Barnet Council: “Outsource, outsource and more outsourcing.”

“A Labour Government would oversee the ‘biggest wave of insourcing for a generation,’ deputy leader Angela Rayner has said” (2022)

Fast forward to 2025 and here in Barnet Council the message is clear outsourcing, outsourcing and more outsourcing.

In the last 12 months our cleaners were told they would not be brought back inhouse our parking workers were told late last year that insourcing was not an option and tomorrow Wednesday 5 February Education workers were told that they would remain outside the Council, denying staff access to a public sector pension scheme.

The trade unions all lobbied the Labour Administration and were sent a very clear message that outsourcing is off the table.


We are in the worst cost of living crisis in 77 years and our lowest paid are living in daily fear as to what bills they can pay.

Our outsourced members are the worst impacted as privatisation brings the following:

Job Insecurity and Reduced Benefits:

Private companies often prioritise profit maximisation, which can lead to job cuts, reduced wages, and fewer benefits for workers.

This can create instability and financial hardship for low-paid workers who rely on the steady employment and benefits that public sector jobs often provide.

Erosion of Worker’s Rights:

Privatisation weakens workers’ ability to collectively bargain for better wages and working conditions.

This can lead to a decline in worker’s rights and protections, making low-paid workers more vulnerable to exploitation.

Increased Inequality:

The focus on profit in privatised services can lead to a widening gap between executive pay and the wages of frontline workers.

This exacerbates existing income inequality and can make it even harder for low-paid workers to make ends meet.


We have workers delivering services for Barnet Council with no occupational sick pay, no access to a public sector pension scheme to name a few of the gross inequalities that are rife across the private sector.

UNISON represents outsourced workers in Housing, Social Care, Cleaning, Parking Enforcement, Security, Schools Catering and Education and all are being told there is no room for them in the Barnet Council workforce.

UNISON has a National Policy called Bringing Services Home and Barnet UNISON fully supports this aim and will continue to push for a clear plan and timetable for services to be brought back in-house.

 

End.

“Withdraw the compulsory redundancies”: £7,804,000

Before our members read this article. It is important to note that there is no detriment to the best of our knowledge to the Pension Scheme because of the unlawful actions identified in the report going to Full Council on Tuesday 28 January 2025. This is confirmed in paragraph 10.2 of the report.

“It should also be emphasised that as the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) is a defined benefit scheme there is no impact as a result of these transactions on members’ benefits.”

 

What has happened?

UNISON has only recently discovered that something unlawful has taken place involving payments to the Council’s Pension Scheme.

The matter was first publicly discussed Pension Fund Committee – Tuesday 14th January 2025 7.00 pm.

You can listen to the discussion by clicking on the link below. You need to scroll 1 hour and 6 minutes to hear the discussion about the unlawful payments.

https://aisapps.mediasite.com/AuditelScheduler/Player/Index/?id=a1c6cfd1-5311-44ae-94fa-6aff99b35ae6&presID=11f4679ca075408d948fb7b34a51a1811d

 

The next piece of critical information came to our attention when the reports were published for the Full Council on Tuesday 28 January 2025.

One damning paragraph stands out:

“5.2.1 After taking advice, and based on the information available the Monitoring Officer and the Section151 Officer are of the view that the Additional Payments and the Repayments were unlawful.”

Source: Report to all Elected members of London Borough of Barnet Under Section 5(2)(a) of the local Government and Housing Act 1989 and Section 114 (2)(a) Local Government Finance Act 1988 By Jessica Farmer Monitoring Officer and Kevin Bartle Chief Finance Officer (Section 151 Officer).

https://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s87758/Appendix%20A%20joint%20report%20S5S114.pdf

The report uses the term unlawful ten times unlawfully once and unlawfulness once.

It is a shocking report.

UNISON recommends that members read the above report that is being discussed at Council meeting.

The two paragraphs set out what happened:

“4.2 The Council (acting as a scheme employer) made a one-off prepayment of £20,477,000 to the Fund in April 2020 (“the Prepayment”) instead of secondary contributions for the years 2020/21, 2021/22 and 2022/23. This was because the Council was advised that a Prepayment would save the Council money compared  with making secondary contributions over three years. The Council received leading counsel’s advice, which was taken without reference to the Monitoring Officer, that making the Prepayment was lawful in principle.”

“4.4 After the Prepayment, the Council continued to make periodic payments of (in effect) secondary contributions for the three financial years 2020/21, 2021/22 and 2022/23 (“Additional Payments”). These were made contrary to the Rates and adjustments Certificate. In effect, the Additional Payments would duplicate the Prepayment, and so officers also arranged that the Fund would repay most of the Additional Payment back to the Council in three annual repayments (“Repayments”). Because of a lack of documentation and staff turnover, the Monitoring Officer and Section 151 Officer have not been able to understand clearly when or why the Additional Payments and Repayments were arranged. As far as the Monitoring Officer and current Section 151 Officer can tell, the most likely explanation is that, at the time, officers believed that the outcome of these fund flows would be advantageous for the Council in accounting terms, while not being disadvantageous to the Fund. In any event, the Additional Payments were made and two of the three planned Repayments have also been made: £6,508,000 in October 2020 and £7,574,000 in October 2021.”

For those of us who are not financial experts the two paragraphs explain that not only was an unlawful payment of £20,477,000 made into the Pension Fund but that a further three payments were made of the next three years which resulted in effect in a double payment into the Pension Fund. Towards the end of the final paragraph the Council explains that the Council clawed back two payments back but that once the unlawful payments had been discovered everything was put on hold.

Many of our members reading this report will know that they all are expected to follow Council procedures and understand what happens if you don’t follow. Many of our members will be wondering about who has the powers to authorise spend. The responsibilities for senior managers are set out in what is referred to as the Scheme of Delegation which you can read on the Council website here https://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s24780/Appendix%20D%20-%20Scheme%20of%20Delegated%20Authority%20to%20Officers.pdf

There are a number of questions UNISON has about how this could happen, but our immediate concern is in regard to the numerous redundancy consultations taking place.

£7.8million is a lot of money that is owed to the Council.

At this moment in time the Council is coming to a close on a number of redundancy consultations which, if confirmed, are going to mean staff will be made redundant. Vacancies will be deleted in teams where there is already increasing pressure on the workforce to deliver more with less resources and to work in a job where their pay has failed to keep up with the cost-of-living crisis.

It is UNISON’s understanding, and we would be happy to publicly correct it if we have misunderstood the report above, that Barnet Council is attempting to find a way to retrieve £7,804,000 back from the Council’s Pension Fund.

£7,804,000 is a lot of money and it is UNISON’s view that if this money were back in the Council’s bank account, then it could be used to mitigate some of the redundancies/cuts to public services which are about to be signed off by Barnet Council.

In the meantime, we have several questions.

  1. Was there a scheme of delegation for the Pension Fund?
  2. If not, why not?
  3. Who made the decision to make the prepayment?
  4. Who decided to make the decision to subsequently carry on with payments that the prepayment was intended to cover?
  5. Who can authorise a payment of up to £20million
  6. What was the cost of the initial legal advice in 2020?
  7. Who has authority to seek counsel’s opinion
  8. Who did seek counsel’s opinion in this case?
  9. Was counsel’s opinion seen by the monitoring officer?
  10. If yes what was their opinion, if not why not?
  11. Was the scheme was initiated by the council acting as the fund or as the employer i.e. did the pension fund ask them to do it?
  12. What has been the total cost of legal advice and tax advice taken so far?
  13. Has anyone been subject to a disciplinary investigation?

 

Recommendations:

As a result of the breaking news UNISON is demanding the following:

  1. The redundancies are withdrawn in anticipation that the monies owed can mitigate the need to make the redundancies in this year.

 

 

UNISON response to Barnet Council’s Restructure Proposals 2024/25

Barnet UNISON has, since September 2024, proposed financial savings which we believe should be tried before any of these other posts are deleted. To date we have had no response and instead our members’ jobs and services are now at risk.

Please see our budget saving recommendations below:

To view our report please click on the link below

UNISON response to Barnet Councils Restructure Proposals 2024

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/UNISON-response-to-Barnet-Councils-Restructure-Proposals-2024.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

Social Care to wait until 2028. No thanks this is not good enough

Our care workers can’t wait for another review.
Politicians keep promising to deliver a fair system where care workers will be recognised for the professional role they provide in the delivery of critical care services.
The recent annoucement by Health Secretary Wes Streeting https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c791gyx2n50o is simply not good enough.
He is kicking the ‘social care’ can down the road.
Our members need this change NOW.

End.

John Sullivan, Father, husband, Barnet resident and grassroots local hero ‘Rest in Peace’

Source: The above video is John Sullivan speaking at the UK Covid Inquiry in 2024.

 

Dear Barnet UNISON members

I want to inform you of the passing of John Sullivan.

John was a Barnet resident and a true friend of Barnet UNISON and the services our members provided for residents of the London Borough of Barnet.

I have known John, Ida (John’s wife) and Susan (John’s daughter) for almost 30 years. I first met him when Barnet UNISON was fighting the closure of Etchingham Park Day Centre. John was an ardent advocate for his community. He would fight tooth and nail for you if he believed it was the right thing to do.

Over the years John has supported Barnet UNISON members across a number of campaigns such as the Fremantle care worker dispute, the One Barnet outsourcing campaign, Your Choice Barnet campaign and sadly, most recently, the fight for justice for those who lost loved ones during the COVID pandemic.

He has stood on Barnet UNISON picket lines, taken part in demonstrations, spoken out in countless public meetings, often calling out politicians who were failing those who most need public services.

It was an honour and privilege to have known John and his family.

My last comment is to direct Barnet UNISON members to the link to the UK COVID-19 Inquiry where John gave evidence about what happened to his daughter who died early on in the pandemic.

The fact that he found the mental and physical strength to take part and give evidence is a testament to the unique person John was.

I am also providing a link to the whole inquiry.

You can watch John give evidence 4 hours and 20 minutes into the inquiry

https://www.youtube.com/live/UyJfu8wOxco?si=-ZjW8QmnXm1DDN8s

Below are some links to John’s contribution to fighting for public services:

 

How Barnet Eye guest blogger John Sullivan moved LBC’s James O’Brien to tears

https://barneteye.blogspot.com/2021/05/how-barnet-eye-guest-blogger-john.html

 

My Susan was allowed to die of Covid because she had Down’s syndrome, father says

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/daughter-died-covid-downs-syndrome-2970056?srsltid=AfmBOorB1oe6ouWHbr2bFmdOF1h3MDqlGFo-WbIqRMXag5ngOlHmeKsI

 

Barnet UNISON Pays Tribute to The Little Chief, Susan Sullivan

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2020/03/30/barnet-unison-pays-tribute-to-the-little-chief-susan-sullivan/

 

JUDICIAL REVIEW CHALLENGE TO PRIVATISATION OF BARNET COUNCIL SERVICES LAUNCHED

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2012/12/07/judicial-review-challenge-to-privatisation-of-barnet-council-services-launched/

 

Your Choice Barnet – John Sullivan’s statement read by Barbara Jacobson 27.11.2013

https://youtu.be/0IsKGHwp0kU?feature=shared

 

YOUR CHOICE BARNET CARE WORKERS CAMPAIGN

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015.01.15.%20YCB%20FLYER%20PUBLIC.pdf

 

CapitaVille song – sung by John Sullivan

https://youtu.be/-MZYbxk2Ssg?feature=shared

 

Legal Challenge to One Barnet

https://youtu.be/etOSBzuN1LM?feature=shared

 

Rest in Peace John.

 

Solidarity

 

John Burgess, Branch Secretary, Barnet UNISON.

 

 

“Three Chief Executives and one plumber”: The unfinished story

Week One of Barnet Council redundancy consultation has ended with six restructures across the Council with more to follow next week.

Barnet UNISON has published several articles where we believe there are savings to be made before any services are stopped or staff dismissed.

Please see the articles published to date below.

UPDATED: Barnet Council the Tale of “Three Chief Executives and one plumber”

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/10/18/barnet-council-the-tale-of-three-chief-executives-and-one-plumber/

 

No stone left unturned” Number 1: Update on Barnet Council Agency Spend.

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/11/25/no-stone-left-unturned-number-1-update-of-barnet-council-agency-spend/

 

“No stone left unturned” Number 2: CEO The Barnet Group & Plumber with oncosts.

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/11/25/no-stone-left-unturned-number-2-ceo-the-barnet-group-plumber-with-oncosts/

 

“No stone left unturned” Number 3: Does it make sense to have a Barnet Council CEO & CEO The Barnet Group.

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/11/25/no-stone-left-unturned-number-3-does-it-make-sense-to-have-a-barnet-council-ceo-ceo-the-barnet-group/

 

“No stone left unturned” Number 4: What about the senior management review?

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/11/25/no-stone-left-unturned-number-4-what-about-the-senior-management-review/

 

 “No stone left unturned” What is The Barnet Group (TBG)? Number 5: Part One

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/11/15/part-one-who-is-the-barnet-group/

 

“No stone left unturned” What is The Barnet Group (TBG)? Number 6: Part Two

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/11/15/9925/

 

 

“No stone left unturned” What is The Barnet Group (TBG)? Number 7: Part Three

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/11/15/part-three-who-is-the-barnet-group/

 

“No stone left Unturned No 8: “Fixing the foundations or looking after corporate big businesses?”

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/12/04/no-stone-left-unturned-no-8-fixing-the-foundations-or-looking-after-corporate-big-businesses/

 

 

No stone left unturned No 9: Bah Humbug “Withdrawal of Tea and Coffee.

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/12/04/no-stone-left-unturned-no-9-bah-humbug-withdrawal-of-tea-and-coffee/

 

“No stone left unturned” Number 10: Barnet Homes the elephant in the room.

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/12/04/no-stone-left-unturned-number-10-barnet-homes-the-elephant-in-the-room/

 

 “No stone left unturned” Number 11: We got to talk Capita

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/12/04/no-stone-left-unturned-number-11-we-got-to-talk-capita/

 

“No stone left unturned” Number 12: Service Pressures

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/12/04/no-stone-left-unturned-number-12-service-pressures/

 

“No stone left unturned” Number 13: Economies of scale.

https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/12/10/no-stone-left-unturned-number-13-economies-of-scale/

 

End.

“No stone left unturned” Number 13: Economies of scale.

Day two of redundancy consultation across the Council workforce and still no responses from the employer to the UNISON proposals where the Council could and should be taking control of its spend.

This article is about economies of scale and how they could make savings which could prevent redundancies and service cuts.

Read on.

30 years ago, there was on Council with one Chief Executive and a smaller senior management team.

It was a larger Council because all the services that are currently outsourced such as Housing (Barnet Homes) Social Care (Your Choice Barnet) Parking Enforcement (NSL), School Catering (ISS), Cleaning (Norse) Education Services for Schools (BELS) Customer Services, Revs and Bens, Payroll, IT (Capita) used to be part of the Councils workforce.

12 years ago, Barnet Council under the Tories Administration created a Local Authority Trading Company (LATC) which is 100% owned by Barnet Council.

They named it The Barnet Group (TBG).

The purpose of the company was to exploit workers by using their labour to provide essential services but deny those workers of the terms and conditions of a Council worker including the right to join the council Pension Scheme.

There are two companies within TBG. Barnet Homes and Your Choice Barnet.

In 2020, Barnet Council created another LATC for education services for schools called Barnet Education and Learning Skills (BELS) following the contract failure of a contractor who pulled out during Covid.

Both these LATCs are owned by Barnet Council.

The UNISON economies of scale proposal were for Barnet Council to conduct a review of back office services across all three organisations.

UNISON knows from some simple research published in our article “No stone left unturned” Number 10: Barnet Homes the elephant in the room. https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/12/04/no-stone-left-unturned-number-10-barnet-homes-the-elephant-in-the-room/ that savings were inevitable with the ending of the outsourced Housing Services. UNISON has continued to campaign for an end to the appalling employment practices of both organisations by bringing services in-house which is in line with UNISONs National Policy ‘Bringing Services Home’.

If the Council is determined to maintain the two organisations it at the very least should end the waste in terms of running three back offices and run only one.

Whilst the deliberate underfunding of Councils rests solely with Tory Governments there are still opportunities for Barnet Council to take responsibility for things they do control, and this is one of them.

Barnet UNISON is now representing members across the workforce who are at risk of redundancy. In redundancy consultations the employer must demonstrate they are making all efforts to control spend to avoid redundancy.

To date we have not heard anything back.

End.

 

“No stone left unturned” Number 10: Barnet Homes the elephant in the room.

Barnet Council published its Cabinet Committee 5 December 2024 report here:

https://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s87121/Business%20Planning%20and%20Medium%20Term%20Financial%20Strategy%202025-2030.pdf

The report paints a stark picture for Council funding.

Barnet Council, in response to the serious overspend for 2025/26, has published a savings plan which is outlined in Appendix B here https://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s87123/Appendix%20B%20Breakdown%20of%20savings%20and%20income%20generation%20proposals%20v2.pdf

Whilst the Government repeats the tired old phrase of needing to fix the foundations, they have ignored the fact that councils have been seriously underfunded over the past 14 years and they are teetering on the point of bankruptcy. They need upfront funding (not a loan) now whilst a new funding formula is agreed which will allow councils to plan and keep our communities safe.

This financial crisis means Barnet Council needs to take a serious look at how it is organised. It must decide whether to keep the organisation it inherited from the Tories or to rebuild it.

This means addressing the “elephant in the room”, Barnet Homes.

Currently Housing services are delivered by Barnet Homes which is part of The Barnet Group (TBG).

Click on the three links below if you want to know more about the history of Barnet Homes and The Barnet Group

  1. “No stone left unturned” What is The Barnet Group (TBG)? Number 5: Part One https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/11/15/part-one-who-is-the-barnet-group/
  2. “No stone left unturned” What is The Barnet Group (TBG)? Number 6: Part Two https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/11/15/9925/

3 “No stone left unturned” What is The Barnet Group (TBG)? Number 7: Part Three https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/11/15/part-three-who-is-the-barnet-group/

Barnet Homes is one of the few Housing Services that is still outsourced. Across London in both Labour and Tory Councils, senior officers and politicians have all come to the same conclusion that Housing must and should return in-house.

Earlier this year a senior officer report to Cabinet Committee recommended that Barnet Homes continues to be outsourced. Barnet UNISON submitted our report calling for Housing Services to be brought back in-house.

Considering the serious financial crisis facing Barnet Council and the knowledge that Barnet UNISON members are now facing redundancy and services are at risk, UNISON has reviewed what other Councils had to say about the outsourcing of Housing services.

  1. Haringey Council Cabinet meeting 7 December 2021

Title: Decision on the Council’s proposal to bring Homes for Haringey (HfH) in-house https://www.minutes.haringey.gov.uk/documents/s128415/Cabinet%20December%202021%20HfH%20insourcing.pdf

“Value for Money

4.3.1 The rationales for bringing HfH back in-house to deliver VFM [Value For Money] are based on the

following:

  1. Efficiency savings are anticipated by eliminating areas of duplication and bringing together Council and HfH back-office services;
  2. Corporate services supporting the HfH Board and subgroups will no longer be needed;
  3. Client-side monitoring resources in the Council can be repurposed;
  4. Some HfH functions will be integrated with Council functions to deliver added value;
  5. Any efficiency savings to the HRA can be reinvested in resident services or add value by funding capital investment in estate improvements and new homes.”

 

  1. Lewisham Council approved at a Cabinet Meeting in Dec 2022.

https://councilmeetings.lewisham.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?AIId=32800

Appendix 3: Cost Benefit Analysis

“Immediate annual savings of £300k would be made through the changes to governance structures and no longer servicing Lewisham Homes’ boards, as well as removing the need to client Lewisham Homes.”

“There will be one-off costs to the transfer of services relating to project management, professional services (IT, Finance, HR and Legal) and any one-off rebranding costs.”

“The transfer of corporate and shared services offer additional opportunities for savings to be made through the removal of duplication and restructuring; the level of these savings cannot be calculated at this stage and are dependent on decisions made by individual services.”

Source: https://councilmeetings.lewisham.gov.uk/documents/s103862/06%20Appendix%203%20Cost-benefit%20Analysis%20171122.pdf

 

  1. Brent Council

“54. It is the In-House option that, by a wide margin, best interacts with the requirement to make significant savings. The Council has a track record of successfully delivering large budget reductions whilst carefully managing the impact on services and residents over recent years. These experiences will be directly relevant to, and can be directly applied to, an in-house option. In contrast BHP will find it harder to achieve the savings potentially required due to being ‘arms length’ with the associated costs this structure carries. The Joint Venture will take time and money to implement and in any case becomes difficult, if not impossible, to engineer as the cost reduction requirement increases.

  1. The financials are the most important factor in reaching the recommendation.
  2. Control is another important factor. The In-House option gives the highest level of strategic and operational control. The Reformed ALMO and Joint Venture options offer good levels of strategic control (though the ability to change course operates more slowly) and lower levels of operational control.
  3. In conclusion, taking into account the challenging financial landscape, and all other factors outlined above, it is recommended that the In-House option is chosen. Moreover, the InHouse option offers the opportunity to re-position the housing service within the Council with the aim of improving a broad range of outcomes for almost 12,000 households. This is not the lift and shift of a self-contained housing service into the Council’s structure. This is the engagement of the housing service with the Council’s wider agendas in order to secure improved outcomes for residents and to enable the Council’s expertise in cost reduction to be brought to bear. However there are two areas for particular consideration within the planning for the In-House option and these are identification and mitigation of the key risks arising from the new position of the housing service within the Council’s wider business and providing effective arrangements for resident and Member oversight and scrutiny.

Source: https://democracy.brent.gov.uk/documents/s46023/Review%20of%20Housing%20Management%20Options%20Full.pdf

  1. Enfield Council

“The reintegration of Enfield Homes offers opportunities to streamline functions across the Council and Enfield Homes, which will enable more efficient working so resources can be effectively prioritised to improve the services delivered to local residents.

The reintegration of Enfield Homes offers the potential for efficiency savings of up to £540K through the deletion of the Enfield Homes Chief Executive post and the governance function, accountancy services, HR savings and from a review of the senior management structure including the appointment of Joint Chief Operating Officer and Joint Head of Housing Finance.

There is the opportunity to improve the performance of the housing management and maintenance services by building on synergies that exist between the services provided by Enfield Homes and those by the Council.”

Source: https://governance.enfield.gov.uk/documents/s45967/ALMO%20Reintegration%20Cabinet%20report%20Final%2023-07-14%203.pdf

 

  1. Harrow Council

“Keith Burchell, cabinet member for housing at Harrow, said keeping housing within the authority would save it £3.6m over 30 years since the running costs of the ALMO were expected to exceed £15m over this period. ”

https://www.building.co.uk/harrow-council-to-drop-almo-plans-in-pursuit-of-better-financial-deal-/3042326.article#:~:text=Harrow%20council%20is%20to%20become%20the%20first,it%20could%20get%20better%20value%20for%20money

 

  1. Tower Hamlets

“Reasons for the decision

The current Management Agreement between Tower Hamlets Homes (THH) and the Council ends on 31 March 2024 (with a possible extension of a further four years). The Council must take a decision on whether to extend the Management Agreement no later than six months prior to this date.

Having reviewed the options for the future of housing management services, the Council has assessed that bringing services back in-house will:

  • provide an opportunity to join up services.
  • increase accountability to residents and the Regulator for Social Housing (RSH).
  • enable the Council to take a strategic approach to delivering good quality and new homes.

Given that no more additional Decent Homes funding is available, the Council did not find a significant reason to justify sustaining an Arms-Length Management Organisation (ALMO) model.

Between 24 October and 18 December 2022, the Council consulted residents on the future of housing management services. A mixed methods approach was used to collect views on if the Management Agreement with THH should be extended or if services should be brought back in-house under direct control of the Council. 86.21% of tenants and leaseholders agreed with the Council’s proposals to bring services back in-house.”

Source: https://democracy.towerhamlets.gov.uk/documents/g13217/Decisions%2022nd-Feb-2023%2017.30%20Cabinet.pdf?T=2

 

  1. Ealing Council

“Cllr Bell said he hoped the local authority might be able to bring the ALMO back in-house before its contract runs out in March 2011.

He added: ‘We need to look at the books closely, but we believe that we can make around £5 million worth of savings by running the service ourselves. The tenants and leaseholders who were at the meeting were very, very pleased that we won the vote.’”

https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/ealing-to-take-housing-management-in-house-19754

“This Council resolves that with immediate effect it withdraws its support for

privatising the Management Contract of Ealing Homes. It instructs officers to

draw up proposals immediately to return Ealing Homes to direct management by

the Council in such a way as to ensure that:

  1. a) tenants and leaseholders have a genuine say in how the stock is managed

and the Council proactively encourages the setting up of tenants’

management organisations;

  1. b) costs are tightly controlled; and
  2. c) management of the housing stock will in future be closely scrutinised in

public so that problems such as poor repairs, expensive and slow Decent

Homes works and lack of adequate communication with tenants and leaseholders can be resolved and future problems avoided.”

https://ealing.moderngov.co.uk/Data/Council/20100518/Agenda/Minutes%20-%2018.05.10.pdf

  1. Havering Council

https://democracy.havering.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx?ID=2095

Reasons for the decision:

  • The Council no longer needed to have an Arms Length Management Organisation (ALMO) in order to access funding from the Decent Homes Programme
  • Tenants and leaseholders had expressed their views clearly, that they would prefer their homes to be managed by the Council rather than retain the existing ALMO structure
  • The integration of the housing management service with the remaining housing services would provide a more transparent and accountable structure for the housing service
  • The removal of duplication in the management and governance arrangements for the service would save at least £300,000.

 

  1. Westminster Council

https://www.publicsectorexecutive.com/News-archive/westminster-city-council-to-bring-almo-housing-scheme-back-in-house-after-performance-concerns

“Pursuing option 2, bringing the service back in-house, would be in the best interests of tenants and leaseholders and in line with feedback from tenants and residents’ groups. This should be combined with consultation and engagement with tenants and leaseholders on the future provision of housing management services and how these services can improve, in order to re-establish residents at the heart of service delivery.”

 

  1. Hammersmith and Fulham Council

https://democracy.lbhf.gov.uk/documents/g1546/Public%20reports%20pack%2010th-Jan-2011%2019.00%20Cabinet.pdf?T=10

4.4 Financial advantages from the creation of single direct management

Housing & Regeneration Department 4.4.1 There will be some significant immediate savings that will flow from the integration of the ALMO into the Council. These will result from the deletion of vacant posts, which would otherwise be duplicated in the new structure, and the elimination of agency workers and contractors to whom TUPE does not apply.

4.4.2 The present organisational structures were created to facilitate the formation of the ALMO and not because they represented the most efficient or cost effective managerial teams. As a result there are some significant areas of overlapping responsibility and accountability which give rise to higher costs

than is necessary.

4.4.3 By bringing the two separate structures together, it will be possible to significantly streamline the current Assistant Director structures under one Director of Housing & Regeneration. Recruitment of the Director of Housing and Regeneration is currently under way.

4.4.4 In addition, It is recommended that the Housing Management Division in the ALMO is linked to the Housing Options Division to create a new Housing Services team. LBHF is currently in the process of recruiting an Assistant Director of Housing Services to develop and lead the integration programme for the Housing Options and ALMO Housing Services teams. Appendix C provides a summary of the proposed Structure of the integration Housing and Regeneration Department.”

 

UNISON comment.

What is clear from reading the reports of other senior council officers is that there are clear organisational and financial benefits to bringing Housing services back inhouse.

The financial crisis facing the Council means that they can no longer continue to allow the expense of running a shadow council with its own bureaucracy and senior management structures. If it is good enough for all the other London Councils, then why is it not good enough for Barnet Council?

UNISON is asking for the Housing Services to be brought back inhouse.

**Please note: This article will be periodically updated as we discover more evidence of Councils bringing back housing services in-house.

End.

“No stone left Unturned No 8: “Fixing the foundations or looking after corporate big businesses?”

 

“Treasury forgoes ‘billions’ of pounds of potential revenue as well-paid self-employed partners spared employer NIC increases

Well-paid City lawyers and other self-employed partners at businesses including top accountancy and private equity firms have been spared the increases to national insurance contributions announced in October’s budget, in a move that will deny the Treasury “billions” of pounds of potential revenue.”

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2024/nov/26/well-paid-partners-in-city-firms-escape-paying-national-insurance-rises

UNISON members who have older relatives being hit by the withdrawal of the winter fuel allowance or UNISON members who have children hit by the two-child benefit cap or UNSION members with family members with a disability feeling they are being attacked by the recent soundbites about going after “benefit scroungers”, or UNISON members with children who are thinking about going to university must now think about the impact of an increase in tuition fees, will all be wondering whose side the Labour Government is on. The article above demonstrates there was a choice about who the Government could target to raise much needed income to address 14 years of Tory Austerity. It looks like the message is clear. Corporate Big Business comes first and at the expense of the rest of us.

This brings us back to how the increase in National Insurance impacts on our members and residents in Barnet. The Government has given councils protection from the increase but not for other employers. One of the biggest Council budgets is Adult Social Care which uses care agencies to provide a service. These companies are getting no protection. Social Care services are already underfunded, understaffed and at breaking point. There have been decades of empty promises from politicians from both parties that if they are in power they will fix the system. The social care providers are going to have to pass the cost onto the Council. This places an additional financial burden on Barnet Council finances.

It is worth noting that Barnet Council chose to create two local authority trading companies that are 100% owned by Barnet Council they are The Barnet Group (TBG). TBG has an organisation called Barnet Homes which provides Housing and another organisation called Your Choice Barnet which provides social care services.

The second is called Barnet Education and Learning Skills (BELS) which provides services for Barnet Schools.

We have recently been told that TBG is not protected and will have a find extra funding for almost 1,000 staff. This is another massive service pressure of extra funding that Barnet Council will have to find.

This cost would not apply if Barnet Council brought these services back in-house like other London Councils.

We are waiting to hear from BELS as to whether they are having to pay the increases in National Insurance.

End.

1 2 3 14