Any danger Cllr Paul Carter learns a lesson from George Osborne

Spotted in a couple of newspapers yesterday, the story that George Osborne (Chancellor), Mervyn King (Gov. Bank of England) and advisors took the trouble to walk down two flights of stairs to the canteen at the Treasury, even queuing so that the group could eat lunch for around thirty two quid rather than have it delivered to the office for an excessive 148 pounds.

Just wonder when such thinking will filter through to Kent's Champagne Conservative councillors, if you read my previous posting, you will see that here in Kent neither officers or indeed Tory councillors have quite got the hang on the difference between public service and business or the fact that people like you and I work hard to earn our money and don't relish the thought of greedy public officials and friends largeing it up on our money.

Incidentally if you wish to complain or express your concerns about Conservative Cllr Paul Carters profligate, extravagant, spendthrift, excessive administration you could always contact your local Conservative County councillor who is entitled to minimum £13,000 a year expenses (your money), for what, who knows. Thanet's Conservative county councillors who presumably support Paul Carter,  are Robert Bayford, Robert Burgess, Bill Hayton, Charles Hibberd, Michael Jarvis, John Kirby, Chris Wells contact details can be found on this page. Please note Cllr  Elizabeth Green is a Labour member who has I assume never supported Paul Carter.

Story in the Sun or Daily Mail

Kent Leader Paul Carter ought to explain £365K payment or go! (it is our money after all)

Last week after all that malarkey with Kent council paying out big sums to former employee Adam Wilkinson, the thought occurred even in the somewhat exceptional world of Kent council paying out all large sums of dosh, for the sheer hell of it, this was nothing if not improbable.

Then I got to thinking the rather bland, none to conclusive statement from Kent Councillor, Roger Gough Cabinet Member, quoted by km online in this article was interesting for the part in which he mentioned the onerous legislation but did not detail exactly why it was necessary to hand out large sums of Wonger (365K) to Mr Adam Wilkinson.

I just wonder whether we were hasty in conclusions drawn and whether Mr. Wilkinson, might have been placed in a situation by the council, that made his continued employment untenable, in which case maybe the payment of £365,000 was compensation for some failing of the council.

That might explain why Cllr Gough said this “We are unable to say more because of the contractual agreement made with Mr Wilkinson” its often the case that when legal teams settle disputes, the side required to pay out, offers settlement on the basis of confidentiality, usually so as not to appear, to have been in the wrong, a face saving exercise.

Whatever the case Kent owes us more than some vague twaddle, perhaps the previous Chief Executive could give an account of the reasons for the payment because surely he would have been involved. It is important for the taxpayer to know if this money was simply given away on a whim, which certainly appears to be the case.

Paul Carter in my opinion, needs to explain why a council officer, after 12 months of service, decided to leave and then presumably request compensation, and why, was then necessary to pay £365,000 for what we don’t know, all this frankly does not stack up.

Kent Messengers Paul Francis also wonders if there is more to this than meets the eye and this comment piece is a bit more informed than mine. Its worth noting I recall around the same time as Mr Wilkinsons leaving there were a few other changes in senior posts at KCC which might be relevant.

ITS ALL SIMPLE REALLY, KCC WOULD NOT HAVE HAD TO PAY OUT £360,000 TO COMPENSATE SOMEONE FOR LEAVING THEIR JOB, SO WHY DID THEY? WE SHOULD BE TOLD!

Where to make cuts No.1 & No2

David Cameron and the coalition are asking for input as to where cuts can be made in public spending, well suggestion number one, comes not surprisingly (for me) courtesy HM Revenue & Customs.

In what has become a twice yearly waste of money, I and I suspect many thousands receive a letter from a cretinous HM Revenue and Customs pointing out an award of £0.00 of tax credits.

Now despite HM Customs being informed some long years ago that we were no longer eligible, they have needlessly sent a determination (with big fat form) followed by an annual review (another fat form) every year for, I’m guessing about seven years.

Now it seems trivial and it is but surely in seven years or whatever these idiots at HM Revenue could stop wasting money. I’ve made numerous attempts to make contact with intelligent life but each time the 15 minutes waiting on a useless “helpline” has never succeeded in stopping this waste.

So money saving cut No1 is don’t keep chopping down trees and sending out bull***t letters and leaflets, money saving cut No.2 is if HM Revenue cannot sort out this trivial waste, then retire the Chief Executive, Lesley Strathie and get another one, crikey who would notice.

I have mentioned this in the past and probably will again in the future.