Editor comment: Conclusion of city council suspensions is satisfying for no one
THE sorry saga of the suspension of one of Gloucester City Council's key directors finally concluded yesterday.
It has ended up with Phil Staddon, the council's £85,000-a-year director of regeneration leaving – albeit with a pay-off worth around £100,000.
In their statement, council leader Paul James, rightly praises Phil Staddon for his 13 years' service, particularly in his regeneration role where he has been a tower of strength in difficult negotiations with partners and developers.
But what transpired yesterday, in our view, should not have been allowed to happen.
Business Cards From Only £10.95 Delivered www.myprint-247.co.uk
View detailsOur heavyweight cards have FREE UV silk coating, FREE next day delivery & VAT included. Choose from 1000's of pre-designed templates or upload your own artwork. Orders dispatched within 24hrs.
Terms: Visit our site for more products: Business Cards, Compliment Slips, Letterheads, Leaflets, Postcards, Posters & much more. All items are free next day delivery. www.myprint-247.co.uk
Contact: 01858 468192
Valid until: Sunday, May 26 2013
We understand that an inquiry had actually cleared Phil Staddon of any wrongdoing over a complex case of nepotism.
In our view, this could and should have been resolved without the need for months of disruption at the council, which has finally led to one of its most hard-working and trusted lieutenants leaving.
Yes, he has gone with a pay-off after long negotiation with lawyers. But Phil Staddon wanted to stay in his job and we believe that he should have been allowed to do so.
Phil Staddon's departure is being dressed up as part of a cost-cutting process. But we believe there is a far deeper story here that we are unable to write about because of legal restrictions.
We feel that an external investigation into the nepotism row should have been carried out straight away. We also feel that what can only be called a disruptive mess has not been well handled by the council.
BAKERS Quay is an appalling eyesore. Even the Queen commented on it when she last visited Gloucester.
For too long, the owners of the land with dangerous, derelict warehouses, have promised to develop this prime site. But nothing has happened.
Now, Dick Bishop is telling us he is in negotiation with Whitbread.
But this development must form part of a joined-up scheme.
10 Comments
by Ysedra
Monday, March 04 2013, 9:04AM
“No, but seriously, ajafox, are we talking about the same person?
And how long do we need to wait for the 'far deeper story' to come out?”
by ajafox
Sunday, March 03 2013, 8:25PM
“gloucester city council is a provincial mediocre organisation. it can hardly afford to lose an officer of phil staddon's talent and dedication. the manner of his departure neatly illustrates the council's lack of care for its staff combined with its attendant lack of strategic vision.
gloucester scores yet another own goal.”
by Ysedra
Sunday, March 03 2013, 4:17PM
“I mispoke (typed?). I should have said 'secretive payoffs', because these deals seem more like hush money to keep former employees from blowing the whistle on further mispractices (like the BBC forbidding female staff from going public with allegations of sexual harassment and/or descrimination).
I await the tipping over a rather putrid can of worms at the city council offices...”
by raidermanuk
Saturday, March 02 2013, 9:54PM
“Ysedra
This payoff is the one we know about! What about the others that are below the radar that we don't know about? All those sleazy deals that are cut behind closed doors where they play with OUR money as if it's confetti. You're quite right about accountability. They don't have to account for things that we can't find out about - and they know it!”
by Ysedra
Saturday, March 02 2013, 1:11PM
“The argument they seem to put forward now is that secret payoffs are always better because they're cheaper. God forbid that we should expect a better standard of behaviour from our public workers so that we don't *need* to pay them off.
Not to sound alarmist, but this is the kind of thing that happens just before accountability is dispensed with altogether, and our MP responds to every appeal with an airy assurance that he has more important things to do...”
by Judas
Saturday, March 02 2013, 12:00PM
“raidermanuk - Spot on. Also the statement "Phil Staddon's departure is being DRESSED UP as part of a cost-cutting process. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if they are using the term 'dressed up', they are making out to us, the local tax payers who funds this council, one thing (which is false information), but actually means something else? ie lying to their own electorates?
I think this should be case for Paul James to make a comment to justify yet another poor decision by the GCC - or is he above this?”
by Ysedra
Saturday, March 02 2013, 10:11AM
“It's unclear to me whether TiG is saying we need to get to the bottom of this, or that nobody should have have known a darn thing. Cover-up, or 'foul'-up?”
by Lecorche
Saturday, March 02 2013, 10:09AM
“Just a little way to go before Gloucester's Councillors are as bad as our Bankers.”
by raidermanuk
Saturday, March 02 2013, 9:28AM
“"an inquiry had actually cleared Phil Staddon of any wrongdoing"
"Phil Staddon wanted to stay in his job"
"we believe there is a far deeper story here that we are unable to write about because of legal restrictions"
An apparently capable Director leaves. Money (our money) is thrown at the situation. Case against him unfounded. It all stinks to me so lets have some transparency and the FULL story.”
by lordigaga
Saturday, March 02 2013, 9:00AM
“Council leader Paul James said: "Phil has served Gloucester well for more than a decade and has played a major role in the city's regeneration, particularly at St Oswald's Park, the Docks and Gloucester Quays.
What he really means is, its my turn for a big pay out next, so I'm not rocking the boat!”