Cayman deal challengers demonised by Council

by DOUGLAS SHEPHERD

Individuals who revealed Scottish Borders Council's £9.6 million Cayman Islands property deal have been criticised for a second time by the local authority while allegations of mischief-making have been thrown at critics by a senior member of the ruling Tory-led executive.

There are already calls for an investigation into the secretive transaction between SBC and agents working for the Hamilton family, who sold their 110-acre country estate at Lowood, near Melrose to the local authority last year. But at this stage there is no sign the local government regulatory bodies  plan to get involved in the contentious issue.

As we have already reported, the identity of two Cayman-based businesses which received millions of pounds of council taxpayers' cash - Lowood Estates Ltd. and Genesis Trust & Corporate Services - was uncovered via a Freedom of Information request lodged by ex-SBC councillor Andrew Farquhar.

But when that information was published here and media outlets followed up the story the council launched an attack, condemning publication of a publicly available FOI answer.

In a statement they said: "“As a public authority SBC was required to provide the information requested by Mr Farquhar.  Mr Farquhar and Mr Chisholm have now chosen to publicise this information in a way that, in our view, is entirely inappropriate.

"The Council believes private individuals should not be subject to this level of scrutiny regarding how they conduct their personal financial and legitimate tax affairs."

As a result of the press coverage, Hawick councillor David Paterson (Independent) who, like many other elected members was unaware the £9.6 million paid for Lowood had ended up offshore, submitted a question for answer at Thursday's full council meeting.

Mr Paterson's question to council leader Shona Haslam asked: "Will Scottish Borders Council be scrapping the deal regarding Lowood estate that was recently agreed with a company based in the Cayman islands?  I am convinced that the vote, which was extremely close, would have been much different."

In reply Councillor Mark Rowley, the ruling group's executive member for business and economic development told Mr Paterson: "The Council negotiated the acquisition of the Lowood estate with agents representing the Hamilton family. As a public authority SBC was required to provide the information requested by Mr Farquhar. 

"Mr Farquhar and Mr Chisholm have chosen to publicise this information in a way that, in our view, is entirely inappropriate.  The Council believes private individuals, in this case, the Hamilton family, should not be subject to this level of scrutiny regarding how they conduct their personal financial and legitimate tax affairs."

So SBC deployed the same tactic for a second time, using the same words in a bid to blame those who submitted FOIs for the developing storm over the controversial deal which will cost taxpayers £11 million, including fees, taxes and interest charges.

And, according to a news story on the Southern Reporter's website, Mr Rowley went further. He is reported as saying at the council meeting: “I think the mischief-making around this is really unfortunate, not least as some of the comment that has gone into the public domain has been provided by the adjacent owner, an Isle of Man-registered company.”

The company concerned is Middlemede Properties, proprietors of the top class River Tweed salmon fishing beat of Upper Pavilion which lies next to Lowood.

Consultants working for Middlemede submitted a detailed report to SBC in early 2018 outlining concerns over pollution risks and potential threats to salmon stocks if the council were to allow hundreds of new houses to be built on the land they subsequently acquired from the Hamiltons.

The local authority chose to ignore Middlemede's submission which also warned the housing market in the Central Borders was weak which meant house building on such a vast scale could not be justified.

Upper Pavilion's owners seem certain to vigorously oppose a number of the proposals contained in the so-called Tweedbank Masterplan, including SBC's development ideas for Lowood.