Causeway Coast and Glens Council: Audit finds failings in land sale deals

The report found "significant failings" in two land deals in which council chief David Jackson was involved

An extraordinary audit of controversial land deals by Causeway Coast and Glens Council has found a "culture existed of bypassing best practice and guidance to get land deals done".

The audit was ordered in November 2020.

It came after it emerged the council granted a right of way in Portstewart to a hotel developer for £1 in March 2016.

The council said it would consider the report and meet to discuss it in August.

The report found the council "failed to demonstrate" that it obtained the best price for the ratepayer in the transacting of land sales and rights of way.

Local government auditor Colette Kane said the behaviour of some council officers had "fallen short of the standards expected in a public body".

• Full Audit Office report into Causeway Coast and Glens Council

The report also found council chief executive David Jackson was "directly involved" in two particular land deals in which "a number of significant failings were evident", including the Portstewart case.

The review of this transaction found there was no professional valuation carried out prior to the granting of the right of way.

'Contrary to best practice'

The sale of land to a charity seeking to progress a hotel development at Castleroe Road, Coleraine, in 2015 for £5,000 also featured in the report.

The report found, in both cases, there was a failure to demonstrate best price was obtained and that "inadequate information" was presented by senior council officers to councillors to enable them to make informed decisions.

The local government auditor said, in her view, both land transactions were not "properly authorised" and that "there is a case for finding they had not been granted lawfully".

The report said the extent of the detailed involvement of the chief executive in a number of cases was "unusual".

The report found that a culture of "bypassing best practice and guidance" to get land deals done existed at the council

"I have identified evidence that adherence to legislation and best practice in land and property matters was not part of the culture of the council," said Ms Kane.

"There was evidence that senior officers were advocating actions that were contrary to best practice.

"This leads me to conclude that a culture existed of bypassing best practice and guidance to get land 'deals done' which set the wrong tone from the top of the organisation.

"In some cases legal advice was ignored and, on one occasion, inaccurate and unreliable information was provided to the local government auditor."

The report detailed how the right of way at Portstewart was granted to a hotel developer to allow site access for a proposed hotel development.

'Serious and concerning'

Ms Kane said senior council officers' responses repeatedly referred to the economic benefit to the borough "as justification for the decisions taken".

However, she added she "did not consider that these responses sufficiently excuse the divergence from good practice and guidance".

The local government auditor found the behaviour of senior council officers was "serious and concerning" and recommended council should "take appropriate action" including referring them to the relevant professional bodies.

On the finding that the conduct of some council officers had fallen "well short of expected standards", the report said "there were indicators of wilful misconduct" which were considered carefully.

However, it concluded "the threshold has not been adequately reached for any officer".

The local government auditor said the Portstewart case demonstrated "little regard for getting the best price for the council and ratepayers" and that the potential for marriage value/other special value to the purchaser "does not appear to have been taken into account".

'Undermined the integrity of public services'

The report also highlighted a perceived conflict of interest relating to the council chief executive David Jackson in the Coleraine case.

Ms Kane said the purchaser of the land nominated the chief executive for the Freedom of the City of London, which he was awarded in August 2016.

This came after initial contact with him regarding the sale but before sealing the transaction.

When asked whether this had been brought to councillors' attention prior to the acceptance of the award, the report said the council responded that "although several members were present when the chief executive initially declined the award and deferred to elected members, subsequently the mayor and group leaders were verbally briefed".

Ms Kane said this example along with another perceived conflict of interest relating to the valuation process in the Coleraine sale "could have, and should have, been avoided".

"They served to further undermine the integrity of the transaction being negotiated and the wider integrity of public services, creating a lack of public trust," she added.

In October 2020, BBC News NI reported the council's chief executive was "ultimately responsible" for granting right of way over public land in Portstewart for £1.

The North Antrim assembly member Jim Allister, who first brought the £1 land transaction to the attention of the Audit Office in 2017, said he welcomed the "robust findings".

Jim Allister said the land deals showed a "cavalier disregard for the ratepayers' interests"

Mr Allister became aware the council had granted the right of way for £1, when he successfully judicially reviewed the council's decision to grant planning permission for the hotel complex in Portstewart.

He described the findings as "truly shocking" and "well beyond the tolerance level where the chief executive and other senior officers can cling to office".

"The £1 land deal to assemble a site for a hotel developer illustrates the cavalier disregard for the ratepayers' interests and the lamentable failure of oversight by compliant councillors.

"I welcome the auditor's belief that the disregard for legal process renders the granting of this easement unlawful. The council must now address this challenge."

The report makes a number of other recommendations which include:

• The Department of Communities "should carry out a detailed consideration of its responsibilities... in light of the significant failings identified by this audit and take the required appropriate action and use its powers to intervene if necessary"

• An independent review of the council's governance arrangements, overseen by the Department for Communities

• The provision of enhanced training to elected members, to facilitate their understanding of the level of challenge and scrutiny needed when holding council officers to account

A spokesperson for the council said: "Causeway Coast and Glens Borough Council acknowledges the publication of the extraordinary audit report by the Northern Ireland Audit Office.

"Time will be required to fully assess the content and recommendations, and for council to consider the next steps.

"Work on this report began in late 2020, and throughout that time council cooperated fully with the Northern Ireland Audit Office.

"Council has already made changes to its land and property procedures and intends to comply with its obligations to ratepayers and stakeholders.

"The council will meet to discuss the report, its recommendations and further action to be taken, at the next full council meeting on Tuesday 2 August 2022."

'Conduct fell short of standards expected'

In a statement, the DUP said the conduct of some senior council officers "fell well short" of the standards expected and that public confidence "has been eroded".

Sinn Féin councillor Leanne Peacock said the findings were "deeply shocking and disgraceful" and urged action for the report's recommendations to be implemented.

The SDLP's Margaret Anne McKillop said there had been a "lack of accountability" at the council while the UUP said the council must ensure "recommendations made are dealt with in an appropriate way".

Independent councillor Angela Mulholland said a "special council meeting should be called sooner rather than later to deal with the findings".