TWO advisory boards have been set up within BCP Council to “ensure proper accountability” within council-owned companies. 

The boards have been set up in response to the controversy surrounding FuturePlaces, particularly how past cabinet members were directors. 

Senior officers at BCP Council have established the shareholder advisory board and shareholder operations board, a report said. 

The aim of the report is to “clarify and define the roles in decision-making in council-owned companies”, cabinet member for governance Jeff Hanna said. 

The advisory board consists of BCP’s leader and two cabinet members as well as senior officers and the chief executive of the local authority. 

And the operations board will exclude politicians, but instead comprise the chief executive and senior officers. 

Mike CoxMike Cox (Image: BCP Council)

Mike Cox, cabinet member for finance, would be on the advisory board due to his cabinet role.

He said: “Given the recent history with councillors potentially abusing their position, we’re in a far safer place.” 

He added: “There will be down sides but on balance there is upsides in terms of councillors’ and officers' relationship with each other and the fairness of that.” 

Council leader Millie Earl, on the advisory board, said she has long wanted cabinet members to not have directorships of council-related companies. 

She added: “It’s fundamentally flawed; we’re not able to have two hats on as a director of a company and at the same time act as a councillor. 

“Yes, we need to be very clear on scrutiny and the fact that these council-owned companies do have a level of accountability to the council. 

“But through directorship that is not the way to go.”  

But Labour BCP leader Patrick Canavan said he found the report “deeply frustrating and deeply disappointing”. 

“The idea of reviewing these council-owned companies by creating more layers of bureaucracy seems to me to be entirely flawed,” Cllr Canavan said. 

“We came into this process off the back of the debacle of FuturePlaces and the fact that things went on within it of which proved to be invisible to many people. 

“It revealed a complete lack of transparency around the organisation and a desire to ensure that all the rest of council-owned companies didn’t fall foul of the same problem. 

“What do you do: you create more committees, more bureaucracy to do exactly what you don’t need to do – to reduce the degree of transparency.”