«

»

Oct 08 2014

Guest Post: Cllr Wright on a ‘Bad Decision’

guest_post2Dear Editor,

Harrow’s Labour administration is now recreating the Chief Executive position at the Council, which was deemed surplus to requirements by the Conservatives and deleted to save over £1 million of taxpayers’ hard-earned money.

The Council has a Head of Paid Service and several experienced senior directors who have been fulfilling their duties effectively for the past year or so. So why does Harrow now need a Chief Executive? Well, with Cllr. David Perry (the Council’s near-invisible Leader) working just two days a week and decision-making happening at a snail’s pace, Labour think restoring the role will provide them with the vision, policies and direction they lack – with Harrow taxpayers footing the bill.

There’s another side to this, too; by bringing back the role and claiming there’s a ‘void’ in the existing arrangement, Labour are essentially saying they don’t have confidence in the top tiers of the Council’s management to cope without a Chief Executive – which is hardly the endorsement they deserve.

Hiring a Chief Executive again is a bad decision which sends the wrong message. At a time when Labour are planning cuts to key services, it is an example of misguided priorities; and at a time when leadership at the Council is needed, it only serves to highlight the lack of it in Labour’s ranks.

Yours,

Cllr. Stephen Wright

Pinner Ward (Conservative)

Harrow Council

(Visited 2 times, 1 visits today)

3 comments

  1. mike mcfadden

    Councillor Wright you seem far too polite to say it like it is!! Labour need a Chief Executive because its another layer of bureaucracy that carries out the subterfuge and confusion that covers for them!!
    If Labour were serious about cutting cost the Chief Executive and other dead weight from the council would save millions. To save money they need to STOP paying for interpretors and printing council info and signs in a multitude of different languages. We are all in “ENGLAND” get over it. Millions could be saved with ease. There absolutely no need to hurt the elderly of the needy of the borough.
    Can someone please inform me if Harrow has STOP taking failed asylum seekers and “lost” children in to Harrow? If so how many are still here and who is paying for them?

  2. Citizen Joe

    I think there is a really good argument here about why Harrow needs a Chief Executive:

    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/oct/14/council-chief-executive-abolition-eric-pickles-harrow

    The costs of bringing one back – when the role should never have been deleted in the first place – should be picked up by Harrow Tories for their bungling incompetence in this whole affair!

  3. mike mcfadden

    Citizen Joe, I think we should all take note of your comment. I think Harrow Nu-Labour should pay the full cost of taking failed asylum seekers and “lost” children. They should also shoulder the cost of frivolously giving out housing benefits that totally changed the character of the borough. Let Labour throw the first stone. We can’t wait!!!

Comments have been disabled.