Newbury News Ltd. Print-Digital-Social

Greenham Parish Council in state of turmoil

Two more resignations and further uncertaintity over project to transform Control Tower

Dan Cooper

Dan Cooper


01635 886632

Future of iconic Greenham Control Tower is put in doubt

AFTER a turbulent two years, Greenham Parish Council is still very much in a state of turmoil with two more resignations and further uncertainty surrounding the future of the control tower project.

Six councillors have stepped down in the past two months alone and there is no guarantee the council will be successful in its application to secure a £150,000 loan to finish the control tower.

Steve Westbrook and Chris Dewhurst, the latest two councillors to resign, have followed four others out of the door.

It is not yet clear whether there will be a by-election to fill those vacant seats – but councillors couldn’t even agree on whether to pay £1,200 for poll cards to inform residents in the event of one.

Even chairman Phil Barnett has tried to stand down from his role, but has been told his resignation is invalid until he finds a replacement.

In his resignation speech, Mr Barnett admitted that the next chairman would face many problems in the months ahead.

And it seems that no-one is willing to take on the job, with the only person to put their name forward – Mr Westbrook – standing down from the council recently.

Mr Westbrook’s resignation poses another problem – he was the councillor responsible for overseeing the project to transform the iconic cold war tower into a visitor centre and café.

With nobody currently appointed to chair the control tower committee, all future meetings have had to be cancelled.

The four vacant seats from the previous four resignations in July and August were all filled by Liberal Democrats, who were elected unopposed.

This led to criticism from other parties that the Lib Dems were politicising the parish council.

The latest saga comes after what has been a challenging two years for Greenham Parish Council and, in particular, for its chairman.

Long-serving chairman Tony Forward resigned in June 2014, saying that owing to increased pressure, he felt he could no longer continue in the role.

His replacement, Patrick Planterose, stepped down in May 2015 – only 10 months after taking over. He said: “It’s been a tumultuous year for Greenham Parish Council.”

In August, Mr Barnett handed in his resignation after 14 months, saying delays to the control tower project and personal commitments were factors in his decision.

The redevelopment of the control tower was first given the go-ahead last September, a year after West Berkshire Council sold it to the parish for a reported six-figure sum.

The project has been dogged by problems since.

Damage to the structure, particularly the roof, was worse than had been anticipated and the council opted to bid for a £150,000 loan in order to finish the repairs.

This setback followed a damning audit which exposed a wide range of failings in the project’s governance and finances. 

Moreover, the audit revealed that the council’s control tower working group had been operating ultra vires – outside proper legal authority – for two years.

In the wake of the controversy, parish councillor Julian Swift-Hook, who had been instrumental in securing planning permission in the first place, was removed from the group by fellow councillors.

Leave your comment

Share your opinions on Newbury Weekly News

Characters left: 1000

Article comments

  • Barney

    22/10/2016 - 15:03

    Sadly GPC had all good intentions but its members who it seems had little commercial reality (based on current situation) got carried away with their enthusiasm for a very commendable purpose. One only hopes BBOWT are not sitting in the wings waiting to make a pounce for the site to acquire it for peanuts for use as its 'main office location'? That would not be particularly tasteful unless the property was leased by GPC to offset the increase of the parish precep in recent years? Now would that make sense?


  • Ihavenonickname

    22/10/2016 - 10:10

    BBOWT are not without blame. Causing the unnecessary spending of thousands of pounds of tax payers money on permissions that were not required. No wonder the project has become toxic!


    • SimonKirby


      22/10/2016 - 12:12

      BBOWT were doing nothing more than ensuring that the development was designed sustainably so that the ecology of the common was not destroyed. GPC had managed the development programme incompetently and had not given any thought to the impact of the development, and so rather than acknowledging their failings and working with BBOWT to mitigate the environmental impact, GPC span it as unreasonable interference by environmentalists, and racked-up an utterly bewildering £60k in consultants fees arguing the toss about planning permission which it turned out they already had.