Financial Exposure

John H Hutchinson made this Freedom of Information request to Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

The request was successful.

John H Hutchinson

Dear Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council,
To what extent, please, is Council's Financial Exposure should the Hoylake Golf Resort be stopped, say, today?

By Financial Exposure, I mean the total of cash, staff, administration and other support costs over the fifteen years or more that it has been under consideration.

Yours faithfully,

John H Hutchinson

InfoMgr, FinDMT, Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Hutchinson

 

I write in response to your recent Freedom of Information request in which
you asked:

 

“To what extent, please, is Council's Financial Exposure should the
Hoylake Golf Resort be stopped, say, today? By Financial Exposure, I mean
the total of cash, staff, administration and other support costs over the
fifteen years or more that it has been under consideration.”

 

The Council can advise that Regeneration staff do not apportion time
against individual projects, therefore no recorded information in the
manner requested exists for staff costs.

 

Prior to the re-launch of the project in 2013 the Council commissioned the
following studies:

 

Capita Symonds Needs Assessment Study - £42,715

Capita Symonds Technical Assessment - £129,940

Counsel advice - £1,500.

 

Total Cost £174,155

 

Since the re-launch of the project in 2013 a budget of £237,000 was
allocated and has now been expended.

 

On 7^th November Cabinet approved (subject to call in) new budget of
£595,969 to support the project going forward. Details of this requested
budget can be found at:

 [1]http://democracy.wirral.gov.uk/documents....
This

 

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Lynette Paterson

Senior Information Management Officer

Business Services - Digital

 

Wallasey Town Hall

Brighton Street
Wallasey
Wirral
CH44 8ED 

[2]Tel: 0151 691 8201

[3][Wirral Borough Council request email]

 

 

[4]LGC Awards15_Winner_MIP

 

 

This information supplied to you is copyrighted and continues to be
protected by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.   You are free
to use it for your own purposes, including any non commercial research you
are doing and for the purposes of news reporting. Any other reuse, for
example commercial publication, would require our specific permission, may
involve licensing and the application of a charge

 

 

 

 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. http://democracy.wirral.gov.uk/documents...
2. file:///tmp/Tel:0151
3. mailto:[Wirral Borough Council request email]

Dear InfoMgr, FinDMT,
Thank you for your reply.

To clarify, please, is the "Total Cost £174,155" included in the "budget of £237,000" meaning that £62,845 was spent elsewhere or additional to it making the actual cost £411,155?

Under which budget are the costs of the Jones Lang LaSalle Report of 15 Novemebr 2005 a part and what did that cost?

Yours sincerely,

John H Hutchinson

InfoMgr, FinDMT, Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Hutchinson

 

In response to your email seeking clarification, the preliminary study
cost of £174,155 was in addition to the subsequent budget approvals as
reported.

 

Regarding your supplementary question (Jones Lang LaSalle Report), this
has been logged as a  new request and a response will be issued within 20
working days.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Lynette Paterson

Senior Information Management Officer

Business Services - Digital

 

Wallasey Town Hall

Brighton Street
Wallasey
Wirral
CH44 8ED 

[1]Tel: 0151 691 8201

[2][Wirral Borough Council request email]

 

 

[3]LGC Awards15_Winner_MIP

 

 

This information supplied to you is copyrighted and continues to be
protected by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.   You are free
to use it for your own purposes, including any non commercial research you
are doing and for the purposes of news reporting. Any other reuse, for
example commercial publication, would require our specific permission, may
involve licensing and the application of a charge

 

 

 

 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. file:///tmp/Tel:0151
2. mailto:[Wirral Borough Council request email]

Dear Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council's handling of my FOI request 'Financial Exposure'.

It is well known that the Jones Lang LaSalle Report formed an early part of the assessment of the golf resort and it should, therefore, have been included in the original response.

I would like to know how it was missed from the original response, please?

I would also like to know why it was not included following my prompt?

Is it not a fact that to have answered the request when prompted that costs would have been saved?

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/f...

Yours faithfully,

John H Hutchinson

Rossell Conner left an annotation ()

"Is it not a fact that to have answered the request when prompted that costs would have been saved?"

Since when have you EVER been concerned about 'saving costs'??

I would give my left arm for Wirral Council to quantify the amount of officer time that has been spent responding to your hundreds, if not thousands of FOI requests.

InfoMgr, FinDMT, Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Hutchinson

 

Thank you for your email of 14 November 2016 in which you asked “under
which budget are the costs of the Jones Lang LaSalle Report of 15 November
2005 a part and what did that cost?”

 

Wirral Council can advise that the Jones Lang LaSalle Report was completed
in 2005 at a cost £13,000. Funding for this study came from the Council’s
Capital Programme.   

  

Yours sincerely

 

 

Lynette Paterson

Senior Information Management Officer

Business Services - Digital

 

Wallasey Town Hall

Brighton Street
Wallasey
Wirral
CH44 8ED 

[1]Tel: 0151 691 8201

[2][Wirral Borough Council request email]

 

 

[3]LGC Awards15_Winner_MIP

 

 

This information supplied to you is copyrighted and continues to be
protected by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.   You are free
to use it for your own purposes, including any non commercial research you
are doing and for the purposes of news reporting. Any other reuse, for
example commercial publication, would require our specific permission, may
involve licensing and the application of a charge

 

 

 

 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. file:///tmp/Tel:0151
2. mailto:[Wirral Borough Council request email]

Dear InfoMgr, FinDMT,
thank you!

Yours sincerely,

John H Hutchinson

John H Hutchinson left an annotation ()

Brendan Conner, if you are happy that our Council should risk £600,000 of our money, whilst the Developer is prepared to risk only £50.00 of his, so be it, because I am not.

Please see Facebook page "Stop Hoylake Golf Resort" https://www.facebook.com/Stop-Hoylake-Go... where your further comments will be most welcome and, unlike Council, receive a response.

Rossell Conner left an annotation ()

I have no problem with Wirral Council spending £600k on something that may benefit the area.

What I do have a problem with, is your absolute hypocrisy in making facetious remarks about the Council wasting your money, when EVERY SINGLE one od your FOI requests has a cost implication i.e. It costs the Council Tax Payer money EVERY TIME you ask a question.

Do you understand that?

EVERY SINGLE REQUEST you make takes a Council Staff Member away from their day job, meaning the things that we pay for every month through our council tax, are not being done, or not being done fully, because of having to respond to your multitudinous requests.

This is not a rant against the FOI legislation, this is a rant against you personally taking advantage of this piece of legislation, just to satify your idle curiosity and inane conspiracy theories.

This has been said many times to you, through this website and others and yet, on each occasion, your response is obtuse and pompous. I would be genuinely fascinated to receive a direct reponse from you as to how you can justify submitting so many FOI requests, across the most disparate range of topics, knowing full well that each request costs money, and yet still criticise the council for wasting public monies?

John H Hutchinson left an annotation ()

Rossell,

I understand perfectly the reason for the Act and why people are employed in the Public Sector to answer related and relevant requests.

When I was a Civil Servant, we hid information from the public. The Act has eliminated that practice, which I value.

My curiosity is not idle nor inane. Council has put at risk a great deal of Public Money in this particular venture.

My direct response to you is as I have said here. Additionally, I am genuinely concerned, due to personal experience and qualification for what Council is endeavouring to complete in our names at Hoylake.

I cannot apologise for having a wide-ranging interest and burrowing mind that must constantly search for answers. Some people refer to me as an activist, which I accept. Some say that I am a polymath that I deny.

I also deny being obtuse. I am particular about facts to the point of ennui. Many say that I am direct and some know that I will not tolerate intolerance. As for pomposity, I am proud to say that that claim has been made by the most pompous person that one could meet.

For as long as our Council wastes money and you allow them, I'll ask questions.

This is a Democracy that I shall defend with my life.

Rossell Conner left an annotation ()

But YOU'RE wasting public money, and you don't seem to realise or acknowledge that.

Give me one example of a request that you have made, that has actually saved money, highlighted wrongdoing or achieved something, other than simply satisfying your curiosity.

As people have previously said, if you had to pay a fee for each request, I speculate that your requests would probably drop to zero.

John H Hutchinson left an annotation ()

Rossell,

Here are two that I shall provide to answer your questions. All of the others have provided valuable information in aid of our research.

1. This request revealed a report that WMBC had kept secret for four years.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/h...

2. This request is causing some embarrassment to WMBC in its answer.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/l...

Since you have no idea of who I am, your judgement is faulty.

Why are you envious of my enquiring mind?

Your questions are wasted here, since this is my final reply.

Why not go to https://www.facebook.com/Stop-Hoylake-Go...

where you can join approximately 4,000 others with concerns for Hoylake Golf Resort. You can read their comments and make your own, which I promise to "Like" because I enjoy an argument and your comments will add to our hits. After others have commented upon your personal comments of me, I shall reply to yours.

Rossell Conner left an annotation ()

Don't worry, it'll be my last word too.

Your intransigence is pathological. I abhor the fact that you take complete advantage of the fact the public authorities are legally obliged to satisfy your random musings about a range of topics, which are so broad as to be utterly meaningless. I am appalled by the fact that, not only have you abused the FOI legislation in your own name, but you've previously been caught out abusing it in other people's names too, which only serves to make your self-righteousness even more disturbing.

I have no doubt that the admin will remove this at some point, which is fair enough but I presume that people holding multiple WDTK accounts would be in contravention of their user agreement? I also presume that WDTK admin record people's IP addresses when they register? In which case, they may wish to compare John H Hutchinsons IP address, with that of Edward Duggans......

Oh, and the jury's still out on Derick Barnes too....

Rossell Conner left an annotation ()

John H Hutchinson, perhaps you could explain this.....

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/user/john...

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/user/john...

Obviously, your use of other people's names to submit FOI requests (e.g. Edward Duggan) will be well-known to the people that follow FOI requests to Wirral Council, but perhaps you could explain why you have two WDTK accounts, under the same name?

Interestingly, the dates of the requests submitted under both of these user names overlap......Why is that?

For those interested, Mr. Hutchinson has submitted 204 FOI requests under one of the user names, and 22 requests under the other name.

Oh, and 10 requests under Edward Duggans name as well.

John H Hutchinson left an annotation ()

Rossell,

you have had your final word on this issue on this website.

I request that you continue this in public at https://www.facebook.com/Stop-Hoylake-Go...