ON MONDAY (November 8), Pembrokeshire County Council voted to defer any movement towards a settlement agreement with its Head of Legal and Democratic Services, Claire Incledon, until after councillors received an Audit Wales report.
Ms Incledon’s identity as the officer seeking a settlement was inadvertently disclosed by simple jigsaw identification during the public part of the meeting. A fact Cllr Brian Hall tartly noted without naming the Head of Legal.The report, into the payment of £95,000 to former CEO Ian Westley, is taking time to arrive at County Hall, even though portions of it dealing with individual officers were circulated to those named in it during the summer.
The payment made to Mr Westley was unlawful. The Audit Wales report will examine the advice given by officers relating to it.

WANTED: £100K+

Ms Incledon wants a payment in excess of £110,000 from the Council to resolve issues around her wish to leave the Council’s employment.
Settlement agreements are usually used to resolve disputes between employers and employees to avoid the risks of litigation.
Their terms are always confidential and governed by employment law.
They are not unusual or peculiar documents and tend, with a few wrinkles here and there, to be used routinely in medium-to-large organisations in both the public and private sector.
Ms Incledon has not begun a formal grievance procedure relating to her Council role, and no disciplinary proceedings against her are underway or even planned.
It is, therefore, unclear why a settlement agreement would be thought necessary at this stage.
One clue as to what might be in the Audit Wales report is now apparent, though. It must contain criticism of Ms Incledon that she rejects either in whole or part.
In a formal statement, a Council spokesperson said: “At an Extraordinary Meeting of Pembrokeshire County Council, Council considered the issue of a Settlement Agreement concerning an employee.
“Members decided more information was required before concluding the matter.”
That bare statement is not the whole story.

OFFICER MEMBER RELATIONSHIPS

On the one hand, Cllr Jamie Adams has seized on a single sentence in an external peer-review.

• “A set of relationship issues are evident at the Cabinet and Corporate Management Team level that are impacting negatively.”

Cllr Adams is keen on that sentence, freely suggesting that senior officers were somehow victims.
He has not, however, bothered much with the observation following it: 

• “Tensions between political and professional leaders are common across all organisations from time-to-time and are inevitable given the challenges and pressures faced by public services in the current environment.”

Or this nugget: 

• “Whenever behaviours and standards are demonstrated as being an issue, responsibility is incumbent upon the Chief Executive, Monitoring Officer, Leader of the Council and political group Leaders to take the necessary action and to support each other fully in doing so.”

Cllr Adams publicly voiced no concerns regarding behaviours and standards before the Corporate Peer Review’s publication.
It’s fair to infer– as the leader of a political group – he had none.
Even in circumstances where he would realistically be expected to be aware of any concerns– whether expressed formally or otherwise – as a former Council Leader, Cllr Adams said nothing to raise awareness of any issues.
And in March this year, any preconceptions about officers’ closeness to the papal levels of infallibility were torpedoed by an external consultant, who worked on the report upon which Jamie Adams has hung his hat.
An LGA expert on Council’s performance told members of the Council’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee he had never met more senior officer resistance to an external review of a local authority.
Chris Bowron said officers’ resistance was overcome only through strong personal leadership by individuals committed to the idea such a review must happen.
Pembrokeshire County Council, the Committee heard, was ‘not a normal council.’
The era of top-down management had long passed elsewhere, and it was time for the Council to catch up and then get ahead of the field.
As a corporate body, Pembrokeshire County Council’s old working methods were unsustainable.
Those old working methods would have been familiar to at least one member of the Committee: Cllr Jamie Adams.
The same meeting decided to defer any investigation of the Corporate Peer Review until after the Audit Wales report landed.
That is another matter that appears to have slipped the memory of some councillors in their eagerness to grab an electioneering pound of flesh.

DECISIONS, DECISIONS

While rumours of wars rattle around the County Hall echo chamber, the issues the Council had to decide on Monday were straightforward: whether to discuss a current member of staff’s employment in public or in private.
And after members reached that decision, what to do about the proposed settlement agreement.
It turned out that having had a leading local government QC advise them against discussing matters covered by the bonds of confidentiality that bind employer and employee at their last meeting made no impact on a few councillors.
This time, likewise, the expert advice of a partner in the employment team of leading solicitors Eversheds had little impact.
This was public money, and the public had the right to know, claimed Cllr Reg Owens.
Huw Rowland Jones of Eversheds patiently – and repeatedly – told members that employment law dealt with settlement agreements based on utmost confidentiality.
He added he had never – in an extensive career – come across a local authority breaking the provisions of employment law to discuss one’s proposed terms in public.
Nevertheless, Pembrokeshire County Council has always been exceptional, and the law wasn’t going to put off a handful of councillors from chasing their dragon to the bitter end.
While very few of that handful are doubtlessly motivated by a genuine concern about open governance, Cllr Jonathan Preston – who again introduced a note of reality into proceedings – said some were posing for the electorate.
Cllr Preston expressed exasperation that the Council was even discussing proceeding in public. The legal advice, he said, was clear, and the law was clear. The meeting had to go into a closed session.
Jonathan Preston got support from Cllr David Lloyd. The latter also expressed disbelief that any councillors thought it was responsible to proceed in public.
Presiding Officer Cllr Simon Hancock moved the matter to a vote.
Councillors voted 42-10 with no abstentions to discuss the proposed settlement agreement in private.
The outcome of that debate was as The Herald said it would be on Friday, November 5.
No decision before the Audit Wales report.