Jan Britton's Sandwell Council has a cavalier approach to replying to Freedom of Information Act replies egged on by the moronic "leader" who was only complaining yesterday about the operation of the Act via "his" Twitter account.
This blog has pointed out that SMBC have lied in FoI replies in the past but they (and the College) are up to other crafty methods to keep information from the pubic gaze too.
Before I give you a couple of recent examples you should note if you are making FoI requests then SMBC replies are frequently late. If you accept this and have to then appeal to the Office of the Information Commissioner (ICO) then the ICO MAY hold this against YOU! Accordingly, I am certainly not going to allow them slack any more and I suggest you follow suit. If you do not get the reply on the due date immediately request an internal review. If there is still no adequate response put in your appeal to the ICO as soon as the review time expires. It is a shame that it has to be like that but there it is.....
Lesson 1 - make sure your write your request in wide, legalistic, terms or SMBC will screw you. Here is something that I have just realised thanks to someone contacting me.
I was informed that Britain's Joint Laziest MP 2010 - 2015, the secretive Tom Watson, had sent Cooper what he laughably called a survey in respect of the tenants at The Public. This was said to be by e-mail. Accordingly, I made this request (part only):
"I am aware that local MP, Tom Watson, forwarded certain e-mails to
SMBC via Cllr Darren Cooper concerning the closure of The Public
Arts Centre.
Please disclose all e-mails received from Tom Watson MP by SMBC
whether addressed to Cllr Cooper or otherwise and all replies from
any SMBC source to Mr Watson for the period 1st April, 2013 to 24th
December, 2013 that relate to The Public."
Mistake! What I SHOULD have written was something like "please disclose all e-mails, letters, and records of communications of any other description" since SMBC were careful to stitch me up. Here is the relevant part of the reply:
"I have liaised with the relevant Officers, who have confirmed that no
correspondence from Tom Watson MP was received by Councillor Cooper in his
official council e-mail address, or by officers of the Council between the
1st April and 24th December 2013" (my emphasis).
You will see that Britton's team were very careful with the wording - there was no correspondence to Cooper's e-mail address. I duly let sleeping dogs lie until someone pointed out to me that the Nonce-Finder General had indeed sent his so-called "survey" to the thuggish "leader" but had actually sent it by LETTER during precisely the period I had sought information for. Unfortunately, I had overlooked this:
Incidentally, I am not aware if there was a reply....
Don't let sleazy Sandwell get away with this sort of nonsense if you are doing your own requests!
Lesson 2 - Another SMBC stunt is to only partially answer the request (see for example the situation when they pilfered the "Arts Festival" funds to promote Jim Cadman's "private" statue). Again, do not delay if they start this sort of nonsense. Go straight to the ICO.
Unfortunately, the College (where, of course, the aforementioned "xxxxx xxxxxxx" [comedic reference temporarily removed] Jan Britton sits on the Board of Governors) are at it as well. Last year I asked questions about the catering contract for the cafe at the former Public. This was the relevant part of a Freedom of Information reply:
"The College has an existing partner [Catering Academy Limited] for delivering all catering within the College and the cafe/catering provision at the new Central Sixth site will
be provided by this partner. This arrangement will continue until July
2015 when we will re-tender for these services."
That could not be said to be in any way ambiguous but, as it turns out, this was a grossly misleading reply at best or a simple lie at worst. Was this done deliberately by someone at the College and if so why?
July, 2015 arrived and I could not locate details of any re-tendering. I duly approached the sleazy College again only to receive this the other day (without any sort of apology for the false information given before):
"The catering contract with Sandwell College allows for an option to extend for up to two years from July 2015. This option has been exercised."
No doubt, Sandwell College will be able to show that they have secured best value for the taxpayer from this cosy arrangement and that there is no element of taxpayer subsidy to the catering company in respect of the disastrously empty ex-Public caff. Once again, I shall be writing to Ofsted about their appalling lax governance.
And so we have it again folks. the secret state of Labour Sandwell in all its glory......
THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - A COMMUNITY BLOG - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!
email: thesandwellskidder@gmail.com twitter: @bcrover (Vernon Grant)
Confidential phone no: 07599 983737
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.