Council fends off JR over cuts to youth services

A High Court judge has this week dismissed a judicial review challenge to a local authority’s proposed cuts to youth services.

The case of Hunt v North Somerset Council [2012] EWHC 1928 was brought by law firm Public Interest Lawyers on behalf of a 21-year-old with ADHD and learning difficulties who attends a youth club in Weston that could be affected by the changes.

The claimant sought declaratory relief and a quashing order in relation to the item of the council’s Revenue Budget for 2012/13 that related to the financial provision of youth services.

At the time the proceedings were brought, the claimant feared that North Somerset would close his youth centre. This has not happened, but he nevertheless pressed for the relief.

The claim was based on two grounds:

• The local authority had failed to comply with 507B of the Education Act 1996 – which imposes a number of duties – and the statutory guidance issued in relation to that section; and
• The council had failed to have regard to the public sector equality duties under s. 149 of the Equality Act 2010.

In the High Court, Mr Justice Wyn Williams dismissed both grounds of the claim.

The judge concluded that – although more could have been done to ascertain the views of individuals – the local authority had taken steps to ascertain the views of qualifying young persons as to the changes as required by s. 507B(9).

Mr Justice Wyn Williams added that there was no evidential basis upon which it would be proper to conclude that the information provided to the council as a consequence of its consultation was not considered in the decision-making process leading to approval of the Revenue Budget.

The judge also found that the approach adopted by North Somerset could not be categorised as a failure to take account of the guidance issued by the Secretary of State.

“In my judgment the statutory guidance is not intended to and could not create a more onerous obligation upon a local authority than the obligation ‘to take steps’,” he said.

On the question of compliance with s. 149, Mr Justice Wyn Williams cited the Court of Appeal decision in R(Bailey) v LB Brent [2011] EWCA 1586.

“I summarise by saying that the duty to have due regard under section 149 can have no fixed content; what observance of the duty requires of decision-makers is fact sensitive and varies considerably from situation to situation; councils cannot be expected to speculate, or investigate the potential impact of a decision upon public service equality duties in a manner befitting a lawyer engaged in forensic analysis in court,” he said.

The judge said he was persuaded by the submission of North Somerset’s counsel that there was no substance in the criticisms of the equality impact assessment (EIA) advanced by the claimant.

Mr Justice Wyn Williams reached the conclusion that the members were provided with sufficient information so as to enable them to comply with their statutory duty.

The judge said he was conscious that a submission and address to members made by a council employee, Helen Thornton of Unison, suggested otherwise.

He added: “I have scrutinised her submission with care. It does not seem to me, however, that it demonstrated that the EIA was incapable of informing members sufficiently upon the defendant’s public service equalities duties especially given that the members must have had a wealth of relevant local knowledge to supplement the written information provided to them.”

Mr Justice Wyn Williams concluded that the members did have due regard to the public sector equality duty when deciding to approve the Revenue Budget.

In a statement, North Somerset Council said: “The judge's decision acknowledges the tough choices being faced by the council in the current financial climate.

“Defending this action has been an unnecessary drain on our resources and has cost the tax payers of North Somerset in the region of £65,000 in legal fees and hundreds of hours of council officer time.”

North Somerset said it was faced with having to save over £47m from its budget by 2015.

“From the outset we have said that we would look at how services could be delivered in a different way rather than simply cutting them,” it insisted.

The council added: “This is an example where community involvement as encouraged by Government has enabled us to keep delivering a service. This will remain our approach as we continue to support and work with the 11 networks being set up across the district which will deliver sustainable, positive activities for our children and young people in the future.”

Philip Hoult