A call-in of a decision to allocate £26.5m of community project funding in Denbighshire has been successful, meaning it will now return to cabinet for debate. 

During a lengthy dispute at a partnership scrutiny committee, councillors expressed their concern that local members had been largely left out of the funding allocation process of the UK Government’s Shared Prosperity Fund. 

The successful call-in followed the council’s cabinet voting that a shortlisting process allocating the fund was fair and open. 

The cabinet had discussed individual projects and decided which funds would be allocated and where behind closed doors. 

110 projects had applied for the funding across the county.  

But back-bench councillors were unhappy, insisting they were left out of the process.  

Consequently five concerned councillors called in the decision. 

NEWSLETTERS:

Cllr Huw Hilditch-Roberts spoke at the meeting at Ruthin’s County Hall HQ and argued the process was not transparent. 

Explaining why he had called in the process, Cllr Hilditch-Roberts said, “I want to be clear: the reason for this call-in is not to hold up any process. 

“As a councillor, our role is to be the voice of the community, is to communicate to the community. 

“I want to understand what the process is so I can be a part of it and help deliver these projects.”

He added: “The comment that probably tipped me was that it (the process of allocating funds) was an art, not a science. Now, I’m sure if I went to a mortgage advisor today and said I wanted a mortgage, but it is an art, not a science, I wouldn’t get a mortgage.” 

Leader Cllr Jason McLellan said Denbighshire had followed the UK Government’s advised procedures and processes and that it had been up to group leaders to keep local councillors informed.  

“We adhered to UK Government guidelines on the process and the allocation of funds, and part of that was to establish a shared prosperity fund partnership, and a number of organisations were written to to take part in that,” he said. 

“I think it’s fair to say that timescales were very, very tight, and that’s just the nature of this process that UK Government is leading on, so at the time, group leaders were again written to, inviting them to be part of the process; therefore, in my mind, it was quite clear that group leaders were invited and group leaders would contact all of their members. That is the way that information across the county is disseminated.” 

Cllr Hugh Evans said, “It is clear you missed so many trigger points where members could have been involved in the process.” 

Cllr Karen Edwards added, “As a new member of the authority, a duly elected representative of this council, I feel as though I’ve had limited information, very sparse if anything at all.”  

The scrutiny committee voted that in future delegated decisions such as these were inappropriate and that the matter should return to cabinet for discussion on Tuesday, May 23. 

Members have also requested that funding evaluation processes and communication plans are shared with all councillors.  

Chairing the meeting, Cllr Joan Butterworth summed up the general feeling.

She said, “I realise there are some disappointments, and there are some procedures that do perhaps need tweaking in the future.” 

Whilst it was insinuated that it’s unlikely that projects would have funding decisions reversed, officers said funds were yet to be transferred and added there was a call-in caveat on each award of the fund.