Pembrokeshire County Council chief executive transferred 'unlawful' pension cash to his wife, confidential letter reveals

Western Telegraph: Pembrokeshire County Council chief executive transferred 'unlawful' pension cash to his wife, confidential letter reveals Pembrokeshire County Council chief executive transferred 'unlawful' pension cash to his wife, confidential letter reveals

PEMBROKESHIRE County Council chief executive Bryn Parry-Jones has transferred money he received under an ‘unlawful’ pay supplement scheme to his wife, according to a confidential letter obtained by the Western Telegraph.

Tomorrow’s meeting of Pembrokeshire County Council is due to discuss the situation whereby Mr Parry-Jones and another senior officer were asked to voluntarily repay money made under a pension opt-out ‘pay supplement’ scheme that the Wales Audit Office later declared unlawful.

The agenda before councillors states that the other, unnamed officer, had not replied but a letter had been received from the Association of Local Authority Chief Executives on behalf of Mr Parry-Jones.

The agenda suggests that the letter and its contents should be discussed in private.

But the Western Telegraph has obtained a copy of the letter.

It states that the council’s decision to end the ‘pay supplement’ and stop future payments is “a unilateral breach of contract by the council and is itself an unlawful act.”

It says that Mr Parry-Jones has suffered “significant detriment since February 2014 in that the council as his employer has made no contribution towards his retirement savings as contractually required and reasonably expected. The essence of the invitation in your letter is that Mr Parry-Jones should further increase that detriment.”

The letter adds that Mr Parry-Jones opted opted out of the scheme and made other arrangements in good faith and “on that basis, leading Counsel has advised that the sums are not likely to be recoverable in law.”

It goes on to add that the cash Mr Parry-Jones received under the scheme in the 2012/2013 and 2013/2014 tax years had been “transferred to his wife who has invested the same to ameliorate her position bearing in mind that since April 1 2012 no further accrual of the widow’s pension has occurred due to Mr Parry-Jones opting out of the Local Government Pension Scheme in reliance of his contractual rights.”

Pembrokeshire County Council meets at County Hall at 10am on Thursday.

Comments (38)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:58am Wed 16 Jul 14

Dave Edwards says...

Impasse!
Clearly little forethought, little judgement and even poorer understanding of the consequences by the Senior Staff Committee.
What w3e need to see is the whole file(s) on this matter to determine who suggested it in the first place, who drove it forward and who could be culpable. As at least one member of the committee stated at the time that it was "all beyond my understanding" and relied on the benificiaries of the scheme to put the case fairly so who else will put up their hand?
Impasse! Clearly little forethought, little judgement and even poorer understanding of the consequences by the Senior Staff Committee. What w3e need to see is the whole file(s) on this matter to determine who suggested it in the first place, who drove it forward and who could be culpable. As at least one member of the committee stated at the time that it was "all beyond my understanding" and relied on the benificiaries of the scheme to put the case fairly so who else will put up their hand? Dave Edwards
  • Score: 26

10:09am Wed 16 Jul 14

Pembrokeshireboy72 says...

There's nothing anyone can do, other to wait until election time. Until then the WT can wind us up as much as possible with stories like this, but the only way to get rid of these people is to vote them out.

I'm all for the WT building up a case against people like BJP, but unfortunately these people have got in through taking advantage of apathetical voters. If you want change, get people standing in the election to challenge their elected position and hold BJP and his cronies to account for incidents like these. If not, we're only going to suffer further at the hands of BJP and his cronies.

BJP and Jamie's response to voters is that we pay one of the lowest council taxes in Wales. That's wonderful, but the essence of what they're saying is something like "Nice house.... be a shame if something were to happen to it."

I'd rather take my chances and have good old-fashioned integrity at PCC.
There's nothing anyone can do, other to wait until election time. Until then the WT can wind us up as much as possible with stories like this, but the only way to get rid of these people is to vote them out. I'm all for the WT building up a case against people like BJP, but unfortunately these people have got in through taking advantage of apathetical voters. If you want change, get people standing in the election to challenge their elected position and hold BJP and his cronies to account for incidents like these. If not, we're only going to suffer further at the hands of BJP and his cronies. BJP and Jamie's response to voters is that we pay one of the lowest council taxes in Wales. That's wonderful, but the essence of what they're saying is something like "Nice house.... be a shame if something were to happen to it." I'd rather take my chances and have good old-fashioned integrity at PCC. Pembrokeshireboy72
  • Score: 17

11:16am Wed 16 Jul 14

Flashbang says...

Would the money transfer be a ploy to stop it being seized because it was illegally paid?
Would the money transfer be a ploy to stop it being seized because it was illegally paid? Flashbang
  • Score: 20

11:18am Wed 16 Jul 14

Indeview J Hudson says...

The Draft 2013/14 Accounts are open to Public Inspection. Pages 77 and 78 contain the required Statutory declarations on Officer's pay.

The Draft Accounts are open on the Council's web-site.
The Draft 2013/14 Accounts are open to Public Inspection. Pages 77 and 78 contain the required Statutory declarations on Officer's pay. The Draft Accounts are open on the Council's web-site. Indeview J Hudson
  • Score: 6

11:46am Wed 16 Jul 14

Rerun57 says...

I agree with Pembrokeshire72's comments. However, I believe that it is also incumbent upon every council member to be "up to speed" with the full implications and lawfulness of the decisions they vote on.
I agree with Pembrokeshire72's comments. However, I believe that it is also incumbent upon every council member to be "up to speed" with the full implications and lawfulness of the decisions they vote on. Rerun57
  • Score: 7

12:23pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Bilbo101 says...

It's nice to be a clever clogs isn't it ? Especially when you have got a collection of yes-men-councillors under you that will recommend and approve just about anything you and your cronies suggest to them. I feel that we have just been 'legally' robbed again! It amazes me that in his defence has has sought the legal advice of the Association of Local Authority Chief Executives and to protest his hardship ;-) > Yes Mr Parry-Jones we all feel extremely sorry for you, it must be so hard for you milking our council tax money! Your paid well beyond your worth and you know it. How this situation arose and allowed to continue for so many years is a travesty. The people of Pembrokeshire want you to go Mr Parry-Jones, most people feel that we have been ripped off, short changed and basically hoodwinked and where the blames lies exactly for this I am not entirely sure, but as you are the Chief Executive and frequently the benefactor of such arrangements then it is you and the IPPG group that I hold responsible. I just wish you would all go so that we can get some decent people in who will act in our interests and not their own.
It's nice to be a clever clogs isn't it ? Especially when you have got a collection of yes-men-councillors under you that will recommend and approve just about anything you and your cronies suggest to them. I feel that we have just been 'legally' robbed again! It amazes me that in his defence has has sought the legal advice of the Association of Local Authority Chief Executives and to protest his hardship ;-) > Yes Mr Parry-Jones we all feel extremely sorry for you, it must be so hard for you milking our council tax money! Your paid well beyond your worth and you know it. How this situation arose and allowed to continue for so many years is a travesty. The people of Pembrokeshire want you to go Mr Parry-Jones, most people feel that we have been ripped off, short changed and basically hoodwinked and where the blames lies exactly for this I am not entirely sure, but as you are the Chief Executive and frequently the benefactor of such arrangements then it is you and the IPPG group that I hold responsible. I just wish you would all go so that we can get some decent people in who will act in our interests and not their own. Bilbo101
  • Score: 26

12:32pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Indeview J Hudson says...

Two failed Judicial reviews into Residential care home fees. (The Council were found amongst other issues, to be unable to provide evidence of its decision making processes.
Failed CSSIW and Estyn inspections
The Council being put into Special Measures,
An audit finding that officers were not informing members properly or adequately ( officers did nothing to correct this).
An audit finding that most council members lacked motivation and capacity to challenge officers in scrutiny.
An adverse External Independent Audit report in the Public Interest concerning Senior Officer's Pay Arrangements. Again apparently based on flawed procedural and incomplete advice.
The on-going Property Grant scheme investigation, given the all clear by the Council's own internal audit. Not to mention the changing of official minutes by an officer)
The Leader's very late expenses (paid under officer's delegated arrangements deemed lawful by Council officers but perhaps not "not right, proper or reasonable" by the rest of us).
The Ombudsman's report in to use by a senior IPG member of the Council's Resources for IPG election purposes.

Have I forgotten anything?

Can we have any shred of confidence in the way this Council is run, and/or the people who are responsible for its corporate management, constitutionally and specifically The Leader of the Council ( £48,000 in 2013/4 plus expenses £1,739) and the Chief Executive £193,136 in 2013/14 (plus £11659 "benefits in kind") .

The CEO's salary includes a sum of £18,557 paid during 2013/14
( £22,269 in 2012/13 ) In addition a further £4,780 was paid to another senior officer.
These items of account were found to be "contrary to law" and the Council on 14 February 2014 rescinded the decision of the Senior Staff Committee which had approved revised pay arrangements for senior officers in September 2012.
Two failed Judicial reviews into Residential care home fees. (The Council were found amongst other issues, to be unable to provide evidence of its decision making processes. Failed CSSIW and Estyn inspections The Council being put into Special Measures, An audit finding that officers were not informing members properly or adequately ( officers did nothing to correct this). An audit finding that most council members lacked motivation and capacity to challenge officers in scrutiny. An adverse External Independent Audit report in the Public Interest concerning Senior Officer's Pay Arrangements. Again apparently based on flawed procedural and incomplete advice. The on-going Property Grant scheme investigation, given the all clear by the Council's own internal audit. Not to mention the changing of official minutes by an officer) The Leader's very late expenses (paid under officer's delegated arrangements deemed lawful by Council officers but perhaps not "not right, proper or reasonable" by the rest of us). The Ombudsman's report in to use by a senior IPG member of the Council's Resources for IPG election purposes. Have I forgotten anything? Can we have any shred of confidence in the way this Council is run, and/or the people who are responsible for its corporate management, constitutionally and specifically The Leader of the Council ( £48,000 in 2013/4 plus expenses £1,739) and the Chief Executive £193,136 in 2013/14 (plus £11659 "benefits in kind") . The CEO's salary includes a sum of £18,557 paid during 2013/14 ( £22,269 in 2012/13 ) In addition a further £4,780 was paid to another senior officer. These items of account were found to be "contrary to law" and the Council on 14 February 2014 rescinded the decision of the Senior Staff Committee which had approved revised pay arrangements for senior officers in September 2012. Indeview J Hudson
  • Score: 20

12:47pm Wed 16 Jul 14

DockBoy53 says...

I find it very hard to feel sympathy for Mr Jones's sad loss of income, when about the same time as he was arranging his new pesion scheme in his own office with a few friends, lots of other people in his employment were having large salary reductions after their review. I fail to see the relevence of where the money has gone as a reason not to repay. Surely without BJP we could employ a new CX on a lower salary and have even lower council tax.
I find it very hard to feel sympathy for Mr Jones's sad loss of income, when about the same time as he was arranging his new pesion scheme in his own office with a few friends, lots of other people in his employment were having large salary reductions after their review. I fail to see the relevence of where the money has gone as a reason not to repay. Surely without BJP we could employ a new CX on a lower salary and have even lower council tax. DockBoy53
  • Score: 22

2:14pm Wed 16 Jul 14

JonnyBlueJeans says...

Flashbang wrote:
Would the money transfer be a ploy to stop it being seized because it was illegally paid?
I think, after investigation, it was found not to be the case that the money was illegally paid. Also it is not write that the WT should be allowed to use unlawful by putting it in exclamation marks. It gives the impression that it was and anyone who is not aware of this could be misled into thinking a crime had been committed. I am not an admirer of either BPJ or PCC but I do require reporting to be factual and not slanted to the one political view or another
[quote][p][bold]Flashbang[/bold] wrote: Would the money transfer be a ploy to stop it being seized because it was illegally paid?[/p][/quote]I think, after investigation, it was found not to be the case that the money was illegally paid. Also it is not write that the WT should be allowed to use unlawful by putting it in exclamation marks. It gives the impression that it was and anyone who is not aware of this could be misled into thinking a crime had been committed. I am not an admirer of either BPJ or PCC but I do require reporting to be factual and not slanted to the one political view or another JonnyBlueJeans
  • Score: -7

3:11pm Wed 16 Jul 14

KeanJo says...

The programme about Smith on Wales this week not only condemned Smith but also outlined the shortcomings of Pembrokeshire County Council and the ' best paid Chief Executive in Wales' who, the presenter pointed out , declined to appear on the programme. Why the First Minister doesn't step in is beyond me. This Council must be one of the worst ever.
The programme about Smith on Wales this week not only condemned Smith but also outlined the shortcomings of Pembrokeshire County Council and the ' best paid Chief Executive in Wales' who, the presenter pointed out , declined to appear on the programme. Why the First Minister doesn't step in is beyond me. This Council must be one of the worst ever. KeanJo
  • Score: 16

3:22pm Wed 16 Jul 14

KeanJo says...

Indeview J Hudson wrote:
Two failed Judicial reviews into Residential care home fees. (The Council were found amongst other issues, to be unable to provide evidence of its decision making processes.
Failed CSSIW and Estyn inspections
The Council being put into Special Measures,
An audit finding that officers were not informing members properly or adequately ( officers did nothing to correct this).
An audit finding that most council members lacked motivation and capacity to challenge officers in scrutiny.
An adverse External Independent Audit report in the Public Interest concerning Senior Officer's Pay Arrangements. Again apparently based on flawed procedural and incomplete advice.
The on-going Property Grant scheme investigation, given the all clear by the Council's own internal audit. Not to mention the changing of official minutes by an officer)
The Leader's very late expenses (paid under officer's delegated arrangements deemed lawful by Council officers but perhaps not "not right, proper or reasonable" by the rest of us).
The Ombudsman's report in to use by a senior IPG member of the Council's Resources for IPG election purposes.

Have I forgotten anything?

Can we have any shred of confidence in the way this Council is run, and/or the people who are responsible for its corporate management, constitutionally and specifically The Leader of the Council ( £48,000 in 2013/4 plus expenses £1,739) and the Chief Executive £193,136 in 2013/14 (plus £11659 "benefits in kind") .

The CEO's salary includes a sum of £18,557 paid during 2013/14
( £22,269 in 2012/13 ) In addition a further £4,780 was paid to another senior officer.
These items of account were found to be "contrary to law" and the Council on 14 February 2014 rescinded the decision of the Senior Staff Committee which had approved revised pay arrangements for senior officers in September 2012.
There are so many it is difficult to remember all of their mistakes, but paying £1.75 million for a 3% interest in Bluestones must take some beating. The Council's flag should be redesigned to include two fingers rampant.
[quote][p][bold]Indeview J Hudson[/bold] wrote: Two failed Judicial reviews into Residential care home fees. (The Council were found amongst other issues, to be unable to provide evidence of its decision making processes. Failed CSSIW and Estyn inspections The Council being put into Special Measures, An audit finding that officers were not informing members properly or adequately ( officers did nothing to correct this). An audit finding that most council members lacked motivation and capacity to challenge officers in scrutiny. An adverse External Independent Audit report in the Public Interest concerning Senior Officer's Pay Arrangements. Again apparently based on flawed procedural and incomplete advice. The on-going Property Grant scheme investigation, given the all clear by the Council's own internal audit. Not to mention the changing of official minutes by an officer) The Leader's very late expenses (paid under officer's delegated arrangements deemed lawful by Council officers but perhaps not "not right, proper or reasonable" by the rest of us). The Ombudsman's report in to use by a senior IPG member of the Council's Resources for IPG election purposes. Have I forgotten anything? Can we have any shred of confidence in the way this Council is run, and/or the people who are responsible for its corporate management, constitutionally and specifically The Leader of the Council ( £48,000 in 2013/4 plus expenses £1,739) and the Chief Executive £193,136 in 2013/14 (plus £11659 "benefits in kind") . The CEO's salary includes a sum of £18,557 paid during 2013/14 ( £22,269 in 2012/13 ) In addition a further £4,780 was paid to another senior officer. These items of account were found to be "contrary to law" and the Council on 14 February 2014 rescinded the decision of the Senior Staff Committee which had approved revised pay arrangements for senior officers in September 2012.[/p][/quote]There are so many it is difficult to remember all of their mistakes, but paying £1.75 million for a 3% interest in Bluestones must take some beating. The Council's flag should be redesigned to include two fingers rampant. KeanJo
  • Score: 10

6:16pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Indeview J Hudson says...

I think it was procedural imperfections that rendered the decision of the Senior Staff committee improper and so the items of account were declared contrary to law. For these items to be lawful, the Council would have to reach the same decision on the basis of all relevant considerations.
It is a fact that we have paid this money out wherever it has ended up.
The equivalent normal payment of the employer's superannuation contrition has not been made.
The Council Leader does not appear to have instigated any steps to correct these procedural anomalies. Outcomes, not procedures being his preference.
I think it was procedural imperfections that rendered the decision of the Senior Staff committee improper and so the items of account were declared contrary to law. For these items to be lawful, the Council would have to reach the same decision on the basis of all relevant considerations. It is a fact that we have paid this money out wherever it has ended up. The equivalent normal payment of the employer's superannuation contrition has not been made. The Council Leader does not appear to have instigated any steps to correct these procedural anomalies. Outcomes, not procedures being his preference. Indeview J Hudson
  • Score: 0

8:10pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Gogledd says...

I want to know when is the Welsh Govt going to wake up and do something about this. They cant just wash their hands of this and say they will not get involved in local politics. This is a National Scandal and it is shaming us in Wales and reflects on our country and our integrity.
I want to know when is the Welsh Govt going to wake up and do something about this. They cant just wash their hands of this and say they will not get involved in local politics. This is a National Scandal and it is shaming us in Wales and reflects on our country and our integrity. Gogledd
  • Score: 9

8:34pm Wed 16 Jul 14

teifion says...

Gogledd wrote:
I want to know when is the Welsh Govt going to wake up and do something about this. They cant just wash their hands of this and say they will not get involved in local politics. This is a National Scandal and it is shaming us in Wales and reflects on our country and our integrity.
Is it carwyn Jones following orders from Millipede - we tell the UK you're doing a better job than the tories in England (hollow laugh) so do npt admit to a single mistake - NHS,skools, ambulance response times or investigating alleged corrupt counculs
[quote][p][bold]Gogledd[/bold] wrote: I want to know when is the Welsh Govt going to wake up and do something about this. They cant just wash their hands of this and say they will not get involved in local politics. This is a National Scandal and it is shaming us in Wales and reflects on our country and our integrity.[/p][/quote]Is it carwyn Jones following orders from Millipede - we tell the UK you're doing a better job than the tories in England (hollow laugh) so do npt admit to a single mistake - NHS,skools, ambulance response times or investigating alleged corrupt counculs teifion
  • Score: 2

8:35pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Welshman23 says...

Hot of the press the vote tomorrow will be as follows In favour of BPJ, IPPG vote en block.
Write to the leader of the Welsh Assembly and Mr Crabb, now they may get of their backsides and do something about the goings on in the Kremlin.
BPJ is stringing us along for a good pay off where is the police investigation taking us.
Hot of the press the vote tomorrow will be as follows In favour of BPJ, IPPG vote en block. Write to the leader of the Welsh Assembly and Mr Crabb, now they may get of their backsides and do something about the goings on in the Kremlin. BPJ is stringing us along for a good pay off where is the police investigation taking us. Welshman23
  • Score: 4

9:03pm Wed 16 Jul 14

seaveiw says...

Welshman23 wrote:
Hot of the press the vote tomorrow will be as follows In favour of BPJ, IPPG vote en block.
Write to the leader of the Welsh Assembly and Mr Crabb, now they may get of their backsides and do something about the goings on in the Kremlin.
BPJ is stringing us along for a good pay off where is the police investigation taking us.
Every day another revelation about this man, I have been writing to Mr Crabb and the Welsh assembly for months. seems they cant interfere with our democratically elected councillors decisions.
[quote][p][bold]Welshman23[/bold] wrote: Hot of the press the vote tomorrow will be as follows In favour of BPJ, IPPG vote en block. Write to the leader of the Welsh Assembly and Mr Crabb, now they may get of their backsides and do something about the goings on in the Kremlin. BPJ is stringing us along for a good pay off where is the police investigation taking us.[/p][/quote]Every day another revelation about this man, I have been writing to Mr Crabb and the Welsh assembly for months. seems they cant interfere with our democratically elected councillors decisions. seaveiw
  • Score: 3

9:03pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Cymru bach says...

What is clear from the above report is that BPJ and his expensive legal advisors are far too clever for the IPG+ group! and he is running rings around them all, and has done all along.

Looking at the above it is also clear that it is going to cost a small fortune to get rid of him, whether we like it or not.
What is clear from the above report is that BPJ and his expensive legal advisors are far too clever for the IPG+ group! and he is running rings around them all, and has done all along. Looking at the above it is also clear that it is going to cost a small fortune to get rid of him, whether we like it or not. Cymru bach
  • Score: 9

9:12pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Bluestone says...

History will be the final judge......look what happened to Jimmy Saville! The truth will come out eventually and those who want to leave a positive legacy should think very carefully about how they are finally remembered!
History will be the final judge......look what happened to Jimmy Saville! The truth will come out eventually and those who want to leave a positive legacy should think very carefully about how they are finally remembered! Bluestone
  • Score: 5

10:08pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Welshman23 says...

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/iplayer/episode/b04
9mpkw/week-in-week-o
ut-the-monster-the-c
ouncil-failed-to-sto
p
This is the link from last night Week in Week out,it's a distressing programme about Mik Smith and the goings on, a lady brought her concerns to the council and he received a verbal warning. My sympathy goes out to all were affected by this monster,.
I urge the police to investigate the people that carried out the investigations , and carry out a full review to determine who is to blame.
Justice has to carried out.
http://www.bbc.co.uk /iplayer/episode/b04 9mpkw/week-in-week-o ut-the-monster-the-c ouncil-failed-to-sto p This is the link from last night Week in Week out,it's a distressing programme about Mik Smith and the goings on, a lady brought her concerns to the council and he received a verbal warning. My sympathy goes out to all were affected by this monster,. I urge the police to investigate the people that carried out the investigations , and carry out a full review to determine who is to blame. Justice has to carried out. Welshman23
  • Score: 7

7:24am Thu 17 Jul 14

Welshman23 says...

Well it's another day at the Kremlin and the monthly council meeting, same old boring agenda crisis after crisis and the voting will already been discussed and as usual the IPPG will block vote to support the un supportable.
I would suggest all councillors have a deep look at theme selves and think if these situations happened in your families how would you react.
Think before you vote do not follow like sheep.
Enjoy your day and MAKE MY DAY Sort out the rotten goings on in the Kremlin once and for all.
Well it's another day at the Kremlin and the monthly council meeting, same old boring agenda crisis after crisis and the voting will already been discussed and as usual the IPPG will block vote to support the un supportable. I would suggest all councillors have a deep look at theme selves and think if these situations happened in your families how would you react. Think before you vote do not follow like sheep. Enjoy your day and MAKE MY DAY Sort out the rotten goings on in the Kremlin once and for all. Welshman23
  • Score: 4

7:46am Thu 17 Jul 14

seaveiw says...

Welshman23 wrote:
Well it's another day at the Kremlin and the monthly council meeting, same old boring agenda crisis after crisis and the voting will already been discussed and as usual the IPPG will block vote to support the un supportable.
I would suggest all councillors have a deep look at theme selves and think if these situations happened in your families how would you react.
Think before you vote do not follow like sheep.
Enjoy your day and MAKE MY DAY Sort out the rotten goings on in the Kremlin once and for all.
I agree totally this arrogant, selfopiniated man has to be told to go. How he walk the streets of Pembrokeshire its hard to ,The catalogue of errors that have accrued until his so called administration is unbelievable, i think cooperative liabilty is the word and he as the head is responsible.
[quote][p][bold]Welshman23[/bold] wrote: Well it's another day at the Kremlin and the monthly council meeting, same old boring agenda crisis after crisis and the voting will already been discussed and as usual the IPPG will block vote to support the un supportable. I would suggest all councillors have a deep look at theme selves and think if these situations happened in your families how would you react. Think before you vote do not follow like sheep. Enjoy your day and MAKE MY DAY Sort out the rotten goings on in the Kremlin once and for all.[/p][/quote]I agree totally this arrogant, selfopiniated man has to be told to go. How he walk the streets of Pembrokeshire its hard to ,The catalogue of errors that have accrued until his so called administration is unbelievable, i think cooperative liabilty is the word and he as the head is responsible. seaveiw
  • Score: 6

8:41am Thu 17 Jul 14

Indeview J Hudson says...

I have just seen on the BBC Wales news site that Solace, has written to the Council on behalf of the CEO about the "payments" apparently threatening the Council with legal action.

At the Public Inspection of Accounts, I came across an Invoice for £398 from SOLACE for membership renewal from Bryn Parry-Jones.

Our money well spent.
I have just seen on the BBC Wales news site that Solace, has written to the Council on behalf of the CEO about the "payments" apparently threatening the Council with legal action. At the Public Inspection of Accounts, I came across an Invoice for £398 from SOLACE for membership renewal from Bryn Parry-Jones. Our money well spent. Indeview J Hudson
  • Score: 4

9:45am Thu 17 Jul 14

KeanJo says...

Was BPJs membership fee paid by the County Council?
Was BPJs membership fee paid by the County Council? KeanJo
  • Score: 1

10:24am Thu 17 Jul 14

Bilbo101 says...

KeanJo wrote:
Was BPJs membership fee paid by the County Council?
I would not be surprised if that was another perk our generous councillors afforded the "O Great One". Seaviews comments on him walking the streets of Pembrokeshire made me laugh. Has anyone actually seen him in the street anywhere in Pembrokeshire, in the supermarket maybe ;-) ? You might of noticed he does not mix with the general population and goes to great lengths to avoid any contact. If it was not for the councils webcam then I would think he was nothing more than cardboard cut-out, because he is hardly seen or heard by the people of Pembrokeshire, it is almost as if all that was beneath him, not in the job description.

It is my view that he knows his days at the council are numbered and he is happy with that and is probably looking forward to the end when he can screw us over that one last final time with his leaving package. It is my guess he is going to milk it for ever last drop he can get, I get the impression that is the sort of bloke he is. Again it amazes me that our councillors seem to act like besotted star-stuck little servants round BPJ, they obviously see something in him that the rest of us can't.....
[quote][p][bold]KeanJo[/bold] wrote: Was BPJs membership fee paid by the County Council?[/p][/quote]I would not be surprised if that was another perk our generous councillors afforded the "O Great One". Seaviews comments on him walking the streets of Pembrokeshire made me laugh. Has anyone actually seen him in the street anywhere in Pembrokeshire, in the supermarket maybe ;-) ? You might of noticed he does not mix with the general population and goes to great lengths to avoid any contact. If it was not for the councils webcam then I would think he was nothing more than cardboard cut-out, because he is hardly seen or heard by the people of Pembrokeshire, it is almost as if all that was beneath him, not in the job description. It is my view that he knows his days at the council are numbered and he is happy with that and is probably looking forward to the end when he can screw us over that one last final time with his leaving package. It is my guess he is going to milk it for ever last drop he can get, I get the impression that is the sort of bloke he is. Again it amazes me that our councillors seem to act like besotted star-stuck little servants round BPJ, they obviously see something in him that the rest of us can't..... Bilbo101
  • Score: 6

1:54pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Flashbang says...

No comments allowed about the result of the vote apparently. Screwed over by these spineless IPG councillors again. Work for the people of Pembrokeshire you low dogs!
No comments allowed about the result of the vote apparently. Screwed over by these spineless IPG councillors again. Work for the people of Pembrokeshire you low dogs! Flashbang
  • Score: 7

6:57pm Thu 17 Jul 14

chizy says...

He has a wife!!!!!!!!!!
I thought the only thing in Bryns' life was Bryn (and money,and a Porsche etc) ;)
He has a wife!!!!!!!!!! I thought the only thing in Bryns' life was Bryn (and money,and a Porsche etc) ;) chizy
  • Score: 1

8:19pm Thu 17 Jul 14

teifion says...

chizy wrote:
He has a wife!!!!!!!!!!
I thought the only thing in Bryns' life was Bryn (and money,and a Porsche etc) ;)
but apparently he has to hand the goodies over to them to keep them happy - wonder what goes on in that house?
[quote][p][bold]chizy[/bold] wrote: He has a wife!!!!!!!!!! I thought the only thing in Bryns' life was Bryn (and money,and a Porsche etc) ;)[/p][/quote]but apparently he has to hand the goodies over to them to keep them happy - wonder what goes on in that house? teifion
  • Score: 1

4:31pm Fri 18 Jul 14

KeanJo says...

The Welsh Audit Office ruled that these payments were unlawful. The recipients refuse to refund the money. In making such payments therefore the County Council members who approved the payments acted unlawfully and beyond their powers. Under the LGA those members who voted for the payments should be surcharged. I would be most interested to learn when and how these payments will be made.
The Welsh Audit Office ruled that these payments were unlawful. The recipients refuse to refund the money. In making such payments therefore the County Council members who approved the payments acted unlawfully and beyond their powers. Under the LGA those members who voted for the payments should be surcharged. I would be most interested to learn when and how these payments will be made. KeanJo
  • Score: 0

5:20pm Fri 18 Jul 14

Indeview J Hudson says...

I think that the power to surcharge councillors was removed some years ago. It would have focussed minds if it was still an option.
I think that the power to surcharge councillors was removed some years ago. It would have focussed minds if it was still an option. Indeview J Hudson
  • Score: -1

5:59pm Fri 18 Jul 14

seaveiw says...

KeanJo wrote:
The programme about Smith on Wales this week not only condemned Smith but also outlined the shortcomings of Pembrokeshire County Council and the ' best paid Chief Executive in Wales' who, the presenter pointed out , declined to appear on the programme. Why the First Minister doesn't step in is beyond me. This Council must be one of the worst ever.
They did eventually take over Angelsey Council why dont they step in here. Since moving to this beautiful county I have seen most weeks news of another scandal at P.C.C. and seen the Chief Executives smug face more or weekly on your site
[quote][p][bold]KeanJo[/bold] wrote: The programme about Smith on Wales this week not only condemned Smith but also outlined the shortcomings of Pembrokeshire County Council and the ' best paid Chief Executive in Wales' who, the presenter pointed out , declined to appear on the programme. Why the First Minister doesn't step in is beyond me. This Council must be one of the worst ever.[/p][/quote]They did eventually take over Angelsey Council why dont they step in here. Since moving to this beautiful county I have seen most weeks news of another scandal at P.C.C. and seen the Chief Executives smug face more or weekly on your site seaveiw
  • Score: 1

6:10pm Fri 18 Jul 14

KeanJo says...

Yes JH unfortunately you are right ,but Councillors are still considered to be trustees of public funds and can not allow unlawful expenditure ,which seems to have occurred in this case. Councillors who approved the payments may well defend their actions by saying they were advised wrongly about the legality of such payments ,in which case the person who gave the advice should be held responsible and the payments recovered from them .So what should be done to return this money to the public purse?
Yes JH unfortunately you are right ,but Councillors are still considered to be trustees of public funds and can not allow unlawful expenditure ,which seems to have occurred in this case. Councillors who approved the payments may well defend their actions by saying they were advised wrongly about the legality of such payments ,in which case the person who gave the advice should be held responsible and the payments recovered from them .So what should be done to return this money to the public purse? KeanJo
  • Score: 1

8:13am Sat 19 Jul 14

teifion says...

Flashbang wrote:
Would the money transfer be a ploy to stop it being seized because it was illegally paid?
as I've mentioned why not just pay him less one month?

Any one else who has been over paid will have it docked the next month but as we've seen time and again Bryn and Jamie are not held to account like every one else :(((
[quote][p][bold]Flashbang[/bold] wrote: Would the money transfer be a ploy to stop it being seized because it was illegally paid?[/p][/quote]as I've mentioned why not just pay him less one month? Any one else who has been over paid will have it docked the next month but as we've seen time and again Bryn and Jamie are not held to account like every one else :((( teifion
  • Score: 2

9:31am Sat 19 Jul 14

Indeview J Hudson says...

Page 77 and 78 of the Council's draft 2013/14 Accounts provide details of Remuneration . These are available to view on the Council's web-site, and are subject to Audit
.
The following is a relevant extract:-
"The appointed Auditor, in his Public Interest Report issued on 30 January 2014, has determined that the decision taken by the Senior Staff Committee to allow senior officers to opt out of the Local Government Pension Scheme and receive as remuneration the equivalent of the employer's pension contribution is unlawful and payments made as a result of that decision result in an item of account that "is Contrary to law".
The remuneration of the Chief Executive in 2013-14, disclosed in the table above, includes a sum of £18,557 ( 2012/13 £22,269) as a result of that decision. In addition a further £4,780 was paid to another senior staff member.
The Council at its meeting on 14 February 2014 has subsequently decided to rescind the decision made by the Senior Staff Committee, acknowledging that withdrawing the option for senior staff and stopping any future payments created contractual issues."

The CEO's salary for 2013/14 is stated to be £193,136, and this amount includes the sum of £18,557 "paid contrary to law" in respect of the equivalent S&P contribution up to the date of the Council's rescinding decision.
These figures reveal that the CEO's gross 2013/4 salary was £174,579, plus Benefits in Kind £11,659. The equivalent full year S&P contribution @ 14.7% of the basic gross salary is £25,663.

It appears that the Council has yet to resolve the contractual issues. Has it sought or been given any advice? Perhaps a knowledgeable councillor who took part in the secret debate could enlighten us, in the wider public interest.
Page 77 and 78 of the Council's draft 2013/14 Accounts provide details of Remuneration . These are available to view on the Council's web-site, and are subject to Audit . The following is a relevant extract:- "The appointed Auditor, in his Public Interest Report issued on 30 January 2014, has determined that the decision taken by the Senior Staff Committee to allow senior officers to opt out of the Local Government Pension Scheme and receive as remuneration the equivalent of the employer's pension contribution is unlawful and payments made as a result of that decision result in an item of account that "is Contrary to law". The remuneration of the Chief Executive in 2013-14, disclosed in the table above, includes a sum of £18,557 ( 2012/13 £22,269) as a result of that decision. In addition a further £4,780 was paid to another senior staff member. The Council at its meeting on 14 February 2014 has subsequently decided to rescind the decision made by the Senior Staff Committee, acknowledging that withdrawing the option for senior staff and stopping any future payments created contractual issues." The CEO's salary for 2013/14 is stated to be £193,136, and this amount includes the sum of £18,557 "paid contrary to law" in respect of the equivalent S&P contribution up to the date of the Council's rescinding decision. These figures reveal that the CEO's gross 2013/4 salary was £174,579, plus Benefits in Kind £11,659. The equivalent full year S&P contribution @ 14.7% of the basic gross salary is £25,663. It appears that the Council has yet to resolve the contractual issues. Has it sought or been given any advice? Perhaps a knowledgeable councillor who took part in the secret debate could enlighten us, in the wider public interest. Indeview J Hudson
  • Score: 1

1:52pm Sun 20 Jul 14

seaveiw says...

Indeview J Hudson wrote:
Page 77 and 78 of the Council's draft 2013/14 Accounts provide details of Remuneration . These are available to view on the Council's web-site, and are subject to Audit
.
The following is a relevant extract:-
"The appointed Auditor, in his Public Interest Report issued on 30 January 2014, has determined that the decision taken by the Senior Staff Committee to allow senior officers to opt out of the Local Government Pension Scheme and receive as remuneration the equivalent of the employer's pension contribution is unlawful and payments made as a result of that decision result in an item of account that "is Contrary to law".
The remuneration of the Chief Executive in 2013-14, disclosed in the table above, includes a sum of £18,557 ( 2012/13 £22,269) as a result of that decision. In addition a further £4,780 was paid to another senior staff member.
The Council at its meeting on 14 February 2014 has subsequently decided to rescind the decision made by the Senior Staff Committee, acknowledging that withdrawing the option for senior staff and stopping any future payments created contractual issues."

The CEO's salary for 2013/14 is stated to be £193,136, and this amount includes the sum of £18,557 "paid contrary to law" in respect of the equivalent S&P contribution up to the date of the Council's rescinding decision.
These figures reveal that the CEO's gross 2013/4 salary was £174,579, plus Benefits in Kind £11,659. The equivalent full year S&P contribution @ 14.7% of the basic gross salary is £25,663.

It appears that the Council has yet to resolve the contractual issues. Has it sought or been given any advice? Perhaps a knowledgeable councillor who took part in the secret debate could enlighten us, in the wider public interest.
so if its unlawful why does he get away with, needs to be a investigation at the Welsh Office. Iam not sure if they have a public accounts committe if they havent its time to put one in situ and then us the public can make judgement with all the facts known.
[quote][p][bold]Indeview J Hudson[/bold] wrote: Page 77 and 78 of the Council's draft 2013/14 Accounts provide details of Remuneration . These are available to view on the Council's web-site, and are subject to Audit . The following is a relevant extract:- "The appointed Auditor, in his Public Interest Report issued on 30 January 2014, has determined that the decision taken by the Senior Staff Committee to allow senior officers to opt out of the Local Government Pension Scheme and receive as remuneration the equivalent of the employer's pension contribution is unlawful and payments made as a result of that decision result in an item of account that "is Contrary to law". The remuneration of the Chief Executive in 2013-14, disclosed in the table above, includes a sum of £18,557 ( 2012/13 £22,269) as a result of that decision. In addition a further £4,780 was paid to another senior staff member. The Council at its meeting on 14 February 2014 has subsequently decided to rescind the decision made by the Senior Staff Committee, acknowledging that withdrawing the option for senior staff and stopping any future payments created contractual issues." The CEO's salary for 2013/14 is stated to be £193,136, and this amount includes the sum of £18,557 "paid contrary to law" in respect of the equivalent S&P contribution up to the date of the Council's rescinding decision. These figures reveal that the CEO's gross 2013/4 salary was £174,579, plus Benefits in Kind £11,659. The equivalent full year S&P contribution @ 14.7% of the basic gross salary is £25,663. It appears that the Council has yet to resolve the contractual issues. Has it sought or been given any advice? Perhaps a knowledgeable councillor who took part in the secret debate could enlighten us, in the wider public interest.[/p][/quote]so if its unlawful why does he get away with, needs to be a investigation at the Welsh Office. Iam not sure if they have a public accounts committe if they havent its time to put one in situ and then us the public can make judgement with all the facts known. seaveiw
  • Score: 2

10:06pm Sun 20 Jul 14

stevedavis says...

Everyone on this thread needs to be fired for insubordination
Everyone on this thread needs to be fired for insubordination stevedavis
  • Score: 0

9:40am Mon 21 Jul 14

teifion says...

stevedavis wrote:
Everyone on this thread needs to be fired for insubordination
oh shut up Bryn
[quote][p][bold]stevedavis[/bold] wrote: Everyone on this thread needs to be fired for insubordination[/p][/quote]oh shut up Bryn teifion
  • Score: 1

9:24am Wed 23 Jul 14

Health fighter says...

Pembrokeshireboy72 wrote:
There's nothing anyone can do, other to wait until election time. Until then the WT can wind us up as much as possible with stories like this, but the only way to get rid of these people is to vote them out.

I'm all for the WT building up a case against people like BJP, but unfortunately these people have got in through taking advantage of apathetical voters. If you want change, get people standing in the election to challenge their elected position and hold BJP and his cronies to account for incidents like these. If not, we're only going to suffer further at the hands of BJP and his cronies.

BJP and Jamie's response to voters is that we pay one of the lowest council taxes in Wales. That's wonderful, but the essence of what they're saying is something like "Nice house.... be a shame if something were to happen to it."

I'd rather take my chances and have good old-fashioned integrity at PCC.
Sadly BPJ is not elected but a full time employee, any views on how to remove him.
[quote][p][bold]Pembrokeshireboy72[/bold] wrote: There's nothing anyone can do, other to wait until election time. Until then the WT can wind us up as much as possible with stories like this, but the only way to get rid of these people is to vote them out. I'm all for the WT building up a case against people like BJP, but unfortunately these people have got in through taking advantage of apathetical voters. If you want change, get people standing in the election to challenge their elected position and hold BJP and his cronies to account for incidents like these. If not, we're only going to suffer further at the hands of BJP and his cronies. BJP and Jamie's response to voters is that we pay one of the lowest council taxes in Wales. That's wonderful, but the essence of what they're saying is something like "Nice house.... be a shame if something were to happen to it." I'd rather take my chances and have good old-fashioned integrity at PCC.[/p][/quote]Sadly BPJ is not elected but a full time employee, any views on how to remove him. Health fighter
  • Score: 0

9:39am Wed 23 Jul 14

Bilbo101 says...

Health fighter wrote:
Pembrokeshireboy72 wrote:
There's nothing anyone can do, other to wait until election time. Until then the WT can wind us up as much as possible with stories like this, but the only way to get rid of these people is to vote them out.

I'm all for the WT building up a case against people like BJP, but unfortunately these people have got in through taking advantage of apathetical voters. If you want change, get people standing in the election to challenge their elected position and hold BJP and his cronies to account for incidents like these. If not, we're only going to suffer further at the hands of BJP and his cronies.

BJP and Jamie's response to voters is that we pay one of the lowest council taxes in Wales. That's wonderful, but the essence of what they're saying is something like "Nice house.... be a shame if something were to happen to it."

I'd rather take my chances and have good old-fashioned integrity at PCC.
Sadly BPJ is not elected but a full time employee, any views on how to remove him.
In order to remove Bryn you must first get rid of the IPPG majority councillors who continually vote to support Bryn even though the electorate are strongly telling them otherwise, it is the IPPG councillors view that they know better. The IPPG group are a collection of sheep that are easily led by the old boys club in the Kremlin on the Cleddau, once told which way to vote it would be a brave or stupid councillor that voted against his or her party colleagues as the consequences I am sure would be many and very painful for the wayward sheep involved.
[quote][p][bold]Health fighter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pembrokeshireboy72[/bold] wrote: There's nothing anyone can do, other to wait until election time. Until then the WT can wind us up as much as possible with stories like this, but the only way to get rid of these people is to vote them out. I'm all for the WT building up a case against people like BJP, but unfortunately these people have got in through taking advantage of apathetical voters. If you want change, get people standing in the election to challenge their elected position and hold BJP and his cronies to account for incidents like these. If not, we're only going to suffer further at the hands of BJP and his cronies. BJP and Jamie's response to voters is that we pay one of the lowest council taxes in Wales. That's wonderful, but the essence of what they're saying is something like "Nice house.... be a shame if something were to happen to it." I'd rather take my chances and have good old-fashioned integrity at PCC.[/p][/quote]Sadly BPJ is not elected but a full time employee, any views on how to remove him.[/p][/quote]In order to remove Bryn you must first get rid of the IPPG majority councillors who continually vote to support Bryn even though the electorate are strongly telling them otherwise, it is the IPPG councillors view that they know better. The IPPG group are a collection of sheep that are easily led by the old boys club in the Kremlin on the Cleddau, once told which way to vote it would be a brave or stupid councillor that voted against his or her party colleagues as the consequences I am sure would be many and very painful for the wayward sheep involved. Bilbo101
  • Score: 0
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree