Category Archives: Uncategorized

Ed Lester to quit head of Student Loans Company

Posted on by

Ed Lester to quit on January 31; Pic cap courtesy of Daily Telegraph

Ed Lester, the civil servant whose tax affairs led Danny Alexander, Chief Secretary to the Treasury to order a  Whitehall wide inquiry, is to step down from the job next January.

The official who took over £182,000 a year in salary and pension without paying tax or national insurance at source is to leave when his current contract ends on January 31 next year. The SLC is already advertising for a successor.

Full details of the decision are in my piece on the http://www.exaronews.com website. Suffice to say since the story broke earlier this year Mr Lester has had to go straight onto the public pay roll and can no longer be paid through management consultants, Penna, to his own personal service company, Placepass, based at his home on an island on the Thames near Marlow.

His company is in the process of being closed down and now 2400 other civil servants and senior NHS executives  paid off pay roll may have to become direct employees by September. A review announced by Danny Alexander to Parliament will also mean that the following tax year people who hold controlling posts in private industry will no longer be able to do this either.

All these changes came from one well placed Freedom of Information request which exposed Mr Lester’s tax arrangements which had even been approved personally by Mr Alexander and  David Willetts, the universities minister. Mr Alexander has admitted to me he didn’t even realise the tax benefits when he approved the post.

 To his credit since then he has ordered the review and been shocked by the findings. But I am expecting a strong reaction from business when  it sinks in what has happened.

Update: In a statement issued today (Saturday) about his decision Ed Smith, chair of the Students Loans Company, said: “Ed Lester’s was appointed as interim CEO of  Student Loans Company in 2010. In that time he has turned the company around and his leadership has been outstanding. He is highly regarded by the Board, BIS and colleagues across the Higher Education sector. “Following the period as interim CEO, Ed was offered a fixed two year contract as substantive CEO from January 2011. This contract is due to expire in January 2013 and Ed has always made clear his intention to move to a new role at that time. As recruitment to such senior posts in public sector can be elongated, we have started the process to recruit Ed’s successor now to ensure they are in place prior to him leaving.

“Ed’s planned departure from Student Loans Company has always been a matter of public record. It is in no way linked to the tax arrangements in his contract agreed by BIS, HM Treasury, HM Revenue and Customs and the Head of the Civil Service.”

Privatising the Police:The scandals behind the bidders

Posted on by

G4S – coming to a police station near you.

Would you trust a private company as much as you would a police force to protect you? Would you believe they follow the same  ethical standards and probity?  Would they train and pay their staff properly?  You could be about to find out as the West Midlands and Surrey police forces start to contract out service provision.

I have just completed a report for Unite the union on some of the companies bidding for £1.5 billion of work with the backing of Theresa May, the Home Secretary. If you link to http://bit.ly/KGVE7I  and download the report you can see my findings on some of the bidders.

A lot are covering up a load of  dark secrets and unethical and immoral practices outside the UK.

If don’t care a damn what happens to Palestinian prisoners on the West Bank in Israel or can’t be bothered that US troops breathe in toxic fumes from burn pits in Kabul or that companies use tax havens to avoid paying out medicare to staff, then you won’t mind what happens to your local police force in Birmingham or Guildford.

Take G4S for example. they have had to admit in their annual report that the need to train people to understand human rights. Evidently their Israeli subsidiary  staff prisons where they practised torture on their Palestinian inmates.

And if you are working in Britain, no prob that the company has axed its final salary scheme for all its employees while lining up a £403,000 a year non contributory pension for its chief executive.when he reaches the ripe young age of 60.

Or that former London police chief,Lord Condon is getting £123,000 plus a year plus his allowances in the House of Lords to promote police privatisation and rubber stamp top salary deals for his fellow directors.

Take another company KVR, best known for building Guantanamo Bay. Not quite as well-known for making sure its 21,000 staff in Iraq need not be covered by Medicare by using a Cayman Island tax haven to avoid having to provide it..

Or in blatant disregard to health and safety they face legal action for burning toxic materials in open tips on US bases in Kabul. So what if troops die from cancer, they are lucky not to be shot by the Taliban instead.

And then they are two home-grown companies. Blue Star, which provided two weeks training for auxiliary firefighters to protect your homes in London, in case the Fire Brigades Union goes out on strike.

And finally Reliance, run by Tory donating Brian Kingham – nice £6m house in Carlyle Square in  Chelsea – finances his company through a rather interesting family  trust – not tax avoiding again, surely not?

Obviously we are going to have a wonderful new era with privatisation – as we ditch ethics for profits.

Exclusive: How you got state funded work experience in a strip club with A4e

Posted on by

From the dole queue to the strip club; Red faces at A4 e and the DWP

The leaked internal audit report into the failings of  A4e featured on BBC Newsnight last month missed an extraordinary bombshell. .

The work provider company run by Cameron’s former work Czar, Emma Harrison, was actually placing claimants to work in night clubs and strip clubs when fun loving Labour minister James Purnell, was works and pensions secretary.

A detailed examination of the audit report reveals that X in the City – a Liverpool lap dancing club – favoured by carousing Premier  League footballers – took at least one person from A4e.

The full story is revealed in my piece for Exaro News, the investigative website.at http://www.exaronews.com

The lap-dancing and strip bar made headlines earlier this year after the Manchester City striker, Mario Balotelli, was fined a week’s wages for breaking a team curfew while visiting the nightspot less than 48 hours before a crucial Premier League match against Bolton Wanderers.

The bar advertises lap dances at £5 a time, and offers a ‘VIP’ deal in private rooms where a half-hour lap dance with champagne costs £50.

The report also reveals that two other claimants were placed in night clubs in Norwich. A4e declines to reveal how many other people got jobs in sex and night clubs at the time in 2009.

The whole matter is also  a bit of an embarrassment for Christian Iain Duncan Smith, the current works and pensions secretary,who has imposed an all out ban on allowing A4e or anyone else telling people to work in lap dancing joints.

At the time of the placement according to his department the ruling was: ‘Jobcentre Plus will no longer advertise jobs that involve the direct sexual stimulation of others because publicly-funded services should not be a conduit to this work. The ban would cover jobs such as lap dancers, web-cam performers and strippers. However, Jobcentre Plus will continue to accept other vacancies in the retail, manufacturing and distribution sectors of the industry. A cleaning job in a lap dancing club could still be advertised, for example.

There is a final irony in all of this. The auditors don’t know whether the person placed there –  one Jamie Nolan – ever took it  up because they were too shy to go in and investigate.

The report says:“It was not possible to conduct a visit to ‘X In The City’ to verify the documents…This employer is a lap-dance bar and was not open during the hours of the audit.”

It was a case of  No sex please, we’re auditors. And the manager of the club claims he can’t remember either. Wow what a mess!

Coleman Update: Final Humiliation – Now facing the sack by true blue Barnet

Posted on by

A report tweeted by the editor of the Barnet Times series is forecasting final doom for Brian Coleman tonight Thursday)- when his own Tory group removes him from his Cabinet  environment portfolio. (see http://bit.ly/Jhqe8h)

This means is less than seven days his income from the taxpayer will be slashed from over £120,000 – to just £12-14,000 a year. For the very first time his income level may justify his subsidised fixed rent two bedroom flat he rents from Finchley Methodist church charity.

He still keeps the chairmanship of an important Barnet Council committee on the budget and spending – but he will no longer get his £38,000 Cabinet salary.

Boris Johnson seems to have taken the sensible decision to keep him away from the London fire authority after his big defeat at the hands of the electorate which saw Andrew Dismore defeat him by 21,000 votes.

How  the mighty are fallen – Thank God for democracy and transparency.

Bye,Bye Brian..beaten by braveheart Barnet bloggers

Posted on by

Brian Coleman: Thrown out by voters in Barnet

The emphatic defeat of Brian Coleman in the London Assembly elections – a larger than life bully in true blue Barnet – was one of the defining features of the London Assembly elections.

 He was knocked out of the seat by Labour comeback kid, Andrew Dismore,  an “awkward squad” former MP for Hendon, whose campaigning skills and determination when he was a MP was  well-known in Parliament. So he shouldn’t have been surprised that Dismore would pursue every voter.

Victor Andrew Dismore: Former awkward squad MP

But there is no question in my mind  why 2012 was so different to 2008 for Brian Coleman –  apart from the political climate that favoured Labour last night but also saw Dismore perform far better than Livingstone.

Coleman had a unique skill to anger  nearly every group in the borough  – whether the small shopkeeper, the motorist,home owners (over parking),the local firefighter, the trade unions, struggling single parents, religious groups, journalists, – and when there was a chance to throw him out they could hardly wait to do so.

But he had relied on a cash strapped local press to bully his way often unreported and rarely held to account by his local Tory group, who seemed to live in ” shock and awe” of whatever he said next.

But the difference between 2012 and 2008 is that he couldn’t get away with it so easily – because of the rise of the blogosphere. Five local bloggers including a larger-than-life figure blogging as Mrs Angry;a guy with a head for figures – Mr Mustard; John Baldy and the Barnet Eye  and Barnet Bugle took him on – and wouldn’t let him get away with it. I should also add – Mr Mustard has reminded me -Mr Reasonable and Vicki Morris.

 He also faced a pretty lively campaign from the Fire Brigades Union – both in Barnet and across London – because of his passion for privatisation which got him far too closely connected to AssetCo, the near bust and badly run owner of London’s fire engines.

 In my view – though this  can’t be scientifically proven – the coverage of the blogosphere changed hearts , minds and eventually votes  in Barnet. They were read by large numbers of people (the one I did as an armchair audit on his expenses,home, and allowances, attracted well over 3000 hits)

Coleman himself was a large dinosaur when it came to the net – he needed young Tories and officials to tell him how to operate a computer – so he didn’t realise what was coming.

Coleman is one of the first councillors  to be thrown out following bad coverage on the net. The very ” armchair auditors” that David Cameron and Eric Pickles are keen to promote – came out and devoured their protegé on the London Assembly. Grant Shapps, the computer savvy local government minister, should be proud to see people held to account in this new way.

If the Tories believe in real democracy the one decision Boris Johnson should take is not to use his power to re-instate Coleman as an appointed councillor in any way to the London Assembly. The people of Barnet and Camden have spoken.

Scandal of John Shannon and Brian Coleman: Unacceptable faces of capitalism and politics

Posted on by

John Shannon: dismissed by his own firm

This blog has followed  relentlessly the unfolding drama of  AssetCo, the company in charge of London and (until last week) Lincolnshire’s fire engines, which nearly went bankrupt last year and had its shares suspended until recently on the stock exchange.

But nothing can compare with the latest revelations in a dry annual report on the AssetCo website (link for anoraks who want the lot is  http://bit.ly/HVeFEN ). This much delayed report for an 18 month period – it had to be produced to allow its shares to be retraded- tells the real story behind the company’s near collapse which saw its share price drop from 60p to junk stock 1.75p. It has now emerged that dividend payments may have been unlawful, the company has been seriously ripped off by its former chief executive and the accounts were false for both 2009 and 2010.

 Revenue had been overstated by a massive £18.6m and a claimed operating profit of £17.4m was actually an operating loss of £11.4m.

But the company still owes banks a massive £43m – despite creditors taking a 78 per cent hit and its auditors, Grant Thornton  (also owed most of their fees) resigning.Even the restated figures cannot be guaranteed and PriceWaterhouseCoopers,who independently audited the firm, have qualified these accounts. Grant Thornton incidently missed all this -just as they did over MetPro-Barnet’s bust private security firm-bankrolled by Barnet Council.

As the company itself says:”errors include the effects of mathematical mistakes, mistakes in applying accounting policies,oversights or misinterpretations of facts, and fraud.”.

Worse it is quite clear that the only major source of money for the firm in Britain is the council taxpayer in London which is keeping  it afloat to the tune of £3om a year. Even here banks are going to have  to give another bail out and Lloyds have a massive interest because they currently own the London fire engine that comes out on call.

 This is where the scandal of Brian Coleman, the Tory chair of the London Fire Brigade, and John Shannon its former chief executive come in.

Coleman was entertained at least four times by Shannon and accepted an expensive Christmas hamper from Harvey Nicks (see the armchair audit of Brian Coleman in previous blog) and has been AssetCo’s cheer leader.

Now it is clear from this report that Shannon was dismissed by the board of AssetCo because of this financial shenanigans.

I quote: “The new board have been informed that under the stewardship of Mr. Shannon and Mr. Flynn there was a lack of transparent reporting, requests for information were ignored, and related party transactions were entered into without full board approval. The new board cannot be certain that all issues have been captured.

Mr Shannon was dismissed as an employee for breaches of fiduciary duty and whilst the company has not carried out a full investigation, as previously announced in May 2011 in connection with the claims against the Company by Messrs Shannon & Flynn in support of the winding up petition, it identified counter claims against John Shannon of £4.6 m and also counter claims for breach of fiduciary duty of £3.4m against Frank Flynn.

Frank Flynn was the chief financial officer and a mate of John Shannon.

The report reveals that Shannon and Flynn also shared the bulk of a £847,000 pay out in dividends that are probably illegal. And Shannon before he was dismissed managed to up his salary and benefits to a staggering £492,000 and Flynn got an unapproved £30,000 redundancy payment.

Even worse they appears to a dodgy property loan amounting to £1.5m to Shannon. This involved a property company called Jaras.

 The report says: “In respect of the ‘Jaras’ transaction, AssetCo have reviewed internal communications between the date in December 2009 when the £1,500,000 was first paid, and finalisation of the 2010 audited accounts,the management and statutory accounts for the business occupying the property and concluded that:

a) on an arms length basis it would be difficult to substantiate effectively paying six years rent in advance in respect of the property,

b) the payment was originally classified as a Directors’ Loan and was subsequently reclassified as

prepaid rent in order to satisfy audit disclosure requirements, and

c) the business occupying the property is now in Liquidation. ”

It adds: “there is sufficient doubt that either Jaras (where a Receiver has been appointed) or John Shannon will repay the amount.”

The report also reveals that London AssetCo which has assets of the London fire brigade has been moved to another off the shelf company and the firm’s  Middle Eastern operations (see another blog they are servicing the military in the United Arab Emirates)  are now based in a Bermuda tax haven, to keep them secure from any other collapse in Britain. Wise move, as Lincolnshire have sacked AssetCo.

Brian Coleman: AssetCo cheer leader and entertained by John Shannon

The real scandal in this story is that this woefully badly run company has been kept afloat by politicians in London. Coleman and Gareth Bacon should shoulder this blame -with their blind belief that privatisation is the only answer.

 But Coleman is more culpable because of his personal  links with Shannon and acceptance of gifts from a man  now dismissed from the firm. Shannon may get away with all this but you do have a choice next month to make sure that Coleman never darkens the London fire brigade again.

Removal  would be a service to  Londoners  and you have a vote at the Greater London Assembly elections in Barnet and Camden.

Thomas Hardy: Kept far from the madding crowd

Posted on by

Thomas Hardy: An A list celeb neglected by the National Trust: Pic caption courtesy victorianweb.org

In a year when Britain celebrates Charles Dickens 200th birthday another great British author,Thomas Hardy, is suffering outrageous neglect by one of the great guardians of our heritage, the National Trust.

The author’s birthplace in Higher Brockhampton, just outside Dorchester and his rather grander home, Max Gate, where he died in 1928, on the  outskirts of Dorchester, are both owned by the National Trust.

You could however be forgiven if you knew nothing about both the humble cottage and the grand home of the author of Far From the Madding Crowd. For the new National Trust 2012 guide gives just a short mention of the birthplace and  is positively misleading about the bigger home  Hardy, also a qualified architect, designed himself.

 Readers  searching for the opening times for the birthplace cottage  can find them  in the guide-Wednesday to Sundays 11-5  but don’t  go looking for when to visit Max Gate- you are told to ring the trust’s West Dorset Office  instead.

What the guide doesn’t tell you  is that Max Gate is open exactly the same times as his birthplace – but the NT couldn’t get its act together in time to tell anybody this year.

Max Gate: Hardy's hard to find home

All this is compounded by a daft decision by the Highways Agency  responsible for erecting tourist signs  giving people directions to both places. These brown signs are meant to direct people to places of interest – and most National Trust properties get one.

But not Mr Thomas Hardy. The two homes  are both  just off the busy A35 on  its approach to Dorchester and on the Dorchester by-pass and managed by the Highway Agency. But look for sign on the A 35 in vain. There are none.

And the irony is in the case of Max Gate millions of motorists pass within 100 yards of the property totally oblivious of  its existence.

But as the Highways Agency says on its website: ”

All authorities limit the number of signs allowed. This is for road safety reasons, as too many signs can be confusing and distract drivers, and for environmental reasons – too many signs could harm the countryside or street scene.”

Of course this could be remedied by Dorset County Council -in charge of tourism and signage off the major highways – but they have done nothing. Not a sign in sight in the centre of Dorchester on how to get  to Max Gate. Indeed there are more directions for dinosaurs and  a Tutankhamen exhibition ( not  part of Dorset’s heritage but I stand to be corrected) than poor neglected Mr Hardy. His study, restored at Dorset County Museum  does get a mention, but unfortunately the opening hours of museum do not coincide with those at the National Trust.

Idyllic but simple birthplace of Thomas Hardy

Hardy is as much part of out literary heritage as Dickens or Jane Austen. In his time he was the equivalent of an A list celeb –  according to the excellent visitor’s book kept at Max Gate – which records visit to his home from Robert Louis Stevenson and composer Gustav Holst. His novels have translated into memorable films, Julie Christie’s performance in Far From the Madding Crowd, being one.

Yet it would appear – despite valiant efforts from enthusiastic volunteers at Max Gate ( predating Cameron’s equivalent of the Big Society) – the powers that be at the National Trust, the Highways Agency and Dorset County Council care little about one of the country’s literary giants.

 Something should be done. I urge people – frustrated like me on the search for Thomas Hardy – to email them in protest at their neglect. The director general of the National Trust is Dame Fiona Reynolds. Her mail is fiona.reynolds@nationaltrust.org.uk . The chairman is Sir Simon Jenkins, journalist and author and can be contacted at simon.jenkins@guardian.co.uk.

The minister responsible for the Highways Agency is Mike Penning. His direct e-mail is mike.penning@dft.gsi.gov.uk  and the chief executive of Dorset County Council is David Jenkins. His e-mail is  d.h.jenkins@dorsetcc.gov.uk .

It is time that this shameful neglect ended. One would have thought Dorset would want to celebrate rather than hide one of its famous sons. It does bring tourist revenue to the county.  And the National Trust might have just a more than passing interest in encouraging more visitors.

Response from Mike Nixon,secretary of the Hardy Society:

 “I hope it doesn’t come as too much of a surprise that we at the Hardy Society are very aware and can identify with your frustrations you detail on your blog.
I have myself  been involved with a ‘working group’ for a couple of years under the promising title of ‘Hardy Country’, whose members include the National Trust/West Dorset Disrict Council/Dorset County Council etc etc etc!!
We have discussed on a number of a occasions the lack of ‘brown’ signs and lack of promotion of Max Gate.
In fairness to the NT, their national handbook had to go to the printers very early, apparently before the Max Gate opening times had been agreed regionally.
They have this year (and last year) issued an attractive booklet entitled ‘Discover Hardy Country’, which links in Hardy’s birthplace/Max Gate and T.E.Lawrence’s, Clouds Hill, just up the road near Wareham. This is helpful.
There is now a strong working relationship developing between us here at the Society and the NT,including regular meetings.
What I can’t be so positive about is your accurate comments on the ‘brown sign’ debate. I think I raised this on behalf of the Society 3/4 years ago, so far to no avail! ”

 Response from the National Trust:

Nicola Andrews, Assistant Director, Operations (Dorset and Wiltshire) writes:  “The National Trust firmly believes that Hardy was a novelist and poet of the greatest merit, and we are passionate about finding ways to deliver increased access and public benefit from the Hardy places in our care.  We are committed to improving the experiences at both Hardy’s Cottage and Max Gate. As you noted, we are blessed with having wonderful teams of volunteers and staff who help us achieve this. The teams at Hardy’s and Max Gate are fantastic….

When tenants moved out of Max Gate in late 2010, and in line with our desire to increase access, we took the decision to trial opening the full building to the public rather than re-letting it. This was a challenge because we do not own the original contents, were faced with an empty house to interpret, and the loss of rental income. We are realistic in our ambition for Max Gate. It will never be a big visitor attraction because of its location in a quiet residential area.  That said, our aim is to make it a fantastic experience for all those who do visit.  After a year’s trial, we took the decision to continue opening the full building and through the support of generous benefactors and supporters we are slowly furnishing the house and bringing it back to life as it might have been when Hardy himself was there.  

At Hardy’s Cottage, we are working with Dorset County Council and other partners on a bid to the Heritage Lottery Fund for a project to significantly improve visitor facilities and interpretation on site. We hope this bid will be successful, but in the meantime we have recently represented the interior of the cottage drawing out the stories of Hardy’s time there much more clearly. You did not mention your thoughts on the interiors in your blog, but we hope you found the presentation a significant improvement on your previous visit. Our vision is to enable people to experience both the Cottage and Max Gate as they might have been when Hardy and his family lived there: to enable people to sit by the fire with a cup of tea as Hardy and his family would have done; to bring to life his poems and novels encouraging people to immerse themselves in them in his studies and other writing spaces. 

We are also committed to the partnership which is developing and promoting the broader Hardy offer in Dorset, as outlined by Mike Nixon in his response to you. I am sorry you found it difficult to find Hardy’s Cottage and Max Gate.  Signage from the A35 is outside our control but has been a frequent point of discussion between ourselves, the Council and the Highways Agency. We agree that from a visitor’s perspective, and to help us enable as many people as possible to enjoy the Hardy legacy, good signs from the A35 would be invaluable and we would very much like a trial of this. 

We are conscious, however, that there is a delicate balance to be struck when introducing such signage.  Both properties are small in size and cannot cope with large numbers of visitors, both are located in quiet residential areas, Max Gate has no car park and Hardy Cottage visitors make use of the small Council car park at the end of the track.  So, whilst we are keen to trial signage from the A35 and would welcome Highways support for that, we also recognise that we will need to monitor the pressure this causes on the sites and to keep it under review. .. I feel it is unfair to say that we don’t care about this literary giant. We do care, and we would encourage people to visit themselves and form their own judgement. ”

Response from the Highways Agency:

Sean Walsh writes :”I’ve looked into the signing for both sites. Although neither is signed from the trunk road, Max Gate House is adjacent to the A35 junction with the A352 (known as Max Gate junction) and has a brown sign just off the A352 on the local road.  Higher Bockhampton, where his birthplace is located, is signed from the A35 at Cuckoo Lane junction and Stinsford roundabout (in both directions), and I understand that there are signs for “Hardy’s Cottage” on the local roads.

I’m pleased that you’ve noted on your blog that the Agency has to limit the number of signs on its network, both in road safety terms as too many signs can cause a distraction/confusion, and because they can detract from the countryside and street scene.  If you’ve not already seen them, the current rules regarding tourism signs are also on our website at http://www.highways.gov.uk/business/32118.aspx .    I’m not aware that the National Trust has applied for brown tourism signs on the trunk road for these two Hardy sites, although under current guidelines it is unlikely that either would meet the criteria for signing. However, the Government’s approach to the provision of brown signs is under review, with the objective of ensuring that signing policy best reflects the needs of both drivers and the tourism industry. It is expected that the review will be completed and revised policy issued later in the year, although I can’t be more specific than that at the present time.   “

Exclusive: Millionaire Francis Maude: the bad bill payer

Posted on by

Francis Maude: Difficulties in paying his taxpayer funded bills on time

Do you fall behind with the gas and lecky?Forget to pay your TV licence and struggle to pay charges? Well spare a thought for poor struggling millionaire Francis Maude who just can’t seem to get his act together when it comes to paying his bills.

The man  was rightly castigated  last week over his ill-judged and downright dangerous public advice to stockpile jerry cans. But there is another side to his character which is equally surprising – his record for paying bills on time.

Hidden on the Parliamentary website following the great expenses scandal is an extraordinary documentation of the time when he owned a flat  in Imperial Court in Kennington, south London between 2007 and 2009. ( anoraks can peruse all Francis Maude’s bills at http://bit.ly/Hbu1Vo )

At the time he was severely criticised by the Daily Telegraph ( see http://tgr.ph/HkjDGC ) for purchasing the flat for £430,000- with a £345,000 mortgage- and claiming all the interest when he owned a house outright in Denny Crescent nearby. As a previous blog disclosed he also got a mortgage on this house and let it out to Tory special advisers – Maude’s madrassa – as it became known.

What the documents also  reveal is an amazing lax attitude to paying his gas, electricity  and telephone bills and service charges.  Not just  the delays in paying out the cash but being threatened with disconnection  and legal action for non-payment.

In August 2007 he was threatened with a termination notice for not paying a £36 telephone bill.

At the beginning of 2009 he received a letter from Kevin Roxburgh, head of energy debt collections, at British Gas because he hadn’t paid his £188.24 gas bill for over a month. The letter asks whether he has payment difficulties and tells him about direct debit.

EDF his electricity supplier also suggests he might like to pay by direct debit because of his overdue payments.

Finally he is threatened with legal action for an overdue bill of over £2600 from his landlords. They write to him warning that his long delay has already led to administration charge of £29.37.

The letter warns:” We request that you settle the amount outstanding within 14 days of the date of this reminder in order to avoid incurring additional costs or further legal action.”

The irony about this is that all his bills were being paid anyway by the taxpayer – he didn’t have to pay a penny as he could claim them back through his Parliamentary expenses.

Yet somehow he couldn’t  get his act together to send them a cheque. Finally the records show that he learns there is something easier called direct debit – and two years after moving into the flat actually sets up direct debit payments for his TV licence and  utility bills. This man is supposed to be a world-class banker -the ex md of Morgan Stanley. And he is charge of getting more efficiency in business payments to the government. God help us.

Why charging for Freedom of Information requests will be utterly wrong

Posted on by

Freedom of Information: Charges will put it under threat

This blog was written for the London School of Economics British politics and policy website (the link is http://bit.ly/H7C8lD) and is now up on the site. I have reproduced it here for my followers who may miss it  at the LSE.

It must be very tempting in these times of austerity for government to introduce charges for freedom of information (FOI) requests. Tempting it might be but it would be utterly wrong.

Giving evidence to the Commons Justice select committee’s post legislative inquiry into the FOI Act, I got the strong impression that some Conservative MPs might want to do this. The example of the Republic of Ireland which has introduced charges for requests, internal reviews and appeals to the Information Commissioner, has provided an excuse.

The fact that the new act has been a resounding success with the public, journalists and also private businesses is not a reason to introduce charges. My reasons for not going down this road are not such much to do with limiting the public’s right to know – although as Ireland has shown – this would be the inevitable consequence. They are more fundamental.

As a taxpayer I am obliged – I have no choice – to fund public services from my income. Therefore if I wish to know whether my money has been spent wisely and people have taken the right decisions – I should have the right to ask questions and ferret for information. As a journalist rather than a private citizen I have more time to do this – it is part of my job – and the information I discover can be communicated to thousands, if not millions, of people.

As one recent example showed – the disclosure under FOI that Ed Lester, the chief executive of the Student Loans Company, had found a legal way to avoid tens of thousands of pounds of tax – it can even lead to alerting ministers to something they were unaware.

To introduce charges would in effect be double taxation. I would be charged once for providing the service and again if I wished to find out what officials and ministers had done with my money. This is why I believe it is unacceptable.

A more subtle variant of charging is a suggestion that private citizens still receive the free service but commercial organisations like the media, private firms and official bodies paid the cost of the request – which could be anything up to £600. Again it would unfair and also unworkable. Businesses, law firms and the media – unless they are near bankrupt – pay their share of taxes to the government and again would be charged twice for seeking to find out how and why their money was spent.

It would also be completely unworkable to run such a two tier system. There is nothing to stop me as a journalist, or indeed any business person, asking a friend to put in a FOI and getting it sent to their address. And there is no way officialdom could find out, unless they subject every private requester to a ninth degree inquisition every time they asked a public body for information.

It would be a nightmare scenario for the public sector to police and make officials extremely unpopular with the general public. It might even lead them to face legal complaints, such as falsely accusing individuals of avoiding charges.

What is required urgently is an extension of the freedom of information act to the private sector when it provides public services. The government has an active policy of encouraging private providers – whether charities, mutual or commercial companies – to provide public services. Francis Maude, the Cabinet Office minister, in an address to the Policy Exchange think tank said that turning state provided services into mutuals owned by the staff might indeed be as widespread as privatisation of state industries in the 1980s Thatcher government.

At present the mechanism for extending FOI to new bodies is rather cumbersome – requiring a designation under the Act by ministers – usually following a consultation period. This is woefully inadequate to cope with a major shift from public to private sector providers in Whitehall, local government and the NHS. One simple solution would be to include a standard clause in any private sector provider contract saying that if the company accepted public money to run a public service they would automatically be subject to FOI requests about that particular service.

No doubt they would be a howl of protest from the business community about new burdens and costs to running the service, but given the multi million pound size of most contracts it would be a small price to pay. And if it was a standard contract it would mean that there would be a level playing field for contractors bidding for the work. It could also be confined only to the services they provided in the public sector and not to normal business contracts.

This would bring within the scope of FOI private train operators and bus companies who take taxpayers subsidies but are at the moment outside the act. It would also encourage these bodies to provide a more efficient service since they would have an incentive not to encounter the wrath of the travelling public every time they failed to provide a public service.

The public could also question and challenge the companies when they cut service provision to prove they had a case and also ask for detailed policy on protecting public safety. Similarly, it would provide the public with some protection as the NHS expands the use of private hospitals for operations as they are outside the scope of the act.

The act does require an overhaul in this area. But MPs on the committee should resist the temptation to call for charges to use the act as this would be unfair to the general public and to taxpayers. The right to demand information on services you are required to pay for without being charged is a fundamental human right that should be non-negotiable, even in the present financial climate.