Charitable Trust, independent of Council

[JustMe]

^^and the youth (almost forgot to include them!)

Well said that person!. Youth should certainly be included if only because it is what will eventually become their money that the rest of us are spending.

[volvo11]

I like Shoogler's idea (above): one Councillor from each ward, and the remainder representing various organisations throughout Shetland, e.g. pensioners, poor, industry, commercial, crofters, fishermen, etc. etc. and whatever.

 

Yes please! Just because someone is elected doesn't mean there the right person of the job - as Edinburgh Council has found out the hard way on their trams project.

 

I think one from each ward would give accountability and selection would add the most suitable ones for the post based on experience/expertise.

 

We don't want our £200m to end up in the hands of loonies - selection as opposed to election should go some way towards stopping that happening.

[Para Handy]

I like Shoogler's idea (above): one Councillor from each ward, and the remainder representing various organisations throughout Shetland, e.g. pensioners, poor, industry, commercial, crofters, fishermen, etc. etc. and whatever.

 

Yes please! Just because someone is elected doesn't mean there the right person of the job - as Edinburgh Council has found out the hard way on their trams project.

 

I think one from each ward would give accountability and selection would add the most suitable ones for the post based on experience/expertise.

 

We don't want our £200m to end up in the hands of loonies - selection as opposed to election should go some way towards stopping that happening.

 

 

Good point volvo11.

I wish someone would point it out to our councillors. Two of which posted in the Shetland Times about this subject. That Shetland oil money should stay in the hands of said councillors who were trusted by being voted in by the public.

 

You don’t get trust issued with the election paper. Trust has to be earned!

And not of the currant lot has ever won mine.

[MuckleJoannie]

The SCT trustees vote to remove the domination of the SIC and Wills and Cluness throw their toys out of the pram

 

http://www.shetnews.co.uk/news/2891-two-trustees-resign-as-reform-agreed.html

[north]

Yet another missed opportunity.

 

The Convener should keep on resigning - all his posts and positions in the SIC.

 

"Selecting" the "independent" trustees is simply contradictory by definition. Maybe we should simply "select" the councillors and get rid of those pesky voters, taxpayers and elections.

 

Maybe the next council will finally make the right decisions. At election time, the electorate should remember this information,

 

In a roll-call vote, those who backed selecting the independent trustees were: Laura Baisley, Jim Budge, Alastair Cooper, Betty Fullerton, Jim Henry, Bill Manson, Rick Nickerson, independent Valerie Nicolson and Frank Robertson.

 

Those who wanted the eight independents to be elected were: Gussie Angus, Addie Doull, Florence Grains, Robert Henderson, Gary Robinson and Jonathan Wills.

[Para Handy]

The SCT trustees vote to remove the domination of the SIC and Wills and Cluness throw their toys out of the pram

 

http://www.shetnews.co.uk/news/2891-two-trustees-resign-as-reform-agreed.html

 

 

 

Not before time! Wills and Cluness show there true colours (money)

The councillors have used the Charitable Trust like a credit card for far to long. For pointless pet projects.

To which many have gone down the proverbial toilet with only councillors voted on to the board of said projects. The Faroe Islands Titanic (Norröna) And now (Camberwick Green) with windmills maybe, Wills and Cluness could get Windy Miller’s old job Where the most serious problem they are aloud to Tackle

Is which tree the mayors hat is in today

[JustMe]

There is probably nothing to stop the first meeting on the Charitable Trust once the new membership is in place considering the issue again and perhaps deciding that some sort of elected membership really is better. As for the current decision it seems to me that the charities people have decided that the current system is not unacceptable and MUST be changed. And they have enough powers to remove all the current trustees if change was not made.

[Colin]

It's not often that I agree with the actions of Jonathon Wills or Sandy Cluness but, this time, I think they have done the right thing.

 

I just don't agree with uneected members sitting on a body so critical to Shetland.

 

Additionally, I have several other thoughts that leave me feeling uncomfortable.

 

1st. Who gets to pick the 7 elected(?) members. Under the 'old' system, we knew that whoever won our vote got a seat. Not any more it seems.

 

2nd. It would seem that only 3 of the sitting Trustees get to 'approve' the unelected appointees.

 

3rd. My vote on anything of any real importance now seems to have been seriously devalued.

 

I would love to know just why our elected representatives feel that we, the people that put them there, are so stupid that we should not be trusted with a vote on the membership of the SCT.

 

Come the May elections, I will be making a point of asking this question of every candidate.

[MuckleJoannie]

A group of CT trustees want you to write to OCSR and comment on the current proposal to reform the Trust.

 

http://www.shetnews.co.uk/letters/3016-end-of-democratic-control.html

[Para Handy]

A group of CT trustees want you to write to OCSR and comment on the current proposal to reform the Trust.

 

http://www.shetnews.co.uk/letters/3016-end-of-democratic-control.html

 

Not a hope in hell!

Roll on OCSR sooner the beter.

[Spinner72]

I would love to know just why our elected representatives feel that we, the people that put them there, are so stupid that we should not be trusted with a vote on the membership of the SCT.

 

An excellent point.

 

Dr Wills is spot on regarding the number/nature of relationships between council services and the trust, and the need to maintain those. Where his argument falls down is in assuming because "we" elected them to sit on the council, we also want them running the CT.

 

Sure, at time of election previously, we knew that was a part of their role, however a recent comment on the ST website made a good point regarding the embarrassingly poor performance, indeed farcical at times, of some of the current elected members since taking office.

 

Not a good advert if you want to be trusted with Shetlands Millions...

[paulb]

whats wrong with using the community councils as a source for membership. they are local they are voted for and they will be representin their community. It must be better than using the same people over and over again. It would also be good if the council members had no control onver the fund it would reduce the suspison that they are corrupt.

[zetlander60]

If what Billy Fox sets out in his recent letter to Shetland News, see below, is correct with regard to the way in which a possibly significant agreement has been entered into by a minority of the Charitable Trust trustees without discussion at a properly constituted Trust meeting , it would indicate that the trustees appear not to have listened to any of the recent criticism of the way the Trust is being operated.

 

Surely a full explanation of this is called for? It the events described did take place as set out, it is not sufficient for the signatories to contend that there is no financial element. We've seen too many cases where Trustees/Councillors have at the time of taking a decision "understood" one thing and then found out later that there had been a misunderstanding.

Letter to Shetland News dated 14th January

 

With reference to the recent letter ‘End of democratic control SN 13/01/12’ I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiments and the concerns of retaining democratic control of the Shetland Charitable Trust. However, when it comes to democracy and transparency there is also a need to examine just how compliant the current trust has been recently.

 

I refer in this instance to the recent Memorandum of Understanding signed between the Shetland Islands Council, Shetland Charitable Trust and Vattenfall, namely to investigate marine renewables.

 

The agreement was signed for the SIC under delegated authority by the Director of Development Services, and for the SCT by chairman Bill Manson, vice-chair Jim Henry, and trustee Gussie Angus. It never appeared on any SCT agenda and was never discussed by the full board of trustees.

 

I emailed the 22 trustees at that time 18/11/11, enquiring if they knew of the agreement and if it had been discussed with them. Only six responded - two who knew of it, being signatories, and of course did not have a problem with it, and four who did not know of the agreement until it was announced at the Dynamic Shetland conference on 16/11/11. Of these four, two did not have an issue with it but two did have genuine concerns. Whatever the situation and opinions with the remaining sixteen trustees I have no idea.

 

I find it unbelievable that an agreement with a global utility company such as Vattenfall was not discussed by all trustees. My disbelief is compounded as the Development Committee meeting on 09/11/11 where the agreement took place was followed the next day by a meeting of the SCT. It follows therefore that a number of councillors, as Development Committee members, knew of the agreement, but presumably did not impart that knowledge to their fellow trustees when they sat down wearing their SCT hats the very next day!

 

The significant commitment of this agreement is being minimised by the SCT signatories’ contention that there is no financial element; this is questionable. Reading the detail of the MoU, which I have obtained through a Freedom of Information request, this agreement is only the beginning!

 

There are a considerable number of councillor/trustees who are principled hardworking members but who are being tarred with the actions of a few, I sincerely hope in the absence of questions being asked in public that a great deal is being asked behind closed doors. If trustees are asking for democracy in future governance, which is essential, there is an urgent need for this to be currently demonstrated.

 

Billy Fox

Brennek

Quarff

[PJ of Hildisvik]

How much are Vattenfall willing to pay towards the interconnector?

 

CT /VE will stoop to any level to push the windfarm through, regardless of the cost/risk to public money.especially when they don't even inform the majority of trustees what they're up to.

They need investigating big time

[Colin]

http://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2012/03/30/no-need-for-council-and-charitable-trust-to-group-accounts-qc

 

Legal 'opinion' only or, does it have some substance?

 

Short of spending a fortune to find out, I am still of the opinion that the only real answer is a full and democratically elected body of trustees.