Okay, done. Here's what I've sent. Transparency Concerns Regarding South Bristol Liveable Neighbourhood Financial Planning
Statement:
I am deeply concerned about the absence of published financial information for the South Bristol Liveable Neighbourhood scheme. Unlike previous schemes, there appears to be no publicly accessible, itemised budget breakdown—despite this being standard practice for capital projects of this scale.
East Bristol's scheme has reportedly exceeded initial cost projections when enforcement and ongoing modifications are included, yet no consolidated financial report has been published. BS3 businesses have raised concerns about economic impact, but I can find no evidence of a formal impact assessment being conducted or published.
As a council tax payer funding this scheme, I believe residents deserve to know: the total allocated budget, the projected annual running costs, the actual costs of comparable schemes, including all associated expenses, whether economic impact assessments have been conducted, and what financial liability the council carries if the scheme requires removal.
I am requesting that the council commit to publishing a comprehensive, itemised financial breakdown of the South Bristol Liveable Neighbourhood scheme within 30 days, including all the information outlined above. Transparency is not optional for publicly funded infrastructure projects.
It's a tricky one, because the options are either to submit a question or submit a statement. The trick is to combine both in such a way that it sneaks past the restrictions while doing both as a tactical challenge. Bristol City Council can reject questions/statements that are "vague," "multiple questions disguised as one," or "not properly formatted." So I needed to weaponise the statement format to make these questions unanswerable by rejection.
Here's the play: I'll submit my statement and force them to respond publicly at the meeting. If they deflect ("we'll publish it later"), dodge ("commercially sensitive"), or reject it outright, I'll immediately file an FOI request for the exact same information—they can't reject an FOI for being "multiple questions," and their meeting response proves the data exists. Each deflection creates a documented paper trail showing they're avoiding transparency, which I can escalate to councillors, the Monitoring Officer, and eventually local media. My statement isn't just about getting answers—it's about cornering them into either providing the information or publicly explaining why they won't, both of which are wins for me.
Can you submit the question about the cost of the LNs for the full council meeting on 4th November, John? Deadline Wednesday midday!
I’ll have a go. Though, I might need a reminder. Too much writing to catch up on and publish since being up north for a few days.
Just do it right now... :) Do it, John, do it!!! (Please)
https://digital.bristol.gov.uk/council/how-council-decisions-are-made/submit-a-question-or-statement-for-a-council-meeting
Questions by 5pm Wednesday, statements by midday Friday.
Okay, done. Here's what I've sent. Transparency Concerns Regarding South Bristol Liveable Neighbourhood Financial Planning
Statement:
I am deeply concerned about the absence of published financial information for the South Bristol Liveable Neighbourhood scheme. Unlike previous schemes, there appears to be no publicly accessible, itemised budget breakdown—despite this being standard practice for capital projects of this scale.
East Bristol's scheme has reportedly exceeded initial cost projections when enforcement and ongoing modifications are included, yet no consolidated financial report has been published. BS3 businesses have raised concerns about economic impact, but I can find no evidence of a formal impact assessment being conducted or published.
As a council tax payer funding this scheme, I believe residents deserve to know: the total allocated budget, the projected annual running costs, the actual costs of comparable schemes, including all associated expenses, whether economic impact assessments have been conducted, and what financial liability the council carries if the scheme requires removal.
I am requesting that the council commit to publishing a comprehensive, itemised financial breakdown of the South Bristol Liveable Neighbourhood scheme within 30 days, including all the information outlined above. Transparency is not optional for publicly funded infrastructure projects.
It's a tricky one, because the options are either to submit a question or submit a statement. The trick is to combine both in such a way that it sneaks past the restrictions while doing both as a tactical challenge. Bristol City Council can reject questions/statements that are "vague," "multiple questions disguised as one," or "not properly formatted." So I needed to weaponise the statement format to make these questions unanswerable by rejection.
Here's the play: I'll submit my statement and force them to respond publicly at the meeting. If they deflect ("we'll publish it later"), dodge ("commercially sensitive"), or reject it outright, I'll immediately file an FOI request for the exact same information—they can't reject an FOI for being "multiple questions," and their meeting response proves the data exists. Each deflection creates a documented paper trail showing they're avoiding transparency, which I can escalate to councillors, the Monitoring Officer, and eventually local media. My statement isn't just about getting answers—it's about cornering them into either providing the information or publicly explaining why they won't, both of which are wins for me.
Does this help?
No, I won't be going. I don't think my bowels will somehow stand the strain. I'll leave it as it is for now while I'm cornering them.