Derby Market Hall review

Derby's Market Hall. Image by LDRS

A request to publish the full findings of the Market Hall review in public has been refused – prompting concerns of “secrecy”.

The city centre venue reopened last year following a £35m restoration project.

However the Market Hall – owned by Derby City Council – is currently forecast to make a loss of £338,000 due to a “shortfall of trader income”.

It follows public criticism surrounding the historic building, with claims it has an “empty” feel and its footfall is questioned.

Earlier this year, and before the forecast loss emerged, council bosses said it was carrying out a review into the operation of Market Hall to assess its performance so far.

The local authority has said it is “currently evaluating” the key findings of the review.

But it has turned down a request to publicly publish the review outcome – despite admitting it is in the public interest.

A Freedom of Information (FOI) request sought the publication of the review and other relevant documents necessary used as part of the process.

But the council turned the request down because “disclosure of the requested information would prejudice the commercial interests of the council”.

However, a Derby City Council spokesperson said it will be releasing “some information” into the public domain in due course.

The council’s response to the FOI adds: “We recognise that there is a public interest in release in promoting transparency regarding council spending and decision making.

“However, this is outweighed by the public interest in ensuring the council’s ongoing ability to do business fairly and negotiate best value for money in projects, as well as protecting the commercial interests of other organisations who provided information in confidence.”

The council has said all future actions will be subject to its formal decision-making and scrutiny procedures and some information will be released in the public domain ahead of a future cabinet meeting.

In a previous statement the Labour-led council said it was “actively working to attract new traders, support existing businesses and enhance the overall offer.”

Conservative group leader Steve Hassall said the council “should be leaning towards transparency, not secrecy”.

He said: “I fully accept that some genuinely commercial information may need to be redacted, particularly where it relates to individual traders or live negotiations. But that is not the same as withholding the review or the substance of its findings from public view.

“Residents deserve to know what has gone wrong, what the review found, what options are being considered, and what the council intends to do differently.”