Mayoral Recommendation - Tarmacademy Training Centre - Part 1

Josie Mullen made this Freedom of Information request to Liverpool City Council

Automatic anti-spam measures are in place for this older request. Please let us know if a further response is expected or if you are having trouble responding.

The request was refused by Liverpool City Council.

Dear Liverpool City Council,

In the Cabinet Meeting /Tarmacademy Construction Training Centre (M/12) / Friday, 11 December 2015 / Agenda – item 4. Mayoral Recommendations - the following statements were made in the Minutes::

Cabinet considered a recommendation that –
(i) authority be granted to assist Kings Construction (and thereby Tarmacademy and Cemex), to acquire sites in the north Docks area of Liverpool, in order to provide a new training facility and tarmac production facility;
(ii) authority be granted to the Director – Regeneration & Employment Services together with the Director – Finance & Resources to negotiate with land owners of suitable sites identified in the Liverpool area and to negotiate with Kings Construction (and thereby Tarmacademy and Cemex) with regards to the terms and conditions for the leasing arrangements; and
(iii) delegated authority be granted to the Director – Regeneration & Employment Services together with the Director – Finance & Resources to commit expenditure of up to £3.5m for land acquisition.......... and a robust and sustainable business case being developed within
the above capital expenditure envelope, which confirms best consideration and revenue returns which more than mitigate the cost of borrowing within a three year period.
.Resolved that the recommendation be approved.

In light of the above mentioned LCC approved recommendation:
_
REQUEST 1
Please supply a copy of the contract between LCC and King Construction /CEMEX in relation to the above mentioned Tarmacademy Mayoral Recommendation

REQUEST 2
Please supply a copy of the 'robust and sustainable business case' which was supposed to confirm 'best consideration and revenue returns' which would 'more than mitigate the cost of borrowing [£3'5 million' - which was actually £4.2 million]

Yours faithfully,

Josie Mullen

Liverpool City Council

 
Dear Josie Mullen
 
Please note:

We would at this time advise that Liverpool City Council in common with
other public authorities is presently dealing with, responding to and
affected by the current public health emergency arising from Coronavirus.

When we have sufficient personnel to be able to deal with, and respond to,
your request we will do so in due course.

We thank you for your patience at this time whilst staff are diverted to
maintaining essential services for the residents of Liverpool during this
current public health emergency.

 
Freedom of Information Act 2000
 
Thank you for your request for information that was received on 17 August
2020 concerning Dear Liverpool City Council,

In the Cabinet Meeting /Tarmacademy Construction Training Centre (M/12) /
Friday, 11 December 2015 / Agenda ' item 4. Mayoral Recommendations - the
following statements were made in the Minutes::

Cabinet considered a recommendation that '
(i) authority be granted to assist Kings Construction (and thereby
Tarmacademy and Cemex), to acquire sites in the north Docks area of
Liverpool, in order to provide a new training facility and tarmac
production facility;
(ii) authority be granted to the Director ' Regeneration & Employment
Services together with the Director ' Finance & Resources to negotiate
with land owners of suitable sites identified in the Liverpool area and to
negotiate with Kings Construction (and thereby Tarmacademy and Cemex) with
regards to the terms and conditions for the leasing arrangements; and
(iii) delegated authority be granted to the Director ' Regeneration &
Employment Services together with the Director ' Finance & Resources to
commit expenditure of up to £3.5m for land acquisition.......... and a
robust and sustainable business case being developed within
the above capital expenditure envelope, which confirms best consideration
and revenue returns which more than mitigate the cost of borrowing within
a three year period.
.Resolved that the recommendation be approved.

In light of the above mentioned LCC approved recommendation:
_
REQUEST 1
Please supply a copy of the contract between LCC and King Construction
/CEMEX in relation to the above mentioned Tarmacademy Mayoral
Recommendation

REQUEST 2
Please supply a copy of the 'robust and sustainable business case' which
was supposed to confirm 'best consideration and revenue returns' which
would 'more than mitigate the cost of borrowing [£3'5 million' - which was
actually £4.2 million]

Yours faithfully,

Josie Mullen...
 
We are dealing with your request under the Freedom of Information Act
2000 and we aim to send a response by 15 September 2020.
 
In some case, a fee may be payable. If we decide a fee is payable, we will
send you a fee notice and we will require you to pay the fee before
proceeding with your request.
 
The Freedom of Information Act 2000 may restrict the release of some or
all of the information you have requested. We will carry out an assessment
and if any exemptions apply to some or all of the information then we
might not provide that information to you. We will inform you if this is
the case and advise you of your rights to request an internal review and
to complain to the Information Commissioner's Office.
 
We will also advise you if we cannot provide you with the information
requested for any other reason together with the reason(s) why and details
of how you may appeal (if appropriate).
 
Yours sincerely,
 
Information Team
Liverpool City Council
 
NOTE: Please do not edit the subject line when replying to this email.
 
LIVERPOOL CITY COUNCIL DISCLAIMER
This email contains proprietary confidential information some or all of
which may be legally privileged and/or subject to the provisions of
privacy legislation. It is intended solely for the addressee.
If you are not the intended recipient, an addressing or transmission error
has misdirected this e-mail; you must not use, disclose, copy, print or
disseminate the information contained within this e-mail. Please notify
the author immediately by replying to this email.
Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states these to be the views of
Liverpool City Council.
This email has been scanned for all viruses and all reasonable precautions
have been taken to ensure that no viruses are present. Liverpool City
Council cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising from
the use of this email or attachments.

Dear Liverpool City Council,
I put this FOI in on the 17th August.....When am I going to get a response????

Yours sincerely,

Josie Mullen

Information Requests, Liverpool City Council

2 Attachments

Dear Josie Mullen

 

Please see attached our response to your recent information request.

 

We thank you for your patience and understanding whilst Liverpool City
Council, in common with other public authorities is currently dealing
with, responding to, and affected by the current public health emergency
arising from Coronavirus which, in accordance with emergency legislation,
has meant that our staff are being diverted to maintain essential services
for the residents of Liverpool during this current public health
emergency.

 

Regards

 

Information Team

 

Information Requests

Liverpool City Council

[1][email address]

[2]LGT auto sig LIVERBIRD

 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Dear Liverpool City Council,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Liverpool City Council's handling of my FOI request 'Mayoral Recommendation - Tarmacademy Training Centre - Part 1'.

[ GIVE DETAILS ABOUT YOUR COMPLAINT HERE ]
First of all you have put IR [Internal Review] next to the reference number [FOI 4877085/IR]WRONG. You supplied a response to my original FOI. It is only now I am requesting an Internal Review
In request 2 I asked for - 'a copy of the 'robust and sustainable business case' which was
supposed to confirm 'best consideration and revenue returns' which would 'more than
mitigate the cost of borrowing [£3'5 million' - which was actually £4.2 million]’

LCC refused to supply a copy of this 'robust and sustainable business case'. I consider that the reasons given are completely irrelevant for the following reasons:
[1] The Tarmacademy Training Centre /CEMEX item - 11th December 2015 / Cabinet committee has absolutely nothing to do with a tendering process........it was a 'so-called' collaboration between Tarmacademy /CEMEX and LCC. All the information relating to this item is freely available:
[a] Via Delegated Powers LCC was going to use £3.5 million of borrowed money [actually £4.2 million] to buy land to rent to CEMEX for the asphalt plant and to rent to Tarmacademy [later called the Liverpool Highways Academy] for the training academy
[b] According to LCC documents CEMEX would be paying £50,000 annual rent
[c] Tarmacademy would be paying £50,000 annual rent
[d] An additional £50,000 would come from 'advertising
[2] FOI responses have revealed the location of these pieces of land and also how much LCC paid for each piece of land
Therefore LCC's assertions that:
[a]' the ability of the City Council or indeed any public authority to secure any form of value for delivering services to the public would be fundamentally and irrevocably compromised';
- IN THIS CASE IRRELEVANT
[b]'such processes are already subject to scrutiny and held to account through the Scrutiny Process as discharged through public meetings of the City Council’s Select Committees'
- WRONG. The 28 Day Notice, allowing scrutiny was cancelled AND ABSOLUTELY NO SCRUTINY HAS TAKEN PLACE IN RELATION TO THE FACT THAT THE TARMACADEMY NEVER MATERIALISED AND YET LCC CONTINUED TO BUY £4.2 MILLION OF LAND AND RENT IT TO CEMEX FOR £50,000 PER ANNUM AND KING CONSTRUCTION FOR NOTHING
[C] 'Were information of this nature to be routinely disclosed the ability of the City Council
to achieve the best possible commercial and financial outcomes for the use of public
funds as well as supporting regeneration and wider activities under its general powers
of competence, and to be able to continue and conclude such negotiations, would be
significantly prejudiced.'
WRONG - The facts are evident - LCC did not achieve in any way 'the best possible commercial and financial outcomes for the use of public funds'. The cost of repaying £4.2 millions greatly exceeds the income that this 'non-collaboration' between Tarmacademy/CEMEX is bringing in .
It is of great concern that Kings Construction deny all knowledge of the Tarmacademy collaboration. Tarmacademy [Mark Neil Doyle] denies all knowledge of the Tarmacademy collaboration - also CEMEX.
LCC deny that there were specific plans for the Tarmacademy and the City Mayor is 'SILENT'

There are 20 official statements and 6 media statements made by LCC/ the City Mayor confirming this Tarmacademy collaboration.
IT IS ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT LCC ARE MAKING A SIGNIFICANT LOSS ON ITS £4.2 MILLION INVESTMENT. IT IS ALSO ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT A WALL OF SILENCE HAS BEEN 'CONSTRUCTED' AROUND THE TARMACADEMY NON-EXISTENT 'COLLABORATION.

THEREFORE, AS IT IS TAXPAYERS MONEY ,IT IS WITHOUT DOUBT, ESSENTIAL THAT THIS SO-CALLED' 'ROBUST AND SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS CASE' IS SUPPLIED VIA THIS FOI - AS ALL EVIDENCE INDICATES THAT IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY EXIST -AND IF IT DID ACTUALLY EXIST - IT CERTAINLY HASN'T BEEN ADHERED TO.

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

Yours faithfully,

Josie Mullen

Dear Information Requests,
I note that many FOIs [sometimes quite complex] have been responded to within days or weeks, and yet this FOI Internal Review request has not been answered after 6 weeks. Please investigate why LCC seem to pick and choose who they respond to in a timely fashion. There seems to be no logic in LCC's procedures. Responses do not seem to be predicated on the dates the requests are sent, nor on the complexity of the request.
I am sending a copy of all my outstanding FOI's to the City Solicitor.
I would appreciate a response to this FOI as soon as possible.

Yours sincerely,

Josie Mullen

Dear Information Requests,
It is now 5 months since I put in this FOI........so much for Tony Reeves assertion that "the running of LCC has greatly improved"
A RESPONSE PLEASE !!!!!!!!!!

Yours sincerely,

Josie Mullen

Liverpool City Council

1 Attachment

 
Dear Josie Mullen
 
Freedom of Information Act 2000
 
Please find attached response to your request for an internal review into
this request.
 
Yours sincerely,
 
Information Team
Liverpool City Council
 
NOTE: Please do not edit the subject line when replying to this email.
 
LIVERPOOL CITY COUNCIL DISCLAIMER
This email contains proprietary confidential information some or all of
which may be legally privileged and/or subject to the provisions of
privacy legislation. It is intended solely for the addressee.
If you are not the intended recipient, an addressing or transmission error
has misdirected this e-mail; you must not use, disclose, copy, print or
disseminate the information contained within this e-mail. Please notify
the author immediately by replying to this email.
Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states these to be the views of
Liverpool City Council.
This email has been scanned for all viruses and all reasonable precautions
have been taken to ensure that no viruses are present. Liverpool City
Council cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising from
the use of this email or attachments.

Susan Anne Marie Stalsberg left an annotation ()

Josie

What a dispicable but expected response to yet another serious issue that has been exposed by yourself and other determined intelligent members of the public.

LCC remains rotten to the core. Cover up after cover up.

Stay determined.
BW
Susie

Dear Liverpool City Council,
Nothing has changed in Liverpool City Council. It is an absolute cover-up. 19 LCC statements where Tarmacademy is stated to be the main reason for buying £4.2 million of land. Then everyone denies all knowledge of it. No wonder the police are investigating.
LCC docs state that a business case was drawn up to support the acquisition of land/Tarmacademy. Absolute lies........the reason why LCC won't give me a copy of the business case is because IT DOESN'T EXIST. And the pseudo-legal jargon 'they' use to support their decision not to give me a copy of the so-called business case is laughable

Yours sincerely,

Josie Mullen