CHRISTCHURCH council "acted with secrecy and a lack of transparency" over the contentious Highcliffe beach huts project.

That's the view of the authority's task and finish group who have been investigating the controversial scheme proposed by the council last year.

An interim report is due to go before the council's scrutiny and policy overview committee committee on Wednesday.

It follows a special meeting in October where members of the council and officers were questioned over the unpopular beach hut proposal, which could have seen 12 'beach retreats' built on the cliff side at Highcliffe.

The final report on the matter will come to the committee's March meeting.

Campaigners fiercely opposed the plans, backed by Christchurch MP Chris Chope, with production company Plum Pictures, eventually pulling out of the scheme.

The report to next week's meeting says the council's participation in the TV scheme was based on plans which were already generated and approved from 2008.

These included the beaches and hinterland management plan, the harbour and coastal foreshore and the Chewton Bunny scoping exercise.

Only one of the reports refers directly to beach huts.

The specific idea for beach retreats at Highcliffe started when George Clarke's Amazing Spaces were filming at Mudeford in 2015, the report states.

It was from this point that confidentiality issues were introduced, insisted upon by the production company, the council says.

The task and finish group, set-up to investigate the unsuccessful project, say they have not seen the agreement between the council and Plum Pictures.

It was signed by council chief executive David McIntosh, with no involvement from councillors.

However, the Policy and Resources Committee did discuss contractual amendments to the contract in June last year, something which is questioned by the task and finish group.

In their interim report, the group said the 'confidentiality issue' does not sit well with the council's aim of transparency, and said it "was a main cause of public misunderstandings, which has led to the ending of the project."

And on the issue of public consultation, the group say this cannot be supported by the documents, "rather contrary evidence has been put before us."

They conclude: "There was no consultation on this TV project and that it was presented to residents that a final decision had already been undertaken, caused the perception that the council acted with secrecy and a lack of transparency."