The Village: Scrutiny Committee Recommends Review of Further Investment

Published on: 15 Nov, 2017
Updated on: 16 Nov, 2017

A recommendation that a review is conducted of further investment into “The Village” project was made last night by Guildford Borough Council’s Overview & Scrutiny Committee – but it will continue to operate over the forthcoming Christmas period, when many events are planned.

The committee was told, in a report written by council officers, that the project is expected to have cost, by the end of this financial year, £1.223,000 million but that was more than offset by the social, economic and community benefit and the “net GVA” (Gross Value Added) for 2017-18 will be £830,000. However, the GVA figures, calculated by consultants, attracted cross-party criticism, the vice chairman of the committee, Cllr Nils Christiansen (Con, Holy Trinity), describing them as “spurious” and “hard to believe”.

Cllr David Bilbe (second left) and the then mayor, Cllr Gordon Jackson cutting the ribbon to officially open the Guildford Pop Up Village back in December last year before the Village was re-branded and re-launched.

At the start of the debate Cllr David Bilbe (Con, Normandy) lead councillor for economic development and tourism, said that he wanted to thank all present, in advance, for what he hoped would be constructive comments. Having read the committee’s constitution, he said, he was clear in his mind that part of the committee’s role was to make positive recommendations and suggestions.

Retail units, some empty, in The Village. Photo taken August 31, 2017. All units have been now been let for the Christmas period.

Then, thanking the council officer team responsible for the scheme, he suggested that the real question to be considered by the committee was: “Is The Village a valuable asset to Guildford?”

Later, appearing to display a sensitivity to sole identification with the project, Cllr Bilbe said: “I would point out that if anyone else says to me it is my Village, it is not my Village this is the council’s village.”

Cllr Tony Rooth

Cllr Tony Rooth (Con, Pilgrims) also made his position clear from the outset, saying: “…from July 2016 it wasn’t my Village either, because I didn’t agree with it and I didn’t support it at the Executive or indeed vote for it and …I had various discussions beforehand about the validity and viability of the project.

“I am a very regular visitor to The Village. I have actually bought things at the shops in The Village, I think I have dined at every little outlet there and I’ve also been to events there. I went to the Prosecco and pizza evening where I got a Prosecco and a pizza for a tenner! Which was good value. Unfortunately, there were only 30 other people with me at eight o’clock on a Saturday night.

“I have been into the venue on a very regular basis… and I’ve counted people on the fingers of one hand. It has been very limited, shall we say, in its usage. So I do question having spent £1.2 million pounds on this project … whether this is a valuable asset.”

Cllr Bilbe responded: “There is a substantial positive GVA to Guildford.”

Then, noticing Cllr Rooth’s reaction to his statement, he continued, “You laugh. Maybe the chairman will make a note of the fact that Cllr Rooth laughed at a positive £700,000+ GVA for Guildford I don’t think that is a laughing matter at all, to be honest, especially given the fact that it was assessed objectively, it wasn’t a made up figure. So I’d like to make absolutely sure that is minuted, that that was a point of ribaldry. So thank you very much for that.”

The committee chairman Cllr Caroline Reeves (Lib Dem, Friary & St Nicolas) interjected at this point, saying: “I don’t think it is necessary to make comments like that.”

But following an audible response from Cllr Rooth that Cllr Bilbe’s behaviour was rude Bilbe challenged: “Did you laugh?”

The chairman again interrupted saying: “Please stop. We have only just started the debate. There are questions over the figures and the report.”

Cllr Michael Illman

Cllr Illman (Con, Shalford), lead councillor for finance and asset management, commented: “Yes the financial statements are up there and it is right that people ask questions on it … David and I were relatively new kids on the Executive block when this came up last year… What is important is that while we are looking at the financial summary statements we don’t forget the other slides that show the social and economic benefits it has had.

“Peppa Pig and a number of other events over the summer really did bring the community of Guildford together amongst people of different classes, different backgrounds and actually it was tremendous being there and seeing the queues going out the door and halfway down North Street.”

Cllr Jenny Wicks

Cllr Jenny Wicks (Con, Clandon & Horsley) said that she would define a valuable asset as one that generates revenue and she did not think The Village made the grade. “As a council, we are not dealing with private money but public money .. money we take out of the taxpayers pocket. We should not be spending money without very careful assessment of our priorities and the other uses to which the money can be put.”

She continued by stating her disappointment with the reporting of the calculation of social-economic benefit. Her questioning revealed that the visitor numbers, given as 15,000, for June to October 2017, had been derived from a “footfall counter”, wifi statistics and “estimates of people through the doors”.

Wicks admitted she found some of the projections difficult to accept and identified, as the most fanciful example, the claim that 7% of the people visiting the village would stay in Guildford overnight and spend money on accommodation. It seemed, she said, as if the report had been produced without any proper survey work of those who actually visited The Village and she was “…very disappointed that the authors of the [GVA] report were not willing to come along and talk to it without a significant fee.”

Village visitors using the picnic tables at lunchtime. Photo taken August 31, 2017.

Cllr James Walsh (Lab, Stoke), asked what exit strategy had been considered for the project.

Cllr Bilbe responded that although options had been considered there was not such a strategy but it was something he would keep in mind.

Cllr Nils Christiansen

Committee Vice Chairman Nils Christiansen, in his summary of the debate, said: “For the amount of money we are spending on this could it be better spent on other things in the borough that might add more value… That is the real question we need to ask rather than focussing on a rather spurious GVA report, which, to be frank, is hard to believe.

Cllr Christian Holliday (Con, Burpham) said the council was faced with a choice. “Do we carry on, spending another £600,000 for no obvious return or do we take the opportunity to save that money and think again about what we do with the site?”

“We need to be very careful we don’t throw good money after bad.”

Cllr Christian Holliday

The Scrutiny Committee concluded the debate by agreeing a resolution, proposed by Cllr Holliday: “The committee has grave concerns over the fact that The Village is facing capital and revenue costs in excess of £1.2 million after less than two years in operation and is projected to incur additional costs of over £200,000 in each future financial year, for which figures are available, with no obvious overriding benefits to justify these costs.

“Therefore, the committee requests the Executive to honour the council’s commitments made over the 2017 Christmas period, until the Village closes on 24 December, and thereafter work up a full exit strategy to include consideration of alternative future uses. As part of this process, consideration should be given to whether or not The Village should re-open at Easter on Good Friday, 2018.”

Cllr Caroline Reeves

Committee Chairman Caroline Reeves said today (November 15): “The background research done by Overview & Scrutiny members on The Village ensured a wide-ranging debate.

“Members were obviously dissatisfied with the report on the economic impact of The Village and will no doubt scrutinise the requested exit strategy in detail when it is published.

“The debate around the validity and value of the whole project recognised that the success of the venue in the run-up to Christmas is key. There will doubtless be further scrutiny before committing to the programme for 2018.”

Click here to view the GBC webcast of the meeting.

Share This Post