsafe, overly prescriptive and lack a foundation of public trust and confidence.

The current proposals miss key opportunities to establish a secure, trusted and cost-effective identity system and the Report therefore considers alternative models for an identity card scheme that may achieve the goals of the legislation more effectively.

The concept of a national identity system is supportable, but the current proposals are not feasible.

http://www.statewatch.org/news/2005/jun/identityreport.pdf

What Part of No don't you understand Deputy Pie Minister?

Prescott hints at elected regions
Regeneration & Renewal
- 24 June 2005

The deputy prime minister appeared to open the door this week for a possible return to the Government's elected regional assemblies strategy.
Despite last autumn's setback when voters in the North-East rejected plans for an elected regional assembly (R&R, 12 November 2004, p5), John Prescott said he still regarded elected regions as the best way forward.

Prescott, speaking at the launch of the Northern Way business plan in Gateshead, said he wanted to resolve the problem of electoral accountabilityfor regional decision-making. Talking about city-region policy, he said: "We started off on a regional assembly argument. Well (the democratic deficit) is still there, and we're going to address ourselves to it."

He later told Regeneration & Renewal: "There've got to be regional decisions. The only bodies we have are the unelected regional assemblies, and somebody's got to make the decision.
"The best way is to have elected (assemblies), but the people in the North-East have been very clear they don't want one. Democratic accountability is still the best way of doing it," he said.

In November voters in the North-East voted against having an elected regional assembly (R&R, 12 November 2004, p5).

Complaint to Your Council (NE only): Unlawful activity by Assembly members

Your name and address

To:
The Monitoring Officer

Your councils name and address

………………………

………………………

………………………

Dear…………………,

As you are aware, there have been a number of reports in the press and media concerning the behaviour of Association of North East Councils / North East Assembly in the past, which has led to censure by the District Auditor for breaches of Section 19 of Local Authority Guidelines on Publicity.

It appears however, that the regional agenda is to continue regardless of the decision in last year’s referendum.

It also appears that the North East Local Authorities are not taking heed of the result and the rejection by the electorate of a regional assembly and are continuing to make financial contributions to both bodies, which have now split.

My concern, and that of many others, is therefore drawn back to what appear to be some very serious misuses of public money.

I am aware that certain discussions have taken place with the District Auditor and the Senior Policy Advisor at the Standards Board and I understand that I first need to raise the matters of concern with you for investigation.

However, because of the seriousness of the allegations and the implications for other local authorities, I will also be copying in a number of other interested parties in on this correspondence.

I also believe that the matter is so serious that it may warrant a Police investigation with a view to prosecutions.

Therefore, I hope that you will treat and investigate the matter thoroughly and with the view that this is simply the beginning of a process that will also be replicated in other authority areas and with other regional assemblies across the country.

There are a number of questions that I wish answered before moving on to the complaint, and the answers will have an obvious bearing on the next stages of the complaint and investigation procedures by outside bodies:

1. Can you confirm that ……………… Council is aware that both ANEC & NEA are ‘unincorporated associations’ and thereby have no legal personality?

2. Can you please provide details of all the amounts paid by ……………………Council to ANEC and NEA since their inception?

3. Can you please provide details of all the ……………………… Council’s representatives of ANEC and NEA over the period this money was paid and whether they were present at council meetings when this payment, the ‘voluntary subscription,’ was agreed in the budget?

4. Can you confirm that at all times the Members’ Interest Book had up to date details of membership of ANEC and NEA? If not, can you advise as to when and where the breaches were noted and the date they were corrected?

5. Had the members indicated in the Member’s Interest Book that they had a personal, pecuniary or prejudicial interest in ANEC or NEA? If not, had you, as the Monitoring Officer, advised them otherwise?

6. Were they ever advised by yourself as Monitoring Officer, or the Council Solicitor, or any other official of the Local Authority that membership of an ‘unincorporated association’ whose members are ‘jointly and severally’ liable may have personal financial consequences? (North Tyneside Council have given such advice to its members…reported Newcastle Journal July 5th 2005)

7. The previous Director of ANEC / NEA, Stephen Barber, advised that he informed all members of both organisations of their potential personal liability. Were you aware of this? If so, did you immediately check with all of …………………members of ANEC / NEA that they required to take independent legal advice?
If not, why not?

8. I am aware that Stephen Barber, former Director of ANEC/NEA advised Sunderland City Council that there was a 'insurance indemnity' in place to cover any potential future litigation / legal challenges to ANEC/NEA’s status and activities.
Did ………………………… Council ask for sight of this indemnity?
If so, can you please provide a copy of this advice / indemnity under the Freedom of Information Act 2000?
If not, do you think it would have been prudent to take independent legal advice should such a potential liability fall on the council?

9. ANEC or NEA are not recognised as an employer under Section 122 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.

— Are you aware of this?

— Did you advise ………………… Council’s ANEC/NEA members of this?

— Did you advise them that they were the ‘legal personality’ of NEA / ANEC? And as such they could face a potential personal liability for those contracts and pensions / redundancies should there ever be a shortfall in the funding stream?

— Following the previous censure by the District Auditor after the behaviour of the Assembly / ANEC regarding unlawfully publicising their activities, did you conduct any investigations or monitor the behaviour of the Assembly / ANEC ?
If so, can you please provide me with details of those activities?
If not, why not?

— Did you check out its legal status, and the possibility of future legal action or did you simply rely on the reassurances of its Director, Stephen Barber? If so, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 can you please provide copies of these investigations?

— Are you aware of any North East Local Authority underwriting the ANEC / NEA’s contacts of employment for their permanent members of staff? If so, which authority?

10. It appears from recent press reports that the ‘unincorporated association,’ known as the North East Assembly is considering changing its name and is planning to incorporate.
Can you please supply (under the Freedom of Information Act 2000) details of communications between the Council and the Assembly on this matter?

11. Can you confirm that under the Companies Act 1985:

Pre-incorporation contracts, deeds and obligations.
36C.-(1) A contract which purports to be made by or on behalf of a company at a time when the company has not been formed has effect, subject to any agreement to the contrary, as one made with the person purporting to act for the company or as agent for it, and he is personally liable on the contract accordingly.
(2) Subsection (1) applies-
(a) to the making of a deed under the law of England and Wales, and
(b) to the undertaking of an obligation under the law of Scotland, as it applies to the making of a contract.

And that incorporation will not protect members from potential liabilities arising from contracts agreed before incorporation?

THE COMPLAINT

The complaint which I will initially ask you to respond to, which may subsequently require further investigation by outside bodies, dependent on your response is as follows:-I wish to make a formal complaint, which I will ask you to make available to the District Auditor because of the potential ‘knock-on’ implications for other local authority councillors and possible future legal action.

The complaint is as follows:-

1. Relates to the Code of Conduct of councillors.

From Part 2.8 (1) of The Local Authorities (Model Code of Conduct) (England) Order 2001,
“A member must regard himself as having a personal interest in any matter if the matter relates to an interest in respect of which notification must be given in paragraph 14 and 15 below, or if a decision upon it might reasonably be regarded as affecting to a greater extent than other council tax payers, ratepayers or inhabitants of the authority’s area, the well-being or financial position of himself, a relative or a friend …”

Can you confirm that ……………………… Council’s Members of ANEC and NEA have recorded in the Members’ Interest Book the fact that they are only ‘members’ of the organisations (you will be confirming whether they have all done this…question 4 above).

Can you confirm that they have not registered a ‘personal,’ ‘pecuniary’ or ‘prejudicial’ interest?

The members’ financial interest arises because as ‘unincorporated association’ it is the members of NEA & ANEC who are ‘jointly and severally’ liable.

Therefore, if, as it appears, ANEC is not registered as an employer under the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 then it is the members of ANEC who have the legal responsibility for contracts entered into by that body.
The liability of the contracts of employment amounts to many hundreds of thousands of pounds.
Therefore, if Local Authorities ceased to pay ‘voluntary subscriptions’ or there was a change of government whereby these bodies were abolished (or both) the liabilities of the members would become immediate and apparent.

Therefore, for the members of ANEC & NEA, sitting as councillors and approving ……………………’s budget and voluntary subscriptions there is a serious breach of Local Government Act 1972 Section 94 (1) as well as breaches of the Members Code of Conduct.

Section 94 (1) states,
“Subject to the provisions of section 97 below, if a member of a local authority has any pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in any contract, proposed contract or other matter, and is present at a meeting of the local authority at which the contract or other matter is the subject of consideration, he shall at the meeting and as soon as practicable after its commencement disclose the fact and shall not take part in the consideration or discussion of the contract or other matter or vote on any question with respect to it.”

(The disability could not be removed by Section 97 (5) of the same Act because the ‘influence’ of the leader and deputy leader of the ruling group could hardly be classed as ‘insignificant').

Therefore, under Section 94 (2) of the Local Government Act 1972 it appears that an offence / offences have been committed.

Please advise the date …………………………Council legally adopted the Model Code of Conduct.

I wish for you to refer the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation, as it is in the public interest to do so.I trust that you will treat this complaint with the seriousness that it merits and I will receive a full and thorough response addressing all of the points raised in order for the complaint to be taken to the next stage of proceedings.

Yours sincerely,

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The Truth? Bend it like Foote-Wood

Northern Echo Hear All Sides
6th July 2004
REGIONAL ASSEMBLY

AT the risk of attracting further malicious and inaccurate personal abuse from certain anti-democratic individuals, I must complain about your report on the North East Regional Assembly (Echo, July 1) which, unusually, I found biased and ill-informed.

The assembly is no different from many public organisations in seeking to establish a proper legal status to protect staff and members. The assembly has always been "open and transparent" and all 73 members give their services free.

All the region's 25 local authorities elect members to the assembly, as do business organisations, trade unions, churches and other voluntary bodies, including town and parish councils. The region's MPs and MEPs are also represented. The assembly is the only organisation representing all the region's communities. It is the North-East's democratic voice.

The indirectly-elected assembly is the only regional body which has the power to call to account OneNorth-East, the region's biggest and most powerful quango. Our discussions and decisions are open to public and Press, and always have been.

If the assembly were to be abolished, these powers would no longer be open to public scrutiny but would revert to decision-making behind closed doors.

Local councils, in particular, would lose the only route they have to directly influence regional policy.

Mr Heron is just one individual who is entitled to his opinion, however mistaken. For the Echo to give Heron more coverage for his wholly negative views than a democratic body which represents the whole of the region, is a travesty.

Councillor Chris Foote-Wood,
Liberal Democrat leader and vice-chair,
North East Assembly.

Academics Call for Quality, not Quantity, in Parking Enforcement Regimes

Reported in the North East press. Sunderland Echo did, however repeat our observation that it was hardly an 'independent' report when it had been commissioned by NCP.
In talking to the Professor he did state that they had not cheked whether Sunderland Council had correctly implemented the necessary Traffic Orders and had not checked the validity of the street signs and notices.
It may transpire that Professor Raine may need to come back to Sunderland and write another report should it be shown that the Controlled Parking Zone for the city centre does not exist.

UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM NEWS RELEASE
For immediate release: 5 July 2005

Academics Call for Quality, not Quantity, in Parking Enforcement Regimes

An independent report launched by the University of Birmingham today [Tuesday 5 July] urges local authorities to put customer service and public accountability at the heart of their parking enforcement regimes in order to address the growing public discontent that is so widely reported in the media.

This timely report argues that councils should apply to parking enforcement the same standards of professionalism and commitment to customer service that they now routinely practice in other regulatory areas such as planning, environmental health and licensing.

Simple improvements such as more face-to-face customer service desks, prompter responses to correspondence and higher standards of communication generally would make a big difference for many motorists wishing to challenge the councils’ actions.

Councils, and their contractors, should also improve their recruitment and retention practices for parking attendants to build up professionalism. The emphasis should be on encouraging quality in parking enforcement by attendants rather than the quantity of tickets issued. One solution is to join up parking enforcement with other street management functions, by developing teams of multi-functional street wardens to deal with issues such as graffiti, fly-tipping, abandoned vehicles, defects in street lighting, and other factors as well as parking infringements - this would encourage parking attendants to take more pride in their role.

A team from the University’s Institute of Local Government Studies (INLOGOV) carried out the six-month research project to investigate the very best practices in council-run parking enforcement. Six authorities were identified and nominated by peers as demonstrating high quality practices: Winchester; Hammersmith and Fulham; Manchester; Cambridge; Weymouth and Portland; and Sunderland.

Since the Road Traffic Act 1991, all London Boroughs and more than 100 other local authorities have taken on responsibility for parking enforcement from the police – many using private contractors for the front-line parking attendant work. Problems have often arisen where contracts have based payments on the numbers of tickets issued, resulting in zealous ticketing. The better way, as demonstrated in Manchester and Sunderland, is for contracts to incentivise ‘correct ticketing’ and the minimisation of enforcement decisions that end up becoming the subject of appeals.

Councils also need to raise their standards in dealing with appeals against tickets issued, with the report suggesting that local authority legal departments play a more prominent role in the process, to increase professionalism. Last year some 45% of appeals made by motorists to the independent parking adjudicators were allowed.

Finally, the report provides councils with a self-assessment method for evaluating the quality of their parking enforcement regimes, which takes account of the perceptions of local residents, businesses and motorists on the subject as well as quantitative and technical measures of performance.

Professor John Raine of the Institute of Local Government Studies, and lead investigator on the study, said: “In our analysis, high quality in parking enforcement is achieved when there is both good compliance with the parking regulations and also public support. Too often councils have been pursuing rigorous enforcement without that vital ingredient of public support. There is much more that can be done to improve communication and build public confidence in the purposes and integrity of the process.

“We hope that local authorities will use the self-assessment method that we have devised in the report to evaluate their current parking regimes and identify the priorities for improvement in their particular areas. The six good-practice councils that were examined in some detail in the study provide many valuable lessons for other local authorities and contractors, and we hope that the research hastens the pace of change for the better.”

Commenting on the report’s findings, NCP Chief Executive Bob Macnaughton, who sponsored the report, said: “NCP welcomes this move to drive the industry forward by defining quality and raising standards in parking enforcement. NCP supports national standards of excellence and we hope that the best practice set out in this report will soon become normal practice all over the country.”

ENDS
Notes to Editors:
The report, entitled Local Authority Parking Enforcement: Defining Quality – Raising Standards, by John W Raine, Eileen Dunstan and Theresa Alexandra Parry from the University of Birmingham’s Institute of Local Government Studies, is priced £25 and is available from The Publications Unit, School of Public Policy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT

The report was commissioned and sponsored by NCP.

The British Parking Association (BPA) has commissioned a parallel review of the whole policy and legal framework for decriminalised parking enforcement, which is being undertaken by Richard Childs QPM and which is to be launched later this month.

Parking Enforcement Facts:
Local authorities were given powers to undertake their own parking enforcement measures under the Road Traffic Act 1991.

The 33 London boroughs were first to introduce their own parking enforcement measures in 1995, and since then the number of other authorities following suit across England and Wales has been steadily rising.

Some councils run their own in-house parking enforcement services while others use private contractors – the largest companies being: NCP; ACPOA; Control Plus; and Legion Parking.

The School of Public Policy
The University of Birmingham’s School of Public Policy is the largest centre for the applied study of public policy and management in Europe with more than one hundred academic staff from a wide range of disciplines and backgrounds. The School is continually engaged with practitioners in the public and voluntary sectors at local, regional, national, and international levels, operating in the vanguard of research on the development of public services. The School wins more commissioned social science research from central and local government and the health service than any other university in the UK. Five specialist departments make up the School, one of which is the Institute of Local Government Studies (INLOGOV), where the particular specialism is local governance and public service management. Throughout its forty-year history, the Institute has been playing a leading role in shaping policy in local government and in developing management practice in local authorities.

The report’s authors
John Raine is Professor of Management in Criminal Justice and Director of the School of Public Policy Graduate School. He has some twenty-five years of’ experience in research and consultancy on judicial systems, local government and public management. He is author of three books and numerous articles on aspects of public management and the administration of justice. He has recently completed a research project on the users’ perspective of the National Parking Adjudication Service and has completed previous studies on parking enforcement for the Lord Chancellor’s Department and the London Parking Appeals Service.

Eileen Dunstan is a Research Fellow in the Institute of Local Government Studies, School of Public Policy. She has worked on a wide variety of public policy research projects. Her previous work with John Raine has included, a study of the enforcement of financial penalties in Magistrates’ Courts in England and Wales for the Home Office, the impact of the National Automated Fingerprint Identification System (NAFIS) on the police use of fingerprint evidence (with Morgan, Harris, Burrows), a review of Restorative Justice intervention for the Youth Justice Board and, most recently, a review of the National Parking Appeals Service.

Theresa Alexandra Parry is a lecturer at the University of Birmingham, deputy director and programme manager for MSc programmes in clinical neuropsychiatry and mental health for older adults respectively. Originally a biochemist, she then trained as a barrister and was called to the bar in 1999. She joined the University in 2001, and for three years worked as a policy analyst for the West Midlands Local Criminal Justice Board. Previously she has lectured in law at Stratford on Avon College and for the Open University.

Further information:
Rachel Robson – Press Officer, University of Birmingham
tel: 0121 414 6681 / mob: 07789 921165 / email: r.a.robson@bham.ac.uk

Assembly considers name change

Assembly Considers Name Change
Jul 5 2005
By The Journal

The North-East Assembly is considering changing its name to avoid confusion with the elected body which was rejected by voters in last year's referendum.

The region gave a resounding 78% `no' vote to an elected regional assembly in November.

But the existing body, established in 1999 containing councillors, business representatives, trade unionists and members of voluntary groups, continued to operate under the name North-East Assembly.

The assembly, based at Newcastle Guildhall was set up as a shadow body in advance of the referendum. Despite the `no' vote, Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott has left them in place with a statutory role to produce regional strategies for economy, planning and housing.

Yesterday, its chairman, Alex Watson, said: "We need to re-launch the assembly and maybe even change its name.

"We need to do things differently and engage with the public better than we have done, because people didn't appreciate the fact that an assembly existed."

The move comes as the assembly is planning to convert itself into a limited company from its present status as an unincorporated association.

Advice given to North Tyneside Council this week confirmed members of such a body are personally liable for any contracts it enters into, such as those with its 18 staff.

Assembly interim director Paul Wilding said: "Whether or not the members would be individually liable is a question that would be tested by a legal case." But Mr Watson said: "It is a risk and we've got to make sure we have the legal and insurance cover in case something happens.

"I think there was some complacency there before, because we expected to get a directly elected assembly."

Neil Herron, a long-time campaigner against the assembly said: "Each one of those members could face massive personal consequences as it stands.

"This organisation has been a shambles right from the beginning. As for changing the name, it's staggering beyond belief."

Conservative Euro-MP Martin Callanan said: "This obsession with bodies who think they can gain public acceptability by changing their name is completely ridiculous. People in the North-East voted by an enormous margin against a regional assembly, elected or otherwise, and the best thing it could do is abolish itself."

British Presidency of EU Begins...so does the Propaganda Offensive

British Presidency of EU Begins...so does the Propaganda Offensive

Listed below is the Government's version of 'What has the EU ever done for us?'

Brief commentary appeared in the Newcastle Journal this morining and can be read here.

North East

Membership of the EU is vital for the economy in the North East:

• In 2000 a report by South Bank University found that 142,000 jobs in the North East depended on exports to the EU.1
• The European Union is the North East’s most important export market. In 2003, 62% of goods exports from the North East went to countries in the EU countries, bringing £5 billion a year into the region’s economy.2
• During 2003 an average of 420 companies exported from the North East to the EU each month.3 These include Trident UK, based in Gateshead, which specialises in the manufacture of dinghies, sailingwear and trailers, and which won new orders worth several thousand pounds after participating on a trade mission to Amsterdam.4
• Tourism is one of the region’s biggest industries and over 44% of tourists who visited Northumbria in 2002 came from the EU countries.5
• The North East region has benefited from 63 inward investments decisions in 2003/4 creating 1919 new jobs, of which 26 were from European companies creating 1291 new jobs. Some examples of European companies investing in 2003/4 in the North East were Saft from France who expanded its workforce in its hi-tech battery system for industrial applications manufacturing plant at South Shields, and Getinge AB from Sweden, which expanded its manufacturing of operating theatre equipment in Sunderland.6

Membership of the EU has brought many cultural and environmental benefits for the North East:

• Gateshead has Strategic Cultural Partnerships with Gdansk in Poland, Gothenburg in Sweden and Tallinn in Estonia, as well as Bergen in Norway. These partnerships will strengthen of the region's links around the North Sea, with the Scandinavian and the Baltic and Central and Eastern European states in the European Union. The link with Tallinn has resulted in a teacher exchange with Tallinn focusing on ICT in the curriculum, and an Estonian Boys' choir visiting and performing in Gateshead. The Tyne Tallinn Film Challenge 2003 - involved exchanges of North East and Tallinn film makers, and workshops with young people (Ryton Comprehensive School who made a film).7
• Since its inception in 1992, Northern Stage Ensemble has been committed to the forging international collaborations from its home base at Newcastle Playhouse. Earlier this year the company’s production Homage to Catalonia, a stage adaptation of Orwell’s novel, was performed in Leeds, Newcastle, Paris and Barcelona. In autumn 2005, after an £8m rebuild and refurbishment, Newcastle Playhouse will reopen as a European Centre for Performing Arts. 8
• Seven beaches in the North East have blue flag status. Four of these are in North Tyneside - Cullercoats, Whitley Bay, Tynemouth and King Edward's Bay which was highlighted as the best in the country. To achieve the EU’s prestigious Blue Flag status means meeting strict European standards for water quality, litter collection and public amenities.9
• Many players from other EU countries have contributed their skills and talents to North East’s football clubs. These players include Newcastle’s Patrick Kluivert (Netherlands) and Middlesbrough player Szilard Nemeth (Slovakia).
• 411 students from institutions in the North East of England took part in Erasmus exchanges in 2003/2004. Robert Hough from the University of Northumbria at Newcastle studying for a BA in International Business Management went to Universidad Antonio de Nebrja – Universitas Nebrissensis in Spain for a year and included in that was a 4 month industrial placement. He received 2350 euros towards his study period abroad.10

EU membership means freedom of movement across 25 countries:

• The passenger terminal at the Port of Tyne handles regular ferry services to Northern Europe and Scandinavia, with in excess of 820,000 passengers per year.11
• Easyjet fly from Newcastle to Barcelona, Belfast, Berlin, Budapest, Copenhagen, Geneva, Malaga, Nice, Palma, Paris, Prague and Rome. The region also has ferry connections to Gothenburg and Amsterdam.12

The North East benefits from millions of pounds of European Funding every year13:

• The North East will receive over £650 million of EU funds from 2000 to 2006.

European funding goes to a variety of projects and organisations, and is broken down into three categories14:

• Business support
• Large scale strategic sites of employment
• Community development

So far, the North East has supported over 1,500 projects. Here’s just a flavour15:

• Business Link County Durham has just (July 2004) received a £3 million funding boost to offer a streamlined approach to business support. This Objective 2 funding will be used to assess small businesses and offer tailor-made advice and support.
• £2 million for a Stockton Community Resource Centre which will accommodate agencies such as Sure Start and will be used for training, meeting and counselling areas. (Funding awarded November 2003 - Objective 2)
• £5 million to allow building work to start on Middlesbrough’s prestigious new art gallery. MIMA - Middlesbrough Institute of Modern Art – will be a world-class modern art gallery based upon the success of Newcastle’s BALTIC and is set to attract thousands of art lovers to the Tees Valley. (Funding awarded March 2004 - Objective 2)
• £1.2 million to develop England’s first national centre for the Children’s Book. (Funding awarded October 2003 - Objective 2)

MEPs representing the North East in the European Parliament:

Mr Stephen Hughes (Labour)

Mr Martin Callanan (Conservative)

Mrs Fiona Hall (Liberal)

Local European celebrities [will be approached to secure involvement with the campaign]

• Thomas Zehermair, artistic director, Northern Sinfonia (Austria)
• Sirkka-Lisa Kontinnen, photographer (Finland)
• Mart Poom, footballer (Estonia)
• Szilard Nemeth, Middlesbrough FC (Slovakia)

For more info: www.go-ne.gov.uk

__________________________________________________________________

1:UK jobs dependent on the EU, Brian Ardy, Iain Begg and Dermot Hudson, European
Institute, South Bank University.

2:HM Customs and Excise, Quarter 1, 2004 Press Release, ‘UK Regional Trade in Goods Statistics’

3:HM Customs and Excise, Quarter 1, 2004 Press Release, ‘UK Regional Trade in Goods Statistics’

4:UKTI,

5:Star UK, 2001 Tourism Facts,

6:Information held by UK Trade and Investment, Inward Investment Group

7:Information held by Gateshead City Council

8:Northern Stage - Mo Lovatt, Programming & Planning Co-ordinator, 0191 245 0014

9:http://www.seasideawards.org.uk/

10:Information held by UK Erasmus Council

11:www.portoftyne.com

12:Information held by the European Programmes Team, Government Office for the North East

13:Information held by the European Programmes Team, Government Office for the North East

14:Information held by the European Programmes Team, Government Office for the North East

15:Information held by the European Programmes Team, Government Office for the North East

EU boons list nets own goal

EU boons list nets own goal, Jul 1 2005
By Ross Smith, The Journal

The Foreign Office is launching a charm offensive to convince the North of the value of the EU as Britain takes over Europe's presidency today.

Benefits cited for the region include 142,000 jobs said to depend on the EU, and £5bn a year coming in from exports to member states.

The department also said the region was receiving £650m in EU funds between 2000 and 2006.

But Newcastle United fans may be puzzled to learn that misfit former striker Patrick Kluivert is considered an example of the benefits of the union, alongside Estonian Sunderland goalkeeper Mart Poom and Middlesbrough's Slovakian international Szilard Nemeth.

And civil servants seem not to know which countries are not EU members.

Gateshead's cultural partnership with Bergen is mentioned, as are flights from Newcastle to Geneva - yet neither Norway or Switzerland is in the EU. But the list says 44% of tourist visits to Northumbria in 2002 came from EU countries and 411 students from the North-East took part in the Erasmus exchange programme between European universities.

Britain takes the presidency of the EU for the next six months in the midst of the crisis following the rejection of a draft constitution by France and the Netherlands.

Europe Minister Douglas Alexander said: "The proof that Europe has been good for Britain is all around us.

"I believe in what works for Britain - and a reforming Europe works for Britain.

"And, in the weeks and months ahead, I want to make that case on the basis of the facts about the practical benefits of European membership and why Britain should be a leading European power."

But Sunderland anti-EU campaigner Neil Herron said: "To infer that without the EU we would not have cheap airlines or student exchanges, or even foreign footballers, is at best misleading - at worst totally disingenuous and dishonest.

"The best one is the tourist one. Do you think that the people of the North-East are gullible enough to think that the tourists from EU countries only come here because of our EU membership?"

Our cultural benefits can be pretty dramatic

Theatre company Northern Stage has felt the EU's benefits.

It brings European artists to Newcastle and sends North-East productions abroad and director of communications Richard Bliss says free movement within the union makes life a lot easier: there's a lot less bureaucracy and form-filling."

In 2003, a £66,000 grant helped the Newcastle Gateshead Gypsy Festival, with theatre, dance and music from Spain and Germany.

And last year, George Orwell's Homage to Catalonia was put on in conjunction with Catalan company Teatre Romea.

A £1.8m grant is helping redevelop Newcastle Playhouse.

"Hopefully this will draw in visitors, particularly if it's theatre you can't see anywhere else in the country, which will benefit the wider city," Mr Bliss said.

Anger at company move by assembly

Anger at company move by assembly
by Neil Hunter,
Northern Echo

THE leaders of a controversial unelected regional assembly are planning to turn the organisation into a limited company to protect members from legal action.

The move - dismissed by critics last night as a way to avoid public scrutiny - will involve the appointment of a director on a £70,000-a-year salary.

Details of the status switch by the North East Assembly were revealed at its annual meeting at the Stockton campus of the University of Durham yesterday.

New chairman Alex Watson told members that the post of director would be advertised next month and the successful applicant should start work next January.

Interim director Paul Wilding said the assembly becoming a company "limited by guarantee" would protect members being individually liable should someone sue the organisation.

But critic Neil Heron warned the move could make it difficult for the public to hold the assembly accountable for its spending or decision-making.

Mr Heron, who campaigned against an elected regional assembly ahead of last November's referendum, said: "When public money is being used, there has to be openness and transparency but with limited companies there does not.

"Here we have ratepayers of the North-East funding a body no one wants and now they are taking it out of scrutiny and accountability and shrouding it in deception and that's not acceptable when it's public money."

Councillor Watson, who is also leader of Derwentside District Council, replaced Coun Bob Gibson, also leader of Stockton Borough Council, as chairman of the assembly at yesterday's meeting.

He defended the £70,000 salary for a chief executive, saying: "It's a high-profile and significant job."

The assembly also came under fire from two members - Dorothy Luke and Olivia Grant - because no women were selected for important posts.

Mrs Grant revealed that the selection panel for the chief executive was likely to be made up of four men, and said: "I don't think that's appropriate in this day and age."