The actions of BKP Council leaders have been criticized as “disgusting and despicable” for failing to attend a scrutinizing meeting and trying to shut down inquiries into controversial plans to sell a beach hut.
Furious opposition councilors on the Corporate and Community Review and Scrutiny Committee accused the administration of a lack of communication about what was happening with the proposal.
No members of the Conservative administration attended the meeting, much to the disappointment of some committee members.
Several councilors said they only knew what was happening through reports in the Daily Echo.
As reported, the proposal for a Beach Hut Special Purchase Vehicle (SPV) could be shelved, with the funding shortfall of around £50m for the transformation financed through a government-approved loan instead.
Detailed details behind neither option have yet been released, but council leader Cllr Drew Mellor said he hoped to get clarity on the government’s position from Secretary of State Greg Clarke MP before the autumn.
Wednesday night’s Scrutiny Committee meeting was due to consider a report on the SPV – a wholly or majority owned municipal company – which will buy the shares in the beach hut from the local authority.
At the end of last week, as the report had not yet been published, members were told that it had been agreed that the matter would be considered at a later date. It was planned that no councilors would be present at the control meeting, therefore it did not have a quorum.
Committee members still met on Wednesday night despite correspondence from the council leader and chief executive.
Conservative councilor David Kelsey suggested adjourning the meeting as soon as it came to an agenda item for the SPV, saying: “There’s no point sitting here if we don’t have an agenda to listen to.”
The move was supported by committee deputy chairman and Conservative member Cllr Roberto Rocca.
Before the vote on this proposal, however, several councilors came out with sharp comments on the situation.
Cllr Mohan Iyengar, member for Poole Local, told the committee that he called the Daily Echo to thank the newspaper for being able to inform him of what had been going on for the past week.
He said there needs to be more communication from the Council going forward.
Cllr Mohan Iyengar
Cllr Iyengar said: “I think there is something about treating people with contempt, towards our ratepaying residents in all of this and there is something that could be greatly improved in the way this procedure works, regardless of the difficulty of this proposal. ”
Committee chairman Laurence Williams, a Conservative, said he hoped he had not treated members of the public with contempt.
“I certainly wouldn’t have that intention,” he said.
“I’m very grateful that they took the trouble to be here and write and give statements.”
Liberal Democrat councilor Sandra Moore called for residents to be kept in the loop, adding that it was clear plans had changed but there had not been “proper communication”.
Labor group leader Mr George Farquhar said it was disappointing Mr Kelsey had tabled his motion so quickly.
“The reason it’s disappointing to hear this is, to echo other speakers here tonight, is that I’m listening as a councilor and group leader to the policy and leadership of the Echo from this administration,” Cllr Farquhar said.
“I also hear from the Echo what is actually going on in this committee. It happens doesn’t it and so on and so forth.
“I fully sympathize with Cllr Iyengar that no councilor and no member should be treated in such a way that they have to pick up the phone to the local press to find out if their services will be required to scrutinize the administration.”
Cllr Farquhar said the lack of attendance from management “defies the very reason we have a review and scrutiny committee”.
Cllr George Farquhar
He added that it was disrespectful to the commission and members of the public.
“We heard a statement (from a resident) tonight and I’m going to read a section that struck me about a concerned resident having a right to have their concerns heard,” Cllr Farquhar said.
“As a mother of two boys under 11, living in a small two-bedroom apartment and working on-site, our beach hut is our outdoor space – it’s our outdoor space – and so we’re very keen to protect it and have the opportunity to comment correct all suggested changes.
“The proposal that has been made to cancel this meeting or to declare it non-quorum so that it is effectively cancelled, is abhorrent.
“It’s disgusting and it’s vile and the reason it’s disgusting and it’s vile is that there’s a mother of two boys whose outdoor space is a beach hut and this meeting was passed on specifically to talk about plans to actually move these beach huts to SPV and directly affects this resident.
“To suggest that this meeting be canceled so that public issues cannot be heard – I am disgusted.”
Cllr Stephen Bartlett, former chairman of the review and control committee before the controversial restructure, said the change in direction to occupancy would have seen the beach hut document withdrawn.
“We only have a report in the Echo,” said Cllr Bartlett.
“Now we have senior officials here working with the leader and other people on this matter.
“I think it would be entirely appropriate to ask if we can have any information regarding this change in direction.
“Is this a figment of someone’s imagination in the Echo newsroom or is it fact, because if it is fact then we don’t need to worry our residents about the effect on the beach huts anymore because it’s a completely different way of funding the transformation.”
Cllr Williams replied: “I don’t see that we can rely on the Bournemouth Echo for information.”
Committee chairman Cllr Lawrence Williams faced a number of questions from members
The committee chairman said that was what Cllr Bartlett was doing, which the independent councilor denied.
Cllr Bartlett said: “With all due respect to the chairman, there was a tweet from the recovery portfolio holder on Sunday that basically let the cat out of the bag for policy change.”
Cllr Vikki Slade, Lib Dem, said she was “disgusted” that no one from the administration attended the meeting. While she said she could accept the need to have all the documents ready and submitted together, there were questions that needed to be answered.
The former council leader said it was “almost unbelievable” that the leadership was confident the plans could be signed off by the government in the summer break.
Cllr Vicky Slade
She said she wanted to recommend that Cllr Mellor prepare an emergency budget as the current budget could fall “down and therefore it would be unwise to wait another six or eight weeks before we know what’s going to happen”.
There was never a vote on this recommendation as Cllr Kelsey’s motion was already on the table and passed, meaning the meeting was adjourned without a vote on Cllr Slade’s motion.
Earlier in the meeting, responding to a question from local resident Daniel Parkin about the existence of a KPMG report on the Beach Hut plan, Council Democratic Services Officer Clare Johnston said: “KPMG supported the Beach Hut Revenue Securitization work .
“Relevant reports will be provided as part of the information package submitted with the Corporate and Public Review and Scrutiny Committee Officer’s report.”
As to why it has not been published until now, Ms Johnston said: “It is important that all KPMG reports are seen in the context of the official’s official report, whether to the Corporation and Community Scrutiny Committee or to Cabinet.”
Cllr Slade asked for clarity on whether answers to public questions were from the leader or staff. It was confirmed by observer Susan Zeiss that they were prepared by officials.
Ms Zeiss said Cllr Slade would have to ask Cllr Mellor if he wanted an answer to his question.
Lowther and Milton Homewatch’s Ian Lawrence, who asked several questions at the meeting, said the move to use “opaque” SPVs exposed the council to criticism for “opacity”.
He said the review and oversight board had been undermined by “one party dominance” with fewer meetings and splitting it into two committees.
In a public statement, resident Alex McKinstry said the SPV would see the beach huts “moved out of reach for 20 years” and not disposed of as required under the flexible use of capital receipts guidelines.
He said he hoped any further “creative transactions” involving council assets would be “strongly discouraged”.
A statement from a “confused” resident said there were mixed messages and a lack of transparency from council leadership.
During the meeting Cllr Williams mentioned several times that the meeting to discuss the plans would now take place on September 2 and he asked for confirmation from committee members that this was acceptable.
After the meeting, there was speculation that this was incorrect and would indeed take place on September 5.
A BCP Council spokesman said: “No specific date has been agreed for the adjournment of last night’s meeting, this will be communicated when agreed with the chairman.”
Add Comment