The decision that the pottery was dangerous appears to have been made on the basis of one councillor supported by her parents.
Why was her view that they were dangerous accepted without consulting those of the SLDC officers, Deborah Wright, Community Spaces officer and her boss Jim Maguire who only three days before had inspected the park and took the view that the pottery was in fact an asset to the park?
Who were the officers that had detailed knowledge of the dangers?
Why were the views of these officers who had this information overridden?
Surely the views of officers Wright and Maguire were more valid than those of a lone councillor and her parents.
Why was the decision made in such haste? Would it not be possible to consult with the group that SLDC frequently communicated with - The BUGs and discuss the problem of the dangerous pottery if in fact your officers believed this to be true. Why were all the pots removed and not just those that were considered dangerous?
A more important question is :
Why was action taken so quickly in this particular case when complaints regarding the safety of the Seesaw, made two years ago have been ignored? Complaints that described serious physical injury of a broken collar bone, and another case of injuries to a child's head. Why was action taken in the case of the pottery, when officers Wright and Maguire, became aware of a series of more serious faults in the park when they visited a few days earlier. The list of faults were substantial whilst the officers were full of praise for the pottery which they failed to see as dangerous.
Do the actions of SLDC not appear to suggest that the decision process was irrational, vindictive and has to be described as bullying without consultation. A view that is supported by those of it's own officers, Wright and Maguire who were greatly distressed by being made to carry out actions they clearly disagreed with.
How can the public have confidence in a council that acts in this way?
Surely The Chief Executive Laurence Conway needs to review the way his staff function and make substantial changes : the main one being delegation of responsibility to those familiar with the situation 'on the ground' namely Mill Dam Park
The BUGs now request that the dangers of all the pottery be reassessed by SLDC officers and all those considered safe be reinstated in the exact position they were placed - which is a matter of video .
Conclusion:
Decisions need to be made by the officers in charge and with their specialised responsibilities. Here a designated risk assessment needs to be followed resulting in a consistent criteria across South Lakeland.The views of their officers should be followed rather than random views of members of the public and local councillors who have no training in judging what is and is not safe.
What has happened raises serious concerns about the functioning of SLDC as a rational institution. Surely the action of the top management brings the institution of SLDC into disrupute with the general public not only within South Lakeland but all across the country and even across Europe
No comments:
Post a Comment