COUNCILLORS have agreed to pause work on the Mull Campus project – as one of them failed in a bid for “full disclosure” on parts of it.
Councillor Amanda Hampsey (Conservative, Oban South and the Isles) sought for Argyll and Bute Council to advise on its legal costs incurred to date, with a judicial review due to take place in October.
She also requested “full disclosure” on other matters, including the legal advice regarding prospects of successfully defending the review, and on potential outcomes if the process was not successful.
However, an executive director ruled that the amendment was not competent at a meeting of the council’s community services committee on Thursday, August 28.
The council decided at a special full meeting on Friday, March 7 that Tobermory South was the preferred site for the new Mull Campus, although several councillors asked for their dissent to be recorded.
At the community services committee, councillor Audrey Forrest (SNP, Dunoon) moved for the committee to follow council officers’ recommendations with one amended.
She requested that the committee agree for all further reports to be brought to members while the ongoing court proceedings progress.
Recommendations to endorse council officers’ decisions to pause a consultation process, which was due to begin on August 18, and to pause all other work on the project, were also part of the motion.
Hampsey then moved the amendment, which also requested that the council reaffirmed its commitment to a new Mull campus, and that “all future significant decisions affecting major capital projects be brought through the proper democratic committee process with full consultation of elected members.”
After an adjournment to consider the amendment, executive director Douglas Hendry advised that it was not competent.
He said: “Regarding legal advice, it would not be appropriate for that to be made public at this stage. It may be different after the legal proceedings are finished.
“On a contingency plan, members know all the sites that were in scope for the Mull project. They were all considered and determined at the meeting on March 7.
“Nothing has changed. The proposals that were there remain on the table are unaware of any others that could feature.
“If you think about the judicial review which has commenced, it is not about asking the court to substitute a different site. The council has taken a democratic decision on March 7.
“If the review is unsuccessful, as I understand it, the court cannot substitute a different site.
“Any suggestion that the council is not committed to a new facility on Mull would be quite incorrect. On significant decisions affecting major capital projects being brought through the proper democratic process with full consultation with elected members, that is what has happened.”
Hampsey then requested, and was granted, a further adjournment to make the amendment competent, but was unable to do so in the time allocated.
She was then given permission to make a short statement and said: “Where is the legal advice that justifies this change in approach? How can we make informed decisions on such matters when it seems we are operating in an information void?
“I was aware of the review, as we all were. But it was not established or made clear to me that there was any intention that it would then be used to bypass the community and the democratic process.
“If there are concerns about the viability, or if legal advice is genuinely concerning, all members have a right to see the evidence.
“The young people of Mull and their families deserve better. They deserve members who are knowledgeable and informed, who demand answers and will insist on transparency.
“As full transparency and accountability is required, and that is a principle I hold as an elected member to serve the people of Oban South and the Isles and Mull, I ask there is consideration for more information for elected members.”
As Forrest’s motion was the only one ruled competent, it became the decision of the committee.
