THE family of former Bournemouth chief executive Tony Williams have expressed surprise they have not been contacted by the independent inquiry into leader Cllr John Beesley.

The inquiry, led by solicitor Mark Heath of specialist public sector law firm VWV, is expected to report imminently.

Mr Heath has been writing up his findings in the past couple of weeks. It’s unclear if council officials have received it or when they intend to publish the findings. But the Echo understands the family of Mr Williams has not been contacted. We asked Mr Heath if he had requested information from the family but he has referred all inquiries to the council.

The council-commissioned inquiry was triggered after the conclusion of the 18-month police investigation in December into Cllr Beesley, his business interests and council matters. It followed a complaint by ten Conservative colleagues. The Crown Prosecution Service concluded there was no evidence to bring charges.

Cllr Beesley, who is currently deputy leader of the shadow authority for the new Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole council, firmly rejects any suggestion of wrongdoing or breach of rules.

There is no suggestion of any illegality on the part of anyone else either.

Yesterday we revealed that the Daily Echo had seen some of Mr Williams’ private papers, which showed the extent of his own enquiries in his last weeks at the council.

He left the authority suddenly on March 17 2017, part way through his own review of Cllr Beesley’s private business activities. Mr Williams died of cancer in March last year.

'No inquiry could be complete' without Mr Williams' side of the story

When the Echo contacted representatives of the estate of Mr Williams, they expressed surprise they had not been invited to take part, to put his side of the story, “without which, no inquiry could be complete.” However they would make no further comment.

The inquiry he had himself initiated into Cllr Beesley’s business interests and their effect on the reputation of the council had begun two weeks before his quickly agreed redundancy. His papers do not allege any illegality on the part of the leader or indeed anyone else.

As we reported yesterday the inquiry centred on Cllr Beesley representing developers in a planning application for the Belvedere Hotel, but looked more widely at the leader’s business activities.

The application was granted by the planning committee in January 2017.

The papers from Mr Williams’ estate include his 40-page draft statement to the police, his own summary of the Belvedere issue, notes of his extensive meetings and phone conversations with councillors, officers, developers, hoteliers, and a Bournemouth MP.

His papers also include notes on legal advice he sought from solicitors Bevan Brittan over his review.

Proposal 'undermined council's excellent' relationship with hoteliers'

On the application, Mr Williams said Cllr Beesley asked the council’s monitoring officer, Tanya Coulter, if working for the applicants would be illegal. She is believed to have said it would not but it carried the risk of reputational damage to him and the Conservative Party. While he was convalescing at home after a life-threatening bout of pneumonia, Mr Williams listened to the audio recording of the planning committee when the Belvedere was approved.

He decided he would raise the conduct of the meeting with chairman David Kelsey when he returned to work.

A few days later he decided to talk to the council’s external auditor, Paul Dowsett of Grant Thornton, about it. He later met director of tourism Mark Smith, who said the neighbouring hotel owners and Bournemouth Accommodation and Hotel Association (BAHA) were unhappy at the decision and at Cllr Beesley’s role in promoting the scheme.

The proposal effectively undermined the council’s own policies and its hitherto excellent relationship with local hoteliers, he said. Hotelier and BAHA official Cllr Gina Mackin said she wanted a judicial review. A local Tory party official told Mr Williams the application had become an issue for some party members and that Bournemouth West MP Conor Burns specifically had concerns about Cllr Beesley’s role.

Solicitors quickly recognised reputational risk to the council

Mr Williams personally sought advice from solicitors. They provided him with a three page report headed: “Confidential advice to Mr Tony Williams of Bournemouth Council in respect of ethical matters.”

The report was written on March 20, three days after Mr Williams left the council. Mr Williams noted in his own papers that they had been supportive and they had quickly recognised the reputational risk to the council.

He wrote that the advice also identified the possible inappropriateness of Cllr Beesley’s work on behalf of the developer given “his executive position on Cabinet.”

In their report, according to Mr Williams, they said concerns expressed by and to him would need to be raised with Cllr Beesley soon. It should be once there was a clear view about issues of concern which had been raised and what action should be taken as a result.

They said that thought had already been given to steps being put in place as a matter of urgency to protect officers and that would establish a single means of communication which would be directly through Mr Williams for any meetings Cllr Beesley needs with planning officers. There is no evidence that Mr Williams had the opportunity to raise his concerns with Cllr Beesley before he left with just a few hours’ notice. In his notes on March 17, just two weeks after coming back to work after his pneumonia, Mr Williams highlights a change of heart by the leader, who a few days after dismissing a proposal for redundancy for him, now agreed it. At this point, Mr Williams had not spoken directly to Cllr Beesley about his investigation, but he had advised officers. Within hours, an agreement had been signed and Mr Williams had left the council minus his phone and door pass. The council also wanted access to his emails.

Mr Williams felt he was treated in 'hostile manner'

He noted in his statement: “I have no idea why. My assumption is that they wanted to see what information I had in the course of my review and what emails I had exchanged with witnesses, the external auditor and the solicitors.

“I could not explain the need to treat me in such a hostile manner as it was a mutually agreed decision.”

Cllr Beesley has been offered a full right of reply but has stated any comment would be inappropriate pending the outcome of the independent inquiry.