<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: When good scrutiny goes bad</title>
	<atom:link href="http://highbarnet.org/2009/03/25/when-good-scrutiny-goes-bad/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://highbarnet.org/2009/03/25/when-good-scrutiny-goes-bad/</link>
	<description>News from High Barnet Liberal Democrats</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 01:21:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don't Call Me Dave</title>
		<link>http://highbarnet.org/2009/03/25/when-good-scrutiny-goes-bad/comment-page-1/#comment-213</link>
		<dc:creator>Don't Call Me Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2009 22:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://highbarnet.org/2009/03/25/when-good-scrutiny-goes-bad/#comment-213</guid>
		<description>Duncan&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Your comments are deeply worrying. All these promises of investigations are nothing more than hot air if councillors and officers are interfering in the work of a scrutiny committee before any investigation has even got underway.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Mike Freer says he was misled by officers. That is a very serious charge to make, so why hasn’t he called in the police as Rog T suggested? We are talking about £27.4 million being invested without authorisation. If that doesn’t warrant police investigation, what does?&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Whilst it is no longer denied that the rules were broken, could it be that the actions of the officers would have been spotted sooner if the Cabinet Resources Committee had done its job properly and read its papers? &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;It would appear that the council is adopting its fall back position whenever there is a scandal - blame it all on a middle ranking officer and sweep everything under the carpet.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;It will be interesting to compare the “approved” report with the draft version to see what changes have been made.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Duncan</p>
<p>Your comments are deeply worrying. All these promises of investigations are nothing more than hot air if councillors and officers are interfering in the work of a scrutiny committee before any investigation has even got underway.</p>
<p>Mike Freer says he was misled by officers. That is a very serious charge to make, so why hasn’t he called in the police as Rog T suggested? We are talking about £27.4 million being invested without authorisation. If that doesn’t warrant police investigation, what does?</p>
<p>Whilst it is no longer denied that the rules were broken, could it be that the actions of the officers would have been spotted sooner if the Cabinet Resources Committee had done its job properly and read its papers? </p>
<p>It would appear that the council is adopting its fall back position whenever there is a scandal &#8211; blame it all on a middle ranking officer and sweep everything under the carpet.</p>
<p>It will be interesting to compare the “approved” report with the draft version to see what changes have been made.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
