Towards the end of last week I was included in a round-robin email seeking the views of members of the Local Party Committee on a specific subject of concern to the Provost of the Council.
When I logged into to my email system this morning there were further messages that totally changed the perception of this subject.
First of all it turns out the Provost has gone “off on her own again” without consulting – apparently – the other 3 LDs on the Council and misinformed the person she’d spoken to originally. This misled the members of the committee who ended up commenting without having the full facts presented to them. Unfortunately, this is not the first time the Provost has done this and we should now know better.
It was originally put about that there was a “civic event” taking place at the invite of the Leader of the Council with no prior consultation with the rest of the “adminstration”. Invites to civic events are supposedly to come from the Provost’s office but that didn’t happen in this case. The proposal was to “honour” the Council staff for all their hard work at a “thanksgiving” service. Some members of the Committee expressed concern at the cost of such an event; that a church was being used that might “offend” other faiths; that there must be a better way of doing this, e.g. special report or feature in the local papers; was this the issue to break the coalition.
Turns out the event was being proposed as part of the multi-faith week of events. That the proposal was led by the Council Leader as a personal thing not political. The Council Leader has apologised to the Provost for not consulting properly and not ensuring the “two tick” approach to all administration decisions was adhered to.
But, after initially implying she had spoken to her LD colleagues, turns out she hadn’t – at the time of the original email- spoken to any of them. Thus she’s asked to Local Party Committee to comment on something she had not got round to discussing with her colleagues and didn’t provide the factual background that one of them has to the rest of the committee.
The final straw came today (10th Nov) when I’ve seen a further email stating that she and the Deputy Council Leader discuss every action before taking any decisions – the email string strongly suggests otherwise. She’s not been honest and misled and misinformed people. She’s not to be trusted I’m afraid.
How to distract and confuse by email
Towards the end of last week I was included in a round-robin email seeking the views of members of the Local Party Committee on a specific subject of concern to the Provost of the Council.
When I logged into to my email system this morning there were further messages that totally changed the perception of this subject.
First of all it turns out the Provost has gone “off on her own again” without consulting – apparently – the other 3 LDs on the Council and misinformed the person she’d spoken to originally. This misled the members of the committee who ended up commenting without having the full facts presented to them. Unfortunately, this is not the first time the Provost has done this and we should now know better.
It was originally put about that there was a “civic event” taking place at the invite of the Leader of the Council with no prior consultation with the rest of the “adminstration”. Invites to civic events are supposedly to come from the Provost’s office but that didn’t happen in this case. The proposal was to “honour” the Council staff for all their hard work at a “thanksgiving” service. Some members of the Committee expressed concern at the cost of such an event; that a church was being used that might “offend” other faiths; that there must be a better way of doing this, e.g. special report or feature in the local papers; was this the issue to break the coalition.
Turns out the event was being proposed as part of the multi-faith week of events. That the proposal was led by the Council Leader as a personal thing not political. The Council Leader has apologised to the Provost for not consulting properly and not ensuring the “two tick” approach to all administration decisions was adhered to.
But, after initially implying she had spoken to her LD colleagues, turns out she hadn’t – at the time of the original email- spoken to any of them. Thus she’s asked to Local Party Committee to comment on something she had not got round to discussing with her colleagues and didn’t provide the factual background that one of them has to the rest of the committee.
The final straw came today (10th Nov) when I’ve seen a further email stating that she and the Deputy Council Leader discuss every action before taking any decisions – the email string strongly suggests otherwise. She’s not been honest and misled and misinformed people. She’s not to be trusted I’m afraid.