Call for answers over council chief executive payout

Marvin Rees has had his position called into question amid accusations of a “cover up” over a £98,000 payout to the former council chief executive.

A “damning” report published last week raised concerns about the lack of transparency surrounding the decision to make a five-figure payment to Anna Klonowski.

External auditors, BDO, found that only half of the sum related to her pay and pension contribution and the remaining £98,000 was a discretionary payment for “loss of office”.

If people expected answers at the full council meeting on Tuesday, they were left largely disappointed as it emerged that three quarters of the report has not been made public and the mayor was accused of giving banal answers to a major issue.

…………….

Read more: Council to make changes following ‘damning’ report into chief executive payout

…………….

“We want full answers,” demanded Gary Hopkins, a Lib Dem councillor for Knowle and one of three who raise concerns about the former chief executive’s pay off.

He continued: “I’m afraid the cover ups have been going on far too long. This scandal, which we have not seen the last of yet, is surely the nail in the coffin of the mayoral system.”

Likening the situation to Richard Nixon’s Watergate scandal, he said: “The cover up is often much worse than what actually happened.”

Leader of the Lib Dem group Anthony Negus said “a leader would resign over the matter”, adding: “You should consider your position Marvin you really should.”

Speaking on behalf of BDO, David Eagles said a large chunk of the report remains private due to sensitive personal and confidential information it contains.

David Eagles of BDO (pictured to the right of the lord mayor) explains why not all of the report is publicly available

Klonowski had been in the £160,000-a-year role for just seven months when she resigned in September 2017.

Rees defended the decision to pay her a five-figure sum, saying that his administration sought legal advice and acted accordingly. His answers – repeated often throughout the lengthy debate – consistently claimed that no procedures had been in place for the severance of senior staff.

This was disputed in the chamber, where it was pointed out that the failure to bring the proposed payment for Klonowski before the HR committee was in fact “exceptional”.

Anna Klonowski left in September 2017 after just seven months in the role

Slamming the mayor’s response as a “disregard of democratic process”, Paula O’Rourke, a Green councillor for Clifton who also raised concerns about the payout, said: “It’s really frustrating to hear banal answers that you acted on legal advice. People just want answers.

“We have paid £21,000 for a report on top of the external lawyers’ fees and the £98,000 discretionary payment because the mayor chose to keep this decision hidden.”

She added: “The mayor has a huge amount of power and people have to have trust and confidence and I’m not sure that many people have that.”

Geoff Gollop, a Tory councillor for Westbury-on-Trym and Henleaze, demanded to know what the lawyers were asked to provide and what they did provide.

“You either share that or this whole thing is an utter sham,” he said to the mayor, who replied that legal advice is confidential.

Councillors were asked to vote on a series of recommendations set out by the council’s head of paid service, Mike Jackson, in the wake of the report.

Speaking ahead of the vote, Helen Holland, the cabinet member for adult social care, said: “It’s clear that the council got it wrong. Processes were not in place and where they were, they were not followed. The HR committee was bypassed.”

She said the council is a learning organisation and it is the responsibility of all within it to ensure lessons are learnt and measures been put in place to ensure it doesn’t happen again.

Her Labour colleague Mark Brain, a councillor for Hartcliffe and Withywood, added: “Mistakes have been made and they are big ones.

“There is no point in trying to pretend that this is not the case. The legal advice we received was clearly shocking.”

He backed a suggestion from Green councillor Jerome Thomas that the council should consider suing the legal firm used, adding: “I don’t believe there is a conspiracy – it’s a mess.”

The Tory group put forward an amendment to the recommendations that a written update go before the next full council meeting after first being considered by the audit and HR committees. The purpose of this is to make sure the information is in the public realm.

The amendment was passed – with lord mayor Cleo Lake casting the deciding vote.

Speaking at the end of the debate, Rees accused opposition councillors of playing party politics, saying they had come in wanting there to be “some grand conspiracy,”, but that they failed to find one.

“The truth is they are banal answers because it’s ultimately a banal situation,” he said. “We had no appropriate procedures in place. In the face of that, we sought legal advice.”

All recommendations for future practice were voted through.

Read more: Transparency concerns over £98,000 payout for former council chief executive