Council extremely disappointed by breach of transit site confidentiality which cost taxpayers £25,000

INDEPENDENT Cllr. Neil Johnson has demanded answers over Warrington Borough Council’s claim that £25,000 of taxpayers’ money was spent on its plans to install a transit site for gypsy travelers in Croft.

In response, the council says it is “extremely disappointed” by the transit site’s “breach of confidentiality”, which cost £25,000 in agents and other fees.

The plans were canceled after a campaign led by Cllr. Johnson and the local community after the former Labor Party member leaked the proposed site at the former Kenyon Lane nurseries, which the council claims breached confidentiality.

In their statement announcing they would not proceed with the site on Kenyon Lane, Warrington Borough Council said: “We have spent over £25,000 preparing the option to acquire the site.”

Cllr. Johnson said: “The public has a right to know why £25,000 of taxpayers’ money was allegedly spent on a secret plan that they would still know nothing about if I hadn’t taken the decision to bring it to their attention. Where did that money go?
“As far as we know, the Council of Ministers voted to continue purchasing the land, despite due diligence on access not being carried out. All they had to do was call the owners of the access roads and they would find out very quickly that their plans were prohibited.
“But phone calls to Croft don’t cost £25,000. So what was our money spent on?
“I ask the Council to provide a full breakdown of these expenses. We should have a complete, open and transparent analysis of costs, with revenues. This is taxpayer money that was wasted on a stupid plan that could never have gone ahead.
“If the Council had properly engaged with local residents they would know this and wouldn’t need to spend any money. So I’m calling on Warrington Council to come clean and show us where the £25,000 went! If they don’t come clean, then external auditors and the Department of Local Government should get involved. We don’t want any more shady cheating!”
He is also holding his fellow counselors’ feet to the fire, accusing them of “false courage.”

Cllr. Mr Johnson said: “My fellow councilors Janet Seddon and Matt Smith have suddenly come out of hiding to say they have supported the residents affected by this proposal. We haven’t seen any evidence of that in the community.”
“To his credit, Councilor Smith attended the last Croft Parish Council meeting, but Councilor Seddon was nowhere to be seen. Trying to pretend that they are responsible for withdrawing this proposal is a beautiful example of false value. It is a shameful feat and we hope for better.”
“The Council’s own statement made it clear that it was the campaign I launched that ultimately forced them to back down. Councilors Smith and Seddon say they “engaged with decision-makers”, but there does not appear to be any evidence of this. The Council does not attribute the change in attitude to any of them. Obviously, they are not as effective as they want us to believe!”
“I hope Councilors Smith and Seddon will join me in finding out how this £25,000 was spent. I am sure you will agree that if public money has been wasted, your Labor colleagues should pay back every penny from their own pockets or else have it deducted from their allowances. Come on councilors, what do you say?

In response, Cllr. Matt Smith said: “I stand by our previous statement. Residents can continue to voice their concerns to Cllr Seddon and me, as they have done in recent weeks. They can contact us at (email protected) and (email protected). We will raise any concerns through the appropriate channels, ensuring residents’ voices are heard.”

A spokesperson for Warrington Borough Council said: “As a member of the Cross-Party Working Group – established specifically to identify a potential commuter transit location – Cllr Neil Johnson was fully aware of our approach and knew costs were being incurred, including payments to agents and other fees. This is completely normal when looking to identify and purchase a website. There will always be costs involved in complex processes like this, and all proper procedures were followed.
“The option to acquire the site, which in turn would be subject to planning approval and independent scrutiny by the Secretary of State, would have involved extensive consultation with the local community as part of a transparent process. We are extremely disappointed with the breach of confidentiality that caused so much disruption and undermined this process.
“We remain committed to providing a suitable transit site to support the management and reduction of unauthorized encampments in our neighborhood, and will continue to seek a suitable alternative site.”