Cllr Mike Stoddart

FOLLOWING a lengthy – and at times angry – debate, councillors voted to pass a motion from Cllr Mike Stoddart to allow the audit committee to have access to documents relating to the controversial Commercial Property Grants Scheme in Pembroke Dock. Cllr Stoddart’s original motion asked for all councillors to have access to correspondence between the authority and WEFO and Mr Cathal McCosker but he amended the motion so that Audit Committee members alone could have access. Many councillors in the chamber felt they should all have access to the information in order to make a proper decision. Cllr Stoddart said: “This is a matter of some importance because public money is at stake here.

“Mr McCosker has offered to pay back a rather large sum of money – £189,000 is the figure I’ve been given. “There is also a sum of money that this council has got to pay back in respect of administrative payments that WEFO have made to this council. “The audit committee have a duty to look into this to see just how much this is going to cost the council, that’s what the audit committee was set up for.

“I am not talking about the police disclosing information; this is about the council disclosing information that is already in its possession. I’m not asking for the police to disclose it. He added: “Suggesting otherwise is another red herring being dragged across the floor.” Cllr Bob Kilmister said: “This is very important information for the debate and we need to see it, but once again members are being asked to debate without seeing any of the information that is required.”

Cllr Jamie Adams said: “Any information will be made available to members on conclusion of the police investigation and we have a process in following that investigation and I believe it’s very important that we recognise effectively the polity that should remain around any evidence that should remain following legal proceedings from that situation. “Members will have full information but as a body of council we must recognise that there is a time limit on it in terms of when that information is appropriate. “It may be appropriate for the audit committee to consider that advice, but I would suggest that it’s not really the function of full council to undertake that, and I am confident in the ability and the desire that is held within audit committee to get to the bottom of these matters with the assistance of the police. “Now is not the time for us as members to discuss the matter.”

Cllr Jacob Williams said: “How times have changed! At our Christmas meeting in 2013, Cllr Stoddart put forward a very similar motion and Cllr Pugh gave a number of facts, and subsequently it was revealed he wasn’t telling the whole truth and he has since been sacked from the Cabinet. “At that stage everybody was in denial in the IPPG group and a vote was taken, but that vote was taken on duff information. “Everything Cllr Stoddart has said about the grant scheme has proved to be correct.

The police investigation is ongoing – I don’t know what stage it is at, but isn’t that a long way we’ve come? Information was denied and it’s still being denied now. “One thing remains constant, and that is the ethos of this county which is to keep elected members in the dark. “Cllr Pugh denied there was a problem but now there is going to be a loss to the authority and I think you should all know about that.” Cllr Paul Miller said: “Clearly we are responsible for the budget. There is a financial issue in terms of a loss or a reclaim and we need to understand that.

That is part of our core remit as members, and this information is key to understanding that. I don’t how we can be in a position when we are not given the information.” Cllr John Allen-Mirehouse said: “The committee was requested by the police not to divulge the information which the police are using during the investigation. The legality of this was confirmed to the committee by the acting head of paid service. Assurance was given that in due course, at the conclusion of the police investigation the documentation would be made available to all members of this council. It is no good listening to what people think, we need evidence.”

Retired senior police officer Cllr Tony Brinsden said: “I’m rather concerned that so many red herrings are being dropped across the floor in front of us. I’m surprised that our leader had to go to council to find out that simple fact.” Cllr Mike Evans said: “This is information that is with the council, this is what we are debating.” Indicating the advice given by officers, he continued: “We open up this advice here and the first line says: ‘In this case I have been asked to advise upon a request by councillors who have access to information obtained by the police. This is not the case.

“How much has this one question cost us? What is the point of asking a question about information in the possession of the police? We all know that we have no right to see their documents. Cllr Bob Summons, a former police constable for over thirty years, said: “An email came in yesterday from the sergeant who is running the investigation. It says: ‘As discussed the police investigation has commenced and as part of the investigation team it is important that we have all material in relation to this matter.”

He continued, quoting the email: “Until any trial it is good practice for all materials to be classed as confidential. I am aware that information is available within Pembrokeshire County Council, which councillors have asked to be disclosed to them. “I would recommend at this stage of the enquiry that this material is not disclosed upon this request.” Councillors were not deflected from their pursuit of the matter by the red herrings offered in response to Councillor Stoddart’s motion: it was passed by 28 votes to 24 with four councillors (Mike Evans, Brian Hall, Stan Hudson and Steve Joseph) abstaining.