19 year old in charge of Children’s Services for Leicestershire Council

[MmeChoufleur]

Reform have appointed a 19 year old, Councillor Charles Pugsley, to run Children’s Services for Leicestershire County Council, . How would you feel about this if you lived in the borough and had SEND children?

Does this make a mockery of democracy, handing over such an important role to a person with no experience in the workplace, certainly not at any high level?

Will this make Reform voters sit up and think about the consequences of voting for this party?

This.
Councillors have less influence than you might think. Often, inexperienced councillors will find themselves differing to council officers.

The Chief Officer of children and families seems to be a woman called Jane Moore. I'd imagine she's got a slightly more impressive CV.

They haven't, perhaps spend a bit more time learning how the council works before posting. Reform aren't my cup of tea but you making up stuff doesn't help.

Why not post something accurate that you find awful about them , start a proper debate. It's a bit like starting a thread about how awful Trump is as he didn't tip in a restaurant one day.

He is the decision maker at a strategic level. Imagine the council is struggling to provide school transport for disabled children, for example, and presents a plan to commission a new transport provider. He can (and, given it's reform) may very well choose to block that. Same for any significant spend the department wants to make, including continuation of existing services that are already in place (children's centers, children's homes, respite services for example). It's actually very concerning.

Perhaps Reform will say being practically a child himself he has the right experience for the role.

Just enough rope, etc but shame for people who will be directly affected.

My apologies if I’ve misunderstood the role. Would he not be in charge of budgets, or hiring/firing a new Director for example? And would that Director not be bound by whatever strategy the council dictates?

Now I get why it feels inappropriate.
But then … theyre over 18yo. They’ve been elected. We’ve had MPs of a similar age.

So…. I’d rather ask why an elected councillor can be put in charge of such a department with no experience in the area. I mean it’s not because you’re 30+yo or 60yo etc.. that you’ll know better how to manage such an area.

I didn’t vote for reform, but you never know, a 19 in charge might be the kick up the arse the department needs.

Yay but that’s what you get when you elect a Reform councillor. Regardless of their age.

😂😂😂
And if there was any evidence needed that they haven't a clue how councils are run. The statutory power (in other words, the person who runs Children's Services) lies with the Director, and that is who actually runs the service. Given budgetary constraints and statutory obligations, he might be "heard" but he won't be "listened to" because the service will do what they must. As with most social services, there simply isn't enough money to provide all that is needed, never mind all that is wanted.

i wonder if having that on his cv will make a difference to future employers

He's not in charge of children's services. He's just the councillor with oversight.

I have worked in several councils (still do) and generally the cabinet member with children’s services in their portfolio is a seasoned councillor with a lot of experience, an in depth understanding of the local picture around the complex framework of children's services and a very good grounding in budgets. It is a decision making position and will have delegated powers on some issues.

He won’t be running a department. The Director of Social Services will do that. He’ll be the councilor with the children services portfolio. Important decisions wil go through a scrutiny process and full Cabinet for agreement.

Yeh as pps say, he’s a councillor, not a council staff member. He’s not in charge of anything.

Take planning as an example that I know about - the decisions are theoretically made by the councillors, but if they don’t follow the advice of the planning officers who are the actual experts, they soon get told.

My god. I sincerely hope it does make Reform voters question themselves before a terrible mistake is made at the next GE. Children's Services is particularly worrying, especially couple with the age and lack of experience of the Cllr, but my understanding of most of the Reform councillors is that they're generally woefully inexperienced and under-qualified for the roles they're suddenly in. I think they'll have a huge shock as individuals and a party as a whole about what it actually takes to run local govt, the state local govt budgets are in after years of Tory austerity and the complex, difficult decisions that will be expected of them. They will crash and burn, I just hope their supporters really take notice and reconsider.

I am no fan of Reform, but I think actually his age isn't an issue for me - he may well ask some excellent questions and encourage enagagement with users. Time will tell.

It’s maybe not a great appointment, but also maybe not significant better or worse than a 50-something councillor who’s never worked in children’s services or education.

Or, if it’s not too outing to say, neither is it necessarily worse than the fundamentalist Christian Labour councillors who formed the cabinet in a local authority I worked in who believed the rapture was imminent (and so why was the big bad LA bothering to take children away from their abusive parents) and tried to block programmes to support women who’d had children removed because they required people to use long-lasting contraception.

Bless the little love not realising his older peers have also at one stage "been there"

No. Hiring and firing of a Director (within the law) lies in the hands of the CEO alongside Members and other senior officers. Settinga nd managing budgets is a complex process, but he wouldn't have that much power as an individual, and the Council can set strategies within the law and statutory responsibilities.

In a reasonable place, the Director and Chair work in a positive relationship to achieve what they need to. And technically elected Members are in power over officers. Technically. Provided Members don't mess with anything too critical. Reality is never quite what is technically true. Officers can, and will, run rings around elected members if they must.

Do you have a link where this is reported?

He’s the portfolio holder, the department will be instructed to go along with his ‘will’ and priorities, and the officers tasked with how to make that happen.
we are in for some interesting times.

Mhairi Black was fantastic.

It’s crazy. He’s only really known school and university - private school at that. Alongside his property business …

No he won’t get to choose a Director. There is a proper recruitment process for all staff.

He’ll probably quickly find he is way out of his depth. This is a really complex area that is heavily regulated and covered by statute. If he thinks being young is enough of a qualification for this role, he has no idea what he has entered into. Unless he is a complete moron he will rely on his officers and take their advice. There are procedures in place to ensure all major decisions are scrutinized and voted on by Council.

I guess he's got very recent experience with children in that he was one a few months ago?
Maybe they should get a shoplifter to be in charge of retail, or a rapist in charge of women's services?