Why Britain’s youth should be seen and not heard: the patronising view of a London Assembly Tory

Posted on by

Gareth Bacon: A man who thinks young people should not question him.Pic courtesy: London fire brigade

An extraordinary e-mail exchange has taken place between Gareth Bacon, Tory London Assembly member, and Danny Hackett a 17-year-old Bexley constituent and a Labour activist.

Danny Hackett challenged Gareth Bacon why he has needed to claim up to £2000 a year to get free travel in London when he earned in excess of £150,000 a year – half of it from allowances as a London Assembly and Bexley councillor. Using material from this website he asked him to justify the claim. “A majority of people who live in London pay for travel themselves you should do the same,” he said.

Back came the reply addressed to, believe it or not, ” Master Hackett,” because as Mr Bacon explained later:”I addressed you as “Master” Hackett because that is the correct title for you – you are, after all, a minor. ”

 He went on to explain he was claiming it because he had to pay far too much tax and that  “means that more than half of  it does not reach me, indeed in effect it never leaves the Treasury and exists only on paper.”

Danny Hackett doing something that Mr Bacon would disapprove: Pic courtesy Danny Hackett

Mr Hackett found being addressed as Master ” patronising, rude and offensive” which really set Mr Bacon going and revealed his true feelings about the country’s youth.

“I suspect you have little or no experience of living apart from your parents, university, working for a living, supporting yourself, paying tax, having meaningful relationships, or raising a family. You have little or no practical experience of politics and no experience at all of public life.

“None of these things are faults in you, they are simply factors of your age. .. to be completely honest and fair with you, my advice would be to experience a little bit of life for yourself before you start criticising other people and preaching to them about how they should live theirs.”

However Mr Bacon has offered the youth a chance to vote ( he appears not to want to ban some teenagers from voting on the grounds they are too inexperienced) if he is 18 on May 3 when he stands again for the London Assembly- an invitation which should be taken up more widely.

“You will be able to exercise your prerogative at the ballot box and vote against me – be aware though, that holds no fears whatever for me, as a democratically elected politician.”

 I might suggest that lots of young people take up his offer and see whether he has any fears then.

 Neither Mr Hackett nor me are allowed to communicate with him. “I have nothing further to say to you” he has told Mr Hackett and he has told me when I raised  it with him : “I have nothing remotely to say to you.”

Believe it or not Mr Bacon is a youngish new generation Tory ( he had to tell Mr Hackett he was not an elderly gentleman) with I am afraid a mental age of nearer 139 than his actual 39. I imagine he would very much at home in Victorian England dragging naughty boys to his study to tell them off for daring to question his authority.

But we are in the 21st century and we live in an open society. So what do you think? E-mail Mr Bacon at his public work e-mail address gareth.bacon@london.gov.uk  if you disagree or back him.Email Danny at danny@hackett.org.uk  Tweet @dannyhackett if you agree or disagree with him.

If you want to see what Mr Bacon earns, where he works, as his strong views against trade unions and demonstrators, it is all on my website at http://t.co/0mKytVV. Health warning: Mr Bacon who doesn’t speak to me claims it is ” poorly researched.” Judge for yourself.

 

 

Morecambe Bay Cockle Pickers: Does the government want it to happen again?

Posted on by
 

The cockle picker victims of Morecambe Bay: Will cuts mean more to come? Pic courtesy bbc

Remember the tragedy at Morecambe Bay which led to the deaths of at least 21 cockle pickers? The public outcry that followed the exploitation of these Chinese workers led to the setting up of the Gangmasters Licensing Authority to protect migrant and other workers from future exploitation.

Since then it  has been very successful in both licensing gangmasters and working together to fight exploitation with other agencies like the UK Border Agency,the Serious Organised Crime Agency, the police and Revenue and Customs. 

A key test case will take place this autumn with the prosecution of  an Oxfordshire dairy farmer, and potentially 18 other farmers, for using unlicensed labour on their dairy farms. Other cases included investigations into shellfish farmers in County Antrim and a successful opposition to a licence being sought through a Facebook friend of a banned gangmaster who exploited Lithuanian workers.

In the last year its inspectors identified 845 workers who had been exploited to the tune of £2.5m, revoked 33 licences, and prosecuted 12 firms. Some 91 per cent of operations identified serious exploitation. Employers who appeal against its decisions have only a 5 per cent chance of success, 95 per cent of appeals are rejected.

Now any further success is being threatened by a triple whammy from the government. The latest annual report ( http://bit.ly/qp7yeo) reveals that in the last year the government is putting their effectiveness at risk.

Eric Pickles abolished funding for gangmaster intelligence

The biggest blow has come from none other than Eric Pickles, the communities secretary. His department abolished funding altogether to the agency from April. This funded work enabled the agency to set up intelligence operations with local councils and funded community enforcement officers. These posts have now gone.

 Then Caroline Spelman, the environment secretary, cut funding by five per cent and Francis Maude, the Cabinet Office minister, imposed a Whitehall recruiting freeze which has mean that skilled people have not been replaced.

At the same time the agency which relies on licence fees for the vast majority of its income has been told to freeze fees for two years, presumably to save business money.It is no wonder the agency’s annual report says: ” The authority faces a major challenge in seeking to prevent the exploitation of vulnerable workers with the prospect of fewer resources.” It also gives a lie to the government’s claim that cutting back office staff won’t have any effect. It admits that these cutbacks” may have an adverse impact on the ability to control risk in the future”.

 Under government spending cuts it will be cut again over the next three years as the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs  reduces its budget by eight per cent a year. Given it runs on a shoestring budget in Whitehall terms of under £5m a year and employs 89 staff, it seems remarkable value for money.

It would be a serious tragedy if penny-pinching by the government gave the green light to new exploiters to take advantage. If it does at least transparency makes it clear which minister to blame.

AssetCo buys a month’s grace as investors asked again to bail it out

Posted on by

AssetCo, the troubled company which owns London and Lincolnshire’s  fire engines, and is £140m in debt, has managed to negotiate a further lifeline from its investors.

 The company which faced being wound up today (July 25) at a High Court hearing in London has gained another month’s grace until August 25 to conclude the deal.

A statement from the company said:””the Board of AssetCo has been in discussions with certain of its major stakeholders (being North Atlantic Value LLP, a part of the J O Hambro Capital Management Group, Utilico Investments Limited and Henderson, which incorporates the interests of Gartmore Investments Limited), ” for further refinancing of aanother £10m.

The price to be paid will be another dilution of the shares – worth just 1p before the deal and 2.50p – after the deal became public, and banks and other creditors will not get all their money back either.

The statement continued:”The strategy will focus  on developing the Middle-East business into a leading emergency services platform and on running the London and Lincoln contracts.  The refinancing proposal to be approved by shareholders will involve the ring-fencing of the LFEPA (london fire brigade)for the benefit of the London subsidiary lender group, although shareholders will retain an interest in any residual value. The Investor Group intends that following this fundraising, the Company will continue to be listed on AIM.”

 The company also said that talks were an advanced stage with a bidder-assumed to Arcapita, the Bahrain based private bank (see previous post), but significantly Arcapita has not signed the deal.

  At Monday’s hearing  the court was told  professional fees for lawyers and financial advisers amd the directors are costing £100,000 a week.

 Mr Justice Floyd warned that if the new private-sector bid failed, it could leave AssetCo with “nothing left in the kitty “.

 “If it is not successful then the assets of the company would look to be depleted by the professional fees being charged to the point where there will be nothing left in the kitty to reimburse creditors of any description “ he said.

  Professional costs to cover just a fortnight’s work restructuring and refinancing the company in the run up to a new bid were detailed in court.  AssetCo directors Tudor Davies and Tim Barrett would charge £40,000 plus VAT, solicitors £112.824 plus VAT and financial advisors would be invoicing for £50,000 plus £5,000.  

  The scale of debt-laden AssetCo’s financial meltdown was disclosed in court – £2.2M at the end of June had shrunk to just £700,020

     Creditors supporting the company’s call for the wind-up order to be adjourned included North Atlantic Value, owed £15.9M by AssetCo. The company, part of the J O Hambro Capital Management Group, which is proposing to contribute to anothedr £10m refinancing deal.. 

   Matt Wrack, general secretary of the Fire Brigades Union said : “ These assets should be brought back into public ownership. At the court today, we heard lawyers haggling over remuneration fees ASSETCO – costs soar as “new bid” staves off wind up – but still no assurances for Londoners.  

 PrIvatising essential services in crazy, as the AssetCo debacle continues to show. Fire engines in London and Lincolnshire should be brought back into public ownership as soon as possible.”

Exclusive:Are London’s fire engines to be owned by a firm whose advisers advocate jihad?

Posted on by

Arcapita's swish Bahrain hq: Picture courtesy:http://thebigprojectme

Just when the appalling story of the near bankrupt company,AssetCo, which owns London and Lincolnshire’s fire engines, nears its conclusion,  there is a new and extraordinary twist to the tale.

AssetCo in desperation to stave off bankruptcy on Monday is negotiating a take over with Arcapita Bank, a Bahrain based but Arab and Indonesian privately owned company. This firm because it is owned by Saudis is governed by Shariah law and any transaction must be approved by a special committee of  Sharia advisers.

 Now an investigation by me has come across extraordinary information about their advisers and their views and connections with militant Islam. Enough for me to contact the company in Bahrain and ask for an explanation. Which is more than Brian Coleman, chair of the London fire brigade and Bob Neill, the fire minister, can do- because they have rendered themselves  powerless to do anything  under the terms of the contracts in selling off the fire engines and recruiting auxilliary staff to AssetCo in the first place.

Here are the details and the company’s response. They are three allegations, that they employed an adviser considered so dangerous by the government that he is banned from entering Britain; that they currently employ an adviser who advocates aggressive military jihad and there were involved in a big controversy in the United States over allegations that  their top man had secretly funded Osama Bin Laden.

The first case involves  Yusuf Al-Qaradawi , a man banned from entering Britain since 2008, after advocating the abduction and killing of US soldiers in Iraq and the killing of Israeli citizens. On other matters he is  tolerant, including allowing Muslims to consume a very limited amount of alcohol . He condones wife-beating as a last resort so long as it done lightly and thinks homosexual acts should be punished by the death penalty. He was chairman of  Arcapita Shariah Advisory Board.Ironically he came to Britain in 2004 and Ken Livingstone, the Labour mayorial candidate who approved the original AssetCo contract, shared a platform at City Hall which was condemned by Bob Neill, then a London Assembly member.

The company confirm his former employment: A spokesman said: ” He was an adviser only on aspects of shari’ah law and our relationship with him ended inFebruary 2002. ”

But since he has left he was had been replaced by another adviser Muhammad Taqi Usmani , a senior Pakistan Muslim scholar, and former judge who has recently advocated ” aggressive military jihad.” According to an article in The Times see http://thetim.es/pcASva– he believes Muslims should live peaceably in Britain,”  only until they gain enough power to engage in battle”. He has since corrected this impression suggesting a more ambivalent attitude to jihad.

He also as a former Pakistani sharia judge argued against the women’s protection law which made rape a criminal offence.

The company said ” We believe the report to be a mistranslation of what he actually said. He did not advocate aggressive military jihad.”

The final area involves a row in the US when Arcapita took over Cypress Communications – a company which manufactured a state of the art computer security kit. There was an allegation that the chairman of Arcapita,Mohammed Abdulaziz Aljomaih – was discovered on the ‘Golden Chain’ list of Bin Laden supporters and financiers which was seized in 2002 during an anti-terror raid in Bosnia.

There followed an inquiry by the Committee for Foreign Investment in the US  on whether the company -like the take-over of  US ports by a Dubai firm- and it ended with the company being allowed to run the company but not allowing non US national access to sensitive computer software. See:http://www.nationalcorruptionindex.org/pages/profile.php?profile_id=325

The company’s response is: “This claim was thoroughly investigated by the US authorities at the time and they found that Al Jomaih, chairman of Arcapita, was not the same person named in the list. Restrictions on non US citizens  were applied at the time, like any other foreign company buying a US company in a sensitive area , but these have since been lifted.”

The only person so far to raise this issue of Arcapita has been Matt Wrack, general secretary of the Fire Brigades Union. In a letter to Bob Neill he says: ” I am sure you will appreciate the importance of this at a time when we are still considering the outcome of the inquest into the 7/7 terror attacks.

“The simple truth is that this privatization has been a complete and utter disaster for all concerned. The complacency and lack of foresight of those responsible is an utter scandal as is the continuing attempt to pretend there is nothing wrong”.

My conclusion is that the arrangements which could lead to Arcapita taking over London’s fire brigade prove there is a major flaw in the government’s privatisation agenda .

If a firm that cannot be vetted can take over such a sensitive area- particularly as London Fire Brigade plays a major role in protecting the capital for future terrorist attacks, there is something seriously wrong.

 I cannot prove that Arcapita is not a fit and proper company to run the operational side of the London fire Brigade ( they own other less sensitive things like Freightliner and Viridian, N Ireland’s electricity). They also point out that their advisers are not employees of the company and they do not have any say in the operation of the company. Nor having just done a blog about the media misrepresenting Muslims, do I want to create scare stories.

But as a citizen I would want my elected representatives to guarantee that in such a sensitive area, they are safe to do so, and there is no hidden agenda behind this take over.

Anything less would be grossly irresponsible and playing with the lives of everybody who lives in London- whether they be Muslim, Jew, Atheist, Christian or whatever. I hope Mr Neill and Mr Coleman are listening.

The unflattering media coverage of Britain’s Muslims

Posted on by

Tabloid image of 2 million Muslims?: Pic: Courtesy Daily Mail

Far from me to add to journalists’  woes in the middle of the Hackgate scandal but a pretty damning book recently out gives an unflattering  picture of the media’s coverage of the Muslim community.

Pointing the Finger: Islam and Muslims in the British Media  edited by Julian Petley and Robin Richardson, chair of the Campaign for Press  and Broadcasting Freedom and ex director of the Runnymede Trust respectively (http://bit.ly/qh4TCv ) , does not make comforting reading. I discussed it  this week on Epilogue an English language arts programme put out by the Iranian state TV, Press TV(see    http://www.presstv.ir/Program/189749.html )                             ).

Much of the analysis – with one glaring exception I  am in agreement. The  book, has a wide range of contributors including my old colleague, Hugh Muir, now the Guardian’s witty diary editor. It provides a forensic analysis  showing  much  of   the media coverage of the country’s two million Muslims equates them with terrorism or extremism  or portrays Islam as a dangerous or irrational religion.

Equally damaging is a forensic examination of tabloid scare stories (both Daily Express) showing that Lambeth Council had abolished  the term Christmas lights  or a museum in the Cheddar Gorge had banned Before Christ to appease Muslims were fabrications. Worse than that, when the authorities tried to correct such ludicrous stories, they were ignored. The broadsheets were not exempt – a story claiming the Archbishop of Canterbury was backing the introduction of Sharia law for everyone -was totally misrepresented by The Times. ( he wasn’t he had raised the issue in a theological discussion distorted by that paper)

Where I part company with  the authors is their attack on John Ware who produced a controversial programme on hidden Muslim extremism in Britain for BBC’s Panorama. His main point was that leading Muslims working with the UK government on a moderate agenda were using Arabic websites to support extremism including suicide bombers. This coincides with a similar warnings from both ex Observer journalist Martin Bright and Nick Cohen, the Observer columnist.

The book gives a lame excuse for this behaviour. If the same people give different versions of their views to meet the needs of different audiences – in this case Palestine and the British domestic public – that’s all right because all politicians do it. But I am afraid it isn’t -either leading figures should tell the Palestinians they sympathise with their cause but don’t support the bombers- or tell the Brits, they do support suicide bombers in the fight against Israel. They can have their cake and eat it. And Ware was obviously right to pursue them over this.

 That aside this book is important -including fascinating interviews with Muslims who are journalists and how they were treated by their news desks -some being  “used” to infiltrate extremist groups. As one put it: “I am a professional journalist not a professional Paki”.

Given the present climate of mistrust and the concerns about society being distorted through the prism of the media, there are valuable lessons to be learned. We need more responsible  and diverse coverage or this will be another reason why the press is dying and becoming increasingly irrelevant to more and more people.

What it does not discuss is the increasingly vitriolic and unbalanced stuff in the blogosphere – from all sides. But if the media doesn’t do its job properly and spends much of its time attacking  or fabricating stories about Muslims or indeed, any other minority,  it  is playing with fire  by creating the climate for even more vicious blogs and racial tensions.

Update: AssetCo stay of execution until July 25

Posted on by

Update : AssetCo hearing  time and place fixed on court schedule

COURT 62
Before MR JUSTICE SALES
Monday, 25 July 2011
At half past 10

APPLICATIONS
Omniway Properties Ltd v Fairlamb
Bowman v Mellor
Monty Farms SA v Agrexco Agricultural Export Company Ltd
Monty Farms SA v Agrexco Agricultural Export Company Ltd
Dr Oetker (UK) Ltd v Kenshawnapier Ltd
Rowan & Dartington & Co Ltd v Davis

COMPANIES COURT
Medipharm Ltd
In the matter of Assetco PLC
Medpharma Ltd & Nafisa ATI
Medicentres (UK) Limited

Assetco, the near bankrupt company in charge of London and Lincolnshire’s fire engines, was given until July 25 to try to stitch up a take over deal or go bust.

Mr Justice Peter Smith  at a hearing in the Chancery Division of the High Court in London rejected moves to wind it up owing £140m  to creditors or going into administration.

The company is thought to be negotiating a deal with a Bahrain bank, Arcapita, owned by Saudis, but there is only a slim chance of the deal succeeding.

Arcapita are said to be offering just 2p a share – valuing the company at £5.77m – but already the shares had dropped to 1p at the close of trading, though after hours sales boosted it to 1.30p. Both are all time lows for the company and a statement from the firm warned ” there can be no certainty of an offer for the Company being made. ”

The company is worth just £3.6m – virtually a pittance because of its huge debts.

A take over by Arcapita Bank will not be good news. Watch this space for new revelations about this firm and some disturbing stuff about AssetCo which has been sent to me by email.

Too expensive to investigate Barnet Council- the auditor’s excuse

Posted on by

Barnet Council " too expensive to investigate"

Paul Hughes, the auditor who refused a public interest inquiry into the appalling £1.3 m MetPro security staff scandal exposed by my fellow bloggers has rejected a further appeal for an inquiry into Barnet Council’s extraordinary inability to monitor  its own contracts properly.

Only last week his inaction was singled out by Eric Pickles, the communities secretary, in a speech to the annual conference of the Chartered Institute for Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) – the big wigs of the accountancy profession – for  missing the scandal altogether when his firm Grant Thornton audited Barnet Council for a £373,000 fee. Instead Pickles praised Barnet bloggers, Mrs Angry and Mr Mustard among many others, for finding out  what Mr Hughes missed. ( see my old colleague Patrick Butler in Society Guardian).http://bit.ly/pujHys Now he says he can’t really investigate because it will be too expensive for the taxpayer.

In a letter to Andrew Dismore, the  former MP for Hendon and Labour candidate challenging Brian Coleman for the London Assembly next year, he says:

“In considering whether to undertake work in connection with a public interest report we are required to balance the additional cost top the taxpayer with the nature and scale of the issue. The relevant Audit Commission rates for the level of staff  that would be required for this are up to £380 an hour (engagement lead) and £210 per hour ( manager) and there is some risk that at a cost to the taxpayer we can only repeat what is already in, or will be in, the public domain.”

” Our view remains that the most appropriate response for the taxpayers of Barnet is to allow the council to complete its own review before committing to any detailed investigation work on our part.”

He does promise that he will not hesitate to use these powers ” in the public interest” when the oucnil reports back in September if the soon to be privatised management are not ” robust” on their response.

Not surprisingly Mr Dismore is not satisfied. He writes back that  he finds his reply   “very disappointing, as I know will many other Barnet residents. Can you please set out  in detail what steps you will be taking to “monitor the situation and assess the management and internal audit review work”.

So there is no change here. The bloggers who got MetPro need to keep Mr Hughes on his expensive toes. A reminder: his e-mail is paul.hughes@uk.gt.com.

Exclusive:London’s fire brigade owners to go bust owing £140m on Monday unless a take over succeeds

Posted on by

AssetCo: In a even deeper hole Pic courtesy TheScottishSun

AssetCo, the owners of London and Lincolnshire’s fire engines will go under on Monday, owing a staggering £140m to creditors unless a take over deal is agreed in the next 48 hours, a registrar’s hearing was told on Thursday evening.

In an extraordinary move in advance of Monday’s Companies Court hearing to examine thecompany being liquidated or going into administration, directors of AssetCo , lawyers, and  investment bankers sought to grab £86,000 in fees before the company went bust.

 Matthew Parfitt, lawyer acting for AssetCo, revealed that lawyers and investment bankers working on potential take over bid said they would ” down tools” or ” down pens” on saving the company unless the Registrar, Mr Briggs, validated fee payments immediately.

He  said  two directors, Tudor Davies and Tim Barrett, threatened to quit the company today (Fri) unless the court authorised payments of £25,000 for a week’s work and up to £1000 for expenses for hotel bills and meals. It was revealed Mr Davies is charging AssetCo £3000 a day for his work and Mr Barrett £2000 a day.

Mr Adam Goodison, acting for creditors Northern Bank, owed over £1.3m, revealed the figures, when he opposed any move to pay out the cash. He speculated whether there was ” panic among the professionals working for the company ” that had made them seek this order. Other creditors were sitting in the Room 412 at the High Court to observe what was happening to their money.

Mr Briggs described Assetco’s submission as ” extremely unattractive” and agreed with Mr Goodison that the company was putting ” a gun to the head of the court” by threatening to ” down tools”unless they received ” a substantial amount of cash.”

He refused to authorise the payments saying ” he hoped the gun will now not go off.” Instead he adjourned any decision to Monday’s hearing which stopped directors getting preferential treatment.

The scale of AssetCo’s woes were revealed in a submission from Mr Parfitt. They show that on Monday it could  go down owing between £117m and £140m and that money was disappearing on a daily basis.

Among the  major new creditors are state owned Halifax Bank of Scotland which is owed £12m and energy company, EDF, which suggests AssetCo may not have paid fuel bills for premises they run in London. Others include FD Direct, the Inland Revenue.

 He tried to talk up the one unnamed bidder still  said to be  in advanced talks saying the deal would mean all creditors would be paid in full ,all bank loans restructured and the company recapitalised. But his statement to the court means that four out of five potential bidders have now walked out.

Mr Briggs queried why in these circumstances the company had not give in confidence details of the bid to the court – which happens in similar cases- so the court could decide itself.

 Mr Goodison went further: ” If this deal is so wonderful why is there any need for this order and it would be unnecessary if it goes ahead.”

Then he detailed the demands for payment. They included a £25,000 flat weekly fee from a foreign investment bank which will get hundreds of thousands of pounds from a success fee if  it goes ahead and £36,000 to a firm of solicitors that has drawn up  the plan for administration.

The only people who came out well were Mr Parfitt and Mr Goodison who declined to take costs for the 90 minute hearing.

Matt Wrack, FBU General secretary said: “The demands the directors and advisors made to the court beggar belief.
“The London and Lincolnshire fire brigades do not own their fire engines and kit and are in crisis because they privatized all of their operational assets. Both brigades, the Mayor of London and Government have shown extraordinary complacency.
“The entire operational assets of both brigades could be seized by creditors and sold off in full or in part. Neither brigade appears to have any fallback plan of any credibility.
“The foolish decision to privatize all fire engines and kit leaves them sitting on the sidelines with no power over what happens to their critical operational assets.
“What was put before the court is a public scandal and makes clear in whose interest private companies work. Yet the only people making an issue out of it are the firefighters on the ground who do care about what happens and the impact it could have on public safety.
“There must be an end to privatization in any critical emergency service.”

 My comment on this is simple. Apart from this being another example of City directors blatantly trying to fill up their boots with oodles of cash at the expense of other people , questions must be asked about all the people who agreed that this company should be given multi million pound contracts. In London I am afraid this includes Labour mayoral candidate Ken Livingstone and Val Shawcross ( he declined to give a quote to me for a Tribune article this week), Boris Johnson  and Brian Coleman, chair of the fire authority, who extended AssetCo’s role. In Lincolnshire I am told senior officials were involved with the firm and then there are all the former fire chiefs who taken jobs with them.

AssetCo shares dropped nearly 13 per cent today to an all time low of 2.22p making it  worth just £5.77m. If  on Monday AssetCo goes down, there must be  an official inquiry.

Exclusive :The district auditor’s disgraceful response to the Barnet MetPro scandal

Posted on by

Andrew Dismore: Right to complain Pic courtesy: thejc.com

The scandal over  the employment of security guards by MetPro Rapid Response is one of the worst examples of a council failing to monitor outsourcing of a service – the only one I know where an authority never even signed a proper contract. See my earlier blog at http://bit.ly/ktHKbs

 So it is  outrageous that  Paul Hughes, the  district auditor,has refused a request from Andrew Dismore, the former MP for Hendon and now Labour’s challenger to Tory Brian Coleman, for a full scale public interest inquiry into the affair.

Andrew rightly decided to report the council to the district auditor and call for a public interest report into the scandal. In his letter to Mr Hughes he pointed out:” Having been at the Council meeting when the Robocop style of security used by MetPro at the request of the Council first came under criticism, the consequent investigations have revealed a catalogue of catastrophic failures by Barnet Council and its leadership.

” This poor contracting and lack of financial control  is not a one off, as the Iceland investment fiasco and cost overruns of the Aerodrome Rd bridge confirm.

“What is especially worrying, is that the internal audit found there were inadequate systems to ensure the same thing did not happen again. The “One Council” initiative will create dozens of opportunities for more to go wrong too, with consequent mammoth losses to Barnet’s long suffering tax payers, if immediate corrective action is not taken.”

Mr Hughes reply is equally instructive:

“Where the body is already taking action to remedy deficiencies the auditor may conclude that a Public Interest Report at that point would only have limited impact and may in fact have the effect of unnecessarily undermining public confidence in a public body” (my italics).

“Therefore,whilst we consider that the matters raised in the internal audit report do represent serious internal control issues, our view is that a public interest report is not required at this time.”

He goes on to say the reasons he has refused a further inquiry is because Barnet has promised to investigate further and reform its procedure and because ” the matter is already in the public domain”.

He leaves a faint hope of reconsidering his decision if the council responds by significantly delaying reforms or the failure is found to be systemic (by the council investigating itself).

Barnet has responded. It is cutting  nine more jobs in the department supervising contracts – presumably to increase the scope for more mistakes.

 As  the leader of Barnet Labour Group, Alison Moore  says:” How will cutting posts help deliver an “effective and responsive” procurement service when the council are about to embark on complex privatisations?  I suspect this decision has more to do with saving money than sorting out the service. This is a barmy proposal.”

Andrew Dismore has challenged this pathetic decision of  the auditor whose company Grant Thornton managed to miss the MetPro scandal for three years and pass Barnet’s accounts without any question.

His letter warns: “Nothing could further undermine public confidence in Barnet’s administration, which is now at rock bottom as any objective resident would confirm and as evidenced by the Council’s own satisfaction surveying.”

 “My request for the public interest inquiry was not just in the context of Metpro, but more generally into Barnet’s contract letting and monitoring processes and checks. Only this week, the Hendon Times has carried on its front page yet another example, this time in the contracting (or lack of it) for care services, where failings at the social care centre with whom the Council failed to follow proper procedures and checks and to agree a formal contract actually led to the death of a resident with learning difficulties. Barnet are serial offenders presiding over a catalogue of procurement disasters. ”

…” there appear to be more deep seated problems with procurement and contracts that throw real doubt about the council’s capacity to take on the highly risky “easyCouncil” service outsourcing.  In the circumstances, I would invite you to reconsider your decision. ”

Mr Hughes will know that a public interest report by him could have wider implications for other councils. Given Barnet boasts it is a Tory flagship council that is blazing the privatisation trail – that is even more reason to check its public probity in this area.

Of course  there might be other reasons. I am sure Mr Hughes is a man of such probity that he  couldn’t have reached his decision in the knowledge that Grant Thornton, under new audit reforms following the abolition of the Audit Commission,, would need to persuade Barnet to continue its lucrative auditing contract. I mean he wouldn’t decide the commercial profits of Grant Thornton are more important than public probity. Or that given under the present rules Barnet will have to pay for the public interest report, that he could save the council money and avoid annoying Brian Coleman by refusing to investigate.

But you don’t have to sit back. If you, and say, all the bloggers in Barnet think Mr Hughes is wrong you can demand he reconsider. I suggest you do this to back up Andrew Dismore. You can email the auditor at paul.hughes@uk.gt.com .

A judge is likely to look sympathetically at large numbers of residents demanding the district auditor investigate  the £1.3m non contract with MetPro and Mr Hughes’ decision is subject to judicial review. I hope it won’t have to come to this.

BBC bosses: Squandering £160m of our licence fee

Posted on by

Broadcasting House: Part of the BBC's wasted £160m Pic Courtesy:vam.ac.uk

Update: Since this blog was written Chris Patten, chair of the BBC Trust, has decided to curb the very high levels of executive pay at the BBC – a first step to deal with the problem. But he will need to tackle how the managers control non journalist spending – such as IT contracts and property moves which cost licencepayers £160m.

Don’t get this blog wrong, this is not  an attack  on the BBC for wasting licence payers money on programmes. It is an attack on how the BBC has wasted  tens of millions of pounds by not controlling the money it spends on the boring bits – the money spent on property, studios and digital equipment that go to make those programmes possible.

Two recent reports from the National Audit Office – the body that on our behalf examines whether our taxes are spent wisely –  make very disturbing reading. They are into the BBC’s handling of some £2 billion of cash that is being spent on moves from  London  to Salford and Glasgow  and back to Broadcasting House in London and into cutting edge digitisation of  TV. I have written about this at length in The Journalist – the National Union of Journalists magazine  see http://bit.ly/mCekbZ .

In a nutshell they show that up to £160m was wasted on these plans because of delays, a botched private tender and exposed a  bad management attitude at the top.

As the auditors, not known for colourful phrases, said on people handling the  studio move to Pacific Quay, Glasgow :“It was sometimes difficult to engage senior staff in decision-making about their area as some seemed to either not fully understand their responsibilities or take them seriously enough.”

To put in context the money lost was enough  to run both BBC News Channel and BBC4 – or in radio terms the entire cost of running Radio Three and Four – for a year. That bad.

The reason why it matters is that the BBC is now having to make cuts to meet the government’s spending targets. Journalists are going to be sacked, programmes and parts of the BBC World Service , radio  and TV channels closed down. It can ill afford to make mistakes in its boring  bits.

I don’t mind paying a licence fee to hear Jim Naughtie and John Humphrys confronting a less than straight politician on the Today programme or  see  Ian Hislop and Paul Merton take the piss out of  Boris Johnson on Have I got News for You? I certainly am keen on Panorama exposing scandals in private care homes. I like to be entertained by comedians like David Mitchell or the lewder Russell Howard on Live at the Apollo or dramas like Case Histories, Waking the Dead etc.

I do mind paying a licence fee for some useless manager to spend millions giving IT contractor  Siemens a monopoly tender  to digitalise TV which then falls apart. Or giving some  property company £46m extra cash because  BBC managers can’t get their act together to move back to Broadcasting House in time and have to extend their leases at Bush House.

So I think it is time the corporation got a grip on this. And what are they and Jeremy Hunt, the culture secretary, doing. Trying to bind the hands of the very body exposing this waste from doing its job properly.

Over a  year in government nothing has been done. The head of the National Audit Office who has the wonderful name of Amyas Morse wrote to Mr Hunt last September trying to get three basic things done on behalf of viewers and listeners.  He wanted  unfettered access to information to the BBC, the right to decide what he wanted to investigate and the right to publish his findings when he and not the BBC wanted.  Hardly revolutionary stuff.

Not granted yet. So how about some interactive reaction. If you think the man from the audit office should get  his access on our behalf –  send him an email at  enquiries@nao.gsi.gov.uk  marked Amyas Morse ( as it says on their website). You think  the BBC Trust is blocking this email trust.enquiries@bbc.co.uk or contact its chairman Lord Patten at pattenc@parliament.uk .

Finally you could remind Jeremy Hunt that he is supposed to have sorted this. Try jeremy.hunt@culture.gsi.gov.uk .  It is time the BBC had a metaphorical bomb put under it so it  gets its act together and doesn’t waste another £160m.