POLITICAL support for council leader John Clancy appears to be waning fast ahead of crunch meetings with Labour colleagues today.

Already two backbenchers have gone public with a request for a vote of no confidence and others have been briefing that it is time for him to go.

Some of them are people who lent him their support in his narrow leadership victory at the end of 2015.

If the numerous Labour group sources I have spoken to in the last two days are correct, it is only a matter of time before the Quinton councillor is forced to step down.

The latest reports suggest that he only just has the confidence of his cabinet – the top table of ten senior councillors.

Rumours suggest that of those who attended a meeting today a couple were highly critical, some remained silent and a couple more defended the embattled leader.

Birmingham council leader John Clancy and Unite assistant general secretary Howard Beckett

While I understand there is no constitutional basis for a vote of no confidence removing the Labour leader, his position would be politically untenable if a majority of his own party fail to back him.

Those arguing for his exit have given a number of strong reasons:

• The bins dispute is now well into its third month, a major service failure which has created a public health hazard and reputational damage to the city. The buck stops with the leader.

• Clancy has lost the trust of trade unions after first negotiating a deal and then backpedalling. They say they are unable to take him at his word again.

• His denial that there was a deal to withdraw the redundancy threat from 113 binmen and reinstate a suspended union representative – only some loose agreement ahead of negotiations – has been contradicted by the Unite union, Acas and seemingly Clancy himself in a leaked email to depot staff .

• There have been behind the scenes battles with chief executive Stella Manzie and senior staff over the ‘deal’. When met with resistance, Clancy seems to have bypassed them entirely, which is against the rules. He crossed the clear dividing line between permanent council officials and political leadership.

Del Broth, holding placard, as binmen went back out on strike
Del Broth, holding placard, as binmen went back out on strike

• The deal appears to have been offered without first seeking advice on its implications for costs and equal pay liabilities

• He appears to have told staff that this deal was agreed by his cabinet. Several cabinet members have briefed colleagues that this was not the case.

• Labour councillors, including cabinet members, say the council leader has show a tendency to act alone and without informing - as he did when former chief executive Mark Rogers was replaced in February.

While no-one has any doubt that Clancy had nothing but the best intentions in trying to end the strike, and end the summer of misery for residents, his gambit has failed spectacularly.

Not only that but the council has only served to inflame the dispute by rejecting the ‘deal’ and sending redundancy notices to the binmen in the middle of negotiations.

Those defending him – and there have been some – suggest he has been hung out to dry:

• They point out that even the ACAS statement on August 15 said the ‘deal’ was an agreement ‘in principle’ which would need ratification by the council and union members.

• Therefore the Unite union jumped the gun in a triumphant press release hailing ‘victory’, giving false hope to its members and putting the council leader in an impossible situation.

• Supporters say that Clancy, despite being the elected leader of the council, has been blocked by inflexible management who fail to see the political necessity to end the strike.

• His office argues that he took legal advice and was cleared to send the controversial email to the depot.

• And he is clearing up a mess and potential equal pay liability that the Labour leadership inherited from the former Tory-Lib Dem council which oversaw the 2011 bin strike.

Whatever side prevails, the Labour group will need to have reached a conclusion and present a united front at the full council meeting on Tuesday, September 11. This is when the Conservatives are likely to table their own vote of no confidence in the leader and dare Labour members who have spoken out to back it.

The backdrop of equal pay and budget disasters

THE backdrop to all the wrangling is that the council has been on the Government’s watch list for the last three years over its failures of governance.

It was seriously rebuked for a £49 million budget overspend last year and underwent a major overhaul of senior management - chief executive Mark Rogers was replaced with the Government approved interim appointment of Stella Manzie.

Part of that budget shortfall was made of a major overspend on the bins department which relied heavily on costly agency staff and overtime payments to fulfil its basic service.

Looming, too, is the spectre of equal pay. Failure to deal with favourable terms for binmen and road workers following a restructure in 2008 proved costly for the city council.

Its total equal pay bill for the last decade has run to about £1.1 billion, led indirectly to the sale of the NEC and Grand Central, and interest on the loans used to pay the rest run to tens of millions of pounds each year.

A potential deal would allow the binmen to keep their jobs at the current pay level as long as they take on extra duties to justify the pay grade. But legal advice on this is divided.