THE District Auditor carried out an exhaustive four-and-a-half year investigation into Crinkley Bottom costing some £700,000.
With regard to my part he said: "I regard the allegations made against Cllr Barker as an abuse of the audit process. I am satisfied that he was not guilty of misconduct, even less wilful misconduct."
Anything less equivocal would be hard to imagine but apparently your correspondent Mr Jackson is not satisfied. He wants me to publish documents already examined by the District Auditor. That says a lot about him and his obsessions.
The rest of the worId has moved on and perhaps has less interest in yellowing 11-year-old minute taker's notes than he does. Most fair-minded people would be prepared to accept the independence, impartiality and thoroughness of the DA. Perhaps Mr Jackson should try reading his report instead.
If he does he will find that on March 2, 1994: "Cllr Barker raised the need for a failsafe' and asked how do we get out of it if it is going wrong" and that "Cllr Barker suggested a limit on the Council's investment of £100,000."
Overall the District Auditor concludes: "Cllr Barker had expressed reservations as to the financial arrangements but he was a lone voice among members."
For most people, though apparently not Mr Jackson, that should be enough.
Cllr Ian Barker, Leader, Lancaster City Council.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article