By John Sullivan,
Your Choice Barnet LATC
(I am informed is known as a Teckal company ) formed by LBB to wash their
hands of the responsibility for vulnerable and disabled people in Barnet , is
purely a front for the decisions of local councillors. This particular board of
puppets rather than afford concerned parents carers service users and Barnet
residents three or four minutes to read out a short statement, chose to cause
further controversy and bad feeling by walking out on service users
parents family carers and concerned Barnet residents stating " This is a
board meeting of a private company, it is not a local authority meeting
therefore that right does not extend ". These same people had been carping
on for an hour about how they were not a private company in fact, at a recent parents
information meeting on 27th March the CEO Tracey Lees made a particular point
of shouting me down, and telling others present YCB is not a private company, obviously
until it suits them. In essence the YCB
board of directors are little more than council employees introducing policies
driven agreed and insisted upon by the local councillors, to cut service quality
provision and therefore the cost of service provision, probably in order to
hide the councils shame at what they are up to from the electorate.
However you have to understand that the six figure salaried T
Lees has to comply with her political masters demands as she has a lot to lose
if she fails to do so. Of course this decision to walk out on us, like all decisions
of YCB was doubtless approved by these political masters at Barnet council (who
are the shareholders of the company). Note " The constitution of a Teckal
company must ensure the local authority has decisive influence and control over
all decision making" furthermore " The council must control the
company and its activities in the same way as they do their own departments and
activities " therefore the YCB board were acting on orders – if they weren’t
then they were breaching their constituion. In fact virtually every question that was asked
of them at a meeting on Tuesday 28th May they answered with "that is to do with the LBB ", prompting
me to ask what is the point of this meeting with YCB when we should be meeting
with LBB if we want any answers. In truth the board meeting followed the same
track, and I sat there wondering what is the point of this board anyway which
was a rather silly really , because the point is obvious.
It is for the councillors who make up the
cabinet of Barnet Council, to make unsavoury and odious decisions that affect the most vulnerable
people in our community, without the underhanded nature of their activities
being put at their own doorstep . The proposed changes of the March 1st
document, that I will explain later, is
a banker bet to hit the skids in a few months time, and finish up in a car crash
like the business plan that launched YCB. Just before a local election the Conservative
administration want somebody to point the finger at rather than take the hit for
their activities in undermining and destroying support services for the most
vulnerable disabled people in the borough. This is definitely not a vote winner
even in this day and age. That brands
every disabled or sick person a scrounging skiving layabout , which any decent
person knows to be rather dishonest and despicable. Neither YCB or LBB want to consult with
service users and family carers they prefer to walk out rather than face the
music, so just for the record it worries
me not who reads this guest blog, here is my view on the incompetent and I
believe to be underhand way the local councillors act through YCB.
Let me be clear about
where I am with regard to Your Choice Barnet . LBB decided to wash their hands
of the responsibility of all and any disabled people in Barnet in the same way
they washed their hands of responsibility for the elderly when they handed care
of the elderly to Fremantle.
The Fremantle business plan was challenged and those challenges were ignored and the
ignoring of those challenges apart from the distress created for service users
and staff, allowed an incompetent ill
considered business model to be forced through. On top of the costs in the original
business plan, The council ended up being sued for “lost profits” by the
contractor, at a cost to Barnet tax payers of over £10 million above and beyond
the contracted amounts.
The Your Choice Barnet business model was subjected to in
depth scrutiny by the academic Professor Dexter Whitfield who highlighted a myriad
of floors in the business plan and challenged the refusal to consider an in house option. Professor
Whitfields concerns were ignored . If you look now a year into the future from
his evaluation of this seriously flawed business plan, you find he got it absolutely right, and the highly
paid so called consultants for LBB (
close on £7 million on OBP to date ) got
it completely wrong.
For Councillor Sachin
Rajput LBB Cabinet member responsible) and co to claim that everything is going to
plan at YCB belies an attitude either divorced from reality or with total
contempt for the people who elected them.
So now having witnessed the failure of the original business
plan that was riddled with holes and was nothing more than a shot in the dark
fingers crossed attempt , at the privatisation of adult services for the
disabled in a desperate bid for profit. We now have the same incompetents that have
come up with a plan B that they launched on March 1st for staff consultation, yet
again riddled with doubts, that is again predicated on a fingers crossed exercise,
strangely enough similar to the DRS
contract just handed to Capita, that obviously no councillor has bothered to
read properly.
As a parent I have watched the disaster unfold regarding the
formation of Your Choice Barnet, I have
seen parents family carers long term and short term staff ignored. some staff and parents even feeling threatened if they
say anything out of fear of losing their
job or the services they are provided with stopped , a similar anti whistle
blower mentality we are witnessing in the NHS and sadly as happened at
Winterbourne View. I have watched LBB & YCB ignore the advice and concerns
of the coal face staff through their union representatives, the ignoring of
Dexter Whitfield the academic, the ignoring of Andy Mudd of APSE ( Association
of Public Service Excellence ) a company that represents councils across the
country of all political colours. I have watched in many ways the dramatic
deterioration of support services for disabled and sick people in Barnet predicated
not on the individual needs of the service users as is claimed , but in so many
ways these days on the need to make cuts
or profits rather than the quality of care being provided being the main focus
as was the focus when services were in-house.
LBB & YCB listened to no one except tame highly paid
consultants with a vested interest. These consultants have got it wrong. Those
who have a vested interest in the health safety and well being of the services users
and the long term viability of these vital public service have been proven
right. What beggars belief is LBB via
the YCB board of director still refuse to listen to or properly consult those
that have a proven track record of getting it right. Not only that but they use
a sanitised version of the March 1st consultation document , having refused to
provide all affected parties with a copy of this document making informed
debate impossible they are now referring to information meetings as a
consultation for service users and family carers.
Invitations to some
of these meetings stated there will be " NO CHANGE " to the service
provided the implication being that no change was in perpetuity, therefore
many people never bothered to attend
the meetings . We now learn from a YCB board member subsequent to those invitations being sent
out, that those no change undertakings cannot be guaranteed beyond six months,
which begs the question how many would have attended had they known the true
facts.
There has been considerable disquiet with parents and family
carers of Community Space who object to the merger of Community Space and BILS
as do many Bils service users ( called co-location by YCB ) for a myriad of
reasons. Yet whilst this dispute was raging the YCB people knew full well they
had not mentioned the fact that they also intended to form an outreach group
for Flower Lane services users at Community Space as well, which can only add
to the concerns being raised.
They want to dump disabled
Barnet residents out of their established environment at Flower Lane to make
way for "new customers" from outside of the borough to boost their
profits, but they never mentioned it at the meetings, I wonder why?. They have repeatedly denied the claims of
family carers and service users that the plans to devastate the working
conditions and incomes of skilled workers and replace them with unskilled
workers , with a further effect on all staff when the benchmarking report
is acted upon resulting in further cuts
in staff wages would have an effect on staff morale, yet in their presentation
to the board they make exactly those points, the points they have repeatedly
denied.
" So now you know why I got angry at this board
meeting, and in my situation so would you".
When this disaster waiting to happen business model was
launched there was an undertaking that
in the event of commercial failure the services would be brought back in house,
the business model has failed it has failed disastrously and they have lost a
great deal of money and the fundamental foundation of that business model the
recruitment of customers ( yes Customers ) from outside of the borough has
failed abysmally, yet they want us to
take their word again that this is a possibility. We asked the question then
and we ask the same question now, " what possible reason would a
significant number of parents or carers have to add to the journey time of
their loved one traipsing them backwards and forwards on a daily basis to
Barnet, away from their community hub and friends" and why should the provision of services for our wards be
affected to accommodate them " . Yet again they refuse to listen to the
pleas and concerns of the service users parents and family carers , the concerns of Mr Reasonable a local
blogger with huge experience in the field of outsourcing of public services,
Professor Dexter Whitfield, Andy Mudd
and everybody else. Apart from the now
proven to be incompetent highly paid consultants with only one vested interest
and that is to line their pockets, no matter what happens to the people that
need the support services. ( I remind you again close on £7million on
consultants to date).
It might happen to you because public services also caters for people that have led a healthy
life and been stuck down by injury or stroke or a sudden debilitating health
issue, so let me ask you if you were in my position would you just lay back and
think of England whilst being shafted ? Or would you,like me, stand your ground and demand that the human
rights of your daughter be respected and valued, would you make every effort to
ensure the long term viability of the
services your daughter relies upon.
Would you demand the right to be meaningfully consulted on
the implications of the proposed support services or cross your fingers and
toes and accept the risky changes in the March 1st proposals ? Would you demand that the opinions of
academics such as Dexter Whitfield and experts in the field such as Andy Mudd,
who have a track record of getting it right be invited to assess the
implication of these proposals on your behalf regarding the future health and
well being of your loved one before they are implemented?
Many are saying “what's the point, they will do what they want in any event. They
don't care what we think or how we feel. As far as I am concerned, my daughter
is more important than that. I will always put my head above the parapet to protect
my daughter from those who put ideology above need , who believe service
users parents and family carers have no
rights to be consulted on changes that could devastate them. These changes have
a massive impact on their physical and mental health ( along with my own physical and mental health). They want us yet
again to trust their judgement a judgement that has been proven to be devastatingly
flawed before. Would you trust the
future well being of a family member to people that are such proven failures
Who can possibly
believe Barnet Council take consultation seriously? The consultation finished
on Friday the 31st May and the decision was to be made two days later on Monday
3rd June. As they had no intention of working over the weekend, so much for any
serious attempt at vetting and
considering the opinions of others that you are supposed to have meaningfully
consulted with. Via legal action I have managed to agree the delay of the
decision on the March 1st proposals that was to be pushed through on Monday
3rd June whilst the legality of what LBB
and YCB are doing is quantified, and had it delayed by one week until Monday 10th
June. But it does go to show how bogus the consultation with staff has been.
Contrary to the opinions of Councillors Cornelius, Rajput and what can only be described as a YCB Board
of puppets, who choose to gamble with
the lives of real people rather than listen to all opinions, particularly from
people who have proven they are far more competent in this field. I believe my
daughter and her peers have the human
right to be consulted and have the benefit of the opinions of those that do not
have a vested interest other than the future well being of my daughter and her
peers such as Dexter Whitfield and Andy Mudd. So I will fight until my dying
breath to demand that right, and if I am
proven wrong by opinions across the piece I will accept her fate because I have
no other option, because I have a YCB gun at my head as does Susan and her
peers.
We all learned an expensive lesson this week about the whole
One Barnet programme that YCB is the phase one failure of, and that is you no
longer have rights because YCB is a private company and where even bigger
companies such as Capita are concerned,
many issues can be deemed contractually sensitive. Therefore Barnet residents, get yourselves prepared for
being told you are not entitled to any answers to your questions, to be advised
that Barnet is now a democracy free zone and any enquiries or concerns you have
about public services are contractually sensitive and none of your business, and if you demand answers the board are
perfectly entitled to walk out on you because your democratic rights no longer
apply.
I am aware disabled people have few rights in this world and
the law does little or nothing to protect them from ideologues like Councillors
Cornelius and Rajput therefore I have no idea whether Susan has the human right to be consulted, or
whether consultation is any longer the right of disabled people . My attempt to
seek help from the legal system and
demand the right of Susan and her peers to be meaningfully consulted may fail
miserably, but as a parent truly in fear of what these incompetent ideologues are
doing to adults services, I am obligated to at the very least try my best to
protect her and her peers.
So I ask the question - " WHAT REPRESENTS PEACE OF MIND
TO YOU ? " do you even know, well let me
tell you what peace of mind is for me. For more than thirty years my
daughter Susan has relied upon in house adult services. In all that time, there
was never one year that huge deficits were created, neither was there ever a
need to downgrade and deskill vital support staff placing service users at
potential risk as so horribly witnessed at Winterbourne View. Yet in one year of outsourcing the opposite
applies making the case for service to be brought back in-house indisputable.
Making "PEACE OF MIND "for many service users parents and family
carers a return to in-house services a priority, coupled with an end to the
failures and risky business plans of LBB/YCB . An end to the hand washing of
responsibility for disabled people by Cornelius and his crew of ideologues ,and
their buck passing to the puppets on the walk away from the reality YCB board ,
and a return to the democratic right to be meaningfully consulted by the LA in Barnet.
Whilst these things would restore my " Peace of Mind
" and that of many other parents family carers and service users, I am
aware there is more chance of me getting nappy rash, however I am by the very nature of my being have a
need to try.
I was present at the Board Meeting and can completely understand John's despair at the way service users and their families are being treated.
ReplyDeleteThe members of the board discussed the need to involve parents in Your Choice Barnet, including inspection of services. However the meeting was conducted as if there were no parents or service users there. I cannot see how the Board has any desire to consult with parents or service users when at the Board meeting they acted as though the parents and service users were not sitting in front of them.
I too was at that shameful board meeting, and I too agree that it is clear Your Choice Barnet directors, are implementing Barnet council's contemptuous attitude towards their service users and residents. It seems they are set on destroying adult social services, which any of us may need now or in the future, and to hit service-users, their families and professional care workers staff with the same blow - to undermine and subdue them. It will make life much easier for the private company (not owned by the council) that will take over when the services will be run down to the ground and we will all remain dependent on the vultures that seek to make a profit from our disabilities.
ReplyDeleteAccountability? Transparency? - don't make me laugh.