According to
the GIAA investigation report, a number of senior council officers appear to
have conspired together to dishonestly mislead the EU about how this large
grant was spent, and rather than telling the EU that the grant had
not been used for the purposes it was intended and offering to return the money, these senior council
officers instead decided to keep the cash in the hope that its misappropriation would not be discovered by EU
Auditors.
The GIAA, as
you would expect, were less than impressed by the actions of these senior
officers. They said that their investigations had unearthed “sufficient
evidence of intent to defraud” and they
recommended that their findings should be reported to the Police “as a
potential fraud case”. I totally agree and hope that those who were involved are
dealt by the courts as quickly and as sternly as possible.
But this is not
just a matter for the police. Thanet District Council also has a responsibility
to ensure that its staff and councillors behave in an honest and lawful manner
and don’t become involved in fraud and corruption. And on paper, at least, this
appears to the case. First, there is TDC’s Officer Code of Conduct which,
amongst other things, requires that
·
Employees
must ensure that they use public funds entrusted to them in a responsible
and lawful manner.
·
Employees
must report to the appropriate manager any impropriety or breach of
procedure
·
All
Members and officers have a general responsibility for taking reasonable action
to
provide for
the security of the assets under their control, and for ensuring that the useof these resources is legal.
TDC also has an
anti-fraud and corruption policy which says that
Thanet District Council takes its
responsibilities for protecting public money very seriously. It recognises that
the public has the right to expect that the Council’s Members, Senior
Management and employees shall:
·
At all times fully comply with all the legislation to which they are
subject;
·
Conduct business in a totally honest and ethical manner;· Take all appropriate actions where fraud and corruption is suspected.
Finally there is a
whistle-blower policy which says-
Thanet District Council is committed
to the highest possible standards of propriety and accountability in the
conduct of its activities for the community. This Code is intended to help
employees who have serious concerns over any potential wrong‑doing within the
Council involving matters such as where: · a criminal offence (for example, fraud, corruption or theft) has been/is likely to be committed
·
a miscarriage of justice has occurred or is likely to occur
·
public funds are being used in an
unauthorised manner
In addition to
Thanet Council’s robust anti-fraud policies it’s interesting to note that at
least one of the officers involved in the alleged fraud was a senior finance
manager. This is the person who according to the GIAA investigation wrote a
report about the EU grant entitled “Request for carry forward of
ERDF funding dated 24 April 2008”. According to the GIAA this report “instead of recommending
repayment of the funds weighed up the likelihood of the project being audited
and the Council being found out” . The author of the report was (and probably
still is) a member of the Chartered
Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA). CIPFA’s Standards of
Professional Practice which apply to all its members say that
Should members receive, or uncover, evidence of the
possibility of fraud or corruption, they should promptly report the matter to
the appropriate person identified in their organisations’ established reporting
procedures.
So despite
working for an organisation which had in place a broad range of robust anti-fraud policies and procedures, and despite one of the alleged fraud perpetrators
being a member of a professional
accountancy organisation which encouraged its members to report fraud and
corruption, this was not enough to prevent £165,000 being dishonestly used for
purposes it was never intended for. Why?
Well one of the things
which surprises me about this case is
that those involved were at the top of the TDC “food chain”. They had years of
managerial experience and were fully aware of TDCs policies and procedures and
professional ethical codes relating to financial management. To deliberately
flout these rules was a very risky thing to do which could have had disastrous,
career ending, consequences for all of them.
I can only assume
that to take such risks those involved must have been extremely confident that
they could get away with it. Getting away with it means that they had
calculated, as the GIAA report confirms, that there was little chance of their dishonestly
being detected via external audit. More worryingly, it also means, in my view, that
the conspirators may have had, or thought they had, the support of their bosses
and possibly also TDCs political leaderships (at that time Tory) in acting
dishonestly. Finally, taking ethical risks and behaving dishonestly has also
been attributed in many studies of corruption and fraud, to be the result of
pressure and bullying from above. Is it possible that in Thanet there was, at this
time, a culture of aggressive, bullying management by senior officers and
politicians? Some people working for the Council at the time have told me that
there was. So its clear that a variety of influences were at work which, either singly or combination,
persuaded otherwise responsible senior council officers, to allegedly defraud
the EU.
But this is not an
isolated example. The £165,000
misappropriation of this EU grant is not the only case of dodgy grant
management at TDC. In 2011 £603,000 worth of EU grants had to be paid back to
Brussels for mismanagement/ misuse. In 2014 £70,000 worth of EU grant had to
paid back to Brussels for the same reason. It’s likely that a further £700,000 may have to be paid back to
the EU for failures of the Kent
innovation Centres Project and of course more recently TDC misused its
Dreamland Heritage Lottery Grant to the
tune of £567,000! Clearly there is an ongoing saga of massive incompetence mismanagement and fraudulent abuse of external grants worth at least at least £2 million at TDC which despite, promise after promise of doing things better, never seems to happen. I think there is clear case for a major enquiry here.
God Driver, we see enough of your boring comments in the local rag without having to put up with them on Facebook. You were pretty useless as a local councillor. More fond of grandstanding and posturing than doing the right thing. And your persuasion of TDC into banning live exports from Ramsgate port cost the rest of us ratepayers a fortune when the export company claimed damages. Do us all a favour and SHUT UP for a change.
ReplyDeleteIf you are fed up of my commentary on local affairs then perhaps you should stop reading this blog site. On a factual matter I never campaigned for, or persuaded, TDC to ban live exports. The only organisation which can stop the trade is the EU - not TDC. TDC's decision was unlawful and TDC knew it as it had extensive legal advice saying as much. Mr Justice Birrs ruled at the High Court that decision to impose the ban was made by former Council officer Mark Seed and that Mr Seed was probably put under pressure to make this decision by the then Labour Leader and Deputy Leader of Thanet Council - Clive Hart and Alan Poole. I would suggest that you take up any complaint with these 2 people
DeleteWell said and keep up the commentary - thanet is plagued by idiots like 13:24 who put up with the BS fed to them by TDC and the weak councillors
DeleteThe EU doesn't control the UK Ports Act and UK ports - youve been fed a line by the MPs to avoid resolving it. You may as well say UK pubs have to report to the EU on who they serve...
Deletewhat a shithole i used to live in. i am glad i left after 45 years. There should be a proper enquiry into how thanet is run and eTt ifforts should be made to clean up the corruption and impunity with which the councillors and officers get away with it.It makes nigeria seem clean.
ReplyDelete