Campaigners challenging the controversial relocation of Walsall Leather Museum were met with minimal scrutiny from council committee members during a recent meeting. The disposal of the museum building to Walsall College for its Special Education Needs provision was presented to councillors, yet most committee members raised no substantial concerns about the decision.
Scrutiny Committee Shows Limited Engagement
Members of Walsall Council's prosperous places scrutiny committee had the opportunity to question, seek reassurances, or make recommendations to the cabinet regarding the relocation plan. However, the majority of committee members either remained silent or offered very little substantive scrutiny of the proposal.
While Labour leader Councillor Matt Ward demonstrated some engagement with the issue, other committee members provided minimal challenge to the executive decision. Committee chairman Councillor Kenneth Ferguson appeared to believe his hands were tied on the matter, suggesting limited scope for intervention.
Campaigners Raise Transparency Concerns
Lead campaigner Lauren Broxton presented recommendations calling for the council to immediately halt the plans, conduct a full public consultation, publish a comprehensive timeline and reasoning behind the process, and commit to greater transparency and accountability in future dealings involving community assets. These recommendations were quickly dismissed by the committee.
Instead, the committee suggested the plans should be brought to future scrutiny meetings as the process continues to move forward. Campaigners Lauren Broxton and Linda Boys attended the meeting to question council leader Councillor Mike Bird and deputy leader Councillor Adrian Andrew about the decision-making process.
Financial and Transparency Questions Unanswered
The campaigners raised several significant concerns during the meeting. They questioned a £47,550 feasibility study conducted in February 2024 regarding the future of the Walsall Leather Museum, but received no substantive information about this expenditure.
Linda Boys highlighted potential issues with the Subsidy Control Act of 2022, noting that the council's investment of £14 million in the Adult Learning Centre and £2.4 million in the Leather Museum building, combined with offering the building to the college at no cost, could be considered a subsidy. She questioned whether this created market advantages that might require treasury approval.
Lauren Broxton expressed concerns about transparency, stating: "The sustained and well evidenced opposition from residents, heritage parties, sector professionals and elected representatives, the reliance on disputed or unpublished figures to justify decision-making, and the repeated refusal or delay in releasing key reports and financial information, all raise legitimate concerns about transparency, value for money and due process."
Council Leadership Defends Decision Process
Council leaders defended their approach throughout the meeting. Councillor Adrian Andrew stated that the council's cabinet is the executive body with authority to buy and sell buildings, adding: "The council has acted within its delegated authority and followed its legal governance process throughout."
Councillor Mike Bird referenced case law, noting: "It was ruled by the judge that the cabinet structure that we have is the ultimate arbiter and therefore the decision has been taken." He later suggested it would have been easier to close the museum rather than relocate it, though he previously stated the decision did not form part of budget savings.
Economy and environment director Dave Brown addressed concerns about subsidy and disposal considerations, stating: "That was all set out to cabinet members in the private report to cabinet when they made that decision. It's not that you can't do it, there's a process to go through that, and we've gone through that process."
Relocation Progress and Alternative Suggestions
The meeting revealed that the council has accepted an offer on a town centre building for the museum's relocation this week. When questioned whether this new building could instead accommodate Walsall College's Special Education Needs provision while leaving the Leather Museum in its current location, Councillor Bird responded that the new building "would not be able to accommodate SEN children."
It was also confirmed that taxpayers' money had already been allocated to renovate the Leather Museum building to make it suitable for Special Education Needs students. The committee heard that Walsall College has yet to carry out their side of the lease agreement, raising further questions about the implementation timeline and responsibilities.
The minimal scrutiny applied to this significant decision has left campaigners concerned about transparency and accountability in council processes involving valuable community assets and heritage institutions.
