The Accounts Commission

[Kavi Ugl]

Oh no......I ken wir SIC needs a peerie bit of a shake up but to draft in a bunch of teuchters from Scotland is a disaster.

 

Who says they're doing things right anyway, and what is this superior standard that we should be aiming for?. As far as I'm concerned yon councils sooth are as bad as anything and yet in typical Shetland style we go looking sooth as if it was the best thing since sliced bread.

 

I'll bet they were only too happy to give their "advice"...

 

http://www.shetland-news.co.uk/2010/October/news/Council%20overhaul%20gets%20national%20dimension.htm

[Ghostrider]

^^ Wir councillors wid do weel ta mind on dat hit wiz shipping in a Scot no muckle mair is twal munt syn syne ta tell dem foo ta do things, dat finally sank dem.

 

No sayin a hame aboot een wid a been a gret dale better, bit b'god if dey hed da abeelity ta wauk upoa twa legs an no fower, dey cud a dun nae waar.

[jz]

Is Jonathan Wills somewhat disingenuous?

 

Shetland News, July 2010

 

On Thursday Dr Wills said it was the chilling report by depute chief executive Hazel Sutherland into the council’s future that convinced him it was time to make peace with the convener.

 

“After the hearing on Tuesday I went home and read Hazel Sutherland’s report and it really is quite shocking. I slept on it and reflected and I thought it was time to put personal and policy differences aside because we have to concentrate on getting the budget back under control,†he said.

 

“Sandy and I are very old friends, we have known each other over 40 years and got along fine. We parted company over the Anderson High School and my criticisms over the handling of Dave Clark, but I have said what I have to say about that and it’s been considered by the ethical standards commission and by Audit Scotland, and now it’s being considered by the Accounts Commission.

 

“We have had our disputes but these disputes must end. This is politics and we have to move on and deal with the next problem, remembering that we are in this situation because a bunch of bankers and speculators stole the people’s money.â€

 

Now today he is reported in the Shetland Times as saying

 

... I can only marvel at the depths to which this rudderless ship has sunk. The lack of leadership by those elected to lead us is truly pitiful and beyond parody. It is becoming embarrassing.

 

“Some of us intend to stand for re-election in May 2012 although I can understand why others might wish to pack it in. We have the right, meantime, to expect our reputations to be defended by the convener and vice-convener, who are paid extra money precisely because they are supposed to lead the council (and carry the can). They are not leading it. In fact they have abdicated their responsibility to protect us. Instead, we have this meaningless waffle about us all being leaders.â€

 

Bearing in mind his recent attack on Shetlink re Greenpeace it appears he reads (some of) the content posted here. Would you please explain your volte face, Dr Wills?

[Spinner72]

^^ That is absolutely typical of Wills endless contradicting of himself depending on who is listening and how he is feeling at any particular time.

 

This is far from new and is a good example of why I have always found it incredibile that so many otherwise sane and intelligent people seem to support blindly support him and his actions.

 

Let us not forget come election time that the ultimate cost of the Clark affair (and the rest, still ongoing) falls squarely at Wills and Robinsons feet. Only the swift negotiations by the convenor and officials prevented it potentially costing us considerably more.

[Guest Anonymous]

no spinner the fault lies squarely with those that head hunted clark and shimmied him into the job without doing a comprehensive check on his background and ability.

[jz]

^^ I don't believe there is any evidence that Dave Clark was headhunted. He applied for the post of CE which was nationally advertised.

 

BdH, can you demonstrate that Mr Clark was headhunted?

[Spinner72]

How Clark was found and appointed (which was by the full council, of which Wills is a part remember), and for that matter Clarks performancy at any stage, has absolutely no bearing on the facts surrounding his dismissal and the financial costs incurred because of Wills actions, which are ongoing lets not forget. They didn't stop with the Clark payoff!

 

It was only a mater of time before the idiocy began again, but lets hope this time the public will be less blinded by the tabloidesqe BS and see whats really going on.

[WiiMan]

...the ultimate cost of the Clark affair (and the rest, still ongoing) falls squarely at Wills and Robinsons feet.

 

You really don'tlike those guys do ya Spinner?

[Ghostrider]

While I don't agree with everything Wills is saying in that report, I can have some sympathy for some of what he's saying.

 

Fine and well, Wills undertook to put differences between Sandy and himself behind them, so that the future best interests for the place could be best served. That was around three months ago, and while it may be little, credit though where its due, he's said nothing during those three months contrary to that.

 

Remember however, that the undertaking was given by Wills on the back of numerous "bleak" reports being presented to the council, not least of which was the Accounts Commission one. Among the numerous criticisms they made, two stood out clearly: a) The council as a collective body had made poor and inconsistent decisions, and The council had an extremely weak leadersip. Both of which a lot of Shetlanders had known for quite some time.

 

During the last three months there has at least been a few "right" noises made now and again, and a few decisions taken that could be said to be starting to address the shortcomings of the council as a collective body. Only time will tell if it does any good, and if they can keep it up though. The hole they've dug for themselves is going to take a helluva lot of climbing out of.

 

On the other hand however, what "improvement" in leadership has been evident in those last three months? As far as I can see, absolutely zero, zilch, its been business and usual from the office chained brigade. They're the said "fair weather" leadership they always were. When at the rare end of a time praise is due, Sandy is right there sucking it up, but when things get sticky, he's rarely to be found, and if he is, he's the "politician" personified, making all the right noises, none of which really say or promise anything tangible, and in any case no results are ever seen from.

 

Its no surprise though, as among Sandy's earliest reactions to the AC report was to seize on the mention within the report that councillors as a collective had made poor decisions, but wholly ignore the equally prominent line about leadership inadequacies. His sound bite something to the effect of "no individual blame, but collective blame" was very telling.

 

To get back to Wills, having given all concerned a three month sabbatical, I cannot entirely criticise him for again having a go. He'd shown willing to let bygones by bygones in the interests of addressing what had been identified as being wrong by outside judges, and of Shetland's future. In his shoes I would have expected everyone who came in for criticism to also at least show willing to do likewise. There has been no indication whatsoever by the leadership that they have altered their ways, or even intend to. In fact everything so far would lead folk to believe they fully intend to continue "business as usual". The council fell down the hole its in partly due to weak leadership, a fact noted by external examiners. Getting itself out of that hole, and keeping itself out of it relies as much on a strengthened leadership as it does on improvements in the other areas. If the current leadership cannot even acknowledge what it staring them in the face, black on white, that they need to pull their socks up and get on with the job properly, there really is little hope of pulling much from the ashes of this lot. Any good that does happen will be done by the rank and file councillors despite their leadership, not because of them. A very poor situation, and unlikely to achieve much.

 

If others within the council machine are not prepared to show willing and change when allowed three months to do so. In the first place, why should Wills be expected to stand by his word indefinitely when its not being reciprocated, and secondly having refused to change, or even acknowledge the need for change, why should he not be allowed to call for changes to be made to remove and replace the most obvious stumbling block of this council being able to raise a phoenix from the ashes rather than a puff of rank stoor.

 

I will concede though, that Wills was almost certainly the wrong person to open his mouth on the subject, given the OTT and almost obsessional hounding reputation he has earned for himself, but that doesn't automatically mean it shouldn't or doesn't need to be said. The leadership were singled out as being a "problem" area, and until or unless the present incumbents acknowledge that and work towards improvements, or stand aside and allow others to take charge, its a "problem" that will not go away, and needs prodding regularly.

 

He too is very probably flogging a dead horse though, given that Flea was after Sandy's head on a platter only a few weeks since, and was met by a deafening silence. Whatever anyone may make of the rest of Wills's speech, the one line I suspect that is indisputable is that there will be no real improvement in the Town Hall before the next election.

[Brian]

Maybe Ghostrider and Jonathan could collaborate on a short history of these events, perhaps with the title 'Flogging a dead horse'.

[Spinner72]

...the ultimate cost of the Clark affair (and the rest, still ongoing) falls squarely at Wills and Robinsons feet.

 

You really don'tlike those guys do ya Spinner?

 

On the contrary. On a personal level I like them both and in their own ways they have done, and still do, a great deal of good for the Shetland community. However the damage they have done in their roles as councillors is undeniable, with Wills in particualr clearly completely incapable of grasping the basics of the requirements of the position.

 

For the first time since the whole mess reared it's head, there is a chance for all to accept the mistakes made, and finally draw a line under them and move on. Of course this will also mean the end of the sensational headlines and individuals going back to being collectively referred to as "da cooncil" again, as it shoud be.

 

It will be a shame of the first is lost because of the second.

[Ghostrider]

Maybe Ghostrider and Jonathan could collaborate on a short history of these events, perhaps with the title 'Flogging a dead horse'.

 

Nah, I wid hate ta stael the only possible title fur ony piece aboot Socialism.

[icepick239]

"The Clark settlement" - why wait until January, 2011?

By the way, the payment was not 'Tax Free'.

Shetland has not reached Belize tax status yet.

It was 'Tax Paid' and there is a real difference between the two.

 

Gary Robinson 'narrowly won the vote' in hopefully getting this whole thing disclosed to Councillors and to the whole electorate.

This was not ordinary, but extraordinary Council Business and should never have been tied up in legalities, designed probably to protect a few misguided and mistaken people and to deprive the public of their due rights.

.

[Muppet]

Lerwick South councillor Jonathan Wills has raised a complaint against SIC convener Sandy Cluness and vice convener Josie Simpson for misuse of public funds, saying they had no authority to spend £3,250 plus VAT on a complaint to the Standards Commission against him last year.

 

Where is it all going to end? Johnathan has reported the Convenor and Vice Convenor to the Standards Commision for reporting him to the Standards Commision.

 

You couldn't make it up!

[Pooks]

/me sits awaiting the Convener and Vice Convener to report Jonathan Wills to the Standards Commission for reporting them to the Standards Commission for reporting him to the Standards Commission.