‘I DON'T HAVE TO JUSTIFY IT’: LIB DEMS SLAM COUNCIL LEADER OVER MILLIONS IN SCHOOL DEBT

Flintshire's Labour-led Council has been accused of an astonishing failure of financial leadership after its Leader declared that he did not have to justify plans which could leave local taxpayers paying millions of pounds towards a new ‘super-school’ school.

The extraordinary exchange took place at Thursday's Corporate Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee, just two days after the Labour-Independent coalition's Cabinet voted to press ahead with controversial plans to close four Catholic schools.

Challenged by Lib Dem Cllr David Coggins Cogan over why Flintshire taxpayers were being asked to fund the 15% contribution that the Diocese of Wrexham has paid towards school projects in Gwynedd and Wrexham, Council Leader Dave Hughes responded:

‘I don't have to justify it, do I?’ 

He went on to claim that negotiations with the Diocese were still ongoing and that no deal had been finalised.

But the Council's own published consultation documents explicitly state that Flintshire County Council would borrow the entire 15% contribution, originally estimated at more than £8.3 million.

The consultation report even states: ‘There is no financial commitment from the Diocese to deliver this proposal.’

Cllr Coggins Cogan said:

‘The Leader of Flintshire County Council stood before a scrutiny committee and told us he didn't have to justify taking on millions of pounds of debt. That is a breathtaking attitude towards public money.

‘Let me make something absolutely clear to the Leader. When you are spending taxpayers' money, you absolutely DO have to justify it. That is your job.

‘Our contingency reserve has fallen to just £750,000. Social services are forecasting an overspend exceeding £5 million. The Chief Executive has warned that some proposed cuts would have catastrophic consequences for services and has refused to rule out e ective bankruptcy.

‘Yet this Labour-led Cabinet is prepared to borrow millions of pounds to cover a contribution which the Diocese has paid elsewhere.

‘And now, after months of being told that Flintshire taxpayers would pay the entire 15%, the Leader suddenly announces that negotiations are still ongoing. 

‘Which is it? Have the financial arrangements presented to Cabinet and the public been settled, or haven't they? And if they haven't, why on earth has Cabinet voted to press ahead with the school closures before knowing who is paying the bill?

‘You couldn't make this up. Flintshire is staring into a financial abyss, and its political leadership apparently thinks it doesn't have to explain how it spends our money.’

The Leader's approach also drew a scathing response from Lib Dem Group Leader Cllr Andrew Parkhurst, who questioned whether the Cabinet needed training in negotiation.

Referring to the Leader's suggestion that the Diocese would determine its contribution, Cllr Parkhurst told the committee:

‘I would just like to know whether the learning and development budget is under or overspent, in view of the very clear need for the Cabinet to have negotiation training… The Leader said, and I quote ‘it’s down to the Bishop.’ 

He added that leaving the matter ‘down to the Bishop’ was no way to negotiate.

Speaking after the meeting, Cllr Parkhurst said:

‘This is supposed to be a negotiation, not a surrender. ‘The Diocese has contributed towards school projects in Gwynedd and Wrexham. Why should Flintshire taxpayers be treated as the soft touch?

‘The Labour Leader seems to think that whether the Diocese pays anything is entirely a matter for the Bishop. That is an extraordinary negotiating position for someone entrusted with protecting the public purse.

‘The Bishop is perfectly entitled to argue for the best deal for his Diocese. But the Council Leader's job is to argue for the best deal for Flintshire taxpayers. At the moment, only one side appears to understand that.

‘Perhaps the Leader should remember that he works for the people of Flintshire, not the Diocese of Wrexham.

‘Labour's priorities are completely upside down. They are contemplating catastrophic cuts to essential services while asking residents to shoulder decades of additional debt for a school they overwhelmingly oppose.

‘Flintshire deserves a Council that fights for its residents, not one that rolls over and asks the Bishop what he'd like them to pay.’