“If anyone is still interested in this matter it appears from the Borough Council published spending analysis that the company that carried out this 'consultation' were paid £2,769.50.”

“So, after my initial comment, and subsequent replies, for and against, pro or anti, as a independant observer, I conclude that my original comment stands alone.
Oscarone three, seems to have adequately summed up the why's and wherefore's by submission, and recieved once again the wallpapering that we expect today from the amateur politicians, that follow the mantra of their seniors.
We are, ill served by our local councillors and their bretheron in the civil service, who feel that phillibustering, or quoting party propoganda extricates them from standard debate. In so many fields of politics, those that supposedly serve, serve porridge whilst gorging on cake.”

“Councillor R. Pritchard the fact that you have reduced the senior officers' by one was not as a result of the 'consultation' that could have been agreed without a consultation, and probably was.

I'm afraid I still cannot see why you needed to employ consultants to help you decide on one of the following options:
1) Sharing a Chief Executive with another District Council
2) Sharing a Chief Executive with Staffordshire County council
3) Going out to the external market to recruit a new Chief Executive for Tamworth
4) Appointing the current 'acting up' Chief Executive.

Even I could have come up with those choices.

It jumps out at you that the obvious answer is to appoint the man already doing the job, and who knows the town inside out. However, I will agree to disagree with you, and leave the good people of Tamworth to come to their own conclusion.

When you say you are elected to make decisions on behalf of the public, I would say this appears to be quite a simple decision to make. I have always believed that Councillor's, like police officer's, were impartial. They may be uninformed but they are impartial.

I do not support a budget for any political party to send letters on their 'parties' headed notepaper. What I do support is a budget for the Borough Council to write to people about Council business.

I think we have aired this matter enough and therefore will not be taking you up on your invitation to call you. I'm sure we may meet up to discuss other issues in the future. Now I'll return to my beat and contemplate the countries woes. Oscar One Three, over and out.”

“Do you engage consultants when you take on all employees??? No – Councillors only employ the Chief Exec, the chief exec is responsible for all other staff. Councillors have no direct involvement in the recruitment of other staff.

The new arrangement has resulted in one less senior officer – a saving for the tax payer – however we needed the impartial advice in order to ensure we are doing things correctly. This was not money wasted – but to save you responding again – we can agree to disagree. I am not dismissing 'a couple of thousand' as nothing'. It was however the cheapest option for getting all the advice together – most councils spends 10's of thousands on Chief Exec recruitment – we only spent a couple of thousand – were we wrong. Feel free to call me to discuss this in person.
We needed someone to look at all the options and advise us – councillors are members of the public – not HR experts or staffing experts. We are elected to make decisions on behalf of the public – those decisions need to be correctly based on evidence/advice/fact, etc….
All councillors can agree on something, but unless that decision is based on solid information it could be the wrong decision – just a group of uninformed people making a decision based on opinion, false fact or hersay. Which is better when it is your money they are dealing with???
I am glad you support a budget for councillors to write back on petitions – can I use your name as a supporter of such a budget? At present there is no such budget.”

“Councillor James are you saying that the local Conservative Party sent out individual letters to every signatory of the petition, numbering 2,600?

If this is the case, I repeat ,I think the letters should have been sent as if from the Borough Council. As I have previously stated the petition was to the Borough Council, and the reply should have come from the Borough Council. It was not a Conservative matter but a Borough Council matter. Public funds were used to fix the problem, therefore it would have been logical to send out letters from the Borough Council. This was a local issue and when the work was carried out it would have been quite obvious that the matter had been dealt with. It leaves you open to comments such as we see here.

As for the 'options appraisal' I am still not convinced that it was necessary. How do you know that members of the public would have dismissed the report as not being independent if it had been compiled by a Councillor? After all that is what you are there for. As for the Councillors they all seemed to be in agreement that Mr Goodwin was the right choice for the job.

I am of the opinion that the whole matter did not need an 'options appraisal' it was purely a waste of money.

As for the Borough Council sending out mass mailings, they do this for other things such as Council Tax. There is obviously a budget for such things. Why would we question the competency of the Council for doing something that we asked them to do, and informing us of the positive result?”

“If a Borough Councillor had produced the report on the replacement of the Chief Executive then certain councillors and members of the public would have dismissed the report as not being independent. Also, the report was produced before any candidates applied and was on the various options available to to select a new Chief Executive.

As for the letter, Cllr Pritchard sent; a copy was sent to every resident of Tamworth that signed the letter to guarantee them knowing the outcome of the petition they signed. Not every Tamworth resident buys the paper or reads this website so there is no guarantee that every person who signed it would have read the report in the Herald.

If Borough Council funds were used by councillors to write directly to every resident of Tamworth many people would be asking questions of the competency of Tamworth Borough Council.”

“In reply to Councillor R. Pritchard. I am well aware that there is a lot of information published on the Borough Council website.

I have a copy of the published report by the 'consultants'.

What I can't understand is why there was a 'need' for someone independent of the Council 'to assist to ensure it is open and transparent'. Do you engage consultants when you take on all employee's? I thought we elected Councillor's to make these decisions. It appears that there were no other applicants.

We are told by the current Government to question decisions which may waste money, which is what I am doing. Whilst some people are struggling to make ends meet our local Council appears to be putting up prices, like car parking fee's, and wasting it on 'consultants'. The money spent on this consultation alone would have almost paid for the 'Duck Ramp'.

You say that the appointment has saved £10's of thousands a year, perhaps you would explain how? As I see it the Council has wasted the amount spent on the consultants. I am sure that any of the Councillor's would have be able to carry out an 'options appraisal' and then report to the full Council.

With regards to the letter to the constituent, this was not a 'mass letter to the public'. It was letter about the Borough Council's actions after a complaint, informing the complainant of the Borough Councils action. All the petitioners would have read the result in the 'Herald'.

I'm afraid your comments do not stand up to scrutiny. You appear to be dismissing 'a couple of thousand' as nothing'.”

“Why was it thought a letter could not be sent on Council-headed paper??? Because there isn't a budget allowing individual councillors writing mass letters to the public

Why was it necessary to engage consultants to carry out an 'options appraisal' before appointing the new Council Chief Executive, - Because someone independent the council needs to assist to ensure it is open and transparent – all reports available on council website - its all in the public domain

How much did that cost - It only cost a couple of thousand to use them and the new appointment has saved £10's of thousands a year. Makes sense really…”

“I note that it is reported that 'A spokesman from Tamworth Conservatives' indicated that because of budget constraints the matter was not made a top priority. The spokesman also indicated that the letter was sent on Conservative- headed paper because the Council can't use taxpayers' money.

I would like to ask two questions of both Councillor's S. Pritchard and R. Pritchard:

Why was it thought a letter could not be sent on Council-headed paper when it was a Council matter that was being dealt with, and taxpayers money used in solving the problem? Was it perhaps, as 'weskiwi' suggests, a matter of 'publicity seeking and point scoring'?

If the budgets are so constrained why was it thought necessary to engage consultants to carry out an 'options appraisal' before appointing the new Council Chief Executive, and at what cost.?”

“Councillor S Pritchard did loads on this issue. He lobbied the leader, offered possible solutions, took it to officers, spoke to the lady several times, signed the petition himself and spoke in several meetings on the issue. The letter says the people fixed the problem, not him. He says it was the weight if public signatures that solved the issue. No where in the letter does it say he fixed it, so don't know how people jump to conclusions. He is only guilty of getting on with the job in the background and not shouting about it.”