Councillor Roger Evans asked the following question:

It is said by many that an interest grant of £80,000 was reputedly made to the New Saints Football Club (TNS) in 2012 (6 years ago) as part of the Market Towns Revitalisation Programme (MTRP). This was a public program involving a number of separate towns and was in place to help revitalise the economy of the main towns in Shropshire. All the money allocated to this program has now been distributed. Each of these programs also involved all the Local Parish and Town Councils.

I note the decision made at the recent Audit Committee. This was that in their opinion no fraud has been committed and the comment that their remit was to look and investigate allegations of Fraud. Their work had therefore been completed and they considered that if any further information is wanted then this is best asked for via the appropriate Scrutiny Committee. They noted there were differences between the remit of the committees.

I and a number of other councillors have and are being asked numerous questions by the media, residents of the area and residents living in Shropshire concerning a reputedly £80,000 grant that was made in 2012, some 6 years ago. These questions cover many areas querying the performance of the council in ensuring best value was obtained from this money, that legal rules covering the giving of grants by public bodies have not been contravened and ensuring it was used for the purposes as laid out in the agreed decision.

• Can the Scrutiny committee be given details including who made this decision, what it was to be used for and how if any of it was to be repaid including a timescale?

• If it was not part of the MRTP can it be confirmed what grant programme this was part of?

• Can we be assured that no legal rules governing grants given by public bodies have been contravened?

• Can the Performance Scrutiny Committee be assured that Shropshire Council will ensure that all grants it gives are used for the purpose as laid out in the original decision?

The Chair proposed that following legal advice taken prior to the start of the meeting, the Committee should exclude the press and public to receive the response to this question.  This proposal was duly seconded.  Councillor Evans expressed strong dissatisfaction with this, stating that much of the information regarding this matter was already in the public realm and he was asking for clarification.  The Senior Solicitor advised that discussing the issues raised in a public forum could prejudice any legal action the Council might take in relation to this case.  He advised that any consideration should be held in private session to enable free discussion of the issues.   

RESOLVED: 

That press and public be excluded under paragraph 10.5 of the Council’s Access to Information Procedure Rules.  The proceedings of the Committee be not conducted in public on the grounds that they might involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined by the category specified against them.

Councillor Evans requested that it be noted that he voted against the resolution.

Following disussion of the matter [as outlined in the confidential minutes] the meeting was reopened to the press and public.