Remember the Birchley Island Casino fiasco when the so-called Sandwell "socialists" swallowed their "principles" and tried to force through a second gambling den in the Borough? Well this is even worse and the prospects for the hole that is Oldbury look very bleak indeed.
I make no apology for the length of this post but you won't get the facts from Sandwell Labour nor from the likes of The Express & Star. This is a disaster and people in Sandwell need to know the truth.
Let's wind back a bit. In 2007 the thief Thomas was still Labour leader and the comrades entered their disastrous deal with BT modestly-named "Transform Sandwell". This was surrounded by the usual PR bollocks (compare and contrast with the current campaign in respect of The Public whilst the actual truth is still being kept secret). This is what "Mr Rotherham" Eling said at the time, though remember that this is the same man who was so "mistaken" about the casino legal costs and recently introduced the illegal CTR scheme which has cost the Borough a minimum of £700,000:
"Deputy council leader, Cllr Steve Eling has described Sandwell's partnering project as one of the biggest and most ambitious in the West Midlands.
He said: "This is a fantastic opportunity for the council to improve the quality of its backroom business services, which will have a knock-on effect in boosting services on the frontline.
"It will secure a level of investment in our business and computer systems and specialist experience in boosting efficiency that would simply not have been possible for us to achieve on our own.
"And on top of improving council services and our way of working, we are delighted we have also been able to negotiate such a beneficial package of measures for Sandwell as a whole with the creation of new jobs and a new multi-million pound regional business centre in All Saints Way, West Bromwich." (ie Providence Place).
As ever, with the alleged "socialists" every project is forced through without thought or consultation on the speculative basis that it will "create jobs".
Of course, my esteemed colleagues the #sandwellscrutineers were not around then and so the whole deal was kept secret. The press said it was a £300m deal but also said it was £15m for 15 years which makes, er, £225m but as we know the local media don't care about small matters like accuracy. I should add here that there has been one local campaigner who has been working tirelessly to expose a massive fraud within the contract itself but I will have to pass by that in this post. Curiously if you add 15 years to 2007 it would mean the contract was due to end in 2022 (see further below).
Of course, the comrades pay lip service to helping the disadvantaged in society but act differently in reality (again it took a High Court Judge to hammer them in July for their discriminatory and illegal actions). Like Brown and Balls they love to suck-up to big capitalist companies like BT and Interserve. In no/low aspiration Sandwell the only thing they are good at is pleading poverty to every Government Department or quango and holding out the begging bowl. Thus outside bodies get sucked into joke "regeneration" schemes which always involve colossal expense (eg BSF).
And so a huge office block was planned for 1 Providence Place. The comrades managed to screw £11m out of (the now defunct) Advantage West Midlands and so what could possibly go wrong with a "guaranteed" tenant - BT divvying up the rent until 2022 at least.........
Sandwell Council hold the freehold of the 1 Providence Place under title number WM822305 but despite the £11m from AWM they apparently needed to get the money men in for this development. What better for the sleazy "socialists" to do than contract with a financial/real estate company BASED IN THE TAX-HAVEN OF GUERNSEY! Thus a 250-year lease from 3rd August, 2010 was granted (the headlease) the useless hypocrites to Invista Foundation (West Bromwich) Limited for £14.9m pounds. Before you get too excited the builders were also party to this deal and would have received the bulk of the loot. There is nothing in the simple Land Registry title WM981972 suggesting what, if any, rent Invista are paying to the freeholder - SMBC. It would appear from the Cabinet Report referred to below that there is just a peppercorn rent ie a purely nominal annual sum and not any "real" money.
It sounds nice and local doesn't it - Invista Foundation (West Bromwich) Limited. I will spare you the effort of putting their name in the search box of Sandwell Council's website since you will draw a complete blank despite their involvement in this major project. You won't find them at Companies House either since they are actually registered at Trafalgar Court, Les Banques, St Peter Port, Guernsey GY1 3YL. As ever Sandwell's loony lefties have kept everything secret but then it wouldn't look very good would it to be getting into bed with tax-haven capitalists!
There is one oddity in the legal title WM981972 to the Guernsey tax-dodger (sorry, tax-efficient business) in that the Homes and Community Agency pops up again with a restriction against disposition without their consent. I can only imagine that this may be to protect the £11m put in by the now defunct AWM but am unable to enlighten you further on that at this time.
(Curiously, there is lots of media coverage including official stock exchange stuff that Invista had exchanged contracts to sell their interest for a quick profit in March 2012 but nothing seems to have come of that...???)
By now the thief had been replaced by the thicko at the "top" of Sandwell Council and the new "leader" was quick to boast about the great regeneration project Labour were delivering. As the huge, ugly, office block neared completion another lease - an underlease - was granted in 2011. You will recall from the above that the original BT deal was for 15 years from 2007 but I can only assume that at this point in time Labour were delighted with BT since the new lease was to run for 15 years again but from 20th October, 2011 ie until 2026.
I should just mention that I have only done a current search at HM Land Registry which does not give an historic view and so I can't quite give you chapter and verse. The actual title number is WM992279 and, as above it is a 15-year lease from October, 2011. Here, as above, I must speculate slightly. This lease was from Invista either to BT and/or a third party and then two sub-leases (apparently unregistered) were granted to BT companies to actually occupy PART of the wretched building OR this lease was from Invista to Sandwell Council who themselves granted two sub-leases to BT to actually occupy PART of the building. Whatever the position Invista were to get an extremely high rent (particularly for West Brom) and - even better - a rent increase of 3% per annum!!!!!
And so the moronic egomaniac Labour "leader", Darren "The Turdmeister" Cooper, was quick to hail yet another brilliant Labour "deal":
“Working in partnership to attract inward investment is key to our regeneration programme, and the opening of this flagship BT building is at the very heart of that.
“Today is about celebrating all that is good about Sandwell – all that we have achieved so far and looking with confidence to the future as our ambitious regeneration plans take shape at an astonishing pace.
“Our partnership with BT has been a very positive experience for Sandwell and its staff. The opening of this building and the wider regeneration of West Bromwich illustrate what we can achieve thanks to partnerships like these.”
Of course, Sandwell Labour miss no opportunity to spend taxpayers' money on sport and so Transform Sandwell forked out a no-doubt huge fee for some ex-Olympian to formally open the building in 2012 even though there was no sporting connexion whatsoever. Narsiccist Cooper- in Olympic year - was anxious to get in on that act too!
In all the secrecy, self-congratulation and lying there was a small point that was not put into the public domain. BT were so committed to the future of Sandwell they had break-clauses in their leases in 2017 and, as the recent Cabinet report suggests, they were only actually occupying part of the building in any event. (If there was empty space upon which SMBC was paying high rents why was this not considered for SIPS or even the grasping College?)
By July, 2013 the whole "brilliant" partnership which Labour had agreed with BT was falling apart and the great deal was terminated on 30th March, 2014 at who knows (at present) what cost - certainly millions. Of course, it goes without saying that this is being kept secret. And all this is Labour's OWN handiwork - nothing to do with The Government or the nasty Tories!
In 2008 the comrades agreed a new office accomodation strategy. As the lefties were sacking their own staff on a regular basis even they recognised that they needed less office space but they haven't even been able to manage even that simple requirement. They have, for example, been landed with the huge Shaftesbury House on High Street, West Bromwich which is being allowed to sit empty and rot whilst SMBC through its SIPS partnership has very recently agreed to lease THREE floors of Guardian House - one of the most expensive office blocks in West Brom! (Incidentally, despite these financial disasters SMBC want to sell off part of the Shaftesbury House car park at an UNDERVALUE to a nearby mosque - see posts passim).
There is some dispute about the size of Providence Place but a Sandwell Council Cabinet Report (which, like The Public Fundamental Review couldn't possibly contain lies) puts it at 75,900 sq ft. It is not clear from the Cabinet report how much rent BT are paying until they exercise their get-out in 2017 but the shifty socialists say the current rental is £1,311,273 ie a stonking £17.28p per sq ft (which sets an interesting benchmark when we eventually find out the lease details for the bent Public deal!) As above this is going UP by 3% per annum. The Land Registry title WM992279 shows the underlease as being in the name of "The Borough Council of Sandwell" but, curiously, only from 22nd April, 2014! This suggests, as above, that there was some sort of different arrangement prior to the break-up of the whole BT contract on 30th March, 2014 and that this new arrangement was then registered. Whatever, this meant that SMBC was potentially liable for a large chunk of the rent until 2017 and then THE WHOLE RENT (ever increasing by 3% per annum) from 2017 to 2026 unless they could sub-let. They would also have a potentially enormous bill from Guernsey at the end of the lease in 2026 for the wear and tear on the building (what is known as dilapidations).
Unless a sale has recently gone through then the morons are stuck with this deal but they have been trying to BORROW the money to buy out the headlease from Invista. Of course, they are borrowing like crazy already eg on behalf of the College for the bent Public conversion, for the endless stream of leisure centres and so on. Cooper's "wongaland" policy will put the present generation into hock AND THE NEXT. They say Invista (who paid £14.9m and have received very high rents too) will want between £20.8m and £21.5m to go away (and I wonder what capital gains tax they will pay on that in Guernsey!) But with stamp duty and other costs Labour will have to borrow £23.2m (although THEY claim that due to some sort of accounting con this is actually ONLY £19.7m!) One also imagines that the Guernsey boys will play hard-ball on the price.
But, as ever, the spin-doctors are out and claiming that this is all a great OPPORTUNITY for Sandwell in that Providence Place "delivers the advantage of acquiring a substantial asset that the Council is able to occupy as its premier head quarters facility." In other words, The Kremlin will have to go even though it was refurbed just two years ago by McDermotts at the taxpayers' expense. The offices at Jack Judge House in Oldbury were also only opened in 2011. But with such a huge and vastly expensive building sitting on their hands this is the only solution. Oldbury is like a ghost town as it is and the Kremlin moving to West Brom must be the death knell for the town. All brought about by pure incompetence.
Of course, BT will no longer be paying business rates when they ship out. It is possible that SMBC may be able to rent some of the building out but given their track record so far, don't hold your breath. No-one is going to acquire the Kremlin and so SMBC will probably have to pay for demolition and how long will it then take for the area to be re-developed (unless Cooper has another bent ice-rink deal up his sleeve)? The taxpayers of Sandwell and beyond will also be responsible for the high maintenance and repair costs of Providence Place (although these will be mitigated once The Krem is eventually disposed of).
The exit is a massive kick in the teeth for the people of Oldbury, another humiliation for Cooper and Labour in respect of their "regeneration" policy and a disaster for all UK taxpayers (ie those not based in Guernsey) who will have to pick up the tab for the enormous borrowings and ancillary costs.
Virtually none of the Labour Councillors has any business experience (indeed a huge number are unemployed) and they are too stupid to understand when big companies are shafting Sandwell. They blindly follow the Leader as shown in the disastrous recent High Court case. Many able SMBC employees have been fired so that the leadership is now surrounded by a useless coterie or arse-lickers/Labour supporters/both. The morons are spending huge sums on experts/consultants to tell them what to do but then refusing to disclose the reports. They are even failing to comply with the law and publish their external auditor's report. Inevitably, more disasters will follow.
What we do need to know is what has happened since June. Has the headlease been bought and, if so, for how much? What is the amount and what are the terms of the borrowing? How much space is BT actually committed to occupy to 2017 and at what rental/rates? What is the "new" (ha ha) Office Accomodation Strategy and can the public see an unredacted version? ? No doubt Labour will hasten to tell us.....
At least one thing is certain from this total disaster - Invista Foundation (West Bromwich) Limited are laughing all the way to Les Banques!
THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - A COMMUNITY BLOG - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!
e thesandwellskidder@gmail.com t @bcrover (Vernon Grant)
Confidential phone no: 07599 983737
Monday, 8 September 2014
Sunday, 7 September 2014
Lying Lucy - New Photos and Info!
 |
| The Liar's new Facebook photo! Not taken in Sandwell! |
 |
| November, 2013 |
December, 2007 - David and Lucy buy their home in Lindsworth Road, South Birmingham;
June, 2010 - According to legal documents at Companies House, Lucy still living at Lindsworth Rd;
2010/11 - Undated application from the Liar to become Councillor. Address switched to Hall Road, Smethwick which helpfully means that she can stand for Sandwell Council. It appears that she never goes on the voters roll at this address but remains on the roll at Lindsworth Road;
2011 - She gives the Hall Road address in her legal nomination papers & is elected;
2011 - Despite being a brand new Councillor having no experience (but with impeccable connexions) she is immediately put onto the important Audit Committee. I am not sure if she received an extra fee at this stage;
17th July, 2012 - "Cashers" as she sometimes calls herself online had to fill in a new Register of Interests following a change in the law. She still claims she is living at Hall Road and now claims not to be working whereas her own LinkedIn pages show that she most definitely was at the time she signed her declaration. She has continued to work ever since. She has not chosen to amend either lie in any way.
An interesting question arises in respect of the 2011 census. What, I wonder were the records for Hall Road and Lindsworth Road. Have more lies been told? Unfortunately, it will be for others to investigate that aspect of the matter.
Lucy did, of course, take down her Facebook pages when all this blew up and, unfortunately, Dave's timeline has disappeared from 2008 to mid-2012 but, hurrah, everything is rosy again when Dave's thread re-emerges. There is everything from descriptions of meals Lucy has loving prepared to the cringeworthy "entry", if I dare use that word, of 22nd December, 2012 "Lethal weapon Bacardi and my milf what a result" whatever that may, er, mean......
By February, 2013 Lucy declared her love in a birthday card to her man:
"My husband, my soul mate, my lover and my best friend:
I won the lottery that December
When at the party I met u
My life became so complete
My life has started a new.
You took me in ur arms that May
Told me I was the one
I knew from that day forward
My amazing life had begun.
Two kids, 2 dogs, 3 cats and us
Our family really grew.
As I did that day in May, I promise to be true, to love u for better or for worse, cause more than all the stars in the sky, I will always love you [illegible] xxxx Love Lucy xxxx
Clearly a case of absence making the heart grow fonder for the sultry socialist siren after her alleged sojourn in the dog-shit-caked streets of Smethwick:
 |
| Now getting extra allowances.... |
Yes, the 2012/13 Labour list of members' allowances show that if she wasn't, er, getting it before she was now in receipt of a "special responsibities allowance" (presumably as Vice Chair of the Oldbury Town Scrutiny Panel [sic]) of £2041.65p plus her basic of £10,619.14p. On top of their joint wages "Cashers" and Dave were able to live the good life with foreign holidays etc. Dave was thrilled in July, 2013 when Lucy paid for him to go jet-skiing. Will Lucy's lies bring her down and also tarnish the memory of her Mother's recent mayoral term or will they live happily in Lindsworth Road for ever after.......
The comrades for all their bluster dare not risk a by-election in these circumstances and with the threat of UKIP but we shall see what happens next.......
PS Hardly conclusive but anyone noticed that the Hortons have a Freeserve internet address whilst Lucy, allegedly living at the same address, has a Sky one?
(Thanks also to "anon" for info today on this subject - am also working on that!)
THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - A COMMUNITY BLOG - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!
e thesandwellskidder@gmail.com t @bcrover (Vernon Grant)
Confidential phone no: 07599 983737
Arts Council Money Diverted for Private Statue Stunt!
Did you miss Sandwell Arts Festival [sic] this Summer? You will not be alone! It was a pathetic "hole in the corner" affair not pushed by Labour Sandwell Council nor by its idiotic "leader", Darren Cooper.
Sandwell Labour have cut the £1.4m per annum arts monies that went to The Public. The Museum Service is negligible, the Library service is being decimated and there is very little other money spent on arts/culture whereas the spend on sport continues to rise inexorably despite the alleged "cuts".
Sandwell Labour and Sandwell College are STILL fighting hard to keep the details of The Public "deal" secret even when they say it is "brilliant for Sandwell". Ask yourselves why? Fortunately, Mr Darryl Magher has been asking questions and his appeal to the Information Commissioner about the failure of these two publicly-funded organisations to tell us the truth is ongoing.......
And so the comrades invested just £9,000 in the Arts Festival but even then they managed to get the Arts Council to stump up £4,140 of that. Quite why the Arts Council would grant any monies to SMBC noting their recent track record is surprising and, inevitably, their trust has been abused. (Incidentally, I wonder if the Arts Council has ever written to Cooper to ask him to explain his infamous tweets of 5th July, 2013 which appear to imply that SMBC shafted the original funders of The Public - including the Arts Council - to get hold of the iconic new building with absolutely no intention of it remaining an arts and community centre?*)
Regulars readers will please forgive me if I provide a little background here to Skidder newcomers with regard to the so-called "Celebration Statue" appeal - a private project to erect in central West Brom a naff statue of West Bromwich Albion's magnificent "Three Degrees". The whole thing is run by Mr Jim Cadman - see my blogs about all this - 3rd August, 2014 "The Darren Cooper Celebration Statue Appeal" and 13th August, 2014 "Jim Cadman - Statue Entrepreneur". The oafish Cooper - self-styled "voice" of all Baggies fans - has very publicly used his Council position to promote this thing and so it came as no surprise when a Skidder Freedom of Information Act request flushed out that the Labour Council had diverted £30,000 (yes, thirty THOUSAND pounds) of public money (without any actual public consultation) into Jim's private appeal fund. (Incidentally, I am still waiting to see the accounts from other statue appeals that Mr Cadman has been involved with....)
One of the main sales pitches for this statue is that it is somehow part of an "anti-racism" campaign. This line has been pushed to SMBC and to cash-rich bodies like the excellent Kick It Out organisation who are on the look-out to financially support anti-racism initiatives with ample funds from the FA, Premier League etc. It is entirely coincidental that Jim's other major project at this time is for a statue in Sandwell's twin socialist paradise of, er, Rotherham where he is using exactly the same shtick to raise money for a statue of Arthur Wharton, "the first black professional footballer". It is not possible to describe me as racist as I am not but there have already been "warnings" made that my opposition to the costs and governance issues surrounding the diversion of public funds to this project is "undermining the anti-racism campaign". The smear campaign appears to have begun.......
Not content with quietly diverting £30,000 of public money to this nonsense, Labour then decided to hold two publicity stunts in West Brom's New Square to push it. They cynically used the Arts Festival as cover with the self-seeking Cooper and SMBC's Press Office playing a very active role in all this aspect of the events via press releases, social media etc. At least £844 more of public money (including the Arts Council grant) was diverted to get actors (some of whom I believe were black) to "gold-up" in a grotesque "reverse" minstrel show and pose as a human maquette of the proposed private statue (even though the statue, if ever completed, will have a mid-brown patination and will NOT be bronze or gold). A peculiar way to get the alleged "anti-racism" message across you may think!
This was all done on two separate days to give it maximum publicity. Needless to say the narcissistic Cooper scurried down to New Square for yet another photo-opportunity:
It seems that Labour Sandwell are still employing one Garry Morris as their arts supremo but one must wonder why if there is no or no significant arts budget. Sharp-eyed readers will have noted, however, that Morris was one of the Haden House mob - the band of SMBC officials who did the bidding of their political masters and voted to close The Public. This "objective appraisal" was made 13 days AFTER Labour had already announced the closure of The Public and its "deal" with the College**. One favour deserves another...
Although the public bodies are so anxious to keep their deal secret SMBC have been forced to continue some arts provision via the College so that they could get consent from the European Regional Development Fund and the successors to Advantage West Midlands to destroy the splendid building. We have been told that in place of £1.4m per annum, SMBC have pledged £1.5m over 10 years (and then nothing) for an "arts partnership" with Sandwell College (to INCLUDE the "festival" funding). But the College has had Cooper's pants down in all the negotiations to date (not funny, unfortunately, as it is all taxpayers' money at play here) and there is already speculation whether the College are really interested in any of this and also whether this small rump of arts provision will provide a job for one Garry Morris. Significantly SMBC (NOT the College) were advertising a tender last week for 4 pop-up banners for the new joint "Arts Cafe" at a modest £3,000 (yes, you read it right - three THOUSAND pounds). Potential suppliers were to contact, er, Garry Morris of SMBC!
Let hope that the next time the Arts Council shakes on a deal with Sandwell Labour it counts its fingers afterwards.
Oh, and by the way, Garry Morris is the son of Labour "aristocrat", Lord (Bill) Morris of Handsworth.
THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - A COMMUNITY BLOG - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!
e thesandwellskidder@gmail.com t @bcrover (Vernon Grant)
Confidential phone no: 07599 983737
* See my post 18th December, 2013, "The Public - Odds and Sods".
** See my post 11th June, 2014, "The Public - The Plot Thickens....".
Sandwell Labour have cut the £1.4m per annum arts monies that went to The Public. The Museum Service is negligible, the Library service is being decimated and there is very little other money spent on arts/culture whereas the spend on sport continues to rise inexorably despite the alleged "cuts".
Sandwell Labour and Sandwell College are STILL fighting hard to keep the details of The Public "deal" secret even when they say it is "brilliant for Sandwell". Ask yourselves why? Fortunately, Mr Darryl Magher has been asking questions and his appeal to the Information Commissioner about the failure of these two publicly-funded organisations to tell us the truth is ongoing.......
And so the comrades invested just £9,000 in the Arts Festival but even then they managed to get the Arts Council to stump up £4,140 of that. Quite why the Arts Council would grant any monies to SMBC noting their recent track record is surprising and, inevitably, their trust has been abused. (Incidentally, I wonder if the Arts Council has ever written to Cooper to ask him to explain his infamous tweets of 5th July, 2013 which appear to imply that SMBC shafted the original funders of The Public - including the Arts Council - to get hold of the iconic new building with absolutely no intention of it remaining an arts and community centre?*)
Regulars readers will please forgive me if I provide a little background here to Skidder newcomers with regard to the so-called "Celebration Statue" appeal - a private project to erect in central West Brom a naff statue of West Bromwich Albion's magnificent "Three Degrees". The whole thing is run by Mr Jim Cadman - see my blogs about all this - 3rd August, 2014 "The Darren Cooper Celebration Statue Appeal" and 13th August, 2014 "Jim Cadman - Statue Entrepreneur". The oafish Cooper - self-styled "voice" of all Baggies fans - has very publicly used his Council position to promote this thing and so it came as no surprise when a Skidder Freedom of Information Act request flushed out that the Labour Council had diverted £30,000 (yes, thirty THOUSAND pounds) of public money (without any actual public consultation) into Jim's private appeal fund. (Incidentally, I am still waiting to see the accounts from other statue appeals that Mr Cadman has been involved with....)
 |
| £30k of public money and counting! |
One of the main sales pitches for this statue is that it is somehow part of an "anti-racism" campaign. This line has been pushed to SMBC and to cash-rich bodies like the excellent Kick It Out organisation who are on the look-out to financially support anti-racism initiatives with ample funds from the FA, Premier League etc. It is entirely coincidental that Jim's other major project at this time is for a statue in Sandwell's twin socialist paradise of, er, Rotherham where he is using exactly the same shtick to raise money for a statue of Arthur Wharton, "the first black professional footballer". It is not possible to describe me as racist as I am not but there have already been "warnings" made that my opposition to the costs and governance issues surrounding the diversion of public funds to this project is "undermining the anti-racism campaign". The smear campaign appears to have begun.......
Not content with quietly diverting £30,000 of public money to this nonsense, Labour then decided to hold two publicity stunts in West Brom's New Square to push it. They cynically used the Arts Festival as cover with the self-seeking Cooper and SMBC's Press Office playing a very active role in all this aspect of the events via press releases, social media etc. At least £844 more of public money (including the Arts Council grant) was diverted to get actors (some of whom I believe were black) to "gold-up" in a grotesque "reverse" minstrel show and pose as a human maquette of the proposed private statue (even though the statue, if ever completed, will have a mid-brown patination and will NOT be bronze or gold). A peculiar way to get the alleged "anti-racism" message across you may think!
This was all done on two separate days to give it maximum publicity. Needless to say the narcissistic Cooper scurried down to New Square for yet another photo-opportunity:
 |
| Egomaniac gets in on the act! |
Although the public bodies are so anxious to keep their deal secret SMBC have been forced to continue some arts provision via the College so that they could get consent from the European Regional Development Fund and the successors to Advantage West Midlands to destroy the splendid building. We have been told that in place of £1.4m per annum, SMBC have pledged £1.5m over 10 years (and then nothing) for an "arts partnership" with Sandwell College (to INCLUDE the "festival" funding). But the College has had Cooper's pants down in all the negotiations to date (not funny, unfortunately, as it is all taxpayers' money at play here) and there is already speculation whether the College are really interested in any of this and also whether this small rump of arts provision will provide a job for one Garry Morris. Significantly SMBC (NOT the College) were advertising a tender last week for 4 pop-up banners for the new joint "Arts Cafe" at a modest £3,000 (yes, you read it right - three THOUSAND pounds). Potential suppliers were to contact, er, Garry Morris of SMBC!
Let hope that the next time the Arts Council shakes on a deal with Sandwell Labour it counts its fingers afterwards.
Oh, and by the way, Garry Morris is the son of Labour "aristocrat", Lord (Bill) Morris of Handsworth.
THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - A COMMUNITY BLOG - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!
e thesandwellskidder@gmail.com t @bcrover (Vernon Grant)
Confidential phone no: 07599 983737
* See my post 18th December, 2013, "The Public - Odds and Sods".
** See my post 11th June, 2014, "The Public - The Plot Thickens....".
Friday, 5 September 2014
Emergency Blog - What the Hell is Going On in Sandwell? Death of Oldbury?
A secret Sandwell Labour document has been disclosed to me tonight via a Freedom of Information internal review (my initial request for this redacted document having been refused). I have only just seen it and cannot comment further at this stage as it is late at night and I have to work tomorrow. Labour SMBC say this is no longer commercially sensitive but do not say why this is. On the face of it, the "socialists" are BORROWING over £20 MILLION just to buy themselves out of the property part of the BT "Transform Sandwell" disaster (nothing to do with the "Government" or "The Tories" that - all the work of incompetent Sandwell Labour!) We need to know as a matter of urgency what has happened since this report of June 2014. Oldbury is already a ghost town and this report suggests that Loony Labour will now shaft it and move most of The Kremlin to West Brom! Also, who the f**k are "Invista Foundation (West Bromwich) Limited?"
At this stage I can do no more than to let you read the previously secret document:
"Agenda Item 9
Not for publication
Exempt information relating to the financial and business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)
The information contained in this report is strictly confidential and in accordance with the appropriate Codes of Conduct, must not be disclosed to unauthorised persons
Report to Cabinet
25 June 2014
Proposed Acquisition of 1 Providence Place
West Bromwich
1. Summary Statement
1.1 The Council is currently the under lessee of 1 Providence Place in West Bromwich (the landlord being Invista Foundation (West Bromwich) Limited who, in turn, are tenants of the Council as freeholder. This is a state of the art building capable of meeting the Council’s long term accommodation requirements.
1.2 The Council's current under lease runs until October 2026. The rent payable on the 75,900 sq ft property by the Council is £1,311,273 in 2014 rising to £1,815,108 in 2025, but is regarded as onerous due to the 3% uplift of the rent per annum. Approximately half the property is occupied by BT (by virtue of 2 sub-underleases from the Council) who pay rent to the Council on a pro rata basis for the space that they occupy within the property. The BT leases run until 2026 but each has a break clause after three and a half years i.e October 2017. It is considered highly likely that BT will vacate their occupation of the property in October 2017, since they have no ongoing requirement for property within Sandwell.
1.3 Invista have now put their long head leasehold interest in the property on the market to generate capital for investment; this report proposes that the Council acquires their interest which provides for a merger of the Council's interests in and ownership of the property.
1.4 Invista's interest has been valued by DTZ on behalf of the Council at between £20.8million to £21.5million. The acquisition of the head leasehold interest would provide the Council with a modern headquarters facility in the heart of West Bromwich that will meet the Council’s accommodation requirements in future years.
1.5 If the Council is successful in acquiring the head leasehold interest in the property, the acquisition will be made using Prudential Borrowing. Initial cost comparators show that the overall cost of ownership is lower using prudential borrowing and that immediate revenue savings can be achieved in the first year following acquisition.
1.6 Given the gearing on the existing under lease and the ability of the building to meet the Council’s long term office requirements, the acquisition of the head leasehold interest is concluded to be a more appropriate way forward both from a financial perspective and the Council’s long term security of the building.
1.7 Negotiations for the proposed acquisition are still ongoing with Invista and further details will be provided verbally at the Cabinet Meeting.
1.8 An Equality Impact Assessment is not necessary at this stage.
Further details are attached for your information.
2. Recommendation
2.1 That, subject to appropriate due diligence, the Director - Legal and Governance Services be authorised to acquire the headleasehold interest of 1 Providence Place, West Bromwich on terms and conditions to be agreed by the Area Director – Regeneration in consultation with the Director of Strategic Resources.
2.2 That the Director Legal and Governance Services be authorised to enter into or execute under seal if necessary any other related documentation, and to take any other necessary steps, in relation to (or consequent on) the acquisition of the headleasehold interest of 1 Providence Place, West Bromwich on terms and conditions to be agreed by the Area Director Regeneration and Economy in consultation with the Director of Strategic Resources.
2.3 In the event that the negotiations for the acquisition of the headleasehold interest of 1 Providence Place West Bromwich are successful , a further report be submitted to include a business case (to ensure that the course of action represents the best interests for the Council), a financial appraisal and the allocation of the necessary resources.
Nick Bubalo
Area Director – Regeneration and Economy
Stuart Kellas
Director - Strategic Resources
Neeraj Sharma
Director - Legal and Governance
Contact Officer
Peter Yeomans
Tel 569 3906
3. Strategic Resource Implications
At this stage I can do no more than to let you read the previously secret document:
"Agenda Item 9
Not for publication
Exempt information relating to the financial and business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)
The information contained in this report is strictly confidential and in accordance with the appropriate Codes of Conduct, must not be disclosed to unauthorised persons
Report to Cabinet
25 June 2014
Proposed Acquisition of 1 Providence Place
West Bromwich
1. Summary Statement
1.1 The Council is currently the under lessee of 1 Providence Place in West Bromwich (the landlord being Invista Foundation (West Bromwich) Limited who, in turn, are tenants of the Council as freeholder. This is a state of the art building capable of meeting the Council’s long term accommodation requirements.
1.2 The Council's current under lease runs until October 2026. The rent payable on the 75,900 sq ft property by the Council is £1,311,273 in 2014 rising to £1,815,108 in 2025, but is regarded as onerous due to the 3% uplift of the rent per annum. Approximately half the property is occupied by BT (by virtue of 2 sub-underleases from the Council) who pay rent to the Council on a pro rata basis for the space that they occupy within the property. The BT leases run until 2026 but each has a break clause after three and a half years i.e October 2017. It is considered highly likely that BT will vacate their occupation of the property in October 2017, since they have no ongoing requirement for property within Sandwell.
1.3 Invista have now put their long head leasehold interest in the property on the market to generate capital for investment; this report proposes that the Council acquires their interest which provides for a merger of the Council's interests in and ownership of the property.
1.4 Invista's interest has been valued by DTZ on behalf of the Council at between £20.8million to £21.5million. The acquisition of the head leasehold interest would provide the Council with a modern headquarters facility in the heart of West Bromwich that will meet the Council’s accommodation requirements in future years.
1.5 If the Council is successful in acquiring the head leasehold interest in the property, the acquisition will be made using Prudential Borrowing. Initial cost comparators show that the overall cost of ownership is lower using prudential borrowing and that immediate revenue savings can be achieved in the first year following acquisition.
1.6 Given the gearing on the existing under lease and the ability of the building to meet the Council’s long term office requirements, the acquisition of the head leasehold interest is concluded to be a more appropriate way forward both from a financial perspective and the Council’s long term security of the building.
1.7 Negotiations for the proposed acquisition are still ongoing with Invista and further details will be provided verbally at the Cabinet Meeting.
1.8 An Equality Impact Assessment is not necessary at this stage.
Further details are attached for your information.
2. Recommendation
2.1 That, subject to appropriate due diligence, the Director - Legal and Governance Services be authorised to acquire the headleasehold interest of 1 Providence Place, West Bromwich on terms and conditions to be agreed by the Area Director – Regeneration in consultation with the Director of Strategic Resources.
2.2 That the Director Legal and Governance Services be authorised to enter into or execute under seal if necessary any other related documentation, and to take any other necessary steps, in relation to (or consequent on) the acquisition of the headleasehold interest of 1 Providence Place, West Bromwich on terms and conditions to be agreed by the Area Director Regeneration and Economy in consultation with the Director of Strategic Resources.
2.3 In the event that the negotiations for the acquisition of the headleasehold interest of 1 Providence Place West Bromwich are successful , a further report be submitted to include a business case (to ensure that the course of action represents the best interests for the Council), a financial appraisal and the allocation of the necessary resources.
Nick Bubalo
Area Director – Regeneration and Economy
Stuart Kellas
Director - Strategic Resources
Neeraj Sharma
Director - Legal and Governance
Contact Officer
Peter Yeomans
Tel 569 3906
3. Strategic Resource Implications
3.1 The proposed acquisition of this property, which will include the associated acquisition costs of Stamp Duty (SDLT), will in the longer term save the Council resources. The current lease arrangements that are in place commit the Council to some £18million in rent up until 2026. Even then there may well be additional costs due to dilapidations that will fall due on the property.
3.2 The exact acquisition price has not yet been negotiated, and the Council may be out bid by Investment Funds wising to purchase the interest for a value in excess of that recommended by the Council’s external advice.
4. Legal and Statutory Implications
4.1 The power for a local authority to acquire land and property by agreement is contained in Section 120 of the Local Government Act 1972. It allows Councils to acquire by agreement any land whether situated inside or outside their area for the purposes of any of their functions or for the benefit, improvement or development of their area.
4.2 The acquisition of the headlease for a significant sum means that it will be essential for the Council to carry out the necessary due diligence exercise to ensure that the property provides value for money.
5 Implications for Council’s Scorecard Priorities
5.1 Great Place
The regeneration of the Borough is a long term objective of the Council. This property was procured by BT in connection with the services outsourcing project (now at an end) and as a component of the Urban Renaissance that has taken hold in West Bromwich. The proposed acquisition will consolidate the Council interest in West Bromwich and, in the longer term, provide a flagship Head Quarters facility that will meet the Council’s accommodation requirements for the foreseeable future.
5.2 Great People
The proposed acquisition will provide BREEAM excellent accommodation for Sandwell employees. The property was constructed in 2011 and has all the requirements of a modern office block. This will be of benefit to the Council employees working within the property.
5.3 Great Performance
The financial advantage to the Council starts to materialise in 2017 and in the longer-term there are significant savings to the Council by virtue of the ownership of the flagship Head Quarters property in West Bromwich.
Great Prospects
The proposed acquisition demonstrates the commitment of the Council to the long term regeneration of West Bromwich. The adjacent plot is being developed by the West Bromwich Building Society and the Providence Place development is clearly being developed as the premier office location within the Borough, affording very good access to the National Motorway Network.
6. Background Details
6.1 The construction of 1 Providence Place was part of the delivery arrangements required when Transform Sandwell awarded the outsourcing contract. This necessitated the construction of a Regional Business Centre with the Borough boundary. The contract provider, in its fulfilment of that obligation commissioned the construction of the property known as 1 Providence Place. This is a 75,000 sq ft BREEAM excellent Head Quarters facility.
6.2 The Council's current underleasehold interest in the property came into effect on 1st April 2014 and runs until 2026. The rent payable by the Council (that was originally negotiated by the Council's predecessor, ) has a 3% uplift per annum and is somewhat onerous since by 2025 the Council will be paying £1.8million per annum for its occupation of the property.
6.3 Due to the Council’s ability to borrow money at favourable rates through Prudential Borrowing it has been calculated that if the total acquisition cost is in the region of £23.2 million than this reduces to a Net Present Value of £19.7million. It also delivers the advantage of acquiring a substantial asset that the Council is able to occupy as its premier head quarters facility.
6.4 Additionally it is anticipated that this property will become a major component within the office portfolio. The Office Accommodation Strategy has been amended to reflect the importance of this office facility and its significant contribution to be able to deliver services to the residents of Sandwell.
6.5 At the moment the former head lessee occupy approximately half the property but have already expressed a desire to reduce the level of this occupation. The company have 2 sub-under leases from the Council that expires in 2025, but it is anticipated that the company will exercise their break clause to exit the property in October 2017."
THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - A COMMUNITY BLOG - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!
e thesandwellskidder@gmail.com t @bcrover (Vernon Grant)
Confidential phone no: 07599 983737
Skidder Shorts No. 18 - Who Do You Believe - Council or College?
In my post of 10th August, 2014 "Sandwell College or Council - which One is Lying" I pointed out that Labour Sandwell Council had form for initiating "deals" but then claiming that the other party had initially "approached" them.
This blog has maintained all along that Councillors Cooper and Hussain of Sandwell Council were the instigators of the plan to destroy The Public with Hussain being "the front man". Yet in formal Council documents they openly stated that it was the College who started the ball rolling. But then in response to a Freedom of Information Act request the greedy College specifically denied this. I pointed out in my post that one of them was obviously lying.
Today the shysters at the College have again responded to a Freedom of Information Act request. They now publicly state that Hussain telephoned the College and arranged a meeting on 15th August, 2012 AT THE COUNCIL'S OFFICES. The College have specifically stated that Sheryl Dowen* and David Hawkins attended for Sandwell College where they met Hussain and two officers of Sandwell MBC - Steve Smith and Brian Aldridge. (Addendum 07/09/14 - Steve Smith was part of Melanie Dudley's team and was right in on this scandal from day 1. But this did not prevent him attending the infamous Haden Hill meeting on 22nd May, 2013 - see my post of 11th June, 2014, "The Public - The Plot Thickens....")
The College has behaved appalling in shafting the people of Sandwell throughout this affair but they do seem very sure of their ground and have now provided details. If they are correct then the SMBC authors of the so-called Fundamental Review which finished The Public off put false information into that Cabinet report. How much of the rest of it is false? And these were no junior bods either but part of the "High Command" ie:
Director of Neighbourhoods Adrian Scarrott (now on £108.614 per annum) , Director - Melanie Dudley (now on £120,092 pa and involved even though she was a Director of Sandwell Futures Limited which "got" the contract), £128,000 per annum Head of Legal, Neeraj Sharma and Director Stuart Kellas (now on £132, 512 pa).
If this bunch lied - why?
Today the moron who "leads" Sandwell Labour - Darren Cooper - wrote in what he alleges is "his" blog, "As we no longer have official opposition group to challenge the decisions the Council makes, I wanted to look at how we maintain our high levels of openness and transparency". "Lol" as he so frequently tweets!
Who do you believe?
THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - A COMMUNITY BLOG - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!
e thesandwellskidder@gmail.com t @bcrover (Vernon Grant)
Confidential phone no: 07599 983737
* Not content with her part in shafting Sandwell this piece of work proposed a celebratory "dinner" at taxpayers' expense to gloat at their cleverness. Fortunately it seems that wiser counsel has prevailed and in another FoI reply the rapacious College assure me that the beano never took place.
This blog has maintained all along that Councillors Cooper and Hussain of Sandwell Council were the instigators of the plan to destroy The Public with Hussain being "the front man". Yet in formal Council documents they openly stated that it was the College who started the ball rolling. But then in response to a Freedom of Information Act request the greedy College specifically denied this. I pointed out in my post that one of them was obviously lying.
Today the shysters at the College have again responded to a Freedom of Information Act request. They now publicly state that Hussain telephoned the College and arranged a meeting on 15th August, 2012 AT THE COUNCIL'S OFFICES. The College have specifically stated that Sheryl Dowen* and David Hawkins attended for Sandwell College where they met Hussain and two officers of Sandwell MBC - Steve Smith and Brian Aldridge. (Addendum 07/09/14 - Steve Smith was part of Melanie Dudley's team and was right in on this scandal from day 1. But this did not prevent him attending the infamous Haden Hill meeting on 22nd May, 2013 - see my post of 11th June, 2014, "The Public - The Plot Thickens....")
The College has behaved appalling in shafting the people of Sandwell throughout this affair but they do seem very sure of their ground and have now provided details. If they are correct then the SMBC authors of the so-called Fundamental Review which finished The Public off put false information into that Cabinet report. How much of the rest of it is false? And these were no junior bods either but part of the "High Command" ie:
Director of Neighbourhoods Adrian Scarrott (now on £108.614 per annum) , Director - Melanie Dudley (now on £120,092 pa and involved even though she was a Director of Sandwell Futures Limited which "got" the contract), £128,000 per annum Head of Legal, Neeraj Sharma and Director Stuart Kellas (now on £132, 512 pa).
If this bunch lied - why?
Today the moron who "leads" Sandwell Labour - Darren Cooper - wrote in what he alleges is "his" blog, "As we no longer have official opposition group to challenge the decisions the Council makes, I wanted to look at how we maintain our high levels of openness and transparency". "Lol" as he so frequently tweets!
Who do you believe?
THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - A COMMUNITY BLOG - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!
e thesandwellskidder@gmail.com t @bcrover (Vernon Grant)
Confidential phone no: 07599 983737
* Not content with her part in shafting Sandwell this piece of work proposed a celebratory "dinner" at taxpayers' expense to gloat at their cleverness. Fortunately it seems that wiser counsel has prevailed and in another FoI reply the rapacious College assure me that the beano never took place.
Thursday, 4 September 2014
Lying Lucy Latest - A New Cashmore Shocker!
Regular readers will know that the Labour liar legally owns a house with her husband (employer - Sandwell Council) in South Birmingham but for electoral purposes claimed she was a "non-paying tennant [sic]" at the Smethwick address of her parents - Councillors Linda & Roger Horton (mother being the recently retired Mayor of Sandwell)*. Strangely, she remained on the voters roll at the Birmingham address. She has stated this in various official documents - nomination papers etc and on her Register of Members' Interests (it is a criminal offence to give false/misleading statements in that document).
Apart from taking down some Facebook pages - eg pictures of her delightful garden in, er, South Birmingham - Cashmore has been totally brazen in her lies. I first drew attention to the "problems" concerning her address as long ago as 3rd July in my post "An Unfortunate Error by Councillor Cashmore?" rapidly followed on 8th July with another post, "Resign Councillor Cashmore!" More particularly I set out that BY HER OWN ADMISSION in her LinkedIn site entry she had been lying in the Register of Interests when she claimed she had no employment (once again, it is a criminal offence to give false/misleading information in the Register). Not only was she boasting of her prowess in the world of recruitment but she clearly admitted that she was working at the precise date she signed her legal declaration stating that she was not. Furthermore, her LinkedIn entry confirmed she has been working ever since. She not only failed to correct the false declaration before I exposed the truth but she has not done so since either - although to take the piss she has changed her photo on the SMBC website! If she is still working she is STILL lying!
Leaving aside the illegality and any potential criminal prosecution this is a blatant breach of Labour Sandwell's own Code of Conduct but I am unaware of the Labour High Command taking any action as yet against "one of their own". Incidentally, the "leader" of Sandwell Council, Darren Cooper, is also a personal friend of the Hortons.
Now you would think that anyone in Cashmore's position would correct the record and keep her head down but she is seemingly determined to put two fingers up to her constituents and the other long-suffering folk of Sandwell. But maybe she doesn't need her members' allowances now that she has a new job - not only in The Borough of Sandwell but with well-known friends of Sandwell Labour! Let the liar tell you the position in her own, slightly garbled, words:
Via LinkedIn 04/09/14: "Branch Operations Manager - STAR Employment Service July, 2014 - Present (3 Months). Taking the lead role in the development of STAR Employment Services, the recruitment agency from MNA, the owner of West Midland's leading media brands - THE EXPRESS AND STAR & Shropshire Star. STAR Employment Services is establishing a reputation for placing high calibre personnel with local employers both permanent and temporary. We offer a quality of service to ensure that every customer's needs are met. Building on the heritage of the EXPRESS AND STAR and Shropshire Star within the region, STAR Employment Services can offer clients a prestigious and tailored made [sic] service....through established relationships through the MNA Group."
And so the Wolverhampton C-S's pop-up again! Whether "Star" will be touting for business from their great pals Sandwell Labour remains to be seen but in the meantime, Cashmore's legal Register Declaration remains false. There are only three words that sum up this sorry saga again - RESIGN COUNCILLOR CASHMORE!
* The Land Registry shows that the liar bought her house in Lindsworth Road with her husband in December, 2007. A search via the Peopletracer website which may or may not be accurate shows her there from 2008. In 2010 she became involved as a director and shareholder in a Company and gave her Lindsworth Road address in legal documents to Companies House. I am unable to find any trace of her being on the voters roll in Sandwell during this period.
THE SANDWELL SKIDDDER - A COMMUNITY BLOG - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!
e thesandwellskidder@gmail.com t @bcrover (Vernon Grant)
Confidential phone number: 07599 983737
Wednesday, 3 September 2014
Mosque Parking Scandal in Pictures! Spot the Oddity!
For further information on the secret deal please see my posts, "Mosque Car Park - Another Secret Labour sale at an Undervaluation" and "Mosque Parking Scandal - Chance for Labour Group & Council to Reflect...."
Shaftesbury House is a large office block right on West Brom High Street. It is owned by Sandwell Council. But the building is empty whilst the "canny" comrades pay taxpayers' money to rent office space elsewhere eg three whole floors of Guardian House - one of the most expensive office blocks in West Bromwich - via their "SIPS" partnership. I pointed out a long time ago that it would have been highly suitable for use by Sandwell College (subject to refurb costs) IF that College really needed to expand but Labour decided on the multi-million pound (still secret) project to destroy The Public instead. In fact, there is a college actually in the office building next door.
Shaftesbury House - now a public asset - is being left to rot and will require a costly refurb or demolition. If the latter proceeds there will be a very large plot for development right in the High Street. As shown below there is a large car park and beyond this to the right is the attached "overspill" car park which is the subject of this blog (see below)
 |
| Main Car Park |
 |
| Next Door |
The planners at Labour Sandwell Council have given planning permission for a large mosque in residential Dartmouth Street in recent history but here's an oddity. The permission was specifically for an "in and out" ie one way layout for the mosque's own car park but take a look at these pictures:
 |
| Main Vehicular Access |
 |
| Street Setting |
 |
| "Out" Access ? |
Just in case you think the proposed car park - which is NOT adjacent to the mosque - is an insignificant little patch take a look:
 |
| "Overspill" Car Park - SH in background |
 |
| Large Plot |
 |
| Housing next door. |
If there are plans for Shaftesbury House then these too are secret but it is hard to imagine in a period of rapidly rising land values that the sale of this significantly-sized plot cannot but diminish the value of the whole Shaftesbury House plot but that is what the sleazy "socialists" are alleging! How so Sandwell Council?
At present the only access to this plot is via the High Street. It has always been fenced-off from Earl Street to the rear:
 |
| Earl Street behind fencing |
 |
| The large plot from Earl Street |
In the recent High Court disaster where the dopey drones voted unanimously for an illegal and discriminatory policy which has cost taxpayers' in excess of £700,000 (nothing to do with the Government/Tories) the Judge hammered them in respect of their failure to consult before trying to change their policy. The idiotic Cooper now says everything is "open" but I managed to speak to two residents of Earl Street last night who both ASSURED me that they had received no communications whatsoever from SMBC about this plan and, as previously stated, the sleazy "socialists" seem to be admitting that they have tried to cook this secret deal up with the mosque without offering the land to anyone else, or on the open market, or by auction.
Depending on whether there IS a secret plan for Shaftesbury House it may be that this plot is surplus to requirements but if there is NO plan then Labour simply cannot say this. How can they know?
If this dodgy deal goes ahead (or rather when it goes ahead as the decision has, in reality, already been made) the fencing shown above will be removed and an access point made into Earl Street which is a small and narrow wholly residential street:
 |
| Earl Street |
 |
| Earl Street |
If this plot is split off from a wider redevelopment of Shaftesbury House even for housing it is suggested by the loony lefties that there will still have to be access via Earl Street but that only really applies IF the plot IS split away from the larger area. In any event, it would have been "nice" if SMBC actually asked the residents of Earl Street whether they would prefer to live next door to a small housing development or a car park.
One of the reasons stated for this rubbish is that it will relieve traffic on Dartmouth Street! Well it is only moving the alleged "problem" into narrow Earl Street!
When The Public was open its management had an ongoing battle with SMBC about long-stay parking with the Politburo stating that everyone should go there BY PUBLIC TRANSPORT. Different rules appear to apply in respect of this mosque even though the mosque has excellent public transport links. It also has its own car park which can be used for the elderly/infirm.
 |
| Mosque close to High Street |
Significantly, the proposed Shaftesbury House car park is a short walk away (it is NOT adjacent to the mosque) which begs the question why a valuable plot of land should be given up at a loss to the taxpayer when there are two nearby SMBC car parks (or perhaps the comrades think worshippers should not have to pay parking charges - something other denominations may wish to explore with them!)
To the north across the High Street is the Sandwell Street/Temple Street SMBC car park (and others):
 |
| Car Park just other side of High Street by parked vehicle on left |
 |
| Edward Street - 3 minutes away |
And so Cooper, there is still time for you to disclose the secret documents and figures before tonight's meeting in line with your new "policy". I invite you to do so.
THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - A COMMUNITY BLOG - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!
e thesandwellskidder@gmail.com t @bcrover (Vernon Grant)
Confidential phone no: 07599 983737
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)