Following a meeting to discuss the return of land at Craigavon Lakes to Council ownership it has now been revealed that the land was sold without an “agreed buy back clause”.
The motion – tabled by Councillor Robbie Alexander – to start the process of returning the land at the lakes was brought before full council on Monday evening (November 24).
Ahead of the meeting, Cllr Alexander said: “I am delighted to bring forward a motion asking Council to formally engage with SRC to enable us to assess the feasibility and understand the options available to ensure land at Craigavon Lakes returns to the rightful ownership of ABC Council.”
He said the community had been “outraged” when the land was sold, adding that the Council must now take steps to protect the site’s future.
“Craigavon Lakes is one of the jewels of this Borough and it is essential that we are proactive in shaping its future,” he continued.
“Alliance believes that Council should be firmly in control of how this land fits into the wider vision for the Lakes and ensure environmental protection for future generations.”
As the Cllr stated, the buy over of the lands has been contentious from the outset. Last year, Armagh I reported that legal costs around the failed SRC development exceeded £1.3m.
The legal challenge had been led by members of a long-running campaign group set up to protect Craigavon’s parks and lakes, who argued throughout that the planning process was fundamentally flawed.
The project was halted after a Judicial Review concluded that planning permission had been wrongly granted for development on land designated for recreational use and the college development was halted.
And now, it has been revealed by Save Craigavon City Park & Lakes that the land was sold without the “agreed buy back clause”.
By way of an update via their social media platforms, the group explained: “So tonight’s motion to start the process of returning the land at the lakes to Council ownership failed because of ‘governance issues’, ‘legal advice’ and ‘planning advice’.
“As highlighted in tonight’s meeting, Members previously agreed to sell the land to SRC subject to planning permission. If permissions were not granted, Council would buy back the land at the price paid, less £30,000 to cover costs.
“It was confirmed tonight that the land was sold without the agreed buy back clause!”
They added: “These maladministration and governance issues need to be urgently addressed. Those responsible must be held accountable for financial recklessness with ratepayers money.”
The group noted the absence of the Council’s figurehead at such a high-priority meeting, adding: “Roger Wilson’s absence was most notable tonight. As Chief Executive Officer, he should have been present when matters of Governance and threats of surcharge were being discussed.”
After much discussion in the chamber an amendment was put forth to the Cllr’s motion that further legal advice will be sought and a report produced.
Making the proposal for amendment, Cllr Alexander said: “On the one hand, I do welcome all the engagement on this issue. I still stand by the sentiment of it, although I have listened to what members have had to say.
“If go back to why this motion was brought, it was to do with the fact that there was public outcry at this decision and I have spoken to members of the public who live in our community, who live around the lakes and that really was the driving force behind this motion.
“To me it was simple, that was a very simple issue that the general public were not happy with this and that was why the motion was brought.
“Having listened to various council officers and having listened to all the commentary from members I would like to adjust the proposal by amending the last sentence to ‘This council agrees to obtain legal advice on this proposal and asks that a report be brought back to the relevant committee’.”
The amendment proposal was seconded by Deputy Lord Mayor. Jessica Johnston
However, Alderman Mark Baxter took an opportunity to voice his opinion in regards to the entire motion being brought before Council branding the exercise as an “unnecessary waste of the last hour”.
He added: “I have to say that… what a complete mess, a shambles… Shambolic! To bring this motion when we had to go into legal advice and I’ve been told that very clearly that from our governance point of view it was an omnishambles and I still hold that view.
“And no doubt the narrative on Facebook and every other social media outlet tonight will be completely different but the motive behind this motion – I think as was pointed out earlier by others – is political grandstanding because, something like this, in my 14 years as a Councillor I have never seen before to come as a motion.
“This is brought as committee papers. This is brought as working groups and discussions. I think at the time the original decision was made of Minister Stephen Farry’s welcoming announcement down here on the Lakes all parties supported it around this chamber but now we are bringing into question that very position.
“Yes, things have changed. I’ll tell you what has certainly changed… the value of the land tonight as a result of this and I think now we are talking about having to get extra legal advice so there is going to be more cost incurred and I wonder did members consider that when we hear in a litigious world about surcharges and all these other things that are bandied about this chamber.
“I have to say in the strongest possible terms, I think it was politically immature to bring such a motion to this chamber this evening and I think the debacle that has surrounded it since has proven that.
“While I appreciate that members have a right to bring these things and every right, democratic right, if they are lobbied and that’s fine and it’s right to do so and it’s good to have the conversation but I think the manner in which this was brought tonight was totally shambolic.”
In concurrence with Alderman Baxter, Cllr Thomas O’Hanlon added: “The way things transpired tonight was cack-handed.
“It was very disappointing and it put some of us in a very difficult position. Never mind the background of debate, the issue of concern but we got very strong legal and governance advice as to why the matter couldn’t proceed in the way it was put before council and I think it’s important that that is on the public record.
“It’s also important to note that 13 of our colleagues left the room… 13 of the 14 who sit on the planning committee exercised caution and left the room and I think that should be noted.
“I have to say that no matter the issue of debate tonight, I think it was very, very disingenuous and the way that the issue transpired and that it was very strong advice from our Head of Planning, it was very strong advice from our Legal and Monitoring Officer and that members are taking the decision based on legal advice with people with no vested interest an I think it’s important that we are taking that independent advice as we step forward.”
