MitzyMu Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 For goodness sake will everyone stop being so damn picky about who said what and what they meant by it and return to the thread. The behaviour of our new CE and the lack of wherewithall of the Convener is drowning Shetland and making the whole debacle a laughing stock !!!!! Let Audit Scotland give them enough rope to hang themselves and lets get on with the task in handRestoring Credibility to Shetland I also hope that Messurs Scott and Carmichael are not fooled by the token " sorry " recently reported and do not withdraw their complaint to the Audit Commission Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mainlander Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 Like the new Chief Executive or not he was basically appointed on a remit to sort out the Councils shambles on this stuff. He identified what he thought was a key problem, and came to a conclusion about what needed to be done. He observed a guy who was meant to be delivering a Capital Programme, but was more interested in politicing on distractions than doing any serious work on the nuts and bolts he should have been attending to. The new Chief Exec told the Council leadership he needed to get that sorted, so they said go for it big man, were right behind you. ^^^Well said, Axolotl. As well as the above quote, your post has more sense in it than all the media coverage (both letters and reported news) put together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogman Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 Mogman's appeal to all 22 councillors sounds like a whole loada sour grapes ta me. Did he have a grant application turned down?No I didn't - I have no axe to grind whatsoever about any way in which I, or my family have been personally treated by the SIC, at any level, at any time. I genuinely feel strongly that Shetland deserves better and, having lived here for over 30 years (I moved here after finishing University), I feel I have the right to express my heartfelt concerns and observations to those who can sort out the situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulb Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 thank you unlink it was what i meant to say. i was trying to say that a lady who is just a standard care worker was getting email from both people and she felt that dr wills was going over the top. i have not seen the emails but i trust this lady. i also think its a laugh that the normal workers are receiving emails telling them not to discuss this matter. shame that the people at the top can't apply the same policy to themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icepick239 Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 I ask again - does anyone know, who were the 4 Councillors that were absent from the meeting on wednesday? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 He observed a guy who was meant to be delivering a Capital Programme, but was more interested in politicing on distractions than doing any serious work on the nuts and bolts he should have been attending to. The new Chief Exec told the Council leadership he needed to get that sorted, so they said go for it big man, were right behind you. This is all very well, but when you're on the payroll of any organisation you either play the game by their rules (however cumbersome, ineffectual or pointless they may be or seem) or you risk creating a sh*tstorm and getting nowhere. Clark has in his five months in the CE position consistently chosen the "risk creating a sh*tstorm" route with everything he's touched. Sometimes he's gotten away with it, others he's created the risked sh*tstorm, and in the case of the Shannon debacle, one of mammoth proportions. For the record, I dislike both Clark and Shannon, along with a whole slew of other hired and elected SIC personnel, in equal amount, so no favouritism involved between the pair. As fair as I'm concerned both could vanish immediately and it would be no great loss, both have been too close to too many "questionable" issues too often. Had Clark been smart enough to go about it in the right way, or if he was genuinely mistaken about the exact procedures for deleting a senior post, those as yet un-named "senior councillors" who alledgedly gave the nod to his plans, had been smart enough to bring him to to speed and quickly. He could have succeeded in doing what he set out to do, quite some time ago, with no controversy or black marks involved. As it is everything is right back at square one, and everyone involved is tainted by the negativity of it. To me the fact that Clark crashed right ahead as he did suggests incompetence or arrogance, the fact un-named "senior councillors" gave the nod (allegedly) to him acting in such a way also suggests ignorance or arrogance on their part. The fact that no senior councillor stepped in at the earliest moment and took control of the situation to perform damage limitation before it spiralled entirely out of hand, suggests ineptitude or lack of committment to their position. None of the above IMHO are traits acceptable to positions of seniority within our local governing body, be they elected or hired roles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeAyBee Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 For goodness sake will everyone stop being so damn picky about who said what and what they meant by it and return to the thread. Wow that's us told! Good job you can't ring anyone and threaten to kick their teeth in. Isn't this whole debate about who said what and what they meant by it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unlinkedstudent Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 For goodness sake will everyone stop being so damn picky about who said what and what they meant by it and return to the thread. Wow that's us told! Good job you can't ring anyone and threaten to kick their teeth in. Isn't this whole debate about who said what and what they meant by it? I was thinking the same thing TAB but have been rather busy with work and couldn't thing of an apt reply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 2012 is good, October 2009 would be much better.... Convener says he will stand down from council in 2012 http://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2009/10/30/cluness-to-stand-down-in-2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crofterlady Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 I think something is rotten in the state of Denmark! I've know Jonathan Wills for over 20 years and although I don't always agree with his politics I would defend his integrity. If Jonathan says Clark abused him, he did. [***Mod edit- content removed at users own request***] Willie Shannon: I don't know the man but all who do say he is an excellent lawyer with an unblemished reputation. Now I wonder why Clark wanted him gone?? Mmmmmm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulb Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 mods i think a little edit is needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiiMan Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 I ask again - does anyone know, who were the 4 Councillors that were absent from the meeting on wednesday? Gussie Angus was at the same funeral I was at on Wednesday morning so that would be one. I think Bill Manson has the Flu and Alastair Cooper is away on holiday. Don't know who the fourth is. Was there four? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Para Handy Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 2012 is good, October 2009 would be much better.... Convener says he will stand down from council in 2012 http://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2009/10/30/cluness-to-stand-down-in-2012 Why hang on to 2012 unless its for all that lovely expenses. It can’t be for doing any good for Shetland. He would have done better for Shetland if he had not been a councillor in the first placeHe should go today, not 2012. And take Mr.clark with him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moorit Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 http://www.shetland-news.co.uk/2009/October/news/SIC%20apologises%20for%20breach%20of%20trust.htm In her report Ms Cogle said that the report’s author Andrew Laidler denied that Mr Angus had told him the information was confidential. Mr Angus insisted that he had. another case of just one persons word against another persons. becoming a bit of a habit recently. Maybe gussie should follow Wills example an take a wistness with him when discussing things in town hall now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddtablet Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 mods i think a little edit is needed.Sorry.....what post did you think the mods should edit ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.