Peterborough City Council is under renewed scrutiny after a Freedom of Information (FOI) response drew a blank over more than £60,000 in payments made between 2012 and 2016 to local radio companies.
The council’s response cited cost and record-keeping limitations for not disclosing full details. CambsNews, which submitted the original FOI, has now requested an internal review of the council’s decision.
The payments and the questions raised
The FOI request, submitted by CambsNews, sought detailed information about five payments made by the council to Radio Peterborough, Peterborough Community Radio Ltd, and Peterborough FM Radio. The payments, ranging from £500 to £30,000, were made over a four-year period and totalled £62,900. The request specifically asked for:
- Copies of all correspondence relating to the authorisation and processing of these payments.
- The names of officers or councillors who authorised each payment.
- Evidence of any councillor involvement or benefit, and whether such interests were declared.
- Details of services provided in exchange for each payment, including contracts, invoices, and evaluations.
The council’s response confirmed the payments but declined to provide most of the requested documentation, citing the “section 12 cost limit” under the Freedom of Information Act. According to the council, retrieving the information would require more than 18 hours of officer time, exceeding the £450 cost threshold set for local authorities.
Councillor Wayne Fitzgerald’s involvement
Companies House records show that Councillor Wayne Fitzgerald, a prominent figure in Peterborough politics and a former leader of the council, was a founding director of both iterations of Peterborough Community Radio Ltd.
The first company, originally incorporated as Radioactive Broadcasting Limited in 1999, was renamed Peterborough Community Radio Ltd in 2010 and dissolved in 2015.
A second company, Radio Peterborough Limited, was incorporated in December 2014 and renamed Peterborough Community Radio Ltd in March 2016, with Fitzgerald and Stephen Durham as founding directors.
From Covid to Christmas – contracts flow to Peterborough councillor’s companies
Despite this direct involvement, council records do not show Fitzgerald declaring an interest when he seconded a motion on local radio services at a full council meeting on 7 December 2011.
The minutes of that meeting, available on the council’s website, confirm that Fitzgerald played an active role in shaping the council’s policy on local radio, including proposing amendments to the motion and voting on the matter.
Transparency and record-keeping concerns
The council’s refusal to provide further details has raised concerns about transparency and record-keeping. In its response, the council noted that financial records are only required to be kept for six years, meaning some documentation may have been lawfully destroyed.
However, CambsNews has challenged this explanation, arguing that the council failed to provide a detailed breakdown of the estimated retrieval costs or specify which records are no longer held. Ironically CambsNews was able, using modern technology, to verify the payments but not able to retrieve supporting documentation.
CambsNews has also pointed out that the council did not comply with its duty under section 16 of the FOI Act to provide advice and assistance. The response invited the requester to “refine” the questions but did not suggest how the request could be narrowed to fall within the cost limit or what information could be provided within 18 hours.
Public interest and calls for review
The payments in question, totalling more than £60,000, were made to organisations in which an elected councillor appears to have had a significant interest. The public has a legitimate interest in understanding who authorised these payments, what services were provided in return, and whether appropriate declarations of interest were made.
In an appeal letter requesting an internal review, CambsNews argued that the council’s cost estimate was not adequately supported and that the public interest warranted fuller disclosure. The letter called on the council to re-examine the reasonableness of its refusal, clarify its record retention policies, and disclose any documentation that can reasonably be retrieved within the cost limit.
The role of Peterborough Community Radio
Peterborough Community Radio (PCR), now broadcasting as PCR 103.2 FM, has played a prominent role in the city’s media landscape. Founded by Wayne Fitzgerald and others, the station is run by a team of DJs and volunteers, offering local news, music, and community programming. PCR’s directors and presenters have emphasised the station’s commitment to serving the local community and providing a platform for local talent.
Despite its community focus, the station’s financial relationship with the council—and the involvement of a senior councillor—has attracted scrutiny. The FOI request sought to clarify the nature of the services provided in exchange for council funding and whether proper governance procedures were followed.
Council’s statement and next steps
In its response, the council stated that providing the requested information would require a manual inspection of archived paper files, which would exceed the permitted cost limit. The council also noted that officers involved in the payments may have left the authority and that some records may no longer be held due to standard retention policies.
PCRFM, the BBC and a councillor: questions over impartiality in Peterborough Showground saga
CambsNews has requested that the council’s internal review address the following points:
- Re-examine the cost estimate and provide evidence to support it.
- Clarify what information can be supplied within the cost limit.
- Confirm which records are no longer held and under which retention schedule.
- Disclose any documentation that can be retrieved within the permitted time.
If the internal review upholds the refusal, CambsNews will escalate the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office.
A broader issue of governance
The case highlights broader issues of governance, transparency, and public accountability in local government. Payments to organisations linked to elected officials are always likely to attract public interest, and councils have a duty to ensure that such transactions are properly documented and disclosed.
UPDATE: The city council today confirmed receipt of the request for an internal review.
“A senior manager or legal advisor who was not involved in the original request will now carry out an internal review,” a council official said today.
“We aim to handle simple internal reviews in 20 working days, in this case by 18/11/2025. We aim to handle internal reviews that involve complex issues that require further investigation and those that require consideration of the public interest test, in 40 working days, which would be 17/12/2025.”
