CROYDON IN CRISIS: Our cash-strapped council has squandered thousands of pounds of public money to try to suppress documents that were in the public domain. Again. STEVEN DOWNES, Inside Croydon’s Editor, on the council’s latest failed efforts to gag this website
For cash-strapped Croydon Council, the local authority that claims it doesn’t have any money to pay for public services, it was no expense spared yesterday afternoon as they attended, mob-handed with a platoon of expensive lawyers, a tribunal hearing in the cause of covering up for their £192,474 per year chief executive, Katherine Kerswell.
Legalled up: Katherine Kerswell’s legal costs were paid for by the council
For the second time in barely a year, as Inside Croydon’s Editor, I found myself in front of a judge, making a case for openness and transparency, while expensively hired lawyers representing Croydon Council, paid for out of residents’ Council Tax, did their best to cover-up and withhold documents that were already in the public domain.
The last time this happened, in November 2022, Inside Croydon was effectively dragged into the High Court by the council’s lawyers who threatened a costly injunction because this website had re-published confidential documents that Croydon Council had itself already published (the italics are because even now, we cannot comprehend the full extent of the bat-shit idiocy of the council’s position).
Yesterday, it was more a case of iC stumbling into court proceedings. But the outcome was much the same. The council’s position on documents submitted to open court as evidence was equally indefensible, equally anti-democratic, and equally self-serving of the badly run, self-indulgent senior officials who inhabit Fisher’s Folly.
For three long weeks, Inside Croydon had been following the crucial Employment Tribunal case brought by Hazel Simmonds, Croydon’s former executive director of Gateway, strategy and engagement, against the council for constructive and unfair dismissal, with allegations of victimisation, harassment and racial and sexist discrimination thrown in, too. Kerswell was also accused of racial discrimination.
But what emerged over the course of the last three weeks at the London (South) Employment Tribunal was a more wide-ranging examination of the chaos and mismanagement within Croydon Council that led to its financial collapse in 2020 than anything that had previously been discussed in public. Not least because, in her role as council CEO, Kerswell has made sure of that – even to the point of suppressing the findings of the Penn Report from the public for more than two years.
But for justice to be done, it must be seen to be done.
At the opening of the case, counsel for the council bellyached about the fact that Inside Croydon had had the audacity to actually report a public hearing over a matter of considerable public interest.
Employment Judge Adam Leith had to remind the council’s (and therefore Kerswell’s) lead barrister, Patricia Leonard, that the proceedings were all in open court and therefore free to be reported. Which we duly did, along the way filling notebooks with testimony given by Kerswell, Simmonds and other witnesses.
‘Heavily in favour’: Judge Leith ordered the council to release the trial documents
But as we watched the remote hearing and listened to the cross-examinations, Tribunal observers were only getting half the picture. For nearly two years, council employees have been accumulating volumes of evidence, thousands of pages of witness statements, emails and meeting notes, for use in the defence of the council’s, and Kerswell’s, reputation.
Kerswell’s own witness statement ran to 101 pages, the longest submission at the hearing, according to Judge Leith.
None of these documents were being made available to the public or observers of the hearing.
So when, say, acid-tongued Leonard cross-examined Simmonds or Guy van Dichele, or Simmonds, suffering tonsilitis, coughed her way through questioning of Kerswell, every time there was a reference to this bundle or that file, anyone watching the court proceeding was only getting half of the evidence.
Inside Croydon’s legal adviser, Ebenezer Grabbit of the long-established high street firm of Sue, Grabbit and Runne, suggested that we might get a fuller picture of what was being discussed if we put in a request to the judge. Which we did.
It took six days for our email to the court to reach Judge Leith. By the time it did, last Tuesday, a simple request for documents which were, effectively, in the public domain, had become a formal “application to the court”. The judge said he would deal with the application after delivering the verdict.
The judgement was due at 2pm Thursday. That was then postponed until 10am Friday. It took Judge Leith three hours to summarise the entire case. Once that was done, he suggested a 30-minute lunch break, after which, “We shall deal with the application from Mr Downes.”
So what was I asking for?
Back on December 14, Day 9 of the hearing, I had originally written to the court to request three emails which the Respondents – the council and Kerswell – had suddenly added to their mountain of evidence. At the time, they had seemed to be of some significance.
In addition, I had requested the written evidence submissions of some of the more integral witnesses: Hamida Ali, the council leader in the immediate aftermath of the financial crisis, Katherine Kerswell, for obvious reasons, Hazel Simmonds, ditto, and Alison Butler, the former councillor and deputy leader of the council who was cabinet member for housing.
Last Wednesday, when Judge Leith asked that I re-submit my “application”, I added a request for the opening and closing statements of both sides, from Leonard and Simmonds.
Croydon Council opposed this application.
Just consider that for a while.
Bottled out: former council deputy leader Alison Butler failed to turn up to give evidence under oath
The council wanted not to have to release evidence that had been given in open court.
Instead, Leonard suggested, iC could make an appointment to visit the council offices, where we would generously be allowed to go through hard copies of the documents, but would not be allowed to make any copies. The council offices were to close at 4pm yesterday for the Christmas break, only opening again on December 28.
All of the documents exist in digital format and had been shared multiple times between the Tribunal and the two sides of the dispute. For some reason never explained, Leonard, on behalf of Kerswell and the council, did not want to release the documents to the media in that format.
Judge Leith asked iC to explain why we had requested the documents.
“I am making this application so that testimony and evidence that has been heard in open court and placed in the public domain can be … errr… placed in the public domain,” I somewhat bumbled from my hastily scribbled notes, written instead of lunch.
“This has been a case of considerable public interest. It is important to have access to these documents to assist with the accuracy and context of my reporting of a significant case.”
In light of the judgement that had already been handed down, the request for the emails that had been admitted late as evidence was withdrawn. In the case of Butler’s statement, I also accepted that as the ex-councillor had failed to show up to give her evidence under oath, this would not now be available publicly.
Leonard, for the council and Kerswell, spoke against the application.
Goodness knows how much this senior barrister, her pupil, the two lawyers from solicitors Browne Jacobson and the council’s own senior brief were costing the residents of Croydon for this additional couple of hours of legal representation. There’s a Freedom of Information request just waiting to be submitted, as soon as anyone from the council are back at Fisher’s Folly.
Not for the first time in her oral submissions to the Tribunal over the past week, Leonard threw in something about how one her clients, Kerswell, had somehow suffered “invidious abuse” in the reporting of her work as Croydon’s best-paid council employee.
When the judge asked iC to respond, we simply offered that we “do not recognise” such a claim.
What the council didn’t want you to see: paid for by Council Tax-payers, the authority wanted to prevent the release of Kerswell’s statement
Judge Leith and his fellow panel members withdrew for 15 minutes to deliberate.
When he returned, the Judge was strongly critical of the council’s obstructive and obdurate position in wanting to make the documents as unavailable as possible, and pointed out Leonard had presented no evidence to support her claim of “invidious abuse”. To this observer, it suggested that he thought she had made it all up, too.
Judge Leith then reminded his legal colleagues of the principles of open justice, of how it was important for public scrutiny and for people to understand how the system works.
It was, Judge Leith said, the Tribunal’s default position to provide access to its proceedings to the public, and he and the panel members had found “heavily in favour” that the council should provide all the eligible documents to Inside Croydon by the close of play yesterday.
Which they duly did, I suspect more than a tad grudgingly.
Inside Croydon is not allowed to publish the documents themselves, but we’ll be transcribing all the most interesting bits over the coming weeks.
Croydon Council 0 – Inside Croydon 2.
Merry Christmas, Mrs Kerswell.
Read more: Tribunal judge finds no evidence of racism or unfair dismissal
Read more: ‘You seem to be trying to put the genie back in the bottle’
Read more: CEO Kerswell could face crucial cross-examination at Tribunal
Read more: #PennReport wanted police probe into possible misconduct
A D V E R T I S E M E N T
- Inside Croydon – as seen on TV! – has been delivering local community news since 2010. 3million page views per year in 2020, 2021 and 2022.
- If you want real journalism, actually based in the borough, you should consider paying for it. Please sign up today. Click here for more details
- If you have a news story about life in or around Croydon, or want to publicise your residents’ association or business, or if you have a local event to promote, please email us with full details at inside.croydon@btinternet.com
As featured on Google News Showcase
- Our comments section on every report provides all readers with an immediate “right of reply” on all our content
Inside Croydon is a member of the Independent Community News Network
- Inside Croydon works together with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, as well as BBC London News and ITV London
ROTTEN BOROUGH AWARDS: Croydon was named among the country’s rottenest boroughs for a SIXTH successive year in 2022 in the annual round-up of civic cock-ups in Private Eye magazine
Without Inside Croydon (and Steven Downes), nobody would be holding Croydon Council to account, and all the dirty deeds done over the last decade would have gone unchecked and unreported
I agree. The offer of a gong would be a good idea, so Steven could refuse at the last minute! Remember, the boss of Croydon got an MBE not that long ago …
It ain’t gonna happen.
Why not – Services to the Public and Journalism and an example of how independent digital news can actually run honestly and independently. That’s a lot more than most news organisations can say
Because, Ian…
(a) that’s not how the Establishment that doles out the baubles to keep the peasants (the likes of me and, dare I say it, you) in our place operates; and
(b) as previously stated, I would never accept an honour. It’s not appropriate for a journalist
Steven – why are you not listed in the new year honours? You are an unmitigated genius and possess a soul glowing of unbridled proprietary. My hat is removed to you sir.
Very kind of you, Laurence. It doesn’t take genius to spot self-serving fuckwittery when you see it played out on such a regular basis.
And any way, with the notable exception of Harry Evans, it would never be appropriate for a journalist to accept an honour. The anthesis of what we stand for.
Conservatives have failed to reform Croydon council’s governance as they show they are just as bad as Labour. Spending of residents’ money to try to stop or limit reporting on what the council is up to is unacceptable.
Thank you for your dogged determination in getting this judgement, without you the residents of Croydon would be completely in the dark.
Thanks Becca.
We didn’t get the judgement exactly, just some of the documents presented as evidence in the case which we believe are important to ensure are in the public domain
Time to cut the out the rot and deadwood from this cesspit starting with Kerswell, piss poor Perry, and all the other flying monkeys that are sucking the life and funds out of the borough
Dead wood in a cess pit? Flying monkeys sucking? The mind BOGGLES!
Kerswell and Perry – both must go soon. They have had enough time to fix problems.
KK is far too low profile and shows no leadership at all.
PPP is always tinkering around the edges.
Both have shown no real intention of sorting the long term core financial problems inside Croydon Council.
Inside Croydon doing what good journalism should do, letting the public know what our council is up to. I think it’s disgraceful that public servants are trying to hide what they are doing from the people they are supposed to serve. I’ve said for a long time that we need far more honesty and transparency at Croydon Council. It seems that the Conservatives are failing to provide that just like Labour before them
Everyone agrees with this view, Peter, but can you tell us what the Greens would do differently if they get into Fisher’s Folly? The scandal-hit Green administration at Brighton and Hove are in trouble over “Routine” racism, sexism and homophobia and can’t even collect resident’s rubbish
Another year of dragging Croydon Council decisions into the light. Well done. Keep it up.
Is IC crowd funding or inviting contributions to help defray Ebenezer Grabbit’s fees? Happy to contribute to Grabbit’s ‘refreshers’
No.
iC’s legal team will cost the people of Croydon nuffink.
Unlike Kerswell’s council.
Anyone who wants factual coverage or breaking news concerning Croydon gets it from Inside Croydon or the BBC. There is no other reliable source. The ‘local’ papers are advert mags, appallingly badly written and are not fit for purpose as news or for cleaning a pony’s arse.
I am personally incensed that the Council I pay thousands of pounds to every year and the local politicians I elect refuse to properly engage with Inside Croydon. This means they are failing to engage with the people of Croydon. What are they afraid of?
Politicians and local administrators (including lazy- dullard, Kerswell) who refuse to engage with the local news organisation (inside Croydon) should be called out publicly for their narrow minded, self-serving aversion to public scrutiny. They are fucking lazy cowards and should be deselected or sacked.
At the next local elections, I want to see candidates mandating their willingness to communicate and be held account by our primary local news outlet.
I want a rocket fired up the asses of the lazy buggers in CC’s press office. They are an embarrassment to our borough.
As for Kerswell, her time in Croydon is finished. She must fuck off back to Wandsworth. She had and has nothing to offer our Borough. Her abilities do not match her salary. She wants to be forced out so she can get multi-hundred thousand pension nest egg.
Why will Croydon residents not wake up to how fucking useless she is !!!
All said and done – let’s not forget that if not for Ms Simmonds we would never have had the opportunity. She may not have got the ruling in her favour but at least she did us all a public service.
Like it or not, Ms Kerswell has scored a spectacular phyrric victory.
Few like the way the adversarial system works in the Courts and it is unpleasant for victims who have to become the accuser and not have the protection of defence processes. Many times you do not get to choose your cases.
It is also possible that due to this case Ms Simmonds no longer has any duty to her ex employer. Unless that was covered in the judgement?
Amazing work Sir! Merry Christmas!! Well written, well followed. Sorry they’re getting you involved.. the 15 minute deliberation period speaks volumes. Keep up the good work – thank you!
Brilliant reporting, Steve – of yourself standing up for truth and openness. And the good guys won, for once! Well done too on the name check for our hero, (Sir) Harry Evans.
Once again, we rely on IC to hold the Council to account. Kerswell made much about how she would bring transparency to Croydon Council yet she spends thousands of pounds of our money preventing documents being made public. The sheer hypocrisy. She’s done nothing for Croydon. She’s done nothing to address the disastrous planning department (also known for wasting thousands in legal fees to defend their incompetence). The town centre is a no-go zone. She doesn’t engage with residents. She has no right to be here and she should go.
Many thanks for your diligence, perseverance and outstanding journalism Steve, I’m not sure how IC is supported but the Croydon residents owe you a huge debt. It is beyond belief that Croydon tax payers are picking up the bill for something that is against the interest of the borough. How can we stop the council from frittering our money away like this? Isn’t the purse strings for the council now being held by central gvt? Did they approve the use of public funds in this way? And what contribution did our part time mayor Jason Perry make??
Journalism at its very best. Everyone in Croydon owes IC a huge debt of gratitude for its quality journalism.
Thank you Sarah.
The cheque’s in the post.
Happy new year!
What is Colm Lacey doing these days?
Disappeared up his own fundament…
https://insidecroydon.com/2022/03/14/ceo-of-loss-making-brick-by-brick-gets-cosy-job-with-architects/amp/
Appalling, residents are paying the price.