IS IT ANY WONDER ?

They say a picture paints a thousand words and this one just about sums up today here in deepest Kent, where we have all the fun of yet another election - this time for the Kent County Council.

Now I have to be careful what I say here not least because at least one good friend is gainfully employed by KCC.   But it always strikes me that any county council is stuck between a rock and a hard place - between the central government and more local councils such as districts and parishes.  The central government and all its doings arouse passionate debate about national and international affairs, whilst district and especially parish councils are concerned with the more local issues that affect out daily lives.

All of which suggests that county councils, whilst perhaps largely and unfairly perceived, are thought of as a bit remote and, of course, like most politicians, theirs share a tendency for us voters to hear from them only at election time.

My personal insider knowledge of Kent County Council is limited to the time when, in a former life over half a century ago, I worked in `administration` at the office of the County Clerk.  I had just finished my national service and was pretty desperate for a job to support both myself and the fragrant, recently betrothed Mrs. Snopper and so I was grateful for the opportunity presented by KCC. 

But the experience left me with a jaundiced view of life in the marbled halls of County Hall.  I would dictate a letter to a comely shorthand typist, get it back, make sure it was OK and then initial the carbon copy, whereupon it was passed on to two other more senior administrators who would themselves initial the carbon copy before the stamped signature of the county clerk himself (one GT Heckels) would be applied.  That stultifying, almost Dickensian regime, coupled with my penchant for minor rebellion, ensured that my tenure at county hall was understandably short lived.

I`m sure things are very different today, with the emphasis on management rather than administration, but I`m still left with a feeling of apathy towards those who seek to spend their time as elected members of that organisation, so is it any wonder that I`ll give today`s election a miss especially as the choices on offer are less than compelling.   It`s the wrong decision, of course, but I confess to being underwhelmed by it all, despite the teachings of Plato........

EVERY LITTLE HELPS....

So, Operation Stack is now in its fourth day with little prospect of the chaotic consequences being eased any time soon.   Now here in my very own Kentish enclave we are not (yet) directly affected by the closure of the Ferry Ports and the Channel Tunnel, all thanks to yet another daft strike by some French malcontents.   At the last count, there were 40 miles of lorries - about 6,000 vehicles - stacked along the M20 Motorway all the way from Maidstone down to Folkestone and beyond.   

That`s bad enough, but the less fortunate Kentish enclaves a little further down the road - Leeds, Hollingbourne, Lenham, Charing, etc. - are suffering the logjams to their villages as a result of non-commercial traffic being diverted from the M20 onto the now inadequate A20.   Villagers are stuck, complaining that it`s impossible to get in or out. 

And all of this in the grip of a heatwave, the likes of which have not been experienced  in July since records began.  There are just so many people to feel sorry for but it seems that those worst affected are the lorry drivers stuck on the motorway with nowhere to go and little in the way of `facilities.  And so it was literally refreshing to see that Kent County Council, through its Emergency Planning regime, have so far distributed something like 7,000 two-litre bottles of water and 700 snack meals to lorry drivers in partnership with the Red Cross, community volunteers, the Fire and Rescue Service and other agencies.

So well done to all those involved in what has become a genuine humanitarian issue.   Now I read somewhere in the numerous reports about this fiasco that the supplies, whilst `organised` by Kent County Council, were actually donated by Tesco - this seems to be confirmed by the photo above.   But so far there has been no mention of this in any of the KCC Press Releases or media interviews.  If it`s true, then we all owe a debt of gratitude to Tesco, which needs to be acknowledged, especially by KCC who are particularly adept at trumpet blowing.  

If on the other hand the cost of supplying these drinks and meals falls on the Council Tax Payers of Kent, then I have no problem with that.   But I hope the KCC are sending the bill to the French authorities, whose collective indolence has given rise to the unprecedented chaos which not only  the lorry drivers but also the good folk of Kent are having to put up with.   

I think it was Margaret Thatcher who said that `the trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people`s money.`   Well, I can`t include Kent County Councillor Valerie Dagger as being among the ranks of rampant socialists but nevertheless she seems to have a curious attitude towards other people`s money.

Yesterday`s edition of the Kent Messenger (`Black and White and Read all over`) included an item about traffic control measures being introduced into the sleepy village of St. Mary`s Platt - Mrs. Snopper`s home village no less - in order to combat `rat-running` through the narrow village lanes.   All very commendable and a much needed initiative.

However, the report mentioned that "the measures are being financed by the local KCC Member, Cllr. Valerie Dagger, from her member`s budget after persistent complaints from residents about speeding cars."  An interesting turn of phrase this, which might be down to slipshod reporting, which I seriously doubt, or which might accurately record the pompous notion that Mrs. Dagger might have whereby she has money at her disposal that she can disperse at her choosing. 

The truth, of course, is that it is other people`s money.  It will be the council tax payers of Kent who finance the work on the leafy lanes of St. Mary`s Platt but this is yet another example of a growing trend on the part of local politicians acting wholly in the misguided  belief that we will be impressed by these patronising announcements, whereas they might well be advised to steer clear of developing the delusions of adequacy that so often give local bureaucracy a bad name.  Or maybe the KCC Press Office needs a good sort out?

THE BEST POLICY ?..

The marble halls of Kent County Council`s Maidstone edifice have been rife with rumours about the departure of its £197,000 a year `Managing Director,` Katherine Kerswell.  A statement  from Kent County Council said: "Katherine Kerswell has done an exceptional job at Kent reshaping our approach to service delivery and recasting our overall management arrangements.  She is a first-rate public servant with tremendous skills at making large organisations work well.  Her management direction has helped produce very significant savings to the Council and confirmed Kent's position as a leading authority.  In just 18 months we have shifted from an approach that was highly departmental to one based on the whole organisation working together for the people of Kent."

A glowing reference if ever I saw one, even if it is in `council/management speak,` and therefore all the more surprising that if Mrs. Kerswell was as good at her job as the statement suggests then surely the council would want to hang on to such talent.  


Now it seems to me that large public organisations quite often run the risk of becoming too insular.  In times of difficulty they have a tendency to close ranks, to adopt a siege mentality, to try and hide the realities from those, like me, who pay through our taxes for their very existence.   And so, once again, Kent County Council, despite the praise heaped on the now departed Mrs. Kerswell, are not allowing those who pay the piper to hear the tune being played and so doubts remain as to the nature of her departure and the reasons why she leaves clutching a cheque to the value of a reported £450,000 of taxpayers` cash.


In the aftermath, the `Leader` of the Council, one Councillor Paul Carter, is fleeing the country as he takes three weeks off to take part in a vintage car rally from London to Cape Town.   Everyone deserves a holiday, of course, as he says himself, but we are left wondering who, if anyone, is left holding the County Council fort, taking the ultimate responsibility for this huge organisation at a critical time.   My fear is that Councillor Carter will be in constant touch with Maidstone as he hurtles through the seering Sahara and the African bush thus assuming some kind of `control` himself.   It all sounds a bit desperate.


He should keep his eye on the road and perhaps reflect on the notion that one of the things the good council taxpayers might appreciate more than anything is a little honesty.The very existence of a `confidentiality agreement` suggests that someone has something to hide, something we are not allowed to know about, I suspect because someone might be embarrassed.   


And so our suspicion grows, not just of the circumstances but also of those involved with such cloaks and daggers.   Time to open the windows of County Hall, let some light and fresh air into the place not only so the taxpayers can look in but also so that the Paul Carters of this world might see a little more of those whom they claim to represent......and probably feel so much better for doing so.


I know we`re dealing with politicians here but there are times, even for them, when  honesty might well be the best policy.  

DEAF EARS....

This week is election week here in the Garden of England. On Thursday, we have the elections for Kent County Council and the European Parliament and they come at an interesting time in the world of politics.

One evening last week, I had a visit from our present County Councillor, whom I had not seen or heard from during any of the past four years she has been `in office.` She smiled sweetly and assumed that she could rely on my support this time, couldn`t she? I`m afraid I had to disappoint her - nicely, of course - which seemed to come as a surprise to her. She immediately thought that my disenchantment was directly linked to the ongoing scandal of MPs expenses in Westminster, thus giving my intelligence a hurtful insult, which didn`t help her cause at all. No, my complaint is nothing to do with stuff about Westminster but all to do with the fact that KCC have squandered £zillions on self-promoting tv stations, brochures, leaflets and their own form of expenses which run into millions of taxpayers` money each year.

And all the while the holes in the road don`t get mended and other basic services don`t get seen to. The thing about KCC is that they may be wonderful at administration, but sadly woeful at management, otherwise they would have their priorities sorted out and they wouldn`t have a Chief Executive who is not only allowed to but activeley does take advantage of the fact that he can sell his untaken leave back to the Council for the princely sum of £20,000, on top of his £220,000 salary and his £30,000 `bonus.` I can`t imagine what the bonus might be for - setting a good and responsible example perchance?. So on Thursday, unless there is a Hole Mending candidate, I will scrutinise the ballot paper and choose anyone except the incumbent in the vain hope that something might just change.

I suppose the ultimate in political indolence will be reached when the politicians don`t listen to the voters any more and the voters can`t be bothered to listen to them either. It could come this Thursday.

DUBIOUS DABBLING...

Yesterday Kent County Council`s quarterly `free magazine` landed on my doormat along with a deluge of junk mail and the odd bill. Today we learn that Kent County Council`s £50million investment in some Icelandic bank is in peril. Two contrasting days in the public face of this giant organisation, which has an annual budget in excess of £2billion.

Now, I should perhaps declare an interest when talking about Kent County Council. I worked there once - getting on for 50 years ago - for about 18 months, 13 of which I was actively seeking employment elsewhere. What disenchanted me about working there was the stifling bureaucracy, the supression of initiative and the remoteness of the Council from those who paid for it and who were supposed to be served by it. It was a rigid, confined, inward looking organisation and I was glad to see the back of it. Pastures new have rarely beckoned so invitingly.

These days, it seems quite the opposite. It is forever coming up with new initiatives, it is adept at finding bandwagons on which to jump and it has seduced itself into believing that everything it does will be welcomed and appreciated by those who pay for it and are supposed to be served by it. Kent County Council has become a dabbler in things that it should leave to others. Its dabbling has impressed those in charge and they in turn are keen to impress the rest of us with the fruits of their dabbling. Hence the need for its `free` magazine, `Around Kent,` which arrives every few months.

Today, we have discovered the enormous amount of council taxpayers` money squirrelled away in investment banks and the potential loss of the £50million to Iceland brings with it the threat that the long suffering taxpayers will either have to fork out yet more in council tax to make up the difference or face the loss of services which the council provides.

So is this the time for the county council to have a think about what it is doing for us? Should it, for example, have a look at what services it is in business to provide - education, highways, social services, that kind of thing - and think again about dabbling in things like its own tv station, the Turner gallery in Margate, the involvement with the 2012 Olympics and maybe, just maybe, self-publicising, quasi-political, backslapping `initiatives` like `Around Kent,` which gets produced and delivered `free` to 600,000 homes in the county at a cost which is anything other than `free.`

A gloomy outlook

The editor of `Around Kent` - one Shelley Whittaker - has said in her opening column that she would `love to know what you think of Around Kent - write in and let me know.` Well, Shelley, I hope you realise just how tempting that may be. For in the times in which we live, we might just be able to manage to do without it. And maybe in the process take a small step along the road towards cutting out the dubious dabbling and recouping a bit of the missing £50million.

THE PIPER CALLS THE TUNE?

These were the anguished faces of residents in Kent yesterday when the Council Tax bills hit the doormats. My own bill is £2034 for the year, comprising payments to Kent County Council, the local Borough and Parish Councils, the Kent Fire Authority and the Police. Kent County Council make up £1450 of the total, so it`s obvious that questions should be asked about where the money is going.

What we do know is that there are at least 10 `executives` being paid over £100,000 a year by Kent and that the Chief Executive is the highest paid Council official in the country with a staggering £230,000 a year. However, he refuses to say who the other executives are who are in receipt of a six figure salary (despite the fact that it`s hardly difficult to work out) citing the prospect that they may be `open to abuse` if their identities are revealed. Indeed, the Chief Executive himself claims that he `was almost abused` last year in a restaurant. It`s the kind of headline that the Isle of Wight County Press specialises in - "PEDESTRIAN ALMOST HIT BY CYCLIST" was one of their recent gems.

But there is a counter argument, of course, that suggests that it is the council taxpayers of Kent who are being abused by not being allowed to know how their cash is being squandered.

And so to the national scene, where the abuse of the taxpayer is so much worse. Some time ago, the Government very properly - and not before time - passed the Freedom of Information Act, designed, as it says on the tin, to allow taxpayers to find out how their taxes are spent by public bodies, including Parliament itself. For the last three years, attempts to discover the way in which MPs use their taxpayer funded`allowances`have been thwarted by repeated legal action instigated by the MPs themselves. Today we learn that the Speaker has once again appealed against a recent ruling to disclose the spending by 14 MPs from their allowances.

And who pays for the legal action, estimated at over £100,000 involved in this appeal? Why, the very same taxpayers who are supposed to be getting the information which the Speaker and his cronies seem determined to deny. Once again, in the parallel universe of officialdom, it is a scenario which defies not just belief, but also natural justice.

It used to be said that he who pays the piper calls the tune. Well, in some official quarters, the piper seems to play what he wants, whoever might be paying him.

In the meantime, I`m about to embark on an exhange of correspondence with those who demand I pay them £2,034 in the next year to question whether there aren`t areas where savings can be made. I confidently expect evasion, refusal, reluctance and for my intelligence to be insulted yet again. But then we don`t call the tune any more, do we?