Not only was the Heritage Lottery Fund concerned about the
appointment of Sands Heritage Ltd as the Dreamland operator but, according to
rumours I have heard, so were others. From what I can gather these
concerns were focused on Thanet Council’s management of the operator selection
process. I understand that formal complaints may have been made to Thanet
Council about its handling of the park operator procurement process and that
there may even have been the threat of legal action related to the tendering process.
These rumours certainly appear to have substance.
In May 2015, Larissa Reed of Thanet Council produced a report headed “Restricted – commercially sensitive
information” in which she described how
Thanet Council managed the Dreamland Operator procurement process. It explains that
2 efforts were made by Thanet Council to secure an operator. The first effort
in, June 2014, resulted in only one application
being submitted by Sands Heritage. On advice, it was “determined that the council should re-advertise
the offer”.
The second procurement effort was launched in September 2014. This time
there were 6 returned applications
including Sands Heritage and the Dreamland Trust. But here’s where things, even
by my standards, get a little odd. Because the report says that whilst all 6 applicants, including
Sands Heritage, provided tender submissions “following legal advice
from Trowers and Hamlins we agreed to consider the previous tender submission
from Sands Heritage Limited”. So if my understanding is correct this means that
on the basis of legal advice Thanet Council decided to reject Sands Heritage’s
tender submission for the second bidding round
of September 2014 and only consider its original submission from the first
round of tendering in June 2014. Why was this?
Clearly, Thanet Council and its lawyers must have had some extremely
serious concerns about the probity of the second Sands Heritage tender
submission. Serious enough to have decided that it would have been inappropriate to consider its second
tender document. My educated guess, and I stress the word guess, is that these
concerns were the result of the alleged complaints and possible threats of
legal action made to the Thanet Council which I have already mentioned. What
the substances of these complaints and threats of legal action were I do not
know. However in the interest of open and transparent Government I intend to
find out and to make my findings public.
4
weeks ago I submitted a Freedom of Information Request to Thanet Council asking
for a copy of the Trowers and Hamlins legal advice. As I expected I was given the bums rush.
Writing to me yesterday, Tim Howes, TDCs Director of Corporate Governance said “I can confirm that Thanet District Council
holds this information” but “the Council consider that the advice from the
Council’s solicitors to the Council is exempt under section 42 of
the Freedom of Information Act as the Council could claim legal professional
privilege in respect of that information.” Fair do’s but the legal and professional
privilege doesn’t mean the document remains under lock and key in the TDC
offices for ever.
I have a
right, which I will be exercising, to appeal
against Mr Howes decision through an internal review at TDC which takes 4
weeks. No matter how valid and lawful my arguments are for release of this
document from the clutches of the secrecy loving Thanet Council, I am certain
that, because of the sensitivity of Dreamland project and the fact that the reputations
of so many council bosses and politicians depend upon it not going pear-shaped, my
appeal will not be successful. That will leave a final appeal to the
Information Commissioner, which will take several months. Having read up on how
to appeal against an FOI rejection , I believe
that in this case there are some very powerful reasons why the Trowers and Hamlins report should be made public- so powerful
I want to play a little game.
So the
game is this. I will draft my letter requesting an internal review of Mr Howes
decision
and publish that letter on this blogsite in a few day’s time. I will
then ask for feedback and suggestions from you as to how I can improve the letter and any
technical and legal suggestions anyone may have to make it stronger. On the
basis of feedback I will then produce a revised version of the letter which will
be published on this website and sent to Mr Howes. I will the conduct a survey
as to your view on whether Mr Howes will release the Trowers and Hamlins report or not, which would be an excellent
way of testing whether or not my view of Thanet Council as a secretive North
Korean style organisation is a reasonable one.
Considering
that Thanet Council tried, but miserably failed, to water down the Freedom of
Information Act, (see my other posting about FOI) it would be most appropriate for
an FOI collaboratively drafted by local residents to bite the out of touch
corporate opponents of the Act on their municipal arse!!!
In the
run up to me publishing the draft letter here are links to 2 guidance documents
produced by the Information Commissioner which are relevant to my appeal and
well worth reading
PS to cut
the FOI process short I am happy to receive any information readers may have about the Dreamland operator selection process. The
usual confidentiality undertakings apply.
Having held that TDC is client and the advice is subject of privilege what happened to the public interest test ?
ReplyDeleteI am trying to find out whether TDC disclosed the water supply contamination facts to their aviation environmental impact advisor for the original Manston Section 106 agreement. FOIs show Public Health England and even KCC have no record of it !
Isn't it about time we all realised that TDC isn't qualified to run a whelk stall? The council's involvement in everything commercial needs to be stopped with immediate effect and it needs to focus on its statutory duties. A case in point would be the ludicrous obsession with identifying a partner to help them pursue a compulsory purchase of the site of the former airfield. This project is massive and is way beyond the council's pay grade. The council should be sitting back and allowing the bidders to sort it out amongst themselves. If Riveroak, or anyone else. wants to buy the site they needs to make contact with the owners and offer enough money. That's it. The council shouldn't be involved at all.
ReplyDeleteEcstatic to see that the Labour Group has followed the Green Party's lead in welcoming Stone Hill Park proposals for the site of the former airport at Manston. A sensible allocation of housing blended with sutainable industry and space for leisure and recreation. It has the potential to be a blueprint for green development. It seems unlikely but let's hope the Tories see sense soon and commit to working constructively with the legal owners of the site. After two years of pointless and futile wrangling there is, at last, a real sense of progress. Politicians of all colours will need to get off the fence and make their minds up because the planning application will be hitting TDC's doormat in a few short weeks.
ReplyDelete