A SENIOR council officer who took the decision to unlawfully destroy planning records held by Warrington borough council should be asked to explain his actions and apologise, according to Liberal Democrat councillors.
Cllr Brian Axcell (pictured) is putting a motion to next week’s meeting of the borough council, seconded by Liberal Democrat 
leader Cllr Ian Marks, expressing disappointment that the officer involved had not explained his action nor apologised and asking that he be invited to appear before a future meeting of the audit and corporate government committee to do so.
The motion notes that in September, a report was accepted stating that the council had, in 2006, made a decision to destroy certain planning records prior to 1996.
In fact, no such decision was made by a formal meeting of the council, or with the consent or knowledge of any elected members.
The report should have said the report should have said the records were destroyed on the instructions of a senior officer and was not referred to any elected member, nor the chief executive, nor the council’s legal officers.
Cllr Axcell’s motion also notes that the officer ordered his staff to destroy despite being warned that it would be unlawful and against council policy. The staff involved expressed misgivings but did not use the council’s whistle-blowing policy nor inform senior officers of the council nor councillors.
The motion also says it is regretable that the officer who took the decision refused to attend the council inquiry into the destruction of the records.
Planning chief should explain his actions
1919 Comments
Share.
About Author
Gary Skentelbery
Experienced journalist for more than 40 years. Managing Director of magazine publishing group with three in-house titles and on-line daily newspaper for Warrington. Experienced writer, photographer, PR consultant and media expert having written for local, regional and national newspapers. Specialties: PR, media, social networking, photographer, networking, advertising, sales, media crisis management. Chair of Warrington Healthwatch Director Warrington Chamber of Commerce Patron Tim Parry Johnathan Ball Foundation for Peace. Trustee Warrington Disability Partnership. Former Chairman of Warrington Town FC.
19 Comments
The major puzzle is why there were no sackings.
A more worrying puzzle is why there has been no investigation into who else knew, other than apparently the the staff involved who expressed their misgivings on the selective shredding. That might give a clue to why they are keeping quiet about disciplinary actions. Is there anyone who really believes that only the staff directly involved knew what had gone on? We know the terms of the public inquiry were set so little more than what the Ombudsman uncovered would come to light. Makes you wonder why the inquiry was held.
I still believe the police should be involved. I know another Lib Dem councillor originally called for this but I’m amongst those who believe the official explanation that it was all a big mistake is not the truth.
From the little I know about it COVER UP is there for all to see or disprove. Odd is it not that this administration was prepared to spend £20k (is that the figure?) on an inquiry which only looked where they wanted it to look, and was deliberately blinkered from where it should have looked?
If it was a big mistake it was made by many people some of whom are paid big bucks for their responsible jobs but are just not big enough to admit their part in the shambles. Then they covered the whole thing up for years and acted as though everything in the borough was rosy and thought they had gotten away with it. By conniving in the cover up they have shown they are not fit for the responsible jobs in WBC. Plainly was not just a big mistake. If they cannot or will not come clean the Police should be called in.
I like a gamble, so should have put money on ‘grey_man’ commenting!
I don’t know what the real problem here actually is, and it does sound like the senior officer made a serious mistake. However, this issue is only being rehashed due to the Lib Dems (affilated with the Cons = Con Dems?) are just using the issue for political gain, not for justice!
I work in local government (not in Cheshire), and I can assure you that if there were any grounds to take this issue further, higher authourities would have had to act on it.
Move on people!
I understand that as well as that, the report was also referred back to the council and edited before being published. I’ve only heard that from people commenting on these stories however so somebody should confirm or deny that.
All this could have been avoided if the council had simply dealt with it head on in the first place instead of trying to ignore it and then manage it away. There is clearly a lot more to this saga than is in the public domain but even what we know should have been enough to prompt disciplinary action against a number of individuals and an investigation by the police.
The fact that this could be extremely damaging to labour (and .yes the records covered events when thsy were in power) is largely irrelevant to the need to properly get to the bottom of it, and to properly deal with the culprits – with criminal charges if appropriate. The individual who destroyed the records may well have also justified his/her actions as being that it was time to, as you say, “move on people”. Not everyone has your confidence that if there were grounds it would have been taken further before now – there have been plenty of cases in which that has not occurred . Hillsborough and the revelations concerning Jimmy Saville and others being just two examples. For very good reasons the public does not trust those in the public sector , whether at a national level or many of your colleagues in local government..
And I could have put money on ‘somebody’ asking us all to move on. Fortunately we appear to have some councillors who are prepared to ask ‘why?’ My other favourite question is this: which is more likely? That an experienced and senior planning officer, who knew the law and had been reminded of it on two occasions should ‘by mistake’ and shortly before he left the council’s employment get his team to spend weekends unlawfully destroying the Borough’s entire planning record without leaving so much as a note, memo, minute or email directly referring to it all; or that there may have been another motive?
As for your other assertions, I don’t think any of our local parties come out of this very well (it happened on the Lib Dem’s watch did it not?) so I hardly think it’s political. On the other point, there are lots of examples of councils trying to manage away bad news and not ask too many questions. Some far more serious than this. Or don’t you read the news?
What do you mean “referred back to the council and edited before being published.” More likely it was referred back to officers, edited and then put to the members of the council before being published. There is a difference and it fits with the continuing refusal for a full and transparent investigation. Some one or some people are keen to keep something under wraps.
Brian Axcell said; “……The report should have said the records were destroyed on the instructions of a senior officer and was not referred to any elected member, nor the chief executive, nor the council’s legal officers”. If that is the case ‘whose watch it was on’ is irrelevant. However, when the deed came to light wasn’t it on the Lib/ Con watch? So why did Cllr Axcell, a member of the Executive Board at the time not do something then? Officers involved should have been immediately suspended, and an investigation ordered with also the police called in. This didn’t happen, it was left for the next administration to deal with – it’s true they haven’t dealt with it effectively enough to satisfy the public but the failure of the Lib/Cons to act whilst they were in power is a clear enough indicator that they wouldn’t have done any different! All this political posturing is pathetic. We have almost 60 borough councillors, what political party they belong to is irrelevant , this is so serious a matter they should ALL be getting involved and getting it sorted! Also, all this shilly shallying re ‘the officers involved’ is disgraceful! Name them Brian! Because not doing so is totally unfair to officers who were not involved. Name them clearly and outline the roles they took in the dirty deed because until this is done the finger of suspicion can point to all those working in the planning dept – which is as I said unfair to those who were not involved.
Its wider than the planning dept, WBC legal services solicitors were aware in 2006 when the unlawful act was carried out, they did nothing about it, even though they knew it was unlawful. Those solicitors are still employed by the Council.
If what you say is fact this matter is more serious than we have been given to believe. Legal officers have moral and ethical principles to uphold in addition to lawful ones.
Legal knew about the destruction, but claimed it was nothing to do with them, this is clearly unacceptable. All of this is in the enquiry report. Also legal officers organised the enquiry and were given a draft report, which they edited and watered down. The report was supposed to be independent. There should not have been a draft sent to those legal officers who were involved in the cover up. The evidence should have been collated and the report published. 20 grand the enquiry cost, just remember the destruction of records, when uncovered by the LGO, made national news. The LGO stated it was a “It was an extraordinary and inexcusable act of maladministration for the Council to destroy records that it had a statutory duty to hold and make available for public inspection.”
http://lgo.org.uk/news/2011/apr/inexcusable-destruction-statutory-planning-records
The Councils independent enquiry concluded it was a muddle headed mistake!
The report was a cover up orchestrated by WBC Legal Services.
Perhaps their professional bodies need to get involved in any proper investigation
You are right Sha innocent people are unfortunately being lumped together with those who really should be brought of the woodwork to face up to the consequences of their actions. The problem is (to paraphrase Einstein) Warrington and its planning/legal departments will always be suspect not because of the wrong some people in them do but because of all those who look on and do nothing. Until that situation is faced upto the wrong doers wil continue to do wrong as they have always done.
Billy if what you say is true that , “Legal knew about the destruction, but claimed it was nothing to do with them”. – Then Brian Axcell’s statement ; “The report should have said the records were destroyed on the instructions of a senior officer and was not referred to any elected member, nor the chief executive, nor the council’s legal officers.” is rather unreliable isn’t it?
Sha, what Billy said is spot on. I think Cllr Axcell’s statement was most likely worded to get the Motion up and running and actually discussed rather than sidelined. We will soon know if he succeeded. Surely no one believes only the officers involved in the hands on labour intensive shredfest knew about it? Evidence given at the independent inquiry shows that others knew and kept quiet at the time, and there were others who knew later but kept quiet for about four years. The way everything since the Ombudsman’s report has been staged managed points to a cover up to limit fallout and preserve the expensive salaries and such like.
This is why those 2 former officers should come forward, and answer questions. They can explain what happened and importantly who knew. One of them wrote to the head of legal and stated ‘you know why I did it’. All of this is in the public domain and is part of the evidence used by the barrister who compiled the report.