Home   News   Article

Subscribe Now

Did the Government squander £500,000 on cones at Newbury Showground Covid test centre?




A GOVERNMENT agency has potentially squandered half a million pounds unnecessarily hiring traffic cones at Newbury Showground in Chieveley.

The site was used as a coronavirus testing centre between June 2020 and March this year.

Traffic cones were used to help control the flow of traffic – and a whistleblower told the Newbury Weekly News that, instead of simply being bought, they were hired instead... at an astronomical cost to the taxpayer.

Testing centre at Newbury Showground. (55642038)
Testing centre at Newbury Showground. (55642038)

But when the NWN investigated, we were stonewalled by the UK Health Security Agency (formerly Public Health England).

A Freedom of Information Act (FoIA) request to discover how many cones were used and how much they cost was also turned down.

So we did our own calculations based on figures provided by local firms.

Testing centre at Newbury Showground. (55642290)
Testing centre at Newbury Showground. (55642290)

Our figures are postulated on two scenarios: one involving 500 cones and the other, 1,000 cones.

Had the agency bought the cones outright, it would have cost around £3,245 for 500 or £6,490 for 1,000.

However, the agency did confirm: "The site is managed by a private partner and the bollards were hired by these to satisfy health and safety considerations."

Using the cost offered by a local firm, the NWN has calculated that it could have cost £294,000 if just 500 cones were hired or a staggering £588,000 if the number was 1,000.

There were 550 testing sites operated by the agency across the country, meaning the potential cost to the taxpayer could have topped £3 billion.

Using the FoIA we asked the UK Health Security Agency how many bollards had been hired at the Newbury site.

The agency confirmed that it held the information requested but refused to disclose it on the grounds that it would take "an excessive amount of time and resources to retrieve the numbers."

The response added: "Section 12(1) of the Act means public authorities are not obliged to comply with a request for information if it estimates the cost of complying would exceed the appropriate limit.

"The appropriate limit for UKHSA is set at £450, which represents the cost of one person spending 18 hours determining whether we hold the information, and then locating, retrieving and extracting the information."

We then asked how much money had been spent on renting the bollards at Newbury Showground.

The agency again confirmed that it possessed that information, but declined to release it – because it was supposedly not in the public interest to do so.

Furnishing the information, stated the response, "would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any entity, including the public authority holding the information.

"We also take into account the fact that this information is commercially sensitive, and we consider that releasing this information would not be in the public interest, as it would prejudice future commercial relations with suppliers if this information were to be disclosed into the public domain.

"Therefore, we consider that the balance of interest favours withholding this information."



This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies - Learn More