We got it wrong

On 10 February we published an article with the headline Lib Dem Council 'extravagance'. The crux of the article was £100,000 of council tax payers’ money had been spent on transferring staff and fitting out the new rooms and the leaders’ office.

We now accept the £100,000 figure was wrong, and apologise to the Lib Dems, Council Officers and our readers for publishing incorrect figures.

A very detailed breakdown now supplied by the Lib Dems shows that just over £11,000 was spent, including new computers (which the Lib Dems insist would have been purchased regardless of the move) – note, however, more than the £3,000 they insisted via the council communications office at the time of the move.

The figure of £100,000 was supplied by Labour Group Leader Councillor Colin Lambert, who insisted the figure was correct and had been verified by an ‘external audit’. However, over a week of requesting a detailed breakdown of the costs from Councillor Lambert has not been fruitful, though he has supplied a list of headings.

Two of Councillor Lambert’s headings do not appear in the Lib Dem breakdown; the equivalent ‘commercial’ rental of office space at Telegraph House and three days’ staff down time. There is disagreement between the Lib Dems and Councillor Lambert as to whether these should be regarded as costs of the move, however, though these would increase the £11,000 Lib Dem costs they would not do so enough to reach £100,000.

The day after publication (11 February) Rochdale Online received a legal threat from the Borough Solicitor. We resisted the legal threat because:

• The Borough Solicitor must, quite rightly, be politically neutral and, whilst we accept responsibility for publishing what turned out to be inaccurate figures, we published, in good faith, information received from a political party leader. We therefore respectfully suggest the Borough Solicitor should not be involved in what is clearly a party political disagreement.
• Local Authority’s are not, for very good reason, permitted to sue for libel (see link below) hence the letter was clearly a misguided attempt to intimidate. 
  
  www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/law-lords-rule-out-libel-action-by-elected-bodies-1473849.html