More details have emerged over why Lichfield missed out on Levelling Up funding to help pay for a new leisure centre.
Lichfield District Council is set to finalise plans to approve £10million to build the new facility at Stychbrook Park at a meeting next week.
The local authority has been forced to rethink where the money would come from after a bid of more than £15million to the Levelling Up fund was turned down.
Feedback has now been given to the council outlining that the bid was “reasonable” but had issues around areas aspects linked to the case for the allocation of funding.
“Overall, the strategic fit section was satisfactory. It was clear what the need was for physical activity provision in the vicinity of the proposed site, though the case for a like-for-like replacement of the existing leisure centre was less clearly made.
“The project had been progressing since 2019 and ongoing market research, stakeholder engagement and detailed demand and financial analyses had confirmed strong support for the new facility, affordability and future viability.
“The council had undertaken significant preparation for the project – including a robust appraisal of procurement options and risk assessment which would allow them to mobilise immediately on the award of a grant. Project timescales appeared realistic
and achievable.“There were two areas where the bid could be strengthened. Firstly, indicative project costs had only been presented at a high-level for the key project stages. Some breakdowns or profiling of costs beyond this level would help to demonstrate that all expected costs had been included and were eligible.
“Secondly, whilst the overarching governance and assurance procedures of the council were detailed and appeared robust, more information on the specific way the governance for this project was to be structured, including, for example, project board membership and responsibilities would have been beneficial.
“When setting out the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) plan, the bid set out a detailed plan and set out how outputs and outcomes would be measured within the costing and planning workbook. While outputs and outcomes were considered, the impacts of the proposal were neglected within the costing and planning workbook.”
Feedback on Lichfield District Council’s failed Levelling Up bid
The decision not to award the money saw Lichfield MP suggest “flaws” in the bid had led to the local authority missing out on funding.
His comments drew criticism from Cllr Doug Pullen, leader of Lichfield District Council.
Mr Fabricant has since sought to clarify his comments, saying that “the bid was flawed – not by any error contained in the bid, but because it was impossible to prove Levelling Up funding need especially compared to the needs of poorer applicants in England and Wales”.
He added that a future application was likely to more successful if it focused on Burntwood.
But Cllr Steve Norman, Labour group leader at Lichfield District Council, said the feedback showed that their had indeed been flaws.
“I was dismissive of the MP’s criticism of his colleagues at Lichfield District Council, suggesting council staff needed training, but the feedback is not good.
“I have now seen the full bid, that Mr Fabricant supported in writing, and it looked well-researched to me, but the local Government office pointed out a number of flaws.
“The council has now found the funding for the leisure centre in Lichfield so perhaps they can concentrate of bidding for grants that will benefit Burntwood.”
Cllr Steve Norman, Lichfield District Council
So there were flaws after all. And those flaws are now costing council tax payers £10m.
Strong support – 2% of the district to use the swimming pool.
A good question to ask would be how much has the failed bid cost LDC in wasted expenditure? Birmingham City Council have wasted £300k according to Birmingham Live.
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/more-300000-wasted-doomed-birmingham-26240667
So when the govt was paying is was £15m down from £22m, now the the council is trying to fund it for £10m. Wait and see after the election the scheme will come to a halt. Cost pressure from raw material inflation, re-evaluation of scheme not providing adequate range of provision, revenue costs (subsidy to cover losses to high) economic climate, going unitary scheme on hold awaiting settlement blah blah.
More then 10 gyms in Lichfield. Really is a waste of taxpayers money and the majority of people don’t wish for this to ahead.
Deadtake name them if you are so sure
Do we really need a new build leisure centre? Either use the Friary leisure centre or join a private one. There must be dozens locally to choose from. Why can’t they refurbish the Friary? We don’t need more all weather pitches. There are already at least 4 in Lichfield for hire. We do however really need more Doctor surgeries, new secondary schools, better rail links, better roads. Stop wasting time and money on white elephants and get a plan for tackling the major infrastructure problems in our city please.
Alica, friary Grange leisure centre was given to the school by SCC the school say they can’t or won’t maintain i
It’s not a gym we need, it’s a leisure centre, with a swimming pool, sports hall and other associated facilities which is family friendly. We are losing the swimming facilities at the Friary, which is why all this came about. I’m not sure there are 10 swimming pools in Lichfield.
The problem with this proposal is that it just doesn’t cut the mustard in terms of the facilities on offer and it is taking away a green space.
At the end of the day, we have a Conservative government. We have a Conservative MP. We have a Conservative Council. This should have been a cakewalk…a formality. Yet still, between them, the council and Fabricant somehow achieved the impossible, and messed up the bid.
This is the level of incompetence we have on a local level, and one can only hope that this is not forgotten come local and general election time.
However bad one might imagine an alternative might be, it’s beyond me to imagine a more inept and ineffective MP and council.
Mike, call me suspicious, or worse if you like, but i why do I get the feeling that once the Friary’s multi academy trust leadership team get hold of the leisure centre and get to keep the revenue for themselves they will miraculously decide to invest in the facilities, make them available to the public and benefit from the revenues. This rendering the new facility built by LDC as obsolete/ un necessary.
OK forgive me for being “hard of learning” but where does the report say that Lichfield was too affluent for the bid to be successful (the Tories story). The bid failed because there were flaws as our MP originally said. Of course he changed his stance when his fellow Tories took umbridge.
Just accept it wasn’t a competent bid and tell us that.
If Burntwood was a better bet why wasn’t the funding sought for facilities in Burntwood in the first place? Well we know the answer to that! Also, if the same incompetents submit a Burntwood bid don’t hold your breath for a successful outcome.
I always thought it was a legal requirement for councils to provide a way for school swimming sessions. If tamworth and Burntwood baths are full where do anti leisure centre persons think we can use. Not sure Stowe or beacon Park ponds are suitable.
@mike, Im sure you could manage a basic Google search yourself, but thanks for the many downvotes anyhow haha
Re my post, from the like/dislike poll seems its Burntwood 4 Lichfield 4. Score draw so far…..
It’s quite clear the tories are imbeciles, the whole party, no economic growth for the country in 12 years and Lichfield is like a poor man’s city thanks to prror delivery of council services by tories councillors, have Lichfield residents seen the swimming pool at Burntwood even Tamworth and Rugeley have better facilities, trouble with Lichfield is the majority of tory voters are rich and old, and they allergic tou young people having fun, of any kind, our wise council even took it on themselves to reduce the size, of skate board park, for the very people that can and do like skate boarding, Mr fabricant is an embarrassment to Lichfield, I’m sure Burntwood residents must love him, we get poor service from Lichfield council, and worse from fabricant.
So, if I understand this correctly, Lichfield was never going to be a suitable candidate for the levelling up fund, and to exacerbate this, the council didn’t fill in the forms correctly. We are being led by donkeys, aren’t we?
Looking at the feedback it sounds like insufficient emphasis was placed on the rationale (need). The governments’ ‘Levelling up’ policy is about investing in schemes that will serve to rebalance the local economy. So if enough evidence isn’t provided about the unmet needs of the local populace (multiple deprivation indices) and causes of inequality (unfair access, opportunity etc) then it won’t meet the criteria.