Local Media Blackout on New Sandwell Council Scandal

The "Socialists" at Labour Sandwell Council have shafted 3,600 of the most vulnerable members of our society and lost-out on a large grant due to their incompetence. You would think that might be newsworthy but the BBC and the C-S's at the Express and Star don't "do" anti-Sandwell Labour stories. You will have to read The Guardian or The Skidder to discover another tale of woe from the Oldbury Kremlin.

A couple of years ago Council Tax benefit was fazed-out and replaced by local authorities operating Council Tax Reduction schemes. Initially the staff at The Kremlin appear to have done a fairly reasonable job in devising the scheme (apart from inadequate public consultation) and had done an Equality Impact Assessment. The joke "cabinet" of Sandwell Council approved the scheme and it went before the full Council (aka "the rubber stamp") on 4th December, 2012.

Regular readers will know that Sandwell Council is almost entirely Labour and that they don't believe in open democracy. Instead there is a secret "Labour Group" meeting the night before the full Council meeting where the comrades decide future policy privately. The actual public meetings are then, indeed, a simple "rubber-stamping" exercise lasting a matter of minutes (Private Eye did a piece on this). Presumably, someone - possibly Councillor Eling - raised a query since, just like that, Labour decided to change the agreed scheme overnight by introducing a residence test. (This is a regular modus operandi for the comrades eg see the ongoing ice rink scandal).

Without going into the legal stuff, Labour were afraid that "benefit tourists" would suddenly start migrating to the dog-shit splattered streets of Sandwell from other parts of Britain and the EU and so decided that to qualify for the scheme, claimants must have lived in the Borough for two years before claiming.

"Councillor" Eling (supposedly "anal" about detail) put the amended scheme to the sheep at the full Council meeting and they duly bleated their approval (see further below).

The Socialists in Sandwell are anti-enterprise and do little to raise the aspirations of the long-suffering population. They spend most of their time trying to screw money out of the taxpayer via the Central Government in Westminster or else borrowing colossal sums from the likes of Barclays to fund a constant stream of leisure centres and other vanity projects. They do reckless deals like the multi-million pound BT shocker and that with the College for The Public building - which they then attempt to keep secret. You would think the least they could do was look after the disadvantaged in the Borough but they cannot even manage that as evidenced by the disastrous Children's Services department and their unequal rip-off of women workers over many years.

In this case, Sandwell were desperate to devise a scheme that entitled them to an additional £675,000 of taxpayer loot from Westminster and as far as I can see they would have got this had they implemented the scheme as draw-up by the hard-pressed Council officers. But the politicians had to go an interfere with the result that last week the Council was utterly humiliated in a High Court case brought, ironically, by those notorious "right-wingers" the, er, Child Poverty Action Group on behalf of 3 unfortunate victims of the scheme (see Winder & Others -v Sandwell MBC).

The Judge delivered a crushing verdict against Sandwell Council on all 6 arguments relating to the residence test. It is clear from paragraph 45 of his judgement that Mr Justice Hickingbottom was totally unaware of the secret Labour Group meetings the night before Council meetings as he was bemused how, where and when the decision had been made to change the scheme and there was no evidence before him that the Labour councillors had given any thought to the legality of their actions or to the likely discriminatory consequences. He assumed that Eling had at least considered the changes beforehand since HE raised the matter at the full Council meeting. There was no evidence before him that Sandwell's ludicrous "cabinet" had reconsidered the matter. He SPECIFICALLY noted that there was no proper discussion of the revised scheme at the full Council meeting which dealt with a substantial agenda in just 39 minutes! (See my post of 17th April, 2014 - Skidder Shorts No. 7 for the Private Eye piece).

The Judge decided that the scheme was "ultra vires" ie that Sandwell Labour had purported to assume powers that they did not legally have so that the scheme was unlawful. That was enough to sink the Council but he also decided:

1. Consultation by the Council was woefully inadequate (regular readers will not be surprised with regard to this eg the ice-rink scandal; closure of The Public; the conversion of The Public into a college: the huge payments to the likes of The Albion Foundation and The Celebration Statue - the list goes on and on). In this case, Sandwell claimed that a link on their website constituted adequate "consultation" even though the linked page did not ask for a response! The Judge stated that proper consultation may have prevented the Council "from plunging into the unlawfulness into which it did plunge" (ouch!)

2. The scheme was discriminatory - particularly towards women (Ed Mili-bland this is your party!);

3. The Labour Councillors failed to take into account material considerations - plain incompetence from the comrades - many of whom have plenty of time on their hands as they don't work);

4. The scheme was contrary to EU law as being a barrier to freedom of movement;

5. The scheme was a breach of s.149 of the Equality Act, 2010 (please note again Ed Mili-bland).

It is difficult to see a more comprehensive and critical judgment against this flawed policy but the idiotic Labour Leader - Cooper - said SMBC were "considering an appeal" - which just about says it all......

And the consequences of this - I am assuming that there will have to be financial compensation for the 3,600 (three thousand six hundred) poor vulnerable people who were shafted by Labour. Their will be large legal costs in respect of this case and, would you believe it - as a specific result of the Labour Councillors unlawfully changing the scheme they have LOST the grant of £675,000 whilst making large-scale redundancies and cuts across the Borough.

This million-pound plus fiasco is ENTIRELY down to the gross incompetence of the Labour Councillors who did not consult their officers before changing the scheme. My view is that they should be individually surcharged for this substantial loss. Anyone agree with me?

THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - A COMMUNITY BLOG

e   thesandwellskidder@gmail.com                  t   @bcrover (Vernon Grant)

Confidential phone no: 07599 983737