The public has been blocked from rooting out the details of a “classified” cash donation to Glasgow City Council.
Members of the public along with local democracy journalists were asked to leave the council chamber while elected officials discussed the donation in private, following the advice of officials.
It is understood that the mystery organisation had requested anonymity and the public would not be informed about the size of the donation, its origin or what purpose the money will serve.
A report issued to councillors by Glasgow’s Director of Economic Growth, Kevin Rush, the city’s Community Empowerment Team and Chief Executive suggested they had been in talks with an “external organisation regarding a possible donation to the council”.
Susan Aitken has served as Leader of Glasgow City Council since 2017
Getty
As the SNP-led council is a public sector organisation, donations are typically included in normal local authority business and are therefore accessible by the public.
Nevertheless, council officials have taken on the requests of the donor and non-elected officials taking part in discussions have been asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement.
Glasgow City Council has been working within a challenging shortfall of funding in recent years, reporting a £110million budget black hold back in 2022, around 80 per cent came from inflated council worker pay.
Scotland’s biggest city responded by hiking parking fees and fines, while cutting jobs and some public service hours to keep the lights on.
Though a cash donation of any size would be a welcome investment in the city planning to host next year’s Commonwealth Games, the cloak and dagger theatrics around the donation has given some Glaswegians cause for concern.
Labour MP for Glasgow East, John Grady, has written a three-page letter to the head of Glasgow City Council, Susan Aitken, to ask her to elaborate further on council plans to keep the donation under wraps.
He wrote: “Accepting the donation on condition that the identity of the donor and related key details are not disclosed would make it difficult, if not impossible, for my constituents and other interested third parties to assess whether the donation created any conflict of interest.”
“More generally,” he said, “my constituents are entitled to expect transparency in connection with decisions of the Council. The acceptance of donations on the basis that key details about the donations will be kept secret is very concerning from a transparency perspective.”
Members of the public along with local democracy journalists were asked to leave the council chamber while elected officials discussed the donation in private, following the advice of officials
PA
Cllr Susan Aitken has pushed back on the discourse surrounding the donation, clarifying that confidential discussions are not simply “secret” and that both elected officials and non-elected officials under NDA are able to discuss the donation with “full transparency” and “have nothing withheld from them”.
Glasgow’s Director of Economic Growth put forward his report to the council on Thursday, which advised members of the council to exclude the public and press from witnessing the meeting discussing the “commercial negotiations relating to a disclosed donation to the council”.
On the advice given by the city’s Director of Legal and Administration Committee, the reason given was because the meeting was likely to disclose “the financial or business affairs” of the donor and therefore gives grounds to hold the session in private.
However, as pointed out by the MP for Glasgow East, the lack of transparency around the issue does not sit well with everyone.
As the story began to surface on social media platform X, user Tommy Taylor wrote: ”Every financial transaction by or given to the council should be public domain on a public ledger. Time for full transparency.”
“The people of the city should know who we are accepting charity from and whether or not we wish to accept it,” wrote Robert Beckett, while user Tony Watson posted, “I’m more interested in where the money is going and what it’s spent on.”
At present, a decision is yet to be made on the city’s position on accepting the donation.
+ There are no comments
Add yours