Ex Chief Exec - Dave Clark

[Spinner72]

anyone else think using the police in this matter is abusing the service of the police.

 

http://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2009/09/26/sic-chief-executive-complains-to-police-about-misleading-information

 

they both sound like little boys running to the dinner lady saying miss miss Johnny did this to me.

 

Well in the first incident, yes, very much so in the light of (as far as we know) the lack of evidence.

 

However, spreading (allegedly) misleading/libellous information about someones business via the council email system is another matter entirely.

[paulb]

but that's not criminal law that's for him to take a civil action. think there is a lot better things for the police to investigate than this.

[unlinkedstudent]

but that's not criminal law that's for him to take a civil action. think there is a lot better things for the police to investigate than this.

 

This involves people in public office who should really set an example. Usually, if children are bullied at school, we tell them to report bullies and stick up to them because if not they get away with it. Granted, the parties involved are not children and should therefore know better. We do not know the full contents of the telephone conversation. I wouldn't like it if I was having a conversation with a work colleague who threatened to smash my teeth in. What sort of example are we setting children and those constantly suffering harrassment of this nature if we say it shouldn't be reported to Police?

[paulb]

come on unlink your from London. think how the met would have treated either of these two.

 

no its not OK for either of these two to do what they have allegedly been up to but then its down to the council complaints and the office of whatever its called to investigate the complaints.

 

so is councillor wills going on gardening leave too. maybe they could all nip round and do my garden. so glad that our council tax is being used so well.

 

lets not forget the other complaints about other councillors were going to be short on the council if they are all proved.

Does Shetland complain more or do we have a worse council than the other Scottish island groups

[TeeAyBee]

lets not forget the other complaints about other councillors were going to be short on the council if they are all proved.

 

That is no reason not to pursue wrong doing. If they break the rules then they should go. That is not to say hang them for mistakes, but hang them for deliberately transgressing.

[unlinkedstudent]

come on unlink your from London. think how the met would have treated either of these two.

 

no its not OK for either of these two to do what they have allegedly been up to but then its down to the council complaints and the office of whatever its called to investigate the complaints.

 

so is councillor wills going on gardening leave too. maybe they could all nip round and do my garden. so glad that our council tax is being used so well.

 

lets not forget the other complaints about other councillors were going to be short on the council if they are all proved.

Does Shetland complain more or do we have a worse council than the other Scottish island groups

 

Whilst I may have lived in London, I'm not from London (born in Lincolnshire). Despite the failings of the Metropolitan Police they would, however, be duty bound to investigate and it would then be down to the CPS to decide whether there was enough evidence for them to be charged and a criminal prosecution brought (from working for the BTP, I know that Police forces take advice from the CPS sometimes before charging an individual).

 

It is not always the prime duty of a council investigation officer to be the person/body to solely investigate complaints. Indeed, even in the private sector, matters do get reported to the Police. For example, if a theft occurred, a complaints officer would expect the Police to have been involved and would seek to obtain documentation from the Officer in Charge. If an employee was deemed to have taken money from a shop till and the Police were not involved/the person not charged with taking the money and was subsequently sacked, an Employment Tribunal would take a dim view.

 

Going back on track to this alleged threat of violence, if it occurred off Council property then why shouldn't the Police be involved? Granted, it may have been to do with Council business.

 

In essence, the point I was trying to get across was to do with what example are we setting those suffering threats of violence if we take the view not to report matters to the Police. We don't know how "threatening/loud/vicious" the alleged comment was.

[JustMe]

Been watching this with great interest during my holiday south and I note that this is the second time in recent years that some sort of problems have followed the appointment of a chief executive by the SIC. This is a reminder of the first time.http://www.lgcplus.com/news/reiter-removal-leads-to-call-for-protection/1434291.article

[JustMe]

Having thought about the issue of the report into the location of the new AHS I have come to what I believe is a sensible conclusion. Since there really can be no doubt that David Clark is a clever man I believe that he must have known that bringing in his former colleague to write the report might be controversial so he must surely have believed that given the need for a speedy report coupled with the fact that his ex colleague was available and qualified to do the work he could justify his actions to both the council and the media if needed.

 

Having an office drink to celebrate the production of the report may well breach council rules but since the Chief Executive gets criticised for going to a pub I wonder where such a drink should have taken place. Certainly this would not raise an eyebrow in many business circles. Maybe a gentle word from the convenor or the head of legal services would have sufficed.

 

The alleged threat to Cllr. Wills is certainly more serious if true but here we have to wait and see the result of any enquiry and also to see if Mr. Clark makes any statement on the subject.

 

As for Willie Shannon I fear that the CEO has overstepped the mark as I am sure the entire council would want to be consulted prior to any move to abolish a senior post. Now this could indeed show that David Clark is a big bully in which case I have to wonder why the council chose him but it could also just show his lack of experience in local government as I am certain that a new CEO joining a business could very well start by doing what he has done. Certainly I will await developments with interest.

[Shoogler]

^^^

Are you sure he was qualified to do the work? I have heard otherwise............j

[JustMe]

^^^

Are you sure he was qualified to do the work? I have heard otherwise............j

Well actually......no. I just kind of assumed that anyone brought in to do the job even at short notice would be qualified to do it. Hasten to add that I mean qualified by way of experience as well as by bits of paper.

[Para Handy]

Been watching this with great interest during my holiday south and I note that this is the second time in recent years that some sort of problems have followed the appointment of a chief executive by the SIC. This is a reminder of the first time.http://www.lgcplus.com/news/reiter-removal-leads-to-call-for-protection/1434291.article

 

 

O! How the Shetland Council likes to repeat it self they never learn from there own history

Has anyone got a big enough Rennie antacid tablets, to solve this once and for all

[euripides]

Any thoughts on the latest instalment, Dave Clark going to the police about some emails?

[Spinner72]

^^^

Are you sure he was qualified to do the work? I have heard otherwise............j

Well actually......no. I just kind of assumed that anyone brought in to do the job even at short notice would be qualified to do it. Hasten to add that I mean qualified by way of experience as well as by bits of paper.

 

There was a bit of a mess at the time, but Gussie, sorry, Cllr Angus, assured everyone he thought Mr Clarks associate was fully qualified.

 

A very good "recap" there a few posts back by justme, which shows just how much this can be open to interpetation, and how much of the defamation of David Clark has been done via use of the media.

 

Whilst I have felt, and previously posted, that he should have known the rules etc, I have been involved with the SIC for longer than I care to remember, as have many posting here I suspect, and it is perfectly possible Mr Clark was just trying to do his best, in "his way", to get things done and make a good first impression.

 

Maybe if he had had some pointers from more experienced members and/or staff, no more need have happened.

 

As for the latest development - i do not believe Mr Clark would file such a complaint without good grounds, especially in current circumstances. Indeed, the circumstances may leave him no choice, as sorting it out over a peerie dram seems oot o da question!

[Guest Anonymous]

Anyone who wants to see just how qualified (or not as the case may be) our new chief exec is they only have to apply to companies house for the audited accounts of his former company.

Not quite the high flyer that was bandied about by Clueless and Miller.

[Treeplanter]

Anyone who wants to see just how qualified (or not as the case may be) our new chief exec is they only have to apply to companies house for the audited accounts of his former company.

Not quite the high flyer that was bandied about by Clueless and Miller.

 

Quite - which could well explain why this allegedly "high flyer" was seemingly immediately available to cease all activities associated with his own company in order to take up paid employment in the Shetland Isles.