The Six Questions Sandwell Council Didn’t Answer

When a council says it has consulted properly, it should be able to explain:

• What was open to change.
• What changed.
• How responses were weighted.
• What alternatives were considered.

In November and January, I wrote to the Cabinet Member for Finance at
Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council
raising detailed concerns about the 2026/27 budget consultation.

The response I received described:

• Engagement channels.
• Social media reach.
• Face-to-face survey numbers.
• Compliance with legal principles.

What it did not do was answer the substance.

Below are the six questions that remain unanswered.

1️⃣ What Was Genuinely Open to Change?

The draft Medium-Term Financial Strategy was considered by Cabinet before consultation launched.

Which elements were actually capable of being amended or removed based on public feedback?

If the answer is “all of it,” then examples should be easy to provide.

If the answer is “very little,” then the consultation was not formative in practice.

2️⃣ Why Use Forced Ranking and Restricted Response Formats?

The survey relied heavily on agree/disagree scales and forced ranking.

Why?

Why not allow residents to weight priorities or select multiple internal reform options?

The full survey instruments have not been published for public scrutiny.

Transparency here would be straightforward.

3️⃣ Why Were Internal Reform Scenarios Excluded?

Residents were presented with familiar “pain options”:

• Council Tax rises
• Service reductions
• Increased charges
• Use of reserves

They were not presented with structured alternatives such as:

• Senior management delayering
• Agency reduction strategy
• Procurement consolidation
• Asset income optimisation
• Debt refinancing options
• Cashable Oracle Fusion savings

Why were these not offered as explicit scenario choices?

4️⃣ Where Is the “You Said / We Did” Report?

Consultation shows strong opposition to the 4.99% Council Tax increase.

Yet the proposal remains unchanged.

Where is the published explanation of:

• What feedback altered decisions?
• What feedback did not?
• Why?

Engagement without demonstrable influence risks becoming procedural rather than participatory.

5️⃣ What Is the Legal Basis for Compliance?

The response states the consultation complies with the Gunning principles.

Was formal legal advice obtained on the design and structure?

If so, can the basis for that assurance be summarised?

This is not a demand for privileged documents — simply confirmation of the foundation.

6️⃣ Where Are the Cashable Savings Details?

I asked for confirmation of whether the MTFS includes:

• Management rationalisation savings
• Agency reduction targets
• Procurement consolidation savings
• Asset income optimisation
• Debt refinancing assumptions
• Oracle Fusion cashable savings

No breakdown was provided.

If these are already included, publishing them would strengthen confidence.

This Is Not About Theatre

Under the Constitution, members of the public may make a three-minute pre-submitted statement at Full Council.

There is no right to ask a live question.
No supplementary.
No reply.

That format is lawful.

It is also tightly controlled.

So instead of performing three minutes of scripted commentary, I have chosen to document the process and publish the unanswered questions.

The Bigger Issue

The budget balances in 2026/27.

Deficits return in 2027/28.

The Council says there is “no alternative.”

But alternatives in how to balance exist.

If consultation does not clearly influence outcomes,
if alternative modelling is not disclosed,
if structural gaps reopen next year —

Residents are entitled to ask whether they were meaningfully heard.

That question remains open.

#Sandwell #SandwellCouncil #CouncilTax #Budget2026 #Consultation #Transparency #LocalGovernment #MTFS #PublicAccountability