Leserbrev Leader of Committee for healthcare, Henning Wold (H), would not clarify this the debate. He opted instead to criticize the leader of the control range – a pure diversion.
READ ALSO: Have rustilbudet in Stoltenberg’s gate 24 outlived its usefulness?
Leader of Supervisory Board, Lars Egeland (SV), pointed out the unprecedented in that municipality have both informed the staff and users about closure without political consideration . Tonsberg Municipality governed by the Presidency model. This means that all politicians exert their control by political decisions. The mission of the mayor and the leaders are putting issues on the agenda and to lead the political process. They will lead on the roads of all elected officials, and are responsible for their municipality controlled through political decisions.
READ ALSO: Lars Egeland: – Politicians should decide fate of Stoltenberg’s gate 24
Local Government Act is crystal clear. In § 30.1 paragraph states that: “Elected bodies treat their cases and make their decisions in meetings.” Moreover, it is said in § 32.2 that: “The chairman of the elected body sets up an agenda for each meeting. Notice of meeting shall be sent to the body’s members with the appropriate period of notice and shall contain an overview of the matters to be discussed. “
After my vision it has developed a very unfortunate practice Tonsberg municipality where important decisions will be made in briefings to the political committees. It’s been said by both alderman and Wold, who heads the committee for healthcare, the Committee was briefed on plans for an inspection in Stoltenberg’s gate. 24.
CONSISTS: it is difficult to understand it to mean that housing Stoltenberg’s gate 24 is adopted closed. (Photo: Morten Wang )
is absolutely not revealed to “decide whether to intervene in the face,” and both SV member Karin Johannessen Shake and Progress Anne May Hognes is clear that they did not experience the “treated”. This meant that the alderman proposed a note about the process of reorganization of services to substance abuse and psychiatric patients to the City council on 25 May. the paper describes the alderman a process of closure. City council majority took note of the report, but also decided that the committee this fall will get a case about the available services.
In my opinion is the decision of May 25, no final closure, although the City council has taken the orientation that the alderman will propose a closure. The question then is whether the business in Stoltenberg’s gate 24 can be scaled down or altered before a final decision is made. Today driven offer is not at full capacity, which inflicts municipality monthly expenses by having to buy services elsewhere.
Users and employees in Tønsberg Blad stated that it is difficult that the situation is unclear. Elected in FO calls for participation, and rusfaget reasons for the closure. The explanation says that the municipality does not provide new resolutions related to shelter.
In the city council debate called for Henning Wold also financing the opposition’s proposals, which we tabled to give tranquility to the case: “the City council requesting that the plan contains daily manned housing in municipal auspices.”. In the commentary is the crux, as both alderman and committee chair constantly denied: Stoltenberg’s gate 24 is also closed down for economic reasons.
Staff and Users need tranquility around their living and employment situation. As elected representatives, we also need clarification on the democratic rules of the game for our municipality. For anyone who uses municipal services, and that’s most of us, it is also important to get an assurance that major deals are not changed or discontinued without political consideration. On this basis, I will ask three questions to the Conservatives by Henning Wold, who heads the committee for health and care.
1. Do you agree that a case that the question of closure of Stoltenberg’s gate 24 requires political treatment with a decision made by a political body?
2. Do you agree that it is not made a decision on the closure of Stoltenberg’s gate 24 ?
3. Do you agree that the administration can not liquidate or practice wind down the use of Stoltenberg’s gate before such final decision has been made?
Olav Sanness Vika
No comments:
Post a Comment