Fylde councillor Simon Renwick has attacked North Lancashire Primary Care Trust for failing to keep Wesham blooming.

Coun Renwick claims under an office lease taken out on council buildings on Derby Road, the PCT were required to maintain the standard of the gardens.

But he says it has so far failed to do this and is appealing for flowers to be planted to return the garden to its previously rosy state.

He said: “I think for a publicly-funded organisation, it’s a disgrace it cannot show more respect to the people that live nearby and to the community it serves.

“The garden used to be lovely and well maintained, but it appears the PCT believe they are above the law and can ignore this clause in the lease.

“They’ve been asked politely time and again and have ignored those inquiries.

“I’d like to ask the PCT to reconsider their arbitrary decision not to plant this garden to the standard that Wesham is used to and put their hands into our pockets and pay for few dozen plants.”

Coun Renwick said the PCT “must be saving cash” by leasing this building so close to their HQ.

“Surely they can invest just a little bit of that in some pansy and a few French marigolds,” he added.

The PCT said it would address the issue, but said vandalism had been a problem.

A spokeswoman said: “Steps are being taken this week to cut the grass at the front. This fully complies with the terms of our lease which requires us to keep the grounds well maintained.

“When the PCT took over the lease of the building there were no flowerbeds in situ, only soil beds.

“Due to the damage, theft and wilful vandalism we have already experienced on both our Derby Road sites, the PCT is reluctant to commit further resources to new flower beds

“With regard to Coun Renwick’s claims the PCT is saving money by leasing the former council offices, I can confirm that the PCT pays full market rent for the building.

“Furthermore, we have invested a significant amount of money to improve the building prior to staff moving in.

“The earth mounds he refers to at the front, were a requirement of our planning consent and were installed at the planning officer’s request. On numerous occasions plants have been removed from these mounds, which has reduced their visual impact.

“We’ve looked at further planting at a cost of several thousand pounds, but given vandalism and repeated theft of plants, we are reluctant to commit further resources.”