SWT Council are showing a lack of transparency over Taunton BID.
Following our correspondence with Somerset West & Taunton Council (SWT) on 22nd October 2019 (see our letter The case for SWT Council to abstain from voting in the Taunton BID ballot), the Council decided to make Taunton Business Improvement District (BID) a restricted and confidential agenda item for the SWT Executive Committee meeting on Wednesday 18th December 2019. This means that the Council Officers report on Taunton BID to be discussed that night has not been made public in advance as normal, and on the evening Councillors will vote to exclude the press and public from their debate on Taunton BID. This is a highly unusual move for a District Council, especially as a lack of transparency is one of the well-publicised problems with BIDs across the UK; lack of transparency both in the development of BID proposals (something businesses here in Taunton have already experienced from the current Taunton BID proposers), and in the operation of BIDs voted in (TDBC even minuted transparency as a problem with the Taunton Town Centre Company running the BID that was voted out in 2012). Considering this Council (as TDBC) has publicly acknowledged that the last Taunton BID company lacked transparency, the very same Council (albeit a new LibDem led administration) is displaying the same trait itself with unprecedented secrecy for no good reason.
On being informed of this situation by the Leader of SWT, we wrote to her (aswell as all Councillors and the Chief Executive) to express our concerns over this, and the following is the letter we wrote:
14th December 2019
Dear Cllr Smith-Roberts,
Re: Lack of Council openness and transparency in relation to Taunton BID
Thank you for your reply dated 29th November, which was very much appreciated. It’s pleasing to hear that my letter will be taken into account during the Council’s decision-making process for Taunton BID.
I am, however, concerned that you have now chosen to make confidential items of the officer report, Council member discussion and voting on the topic of Taunton BID at a public council meeting (with immediate effect for the Executive Committee Meeting agenda report pack, and discussion subject to a vote at the meeting). The reason stated is that it is commercially sensitive to the Council, but it certainly does not appear to be. I understand that BID is a controversial subject, and perhaps a difficult one for the Council to discuss openly – particularly if that discussion takes into account all viewpoints, along with Taunton’s poor BID history – but I suggest it’s nothing more than that.
Specifically, I note that the Council has chosen to invoke this restriction by virtue of paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972: “information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that person)”. In fact, the BID proposal is of no commercial significance or sensitivity to the Council, as its only involvement should be to allocate budgets for (a) relatively minor ballot costs and (b) its own hereditament levy payments for the modest amount of £14,164 per annum if BID is voted in. Given these relatively small budgetary considerations, I fail to see any logical reason for declaring the subject to be commercially sensitive to the Council by virtue of having to disclose any sensitive information related to financial or business affairs. Hence I find the Government Act clause you have chosen to invoke rather questionable. If you really believe BID to be so commercially sensitive and impactful on the Council’s financial plans that it warrants a closed discussion that would be extremely worrying, because BID is supposed to be totally separate from and inconsequential to Council services and financial / investment plans for a BID area. This decision raises questions over what the real reason could be for restricting public access to the Council’s consideration of Taunton BID.
Whatever the reason is, it is extremely disappointing that you have decided to go down this veil of secrecy route. Such a move demonstrates that the new LibDem Council administration under your leadership is not showing the openness and transparency you promised us upon taking power from the previous Conservative-led administration earlier this year. I believe that having a debate behind closed doors – for what should be a public and openly discussed council matter affecting hundreds of businesses – in fact shows a distinct lack of openness and transparency, and many people will have expected better. The confidentiality that has now been imposed on the subject of BID seems unprecedented in this district council; as far as I can tell, under the previous Conservative administration TDBC had the courtesy to make Taunton BID discussions, reports and minutes accessible to the public, and I have not yet found an example of any other council in the UK going down the secrecy route you have chosen to take for considering BID proposals. The extent to which the Council is showing a lack of openness and transparency for its decision-making process in relation to BID really does appear extraordinary, and stands in stark contrast to your election promises.
Furthermore, one of the well-publicised problems with BIDs across the UK is a lack of transparency, both in the development of BID proposals (something businesses here in Taunton have already experienced from the current Taunton BID proposers) and in the operation of BIDs that have been voted in (TDBC even minuted transparency as a problem with the Taunton Town Centre Company running the BID that was voted out in 2012). Therefore, you can probably imagine that the Council showing a lack of transparency by choosing to not share its own council officer report and wanting to discuss BID behind closed doors, does nothing to overcome such concerns – in fact, this move rather inflames the issue instead. This situation could certainly add to the risk of reputation damage for the Council, as it appears to break election promises of openness and transparency in general, as well as specifically relating to BID. Unfortunately for both the Council and Taunton BID, the more the Council continues to keep its reports and discussion of BID secret, the more negative PR “ammunition” we build up against Taunton BID and the Council to leverage in our forthcoming ballot campaign.
What’s also interesting to note is that by taking the decision to make BID a restricted agenda item (for dubious reasons), even the council officers’ report on Taunton BID has not been made public with the agenda reports pack this past week. This means that members of the public will not have the opportunity to read the report and then make appropriate representation to the Council at the Executive Meeting when the report and decisions will be discussed. As we understand it, this is a report that has been put together by Lisa Redston, who is a member of the Taunton BID YES campaign working group itself. By keeping the report secret in such an unprecedented way, one can only surmise that there is a certain level of YES bias in the report, and a lack of proper consideration of the alternative (but legitimate) perspectives on BID.
Therefore, I have a request now, both in the spirit of appropriate openness and transparency and to allow me to provide pertinent representation at the forthcoming Executive Committee meeting on 18th December: could you please make public pages 63-74 of the meeting agenda reports pack, and also send me a copy to read? I believe there should be no need for this, but if the Council feels it needs to redact any commercially sensitive information pertaining to council finances then of course I accept that. As other councils accept and TDBC did previously, such a report should be a public document, and the public should be allowed a fair chance of making appropriate representation in respect of its details that will be discussed by Councillors. How can fair and democratic public representation possibly be made at the Executive Committee meeting if one is not aware of the content of the council officers’ report, and the recommendations and decisions to be made at that meeting?
I sincerely hope my request to see the agenda report will be approved before the Executive Committee meeting. In addition, irrespective of the outcome of that request, I trust that Executive members reading this will listen to my reasoning and appeal for greater openness and transparency, leading them to vote the right way to keep discussion of Taunton BID open to the press and public. However, seeing as BID has been tacked on to the end of two other agenda items the Council also wants to discuss behind closed doors, I am unsure whether the Committee can vote on each agenda item. This would be the logical thing to do, given that each agenda item is different, but can each agenda item be voted on separately re restricting public and press access to discussion?
Regardless of what is decided at the Executive Committee meeting, you have already said that the subject of Taunton BID will go to a Full Council meeting on 27th January, which is why – in the spirit of openness and transparency – I have decided to copy in the Full Council members at this stage. Even if the Council decides to see through in full its public restriction for anything to do with BID at this week’s Executive Committee meeting, then hopefully the Council will do the right thing for its stated goals of openness and transparency by not restricting public access to the Full Council meeting agenda reports pack, discussion and voting in January.
I would suggest that the most important point here is the democratic right of the businesses to hear the Council’s view on both sides of the argument for and against the current Taunton BID proposal. We already have evidence of Taunton BID showing a lack of openness and transparency over development of the BID, and the last thing we expected was for this new council to show such an extreme level of the same, in stark contrast to the promises you have made.
