That interview

Edited transcript - interview of Chris Holley by Simon Morris (BBC Wales)
Cross talk and repetition have been removed

David Williams (presenter): “Simon Morris started by asking him why he persuaded the councillor responsible for planning, john Hague, not to send his letter to the chief executive last October.”

CH: “This planning consent went through the planning committee and had that retrospective planning consent so the issue was dealt with. The letter that you comment about when it was discussed with myself and John Hague, I suggested to him that the issue had been dealt with and it was unwise …

SM: “In what sense had it been dealt with? The planning issue had been dealt with but the ethical issue had not.”

CH: “Well I’m here to discuss the planning issue.”

SM: “No, no, it’s the ethical issue. I’m not talking to you as a planning officer, but as the leader of the council, the only man on the council senior to the chief executive who is responsible for ensuring ethics and probity. We’ve got the situation of the chief executive regarded potentially guilty of gross misconduct and yet you did nothing about it.”

CH: “Let’s look at it this way. No-one in October at officer level was responsible, the monitoring officer, none of them brought the issue up.”

SM: “Councillor Hague did, a member of your own Cabinet, and Reena Owen did, also the following week, and discussed the matter personally with Tim Thorogood and expressed her concerns.”

CH: “I don’t know what Reena Owen discussed with the chief executive, all I can tell you …

SM: “You just told me officers weren’t concerned and I’m telling you that they were. It’s in the monitoring officer’s report.”

CH: “It was a planning issue. The planning issue was dealt with.”

SM: “It was an ethical issue. It’s about the conduct of the chief executive. The monitoring officer says at the end of his report that is one of the grounds for concluding he might be guilty of gross misconduct. Yet it was January but you did nothing about it in October.”

CH: “In October the monitoring officer didn’t say that.”

SM: “Why didn’t you mention this contact in the answer you gave councillors today? It didn’t mention John Hague’s contact. There’s an answer from you today and it doesn’t mention John Hague bringing this to your attention or any of that.”

CH: “Because the report was in red papers and not for general circulation.

SM: “But the facts are correct so you can still reveal them here.”


CH: “The facts were in red papers. The table of events that were in there are factual and that’s what happened.”

SM: “But it’s not the complete table of events, though, are they? Very far from it.”

CH: “Well they are there.”

SM: “But they’re not telling the whole truth.”

CH: “Yes.”

SM: “Not the whole truth. It doesn’t mention John Hague bringing this to you in October – it completely glosses over that.”

CH: “It doesn’t gloss over it, It says the truth of what happened.”

SM: “It doesn’t tell the whole truth.”

CH: “It tells the truth of what happened.”

SM: “It doesn’t tell the whole truth, though, does it?”

CH: “It tells the truth of what happened.”

SM: “You’re skating over that aren’t you?”

CH: “I’m not skating over it. I’m telling the facts as they are.”

LABOUR CALL FOR APOLOGY FROM COUNCIL LEADER

6 March 2006

Swansea Council leader Chris Holley has been told to apologise over the Thorogate affair by Labour rivals.

They claim Councillor Holley should have intervened when he first learned of planning issues regarding former chief executive Tim Thorogood's Rhossili home in October and read the £120,000 a year top officer the riot act.

Councillor Holley said Labour had far more to apologise for, pointing to the huge building repair bill the city is facing, and insists he did everything properly and acted swiftly once an official complaint was lodged in December.

He said: "The issue in October was dealt with by a planning committee which is open to public scrutiny. That committee dealt with the retrospective planning permission.

"There was no comment made to myself either from the monitoring officer or the head of human resources about the matter."

Councillor Holley said that when a complaint was made against Mr Thorogood in December and he was informed by the monitoring officer and head of human resources of the situation it was dealt with straight away.

He said: "I instructed them to make sure that everything they were doing was legal and above board and they approached me the following day which resulted, within an hour, of the chief executive being asked to leave the building."

Councillor Phillips believes that he is partially responsible for the action taken which is grossly incorrect and he has claimed that nothing happened until he intervened which has also proven to be incorrect."

Mr Thorogood has left the council in a £60,000 deal last month after facing an investigation into the row over a garage he built at his home.

Labour leader David Phillips believes Councillor Holley should have acted much sooner after a leaked report confirmed he was aware of the issue in October.

He said: "The report makes it clear that he knew something was wrong two months before an official complaint was lodged. As leader of the council he should have got Tim Thorogood in his office and read him the riot act there and then.

"Chris Holley was telling people that they should have been delighted with the £60,000 pay off and that it represented value for money. I believe that he now owes them an apology and a more truthful explanation about his involvement."

Council rebuts claims on garage

6 March 2006 - Western Mail

SWANSEA Council leader Chris Holley has strongly defended the authority over allegations it should have acted sooner over former chief executive Tim Thorogood's controversial garage.
Mr Thorogood quit his £120,000 post as head of Swansea City and County Council's 11,000 staff last month.

It followed complaints about additional work on the garage at the rear of the 46-year-old officer's luxury Gower home.

Mr Thorogood and his magistrate wife Alison only had planning permission to operate the building as a garage or tackroom.

A neighbour complained to the council when windows started springing up on the structure.
This week the BBC's Dragon's Eye programme revealed concerns were raised by councillors and council officers in October last year.

But it was not until December, when the neighbour complained, that action was taken.
The Thorogoods had been granted retrospective planning approval for the garage in October.
But the programme said an officer and a councillor, when driving past the Thorogood home, started to express concern.

Labour opposition group leader on Swansea Council, David Phillips, said that was the time action should have been taken.

But Mr Holley, leader of the ruling Liberal Democrat alliance on the council said yesterday, "As soon as the member of public complained and it was taken, we did go into action. Within an hour of having that information in December Mr Thorogood was asked to leave his office and he did not return.

"I did speak to a fellow councillor before the complaint came in. He was flabbergasted at what he had seen at the house. But politicians should not get involved in the planning process.

"As soon as we had an official complaint action was taken and we are now looking for a new chief executive.

"And I must stress that if enforcement action is necessary over that garage then it will be taken. It will be treated like any other planning matter and that is how it always was treated."
Mr Thorogood left the authority with a "mutually agreed" reference and a financial deal amounting to six months' pay.

Mr Holley said yesterday, "That was the best deal for the council tax payer because the costs could have been huge if we had a long, drawn out investigation while the chief executive was suspended on full pay."

TAX PAYERS NEED ANSWERS

South Wales Evening Post Editorial
4 March 2006

It's the mystery of the letter that never was. What did Councillor John Hague intend to bring up with Tim Thorogood on October 21 before the leader of the council persuaded him not to write? Was his main beef that the chief executive had jumped the gun by building before planning permission had been given? Or was he more concerned with the size of the development itself?

However interesting his reply would be, there are bigger questions left unanswered by the leaked report.

The first is what kind of work was carried out at the "garage" before the second application was approved. The second is whether Mr Thorogood made assurances, as sought by the Gower Society, that the "garage" would not be used for residential purposes before his wife inquired about advertising a holiday home on the council's website.

Unfortunately Mr Thorogood left the council with £60,000 before he could provide the answers.

Pursuing a disciplinary case may well have cost even more, but at least the council tax payer would have had the satisfaction of getting the answers. And without them this controversy will not simply go away.

LETTER OUTLINING COUNCIL CONCERNS WAS NOT POSTED

4 March 2006

Council leader Chris Holley persuaded a senior cabinet colleague not to send a letter outlining concerns about building work at the home of former chief executive Tim Thorogood, it has emerged. Mr Thorogood went on to leave before Christmas from his £120,000 a year post as details of a planning row came to light.

He was later suspended and left the council with a pay off worth £60,000.It has now emerged that cabinet member for environment, John Hague, drafted a letter to Mr Thorogood expressing concerns about the way planning applications had been handled by the former chief executive.

A leaked document, written by the council's monitoring officer, details the events and shows Councillor Hague had serious concerns months before an official inquiry was launched.The report said: "A letter was compiled from Councilor Hague to the chief executive expressing his concern over this matter.

"However, on returning to his office on October 21, Councilor Hague discussed the matter personally with Tim Thorogood.

"Councillor Hague advised him of his unhappiness with the circumstances, and he felt Tim Thorogood's actions in undertaking the works prior to approval had compromised the council's planning service.

"Councilor Hague advised him that he would be writing to him on this. Tim Thorogood stated that he would have to take advice if Hague sent the letter.

"Councillor Hague spoke to the leader, Councillor Chris Holley, later that evening and Councillor Hague was persuaded not to send the letter.

"Councillor Hague told a meeting of Swansea Council that he had seen the completed work at Mr Thorogood's home days after a retrospective planning application had been submitted.

He said he had dropped the letter because Councilor Holley had advised him the application had gone through the correct planning channels.

He said: "What I was upset about was that the work had already been carried out.

"I spoke to Tim Thorogood at length, then I spoke to the leader and he advised me that it had already gone through planning, and I took that advice."

Councillor Holley admitted the meeting with Councillor Hague took place, but defended his role in the matter, saying that until official complaints were received there was no issue.

"Yes, that meeting did take place. We discussed things that did go on, but that conversation was not relevant - it had been dealt with in a planning meeting," said Councillor Holley.

A planning request was put in by the former chief executive. On October 18 it was debated in public.

"No disciplinary issues were brought up, no human resources issues were brought up - nothing at all. It was a normal planning request," he added.

HOW THE SORRY SAGA UNFOLDED

4 March 2006

September 3, 2004 - Chief executive Tim Thorogood (pictured above) submits a planning application for a detached garage and workshop and informs department heads.

January 26, 2005 - Permission is granted.August 17 2005 - He seeks advice about making further changes and is told to submit a fresh application. He does not speak to heads of department.S

eptember 8, 2005 - A second application is submitted but he does not inform department heads. Work is carried out before the application is heard by councillors

October 18, 2005 - The application is approved, but Rhossili Community Council members point out they would have expected work to be carried out after permission was granted. The Gower Society raised questions about the size and design of the garage and sought assurances it would not be used for residential purposes.

October 20-21, 2005 - Councillor Hague drafts a letter to the chief executive but does not send it. Head of planning Reena Owen tells Mr Thorogood it would have been preferable for him to wait for permission.

November 29, 2005 - Alison Thorogood, Mr Thorogood's wife, asks for advice about advertising a holiday home on the council's tourism website.

December 2, 2005 - An official complaint is lodged alleging planning rules had been broken.

December 5, 2005 - Mr Thorogood is told of the complaint and that the planning department investigation would be carried out. As a result of that inquiry, it was found that a fitted kitchen had been added to the garage and that planning rules had been breached.

December 20, 2005 - Mr Thorogood is suspended, pending an internal inquiry.

January 13, 2006 - His resignation is accepted after a review panel decides Mr Thorogood has a case to answer.