Well at least councillors are trying to get on the right side of their officers – they have just awarded them a 1% increase in their salaries and have thrown in a few perks – like loans for cars and new bikes… might be an idea if some Officers got onto them and peddled into oblivion…?
WORKING relationships and attitudes between Waverley borough councillors and officers need improving, an independent report has found.
Cratus Communications management consultants was commissioned by Waverley to undertake a strategic review with recommendations on how the borough council could develop a “more ambitious” strategic vision and improve its working practices.
Well – not before time – say WWebbers!
The review found that “attitudes and working relationships between members and officers was not always as it should be” and there was “insufficient dialogue” between elected members and office leadership teams.
“This results in a feeling of mistrust on both sides, some confrontational experiences and a feeling that officers are inappropriately blocking implementation of member decisions,”
the review found…
“The failure as yet to appoint to the new scrutiny post, which was agreed by the Executive in July 2016 and with no interim solution in place, is perceived, rightly or wrongly, as officers blocking member decisions.”
Ah well that’s been done now, and the new Scrutiny Officer is in post and then no doubt the council will employ someone to scrutinise the Scrutiny Officer to scrutinise the unscrupulous goings on at ‘Your Waverley?
The review noted several elected members were concerned planning services and HR departments were finding it hard to cope with the increased workload due to “recent losses of experienced staff”.
Well we can agree with that, because we hear from them from time to time – brave souls happy to dish the dirty swept under Waverley’s carpets!
Four key priorities were identified:
- Firstly, directors heading Waverley’s service areas, should lead a “programme of cultural change” with a focus on strategic rather than operational matters;
- secondly, the council’s strategic ambitions should focus more on “place-shaping, economic development and income generation”;
Certainly got hat one of to a brilliant start! Grab a few leases from the elderly of the parishes – including Cranleigh, Farncombe – and Haslemere! Breach planning rules, and then give themselves retrospective planning permission at the Farnham Memorial Hall. We could go on… and on…! Do as much business as they can invoking Procedural Rule 20 of The Local Government Act 1972 – whenever possible and go behind:
To make decisions which they don’t want the voting fodder to know anything about!
- thirdly, the council should develop a new medium-term economic strategy and a series of town centre master plans;
Watch out over there in the East- some councillors says they would like to “redesign Cranleigh” and there were we thinking they already had!!
- and fourthly, the council should strengthen its partnerships for the benefit of Waverley’s residents.
Waverley leader Farnham councillor Julia Potts, who chairs the Executive, said: “This is a detailed action plan with a number of recommendations. One of the major influences is cultural change and I am very keen we embrace that. This is ultimately for the good of residents who we are here to serve.”
Haslemere councillor Jim Edwards said: “This is something we have needed for a long time. The review has identified areas we need to improve. It’s a dynamic process. What has been addressed are a lot of concerns that residents have raised over the past few years.”
WW. You condemned POW – for saying it was not right for Substitute Councillors to vote on the DP application and yet you also say it was unfair that Liz Townsend was NOT allowed to vote on the Cranleigh Application. Councillor Hyman tried to raise the issue of clarity on this issue last night and was all but Ignored by Ms Potts – who continued to be both rude and dismissive of him
She had to catch herself on a number of occasions to remember he IS a COUNCILLOR and a good and honest one from what I can see. More like him PLEASE!
The situation with Councillor Townsend is slightly different. If we can explain..
On the death of Councillor Brian Ellis there was a by-election during which Clr T was elected. However, his place was not filled on the JP Committee. So this left Cranleigh with three representatives – two of whom(J and S Stennett) declared a pecuniary interest. So this left Cranleigh with only one lone voice – that of Councillor Foryszewski. Cllr Townsend was not seeking substitution but her rightful place on the JPC! Which she is still waiting for? Why?
You are oh! so right about Councillor Hyman – he is treated by Gone to Potts as if he has been scraped from the bottom of her shoes! What is worse – his questions are never answered, he is told not to criticise officers/colleagues and yet – SOME officers and councillors can criticise him with impunity. It is obvious to all that Councillor Hyman is a thorn in Waverley’s side which it wishes could be extracted.
More like him – YES – the whole borough needs a Jerry – and not the one we frequently put in a chamber pot!
I totally agree Liz Townsend should be elected onto the JPC and it is a disgrace that she hasn’t been, How long does it take? I am just appalled. We have little enough representation on the JPC in the East as it is – As I said MANY MANY (groan) months or is it years ago ???? That I so didn’t want a split in the Borough between East & West and it benefits NONE – but I am afraid we do now.
Cranleigh feel totally trashed by some of the developments that have been approved. As I have said on many occasions; Farnham, Godalming and Haslemere etc.. have the BENEFIT of GREEN BELT we do NOT here in the East due to the fact we are Rural
Green Belt does not mean Better land it is Land which has been designated to prevent Settlements joining up – Green Belt is effectively a BUFFER ZONE. – If we can bear that in mind it will prevent some of the misconceptions that people seem to have about the importance of the actual quality of the land.- We are potentially losing Agricultural Land and AGLV land that doesn’t seem to have the same importance to WBC
I will be looking seriously about my options for the Elections in May and I hope others register a Protest Vote too – about time – they all need a kick up the A***
We wish we were confident that we will not end up with more of the same- but sadly history shows that it will be the same old, same old! Look at what they are putting up for the SCC seat over there in the East – Andrew Povey former leader of Surrey County Council. The same man in whom the TT’s took a vote of no confidence – you watch this space – he’ll be back?
Well It is about time we had a “Protest Vote” for the CC Elections – WBC councillors – I voted for my Local Councillor because I think he is a decent Man (despite recent disagreements- on another matter) – I can’t help but notice an apathy recently – I think Locals are so fed up with all of this – They will either Suck & see or leave – A lady I met today – said she has had enough and is moving to the South West – Just fed up with all the developments – Sad as she seemed a lovely lady
I don’t think people that moved here for a different Peaceful life after living in various cities will necessarily leave – But I think a lot less Will move here and that will cost this area. Some Locals may not like in-fill from Newbies – But someone has to fill the gap of disillusioned Leavers
We here at the Waverley Web who really do care about the future of this lovely borough are very, very sad. Yes, we hear from people who intend to leave, and are putting their properties on the market, others are saying if you can’t beat them – join them,and are putting in planning applications on every dot and sniff in the hope they too can get out! But We at the WW are going nowhere – until the fat lady sings – and she aint singing yet!!