Charitable Trust, independent of Council

[peeriebryan]

personally i only think , you should keep da flea , Wills and Robinson ,the rest are a bunch of clowns who dont have the courage to speak thier minds and stick to a desicion !

But aren't they the councillors who tried to get the council's long-standing decision to support Mareel overturned in 2008, denounced the decision when the council voted to continue support six weeks later and have persisted in their opposition to the decision(s) ever since?

[Guest Anonymous]

just shows they are consistent in not wanting to waste money Brian.

[north]

But aren't they the councillors who tried to get the council's long-standing decision to support Mareel overturned in 2008, denounced the decision when the council voted to continue support six weeks later and have persisted in their opposition to the decision(s) ever since?

 

The Mareel Business Plan is built around the same concept of the Leisure Centres, Restaurants and other SIC "ventures".

 

Smoke and Mirrors, unviable plans and no accountability.

 

The only people that lost their jobs at the Clickimin were the poor old employees; not the financial geniuses who wrote the plan or anyone involved in the management or execution.

 

There is nothing wrong with building and funding Mareel from a realistic approved budget - this is NOT what happened - it is built on an unrealistic imaginary financial model that will NEVER work. Fortunately a couple of councillors were prepared to make that known. Who will lose their job when it fails to meet it's financial goals?

[peeriebryan]

My point was not the Mareel business plan, rather the councillors mentioned sticking to a decision. Without wishing to go too far off topic I'll briefly address your points....

 

The Mareel Business Plan is built around the same concept of the Leisure Centres, Restaurants and other SIC "ventures".

 

Smoke and Mirrors, unviable plans and no accountability.

No, the business plan is not 'built around the same concept' as leisure centres etc which are based on annual subsidy, and Shetland Arts is accountable.

 

The only people that lost their jobs at the Clickimin were the poor old employees; not the financial geniuses who wrote the plan or anyone involved in the management or execution.

 

There is nothing wrong with building and funding Mareel from a realistic approved budget - this is NOT what happened - it is built on an unrealistic imaginary financial model that will NEVER work. Fortunately a couple of councillors were prepared to make that known. Who will lose their job when it fails to meet it's financial goals?

Mareel will create jobs, and the business plan has been reviewed and approved by many organisations, regulatory bodies and all the funders (inc Shetland Islands Council, European Regional Development Fund, Scottish Arts Council lottery fund, Highlands and Islands Enterprise, Shetland Development Trust, Gannochy Trust)

[north]

Then we will have to sit back and watch the outcome.

 

There is no point debating the potential outcome of any venture that at this point exists only a financial spreadsheet. The first day of reckoning will come at the end of the commisioning phase when the build costs are reviewed. The second will be at the end of the first year of operation, when the forecast utilisation and revenues can be examined.

 

I have never really had a position one way or another on the building of Mareel, and I think there is certainly a requirement for a venue of this type in Shetland. That being said, I have no great faith in the financial abilities or acumen of those tasked to bring it home.

 

As the SIC's own finance officials put it;

 

The finance officials’ 39-page report found Mareel’s business plan to be “robust and well researchedâ€, although some estimates of costings were deemed “light†and audience and income targets “challengingâ€. Its overall recommendation, however, was that SIC approve the project.

 

http://www.hi-arts.co.uk/july08-feature-mareel-lerwick.htm

[Guest Anonymous]

I take it from your reply Brian that you and the rest of them at Shetland Arts will fall on your own swords when mareel needs subsidised then.

[peeriebryan]

^ by that do you mean resign? If I no longer felt that I was meeting the requirements of my post or fulfilling my role to the best of my abilities then yes, I would resign

 

If you mean it in the literal sense ie. hara-kiri, then no, probably not

[north]

The people in the trenches should not be the ones that carry the can if the venture fails to meet it's budgeted performance - for that the responsibility lies much higher up the food chain.

[voxreasonable]

(** mod edit - new thread merged with existing thread **)

 

There will be an Inquisition held on the 28th of June regarding Shetland's Council's failure to unify their auditied accounts with those of the Shetland Charities Audited accounts.

 

The problem is as follows:-

 

After many years of arguing that the charities are seperate legal entities and can not have their accounts unified with the council's the Scottish Governing body has ruled that they must be unified and wont discuss it further.

 

All other council linked charities around Britain seem to have accepted and complied but Shetland has so far refused.

 

The problem is. The heavies from the mainland are arriving on the 28th to exert pressure on various council staff for failing to unify those accounts. They could even force staff to quit. The Auditor would seem to me to be an obvious potential victim here.

 

However, the council staff have no legal authority over the charities. The trustees of the charities are actually the elected members of the council and they dont want to unify the accounts. They understanably dont want to put their necks on the line for a change that seems to have no benefit to the charities and, despite confirmation from the Charities Commission than no harm will happen, some unknown future risk.

 

Civil Servants have no authority over politicians, therefore, how can they force the charities to unify their accounts with the council's accounts?

 

As far as I can predict the outcome seems to be that Shetland might lose its Auditor and then be completely unable to find another, since which auditor would willingly ruin their reputation by taking on an absolutely suicidal job such as this?

 

The problem is rediculous really if you stand back and look at it. The politicians in Scotland are demanding unified accounts and are hitting the Shetland Island civil servants on the head with a stick hoping if they do it long enough and hard enough somehow it will solve the problem, when in fact what they need to do is go directly to the trustees (i.e. the politicians of Shetland) and hit them long and hard until it they do as they are told.

 

I predict a bloodbath followed by a protracted court case and in the end the Charities will unify but along the way, it will cost the Shetland people millions.

 

The politicians yet again, by sitting on their hands and failing to apply their brains to finding a solution that both complies with the audit laws and protects the charities further have caused another rediculous event. This one will not be cheap.

[dtothet]

I reckon everything in the world will work out fine and we don't need to worry about anything.

[Guest Anonymous]

The quantity of millions held in the trust funds will be too tempting for "politicians from the scottish mainland" they will have it by hook or by crook, its always been the way n always will. Holyrude will take anything Shetland has got n the populous will still go snivveling after them. As soon as that profane parliament was declared i did exclaim Shetland could kiss its rear goodbye. Without even studying , they are quite capable of forcing the council to merge with the trust funds and stop all central govt monies, hence saving them money ,constructively taking the trust funds. Shetland has been constantly been under attack from scotland

[voxreasonable]

I understand your fears on this but having the politicians sit on their hands while Civil Servants burn at the stake is no solution.

 

If they dont want the accounts to be unified they should fight it out in Hollyrood or in the high court.

 

The problem is they will lose because the charities are linked to the council. They fund projects that councils normally fund and the Trustees are Councillors. If they really want to have them unconnected then they will have to change how they are doing things now.

 

Doing nothing is not going to work for much longer. They could lose their charitable status and have to pay tax. Thats a whole lot of tax if the goverment really wants to play dirty.

[voxreasonable]

That I don't know the Auditor. I don't even know his name.

 

Understanding how much training, ability and dedication it takes to become an Auditor I'm fairly sure he's done an excellent job and doesn't deserve what's happening.

 

I was just merely speculating about what leverage they might use and what weapons they have. Not having unified the accounts would be one. They are bound to go for someone's throat.

 

However, after thinking about it a bit further, if I was him, I would stand firm. I dont believe they can sack him. Shetland needs him to stay where he is, so I hope he wears his iron underpants to the hearing.

[MuckleJoannie]

I can see we are heading towards the same situation Inverclyde council faced in 2005.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4601297.stm

 

A council branded one of the worst in Scotland has been ordered to seek outside help to solve its problems.

 

The Accounts Commission said Inverclyde Council requires "urgent remedial action" to address weaknesses in its leadership and direction.

 

Public Services Minister Tom McCabe said the findings were "completely unacceptable" and urged the council to tackle its failings.

 

Council leader Alan Blair said it had drawn up a recovery plan.

 

The commission's report, published on Thursday, said Inverclyde needed better leadership, more consistent decision-making and urged it to carry out a "recovery exercise".

 

The Accounts Commission report is part of a drive which began in 2003 to assess whether councils are meeting their legal duty to improve services.

 

Its deputy chair, Isabelle Low, said the report was the most critical so far and added that problems could be traced back to 1996 with local government reorganisation.

 

"Extensive and fundamental weaknesses in leadership and direction by elected members and senior management are preventing Inverclyde from improving," she said.

 

And from

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4251892.stm

 

A team of outside experts was brought in to help improve performance.

[Skunnered]

The main problem arises because the SIC insist in keeping control of the CT by having the majority of the Trustees made up of Councillors. If they would give way on this and make the majority independent Trustees, then they probably wouldn't have to combine the CT accounts with the SIC's accounts, and they wouldn't be in danger of losing their charitable status.

 

As it is, they are heading on a course for disaster.