Schools | A blog about Wirral Council, Wirral Council's councillors & officers

Marvin the Martian returns to try to understand the incredible Lyndale School situation and the £1 million SEN budget cut

Marvin the Martian from Disney's Looney Tunes — Marvin the Martian from Disney’s Looney Tunes

The below is a fictional interview with Marvin the Martian about Lyndale School. Marvin the Martian is trademarked to Warner Brothers Entertainment. Our legal team point out their trademark doesn’t actually cover its use on blogs but in case they try to argue this blog is an “entertainment service”, it isn’t, so no laughing! Yes I mean it, not even a smile! We also point out it’s not an infringing use of class 9 of this trademark as that refers to its use on goods rather than virtually.

We rely on s.30 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 and class this as “fair dealing” due to the acknowledgement above. As the The Copyright and Rights in Performances (Quotation and Parody) Regulations 2014 have come into force earlier this month, we’ll rely on this too and the new section 30A on parody.

JOHN BRACE: Thanks once again for agreeing to be interviewed about Lyndale School. We asked Wirral Council for a meeting about Lyndale School but they declined.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: You’re welcome. Well that is a shame I was looking forward to finally meeting people from Wirral Council that I have seen on your video broadcasts. Why do your politicians think they can get away with making decisions like this?

JOHN BRACE: They believe they’re doing the right thing in making “difficult decisions” that are “unpopular”. Also many are what’s in “safe seats”, and many of them (if they choose to do so) will not have to face the public in an election for many years to come.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: But they’re still subject to laws right, that meeting last Thursday the people making the decision didn’t have the required statutory guidance for decision makers which includes the SEN Improvement Test as part of the papers for that meeting?

JOHN BRACE: Well the politicians could have adjourned the meeting and received the correct documents but they chose not to. However you can’t expect politicians to know what they’re doing. They’re elected to look at things from the public perspective and rely on officer advice in such matters. Anyway preparing the papers for a meeting is an officer function in consultation with the Chair.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: You can’t blame this on the committee services officer Lyndzay Roberts though as she only includes in the papers for the meeting what she’s been given in time for it to be published and on that subject why do they keep picking the committee services officer who is a wheelchair user for the Lyndale School meetings?

JOHN BRACE: I’m afraid I can’t read people’s minds and would prefer not to answer that question.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: Ahh the “Lynn Wright” defence eh? How much do you get paid then?

JOHN BRACE: Not enough to be answering questions from fictional characters about difficult subjects and I’m assuming your second question is a joke! I know what I got paid last year, so does HMRC. I can estimate what I will get paid this year but as I’m on a fixed amount plus an element that is related to performance, I literally could only tell you it’s above £x,xxx/year. I’m also not sure if you mean gross or net salary as a certain proportion of my earnings I don’t get as they are paid in taxes. I have income from sources other than my salary though.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: Ha ha! OK, I won’t pry too much! Back to Lyndale, what was decided on Thursday?

JOHN BRACE: To uphold the Cabinet decision of 4th September 2014 on a majority 9:6 vote.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: And remind me what the Cabinet decision of 4th September 2014 was?

JOHN BRACE: Following the first consultation, to have a further second (but different) consultation on closure.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: I thought they’d just had a consultation!

JOHN BRACE: This is a similar but different sort of consultation.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: OK, I never realised closing down a school was made so complicated!

JOHN BRACE: A final decision on closure has not yet been made. This is just an “in principle” decision on closure.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: And how much is this all costing?

JOHN BRACE: Who knows? The school closure/retirement costs budget for this year is £326,000. However it looks like £200,000 of that will be moved to another budget heading soon.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: Which budget heading?

JOHN BRACE: PFI (private finance initiative).

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: Why’s that?

JOHN BRACE: Well you always have to plan for the worst and hope for the best with school closures, extra call in meetings, delays, legal challenges et cetera. Sometimes that means budget allocated goes unspent which can be used for other things.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: So they’re not going to use a £200,000 underspend on the school closure budget to keep Lyndale open another year (costing ~£190,000)?

JOHN BRACE: No, pending a decision by the Wirral Schools Forum an underspend on the school closure budget will be spent instead next year on the ~£12 million a year PFI contract.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: OK, so when does this second consultation on closing Lyndale School start?

JOHN BRACE: Wirral Council officers had authorisation to proceed with implementation of the Cabinet decision of 4th September 2014, once the call in ended on 2nd October 2014. This has been delegated by the Cabinet to Julia Hassall to implement.

Regulation 8 of the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014 will require Wirral Council to publish a notice on their website shortly after Julia Hassall implements this decision. This public notice has to contain the date of the decision, a record of the decision and reasons, details of any alternative options considered and rejected and the names of any of the Cabinet that declared a conflict of interest in the decision.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: Well how likely are Wirral Council to do that?

JOHN BRACE: They probably won’t. They always have great difficulty in complying with their legal requirements (of which there are many).There have been many decisions delegated by councillors to officers taken since these new regulations came into effect near the start of August 2014 ranging from taxi licences to other types of decision. Another part of the same regulations dealt with filming of public meetings, which thankfully settles a long running industrial relations dispute with us and them. As far as I can tell no public notice has been published by officers relating to those yet?

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: Why ever not?

JOHN BRACE: Some of the officers to whom the decisions have been delegated to make don’t have the authorisation to publish public notices on the website through the Modgov system. Also this change to legal requirements (which should’ve been implemented from August) would require a change to working practices which requires consultation with the trade unions through the HR department before implementation. Finally, in the vast majority of cases, there are either existing capacity issues with staffing or the decisions are so minor that nobody’s really apart from myself is paying that much attention whether internally or externally while more interesting things are happening and putting the necessary political pressure on to ensure these new regulations are implemented?

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: Like what is more interesting?

JOHN BRACE: Like officers’ plan to persuade the Wirral Schools Forum on Wednesday evening to make £1 million of in year cuts this year in 2014/15 to (SEN Top Ups/Independent School Fees (£600,000), statements (£200,000) and support for SEN (£200,000)).

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: And why are they proposing to cut a further £1 million from the SEN budget this year?

JOHN BRACE: So they can pay for PFI costs in 2015/16.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: And why have PFI costs risen so much?

JOHN BRACE: Because a political decision was made a long time ago to take ~£2 million out of the PFI budget for 2015/16 and get schools to pay for it instead through budget cuts. Also the calculation in the contract bases yearly increases in how much is paid based on the RPI value in December of one year compared to the previous year then multiplied by ninety percent. That’s my simple explanation, the contract itself refers to the 90% as 0.9 and has a formula as to how the increases are calculated.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: So if the other special schools (other than Lyndale) think they’re safe they’re not?

JOHN BRACE: Indeed, their budgets were protected this year by dropping by more than 1.5%. Based on the draft regulations circulated by the government (Schools and Early Years Finance (England) Regulations 2014) as part of the current consultation (which closes on October 17th 2014), for special school that protection (assuming the draft regulations aren’t changed) will end in 2015/16. The department for education can be emailed at 2014SchoolFinanceRegulations.Consultation@education.gsi.gov.uk about the policy side of the consultation, or consultation.unit@education.gsi.gov.uk or by telephone on 0370 000 2288 or by mail to Department for Education, Beth O’Brien, Department for Education, Great Smith Street, London SW1P 3BT. Further detail about the consultation is on the DfE website here and you can respond online to this consultation here.

However for mainstream it looks like the minimum funding guarantee of at least 98.5% of last years budget will continue in some form?

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: So because they can (or assume they can) Wirral Council will target more special schools for cuts in the future?

JOHN BRACE: Probably, but officers don’t decide that however they can recommend that. That’s ultimately decided by the Wirral Schools Forum/councillors.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: So is the money they’re getting for schools each year, the ~£175 million they get from the government under the direct schools grant going down next year?

JOHN BRACE: No it isn’t, but a financial and purely local decision by Wirral Council has been made to withdraw the extra funding from Wirral Council that paid for the PFI affordability gap. This amounts to £600,000 this year and millions next year (2015/16). The PFI affordability gap is the total PFI expenditure minus the fixed grant minus the costs schools pay for the services under the PFI contract which is next year about £2.6 million.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: So who was the Cabinet Member that originally agreed to this PFI contract in the first place?

JOHN BRACE: Councillor Phil Davies, the current Leader of Wirral Council.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: Is there any way out of the contract, when does it end and can it be renegotiated?

JOHN BRACE: Yes, 2031 and yes.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: So will they try to renegotiate to save money or terminate it?

JOHN BRACE: Probably not no, management were asked this at the last Wirral Schools Forum, however management only know what they’re told about the contract, they’re not managing it on a day to day basis. Terminating it would be expensive as there is still 17 years left to run, renegotiating would be the more likely option of the two if the political will is there.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: So you’re saying the Wirral School Forum members asked Wirral Council officers that hadn’t actually read the contract?

JOHN BRACE: Judging by their answers probably not, managers don’t do things themselves they delegate tasks such as reading contracts and managing contracts to others, maybe not even people that are directly line managed by them but people lower down the food chain.

You can’t expect a senior manager to read such a long contract. Even if they did, it’s hundreds of pages long. It would be very hard to remember all the details unless they brought an electronic searchable version along to the Wirral Schools Forum on say a tablet computer or alternatively circulated an electronic copy to the members of the Wirral Schools Forum. I suppose as a councillor (and member of the Wirral Schools Forum) Cllr Wendy Clements could ask for a copy if she so wished.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: So what does the PFI contract actually say about renegotiation?

JOHN BRACE: Wirral Council have to ask the provider (Wirral Schools Services Limited) about changes to the contract and be specific. Wirral Schools Services Limited then have a limited time period in which to respond stating (and I summarise here) whether they agree or not to the changes or not. If they agree they are implemented. However if there is disagreement between Wirral Council and the contractor there is a dispute resolution procedure that can be followed.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: So are there any changes they have to agree to?

JOHN BRACE: Yes certain changes they have to agree to. For example there was a legislation change recently on free school meals for children under a certain age. As this was a legislation change, Wirral Council can ask for such changes to be implemented so that Wirral Council does not breach its legal obligations.

There are other categories of change that the contractor has to agree to too.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: Indeed, so could Wirral Council’s legal department come up with similar changes which could result in the total cost being lowered?

JOHN BRACE: Wirral Council’s legal department has issues of its own. Also it in order to implement changes quickly it would require agreement of the contractor Wirral Schools Services Limited. Wirral Council would have to seek appropriate authorisation internally from sufficiently senior officers and if it had large budgetary implications in terms of costs or savings then also authorisation from politicians.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: So it’s possible?

JOHN BRACE: Anything’s possible. However as the contractor is a large organisation with a turnover off the top of my head of about £62 million, although they are considerably smaller in annual yearly revenue budget than Wirral Council, Wirral Council still get scared of organisations with that sort of financial clout, as well as organisational and legal resources at their disposal.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: Does current senior management at Wirral Council want to renegotiate the contract?

JOHN BRACE: If the Wirral Schools Forum and/or politicians in the administration asked them to they’d have to to look into the option (which would depending on the option and the savings/cost implication would affect budgets through to 2031). After negotiations, generally officers would bring back options to politicians/Wirral Schools Forum for a meeting. However the Schools PFI contract is complex, it is hard for anyone to understand easily.

If neither of those formally happen, senior management already have enough on their plate already and lack the current internal capacity as they are already negotiating a 7 year extension to a contract of a similar size (~£12 million a year) with Biffa Waste Services Limited.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: But Biffa is in a different strategic directorate to schools!

JOHN BRACE: Indeed but there are capacity issues at the management level and across the organisation at all levels. This is due to annual leave requirements, illness, other factors and the mere practical constraints of there only ever being so many people to keep all the plates spinning up in the air at once.

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: Oh dear. So what is the likely net result to be?

JOHN BRACE: Instead of renegotiating savings on a contract, Wirral Council in the absence of either strong leadership at either the Wirral Schools Forum level or political level will probably accept the status quo and instead make in year cuts of a further £1 million to special educational needs. Officers will probably point out that they have tried to make sure the cuts don’t adversely affect front line services, but they will!

MARVIN THE MARTIAN: How on Mars do you make £2 million of in year cuts without it affecting frontline services?

JOHN BRACE: Indeed… here is a link to the papers for tomorrow’s Wirral Schools Forum meeting which is a public meeting starting at 6.00pm in the Council Chamber in Wallasey Town Hall.

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:

The £1,092,160.12 PFI invoice connected to Lyndale School & why Wirral Council can afford to keep Lyndale open

To the left is a £1,092,160.12 invoice for Wirral Council for paying a company called Wirral School Services Limited under a PFI agreement. This is a monthly invoice, so the yearly total comes to about £12 million. As previously reported this is a story about money and education that is rather complex, but does connect to Lyndale School.

The current PFI contract was signed ten years ago, when Cllr Phil Davies was Cabinet Member for this area. It was originally supposed to run for 25 years in 2001 but was extended in 2004.

For many of these years, if I am getting this right, it was funded from general Council resources and not through the Schools Budget. This year £600,000 of costs for the PFI agreement are paid for by an £1.4 million underspend in money that it was agreed would be spent on special educational needs.

Next year, it’s been stated that Wirral Council want to reduce its contribution to the PFI agreement by £2 million, which led to some angry exchanges at a recent Wirral Schools Forum meeting about the consequences of this decision.

Basically it means that for 2015-16 (the year that there’s been the recent consultation on closing Lyndale) that £2 million of extra compensatory savings will have to be found because of a political decision. The actual funding from one year to the next that Wirral Council is receiving for education isn’t really changing that much so this £2 million issue has dare I say it ruffled some feathers.

I state political decision because (yes there was a U-turn on this last year so who knows really) statements already made are that Labour want to freeze Council Tax in 2015-16 at 2014-15 levels.

However, going back to Lyndale School (soon to be discussed at a special Cabinet meeting). This underspend on special educational needs (money already agreed that should be spent in this area) was shifted out of that budget to pay for the PFI costs. I have requested the actual contract between Wirral Council and Wirral School Services Limited, first by a freedom of information request (denied), now as part of the audit (I’m still waiting).

Based on what I do know, I can tell you this. Part of the PFI cost is funded by a fixed grant Wirral Council get of £5.5 million a year. There are facilities management support costs built into the contract that Wirral Council charge the schools for which total about £3.3 million a year. However this leaves a gap of £2.5 million.

Until this year (although strangely at the Lyndale call in officers stated that funding educational items from outside the schools budget would cause problems and as far as I remember somewhat glossed over the fact that they were already doing this to the tune of £millions for the PFI schools), Wirral Council have plugged this gap.

The problem is essentially due to a political decision not to raise Council Tax in 2015-16 and not carry on with this arrangement (diverting an underspend from special educational needs to plug the gap this year) that although the education money Wirral Council receive is hardly changing that from next year (when there’s a General Election on) the cuts to education can be blamed on the national coalition government despite this being a local decision that’s been made.

I’ve looked at what happened in another borough on Merseyside at their Schools Forum when there’s an underspend in special educational needs. The money didn’t get diverted in this way and was carried forward to the next year to be also spent in that budget area.

There’s no legal impediment in money between different budget headings in the schools budget being shifted around in this way, but as far as I can tell not one of the schools covered by the PFI agreement fall into the special schools category (please correct me if I’m wrong on this point). Therefore there is the moral question to be asked should money previously agreed to be spent on special educational needs be diverted to pay for PFI projects in this way?

Obviously if you’re a parent or member of staff at Lyndale School the answer to that would probably be no. Yes, I have somewhat simplified matters and there are complicated factors involved also in schools funding such as the minimum funding guarantee which for example for this year guarantees that the money schools receive from Wirral Council won’t drop by more than 1.5%.

Interestingly as Wirral Council wanted to bring in its “banding” for special educational needs this year, it asked the Education Funding Agency for permission to drop school budgets by more than the minimum funding guarantee (which is a legal requirement) allows. However this request was withdrawn.

There is also a little confusion as to what was agreed by the Wirral Schools Forum in its five bands for special educational needs. There’s £10,000 for each child, then bands depending on need that go up to £16,000 (band five). However band five was never an absolute limit and from what I remember there was flexibility to go above this in certain circumstances. In fact I doubt putting funding into bands would have ever been agreed by the Wirral Schools Forum without that uncapped band.

You see there is an uncapped band that applies to independent schools, non-maintained schools or schools located outside of Wirral. If Lyndale closed and some children were transferred to schools outside of Wirral there wouldn’t be a cap on their education funding. In fact it almost seems wrong to cap funding to Wirral’s special schools, but not outside of the Wirral.

To give an example of a special education school on the Wirral that falls into the independent category, below is a three page invoice to Wirral Council for one term which totals £535,098.00. These fees range from £10,213 a term to £23,361.00 (or over a year would be from ~£31k to £69k per a pupil). Just for comparison, the consultation on closing Lyndale is because ~£33k a child per a year is seen as high, but when you compare that to what children at West Kirby Residential School cost Wirral Council is actually lower.

44 children at West Kirby Residential School cost £535,098 a term (£12,161 a term). There are three terms in a year, so that works out at about £36,483 a child there compared to ~£33k at Lyndale.

The truth is Wirral Council officers have made an artificial comparison between Lyndale School and other special schools were the needs of children (and therefore staffing costs) were far, far less than at Lyndale School which made Lyndale School look expensive by comparison.

What do you think? Below is a heavily redacted invoice (unfortunately as its double-sided some of the redactions come through on the other side) that backs up my argument that Wirral Council does have the money currently to fund special schools at Lyndale levels (or even in the case of West Kirby Residential School above Lyndale levels).

West Kirby Residential School invoice November 2013 Page 1 of 3 £535098

West Kirby Residential School invoice November 2013 Page 2 of 3 £535098

West Kirby Residential School invoice November 2013 Page 3 of 3 £535098

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:

Why did Wirral Council spend an incredible £1,872 on a London barrister to prevent openness and transparency?

Treasury Building (Wirral Council), Hamilton Square, Birkenhead, 19th August 2014 (you can click on the photo for a more high-resolution version)

Yesterday on a sunny afternoon, I went to the Wirral Council building pictured above known as the Treasury Building to inspect various Wirral Council invoices. I was exercising an obscure right under s.15 of the Audit Commission Act 1998 c.18. This right means that for a few weeks each year, as an “interested person” you can inspect the accounts for the previous financial year that in the process of being audited by Grant Thornton. You can also inspect all books, deeds, contracts, bills, vouchers and receipts that relate to these accounting records and make copies of all or any part of the accounts and those other documents. This year (for Wirral Council) that period ran from 21st July to the 15th August, so sadly if you’re thinking of exercising this right you’ll now have to wait till next year to do so!

However I had put in my request during that brief time period for five areas I was interested in. I’ve briefly describe what those four areas were, the first was invoices from SCC PLC (which is a large IT company), the second and third batches were invoices for legal matters (solicitors, barristers, expert witnesses, court fees etc), the fourth were some general invoices and the fifth were various contracts (two of which were the Schools PFI contract and the Birkenhead Market lease).

The contracts aren’t ready yet, but the invoices were available for inspection yesterday and I also exercised my s.15(1)(b) right to copies. Just the copies of invoices comes to hundreds of pages of documents (which may take me a while to scan in). Some pages are more heavily redacted than others. However this blog post is going to concentrate on just one which is document 117 in one of the two legal bundles. The document (in the form I received it from Wirral Council) is below (you can click on the photo for a more readable version).

11KBW Invoice for appeal of an ICO decision notice (October 2013) Metropolitan Borough of Wirral (£1872) redacted

A bit of context is probably needed about this invoice first. 11KBW is a London-based chamber of barristers that specialise in employment, public and commercial law. You can find out more about them on their website. This particular invoice for £1,872 (including VAT) was for “perusing and considering papers, advising by email, telephone and writing and drafting grounds of appeal to an ICO decision notice”. Whereas the first bit of that is understandable, if you don’t know what an ICO decision notice is then I’d better explain.

If a person makes a Freedom of Information request to Wirral Council, then is not happy with the response, requests an internal review, then they’re not happy with the internal review they can appeal the decision to the Information Commissioner’s Office (known as ICO). The ICO prefer to deal with things informally, but if they can’t they will issue a “decision notice”. A decision notice is an independent view of ICO’s one way or the other on the FOI request and as to whether the body to whom it has been made has complied with the Freedom of Information legislation and sometimes also the Environmental Information Regulations.

Unless the body to whom the FOI request is made or the person making the request appeals the decision notice within 28 days, the body to whom the FOI request is made has to comply with the decision notice within 35 calendar days. Sometimes ICO agree with the body the FOI request is made to so no further action is required. Other times the decision notice compels the body (unless they appeal) to disclose the information. If the public body doesn’t comply with the decision notice within 35 calendar days then ICO can tell the High Court about this failure and it would be dealt with as a “contempt of court” issue.

Helpfully (unlike a lot of other court matters), ICO have a search function on their website for decision notices. As the invoice is for drafting grounds of an appeal (which has to happen within 28 days of the notice) a search for decision notices from the 27th September 2013 to the 25th October 2013 brings up three decision notices FS50496446, FS50491264 and FS50474741.

The first of those three (FS50496446) states in the summary “As the council has now provided a response, the Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.” so it’s not that one. The last sentence of the summary on FS50474741 states “This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal” (which is a little out of date as by now the tribunal has already reached its decision on that matter). Therefore this invoice is (by process of elimination) about the eight page decision notice FS50474741.

The decision notice goes into the detail about what the original FOI request (which you can read for yourself on the whatdotheyknow website) was about (made on the 4th February 2012), which is for correspondence between Wirral Council and DLA Piper UK LLP. Much of the correspondence is between DLA Piper Solicitors and Anna Klonowski Associates Limited and includes an amendment to the contract between AKA Limited and Wirral Council. The information also included Bill Norman (Borough Solicitor)’s advice to councillors on publication of Anna Klonowski Associate’s report which was previously published as an exclusive on this blog on December 12th 2011.

When the AKA report was published, the issue made the regional TV news (you can view a video clip of that below this paragraph) and a no confidence vote which removed both Cllr Steve Foulkes as Leader of the Council and the minority Labour administration. The Labour administration was replaced by a short-lived (~3 month) Conservative/Lib Dem one in the February of 2012. The whole matter was a very sensitive (and somewhat embarrassing) period in Wirral Council’s history (even more than the public inquiry into library closures was) and it’s probably somewhat understandable as to why Wirral Council didn’t want information as to what happened “behind the scenes” being released into the public domain. As far as I remember (and it was some years ago so I hope my memory is correct on this point), Wirral Council was paying DLA Piper to give legal advice to itself and AKA Limited. This was in relation to the inquiry of AKA Ltd started by Cllr Jeff Green into Martin Morton’s whistleblowing concerns (in the brief period when as a Conservative councillor he was Leader of the Council).

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

However, in addition to the details of the decision notice, other information has been blacked out. The part at the top right where it states “professional fees of”, I think relates to a junior barrister called Mr Robin Hopkins who is also on Twitter. The reason behind this is that at the bottom of the invoice it states “PLEASE MAKE CHEQUES PAYABLE TO Mr Robin Hopkins” and his name also appears as the organisation name on the list of invoices Wirral Council publish of over £500 for October. On Wirral Council’s systems although a small number of invoices from barristers chambers come under the name of the barrister’s chambers, most appear using the barrister’s name as the organisation.

As to the name of the Wirral Council officer that the pro forma invoice is addressed to, it would seem most likely that this is Surjit Tour. Not only does his short name fit what is blacked out, but he’s also the Head of Service for this service area within Wirral Council. I don’t know whether he’d actually be the solicitor at Wirral Council giving instructions to the barrister on this issue (as there are over a dozen solicitors employed at Wirral Council). I’ve no idea whose signature it is on this invoice and there are three other places on the invoice where officers’ initials or names have also been blacked out.

When the appeal to ICO’s decision notice was heard at the First-Tier Information Tribunal you can read this post about it on Paul Cardin’s blog, there’s another write-up about it in Local Government Lawyer and a copy of the 16 page unanimous decision of the tribunal can be read here.

The invoice (partly revealed) with my educated guesses in green as to what’s behind the redactions is below. However it begs the question, why did Wirral Council redact this information and what have they got to hide? Or is it just a case of they’d prefer the press and public to forget about the entire Martin Morton/AKA issues which were compared to “Watergate” by Cllr Stuart Kelly? If they’d chosen not to appeal this decision wouldn’t that meant a saving of £1,872 that Wirral Council could have instead spent on education or social services? I thought that a Labour councillor (was it Cllr Phil Davies?) stated that the current Labour administration was “open and transparent”? Only as recently as June of this year wasn’t the Cabinet Member Cllr Ann McLachlan stating “the key problem here that we have a high volume of FOIs from a small number of people”? So do Wirral Council see the people making FOI requests as the problem rather than their own cultural attitudes towards openness and transparency?

Partially unredacted invoice relating to an appeal to ICO Decision Notice FS50474741 (Robin Hopkins of 11KBW) Metropolitan Borough of Wirral for £1872 (invoice 117)

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:

Cabinet agrees school meal price hike to £2.30 from September; government makes meals free for first 3 years of school

Councillor Tony Smith (Cabinet Member for Children and Family Services) on the far left of the photo explains to Wirral Council’s Cabinet about the changes to the cost of school meal cost and what universal free school meals means

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

The item on changes to the price of school meals starts at 2:09 in the video above and the report to Cabinet and its appendix are available on Wirral Council’s website by following those links.

One of the decisions made at last Thursday’s Cabinet meeting was to increase the price of school meals to £2.30 from September 2014. This will increase the price of school meals at three nursery schools, sixty-four primary schools and thirteen special schools on the Wirral.

Just under half (48%) of school meals are however provided free. Families on means tested benefits such as income support, income-based Jobseekers Allowance, income-related Employment and Support Allowance, receiving support under Part VI of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, the guaranteed element of State Pension Credit, Child Tax Credit (providing the person working is not also entitled to Working Tax Credit and has an income of less than £16,190), Working Tax Credit run on and Universal Credit may be entitled to free school meals.

However those who are entitled to free school meals don’t receive this automatically and have to first apply to Wirral Council. This can be done on Wirral Council’s website by clicking on the link on this page “Apply for Free School Meals”.

The increase in the school meals cost is however the bad news, but there is good news. From September (as part of the reforms the government are bringing as part of the Children and Families Bill) there will be a legal requirement that school meals will be free for all children (not just children from families on the means tested benefits mentioned earlier) in reception as well as years 1 and 2. This will have effect from September 2014.

To cope with the increased demand that Wirral Council predicts will happen once there is a free school meal entitlement for all children in reception as well as years 1 and 2, Wirral Council are starting a recruitment process to hire a further eighty to a hundred people to work in school kitchens preparing the extra meals. Wirral Council will be receiving extra money from the government to pay for this extra free school meals entitlement.

The price increase and putting in place arrangements for the start of universal free school meals for infants from September were both agreed by Cabinet. However the topic will also be discussed at a future meeting of Wirral Schools Forum.

Cllr Tony Smith (Cabinet Member for Children and Family Services) had this to say about it at the Cabinet meeting, “This report is in two parts Chair, part one is to increase the price of a paid meal in schools from £2 to £2.30 with effect from September 2014. The second part is to implement government policy with the introduction of universal free school meals for infant aged children.

I’ll just take the first one free school meal policy. Metro provide to the authority meal service for eighty schools, nursery, primary and special and has a turnover in excess of £4 million. Food costs are increasing and unit costs remain historically in excess of £2.80. With a charge of £2 for each meal there is a significant subsidy. Decision about the price of a main meal is taken by government bodies taking account of local authority costs.

Many other authorities in the area that we’ve looked at currently charge in excess of £2 per a meal although none charge £2.30. Can I just say we haven’t got the figures from other local authorities for this year so we’re talking about what the charges were last year and some of those are in excess of £2?

The increase recommended that some, not all inflationary pressures over the period to help the Metro trading account achieve and maintain a balanced position. The cost of meal production will be reviewed and an expansion of the service will provide greater economies of scale through better financial monitoring.

The second part is on universal free meals. I think this has been adopted by the Deputy Leader in the last week or so. This is a new national policy initiative backed by legislation to provide all infant age children in schools with a free meal. Plan for this change, some additional equipment and alterations is needed. A capital grant of £623,802 has been allocated and should be included within the capital program.

Schools will be paid £2.30 by the government for each additional meal produced. It’s anticipated that Metro meal volumes will increase by 80% in September with an ongoing grant in the full year for schools of £3.5 million. The additional revenue and this is good news again funding will fund additional food production and the need for more staff in kitchens. We’re talking about eighty to a hundred posts in Metro kitchens.

At this time proposals have not been considered by the Schools Forum and the headteachers groups although this will happen prior to implementation. I’ve got three recommendations, that one that the price of a paid school meal is increased to £2.30 from September of 2014 in primary schools where their services are provided by Metro services and that this increase is recommended to governing bodies of primary and special schools.

Two subject to Council approval, that the capital grant received will implement universal free school meals for infants in maintained schools totalling £623,802 is included within the capital grant for 2014-15 and is used to progress a range of schemes described and thirdly that Metro school kitchen staffing numbers are increased to take into account the additional meal numbers with costs funded by schools and the Department for Education revenue grant based on £2.30 per an additional free meal served. Thank you Chair.”

Cllr Phil Davies replied, “OK, thanks very much, can we agree those recommendations?”

Cabinet agreed the recommendations.

If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.

7 invoices during Wirral Council’s “spending freeze” are they all essential spending?

Wirral Council’s Cabinet recently voted to consult on closing Lyndale School because of a projected shortfall this year in Lyndale School’s budget of £15,667 and next year of £72,000.

The Wirral Council invoices below are all for 2013, after Wirral Council instituted a freeze on “non-essential spending” in the Autumn of 2012. As usual you can click on the thumbnails for larger versions of the invoices. What is or isn’t “essential spending” is quite subjective, but if you have a strong opinion on way or the other please leave a comment.

Invoice 1

This is for £64,800 to a London-based company called The Ten Group Limited. The invoice is for answering governors questions at a one hundred and twenty Wirral schools. Surely Wirral Council could either direct governors questions to the Wirral Schools Forum or its own officers to answer? Even hiring someone full-time to answer governors questions would be cheaper than outsourcing it!

Invoice 2A/2B

The first of these two invoices is to a Rotherham based company called U-xplore Ltd for £23,256 for renewal of twenty-four full U-Explore licences. It’s for online careers advice. The company also charged £1,720.80 for “one month hosting” although what they’re hosting isn’t specified on the invoice. As part of the Greater Merseyside Connexions Partnership Wirral Council already contract with Connexions for careers advice who provide a jobs explorer database to schools and colleges, access to software, as well as face to face careers advice. So why the duplication?

Invoice 3A/3B

These two invoices total £10,368 to Theatre and Ltd (based in Huddersfield). It is for a four-day safeguarding think family training workshop. The money is for development, scripting, rehearsal and includes £249.60 in travel & mileage costs. Couldn’t Wirral have hired a more local company (which would’ve meant a saving on mileage) & surely everything anybody needs to know about safeguarding could be covered in a course of less than four days? I’m sure a local college or university could have put on a bespoke workshop for less than £10,000! Finally how many people actually went on this workshop?

Invoice 4

This invoice is from Wirral Metropolitan College for £3,240 for 27 hours of training about home based caring for up to twenty people for a course run over ten days for staff in the Wirral Council’s Surestart team. It ties in with my point about the earlier invoice that Wirral Council can get training from local providers cheaper and with the added bonus of supporting local employment!

Invoice 5

This is for £1,194 to Veryan for a “Veryan WorkPlace annual licence”. Veryan is a Hampshire based software company and workplace is a piece of software to manage work experience placements. I don’t have a problem with using software for this, although it’s the kind of simple application based on a database that Wirral Council could easily write in-house (which would save the cost of an annual licence fee).

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:

Marvin the Martian returns to try to understand the incredible Lyndale School situation and the £1 million SEN budget cut

Share this:

The £1,092,160.12 PFI invoice connected to Lyndale School & why Wirral Council can afford to keep Lyndale open

Share this:

Why did Wirral Council spend an incredible £1,872 on a London barrister to prevent openness and transparency?

Share this:

Cabinet agrees school meal price hike to £2.30 from September; government makes meals free for first 3 years of school

Share this:

7 invoices during Wirral Council’s “spending freeze” are they all essential spending?

Share this: