Leak of JLL Reports - Part 1

The first thing I should say is that I am merely an amateur Kremlin-watcher and do have to try and scratch a living. This blog is solely about the leak of the JLL reports (or at least ONE of its conclusions) and a further blog about the reports themselves will follow asap (hopefully within 48 hours).

The JLL scandal is important as it illustrates everything that is wrong with the modus operandi of the Labour Group of Sandwell Council (SMBC), their capacity to waste public money, the secrecy surrounding their doings and, finally, their contempt for freedom of information. Add to that the craven behaviour of the local media and a sorry tale emerges.

THE JLL REPORTS

Determined Kremlinologists are referred to my blogpost "Nice Work if You Can Get It! JLL & The Public" dated 23rd November, 2013. Suffice to say here that the leadership (sic) of SMBC, were,in Spring 2012, casting around for an excuse to axe The Public and the "cabinet" thought it would be a jolly good idea to appoint expensive commercial property consultants, Jones Lang LaSalle ,to produce a report - seemingly at the "low" cost of £10,000 ex Vat - as to possible ways of reducing or eliminating public subsidy to the building (as an arts organisation largely reliant on subsidy this was, in reality, the preparation of a death warrant).

A report was formulated by JLL but for reasons known only to "Councillor" Hussain and his "cabinet" chums, the report was unsatisfactory. Seemingly without getting alternative quotes or costings JLL were asked to report further (this time creating extra costs for architect's plans etc) and when this was done the final bill to the taxpayers of Sandwell was a paltry £39,000 - nearly 4 times the alleged initial "quote".

One can only assume that all this was sanctioned by the Chief Executive of SMBC,Mr Jan Britton (annual pay etc just £165,659) since the £39,000 ex vat WAS duly paid to JLL.

In their report JLL mentioned that SMBC had some space in 3 old town hall buildings and that they would be delighted to assist in reporting about them. These are crappy old offices in decrepit buildings and SMBC has its own in-house property department. I am not sure what they are paid to do but seemingly they were incapable of advising the "cabinet" about use of these spaces and so "cabinet" paid a further £10,500 ex vat to JLL to report on these.Again the CE must have sanctioned payment since JLL got the dosh. Of course, the reports have been kept secret again. Interestingly, so far as West Brom Town Hall is concerned, some of the tenants from The Public were forced to move there and so one wonders why "reports" were needed at all.

NON-DISCLOSURE OF JLL REPORTS

The second JLL report was dated July 2012 but the reports are still not in the public domain. SMBC decided to keep them secret - even from non-Labour Councillors (ie elected representatives)! For several months myself and others have been attempting to force disclosure. I personally have been in communication with most local media organisations but they showed no interest whatsoever. On 2nd September, 2013 UKIP put in a Freedom of Information (FOI) request to SMBC for disclosure. This was refused on the basis that (a) the reports were commercially confidential from SMBC's point of view and, even more bizarrely (b) that disclosure would damage JLL's commercial interests! Unfortunately, UKIP did not ask for a review of this nonsense or appeal to The Information Commissioner.

I don't want to go into the meat of the reports here but have said for months (mostly via @bcrover on Twitter) that the reports are not commercially sensitive - they may be embarrassing to SMBC but that is something different all together. In particular, the reports are, in effect, inconclusive and they also do not deal with any proposed use of the building as a college (although they DO pooh pooh the idea of converting it into a school!)

The ludicrous other argument was that if consultants knew their reports were going to be made public they could not comment freely. But this is PUBLIC money that is being used to pay them! If they don't want to do public work then get out of that market!

Enter stage left SMBC's motor-mouth leader,Cooper. He said via Twitter on 13th October, 2013:

"The so-called JLL report (sic). I want it out there it adds further evidence to my case. It will be in the public domain next week."

The reports were still not forthcoming (once again I pointed this out to several local media organisations but they took no interest). I followed this up on Twitter (as did others) and on 17th October, 2013 Cooper (apparently under the impression that I am someone called Dan) said:

"Scraping the barrel again,Dan you should know better only officers can release the report not members."

THE LEAK

Just before Christmas SMBC and Sandwell College apparently signed the multi-million deal to steal The Public from, er, the public. At the time of writing the "deal" is, of course, secret. Press releases were put out and then everyone ran away on holiday but campaigners remained active via Twitter. Maybe the leak was some hamfisted way of getting back at them? Sooner of later, SMBC and the equally secretive College are going to have to supply details (surprising that they haven't already as it is such "good" news). Incidentally, there has been no apparent activity from local media as to this aspect of whole shoddy affair. They have just spewed out the press releases without question.

Somehow, either the JLL reports or information therefrom found its way to the Express and Star who, despite previous lack of interest, laughably hailed this as a scoop (they had ignored the heavy hint about possible demolition in my blog of 23rd November,2013).

The E&S were aware from the UKIP FOI request that the report was confidential but sought a quote from rent-a-gob Cooper. Interestingly, he did not apparently say they could not run the story or provide "no comment" on a leaked confidential report (standard practice) but was happy to provide a quote that the report(s) somehow "vindicated" him (see also Twitter quote above).This begs the question, who leaked the report? The @loveourpublic Twitter a/c asked Cooper directly if he had been responsible for the leak and I have also done so. He replied to me, "How do I know" and so we must assume that it was definitely NOT him that leaked (and so query his political judgement in commenting on it to the press).

This leak is serious particularly noting that disclosure was specifically refused via the FOI request. It can ONLY have come from a council "member" of officer. Cooper himself has pointed out (as shown above) that members are NOT permitted to make disclosure and so either a councillor broke the rules of an officer is guilty. I am sure UKIP in particular will wish to make a formal complaint to the SMBC Chief Executive and to demand a formal enquiry. They may also wish to write a letter of complaint to The Information Commissioner, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, SK9 5AF.

You may also wish to complain to the SMBC Chief Exec via jan_britton@sandwell.gov.uk I am sure he will be anxious to hold a leak enquiry and to take appropriate action against the culprit.

Unbelievably, the reports are still not in the public domain - again even to non-Labour Councillors (I have checked via Councillor Mick Davies). Presumably the non-Labour Councillors will at least receive their copies prior to tomorrow night's full Council Meeting.

Readers of a sensitive disposition may want to look away now. You will have to wait for Part 2 to decide for yourselves whether the reports were "commercially confidential" either in respect of the college "deal" or otherwise and whether they "vindicate" Cooper. I will be saying that on both counts this is "bollocks".

Contact via post - Vernon Grant, Box 374, 27 Colmore Row, Birmingham B3 2EW

Email:  thesandwellskidder@gmail.com