Taxpayer paying twice for development land?

 
Barnsley market Barnsley's drab 1970s concrete market complex is to be bulldozed

Barnsley Council has just paid £10m to buy its own town centre - even though all the land and property was already owned by the taxpayer.

The drab 1970s concrete markets complex and adjacent shops and offices were among dozens of abandoned or failing commercial and industrial sites across the country bought up by the previous Labour government's Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) over the past two decades.

Local councils believed they would be given the land for redevelopment and expected that to be the case even after the incoming coalition government abolished the RDAs in 2010.

So earlier this year when Barnsley's Labour-led council put together a consortium with commercial partners to start a £125m project to bulldoze and rebuild the town centre it got a shock.

"We were told in no uncertain terms that we would have to pay the full market value for the land or it would be sold off to somebody else," council leader Steve Houghton told me.

"It was vital for the future of a development which will boost the economic prospects of the town. We had no choice but to pay."

Kick-starting economy

In 2010, along with all the other RDAs' assets, the Barnsley's market complex was transferred to a new government organisation, the Homes and Communities Agency.

Councils have since been spending millions buying back some of this property to develop and many of them are now claiming this means the taxpayer paying twice for the same land.

Conservative and Liberal Democrat politicians have a different view.

Artist's impression of the new Barnsley market  Artist's impression of the new Barnsley market

"I don't think the taxpayer would be impressed if the land was simply given away for free," Conservative MP for Selby and Ainsty Nigel Adams told the BBC's Sunday Politics for Yorkshire and Lincolnshire.

"You have got to remember that some of this land was bought years ago and will have increased in value. That would be an unfair windfall for some councils."

David Ward, Bradford East's Liberal Democrat MP, pointed out that many of the properties had been bought up by the RDAs simply because the only alternative was to abandon them to years of dereliction.

"I have long taken an interest in the future of the old Odeon Cinema in my constituency. It has been offered to Bradford City Council for just a pound," he said.

"But it has already had £100,000 spent on it and still needs more investment. Many other sites could even have a negative equity value. I don't think councils would want all those to be passed on to them."

Money 're-invested'

The Homes and Communities Agency for Yorkshire confirmed that it was not allowed to give councils the property, but denies any of the money has been reimbursed to the Treasury,

"So far we have re-invested every penny from sales into sites we are developing ourselves or in partnership with commercial businesses or in some cases other local councils," the agency's Yorkshire executive director David Curtis told me.

He showed me around the Tower Works, an historic Victorian manufacturing site in Leeds which had been left as a dilapidated site in the 1990s.

Here the agency has spent £5m turning it into starter units for small businesses in the media sector.

Back in Barnsley and York that undoubted success story is cold comfort to two cash-strapped local councils paying millions for property they thought the taxpayer had already bought.

 
Len Tingle, Political editor, Yorkshire Article written by Len Tingle Len Tingle Political editor, Yorkshire

Ballot boxes for national parks?

The Queen's Speech contained a brief reference to government plans that could see the biggest change to how the national parks are run in the six decades since they were set up.

Read full article

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 14.

    So who owns this land right now if the RDAs have been abolished? Central government? Another public/government-owned body? If so then it's not like 'the taxpayer' is having to buy it from private hands. And, presumably, the council got some money when the RDA acquired the land from them to begin with?

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 13.

    10.Trog


    Not quite right the council paid £10m to the HCA (which did not pay back the RDA sums to the council hence the assets were foc to the HCA) the problem is that £10m is taken out of the council budget & will have to be raised from taxation or from service cuts so yes the taxpayers in Barnsley have a right to be agrieved.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 12.

    The boroughs owned much of the town centres, gas, electric, water etc. I don't recall they being compensated when central government took them over and then sold them off. This is just a form of mugging by central government really. Is the MP ignorant of recent government history or speaking with a forked tongue...which is it???

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 11.

    I hate how people use the umbrella term 'the taxpayer' in this context. Different public bodies are responsible for doing different things and each has their own budget and set of priorities. You can't expect one public body to give multi-million pound capital assets to another public body for free, just because they're 'taxpayer owned'. That's not how things work in the real world.

  • rate this
    -2

    Comment number 10.

    Please grt someone to read the whole article to you before going off on rants about Thatcher and her crooks etc.

    The land is still owned by the government so the money paid is just moving from one pocket to another. There is no paying twice central government paid once and local councils wanting the land pay them so canceling out the first payment.

  • rate this
    +2

    Comment number 9.

    This is a scandal. It was bought with my taxes and should now be leased at a peppercorn rent to the local council. Nigel Adams just lost my vote as I'm off to UKIP

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 8.

    Lenny got this right(5).
    Public owned utilities were sold off to private buyers by Thatcher and here crooks so why does anyone expect anything else from her contempories.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 7.

    Those that think taxpayers should pay twice are most probably those who will profit from this stupidness,the Homes and Communities Agency should be made to hand it over for free or be made to improve it..

  • rate this
    +4

    Comment number 6.

    Of course in London, all RDA assets were transferred to the Greater London Authority. Taxpayers in London did not have to pay to retain previously acquired sites in public ownership - why should people outside London be treated differently?

    More shoddy behaviour by this appalling government.

  • rate this
    +3

    Comment number 5.

    When are the public going to learn, this is just another eg of the Free market at work,
    Thatchers govt sold off the already publicly owned utilities to the public? so why should this lot be any different.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 4.

    What a waste.

    The only winners will be the land transfer agents taking their cut.

    We own the council assets as well as the RDA assets stop being so stupid. It is just moving pots of money around in government.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 3.

    Who did the development agency buy the land from in the first place? I would presume the council owned it originally, took the money & hoped to get the land back for free. I'm not sure we've got the full story here although I am sympathetic if different areas are getting different treatment i.e some buy the site & others get cash for development.

  • rate this
    -5

    Comment number 2.

    Bleak and dreary town. Absolutely no life in the town. I'm surprised even the council would want to pay for that.

  • rate this
    +5

    Comment number 1.

    Already paid for once by the taxpayer, the government is asking already- cash-strapped councils in deprived areas (and ultimately the taxpayer) to stump up the cash again for land that is already publicly owned. Couldn't make it up? It tells you everything you need to know about this coalition government - not here to serve the interests of the people. This is nothing short of shameful politicking

 

Features

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.