A row over an application by the provost of Stirling to host a celebration of UK’s armed forces has led to a call for a probe.
Provost Mike Robbins made the application to defence minister Anna Soubry. The Ministry of Defence then named Stirling as host city before councillors were able to analyse the bid.
The event on June 28 is expected to cost £250,000 to stage and clashes with a commemoration of the Battle of Bannockburn.
SNP councillors have asked why the decision by Stirling Council’s administration to host National Armed Forces Day was not brought to their attention until the application had been submitted.
SNP councillor Steven Paterson has now written to council chief executive Bob Jack, requesting an explanation for an aspect of an officer advice note at last week’s audit committee meeting.
Mr Paterson claims the note stated “as fact” that, by the council passing an administration report at a meeting held in October, this “explained and endorsed” the actions of the provost almost a year earlier, when he “apparently” applied for the event without any authorisation.
Mr Paterson said: “It is extremely disappointing that a statement seeking to explain away the actions of the provost in apparently applying for the National Armed Forces Day without authority in December 2012 was included in the officer advice note to councillors at last week’s audit committee meeting.
“The statement is clearly nonsense since, far from justifying any rogue behaviour on the provost’s part, the report at the October meeting merely noted Stirling’s selection and called for further information.
“There is a danger that this seeks to justify his actions before any full investigation has even begun, which is unhelpful to say the least.”
The email sent to Mr Jack highlights Mr Paterson’s concerns over “part of the content” of the advice note.
It said: “I consider that the insertion of the statement to the effect that any rogue behaviour by the provost in applying for an event and committing Stirling Council to a possible £500,000 of expenditure without proper authority is excused and authority backdated is entirely unacceptable.
“Please could you investigate the reasons this inappropriate opinion was added to the advice sheet?”