The Mayor of Bedford regrets 'work from home' stance
'High performance culture'
At a meeting of the council's executive, independent councillor Doug McMurdo asked Wootton whether he had "executed" the 10 June announcement that staff were to return to the office three days a week.In response, the mayor said: "This is not being done as a rule of 'you must return'," and added it was being done "department by department, head of service by head of service".He added that he "bitterly regrets making the comment about sofas".In a Facebook post in June, Wootton said: "Good services rely on great teamwork."Collaboration, visibility, and a strong workplace culture matter. You do not build that on Teams calls from the sofa."He had added: "The future of this council rests on a high-performance culture where openness and innovation are not just buzzwords, they are daily practice. Residents expect more. We are raising the bar."A month later, he says: "We have some wonderful officers, we have some wonderful workers.""I just think this policy of coming back to the office three days a week is a really good one, and it is one that lots of private industry have benefited from."At the meeting, McMurdo responded to Wootton: "Some advice I'd give you is to be careful what you put on social media."McMurdo added that he considered that "council staff being told to return to the office three days a week was a message that should come from the head of paid service, and not the directly elected mayor".The authority currently employs 1,740 full time staff across the borough.
Follow Beds, Herts and Bucks news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
North Wales Chronicle
9 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Plan to strip citizenship from ‘extremists' during appeals clears Commons
The Deprivation of Citizenship Orders (Effect during Appeal) Bill was passed at third reading by MPs, and will now go to the House of Lords for further scrutiny. Under the legislation, alleged extremists who lose their British citizenship but win an appeal against the decision will not have it reinstated before the Home Office has exhausted all avenues for appeal. During the Bill's committee stage, Labour MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy said black, Asian and ethnic minority communities will be 'alarmed' by the proposals. Home Office minister Dan Jarvis said the legislation has 'nothing to do with somebody's place of birth, but everything to do with their behaviour'. Speaking in the Commons on Monday, Conservative former minister Kit Malthouse said: 'My trouble with this legislation is that it puts a question mark over certain citizens. 'When it's used with increasing frequency, it does put a question mark over people's status as a citizen of the United Kingdom, and that, I think, is something that ought to be of concern.' Intervening, Mr Jarvis said: 'He's making his points in a very considered way, but he is levelling quite serious charges against the Government. 'Can I say to him, in absolute good faith, that our intentions here have nothing to do with somebody's place of birth, but everything to do with their behaviour.' Mr Malthouse said: 'I'm not concerned about it necessarily falling into his hands as a power, but we just don't know who is going to be in his place in the future, and we're never quite sure how these powers might develop.' He continued: 'What I'm trying to do with my amendment is to explain to him that this is an area of law where I would urge him to tread carefully, where I would urge him to think about the compromises that he's creating against our basic freedoms that we need to maintain.' The MP for North West Hampshire had tabled an amendment which would allow a person to retain their citizenship during an appeals process if they face 'a real and substantial threat of serious harm' as a result of the order. It would also have required a judge to suspend the removal of citizenship if the person's ability to mount an effective defence at a subsequent appeal was impacted, or the duration of the appeal process was excessive because of an act or omission by a public authority. Ms Ribeiro-Addy spoke in support of the amendment, she said: 'Certain communities are often wary of legislation that touches on citizenship, because it almost always – whether it is the stated intention or not – disproportionately impacts them. 'And to put this clearly to the minister, I'm talking about people of black, Asian and minority ethnic communities, those who have parents who may have been born elsewhere, or grandparents, for that matter, they will be particularly alarmed by this legislation. 'Those of us who have entitlement to citizenship from other countries for no other reason than where our parents may have been born, or where our grandparents may have been born, or simply because of our ethnic origin, we know that we are at higher risk of having our British citizenship revoked. 'And when such legislation is passed, it creates two tiers of citizenship. It creates second-class citizens.' The MP for Clapham and Brixton Hill added: 'I would like to ask why the minister has not seen it fit to conduct an equality impact assessment on this Bill? I know it's an incredibly narrow scope, but these potential implications are vastly potentially impact-limited to specific communities.' At the conclusion of the committee stage, Mr Jarvis said: 'The power to deprive a person of British citizenship does not target ethnic minorities or people of particular faiths, it is used sparingly where a naturalised person has acquired citizenship fraudulently, or where it is conducive to the public good. 'Deprivation on conducive grounds is used against those who pose a serious threat to the UK, or whose conduct involves high harm. It is solely a person's behaviour which determines if they should be deprived of British citizenship, not their ethnicity or faith.' 'The impact on equalities has been assessed at all stages of this legislation,' he added. The Bill was passed on the nod.
Sky News
10 minutes ago
- Sky News
Wes Streeting says doctors' strikes 'a gift to Nigel Farage'
Wes Streeting has stepped up his war of words with junior doctors by telling Labour MPs that strikes would be "a gift to Nigel Farage". In a hard-hitting speech to the Parliamentary Labour Party, the health secretary claimed ministers were "in the fight for the survival of the NHS". And he said that if Labour failed in its fight, the Reform UK leader would campaign for the health service to be replaced by an insurance-style system. Mr Streeting 's tough warning to Labour MPs came ahead of a showdown with the British Medical Association (BMA) this week in which he will call on the doctors to call off the strikes. The BMA has announced plans for five days of strikes by resident doctors - formerly known as junior doctors - in England, which are due to begin on 25 July. At a meeting in parliament at which he received a warm reception from Labour MPs, Mr Streeting said: "The BMA's threats are unnecessary, unreasonable, and unfair. "More than that, these strikes would be a gift to Nigel Farage, just as we are beginning to cut waiting lists and get the NHS moving in the right direction. "What better recruitment agent could there be for his right-wing populist attacks on the very existence of a publicly funded, free at the point of need, universal health service? He is praying that we fail on the NHS. "If Labour fail, he will point to that as proof that the NHS has failed and must now be replaced by an insurance-style system. So we are in the fight for the survival of the NHS, and it is a fight I have no intention of losing." 2:27 The threatened strikes are in pursuit of a 29% pay rise that the BMA is demanding to replace what it claims is lost pay in recent years. The government has awarded a 5.4% pay increase this year after a 22% rise for the previous two years. Earlier, appearing before the all-party health and social care committee of MPs, Mr Streeting said the strike would be a "catastrophic mistake" and not telling employers about their intention to strike would be "shockingly irresponsible". He said BMA leaders seemed to be telling their members "not to inform their trusts or their employers if they're going out on strike" and that he could not fathom "how any doctor in good conscience would make it harder for managers to make sure we have safe staffing levels". He said: "Going on strike having received a 28.9% pay increase is not only unreasonable and unnecessary, given the progress that we've been making on pay and other issues, it's also self-defeating." He said he accepted doctors' right to strike, but added: "The idea that doctors would go on strike without informing their employer, not allowing planning for safe staffing, I think, is unconscionable, and I would urge resident doctors who are taking part in strike actions to do the right thing." Mr Streeting warned the strike would lead to cancellations and delays in patient treatment and spoke of a family member who was waiting for the "inevitable" phone call informing them that their procedure would be postponed. "We can mitigate against the impact of strikes, and we will, but what we cannot do is promise that there will be no consequence and no delay, no further suffering, because there are lots of people whose procedures are scheduled over that weekend period and in the period subsequently, where the NHS has to recover from the industrial action, who will see their operations and appointments delayed," he said. "I have a relative in that position. My family are currently dreading what I fear is an inevitable phone call saying that there is going to be a delay to this procedure. And I just think this is an unconscionable thing to do to the public, not least given the 28.9% pay rise."
Sky News
10 minutes ago
- Sky News
Wes Streeting says doctor strikes 'a gift to Nigel Farage'
Wes Streeting has stepped up his war of words with junior doctors by telling Labour MPs that strikes would be "a gift to Nigel Farage". In a hard-hitting speech to the Parliamentary Labour Party, the health secretary claimed ministers were "in the fight for the survival of the NHS". And he said that if Labour failed in its fight, the Reform UK leader would campaign for the health service to be replaced by an insurance-style system. Mr Streeting 's tough warning to Labour MPs came ahead of a showdown with the British Medical Association (BMA) this week in which he will call on the doctors to call off the strikes. The BMA has announced plans for five days of strikes by resident doctors - formerly known as junior doctors - in England, which are due to begin on 25 July. At a meeting in parliament at which he received a warm reception from Labour MPs, Mr Streeting said: "The BMA's threats are unnecessary, unreasonable, and unfair. "More than that, these strikes would be a gift to Nigel Farage, just as we are beginning to cut waiting lists and get the NHS moving in the right direction. "What better recruitment agent could there be for his right-wing populist attacks on the very existence of a publicly funded, free at the point of need, universal health service? He is praying that we fail on the NHS. "If Labour fail, he will point to that as proof that the NHS has failed and must now be replaced by an insurance-style system. So we are in the fight for the survival of the NHS, and it is a fight I have no intention of losing." 2:27 The threatened strikes are in pursuit of a 29% pay rise that the BMA is demanding to replace what it claims is lost pay in recent years. The government has awarded a 5.4% pay increase this year after a 22% rise for the previous two years. Earlier, appearing before the all-party health and social care committee of MPs, Mr Streeting said the strike would be a "catastrophic mistake" and not telling employers about their intention to strike would be "shockingly irresponsible". He said BMA leaders seemed to be telling their members "not to inform their trusts or their employers if they're going out on strike" and that he could not fathom "how any doctor in good conscience would make it harder for managers to make sure we have safe staffing levels". He said: "Going on strike having received a 28.9% pay increase is not only unreasonable and unnecessary, given the progress that we've been making on pay and other issues, it's also self-defeating." He said he accepted doctors' right to strike, but added: "The idea that doctors would go on strike without informing their employer, not allowing planning for safe staffing, I think, is unconscionable, and I would urge resident doctors who are taking part in strike actions to do the right thing." Mr Streeting warned the strike would lead to cancellations and delays in patient treatment and spoke of a family member who was waiting for the "inevitable" phone call informing them that their procedure would be postponed. "We can mitigate against the impact of strikes, and we will, but what we cannot do is promise that there will be no consequence and no delay, no further suffering, because there are lots of people whose procedures are scheduled over that weekend period and in the period subsequently, where the NHS has to recover from the industrial action, who will see their operations and appointments delayed," he said. "I have a relative in that position. My family are currently dreading what I fear is an inevitable phone call saying that there is going to be a delay to this procedure. And I just think this is an unconscionable thing to do to the public, not least given the 28.9% pay rise."
