The ongoing saga over the relocation of Henry Cort school in Fareham has cost taxpayers in Hampshire around £5,000.

Hampshire County Council approved a formal consultation (October 25) for the proposal to relocate Henry Cort Community College in Hillson Drive to a new site in North Whitely from September 2027. 

Fareham councillor Joanne Burton criticised the decision, saying the people felt they were not listened to since 72 per cent of the local people prefer to keep Henry Cort open in its existing location.

However, the consultation was postponed after members of the children and young people select committee asked the council to arrange a meeting and reconsider the decision to launch a consultation since it was not in line with the community response received through the initial public consultation.

The process is known as a decision being ‘called in’. This is where members can ask the council to reconsider a decision and provide more information to seek a different outcome.

At the meeting, councillors voted against reconsidering the decision and continued with the public consultation, which will be launched on January 10.

At a full council meeting (November 28), Cllr Juliet Henderson, who chaired the select committee, asked about the cost of these procedures.

The council leader, Councillor Nick Adams-King, said that despite being unable to quantify the cost of a ‘call-in’ due to its complexity and individuality, the council estimated it based on a blended charging rate of £85 per hour.

“We can estimate the cost of the most recent one, which dealt with the call-in for the Henry Cort school.

“If we apply that to the time taken by the different parts of the council involved in dealing with the call-in, this includes preparation time and the attendance at the meeting itself. So children’s services contributed 35 hours, legal services 15, and DMS colleagues contributed 11, totalling 61 hours and, therefore, a total estimated cost of £5,185.”

In a follow-up question, Cllr Henderson asked whether members putting their name to a call-in should be obliged to attend the meeting.

This question concerned the absence of one of the councillors involved in the request for the call-in meeting.

Cllr Adams-King said that although there is no legal requirement to name call-in requests, members who call in the decision should be present to present their case.

“If they are not prepared to do so, there would need to be a very good reason for them not to be in the room,” he said.