Fears Community Cash Could Be Lost

There are fears over £800,000 allocated to improve community facilities in Great Glen will have to be handed back to housing developers.

The cash was paid to Harborough District Council and subsequently awarded to projects through the ‘Section 106’ scheme – where developers provide funding for upgrades to community facilities in areas where they have built new homes.

It included funding to Great Glen Parish Council towards the delivery of a new community pavilion complex.

Such agreements have a ‘spend-by’ date which has now passed and because the schemes have not progressed quickly enough, the funding could be clawed back.

HDC say ‘all parties’ were aware of the deadline and it is working to ensure the money is not lost.

However, opposition councillors say more should have been done to protect the funding,

Cllr Phil King (Con), opposition finance spokesman, spoke to HFM:

Great Glen

HDC say it is not the body responsible for delivering projects within required timelines and Cllr Phil Knowles, Leader of the Council, spoke to HFM:

A spokesperson for HDC said : “The council secured a significant allocation of funds for the provision of new community facilities in Great Glen seven years ago; a significant amount of which was allocated to Great Glen Parish Council for a specific project. All S106 agreements have a spend-by date, which in the case of this funding has now passed.

“All parties were aware of this date, including at the time of the most recent allocation to the parish council at last December’s Grants Panel.

“The council agreed to the request based on the understanding that the project would be sufficiently progressed to enable expenditure within the required timescales, through the parish council working proactively with developers.

“Unfortunately, this has not been the case, as the project has not moved forward.

“There are now on-going discussions with all parties including the Leader of the council who has immediately met with the parish council, informed the ward members (with a follow up meeting being arranged) and instigated an internal review of this matter.”