William Hague says the "whole community is in uproar" over whether Richmondshire District Council should sell off its town centre assets to finance a £4.5m move to Colburn. Chris Lloyd and Joe Willis ask the four candidates in the General Election how they would resolve one of the most contentious issues facing the district in the past few decades

IN William Hague's latest election leaflet, he outlines four principles that should be used to resolve the relocation argument.

They are: The council should consider other options for funding the move; the views of local residents must be respected; the character of Richmond must be maintained or improved by any changes; and if the move is in conflict with any of these, it should not happen.

Mr Hague, Richmond's Tory MP since he won a by-election in 1989, accepted that the Conservative council was in a tricky position.

"The council has been repeatedly told the working conditions of its staff are not satisfactory," he said, "and it is difficult for the council to develop any new premises in Richmond.

"But a council has to take people along with it. You can't really carry out policies which are opposed by an entire community."

He said the council should consider other ways of funding the move.

"They can look at their other assets, look again at how much the move would cost and they can look at borrowing," he said. "In my view, if they can't find an acceptable way to finance the move, they shouldn't be moving.

"If I am elected, I will regard myself as having a mandate to take those four principles to the council.

"My general policy has been not to interfere with any council's decisions, but when the whole community is in uproar I have to."

While criticising Mr Hague for his delay in speaking out over the row, Liberal Democrat candidate Jacquie Bell agrees that a fresh approach to the question of funding is needed.

"People recognise that the council staff are not working under the best conditions," she said.

"But we would question if an expensive move to a building in Colburn is going to be the best option.

"We would like the council to take a fresh look at its options after the elections and ask itself, is this move to Colburn needed and if the answer is yes, does the family silver need to be sold to pay for it?

"It is essential that we don't get rid of the car parks. Richmond is a tourist town and if you take away the car parks, and close the toilets (toilets in the market place shut at the beginning of the month), visitors wont stop."

In a rare example of accord among politicians from opposing parties, Labour candidate Neil Foster has also questioned the need for new offices.

"There's a concern that a big new building could lead to big new bureaucracy," he said.

"I would suggest an immediate halt of plans to move to Colburn and an independent economic impact study to examine fears and concerns that the council's move away from Richmond, and it's implications, could lead to a ghost town."

Mr Foster has called for consultations to be held with Richmond residents, businesses, and heritage and tourism groups on the impact of the plans.

He also hit out at council leader John Blackie for declaring that the principle of the office move to Colburn had already been agreed.

He said he was concerned to have heard this and he would like to have more information on that aspect of the matter.

The Green Party candidate Leslie Rowe was adamant that new headquarters in Colburn were not needed.

He said: "I believe the move is not a good idea.

"They have adequate facilities in Richmond and a move out of the town would be a regressive step.

"They should make better use of these assets. By taking the civil servants out of Richmond, you're going to leave a big hole in the local economy.

"The council hasn't thought it through and I would like to see a much better plan put together and put in front of the public before they make these big dramatic proposals."