News RSS Feed Send your news, pictures & videos


News coverage for York, Ryedale, East Yorkshire, Harrogate and Selby.

Popular topics: Community Stadium | Snow | Germany Beck | ftr | Queen's visit | Council tax


£100k of taxpayers’ money used to fund legal battle to save Derwenthorpe project


MORE than £100,000 of taxpayers’ money was spent on the European legal battle to save one of York’s largest and most controversial developments.

The full cost of City of York Council’s row with the European Commission over the 540-home Derwenthorpe model village scheme has been revealed following an investigation by The Press.

Documents obtained under the Audit Commission Act show the authority paid £60,787.94 to Leeds-based law firm Shulmans during the 2009/10 financial year for advice on the argument, on top of the £44,575 it forked out the year before.

The Commission became involved after the council sold the land to the Joseph Rowntree Housing Trust without going out to open tender, but said earlier this year that while the deal did not comply with European Union procurement rules, the case should not be referred to the European courts.

Seven invoices sent to the council by Shulmans between April last year and and February this year show the firm asked for payment for all meetings, train travel, taxi fares, mileage, parking, telephone calls and letters relating to the case. The heftiest invoice, sent out in July 2009, was for £24,061.94.

The council has said the Commission’s decision paves the way for Derwenthorpe to be built. The Trust will now invite tenders from companies across the European Union to bid for the construction of homes in four phases, but those opposing the scheme have vowed not to call off their attempts to block it.

“The possible implications of the European Commission’s rules were flagged up as far back as 2003 and were dismissed by the council,” said Mark Warters, who chairs Osbaldwick Parish Council and has been a leading campaigner against the model village proposals.

“It is regrettable that they have had to spend this money when they should have been fully aware of these rules back then. Perhaps they would not have needed to spend it if they had taken this issue more seriously.

“I also feel that senior council staff should have had the expertise to deal with this matter rather than the authority needing outside legal advice.”

Council leader Andrew Waller said: “The cost to the council of this legal advice is money which could otherwise have been used for public services in the city.

“As the Derwenthorpe case was setting a legal precedent, we could not do all the work in-house and so had to seek advice from a specialist legal team. Delays in responses by the UK Government and the European Commission all added to the costs, but we did all we could to speed things up to reach the final lifting of the case against York as quickly as possible.

“The council took legal advice in 2002 on handling the Derwenthorpe project and acted within the advice based on the understanding of EU procurement law at that time. Nobody could have predicted that, five years later, a court case in rural France would completely change the working of this part of procurement law and leave Derwenthorpe trapped in a legal case.

“The council’s difficult position was made worse by the way in which the European Commission will only talk to Government civil servants, and so York was often stuck in the middle without direct access to the people assessing the case.

“We made sure all the steps required of York were done quickly and reported to the European Commission and I also had to lobby Government ministers to speed up responses from civil servants. If that had not been done, we would have been landed with an even higher legal bill.”

Comments(23)

Yosser Hughes says...
12:51pm Mon 23 Aug 10

Andrew Waller passing the buck again. Why cant he just say sorry and admit another 100 grand of taxpayers money has been abused by the Lib Dems?

spiritofyork says...
1:21pm Mon 23 Aug 10

Would the Press have investigated the council if it was Tory-run? I suspect not. Although, actually, these two seem to be one-and-the-same now, so I'm not sure what my point is.

Boatie says...
1:47pm Mon 23 Aug 10

Let me make it clear I am not, or ever will be a Lib Dem Supporter, however this is not the fault Andrew Waller. This development has cost the Council an absolute fortune, mainly because the Parish Council chairman has used every perceived loophole to prevent the development of Derwenthorpe, land that was classified for housing 20 yrs ago. The type of housing intended for this site is desperately needed, the costs incurred by the City Council should be met by thr Parish Council not Council Tax payers as a whole.

horatio churchill says...
1:50pm Mon 23 Aug 10

Why has Antonius' comment been removed? Can't the Press stand the truth being told or is Mr W editing these comments today?

hifive says...
1:51pm Mon 23 Aug 10

Boatie wrote:
Let me make it clear I am not, or ever will be a Lib Dem Supporter, however this is not the fault Andrew Waller. This development has cost the Council an absolute fortune, mainly because the Parish Council chairman has used every perceived loophole to prevent the development of Derwenthorpe, land that was classified for housing 20 yrs ago. The type of housing intended for this site is desperately needed, the costs incurred by the City Council should be met by thr Parish Council not Council Tax payers as a whole.
Completely agree. I'm no supporter of Waller - quite the contrary in fact but in this case it's not his fault. Believe me, I'd be the first to comment if it was!

horatio churchill says...
2:06pm Mon 23 Aug 10

hifive wrote:
Boatie wrote: Let me make it clear I am not, or ever will be a Lib Dem Supporter, however this is not the fault Andrew Waller. This development has cost the Council an absolute fortune, mainly because the Parish Council chairman has used every perceived loophole to prevent the development of Derwenthorpe, land that was classified for housing 20 yrs ago. The type of housing intended for this site is desperately needed, the costs incurred by the City Council should be met by thr Parish Council not Council Tax payers as a whole.
Completely agree. I'm no supporter of Waller - quite the contrary in fact but in this case it's not his fault. Believe me, I'd be the first to comment if it was!
Sorry guys this is down to Waller and his master Galloway. Pure and simple. They want all the glory but none of the flack.

voiceoreason says...
2:20pm Mon 23 Aug 10

The dispute was between the EU and the UK government. York was just one of many authorities across the country that followed legal advice provided by the UK government. The EU questioned whether this advice was in fact correct. Check the facts, the Derwentthorpe matter was just one of many examples cited by the EU in their dispute with the UK government. It is a disgrace that York tax payers have to pay for what is merely a squabble between the then government and those in Brussels

horatio churchill says...
2:27pm Mon 23 Aug 10

voiceoreason wrote:
The dispute was between the EU and the UK government. York was just one of many authorities across the country that followed legal advice provided by the UK government. The EU questioned whether this advice was in fact correct. Check the facts, the Derwentthorpe matter was just one of many examples cited by the EU in their dispute with the UK government. It is a disgrace that York tax payers have to pay for what is merely a squabble between the then government and those in Brussels
keep quoting the party line Nigel.

spiritofyork says...
2:43pm Mon 23 Aug 10

^^ He's just angry because his aeroplane broke.

King Edward says...
2:57pm Mon 23 Aug 10

Your best bet then is to avoid paying as much tax as possible so these politicians and their cronies have to find another way of funding their stupid schemes and lifestyles. Or become a councillor or MP yourself!

Theendoftheworld says...
2:59pm Mon 23 Aug 10

I hate the LibDems (even more now they are the Cons yesmen) but this time it's not their fault. Blame the NIMBYS of Osbaldwick.

Minsterview says...
3:59pm Mon 23 Aug 10

Yes its down to Mr Waters.
(Oh and Labour were in control of the Council in 2002 when the deal was struck, although they seem to have acted honorably at that time).
The EU have gained no fans in York as a result of their actions

meme says...
4:33pm Mon 23 Aug 10

This was not a political parties fault. The rules changed as described in the press article which threw CoYC into the middle of a legal wrangle that affected lots of different people/councils etc in many ways
However the NIMBYS of Osbaldwick should be ashamed of themeselves for costing everyone lots of time and money on a hopeless and misguided cause.As they have lost its a shame the local parish cannot be made to bear the cost of their ill fated campaign rather than the ratepayers of York. Perhaps if that were the case they would have thought twice about their ridiculous campaign and its almighty costs to all of us

hifive says...
4:37pm Mon 23 Aug 10

horatio churchill wrote:
hifive wrote:
Boatie wrote: Let me make it clear I am not, or ever will be a Lib Dem Supporter, however this is not the fault Andrew Waller. This development has cost the Council an absolute fortune, mainly because the Parish Council chairman has used every perceived loophole to prevent the development of Derwenthorpe, land that was classified for housing 20 yrs ago. The type of housing intended for this site is desperately needed, the costs incurred by the City Council should be met by thr Parish Council not Council Tax payers as a whole.
Completely agree. I'm no supporter of Waller - quite the contrary in fact but in this case it's not his fault. Believe me, I'd be the first to comment if it was!
Sorry guys this is down to Waller and his master Galloway. Pure and simple. They want all the glory but none of the flack.
What glory??? Nothing's happened thanks to the NIMBYs dragging their feet and the rule change! Nah, this is one of those rare occasions that Waller et al are not to blame....
Mr Warters should just move elsewhere if he's not happy - it'd save the rest of us a lot of time and taxes.

gerry merryweather says...
4:45pm Mon 23 Aug 10

I'd be interested to know exactly whow many people in Osbaldwick and Meadlands are actually for or against this development.

Just to ensure that the PC are propertly representing the views of the majority.

Any figures anyone?

2oldies says...
4:46pm Mon 23 Aug 10

Boatie wrote:
Let me make it clear I am not, or ever will be a Lib Dem Supporter, however this is not the fault Andrew Waller. This development has cost the Council an absolute fortune, mainly because the Parish Council chairman has used every perceived loophole to prevent the development of Derwenthorpe, land that was classified for housing 20 yrs ago. The type of housing intended for this site is desperately needed, the costs incurred by the City Council should be met by thr Parish Council not Council Tax payers as a whole.
In my view the Parish Council has been used for years by a few NIMBY's to prevent this development. And Osbaldwick parishioners were also billed an extra £10,000 on their precept the year of the Inquiry. Most have little interest in Derwenthorpe. Please do not suggest we should pay more.

pedalling paul says...
5:20pm Mon 23 Aug 10

The alternative is to sterilise the population, or reduce it drastically with a nuclear war. Then we won't have any demand for this housing.
At least, if it's built, it will be within easy pedalling distance of York, via the Foss Island offroad route. So an inducement for some sustainable travel.

The Ludovician says...
6:51pm Mon 23 Aug 10

I'd be interested in hearing Steve Bradley's opinion on this apparent waste of taxpayer funds. He's always been proud of how opinionated he is, and it was of course him that referred the Derwenthorpe matter to the EU in the first place.

If you're upset about the council having to spend this money defending the 20 year old decision to classify this land as residential, then take it up with Steve 'Rust' Bradley. Not Waller, Galloway or anyone else.

Boatie says...
8:09pm Mon 23 Aug 10

I have yet to find any justification for the contuence of Parish Councxils in the 21st centuary, a throw back to another age long gone. as I said before for once the City Council and it's Lib Dems are NOT TO BLAME

Cost Accountant says...
11:15pm Mon 23 Aug 10

Mr W and friends should pay the cost involved in this silly attempt by them using all sort of tactics to put a stop to this development which was and still is required to help meet the needs for lower cost housing in York.
Shame on them, they must live in a world different from most of the rest of us as I am sure that there are very few people in Osbadlbwick who really oppose these houses. If I lived in the village I would be seeking answers and redress over the monies spent by the parish council out of the precept charged to the villagers. Go to the meetings to complain and vote those councillors responsible out of office at the next election.

Cost Accountant says...
11:15pm Mon 23 Aug 10

Mr W and friends should pay the cost involved in this silly attempt by them using all sort of tactics to put a stop to this development which was and still is required to help meet the needs for lower cost housing in York.
Shame on them, they must live in a world different from most of the rest of us as I am sure that there are very few people in Osbadlbwick who really oppose these houses. If I lived in the village I would be seeking answers and redress over the monies spent by the parish council out of the precept charged to the villagers. Go to the meetings to complain and vote those councillors responsible out of office at the next election.

Cold_as_Christmas says...
11:51pm Mon 23 Aug 10

The scheme should not have been proposed in the first place.
York is already gridlocked and surely to build yet more housing would further encourage even greater overpopulation of a crowded city.
Another 100K wasted, the people in the area most affected said NO & that should have been an end to the matter. Just who do the Council represent?

Yosser Hughes says...
7:09am Tue 24 Aug 10

pedalling paul wrote:
The alternative is to sterilise the population, or reduce it drastically with a nuclear war. Then we won't have any demand for this housing. At least, if it's built, it will be within easy pedalling distance of York, via the Foss Island offroad route. So an inducement for some sustainable travel.
I wish your father had been sterilised then you wouldnt be posting irrelevent comments like this


Most popular


Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Local Businesses