Yet another gem of a press release from Barnet Council - A new scheme to help poor hard up property developers. Ah diddums you think. Interesting to see that of all the people struggling in Barnet, the ones they single out for help are the property developers. How do they plan to do this - by allowing them to defer "section 106" payments for up to 2 years. You may ask what a "section 106" payment is? Well in effect it's a tax that property developers have to pay. In return they make huge profits (although I'm sure some bright spark will point out that it's not a tax - it's a contribution). Anyway, to get planning permission, you sign up to make an agreement to pay this. Now the whole concept of getting the private sector to do things is to take the risk away from the public purse. As ever this works until things go wrong. Then, the white knight taxpayer rides to the rescue, using your cash for a big baleout. Now at the moment, there is a recession. Barnet is a commuter suburb. Many people working in the City have lost their jobs. Has the Council said "you've lost your job, have a 2 year Council tax holiday"? Nope, of course not. You see the Councillors and Officers of Barnet have a rather different relationship with developers to us taxpayers. Earlier this year it was disclosed that a couple of Council officials ran up £5,000 expenses bills attending a property conference in Cannes. That's more than my 2 week family holiday, for 5 people in Florida. I suppose if the developers didn't get the tax breaks, our council officials might not get an invite next year.
Lets do a little tour of Barnet Council's other finest moments.
They went £11 Million over budget on a £12 Million budget with the Bridge replacement project at Aerodrome Road. Why? because they couldn't control Contractor and Partners effectively.
They spent £1.4 million on obsolete laptop computers and warranties for ALL of them, even though a large number were immediately put into storage (Computers which many local schools, OAP's, community groups are crying out for). These are being stored at huge cost to the taxpayer. A clear failure of the council's procurement procedures.
They lost £27.4 Million pounds in Icelandic banks, because senior council officials did not follow their own policy for making investments. A recent report has shown their was no supervision of the individuals making the policy. They were able to throw your cash around like confetti. There is clearly a lack of any form of financial discipline in Barnet council's treasury management team.
Burnt Oak Library refurbishment overran by many months, due to mismanagement of contractors.
They incurred legal costs of £1 Million because they couldn't draw up a contract to sell Underhill to Barnet FC properly.
Lastly (there are plenty more but I'm sure you are busy), and this one is close to my heart because it affected my own dearly departed mum and is probably the reason I started my crusade to sort the council out, the outsourcing of the Meals on Wheels contract to Sodexho.
My Mum, like many old and vulnerable folk in Barnet, relied on the Council for her daily meal. In April 2007, this contract was taken from the Council and given to Sodexho. They constructed rounds where they allowed 3 minutes per drop. Some drivers had to do 40 drops in the llunch period. Some old dears take 3 minutes to answer the door. My mum had several days where her dinner never arrived at all. The stress nearly killed her and I am convinced it contributed to her deterioration and eventual demise. It made her realise her total vulnerability and powerlessness. Why was this done? To save cash. Who benefitted? The shareholders of Sodexho? Who suffered? The weak and the vulnerable. Just to clarify one point. My mum paid for the service. The quality of the meals vastly deteriorated, but the cost stayed the same.
What does all of this tell us? That Barnet Council only care about the rich and the powerful, such as property developers and the shareholders of corporations such as Sodexho. They don't give a stuff about frail pensioners. This has yet again been shown with the cuts to sheltered housing wardens. You may believe them when they say "Yes, but it will save the Taxpayers money", but consider this. They have shown that they can't manage contractors. Aerodrome Road proves this. They don't have procedures to manage outsourcing migration properly - Sodexho & the Meals on Wheels contract proved this. They don't have the expertise to manage their cash, Iceland proved this. They don't have the skills to even manage small projects - Burnt Oak Library proved this. They don't understand procurement or IT. The Laptop fiasco proved this. They don't know how to draw up a legal contract or manage a legal process. The Underhill fiasco proved this.
If I want to back a horse in a race, I check the form of the Horse. Barnet Council have a massive project to privatise the Council called future shape. What are the key elements of outsourcing.
1. Effective contracts
2. Tight financial management
3. Effective controls
4. Effective contractor management
5. Robust service migration planning
Barnet have shown themselves to be useless at all of these. There are high profile, well documented failures to prove it. They say they'll save £11 Million from Future shape. That is how much they overspent on one small bridge replacement project at Aerodrome Road.
So if (when) Future Shape goes wrong and huge bills start arrriving for "out of scope of contract work", who will pay? We will, the old mugs, the taxpayers. Worse than that, the Council will be legally tied to the contractors, so it'll go on for years, regardless of who is in power.
The current regime responsible for all of this came into power when the bloke pictured at the top, Brian Coleman, the man who thinks that a taxi bill of £500 to take him to dinner is good value for the taxpayer, tabled a no confidence motion against the guy who lead the Tories at the last council election. As a result Mike Freer came in and the litany of failure began. In return Freer handed Brian Coleman the job of Mayor, something he has dreamed of for years.
No comments:
Post a Comment