The bitter in-fighting over the defection of Dundee's Labour Lord Provost, handing the SNP control of the city, erupted yesterday with his claim that he had been offered an OBE to step down.
Labour have vehemently denied the claim that Lord Provost John Letford was offered the honour to stand down during a time when the party was desperately trying to avoid the SNP gaining control of the city.
The deputy Lord Provost, Ian Borthwick, another councillor who left the Labour fold, was to have taken over as Lord Provost, keeping the ruling anti-Nationalist coalition intact, with Mr Letford stepping down in return for being put up for an OBE.
But he refused and stayed on as Lord Provost. Now he has quit Labour to sit as an independent, saying he will vote in favour of the 14-strong SNP group forming an administration on the 29-seat council next week.
When Mr Letford announced his intention this week he hinted that if former Labour colleagues attacked him he would release further allegations against them. These came yesterday with his claim that they tried to bribe him with promises of an honour if he stepped down.
Revealing the "very major reasons" why he resigned, he said. "The overriding incident, which I found disgusting and unforgivably embarrassing, was that I was approached by the group asking if I would give up two years of my term of office to keep Mr Borthwick on board, who would subsequently get me an OBE. I am disappointed to say that Mr Borthwick made the same request to me later.
"I turned both requests down, of course, expressing my disgust to both of them and reporting the incidents to the relevant officers of the council."
Both Labour group leader Kevin Keenan and depute Lord Provost Borthwick have vehemently denied the claim, although councillor Keenan has been arguing this week that Mr Letford should be sacked as Lord Provost to make way for Mr Borthwick.
Mr Keenan said he had no "position or influence" to deliver an OBE, while Mr Borthwick described the row as "a very sad turn of events" adding: "What on earth does this do to the image of the city?"
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article