Traver's talks

There is a museum dedicated to Magritte in Brussels which friends of Mr Mustard have just been to & he would like to visit. He hasn't seen Andrew Travers in a bowler hat but it is what senior civil servants used to wear years ago. Now to what Andrew has just sent to the staff (do they all know who he is?) about the JR along with, in red, Mr Mustard's comments.

From: First Team
Sent: 10 June 2013 10:55
To: AllStaff
Subject: Judicial Review update

The First Team update on Tuesday set out the provisional dates set for the Appeal Court hearings of 7 and 8 October. True.

Since then we have continued to explore with the Court whether those dates could be brought forward, but so far to no avail. What I haven't told you is that Maria Nash's lawyers have been available since they submitted the appeal and it is the council's QC Monica Carrs-Frisk who is busy on another trial so the delay is entirely down to the council's decision to stick with her. 

We are looking at the possibility of instructing a new QC in the hope that could lead to an earlier date for a hearing, although this is still dependent on the Court listing. A new QC won't lead to any consultations being found as they don't exist.

We remain confident that permission to appeal will not be allowed and that the benefits to our residents will be delivered. Is it possible to read the mind of appeal Court judges with their superior brain power and extensive legal knowledge? This is guesswork or possibly based upon the advice of Trowers & Hamlins who would say that wouldn't they.

When this is confirmed we will sign the NSCSO contract. A.s.a.p.

The transfer of staff to Capita would take place shortly after. We can't get rid of staff quickly enough. Contrast with "continuing commitment" below.

The One Barnet programme is designed to protect and enhance our ability to serve our residents through an unprecedented period of austerity. The words "to protect" are not needed as they are followed by "to enhance" which aren't true anyway as One Barnet includes service cuts. We are not "our residents". You on the other hand represent "our council" except it has gone rogue on us. Mr Mustard thinks that some reading about the Great Depression is in order to question the use of "unprecedented".

The NSCSO contract will improve the quality of our services and will save an average of £12.5m per annum. Ask Mr Mustard if this is true in 2023.
 
This is £12.5m which would otherwise come largely from front-line service reductions. Well that is one choice. Getting every consultant & interim out of the North London Business Park, reducing the number of councillors from 63 to 21, not paying anyone more than £100,000 p.a., flattening the management structure and starting again with zero based budgets and becoming a boringly efficient organisation would be another way.

The DRS contract will improve the quality of our services, will save an average of £3.9m per annum which would otherwise largely come from front-line service reductions, and will create a growing Barnet-based business. Will other boroughs really agree to let Barnet make a profit out of providing services for them which would otherwise represent a saving in their own budget? For every winner there will be a loser. If having a Barnet based business is such a good thing why did you let NSL transfer the parking back office to Croydon?

Cabinet has carefully considered and approved these arrangements at all stages. So carefully that they haven't all read some or all of the NSCSO contract. Mr Mustard emailed all of the Cabinet as to how many pages they had each read. We know Richard Cornelius didn't read it as he said so and so his cabinet team are unlikely to have bothered; none responded to Mr Mustard's email (hello Cabinet member, it isn't too late to tell Mr Mustard you have read it all - what is that, oh an empty inbox).

The legal action pursued by the claimant is designed to delay or prevent these arrangements coming into place. It is designed to seek justice.
 
The initial application for Judicial Review was not allowed by the High Court and permission to appeal was refused. The claimant has, nevertheless, sought permission direct from the Appeal Court. This is called following due process, unlike the missing consultations.
 
The council deeply regrets this. Officers are not the council, they are its servants even if that doesn't appear to be the case. Is this remark on behalf of councillors? Richard Cornelius said "everyone has a right to speak to the Courts" (except when it buggers our cunning plans up of course).

I am acutely aware of the challenges of continuing effective service delivery during this period of uncertainty which is not of our making. Who started this pig in a poke that is One Barnet then, as it wasn't the residents?

I remain very grateful for the continuing commitment of all staff affected by these projects. Why would anyone want to TUPE transfer out such a committed workforce? If this is the case why has £167,000 been committed to Capita to cover for holes in the staffing? see Mr Reasonable's blog here.

We will be putting additional measures in place to support the continued delivery of services during this period, and more information will be available shortly for the affected areas. Can't wait. Crisis, what crisis?

Andrew no longer a Town Hall Tax Dodger Travers

Barnet Council - the soap opera

If you want to leave now you will be forgiven. This will be a long and confusing posting. HR are so on top of their game that incorrect FOI answers get sent to Mr Mustard and it's only because he can see through the fog that eventually he gets the right answer (possibly). It all started with this DPR

1645 - Interim HR Management Structure

---

Mr Mustard has the notion that DPR should make things clearer not more muddled but they often don't seem to. Here, without the truly boring bits, but leaving in the fairly boring bits, are the two versions of the FOI answer that he received:

 

I write further to my email of 12th July 2012 acknowledging your request for an internal review into the handling of your request for information.

You have requested an internal review of the Council’s response in relation to your request for:

I understand that Jacquie McGeachie is no longer the interim Assistant Director of HR and is working on some sort of special project for Nick Walkley.

Please tell me the nature of the special project and provide the job description for it.
Please tell me when and where it was advertised and how many candidates applied and how many were short-listed. Is Ms McGeachie now on the payroll and if not through which company is she being paid?
Please tell me what salary scale applies or the daily rate paid to the agency.

I note that Sarah Murphy-Brookman is now the Assistant Director of HR (the report to the Remuneration Committee does not say if this is an interim post or not).
Is this a permanent posting or an interim one?
Has the pay scale of the post been changed in the last 12 months, and if so in what way?
Please tell me when and where the post was advertised and how many candidates applied and how many were short-listed.

Ms Murphy-Brookman previously filled the role of Head of Business Partnering and Change.
Please provide a copy of the job description for that post including the pay scale. Has the pay scale of the post been changed in the last 12 months and if so in what way?
Please tell me who is now filling the post.
Please tell me if that person is now on the payroll under PAYE or are provided by an agency and which one.
If paid through an agency please tell me the daily rate.
If an employee paid under PAYE is the posting an interim or permanent one?
Please tell me when and where the post was advertised and how many candidates applied and how many were short-listed.

This request was replied to on 24th May 2012, the response is copied in below, and you were provided with a copy of the Role Profile for the Head of Business Partnering and Reward. You found this response unsatisfactory and requested an Internal Review which we received on 30th June 2012.
The response you received was:
Please tell me the nature of the special project and provide the job description for it. An HR consultant role has been created, there is no Job Description.  Please refer to DPR no. 1645 for the detail. http://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=123

Please tell me when and where it was advertised and how many candidates applied and how many were short-listed. Is Ms McGeachie now on the payroll and if not through which company is she being paid?

The HR Consultant role was not advertised.
Ms McGeachie is not an employee of the London Borough of Barnet
The AD Consultant role has been filled on a temporary basis through Hays
Please tell me what salary scale applies or the daily rate paid to the agency.The DPR sets out the salary scale. The day rate paid to Hays is £575
I note that Sarah Murphy-Brookman is now the Assistant Director of HR (the report to the
Remuneration Committee does not say if this is an interim post or not).Is this a permanent posting or an interim one?This detail is set out in the DPR
Has the pay scale of the post been changed in the last 12 months, and if so in what way?
This detail is set out in the DPR

Please tell me when and where the post was advertised and how many candidates applied and how many were short-listed.

The post was not advertised
Ms Murphy-Brookman previously filled the role of Head of Business Partnering and Change.

Please provide a copy of the job description for that post including the pay scale. Has the pay scale of the post been changed in the last 12 months and if so in what way?

A copy of the Job description is attached
The pay scale for this post is set out in the DPR
Please tell me who is now filling the post.The post has been filled on a temporary basis through Hays
Please tell me if that person is now on the payroll under PAYE or are provided by an agency and which one.

The post has been filled on a temporary basis through Hays

If paid through an agency please tell me the daily rate.The daily rate paid the to Hays is £532
If an employee paid under PAYE is the posting an interim or permanent one?Not applicable
Please tell me when and where the post was advertised and how many candidates applied and how many were short-listed.

The post was filled through HaysInternal Review

I have undertaken the Internal Review and the outcome of my review is set out below. I have processed this review request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

I have looked at your original request and the answers provided. Whilst some of the information provided and answers given were correct, I do agree that some of the information provided to you did not directly answer some of the questions you had asked. Additionally, I am afraid that some of the answers to the questions were slightly incorrect, in that the answers given referred to a different post (the Head of Business Partnering and Reward) rather than that specifically asked about (the Head of Business Partnering and Change). This appears to have been caused by a genuine misunderstanding of the detail of your question. The Role Profile sent to you was similarly incorrect in that instead of it being for the Head of Business Partnering and Change it was for the Head of Business Partnering and Reward. I apologise for any inconvenience these errors may have caused.

The corrected answers and information to answer your FOIA request, with clarified numbering, are:
I understand that Jacquie McGeachie is no longer the interim Assistant Director of HR and is working on some sort of special project for Nick Walkley.

1. a) Please tell me the nature of the special project and b) provide the job description for it.

1 a) Ms McGeachie is assisting the Chief Executive with HR and associated issues arising in the current restructure of the council’s senior mangers (sic). If there was a recruitment drive we might get a better officer for less money?

1 b) There is no Job Description available, therefore the Council does not hold this information.

The post is a HR consultant role, which was has been created, under DPR no. 1645. This may be obtained at the following link:http://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=123

2 a) Please tell me when and b) where it was advertised and c) how many candidates applied and how many were short-listed.

2 a), b), c) and d) The post was not advertised therefore the Council does not hold this information.

3 a) Is Ms McGeachie now on the payroll and b) if not through which company is she being paid?
3 a) Ms McGeachie is not a London Borough of Barnet employee and so is not on the Council’s payroll

3 b) Ms McGeachie is paid through Hays on a temporary basis. Where temporary means forever, 3+ years so far, since January 2009, and not a single penny of PAYE paid?
4 Please tell me a) what salary scale applies or b) the daily rate paid to the agency.
4 a) The salary scale is as set out in the DPR, in section 5 under HR Change Consultant

4 b) The day rate paid to Hays is £575

I note that Sarah Murphy-Brookman is now the Assistant Director of HR (the report to the Remuneration Committee does not say if this is an interim post or not).

5 Is this a permanent posting or an interim one?

5 This is an interim post, please see section 8.2 of the DPR which refers to an interim structure which will be reversed at outsourcing. At which point doubtless she will slip seamlessly into another role. She doesn't put interim in front of her title like others do. She also doesn't tax dodge as far as Mr Mustard is aware.

6 a) Has the pay scale of the post been changed in the last 12 months, and b) if so in what way?
6 a) Yes.
6 b) It has been reduced from spinal column point (scp) range 247-250 to scp 243.

7 Please tell me a) when and b) where the post was advertised and c) how many candidates applied and d) how many were short-listed.

7 a), b), c) and d) The post was not advertised therefore the Council does not hold this information Aren't all posts meant to be advertised?

Ms Murphy-Brookman previously filled the role of Head of Business Partnering and Change.
 

8 Please provide a copy of the job description for that post including the pay scale.

8. The Role Profile for the Head of Business Partnering and Change can be found at this link. Please note that this post was previously called Head of Business Partnering and Employee Engagement, and when the role was changed to Head of Business Partnering and Change the title on the role profile was not similarly amended. Now you know it is wrong why not correct it? You have had a month and not done it. No-one cares about detail.

9 a)Has the pay scale of the post been changed in the last 12 months and b) if so in what way?
9 a) the pay scale for this post has not been changed as such, but as can been seen in the DPR (link provided above in 1 b)) this post has been temporarily suspended.

9 b) please see 9 a) above

10 Please tell me who is now filling the post.

10 As can be seen in the DPR the post has been temporarily suspended, so there is no person in post.

11 Please tell me if a) that person is now on the payroll under PAYE or b) are provided by an agency and c) which one.

11 a)b) and c) As can be seen in the DPR the post has been temporarily suspended, so there is no person in post, therefore the Council holds no information on this.

12 If paid through an agency please tell me the daily rate.

12 There is no person in post, therefore the Council holds no information on this.

13 If an employee paid under PAYE is the posting an interim or permanent one?

13 There is no person in post, therefore the Council holds no information on this.

14 Please tell me a) when and b) where the post was advertised and c) how many candidates applied and d) how many were short-listed.

14 a) b) c) and d) the post has not been advertised, therefore the council holds no information on this.

Is that all clear for you? There are 3 senior temporary posts which are in the DPR apart from the McGeachie one and for which Mr Mustard has sent for details which he will bring you in a few months time.

 

Just to show you what a soap opera these jobs are, with even the council getting confused by their own changes, in which they seem only to change the tile of the post and nothing substantive, you need to see this blog post so that you can see that HR have been tiddling about since at least 2009.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

No more dodgems for the Town Hall Tax Dodgers

Picture credit - The Mirror

The reign of the Town Hall Tax Dodger is about to come to an end.

Deep in the budget paperwork is the following statement:

2.207 Personal service companies and IR35 – The Government will introduce a package of measures to tackle avoidance through the use of personal service companies and to make the IR35 legislation easier to understand for those who are genuinely in business. This will include: strengthening up specialist compliance teams to tackle avoidance of employment income; simplifying the way IR35 is administered; and subject to consultation, requiring office holders/controlling persons who are integral to the running of an organisation to have PAYE and NICs deducted at source by the organisation by which they are engaged. (Finance Bill 2013)

Welcome to the deduction of Tax and National Insurance under PAYE everyone. All those consultants who live miles away from Barnet; no more tax relief on your travel or accommodation costs so go back to Peterborough and let us employ local people. It looks like a level playing field is starting to arrive.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Not the retiring type

New schools, like Colindale, can only be built if we all pay proper taxes

Let Mr Mustard say straight away that he has been told that Ieuan Renowden is a good chap. It looks like he has got in with bad company though.

Executive summary:

There is another "consultant" not paying PAYE

You can take early retirement and then come straight back to work as a consultant.

There is no need to bother with tiresome paperwork like contracts in Barnet Council.

Consultants can set their own charge rate.

Tax dodging is endemic at Barnet Council.

---

Until about 2005 Mr Renowden was the Head of Colindale Junior School. Then he became a Learning Network Inspector and must have been on the council payroll (Mr Mustard does not know if he was simply a shoe-in or if an advertisement and true competition was necessary).

In School Circular #25 of 26 March 2008 it was announced that "Mr Renowden, the Learning Network Inspector for the West will be taking early retirement at the end of this academic year" i.e. in July 2008. He was only 58 at that time so that would be early retirement, if he had stopped working. He took the summer holidays off. His pay at that time would have been in the range of £59,155 to £65,276. The range is now £60,781 to £67,071 (Soulbury Scales 27-33)

So what happened next. Take a look at these payments to IJR Associates Ltd , whose Director is one Ieuan Renowden. Someone at Barnet Council might have put him up to the idea of using a Limited company. For some reason these payments have not been re-routed through Hays from April 11.

Date	Paid £	Service Provided
11/11/2008	6,750	consutancy Oct to Dec 2008
04/12/2008	5,400
08/01/2009	5,850
10/02/2009	1,800	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring, spring 2009
10/02/2009	1,800	consultancy - cover, Learning network Inspector
20/02/2009	1,600	Interim management of Early Years Capital grant
09/03/2009	1,350	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring, spring 2009
09/03/2009	1,350	consultancy - cover, Learning network Inspector
12/03/2009	1,200	Management of Early Years Capital grant
03/04/2009	1,800	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring, spring 2009
03/04/2009	1,800	consultancy - cover, Learning network Inspector
09/04/2009	2,000	Interim management of Early Years Capital grant
11/05/2009	450	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring
11/05/2009	2,700
22/06/2009	4,500
07/07/2009	5,400
22/07/2009	4,050
05/10/2009	5,850	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring
05/11/2009	4,950
01/12/2009	5,400
08/01/2010	4,050
12/02/2010	5,400	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring
03/03/2010	5,400
07/04/2010	6,300
10/05/2010	2,700	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring
02/06/2010	5,400
02/07/2010	5,850
28/07/2010	4,950
04/10/2010	6,300
09/11/2010	4,500
03/12/2010	5,400
11/01/2011	4,050
11/02/2011	5,400
15/03/2011	4,050
13/04/2011	6,300
11/05/2011	3,150	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring, Summer 2011
03/06/2011	5,400
05/07/2011	4,950
02/09/2011	2,700
02/09/2011	1,800	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring, July 2011
Total	160,050

The daily rate appears to be £450 and using the 195 day school year this would lead to annual payments of £87,750.

Can a consultant really be employed for 3 years on what looks like a pretty constant basis, i.e. like an employee, without them being on the payroll. The problem here is that for part of the time at least Mr Renowden was doing his old job of Network Learning Inspector so if he was on PAYE doing that job in 2007 then he should have been paying PAYE when doing it in for 3 months in 2009 and so Barnet Council are at fault. The length of time that you are doing the job is irrelevant, it is a question of if you are acting as an employee and clearly he was when he was a NLI. Here are the Accounts of IJR.

Accounts of IJR Associates Ltd

If you are wondering what has happened since the payments stopped the answer is on a different blog, here. If you don't want people to know your business then don't put anything on the internet. Mr Mustard will be looking out for more payments to you in the future, once you have come back from around the world, Mr Renowden and he hopes he won't find any.

Normally when consultants are being employed on a doubtful tax basis there is an indemnity in the contract (there is one in the Jacquie McGeachie contract, for example, although it is badly worded) so that the council can recover any tax it ultimately has to pay on behalf of the "consultant". Is there such a clause in the contract with Mr Renowden? No, there isn't. Why is that? It is because a contract does not exist. That is correct. Another £160,000 paid out without any contract whatsoever. Disgraceful. This missing contract did not get picked up in the review of procurement presented to the Audit Committee on 6 September 2011. How many others were missed?

If you are aware of any other Barnet Council or ex school ex-employees retiring or being made redundant and then coming back fairly quickly as consultants please do send the details to Mr Mustard. Your identity will not be disclosed (if in doubt create a gmail address just for this communication).

The BBC have been looking at Town Hall Tax Dodgers and report that there might be 100 across all local authorities. They are being very cautious for some reason. There are 33 London councils who will probably account for 1,000 on their own. Mr Mustard has identified several so far in Barnet alone and there are more to come from his records. No dodger is safe.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Lower Tax Bill

picture credit: http://www.38degrees.org.uk/

The question is "Is the new Interim Assistant Director of Customer Services" paying PAYE like any other employee would?"

Roll back to May 10

East Sussex County Council

That was when Bill joined ESCC as Interim Director of Governance and Community Services and he stayed there until July 2011. Mr Mustard looked on the over £500 lists published by ESCC, they give slightly more detail as to the category of spending but less in that there isn't a payment date. All Mr Mustard could find in those 15 months was a payment under ref 45005338095 of £780 which either slipped through the net or was some sort of expense claim. It is very odd that payments to Jacquie McGeachie at Barnet Council also failed to appear on spending lists ( as Mr Reasonable found out ). This sort of expenditure seems to just fall off lists; it's not as if councils are trying to hide anything, is it?

If we look at the published accounts of ESCC for the year ended 2010/11 we find reference to Bill's post and that £125,119 was paid in that year and that Bill was "engaged via an agency". ESCC coyly didn't say which agency.

It is apparent that the payments ended up with Murphy's Solutions Ltd, in which Bill Murphy holds 100% of the shares, as the company was only formed in April 2010 and so the figures on the balance sheet are unlikely to relate to any other source of income.

Murphy's Solutions Ltd Accounts to April 11

Now to Barnet Council

Mr Mustard has been making various enquiries under FOI. One of these was as to who was paid on the payroll and who via Hays. Bill Murphy is paid by Hays. Non PAYE staff, like the £1,000 a day Chief Financial Officer, Andrew Travers, are no longer paid directly to their service company, in his case Halliford Associates Ltd but via Hays. This makes the payments harder to follow. Bill Murphy is paid by Hays and so they are probably paying Murphy's Solutions Ltd (although Hays are not automatically subject to FOI so Mr Mustard can't easuily find out).

Conclusion

Bill used to be what Eric Pickles MP would call a "Town Hall Tax Dodger" and he probably still is, at least until 1 April 2012 when Barnet Council are likely to change their arrangements once again.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard