Wednesday, 19 December 2012

Capita Week - Sefton Council to end £65m technical services contract with Capita Symonds


This week is “CAPITA WEEK” in the London Borough of Barnet. Following the decision of the cabinet of Barnet Council to award CAPITA a £750 million outsourcing contract, which will destroy 300 jobs in the Borough, the local blogs are spending a week investigating the record of Capita at other local authorites.
We are highlighting issues with outsourcing projects run by Capita, Barnet Councils chosen supplier for the One Barnet project. We are asking councillors to ensure that they are fully aware of all of the likely issues, before they put pen to paper with this massive contract.

 
Today we look at delivery. Have Capita delivered the savings that were promised? Our guinea pig council for today is Sefton.  Capita Symonds had provided the council’s technical services remit – such as road maintenance, engineering, property management and regeneration – since 2008.

But town hall chiefs are to now activate an escape clause which will see up to 140 staff transferred back to the council.

Council leaders claimed the contract was not delivering the savings which were anticipated when the deal was stuck.

Computer worryingly weekly reported “Capita was found to have directly contributed to clients' maladministration in the Individual Learning Accounts (ILA) contact. The ILA scheme was implemented in 2000 and abruptly pulled in 2001, after fraudulent activity was discovered. Credentials for individuals to access the scheme were being openly traded by both individual crooks and corrupt service providers, and used to cash out the accounts. People were still being prosecuted for fraud as late as seven years after the ILA debacle.”

We have heard big savings bandied about. We are told they are “guaranteed”. Has anyone from Barnet t Council spoken to Sefton Council to see what sort of Guarantees they received?
If you are worried, join the Barnet Alliance for Public Services , who are  holding a demonstration against One Barnet at Capita HQ on Thursday 20th, 5-7pm, 71 Victoria Street, London SW1H 0XA

Friern Barnet Library Court Case - my final thoughts

Today as I stood watching the Judge read her summing up of the reasons behind her judgement, I looked across at the various protagonists in the court. We had Mr Grundy, the council for Barnet, presumably a man who commands a few hundred pounds an hour for his services (assuming he's any good). We had Bill Murphy, the highly paid contractor who has come in on a wage perhaps equivalent to four or five librarians, to dismantle the library service. We have Suzanna Lewis, the lady who is the property specialist for Barnet. I've no idea what she gets paid. Possibly more than a librarian?

Then I looked at the other side. Keith Martin, a retired accountant who stuck his neck on the line financially to defend a library, a man who spends his life publishing books on topics of local interest. Pete Phoenix, a community activist working to assist people who are homeless find some sort of accomodation and in Friern Barnet to stop the council from closing a library, giving of his time for free. We had a stack of other people giving up a days work and pay. Why, to defend their community.

Yesterday I had a chat with Bill Murphy. He claimed that he isn't the bad guy. He claimed he's doing his best in a difficult circumstance. I genuinely believe that he thinks he is. The trouble is, who does he think he's doing his best for? The pensioners who use Friern Library? The children who are deprived of books? The students deprived of a place to study? Bill do you think you have served these people, at the bottom rung of society. Those who won't earn in ten years what you earn from the taxpayer this year?

Today I also had a nice little chat with Mr Grundy. Mr Grundy clearly has had a very good education. I wondered if he has ever struggled to study in a cramped flat, surrounded by siblings with the television blaring? Maybe he has? I wondered whether he ever took refuge in a public library when he was taking his law exams. When he was at whichever Inn he is a member of, scoffing the requisite number of dinners and drinking the requisite bottles of plonk, did he ever worry about how he'd get access to the books to pass his exams? Maybe he did, I have no idea. Mr Grundy is clearly a far clever chap than I am. He's far better spoken and I'm sure that as a trained advocate, he can earn far more money than I can. I'm sure that being highly intelligent and not dyslexic, he could write a far better, funnier and more informative blog than I can, if he chose to. Perhaps he has a social conscience and is a far better person than I am as well. Maybe, but he has done a terrible thing. He has facilitated a judgement which could lead to the closure of a community resource, depriving hundreds of people of a valued space, which may allow them to improve the quality of their education, their employment prospects and their childrens well being. Mr Grundy has climbed a ladder and achieved a job with stability, good prospects, a good salary and a nice pension. He is happy to take that ladder away from a whole community of other people. He sits atop the apple tree, eating the ripe apples and tossing down the ones with worms in, to the paupers below saying "I have succeeded, but you do not deserve your library, you do not deserve the chance to better yourself, you do not deserve an opportunity to improve your prospects" because this is the effect of the judgement on all those people who need the facilities and the space to study. To Mr Grundy it is simply a job well done. I congratulate Mr Grundy on doing such a fine job. On Thursday morning, I will be down at the homeless charity where I volunteer, making toast for the homeless of London. For all Mr Grundys wit, wealth and charm, I'd rather be there than spend another second in his company. An unkind comment was left on a picture of the gig my band did at Friern Barnet Library concerning the smell of homeless people. I would rather breath that than share my oxygen with people who rake in huge amounts of money from destroying the quality of life of their fellow man and pulling up the ladder so the hard working, intelligent young people from poor backgrounds in Friern Barnet suffer social exclusion.

As for Ms Lewis. Presumably if she does a really good job, she'll sell the site to a property developer who will make a few million quid from it. A community will have lost its heart and someone with perhaps no association at all with Barnet will rake in a huge profit.  I hope she's well paid. I hope that she is completely heartless and doesn't care at all about this, because if she does have a heart, sooner or later she is going to feel very bad about what she's done. I wouldn't wish such a pained soul on anyone.

What all of us forget sometimes is that one day, we may well be old and infirm. Money comes and money goes. The friends we have when we are doing well, disappear when times get rough. Ill health robs the strongest of us of our dignity and our authority. They say that only the good die young. Maybe the real curse for those who rape our public services is that they will have to grow old and lonely in the world they created. I remember seeing my mother on a geriatric ward in Barnet following a stroke. The forlorn stares of the pateints staring out of the window was quite the saddest thing I've ever seen. For those of us who have tried to do our bit to preserve and improve our community, we will at least have consolation that we tried to make a difference, tried to do the right thing. I shudder to think what those of us who have spent our lives ripping apart communities think about when they find themselves in that position?

As they say, only the good die young. Perhaps that is the curse that the rest of us must face. A life of impotence at the hands of an uncaring state, knowing that it is partially our fault for colluding with the system that created it.

Tuesday, 18 December 2012

From Underhill to the Hive - A short video by Steve Pankhurst



Barnet FC supporter and Friends Reunited creator Steve Pankhurst has made a video highlighting the reason that most Barnet Football Club fans oppose the move to the Hive. Guest videos and blogs are always welcome at the Barnet Eye

The Official Rog T Xmas Card to all my readers

This year I'm not sending anyone a Christmas card, apart from my Aunty Audrey. Instead I'm sticking £50 in the One Barnet legal fund. I sincerely hope you consider doing the same. Here is the card you would have got.

Capita Week - Translators database "dogged" with problems

This week is “CAPITA WEEK” in the London Borough of Barnet. Following the decision of the cabinet of Barnet Council to award CAPITA a £750 million outsourcing contract, which will destroy 300 jobs in the Borough, the local blogs are spending a week investigating the record of Capita at other local authorites. 

Installment two in todays tales of woe from Capita concerns the Court Translators database.

The Telegraph reports that this was so inaccurate that even someones pet dog appeared on it

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9742685/Total-chaos-after-pet-dog-counted-on-translators-database.html

Cases were delayed, hundreds of translators failed to turn up, and many more refused to work for Applied Language Solutions (ALS), which was taken over by Capita at the end of last year, the Commons Committee of Public Accounts said.
But Capita has only been fined a “risible” £2,200, sending the message that the ministry allows private firms “to get away with over promising and underdelivering”, the report warned.

Margaret Hodge, the committee’s chairwoman, said the project was an “object-lesson in how not to contract out a public service” as “almost everything that could go wrong did go wrong”.

“We heard that some names were fictitious and one person had even successfully registered their pet dog,” Mrs Hodge said.

Whilst Hendon is famous for it's MP Matthew Offord, who famously stood up for "human rights for dogs", we are sure even Matthew would find it a bit strange that a dog could be registered as a Court Translator.

As Capita week progresses, we'll bring you more tales of woe.

Friern Barnet Library Court case Day #2

So we all trudged back at High Noon (Do not ofresake me oh my Darlin') to hear Judge Pearls decision. The reading of the judgement took approximately an hour. It was a very long and detailed analysis, which i won't bore you with the details of. The judge basically said that granting a possession order would infringe the rights of protestors as defined in Sections 10 & 11 of the Human rights act, but this was ouitweighed by the requirement of the council to be able to  market the building in a fair and proper manner. The possession order was granted with the caveat that the council had to try and negotiate a license with campaigners to allow the peoples library to continue in a volunteer manner until such time as new tenants were found.

The defendents asked for leave to appeal the decision. Judge Pearl announced that it was not in her remit to grant or block this. It looks like we'll all be doing this again at the appeal court.

It goes without saying that I believe this whole court case to be a massive own goal. The case has galvanised local support behind the library and the council has been made to look completely out of touch. In September, when the council first found out that the library was occupied, meetings were held and progress was made towards a solution. This halted abruptly when lawyers advised the officials holding the talks that they couldn't continue. With todays judgement, it is likely that the process will be restarted. The only difference will be that thousands of pounds have been wasted on a trial and maybe thousands more on an appeal.

One small item which Barnet must be given credit for was the decision not to persue one of the defendents, Keith Martin for costs. I sincerely hope that the dialog can be restarted in a proper spirit and a temporary license concluded to allow continuation of the Peoples library. Barnet Council may have won a battle, but a consensual agreement may mean we all win the war, keep a local resource and save a fortune in legal costs.


Capita Week - Capita blamed in schools' data loss

This week is “CAPITA WEEK” in the London Borough of Barnet. Following the decision of the cabinet of Barnet Council to award CAPITA a £750 million outsourcing contract, which will destroy 300 jobs in the Borough, the local blogs are spending a week investigating the record of Capita at other local authorites.

We are highlighting issues with outsourcing projects run by Capita, Barnet Councils chosen supplier for the One Barnet project. We are asking councillors to ensure that they are fully aware of all of the likely issues, before they put pen to paper with this massive contract.
The issue we investigate today is data security. Barnet Council has personal and financial details of every resident in the Borough. If these are compromised, every single resident could be at risk from fraudsters and criminals. How have Capita managed the data of existing public sector clients? Data security is the most important issue for service providers.
This article, in the highly respected publication Information age, details how Capita have been blamed for losing schools data. According to reports in the Guardian newspaper, Capita has lost irreplaceable school data after a botched software upgrade to Sims, the management system used in more than two-thirds of schools to keep staff and pupil records, finances and timetabling schedules. As a result of the corrupted records, some schools have been forced to move back to a paper-based records system until the problems are ironed out. Is this something we want to happen in Barnet?


Have Barnet Councillors satisfied themselves that no such breach of data integrity could occur in Barnet? Are they convinced that the outsourcing of data and loss of control of data security poses no risk to the residents? Unless Barnet Councillors are 100% convinced that such threats cannot occur, then they should cancel the One Barnet program and have a solution where they have responsibility for the security of residents and tax payers.
 
If you are worried, join the Barnet Alliance for Public Services , who are  holding a demonstration against One Barnet at Capita HQ on Thursday 20th, 5-7pm, 71 Victoria Street

Monday, 17 December 2012

Friern Barnet Library Court Case - Day 1

I spent the day at Barnet County Court observing the proceedings as Barnet Council began their court case to evict the Friern Barnet Peoples Library.

The proceedings started with lengthy legal debates as to whether the defence could alter their hearing to include a defence that the eviction would breach article 10 & 11 of the European Human rights act. These protect the right of free speech and fredom of assembly.  Not being a lawyer, the nuances of it passed me by. Barnet Council opened by saying it was too late to include these arguments. The judge offered an adjournment. Suddenly it became alright and there was enough time. Then there was discussion as to whether Barnet may get a possession order, but allow the Peoples library to stay until the end of January. As no one trusts Barnet to do the decent thing and negotiate in good faith, this seems a bit of a non starter (although the judge seemed to like the idea). The defence seemed to suggest and adjournment of decision until the end of January may be in order. 

Once all of the legal points were sorted out, amid much whinging from the Barnet Council Lawyer that the defence hadnt given him enough time and a lengthy and pointless debate about who was a defendent, Barnet Council put up their two star witnesess.

The first was Suzanna Lewis, who I believe is a former estate agent, who advises the Council on its commercial property portfolio. She made a bad start. When asked to confirm her name, she said "erm, Susan Ellis". She then got very flustered and the judge, who appears to be very jovial, got her a drink of water and asked her to sit down for a minute. The prosecution then asked some nice questions (she's on their team, so he clearly would). The Defence lawyer then started. She wasn't quite so nice. Poor ms Lewis (or is that Ellis), was very flustered, but had to admit that the Council have been able to get access to the Library whenever they wanted and that the occupation had not actually caused any problems. She got off the stand and seemed highly relieved to still be alive. The judge clearly felt sorry for her and did at one point suggest that the prosecution barrister be a bit nicer to her.

Next up was the assistant director responsible for libraries. His name is Bill Murphy. I got a little bit cross with Bill (although I couldn't say anything). He wasn't quite as straightforward with his account of the meetings between residents and Council officials as he could have been. I was there so I probably had a little bit of a better insight into how he was spinning the facts than the judge. Given that the Council had opened by saying the occupiers of the library had no case for defence, I was puzzled as to why he was so economical with the facts.

We then adjourned. I had a conversation with Bill. He is a consultant and he's off in March. This measn that whoever comes in will have no clue as to what has been going on. Bill is proud of his achievements in Barnet. He said "I've done what I can, you don't realise the pressures. We need money to run the service and we are suffering cuts".  I then pointed out that they had done nothing about my suggestion in September that they start friends groups for the libraries. His response "I have lots of other things to do" and listed an impressive list. I retorted by saying that this meant the council was under resourced and clearly needed more staff. I've met people from all walks of life. It is clear to me that Bill is not on the side of the people who pay his wages. I'm sure he's a nice bloke if you are a friend of his, but he is doing the people of Barnet no favours. He clearly knows what is going on and his performance on the stand was rather upsetting, if not entirely unexpected.

After lunch we had the defence witnesses. First up was Fion Brickwood from the campaign looking to run a community hub at the library. Until this point I was worried that the defence was not getting the better of the arguments (in the minds of people unfamiliar with the whole story). Any impartial observer (and quite clearly the Council team) would conclude that Fiona wiped the floor with Mr Grundy (the Barrister for the Council). She was superb. When a witness czares about an issue, is intelligent, well informed and tells the truth, they have a massive advantage. Every ruse Mr Grundy tried to use to unsettle her failed and as his Zeppelin crashed a look of abject horror appeared on the fresh face of the legal officer from Harrow who was sitting next to me. His foot starteded to shake at one point. I was a bit worried a puddle would appear on the floor.  His colleague had nicked my seat in the lunch interval and informed Rosie from the Save FBL campaign that "they were unreserved seats". I was mildly put out until I realised I could read all the texts she was sending over her shoulder. I thoroughly enjoyed that. Most amuzing. I will spare her blushes here, but the infor is filed away ! Memo to any naive council officers - if you are texting, don't sit next to a nosey blogger, wind them up and then forget they are looking over your shoulder (For the absence of doubt, I am actually slightly short sighted and couldn't have read a word on the screen which was about 4 ft away. In fact even if I could see the letters, I wouldn't have bothered. I just wanted to make our friends at the council aware that they should be a bit more circumspect in their behaviour, which in the particular context, I thought was a bit stupid and careless. There are many cases of public servants being "lazy" with regards to data security, they really must think about such issues. I once worked at a company, where our salesman sat opposite two employees of a rival company discussing a bid he was working. Needless to say, this was very useful and our company won the bid. I personally respect peoples privacy, which is why  I used the word "could". This is rather different in its meaning to "did").

Next up was Pete Phoenix, the front man of Occupy in Barnet. Mr Grundy suggested he was a "professional activist". mr Phoenix objected as he said he doesn't get paid. At the suggestion of the Judge, experienced was deemed a better term. Mr Phoenix explained how marvellous the reopened library was. Strangely Mr Grundy didn't disagree. In fact Mr Grundy seemed to use the defence that Mr Phoenix had done too good a job and further protests were unnecessary. All rather odd.

Last up was Barnet resident Keith Martin. The judge seemed to approve of Mr Martin. He's a retired accountant. She shared his passion for the 43 bus. Mr Grundy again tried to portray Mr Martin as a dangerous subversive, but by now his heart wasn't in it.

We had a five minute recess, then the summing up. Mr Grundy said that because Occupy had been slung out of St Pauls Courtyard by the Court of Appeal, the Judge had no choice but to do the same at the Library. The defence Barrister read out a list of  "aggrevating facts" at St Pauls, sited as the key facts that didn't exist in Friern, such as public nuisance, blocking the highway, health concerns, preventing people gouing to church.  She explained that the Prosecution had conceded that the protestors at the Library were covered under articles 10 & 11 of the EHR act. The point was agreed to it was just deciding how to balance their rights with those of the council. The Council defence seems to be that there may be an as yet unidentified community group, who may wish to use the building but are deterred by the protest. Given that no such group has been identified, it is a rather shaky reason in my opinion. 

We reconvene at  noon tomorrow to get the judgement or determination. I suspect that the minimum the defence will get is a stay of execution until the end of January to try and sort out a proper license for the building. If I were the judge, I'd adjourn the decision until the end of January and say that if either side doesn't act in good faith that will colour the determination.  The only valid concern is that if another group did appear, the council may not be in a position to evict the current occupiers if the case is struck out completely. 

The real shame is that Barnet Council have scored a massive own goal. They could have got a huge level of good will and a library with far lower running costs than before had they embraced the Save Friern Barnet groups proposals. As it is we've had four days in court and a pointless and expensive legal case. 

On Friday night I performed a set of music at the Library with my band the False Dots, as part of an open mic night. We had young and old, peopel with learning difficulties and people without. A great night was had by all. This was a true community event. Here's a video shot of the last two numbers in our set.

Would the community in Barnet really benefit if this space was shut and closed?


Capita week - The Southampton experience - Guest blog by Brian Norgate

By Brian Norgate,
 
We are amazed here at Southampton that has just gone through the worst industrial dispute of any Council which was only resolved at the 2012 election where the Tory council lost control as the residents Southampton voted in sixteen Labour Councillors that Barnet Council could use our Council as an endorsement for the Capita contract.
 
I have to praise the former Southampton Tory administration eight years ago for part of their negotiations with Capita, as they built in "Breaks" in to the contract with Capita at years 3 and 7 and subsequent 5 year terms, even though the performance is reviewed each year and errors corrected for over/under charging", to my knowledge other Councils including Hampshire County Council and Swindon Council have Break clauses in their contracts, everyone would agree this is a pre requiste for any contract and standard in contractual agreements.
 
Listening to the debate at Barnet Council it comes across as either the Tory administration don't do detail or don't comprehend or worse turned a blind eye to what the contract with Capita is all about, to start at the begining its not the Torys money, its the rate payers and as Abraham Lincoln said "poverty is not having the ability to say No", from this all the financial information used with public money should be openly declared. including all Capitas costings, I know they claim to save 100million but so could anyone, you must remember that when negotiating with public money you must get the best deal that would pass the test of not knowing whether you were the council, Capita, suppliers or tax payers that is a Councillors public duty.
 
Once you accept its public money there can be no hidden accounting, "warts and all" said Cromwell yet at Southampton that doesn't appear to be the case, most budget books tell you a story rather than the all the facts, an account may have more money in than declared as only the declared spend/income can be shown, Councillors asking for the books to be opened will be sent a tag line "Before these figures are disclosed to an external requester we should confirm with legal if this is appropriate information to provide" or similar statement. now thats not British justice or fair play is it, that is a form of poverty
 
 
 
for the people of Barnet Capitas fees whether Professional, additional or standard contract should be publically declared in the budget book and in the mid term finance statement, exit strategies should have an accrual in the budget book should there be clause in the contract for " Lost Future profits" and Costs for ending the contract or similar liabilities. so should revised budgets but I could provide a shopping list. I was a trustee on the Railway pension scheme from 1998 to 2004 and all of these are known and in good negotiated contracts and thats what you need to look for in Barnet.
 
I know many companies took independent advice which was openly declared to the pension trustees and pensioners so they could have faith in the contract and that they could not potentially be held to ransom when the break in the contract was being negotiated, our actuarries went through these details with a fine eye for detail and its what i would have been expected to hear the Barnet cabinet speeches and very concerned i did not. whats missing is the biggest liabilty you have to worry about.
 
Yes people will ask questions but fully declaring all the information they may later use in their defence is their public duty, if they with hold information which is against audit commission rules they potentially could be liable for the losses,
 
 
 
Its interesting that none of the other councils Capita negotiated with are mentioned several other councils here in Hampshire have declined Capitas contracts whether thats in part
or in full as Barnet appearing to be going do, I have been involved with five local councils three went with Capita and two declined.
 
 
 
The two Councils that declined both agreed it was cheaper in house and the contract with Capita was too complicated to get out off in making their decisions, even though things may have changed recently i understand they have not.
 
 
 
 
working with the Southampton MP i raised the subject of several budget issues Capita were involved with, two of these are the Exford road Housing development and Meggeson Avenue housing developments in Southampton, we did a Freedom of information request as they were not shown in the budget book and were stalled sites, 260 propoerties
had tenants decanted for regeneration and Council rent and rates was lost over a three year period of �1.5million, but this wasnt the total losses and didnt include all the lost revenue or Capitas costs, this is not how public money should be dealt with "warts and all".
 
So 260 empty proerties in Southampton, our housing list went from 7k to 9k in the same period, do you think everyone in Southampton would give you the same recommendation surely if Southampton or any other Council was in negotiations to take their options to use the Break in the contracts you would have been told
 
Another contract with was the refurbisment of kitchen and bathrooms on the Harefield and Bitterne estates, I was shocked to see in the Council minutes that an overspend of �109,000 in one year but thats all the breakdown the public got as to what had gone wrong. surely you take out one bathroom/kitchen you fit one bath room kitchen thats what you pay for so how come there is a retro fitting clause, which ended soon after it became public knowledge
 
from this came strange stories about Southampton work being done by Capita was done elsewhere, for example Lambeth Council who have a Capita contract part of  the work is done at Southampton and in the Barnet contract some of their work is being done at Southampton whilst Some of Southamptons work is being done either at Portsmouth or elsewhere,Capitas newest office block is at Lakeside Portsmouth and during the negotiations its reported that officers were told by Capita Portsmouth would be potentially be working on Hampshire CC and other local councils as well as London councils, this is surely the strangest part of the contracts, whilst i accept David Cammerons Governent failures are down to the fact they dont do detail it must have spread to their tory Councils.
 
I got a call from a Portsmouth Council officer who said hows the Capita contract going at Southampton as Portsmouth Council were in negotiations with Capita, Surely I said the the Portsmouth Council officer as we sat on Portsdown hill over looking Portsmouth - doesnt that worry you being told the work you have a duty of care to protect is potentially going to be moved around the Country and lose the local connection, during the industrial dispute at Southampton i asked what figure the council estimated a month they had lost in goodwill from the staff, an officer told me he would not be surprised if it was half a million a month. this goes to the central point of these negotiations because there are clauses potentially not declared in the contract as shown by the need to contact the council legal department to see if all the figures could be released.
 
 
 
so in the Warts and all theory,  if there was a contract point that if a certain level of acvitivity rose above 50% for more than a couple of months the work would be transfered back to the council officers to do, how can you tell if the work is being done at Southampton or else where.
 
Capita do what they say they are going to do and are a good socially responsible company as I have worked well with them at Salisbury,I dont claim to know it all but its a very different view here from Southampton as you were led to believe no ringing endorsement, so unless you know the whole deal and fully comprehend the implication the Bell tolls for you Barnet ignore it at your peril 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest Blogs are always welcome at the Barnet Eye
 
1

Capita Week - Capita's £1bn Service Birmingham venture falls short




As well as reporting the stories on our blogs, we will be sending a daily email of the stories to all 63 Barnet Councillors, asking them whether they were aware of the issues raised by the experiences of other local authorities and what they have personally done to mitigate the risk.
Councillors are paid a five figure sum for the privelige of representing us. The least they should do is make sure they are aware of all of the issues and risks of decisions made on their watch. The reason we are emailing the councillors is twofold. One is to make sure they have access to the information necessary to make an informed decisions about the One Barnet program. The second is so that they can be held to account. If in two years time, there are problems, no councillor will be able to say “I wasn’t told about the risks, don’t blame me”. If they do say that, then we will know that they did not even bother to read their emails.
Every day this week we will investigate a specific area of Capita outsourcing and its implications. Today we start with performance. The first Council we will investigate is Birmingham.

 Service Birmingham is a “joint venture” (JV) between Birmingham Council and Capita. It was set up in 2006 and extended in February 2011 until 2021, was intended to provide "world-class ICT services" as well as manage the council's revenue service and contact centre. It is also required to deploy various other large and small-scale IT-enabled solutions to the council.
It is failing to perform as expected, says a new review of the long-term operation by consultancy Best Practice Group.

According to a news report, the review concludes that Service Birmingham, as the JV is called, needs "serious improvement" if it is to meet its targets.
Have Barnet Council spoken to Birmingham Council to see what the problems are and why they have  happened? Have lessons been learned? 

The Barnet Alliance for Public Services is holding a demonstration against One Barnet at Capita HQ on Thursday 20th, 5-7pm, 71 Victoria Street