Non-existent Academy/Mayor/Unauthorised Authority .

John Hanlon 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,

1. In the reports attached to the Cabinet meeting of 11th December 2015 it states the King Construction approach the Council about receiving help to build a training academy.

A) Which person from King Construction approached the Council?
B) Which Officer(s) or Elected member(s) was/were approached?

2. In FOI 3940021 the Council’s response to question 8 stated that “Mayor Anderson does not acquire land”.

Therefore if the Mayor is not responsible for land acquisitions then why he is making Mayoral recommendations to do so on behalf of King Construction?

3. The Cabinet in December 2015 gave specific delegated authority for Officers to acquire land for up to £3.5 million. Explain why they spent over £4.2 million when they didn’t have the authority to do so?

4. Can the Mayor explain why he did not question where the ‘Tarmacademy’ was after he personally opened the CEMEX / ‘Tarmacadeny’ site with Steven Gerrard on the 11th January 2018?

5. On the 1st February 2018 the then Deputy Mayor of Liverpool Ann O’Byrne addressed the Regeneration, Housing & Sustainability Select Committee. With the following comment;

“…work was ongoing with King Construction to support the establishment of training facility in North Liverpool to train up new crews to undertake resurfacing work to a high quality and building the skills base to, in turn, secure business from a wider geographic area. “

Can Councillor Ann O’Byrne explain why after spending over £4.2million in 2016 on sites for the ‘Tarmacademy’ would the Council still looking for adequate sites some 2 years later?

6. Why is the tenancy agreement with King Construction for the Derby Road Site not dated?

7. What was the point of purchasing the Margarine Works for £1million as an ‘Invest to Earn’ when it has sat unoccupied for 4 years?

8. Why were the sites at Derby Road and Forth Street given to King rent free and who authorised this?

10. Why are King not paying business rates on 10-12 Forth Street when it previously generated in excess of £50,000 per year?

11. How many Officers or Elected members have family who worked for Mark Doyle the then owner of King during the period 2015 – 2019?

Yours faithfully,

John Hanlon

Liverpool City Council

 
Dear John Hanlon
 
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 16 July
2020 concerning Dear Liverpool City Council,

1. In the reports attached to the Cabinet meeting of 11th December 2015 it
states the King Construction approach the Council about receiving help to
build a training academy.

A) Which person from King Construction approached the Council?
B) Which Officer(s) or Elected member(s) was/were approached?

2. In FOI 3940021 the Council's response to question 8 stated that 'Mayor
Anderson does not acquire land'.

Therefore if the Mayor is not responsible for land acquisitions then why
he is making Mayoral recommendations to do so on behalf of King
Construction?

3. The Cabinet in December 2015 gave specific delegated authority for
Officers to acquire land for up to £3.5 million. Explain why they spent
over £4.2 million when they didn't have the authority to do so?

4. Can the Mayor explain why he did not question where the 'Tarmacademy'
was after he personally opened the CEMEX / 'Tarmacadeny' site with Steven
Gerrard on the 11th January 2018?

5. On the 1st February 2018 the then Deputy Mayor of Liverpool Ann O'Byrne
addressed the Regeneration, Housing & Sustainability Select Committee.
With the following comment;

'…work was ongoing with King Construction to support the establishment of
training facility in North Liverpool to train up new crews to undertake
resurfacing work to a high quality and building the skills base to, in
turn, secure business from a wider geographic area. '

Can Councillor Ann O'Byrne explain why after spending over £4.2million in
2016 on sites for the 'Tarmacademy' would the Council still looking for
adequate sites some 2 years later?

6. Why is the tenancy agreement with King Construction for the Derby Road
Site not dated?

7. What was the point of purchasing the Margarine Works for £1million as
an 'Invest to Earn' when it has sat unoccupied for 4 years?

8. Why were the sites at Derby Road and Forth Street given to King rent
free and who authorised this?

10. Why are King not paying business rates on 10-12 Forth Street when it
previously generated in excess of £50,000 per year?

11. How many Officers or Elected members have family who worked for Mark
Doyle the then owner of King during the period 2015 ' 2019?

Yours faithfully,

John Hanlon...
 
We are dealing with your request under the Freedom of Information Act
2000 and we aim to send a response by 13 August 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,

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 'Non-existent Academy/Mayor/Unauthorised Authority as it has not been answered in the statutory time limit.

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

Yours faithfully,

John Hanlon

Dear Liverpool City Council,

No response has been forthcoming for the original request and the request for an Internal review has not been answered within the 40 days guidance recommended by the ICO, therefore I will now pass this request over to them.

Yours sincerely,

John Hanlon

Information Requests, Liverpool City Council

2 Attachments

Dear Mr Hanlon

 

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 Information Requests,

I will be referring the matter to the ICO today due to the response given.

John Hanlon

Josie Mullen left an annotation ()

According to the December 2015 Cabinet doc, the main reason for spending £3.5 million [actually£4.2 million] on land for CEMEX and King Construction [actually Knowsley Contractors] was to support the establishment of the Tarmacademy " In order to train up to a 1000 young people from North Liverpool. Mayor Anderson's quotes on this are in seven media articles at the time.
Now we have the "NOT ME GUV" SYNDROME
CEMEX - know nothing about Tarmacademy
LCC know nothing about Tarmacademy
Tarmacademy - [Mark Doyle] - no comment about Tarmacademy
THIS FOI RESPONSE IS AN ABSOLUTE COVER-UP. THERE WAS NEVER GOING TO BE A TARMACADEMY.....JUST A FAVOUR TO MATES.
IT ABSOLUTELY APPALLING THAT THE MAYOR CONSTANTLY MAKES UP 'STORIES ABOUT HELPING THE YOUNG UNEMPLOYED OF LIVERPOOL
[1] Mayoral Educational Allowance - one year then nothing
[2] Eliminating NEETS in 12 months - never happened
[3] Enterprise Village - never happened...a complete con job
[4] Liverpool Futures - never happened
[5] Tarmacademy - never happened
.......shall I go on !!!!!!!!!

Susan Anne Marie Stalsberg left an annotation ()

HicJohn,

This is indicative of what happens when you request genuine explanations regarding serious issues within LCC. You clearly have disturbing evidence and LCC have done their usual, simply refuse to answer or total deflection.

This particular FOI has been handled apallingly. Sadly my feeling is you will never get to the bottom of this or any serious issues in Liverpool.

Our dossier is nearing completion and heading straight to London. Been so busy with legal action. Slowly slowly catch the monkey.

Time to get some serious and reputable media on board.

Stay safe......