SALFORD MAYOR REVEALS SALFORDS REDS £164,000 WAS TAKEN FROM FRONT LINE SERVICES
Star date: 17th September 2014
COUNCIL STREET CLEANING AND REFUSE SERVICES DIVERTED TO SALFORD RED DEVILS
Salford City Mayor Ian Stewart got himself in a right mess today trying to justify the handing of up to £164,000 towards Salford Red Devils' match day costs. First he told the full meeting of Salford Council that the money wasn't taken from the revenue budget which pays for services. Then he said it was.
The Salford Star can reveal that up to five staff from the Council's environment services have been directed to cleaning up after Salford Red Devils home matches, while street cleansing services around the city have been decimated.
Salford City Mayor, Ian Stewart, got totally confused at a full meeting of Salford Council today as he tried to `make clear' the happenings surrounding the controversial secret payment of up to £164,000 for the match day costs of Salford Red Devils (for a full background see here and see here).
Stewart first told opposition councillors there was "no secret deals and no moving of money away from front line services to give to a private stadium and private club".
He added, confusingly that "The money used in the stadium and with the club, the money used in the stadium was capital budget money and you cannot transfer capital budget money to revenue budget which pays for the services. It's a myth and you keep perpetrating it and it must stop."
This seemed to imply that the £164,000 was from the capital budget. The `capital budget' pays for one-off things like buildings and is separate from the `revenue budget' which pays for staff and services. Indeed, Conservative opposition Councillor Cheetham questioned how match day costs for the Red Devils, like cleaning up around the Stadium, could possibly be a capital item.
In response, the Mayor appeared to say something completely different to what he said a few minutes earlier...
"I didn't say that the £164,000 was capital" he `explained' "...so I'll say it again to be very clear. The £164,000, up to, was a deal breaker for the potential new owner, and if we hadn't have accepted the responsibility for the, up to, £164,000...which by the way, to clarify, is not necessarily cash money, it can be services in other things which will show you the implication of it.
"It is not capital investment, so if I can make that clear" he added "The capital investment is the money that we have given to the stadium in terms of cash flow, those are given as loans, we get interest back on those loans and we can use the interest. I hope that clarifies it a little. But if Councillor Cheetham is still confused, because I've confused him, then I'm quite happy to talk to him separately on it. But please be clear the £164,000 was nothing to do with capital..."*
If the £164,000 was not `capital', then it had to be taken from the revenue account which pays for front line services. The Mayor himself said that the £164,000 "is not necessarily cash money, it can be services in other things"... The Salford Star can now reveal what those "services in other things" might have included...
We understand that road sweepers and a refuse wagon (four staff) plus a supervisor are regularly diverted from cleaning Salford's streets to clear up after Salford Red Devils home games, virtually always on overtime payments. And this at a time when street cleansing services have been decimated through cuts that have seen streets left unswept for up to six weeks.
So when Ian Stewart said there had been "no moving of money away from front line services to give to a private stadium and private club" he was either very confused or being very misleading.
Either way, this shows that public money which should be paying for front line services is very definitely being used to prop up a `private club'.
The rest of the Council meeting on the controversial handing of up to £164,000 to the Salford Red Devils revolved mainly around Labour councillors backing the Mayor, sneering at the idea of an Independent Inquiry and underlining how important it was to `keep the rugby club going'.
Meanwhile, the Mayor got angry that anyone should doubt his integrity over the failure to record the £164,000, insisting that the external auditors as well as the internal Audit Committee had cleared him of any `wrongdoing'... "It was human error by an officer" he frothed "Things happen".
Stewart railed against the press for "mis-reporting" that six Labour councillors sitting on the Council's Audit Committee had blocked any further investigation into the Reds payment ...while failing, of course, to mention that the one opposition councillor and two independent community representatives had not accepted the findings of the internal audit that cleared him of any "wrongdoing"(see here).
At the end of one of the Mayor's meanderings on the Reds gift, Labour Party members in the public gallery actually clapped. It might have been stage managed for the cameras livestreaming for the first time from a Salford Council meeting. But, unfortunately, that didn't work either, due to a technical error...
For a full clip of the Mayor's speech see the embedded YouTube video or click here
* See also: Salford Red Devils could be facing bailiffs over non-payment of shirt suppliers - click here
David Cameron wrote at 09:22:59 on 19 September 2014
Phillip bloom, don't understand your question, if there is one. on Scotland they have just had a vote for indipendence and rejected it, if they had voted for indipenence they would't have been part of Britain, so which part didn't you understand about my question mr bloom. Mr bloom, England is a country, wales a country, Ireland a country and Scotland a country and all proud of there histories and rightly so, Britain is a group of countries, on the world stage were British, back home were either English, welsh, Irish, or Scottish. Ask most of the people of the above nations what their nationality is and most would say their country before being British, but are still proud to be British, as I am as a Englishman.
?
Bernee Boopy Bailey wrote at 06:31:26 on 19 September 2014
Has MR IAN STEWART SAYS AT MEETINGS .... WITH A HEAVY HEART MR IAN STEWART ...WE THE PEOPLE OF SALFORD WANTS YOU TO, AND SHOULD RESIGN NOW .. RESIGN .. RESIGN NOW SALFORD PEOPLE DO NOT WANT YOU ... Fantastic report from SALFORD STAR FOR THE TRUTH, AND ALWAYS THE TRUTH.
?
Philip Bloom wrote at 06:30:59 on 19 September 2014
'English'?? I thought we're all BRITISH are wasn't geography a strong subject for you at school 'David cameron'??
?
Carmen wrote at 22:11:11 on 18 September 2014
I travel to work past the stadium each day & I am baffled as to why I see the road being swept at 8am & when I pass again at 4pm it is still being sswept...where the cuts have hit are most vulnerable...anyone agreeing to giving any monies to the stadium should be sacked!!!!!!
?
Spongebob Squarepants wrote at 18:32:51 on 18 September 2014
A further comment of which "Garrido Out" has commented on... People in certain positions are now being caught out... The old school of "backhanders" is now being exposed. It is all now about the welfare of our community addressing where monies from the annual budget can be used effectively. Why should the streets of Salford where honest people live are being deprived of street cleansing? Who's bothered about revenue coming into Manchester from high profile games Salford citizens don't see any of that. It's Salford that we need to be looking after, and dealing with the corruption within. We all need to oversee where monies are being used. Salford people deserve better from our elected Councillors and Salford City Council.
?
shirley jones wrote at 17:20:49 on 18 September 2014
Mayor Ian Stewart is..... Confused.com !!!???
Make a good advert for them...
This wasn't about the cleaning issue, that was just yet another example of misuse of either public money or services, all of which Salford residents pay for. I never witnessed anyone being cleared of 'wrongdoing' when it was investigated, but I did see yet another a whitewash by the old boys club, aka Salford Labour party, once again protecting their own. 2 people making up the rules & changing them at every opportunity to suit themselves when it suits, and making all the decisions between themselves behind closed doors,is not democracy. Isn't that set up wide open to abuse of power? 'Ultra Vires' (legal term for 'Beyond the Powers!!) springs to mind!!! Salford citizens should concentrate on this issue, it's this that is ruining our city and bringing it and it's good people to their knees!!
?
Garrido Out wrote at 17:20:42 on 18 September 2014
I think a few on here are missing my points. As I first stated it has been eye opening to see some of the extra payments the club have received and good to see it reported on, however making a big deal out of payments for street cleaning makes it all look a bit desperate.
Stick to the bigger issues that you have actually reported on quite well, rather than creating arguments over who should pay for the overtime of 4 street cleaning staff.
?
Council are Muppets wrote at 15:11:40 on 18 September 2014
I think this is all very well done, you can't see David Lancaster pulling mr mayor's strings, but its happening. The man does not have a clue whats going on or what he's signing. Stand down your a complete fool. Lancaster go as well
?
Well wrote at 15:11:11 on 18 September 2014
There will be a very strong stench of bullshit in that meeting room.
?
Michael Felse wrote at 15:11:02 on 18 September 2014
Sorry Brian, I asked to keep to the main issue. I see our Mayor as taking every measure to ensure a Sustainable Future for Salford. If you do wish to stay stuck on street cleaning responsibility look no further than Old Trafford Ground where match litter spills over into Salford from United games. This is sort of a tradition going back years but we cannot ask the Stadium owners to clean our streets. We do expect our Mayor to carry out the statutory function of public hygiene in interests of local residents.
?
Brianfkirkham wrote at 11:45:14 on 18 September 2014
Michael - I've No Problem with the Principle of keeping our streets clean, but i don't approve of paying for Millionaire companies getting services on the cheap through our council...Peel keep on getting funds for their glorified projects hand over fist yet still we see no return - and surely if they deem the AJ Bell as their property - why can't they pay to clean up after their events? Another example of the developers having this city over a barrel.
?
Michael Felse wrote at 11:04:39 on 18 September 2014
Street cleaning is always necessary after any games (including City or United). Do we want our streets left littered in disgrace after games. Let's accept street cleaning is appropriate and keep to the main question on how much do Salford people want a high level sports visibility that attracts media, jobs, tourists to make Salford a big face of the future?
?
Spongebob Squarepants wrote at 10:49:45 on 18 September 2014
The manager mentioned who oversees the cleaning up of the rugby ground after the matches also regularly attends meetings at the club prior to match days. He/She will also receive payments for that duty. They are also on duty before, during and after ALL games of which they will receive overtime payments at their overtime rate which is in the region of £100 for 4 hours work - add this to their overtime payments of 4 hours after orchestrating the clean up after all matches and they will probably receive payments of over £10,000 per season!!
Why as tax payers - where our money should go towards local people and local services are we subsidising a private company????
?
Brianfkirkham wrote at 10:49:41 on 18 September 2014
Whilst I smiled at another local official getting himself into yet another pickle...can I offer a word of advice to our dear old council? In order to reclaim some of the funds this rugby club has already got from the council (without consultation) - instead of cleaning up around the stadium for nothing - how about charging them a rate for cleaning up around the ground? I mean, Peel could do it (the stadium is on their land - and they can't wait to cream off their take) but once again the people seem to be picking up the tab for a commercial business...if they were charged for the service they might treat the asset with more respect!
?
Steve wrote at 08:45:18 on 18 September 2014
Garrido - I don't think it reads as you suggest. The article suggests that instead of doing their usual routes the staff are cleaning the area around the ground and are getting paid extra for doing it. But either way why should this area be getting additional services over other areas? And more importantly why should we be giving money to Salford Reds from the budgets for front line services when essential services that can be paid for from this budget, like the disability transport unit, are being cut? And as for not propping up the club, any additional services from Salford Council to support the club will help prop up the club. Again, why chose giving extra support to Salford Reds over giving extra support to people with disabilities?
?
noreen wrote at 08:13:20 on 18 September 2014
thank you Steve Garrido out I am one of those affected by these cuts and we have done everything with in our power to try and ask this mayor and council to listen to us but to no avail, We all know that the cuts have to be made and we all know that this council was given a certain amount and yes had make cuts but surely not to every vulnerable service going. I have 3 sons all with special needs 2 who are totally dependent for all their needs we really do rely on the transport to take our sons and daughters to the day centres we don't have a life like you and a lot of others know I can not remember when we last had a nights sleep or able to just get up and gout for the day we are our special ones doctors nurses carers we have to learn to read their facial expressions because they can not tell us if they are in pain if they want a drink if they need changing, we have more hospital appointments than most and before any one can say you get high rate mobility yes my boys do but the amount of journeys just for every day running about there is nothing left so if we have to start transporting them ourselves to their day centres what do we use to take them our for the day we don't ask the authorities for anything we try our best to get on with our lives but to be so insulted when we see that a rugby club is more important than the most vulnerable of Salford shame on this council
?
joe oenill wrote at 07:14:31 on 18 September 2014
Surely Steve
What the film shows in all it's glory is that Mr Stewart has little understanding in the daily workings of an inner city council. He fails in any clarity to clear the concern raised by opposition and to offer to speak privately with the concerned member would in my opinion be an easy option in doing so he is away from camera and his glaring inept understand of capital and revenue would be highlighted. One other thing Steven the film failed to show his operator moving is hand in and out when he spoke surely that is where we should be targeting our questions to the real guiding light of all these decisions we see.
?
cbp wrote at 05:54:40 on 18 September 2014
hahaha!!! Ian Stewart already seems to have forgotten that Council meetings are filmed!!! What a magnificent display of Council muppetary! Donkeys led by a muppet!
?
Fat End of the Wedge wrote at 05:54:36 on 18 September 2014
Whilst important services to certain sections of the community have been cut, or are under threat of being cut, there are services that have been cut that affect everybody. One of these is the street cleaning mentioned in this article. One that particularly annoys me, and I'm sure many others, is the removal of flower beds on roadside grass verges and planters. And now our parks are bereft of any floral displays. The parks near me have nothing worth talking about now, we are probably expected to be grateful the grass is cut. But! I notice that this does not apply to the civic lawns and flower beds in Swinton, and the nearby Victoria park. Perhaps the Star can ask Mr. Mayor about this inconsistency in funding? I accept PayPal for my refund...
?
Salford Star wrote at 05:54:18 on 18 September 2014
See Garrido Out's comment below... Rest assured, the Salford Star does not block any comments posted unless they are racist in tone or could have us done for libel, so we do have to block about five or six comments per day! But we never block people's opinions from being aired, even if we find them distasteful. Meanwhile, we think you've misunderstood the gist of this article. The point was that on one hand the Mayor was saying no services have been affected by the £164,000 being given to the rugby club either in cash or in kind, but on the other he's saying that the Reds money was being taken from `revenue' ie services. The cleaning up private land around the stadium for the Reds is just one example that we know about of how services are being diverted away from citizens of Salford. This, we understand, happens during normal working days as well as during overtime hours. But whenever it is happening, the bill is being paid by council tax payers from the `revenue' budget which pays for front line services. Hope this clears it up (pardon the pun!). We're not looking to create `mock outrage'. This is actually happening while thing like transport for special needs adults is being cut. Why don't you ask the parents and carers of these people if their outrage is `mock'? We speak to them virtually every day, we know their anguish - and it's our job, as a community centred publication, to hold this Council to account and challenge its actions. It's called freedom of the press and democracy.
?
Garrido Out wrote at 05:36:06 on 18 September 2014
Overtime payments would suggest that it is in addition to the street cleaning budget? Therefore no one is being diverted from cleaning Salford's streets as this would be classed as extra work.
Also I'm not sure how money being spent on cleaning the area outside the stadium can be seen as propping up the club?
Some of your articles on the financial outlay from the council to the club have been decent and revealing but this one just slaps of desperation.
No doubt this comment won't be added as it doesn't follow on with the 'mock outrage' that you are attempting to create.
?
David cameron wrote at 05:35:57 on 18 September 2014
If Scotland go indipendent tomorrow, won't this mean that by right salford council has to hold a new mayoral election straight away, as Ian stewert will now be classed as a foreigner and not allowed to hold a a prominent English council position. and on the chauffeur driven limo if any member of the public out there see this service being abused ie being used for the ceromonial mayor to do their shopping, then this would be in breach of of what that this vehcle is for and people should take photos and send them to the star for publication.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
(3).jpeg)
.png)
(1).JPG)
