Mark, have you not been following the hotel saga? Clearly not.The town hall contains two halls that are hired out, The Victoria Hall being the main one. They are held under a charitable trust and income derived from their use should go to their upkeep and maintenance. It hasn’t been for years. There was also a budget available to the council for maintenance of the rest of the Town Hall. Indeed it had a major overhaul about a decade ago. Money also glows in from its use as a filming location.Some years ago Arthur Breens asked the council for a list of supposed repairs required for the building, as it wasn’t evident externally that anything was required. Non-partisan councillors informed those interested enough that regular maintenance wasn’t being done because ‘letting the building fall into a poor state will help the hotel plan’.We were told the conversion would bring £2million to the borough. The council has spent well in excess of this in its pursuit of the hotel deal.And if finances are so desperate why was the hotel developer, Mastcraft, given a £350,000 indemnity by the council should the hotel project fall through? That was given BEFORE the planning committee passed the application. No answer has been forthcoming from the council on this.The Victoria Hall was paid for by public subscription and belongs to us, the people of Ealing. It’s not the council’s property to do with as it pleases. It wasn’t ’going to be sold regardless’, the council’s highly paid legal advisers didn’t do their homework beforehand. The Mastcraft deal will deny Ealing residents much of the use of the hall if it goes ahead. Ironically it was also used for counting votes at elections.There’s another appeal due on this, with more money spent. This is actually quite an important legal point that has yet to be decided.If you want figures on repair costs you need to ask the council. You are unlikely to get a response.
Simon Hayes ● 15d