BIG business does what it likes. But local government is always accountable to the people who vote a

Here he tries to make sense of some recent decisions made on your behalf

K kilrie

?

K library

K

ILRIE Children's Home has been the cause of controversy until the end.

The child abuse scandal which contributed to its closure has been superceded by a new row over the bricks and mortar.

County Hall bosses tendered the Northwich Road mansion to potential developers last year and found the best deal with housebuilder Seddons.

At least, we think it was the best deal. For Cheshire County Council have refused to disclose how much they raised from the sale.

Rumours suggest that one of Knutsford's most historic properties went for £1 million, but the county council won't confirm or deny the figure.

Nor will they give reasons why they have drawn a veil over what they have earned from your assets.

Council spokesmen - citing 'commercial confidentiality' - are reluctant to discuss the matter further and appear surprised about the level of interest.

But Jan Vass from the Department of the Environment, the local government paymaster and watchdog, is less surprised and more prepared to discuss the background.

He said the 1985 Local Government Access to Information Act did give Cheshire the right to withhold the details of their financial dealings with businesses.

It could even be justified if, for example, there were five Kilries up for sale. Disclosing the price tag for one could affect the sale of the others - and leave council taxpayers out of pocket.

"But the council should aim to be as open as possible in all matters," he said. "Especially financial details."

No one from Cheshire is prepared to explain to the public in Knutsford exactly how this revelation would affect either the council or the buyer.

Knutsford Guardian reader Reg Lawrence, who was annoyed enough about the ban to write to Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott and MP Martin Bell, believes only the long-promised Freedom of Information Act could clear the secrecy.

"These are things that are going on in the background and we're being denied access," he said.

But compared to the fate of Knutsford's millennium library, the story of Kilrie is crystal clear.

The rows over the county council's attempt to build a £1 million library, community centre and commercial development with a private developer - and the borough council's views on what it should look like - have been well-documented in the Knutsford Guardian.

The latest twist is, bizarrely, a referendum, launched by the town's Labour group and inspired by an anarchic TV comedian's similar ruse.

Ever since the original library plans were exhibited at the Civic Centre last summer, borough councillors and planners have conspired behind the scenes to change the plans without making much effort to inform the public.

At least that's what the Labour group claims. They argue that a parish poll, an almost unique event according to the Electoral Reform Society, is the way to throw it back to the Knutsford public who have been so arrogantly misled.

"If you had something on display and people had the chance to look at it and approve it and the planning application is successfully approved, you would get what you think you were getting," said Labour group chairman Laurie Burton.

Instead, he believes Knutsford is getting a scheme which is nowhere near as attractive as the original for the sake of keeping Toft Road a restaurant-free zone.

And few people, if anyone, have been into the Information Centre to look at a set of elevations and line drawings which are indecipherable to the inexpert eye.

Even if the referendum bid fails, those who are unhappy about what has happened to the library, which appeared on the Knutsford Guardian's front page, will have made their point and alerted the public to what has gone on under their noses.

It's true that the library approved at Macclesfield Town Hall last week is different - and few people, even planning officers, will disagree that it's not as good as the original.

But a council spokesman said this week the planning department had not acted in any way they shouldn't have.

Neighbours were informed of the changes and adverts were put in the paper.

Cty Clr Bert Grange, who attended the meetings, said behind-closed-door meetings between developer, borough councillors and planners were the norm for all planning applications.

The idea is that it would be for the county council and the developer to come up with a new public exhibition, not the borough.

But will the public - if it gets to vote on the question - agree? Or will they decide, as many in the town do, that it's decision-making by the back door?

After the events in Labour-controlled County Hall and Tory-controlled Macclesfield, it's the turn of the largely apolitical town council to get confused over who they are accountable to.

They recently persuaded landowner Randle Brooks' agent Graham Pike to the negotiating table to see if the man who owns most of Knutsford - we think - is prepared to tidy some of it up. Hopes were dashed, however, by his rather non-commital response. What they did get was a map, giving details of all the land which Mr Brooks owns in Knutsford.

But it has put councillors in a somewhat compromising position. Mr Pike didn't want the town council to release details to the public or press and all meetings on the matter were held privately.

After weeks of secret meetings in a public chamber councillors eventually decided the map should go no further.

So the people who sit in the chamber, albeit under almost non-existent powers, can have a good look at something which you - the people who voted them there - can't.

For elected members who believe the council's responsibility should be to the town and not to a private landowner, such as Bill Davies and Bert Grange, the decision weakens them in the eyes of the public.

Residents who want to find out what town councillors already know can ask them to describe what they've seen on the map.

Absurd? Certainly. Democratic? That's up to you.

Converted for the new archive on 13 March 2001. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.