When the Rotherham Local Plan for building on greenbelt hit the headlines a year or so ago I wanted to find out more. I wanted to find out where these plots of land drawn on a map came from. Who drew them and what work was done to prove they are sustainable.
I found it was not easy to get this kind of information, Council officers were guarded when it came to the sit down meetings they have with developers. I logged a Freedom of Information request as I felt it was in the public’s interest to know how the process had been carried out.
I was shocked when my FOI was knocked back, I had asked for details of any meetings or correspondence and they were claiming none existed. I queried again and again and a subsequent reply said some details had “come to light” but release was not possible for reasons of commercial sensitivity and confidentiality.
I don’t think a Council embarking on a public consulation should be having secret meetings and communications. I think if a public body is doing something they don’t want us to find out about then they ought to consider whether or not they should be doing it. I KNOW they should not put the commercial wellbeing of developers ahead of the public good.
I have taken the matter to the director concerned, the Chief Exec and the Council leader, they now refuse to discuss it further. They have also refused to show the info to elected councillors which begs the question, who are these people answerable to?
When a Council serving a quarter of a million people feels it necessary to keep secrets from its own elected members I think we are in a dangerous place indeed.
- Comment
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
LoveDinnington.com 
Putting the commercial wellbeing of developers before the public good is exactly what RMBC do. This is how Wales lost the Conyers in the conservation area. Skulking in dark rooms with developers seem to be the norm for RMBC members and officers. Trying to get information from them that isn’t downright lies is impossible. You highlight the very point I made to the chairman of the planning committee – do officers run the council?
To say he defended the officers would be an understatement! We the public have no chance against them!
Citing “Commercial confidentiality” is a cop-out used by many organisations subject to FoI.
If you haven’t already done so, maybe you should read this:
Click to access awareness_guidance_2_-_information_provided_in_confidance.pdf
It doesn’t appear to me that the commercial parties in such preliminary discussions could have had any expectation of confidentiality, nor are contractual obligations likely to have been in place.
Possibly there are some developers who would be hurt to discover that they were not invited in for a chat, when others were. But you can’t stretch commercial confidentiality that far IMO. 🙂
You have to ask for an RMBC internal review before you can complain to the Information Commissioner, but that is what he is there for.
RMBC’s so called ‘public consultations’ are a joke. The bare minimum in ‘consulting’ and the results are pointless anyway as it’s already been decided what’s going to happen – usually before the official time begins. Definately take this to the Information Commissioner. RMBC have got away with this sort of thing for far too long. Good luck