Nick
Administrator
There is one from a council employee that says it?
Page 40 here - http://democraticservices.coventry.gov.uk/documents/s26521/Appendix 5b Documents.pdf
Weber Shandwick emails now being read out. This is advice being offered to parties.Talk of a “media war” from Weber Shandwick employee. No responses from council ACL included in these extracts.
Sisu lawyer Ms Morris: “It’s quite surprising talking about going on the attack with Sisu when they were still in negotiations.”
Sisu lawyer reads from comments of Alan Edward Higgs Charity trustee who said Weber Shandwick supplied “papers, all sorts of things”.
She adds, “no doubt the council had access to all of these.”
Coun Lucas raises her eyebrows at this remark.
Point 13...it says that AL was Chair of the ACL Shareholder Panel which she took up before she became Leader of the Council. Is there a conflict of interests here? If she was chair of that panel, is she likely to have been a shareholder in ACL?
After the sale of the Ricoh to Wasps, did the shareholders see any payments from Wasps in relation to the purchase?
For the benefit of legal eagles reading this forum, I'm not suggesting bungs or the sort but....just asking the questions to clarify my understanding.
She'd have been there as a rep of CCC - the shareholder in question.
Les Reid 1 minute ago NEW: email by coventrycc chief/Ricoh director Reeves to Weber Shandwick Jan '13. "Had constructive discusn with Cov Tel editor so all good"
That doesn't sound too good, does it?
So I blatantly haven't got Hill83's gif skills.
Anyway, interesting to hear Mr Gilberts views on things. To be fair, I've always appreciated his efforts on coming on here and putting across as much as he can, despite thinking that the CT has been far too pro-Wasps and happy to pee on our parade. I do get that isn't necessarily Simons agenda though.
I'd assume that these discussions where they acted as a neutral party were above his head?
Coun Mutton says quote about “greed running through Sisu’s DNA” was actually him quoting Bob Ainsworth who had made those comments with Parliamentary privilege in the House of Commons.He adds: “Why are they referring to independent witnesses when Mr Barber was an advisor for ARVO and certainly not independent.”
He adds the AEG representative was also not independent as he had business incentives to work with Sisu.
Sisu’s lawyer says she believes Mr Barber, an advisor to Sisu company ARVO at the time, was independent. She adds Mr Goacher should have interviewed Mr Barber.
John Mutton says: “You tried to make a big play of ‘bad faith’.
“Can you explain why when we were in a position of negotiation, you were going down a different avenue of travel? Would you explain why in a period of negotiation Sisu had made bids to Yorkshire Bank in December?”
“Never” replies Sisu’s lawyer.
I think above his pay grade!
Yeah, I expect so as well but would he have known anything at all? Not trying to dig him out here btw.
Coun Mutton asks Sisu lawyer if she can accept some people felt the council needed to respond when Tim Fisher, CCFC chief executive at the time, was making negative comments in the press at the time.
“No” replies Sisu’s lawyer.
Coun Mutton replies: “So what’s good for one isn’t for another?”
Coun Linda Bigham indicates Sisu’s lawyer seems to be presenting presumptions as a result of heavily redacted emails, but suggests she “can’t see” some of what is being suggested.
Sisu’s lawyer says the full unredacted versions are in the possession of Coventry City Council so could be made available.
Still seems like he is justifying what happened rather than saying it didn't happen?
It is absolutely true that SISU is a predator with greed running through its DNA
There is one from a council employee that says it?
Page 40 here - http://democraticservices.coventry.gov.uk/documents/s26521/Appendix 5b Documents.pdf
Coun Lucas raises her eyebrows at this remark.
Mr Goacher suggests that Sisu’s complaint that they have suffered losses provides an insight into the motives for the complaint and underlines a lack of understanding of the process.
He said: “Despite no evidence of loss being provided to support the allegations of damages they have suffered, there’s no ability for the council to award compensation through this procedure.
“This provides insight into their motives and demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of this process.”
Report author Mr Goacher says he doesn’t feel Sisu have understood the complaints regime.
He adds: “they have demonstrated a lack of understanding of the very narrow parameters we have to consider.
“Clearly the complainant doesn’t like what has been done, but the question for you is whether you can make findings on the complaints that have actually been made.”
Council hired investigator now defends his work. Says it complied with standards regime for England &he had discretion as to a fair protocol
(2of2)council hired investigator Goacher: "was difficult to nail down what complainants were complaining of & how it related to 2 (leaders)"
Chair Coun Clifford asks how Sisu lawyer feels the council’s code of conduct has been breached by comments made by councillors - reference to “Sisu greed” highlighted.
She replies “some of the marks are highly defamatory, the code talks about respect”.
Coun Clifford pushes the point.
She replies the code says “always treat people with respect”.
So is the Mr Goacher the one making the final decision? He's firing out headlocks at the moment.
mr goacher said there was nothing in the evidence to support allegations that coun mutton had behaved in a “sexist” way
he adds: “you would have thought if this was as distressing as the complainants say they would have been able to provide something specific.
“they may say they can’t be expected to remember things from three years ago. But that’s the risk you take when you wait three years to make a complaint
Mr goacher has also laid into the credibility of sisu’s complaint, citing a hug between coun mutton and joy seppala at the end of a meeting where coun mutton was alleged to have been “aggressive” and “sexist"
he said: “i can understand the difficulty in raising concerns at the time of the meeting, or immediately afterwards. But is it reasonable or credible not to raise it for three years? Or to hug at the end of the meeting? It’s my submission that lacks credibility.”
We’re back underway. Mr Goacher says he has summed up his report in a “slightly unusual way”.
He said this was because usually it’s fairly easy to address the nature of the complaint, but this was not the case this time.
He said: “With this complaint it has sometimes been difficult to understand exactly what the complainants are complaining about and how they relate to the two councillors and, even more, how that amounts to a breach of the code of conduct.”
(3of3) Goacher says reeves west Collingham all accept dealings with Weber Shandwick but on ACL side. But collingham is Council PR, not ACL
(4of4)he adds if reasonable suspicions over complaint,he'd have sought evidence but none to link 2 leaders. Er - Commane email for starters?
Another Les Reid article, no bias there then :thinking about:
Mr Goacher said: “I don’t think the council officials have ever denied being in contact with Weber Shandwick, albeit through ACL.”
In relation to the councillors’ denial of being involved in a targeted media campaign, he said: “I don’t think there’s any reasonable grounds for suggesting they’re lying
“The complainants haven’t raised a reasonable link to suggest there was that involvement. They’ve provided a lot of evidence about Weber Shandwick but held back other documents and seemingly expected me to guess some information
“That’s not how I would expect these proceedings to work, and certainly not how its worked with other complainants.”
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?