Funded & Won by Judged by
The Cover-Up
By Andy Baldwin (Advisor & Advocate) & Natasha Thoday (Profile)
(... Petition, Chronology & Recent News, below ...)
... Latest News ...
6 October 2009 Appeal and Review request lodged with the Information Commission to force Alex Bailey and the Council to reveal the history of the lie that Ms Thoday asked for £120,000 (click here for details) as reason to use public money to fight and loose at the Employment Tribunal against Ms Thoday and the Government Equality Champion.
16 July 2009 Council refuse to process complaints about senior officers Lies: -
a) Alex Bailey, Director of Strategy & Governance at Brighton Council (pictured) misled colleagues that Natasha Thoday had asked for £120,000 when she had NOT (click here for details). He entirely made it up as reason to use public money to fight and loose at the Employment Tribunal against the Government Equality Champion who represented Ms Thoday against Council discrimination and victimisation. Councillor Paul Elgood alerted Ms Thoday about Alex Bailey in January 2008: -
”...he [Alex Bailey] basically held his hands up and said the only reason why they let it go to tribunal was that a £120k settlement was unreasonable - which is actually what they said to me at the time.”
b) A Council Solicitor Louise Hanrahan repeatedly misled Ms Thoday that costs information did not exist, but later she sent the time-sheets and salary of the Council lawyer Ian Yonge (who fought the tribunal case) to a member of the public. It had Ms Thoday's name on it showing Ian Yonge spent 165 hours on a case number she'd never heard of before "Matter Number: 24949". The Information Commissioner found in October 2009 that the Council acted "unfairly" in not giving this information to Ms Thoday. But Louise Hanrahan's manager, Simon Court, whilst apologising, refused to accept Ms Thoday was deceived by Ms Hanrahan casting her actions as only an "error".
The Council's own Standards and Complaints Manager also refused to process the complaints: -
“... the Council’s Corporate Complaint process is unable to deal with [it]...If you wish to seek a further remedy my recommendation is that you might like to seek legal advice on how you can pursue those matters.”
22 May 2009 Information Commissioner is asked to force the Council to disclose its “professional view” in the 'public interest' and to shed light on the origin and consider the impacts of the LIE that Ms Thoday wanted £120,000 as reason the council refused to negotiate or settle (click here for details). Instead they chose to fight and loose at the Employment Tribunal against the Government Equality Champion.
Information Commissioner is asked to investigate why a Council Lawyer's Time Sheet was disclosed to third party when its existence was denied to Ms Thoday. It shows 165 hours were spent by Council solicitor Ian Yonge on "Matter Number: 24949" loosing at the tribunal against the Government Equality Champion.
20 May 2009 Council refuse to disclose its “professional view” by misusing ‘legal professional privilege’ exemptions and denials that information exists.
* Sign Petition *
"I am appalled at this blatant disregard for equality and accountability"
Lord R McDowall - LGBT Network Chair
"Blatant Chronic Transphobia at Brighton and Hove Council"
LGBT Network
Comments • Signatures
Calling on the Council to: -
'Disclose how much Public Money they spent fighting these cases'
Caroline Lucas, Green MEP & Candidate MP for Brighton Pavilion
Des Turner, Labour MP " I think it is doubly inappropriate in a city like Brighton and Hove that the Council should even seem to be discriminating against a transgender person. I am sure that the problems could have been much more sensitively handled and it is entirely right that the costs involved should be made public."
Simon Burgess, (experienced Labour Cllr & Candidate MP for Kemptown): "Transgender equality is as important as all other forms of equality. It is important to know whether the decision to fight this tribunal was taken on the same basis as the decision to fight other tribunals."
Peter Tatchell, Human Rights Campaigner
Brighton & Hove City Councillors (full list): -
Green: (11 of 12 signed) 1. Ben Duncan; 2. Rachel Fryer; 3. Amy Kennedy; 4. Sven Rufus; 5. Jason Kitcat; 6. Ian Davey; 7. Paul Steedman; 8. Vicky Wakefield-Jarrett; 9. Pete West; 10. Georgia Wrighton; 11. Bill Randall;
Labour: (1 of 13 signed) Craig Turton;
Lib Dem: (100%) Paul Elgood & David Watkins;
Conservative: (0 of 26)
Other Councillors: -
North Devon: Green Councillor Ricky Knight
Edinburgh: Scottish Conservative Councillor Gordon Buchan
Worthing: Lib Dem: James Doyle & Bob Smytherman
Oxford: Lib Dem: Ruth Wilkinson
In her final letter she also supports the idea that the Council had to consider its “reputation” at the expense of Natasha Thoday's career. It is disreputable of the District Auditor to write this.
She goes on to cause great damage the credibility of office of District Auditor to suggest there was “uncertainty in the law” as if the law was unclear, when it was not, and that therefore it is "uncertain" whether an employment reference should be given to transgender people when they are mandatory for all professional employment. Such scandalous attitudes and ignorance from the District Auditor is truly shocking.
She has also kept a letter secret that was sent to her by Chief Exectutive Alan McCArthy, which she had asked for during investigations of the council's treatment of Ms Thoday. She states it was "...not material..." and that "the Council has not given its consent to release this to you... as [it] would prejudice... open exchange of information between the auditor and the council of... sensitive information in the future." If it were truly "not material" then why refuse to release it under the Data Protection Act, especially since it was about Natasha Thoday? Such secrecy can only destroy public confidence.
18 December 2008 After more than a year of campaigning, (former) Director of Strategy & Governance Alex Bailey's 'secret' letter responding to Cllr Elgood's questions of January 2008 Finally Disclosed. Alex Bailey confirms this Council decided to fight Natasha Thoday BEFORE she had even lodged the Tribunal case, and that under him, officers NEVER intended to try to settle. Instead without even the courtesy of ever approaching her to negotiate, he accuses her of wanting "£90,000 plus" and that "she would not have settled" : -
November 2008 A feature article on Natasha Thoday and Andy Baldwin and a news report about the General Teaching Council's decision against Philip Morgan published in G-Scene magazine. The Editor, James Ledward dedicates his editorial on our efforts. He criticises Brighton & Hove City Council, and links to Andy Baldwin's Tribunal in 2005 against the Council that is now case law.
16 October 2008 The General Teaching Council's publish their decision on Philip Morgan online. 'Education Chief Disciplined for Discrimination, Blames Brighton Council for Bad Advice' press release published in GScene magazine online. 29 April
11 September The General Teaching Council's Professional Conduct Committee heard Phillip Morgan defend his actions. He claimed he was misadvised by the Council’s head of personnel, at the time Mark Lamb, and employment lawyer Ian Yonge.
1 October 2008 Circulated to all Councillors by email: the Times Educational Supplement and the GScene report. GScene magazine print edition released.
(... Petition, Chronology & Recent News, below ...)
... Latest News ...
6 October 2009 Appeal and Review request lodged with the Information Commission to force Alex Bailey and the Council to reveal the history of the lie that Ms Thoday asked for £120,000 (click here for details) as reason to use public money to fight and loose at the Employment Tribunal against Ms Thoday and the Government Equality Champion.
Case reference: RFA022622
Review reference: RCC027244016 July 2009 Council refuse to process complaints about senior officers Lies: -
a) Alex Bailey, Director of Strategy & Governance at Brighton Council (pictured) misled colleagues that Natasha Thoday had asked for £120,000 when she had NOT (click here for details). He entirely made it up as reason to use public money to fight and loose at the Employment Tribunal against the Government Equality Champion who represented Ms Thoday against Council discrimination and victimisation. Councillor Paul Elgood alerted Ms Thoday about Alex Bailey in January 2008: -”...he [Alex Bailey] basically held his hands up and said the only reason why they let it go to tribunal was that a £120k settlement was unreasonable - which is actually what they said to me at the time.”
b) A Council Solicitor Louise Hanrahan repeatedly misled Ms Thoday that costs information did not exist, but later she sent the time-sheets and salary of the Council lawyer Ian Yonge (who fought the tribunal case) to a member of the public. It had Ms Thoday's name on it showing Ian Yonge spent 165 hours on a case number she'd never heard of before "Matter Number: 24949". The Information Commissioner found in October 2009 that the Council acted "unfairly" in not giving this information to Ms Thoday. But Louise Hanrahan's manager, Simon Court, whilst apologising, refused to accept Ms Thoday was deceived by Ms Hanrahan casting her actions as only an "error".
The Council's own Standards and Complaints Manager also refused to process the complaints: -
“... the Council’s Corporate Complaint process is unable to deal with [it]...If you wish to seek a further remedy my recommendation is that you might like to seek legal advice on how you can pursue those matters.”
22 May 2009 Information Commissioner is asked to force the Council to disclose its “professional view” in the 'public interest' and to shed light on the origin and consider the impacts of the LIE that Ms Thoday wanted £120,000 as reason the council refused to negotiate or settle (click here for details). Instead they chose to fight and loose at the Employment Tribunal against the Government Equality Champion.
Information Commissioner is asked to investigate why a Council Lawyer's Time Sheet was disclosed to third party when its existence was denied to Ms Thoday. It shows 165 hours were spent by Council solicitor Ian Yonge on "Matter Number: 24949" loosing at the tribunal against the Government Equality Champion.
20 May 2009 Council refuse to disclose its “professional view” by misusing ‘legal professional privilege’ exemptions and denials that information exists.
* Sign Petition *
"I am appalled at this blatant disregard for equality and accountability"
Lord R McDowall - LGBT Network Chair
"Blatant Chronic Transphobia at Brighton and Hove Council"
LGBT Network
Calling on the Council to: -
'Disclose how much Public Money they spent fighting these cases'
Caroline Lucas, Green MEP & Candidate MP for Brighton Pavilion
Des Turner, Labour MP " I think it is doubly inappropriate in a city like Brighton and Hove that the Council should even seem to be discriminating against a transgender person. I am sure that the problems could have been much more sensitively handled and it is entirely right that the costs involved should be made public."
Simon Burgess, (experienced Labour Cllr & Candidate MP for Kemptown): "Transgender equality is as important as all other forms of equality. It is important to know whether the decision to fight this tribunal was taken on the same basis as the decision to fight other tribunals."
Peter Tatchell, Human Rights Campaigner
Brighton & Hove City Councillors (full list): -
Green: (11 of 12 signed) 1. Ben Duncan; 2. Rachel Fryer; 3. Amy Kennedy; 4. Sven Rufus; 5. Jason Kitcat; 6. Ian Davey; 7. Paul Steedman; 8. Vicky Wakefield-Jarrett; 9. Pete West; 10. Georgia Wrighton; 11. Bill Randall;
Labour: (1 of 13 signed) Craig Turton;
Lib Dem: (100%) Paul Elgood & David Watkins;
Conservative: (0 of 26)
Other Councillors: -
North Devon: Green Councillor Ricky Knight
Edinburgh: Scottish Conservative Councillor Gordon Buchan
Worthing: Lib Dem: James Doyle & Bob Smytherman
Oxford: Lib Dem: Ruth Wilkinson
... RECENT NEWS ...
2 February 2009 GScene LGBT Magazine: Labour Councillor Signs Trans Petition
30 January 2009 Letter & Press Release sent to all Brighton Councillors urging them to sign the Petition and circulated e-democracy.org BrightonActivist.net & IndymediaUK
1 December 2008 "Philip Morgan sent... a letter, on Brighton & Hove City Council headed paper... in an attempt to get her blacklisted."
8 November 2008 Natasha Thoday has "demonstrated no matter how much an employer tries to use it's substantial resources to justify discrimination the truth will come out."
2 February 2009 GScene LGBT Magazine: Labour Councillor Signs Trans Petition
30 January 2009 Letter & Press Release sent to all Brighton Councillors urging them to sign the Petition and circulated e-democracy.org BrightonActivist.net & IndymediaUK
1 December 2008 "Philip Morgan sent... a letter, on Brighton & Hove City Council headed paper... in an attempt to get her blacklisted."
8 November 2008 Natasha Thoday has "demonstrated no matter how much an employer tries to use it's substantial resources to justify discrimination the truth will come out."
... CHRONOLOGY...
(Key Events in Red & most recent dates first)
(Key Events in Red & most recent dates first)
22 December 2008 District Auditor Helen Thomson covers-up for senior Council officers. From the outset they misled Councillors and others, that the victim, Natasha Thoday had demanded a payment of £120,000, which was portrayed as unreasonable and used as reason to fight two tribunal cases against the government's equlity champion and loose. Helen Thomson has NO eveidence whatsoever, yet she supports a rewrite of history in her final letter by Alex Bailey (the Council's former Director of Strategy & Governance, see 18 December 2008 below) that Ms Thoday had demanded a payment of £120,000 : -
“A key factor in reaching its decision [to fight Natasha Thoday in 2004 & the Governments Equalities Champion in 2005] was the size of [Natasha Thoday's] claim [first given to the council in 2007] as [the Council] had concluded [in 2004] that a lower settlement was possible.”
Where is the evidence this is based on? Alex Bailey refers to a "professional view" (on 18 December 2008 below). But without written copies of such "views" Helen Thomson shatters the integrity of the office of District Auditor.
In her final letter she also supports the idea that the Council had to consider its “reputation” at the expense of Natasha Thoday's career. It is disreputable of the District Auditor to write this.
She goes on to cause great damage the credibility of office of District Auditor to suggest there was “uncertainty in the law” as if the law was unclear, when it was not, and that therefore it is "uncertain" whether an employment reference should be given to transgender people when they are mandatory for all professional employment. Such scandalous attitudes and ignorance from the District Auditor is truly shocking.
She has also kept a letter secret that was sent to her by Chief Exectutive Alan McCArthy, which she had asked for during investigations of the council's treatment of Ms Thoday. She states it was "...not material..." and that "the Council has not given its consent to release this to you... as [it] would prejudice... open exchange of information between the auditor and the council of... sensitive information in the future." If it were truly "not material" then why refuse to release it under the Data Protection Act, especially since it was about Natasha Thoday? Such secrecy can only destroy public confidence.
18 December 2008 After more than a year of campaigning, (former) Director of Strategy & Governance Alex Bailey's 'secret' letter responding to Cllr Elgood's questions of January 2008 Finally Disclosed. Alex Bailey confirms this Council decided to fight Natasha Thoday BEFORE she had even lodged the Tribunal case, and that under him, officers NEVER intended to try to settle. Instead without even the courtesy of ever approaching her to negotiate, he accuses her of wanting "£90,000 plus" and that "she would not have settled" : -"By the time a tribunal claim had been lodged, [in August 2004] the professional view taken was that... the claimant would not have settled for a payment that the Council would have deemed acceptable."
Even when the governments's equalities champion represented her, the Council continued to fight Natasha Thoday at the Tribunal keeping her out of work for more than 4-years defending its illegal decision to refuse her a reference. It is scandalous of Alex Bailey to try to cover-up this coldly calculated victimisation and discrimination of Natasha Thoday with such dishonourable misrepresenations. The 'secret' letter was finally handed over after nearly a year of wrangling under the Freedom of Information Act.
November 2008 A feature article on Natasha Thoday and Andy Baldwin and a news report about the General Teaching Council's decision against Philip Morgan published in G-Scene magazine. The Editor, James Ledward dedicates his editorial on our efforts. He criticises Brighton & Hove City Council, and links to Andy Baldwin's Tribunal in 2005 against the Council that is now case law.GScene publicly exposes for the first time that the transgender partner 
of ex-Chief Executive David Panter (right), a police officer, intended to undergo gender reassignment in 2004, and that within a month he gave his notice to take an appointment in the health service in Australia. Editor James Ledward wrote: "I think it is reasonable to ask the question, did he go or was he pushed? Institutional transphobia is particularly difficult to challenge."
of ex-Chief Executive David Panter (right), a police officer, intended to undergo gender reassignment in 2004, and that within a month he gave his notice to take an appointment in the health service in Australia. Editor James Ledward wrote: "I think it is reasonable to ask the question, did he go or was he pushed? Institutional transphobia is particularly difficult to challenge."Waiting For: The Audit Commission wrote on 14 October "a letter will be sent to the Council's Chief Executive this week asking for a further commentary on the background to your case. We will update you as soon as possible after this." Follow the story here.
Waiting For: The Information Commissioner's Office wrote to the council on 13 October "asking them to provide a response to your information request dated 29 April 2008, [in our letter to Chief Executive McCarthy] in compliance with the Freedom of Information Act... this covers questions previously asked by Councillor Elgood in his request dated 8 January 2008 as well as your own questions regarding 'legal action' " as threatend by Director Bailey on 28 March.
16 October 2008 The General Teaching Council's publish their decision on Philip Morgan online. 'Education Chief Disciplined for Discrimination, Blames Brighton Council for Bad Advice' press release published in GScene magazine online. 29 April11 September The General Teaching Council's Professional Conduct Committee heard Phillip Morgan defend his actions. He claimed he was misadvised by the Council’s head of personnel, at the time Mark Lamb, and employment lawyer Ian Yonge.
1 October 2008 Circulated to all Councillors by email: the Times Educational Supplement and the GScene report. GScene magazine print edition released.
26 September GScene editor James Ledward publishes report (click on image right) “naming and shaming” of Council by Times Educational Supplement and David Lepper MP's support of our call for an investigation. Philip Morgan claims he was misadvised by the Council.25 September The eighth sign of a cover-up. The Audit Commission emailed to confirm that they never received the letter of 13 May 2008 by the Chief Executive from the Council, and that they are preparing a further briefing on the matters we have raised.
25 September We wrote to ask for the Audit Commission’s intervention now because the Council have entirely refused to disclose the cost to the public and the reasons for fighting two cases against the Equalities and Human Rights Commission at the Employment Tribunal.
19 September We wrote to complain to the Standards Board for England and to the Freedom of Information Act Commissioner.
16 September The seventh sign of a cover-up. Council Leader Mary Mears' reply to our letter of 19 August claimed the Council acted in “good faith” and cheating and lying by senior officers was “protecting the position of the Council”. This was opposite to the original messages from Cllrs. Elgood, Mitchell and Taylor.15 September PinkNews report “Education chief accused of discrimination against transgender teacher” about Philip Morgan and the General Teaching Council hearing. Story circulated by the Equalities Network and Russel Jones and Walker solicitors on 17 September.
14 September the Brighton Argus report “Teaching boss could be struck off” about Philip Morgan and the General Teaching Council hearing on 11 September.
12 September the Times Educational Supplement singled out the Council as a discriminatory employer in a feature article about transgender teachers.
11 September the General Teaching Council's Professional Conduct Committee heard Philip Morgan, the Council's senior manager found guilty of discrimination, defend his actions. Morgan claimed he was misadvised by the Council’s head of personnel Mark Lamb at the time and employment lawyer Ian Yonge.3 September The sixth sign of a cover-up. Gill Mitchell wrote to us only that she has “noted the contents” of our letter.
29 August David Lepper MP, sent a letter to Mary Mears, to support our call for an investigation, as we “raise important issues.”19 August We asked Gill Mitchell to lead on the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Commission, and sent a bespoke cover letter to all Council political leaders and the MP to ask for their support and action.
19 August We sent a letter to Mary Mears, Council Leader, to complain and ask for an investigation. We wrote three parts 1. What happened & What others think ; 2. Analysis and critique of Alan McCarthy's letter of 13 May ; and 3. Ways forward with Achievable actions. Sent to all political leaders, David Lepper MP, Audit Commission, Gender Trust and Spectrum.15 July Rebecca Dittman, Chair of the Gender Trust wrote to us a that she had sent a letter to McCarthy to correct his misrepresentation of the facts in his 13 May letter.
30 May Gill Mitchell, Chair of Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Commission and Labour Party Leader, wrote disingenuously to us to show support: “… to continue to monitor the council’s Equalities work and to assure ourselves that these initiatives are affective and providing protection for employees.”30 May Mary Mears, Council Leader and Conservative Party Leader, wrote to confirm she received our letter and McCarthy’s letter.
28 May The fifth sign of a cover-up. The Audit Commission emailed us that they did NOT get a copy of McCarthy’s reply to our letter.
22 May We emailed the Audit Commission to explain why and how McCarthy’s reply was inadequate and misleading.
16 May We sent a reminder to McCarthy, crossed in post with his reply. We also sent a letter to all the political leaders to ask for their support and action.13 May The fourth sign of a cover-up. McCarthy’s reply to our letter, which is inaccurate and misleading.
8 May The Audit Commission emailed us that they would wait to make a decision until the Council replied to our question about the cost of the two Tribunal cases.
7 May Elgood emailed us noting we had taken issues up directly with McCarthy.
6 May Keith Taylor, Green Party Leader, wrote disingenuously to us to show support: “I will do whatever I can to help progress a satisfactory outcome.” He has not responded since, despite our 19 August letter to him.29 April We sent a letter to McCarthy to take up the same issues. Sent to all political leaders, David Lepper MP, Audit Commission, Gender Trust and Spectrum. We wrote a cover letter to all Council political leaders to ask for their support and action. We highlighted examples of Council institutionalised discrimination reported in The Argus newspaper 'Culture of 'fear and bullying' at council' and 'Council bid to root out racism'.
11 April We gave the Audit Commission Elgood’s reply and an explanation of why we went to a councillor, and Elgood in particular.
11 April We emailed Elgood to criticise his back-peddling and helping to cover-up wrong-doing, analysed his reversal of support, and included 2 press reports on this Council: “Culture of 'fear and bullying' at Council” 14 June 2006 and “Council bid to root out racism” 28 July 2006. On 2 May we sent Elgood the emailby post, recorded delivery, because he did not reply.9 April The third sign of a cover-up. Elgood sent a one line email to tell us we need to ask the Audit Commission to contact him directly. after we emailed him to ask him to ask what the “further legal action” threatened is, as the Audit Commission want to know, and to confirm he will get the “non-confidential” written reply he stated he would.
7 April The Audit Commission emailed us to ask for Elgood’s reply and the nature of the legal action threatened.
4 April The second sign of a cover-up. Elgood emailed to say the issues were given an “airing... internally at the Council”. The opposite of “public explanations” and “withdrawal of damaging statements” on 8 January .
2 April We emailed Elgood to ask him to get a “non-confidential” response in writing.
1 April the Audit Commission asked on the ‘phone if we want them to raise the question with McCarthy verbally at their meeting today. We said no, only in writing.
31 March We first contacted the Audit Commission to ask them to question the wasted costs of the tribunal cases to the Council and raised the “further legal action” threat and bogus confidentiality.
28 March The first sign of a cover-up. Elgood emailed saying he can’t show us the response from Bailey due to being “marked confidential” and “further legal action” was threatened.
27 March emailed Elgood to request an update due to no communication from him.
8 January Later in his second email, he revealed a lie, that Ms X, the victim had asked for a “£120k settlement” that was was circulated in the Council as reason to fight the cases. Elgood also suggested “pressure” is put on the Council by publishing his letter in the press.
8 January Elgood's emailed us he would get a “full response in writing” to his letter, based on our briefing, to the Council. It “demands public explanation” and “examination”, that “entrenched transphobic prejudice” and statements be “publicly withdrawn”. It also asked Under the Freedom of Information Act for “... the total cost of the case to the Council”
6 January Elgood asked us to give him a full briefing, which we sent.
5 January 2008 We sent an email to Elgood asking him to take up these issues at his meeting with a Council Director, Alex Bailey.
26 November 2007 Paul Elgood, Liberal Democrat Councillor and a former Council Chair of Equalities, supported us in a public statement “that all is not well by the City Council” in GScene magazine.
18 November 2007 We sent a letter to Elgood asking him to investigate why the Council fought the government’s equalities champion at the Tribunal, the costs and denying Ms X, the victim a reference for over four years.
15 November 2007 the Council finally sent the £100,000 reference to the solicitors over four years after first asking Ms X's former colleague, senior manager Philip Morgan. A second request was refused on 3 February 2005. Solicitors had to write four more times to get a usable reference after it was promised to the Tribunal on 5 April 2007.
6 November 2006 Council twice judged guilty by an Employment Tribunal on five separate counts of discrimination and victimisation.
3 May 2006 Council Chief Executive, Alan McCarthy, dismissed in a terse response the request by David Lepper MP, initiated by Andy Baldwin to investigate the Council’s role in forcing Ms X out of work, causing long term incapacity.
31 October 2003 Ms X first asked the Council for a previous employer reference from Philip Morgan - it arrived more than 4-years later in November 2007 after fighting two tribunal cases funded by the government's equalities champion the Equalities and Human Rights Commission.
