Row over controversial Kent TV contract
Comments |
by political editor Paul Francis
County councillors have voiced concerns over the way Kent
County Council agreed to a seven-month extension to Kent TV, its
controversial Internet channel.
The issue of the new contract came under the spotlight at
a meeting of the council’s all-party watchdog committee today, but
the decision to examine what happened has succeeded in triggering a
major political row.
County council leader Paul Carter said he should have been
invited to address the meeting and explain the background and has
now hinted he could sack the opposition Liberal Democrat leader as
the committee chairman.
The two-year pilot of the scheme was due to end in
September but will now continue until March after KCC agreed to
give Ten Alps, the company that operates it, a seven-month
extension to its contract at an additional cost is
£350,000.
Councillors questioned whether chief executive Peter
Gilroy, who is also the chairman of Kent TV’s board of governors,
should have taken the decision. While they concluded he had acted
within his powers, they said it could have raised a perception of a
potential conflict of interest.
Mr Gilroy sought legal advice before taking the decision
and was told there was no such conflict.
But Conservative committee member Cllr Jeremy Kite said:
"This fails the public perception test" while Cllr James Scholes
(Con) said it was "inconceivable" the public would not think there
could have been a conflict of interest.
Meanwhile, Cllr Eric Hotson (Con) said: "It is
unforgiveable that there was a period of three to four months when
there was no member involvement. Under no circumstances must that
be allowed to happen again. It [the contract] should at some stage
have gone to cabinet," he said.
Speaking after the meeting, Mr Gilroy said he was puzzled
by councillors’ concerns and defended his handling of the
matter.
"I sought legal advice about my position on the board and
the advice was unequivocal . If I ran the council on the basis that
there might be a perception of a conflict of interest, I would
never make a decision."
He also said the committee was mistaken in believing
politicians were not involved, saying the issue was discussed with
the leader Cllr Paul Carter, deputy leader Cllr Alex King and the
cabinet.
He took the decision because the Conservative
administration had indicated it wanted to consider the scheme’s
long term-future after the June election and had run up against
election "purdah" rules.
County council leader Paul Carter said he was outraged he
was not invited to explain the background to the contract
renewal.
He said he was assured by committee chairman Cllr Trudy
Dean the issue would not be discussed at the meeting and hinted
that as a result, she could now be replaced as committee
chairman.
"It is quite extraordinary that it should have been
discussed. If people have a beef about these things, we should be
allowed to explain. It should not have been brought up without me
having the opportunity to explain my role."
Asked if he intended to sack Cllr Dean as chairman, he
said: "It is within our gift [the appointment]. I would prefer
someone from the opposition to chair the committee but watch this
space."
It is understood another urgent scrutiny committee meeting
has been scheduled next week at which the issue will be considered
a second time.
Wednesday, July 22 2009
The KM Group does not moderate comments.
Please click here for our house rules.