Chief Executive under fire over statement about controversial billboard
Date published: 08 May 2018
Protesters with the billboard
The Chief Executive of Rochdale Borough Council has come under fire over a statement made in response to a controversial billboard erected on Molesworth Street.
The board, which was taken down a day after its installation, referred to contentious plans for a new link road at junction 19 of the M62 and up to 1,000 new homes. It also named nine Labour councillors who voted in favour of the application at a meeting in March, before it was given the green light by the Secretary of State, who chose not to call in the application.
Darren Court, who organised the protest, said: “The media company who put up the sign, led me to believe that they received a demand from Rochdale Council for the sign to be blanked out. When news of this leaked out, it understandably caused some concern and anger amongst Rochdale residents.”
Speaking after the board was removed, Steve Rumbelow, chief executive of Rochdale Borough Council, told Rochdale Online: “This billboard is misleading and inaccurate. When deciding on this application, our planning committee followed proper guidance. The council referred this to the Secretary of State, who carefully considered the case and decided not to call the application in. This is a clear indication that the government thinks that the council properly considered the application before reaching its decision.”
It is this statement that ‘shocked’ Mr Court.
He commented: “Frankly, I was shocked by this statement, because from my understanding I was given to believe that the Secretary of State’s decision had nothing to do with council process or any kind of endorsement of it. In addition, the question as to whether the council followed proper process seems to be a matter of opinion and not fact. No external or independent body has commented.”
To clarify, Mr Court wrote to the Planning Casework Unit, which represents the Secretary of State.
He said: “They confirmed my understanding, saying, ‘the Government is concerned that all local authorities should administer the planning system with the utmost propriety. However, local authorities are independent of central government and Ministers have no statutory duty or powers to supervise the general propriety of individual authorities.
‘In considering planning applications it is the responsibility of the committee to ensure that it is in possession of all the relevant facts and it would be for the committee to decide what (if any) further clarification was necessary.’”
He added: “I wonder if the Chief Executive knew this before making his statement or whether he was misinformed in making his statement?"
“I find it hard to reconcile how the Chief Executive could make should a bold statement that seems so wrong. This is especially puzzling when we consider this was his response to why the Council had taken action to remove a billboard sign. Does the Chief Executive make public statements without knowing the facts?
“Rochdale Council took steps to have the sign removed and I can’t help reflecting on how their actions demonstrate why some people believe it should be called the ‘Council of Shame’, as stated on the sign. It doesn’t help that the council has not being clear on why it wanted the sign removed which might lead some to believe it has something to hide.
“First, we had the Chief Executive, saying the council acted to remove the sign because it was factually incorrect claiming the government thinks it acted properly. Then the media company tells me it was because the landlord objected to the council; now a reporter informs me that Rochdale Council press office say it is related to planning permission.
“This last one might appear odd because the billboard has been in-situ for some time and there are other adverts the council has not taken action against. Strangely though the media company responsible for the sign were allegedly told by the council, that ‘under the advertising consent granted to the landlord that they had the right to object to certain adverts, and (this one) caused them to object’.
“If this is true, I can’t help wondering is Rochdale Council controlling [certain] media around the town?
“It also leaves us with a big question: why did Rochdale Council want this sign removed so badly?
“I believe it’s time Rochdale Council provided clear and truthful answers to council tax payers questions:
- Who objected to the billboard?
- Why the Chief Executive claimed the government thinks Rochdale properly considered the application?
- Who in the council contacted the media company?
- Did the Council threaten legal action, or other action, against the media company or the landlord?
- Who is the landlord of this billboard?
- Does Rochdale Council include the right to object (and remove) adverts on other billboards?”
A council spokesperson said: “We understand the advert was erected without the permission of the landowner, which is one of the conditions of advertising consent, so the landowner took action to get it removed.”
With regards to his previous statement, the Chief Executive did not wish to comment further.
Do you have a story for us?
Let us know by emailing news@rochdaleonline.co.uk
All contact will be treated in confidence.
Most Viewed News Stories
To contact the Rochdale Online news desk, email news@rochdaleonline.co.uk or visit our news submission page.
To get the latest news on your desktop or mobile, follow Rochdale Online on Twitter and Facebook.
