Petition for resignation of SIC

[B/M/S]

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/shetland-islands-council-resign?recruiter=30548335&utm_campaign=signature_receipt&utm_medium=email&utm_source=share_petition

 

The people of Shetland have been badly let down by their elected officials. The last election was fought and won on a promise to slash waste and save services in particular rural education. Our council members tell us they have got to grips with the overspend, yet are slashing services and closing rural schools, but admin has got off very lightly. They are negotiating our future with Westminster and Edinburgh yet are not asking for the extra money needed now to save our schools and rural communities as “that would be greedyâ€. The historic housing debt of £40 million owed to us has been turned into us borrowing £30 million from the government, £30 million that at the reduced rate of interest will save us £1 million over the next 40 years, that's £25,000 a year, less than the cost of one councillor, What they don't mention is that over the 40 years we will now pay out approximately £60 million Thats £1.5 million a year we won't have to spend on the community. I'm sure if da Flea came banging on your door looking for money owed he would laugh in your face if you offered that settlement terms.

The much vaunted secret agreement with Total is by all accounts just as good as the previous one for Sullom Voe, in other words no good at all.

You are spending millions and causing deep divisions in the community with the viking energy project for a community return of maybe £20 million a year, if you were half as good as you think you are the Total agreement would dwarf that amount.

After failing so miserably to do what you were elected to do we demand you step down so we can have an election and elect people to get the job done, and negotiate a better settlement from both governments before September 18th so the people of Shetland can make up their minds based on the facts at hand and not the vague promises of politicians.

Shetland will be divided into 11 areas and each area will have 2 representatives one for sorting out public services and one for the negotiations with the governments. (two different jobs that need different skills) Our negotiating position will start at full independence with all the resources that will bring. It will be up to each government to persuade us that we would be better of with them and what they are putting on the table to that effect, and then it will be up to the people of Shetland to decide which option suits them the best.

[brian.smith]

Not sure about your figures but sounds like a plan indeed the first one I've heard that has some thought behind it but as I say not suree on the details perhaps you could expand on the Sullom or Total situation perhaps you could expand

[B/M/S]

I am not the author of the article or the petition , please see link

[MuckleJoannie]

 

After failing so miserably to do what you were elected to do we demand you step down so we can have an election and elect people to get the job done, and negotiate a better settlement from both governments before September 18th so the people of Shetland can make up their minds based on the facts at hand and not the vague promises of politicians.

Shetland will be divided into 11 areas and each area will have 2 representatives one for sorting out public services and one for the negotiations with the governments. (two different jobs that need different skills)

 

In the first place you wouldn't be able to replace the current SIC members in such a manner, the law of Scotland lays down how the wards are set up and how many members each has.

 

In the second place, do you have names who you suggest will be able to stand up and do the negotaitions? There may be people out there but I suspect they are busy earning a living and wouldn't come cheap.

[Colin]

 

 

In the first place you wouldn't be able to replace the current SIC members in such a manner, the law of Scotland lays down how the wards are set up and how many members each has.

The 'Law of the Land' might be there to protect those duly elected and, as far as I know, we have no right of 're-call' at any level but, if there were enough signatories then, surely 'natural justice' would suggest that the 'targets' would/should feel obliged to step down and seek re-election.  Trying to 'ride out' the displeasure of the electorate implies a level of arrogance that is breathtaking and is only (normally) seen at a national level.

 

Electoral boundaries are another matter entirely and, imho, have no overall bearing at a local level.

[Scorrie]

Rambling and pointless bluster.

[paulb]

is it how much has the oil industry avoided paying to the shetland people with there renegotiation of the original oil agreement. time to revisit that agreement after all they were conned into agreeing the change.

 

 2 has it was a rather iffy chap who talked to the gas folks think we should see what was agreed. a penny a cubic meter would be a good starting point.

 

3 how many millions has been wasted on failed/ badly managed projects.

 

4 why is the council care way more expensive than other councils, same with education, 

 

in fact the threat of being run by the scottish government may be the cheaper option. with decent cost controls there would be no needed for savage savings. 

[Davie P]

It's hard to know where to start with the wording of the petition. Does the person who started it and the signatories really think the councillors will resign? And who will replace them? More councillors? I think you'll find that's called 'an election', and there's one not too far off anyway.

 

It seems to me to be complete red herring.

[bon scott]

Red fish it might be..

But you have to start somewhere

This council is very unpopular.

[Ghostrider]

Removing and replacing the council is a pointless exercise (whether possible, or not), until and unless any council, incumbent or incoming, realises and addresses the fact that they will be equally as unpopular as the several previous councils, as long as they allow themselves to be told what to do by the hired help, instead of telling the hired help what is going to be done.

 

For at least in excess of two decades we've been lumbered with reactive councils whose role has never extended beyond rubber stamping one of the choices (if more than one was offered), or the only choice spoon fed them by their civil service, for any given scenario. Until and unless we again get a pro-active council who decide first what they want to be done and how they want to do it, and then send the hired help to scuttle off and sweat over how to make it happen, instead of just asking that hired help to tell them what they can do, regardless of how many councils we go through, we'll just continue stepping from one mire to another exactly as we have for years. 

 

The council as is, is just a nominal figurehead, much like the Queen is nationally, they have to make their "mark" on the right bits of paper to make things "legal", but its the little grey people in suits sitting behind desks in offices dotted all overm and well protected from both the gaze and ire of the plebs who are running the show.

[Colin]

The council as is, is just a nominal figurehead, much like the Queen is nationally, they have to make their "mark" on the right bits of paper to make things "legal", but its the little grey people in suits sitting behind desks in offices dotted all overm and well protected from both the gaze and ire of the plebs who are running the show.

 

We've got a council full of queens?  Maybe that's why they flew that silly 'LBGT' flag a couple of weeks back..

 

Although I agree with the underlying statements, I will not sign the petition because I think that it is to 'broad' in it's scope.  Some of our current bunch of councillors have, imho, the necessary 'savvy' to deal with anyone and, I would hate to see them resign as 'collateral damage'.  They just need to be 'elevated' to the correct positions.

On the other hand, the rest should not be allowed within 10 miles of the place as I suspect that they are way out of their depth.

[shetlandpeat]

Snip....

 

For at least in excess of two decades we've been lumbered with reactive councils whose role has never extended beyond rubber stamping one of the choices (if more than one was offered), or the only choice spoon fed them by their civil service, for any given scenario. Until and unless we again get a pro-active council who decide first what they want to be done and how they want to do it, and then send the hired help to scuttle off and sweat over how to make it happen, instead of just asking that hired help to tell them what they can do, regardless of how many councils we go through, we'll just continue stepping from one mire to another exactly as we have for years. 

 

...snip

If the right folk stand, your theory could be put in practice, while, in your mind, they do not, and you (the electorate) continue to mandate folk you think are wrong, the situation will never really change.

 

You will need a council who can change the rules, even those set nationally if your dream were to happen, and also have the stamina to use the officers for their bidding.

 

After all, it is in the gift of the council to chose an executive that can do that for them. You are the council, well, not really, rather let someone else do it and moan about them.

 

It is the people who really are letting themselves down, if your theory is right.

[Kavi Ugl]

I was at the public meeting for the OIOF.

 

A comment was made from the audience that the SIC/Councillors are cutting the very things they said they would protect.

 

The exact wording as I remember it was that they had "promised to cut the waste and protect front line services but you have done the exact opposite".

 

I agree. The huge SIC machine that had grown up, and was out of control, is STILL in place whilst they've cut things like the rural skips, black bags and closed the Pensioners Lunch Club at Freefield. Skrimping £20,000 here and £9000 there by cutting front line services is a disgrace when you consider the combined wages of the vast ranks of staff. No wonder folk are fighting tooth and nail to protect their schools.

 

Some of the job vacancies I still see being advertised are an absolute joke.

 

Instead of taking control of the situation from the bottom up they have let the Officers decide what should be cut and all they've done is put forward the basic frontline services as mentioned while leaving all the teirs of number crunchers and pointless beauracracy in place.

 

So, sadly, yes, on this basis I've come to feel that the present SIC/Councillors are indeed inept and should resign.

Edited June 7, 2014 by Kavi Ugl

[fionajohn]

unfortunately the sic is afflicted by nepotism and back scratching untill they clear out the family back office the cost of running the office will always be greater than the everyday needs of the genuine article 

[brian.smith]

For this topic to have any credibility someone needs to get a hold of the costs for the adminstration portion of key services. Ferry's what is the cost of say the non productive part of the service managers directors etc not the cost of the Ferry crews and fuel. Refuge minus the cost of the actual workers who lift the rubbish and provide skips etc what part of the budget again is for administration and management. Once this is known we will all know where the money goes