Concerns of a potential cover-up have arisen at Cotswold District Council after a complaint regarding an unnamed councillor implicated in a counter fraud investigation has been blocked due to the councillor’s identity remaining confidential.
The probe began in October after whistleblower allegations about procurement irregularities surfaced within the Liberal Democrat-led council. More than £80,000 worth of contracts were awarded to companies reportedly linked undisclosed to council officers and one councillor.
The council’s counter fraud and enforcement unit examined claims that three companies had been engaged outside established contract rules, possibly due to undeclared relationships with council members involved in the procurement process. Among these cases was a contract for rebranding work.
Though three proposals were submitted, one recommendation came from an unnamed councillor, while the successful tender was recommended by an unidentified council officer. The report notes that the evaluation process deviated from official procurement policies: no award criteria were specified, a single officer conducted the evaluation, and it was not independently verified before the contract award.
Furthermore, only the contracted company signed the agreement; the District Council did not. Legal services, finance, and the council’s senior leadership were reportedly not consulted regarding this procurement.
Council leader Mike Evemy declined to disclose the councillor’s identity during a recent meeting, stating he did not believe the report identified any wrongdoing by the councillor.
In contrast, the Conservative opposition asserts there are multiple breaches of the councillors’ code of conduct. They filed a formal complaint against the unnamed councillor, but it has been rejected because the complaint did not name the individual.
Conservative group leader Tom Stowe condemned the situation as a “farce” and a continued cover-up. He criticized the council for refusing to process the complaint without a named councillor while simultaneously withholding the name, calling it a Catch-22.
“It’s in the public interest to know who this councillor is and their current role in local government,” Stowe said. “If nothing wrong has been done, why hide their identity? What are they trying to cover up?”
He warned that until the councillor is named, uncertainty and speculation will continue to undermine trust in the council.
A spokesperson for Cotswold District Council said they could not proceed with the complaint as no councillor had been identified. They referenced the Localism Act 2011, Local Government Association guidance, and their own recently approved Code of Conduct Complaint Handling Arrangements, which stipulate that complaints must name the councillor involved to be investigated.