Former Braddan clerk says he left room when Commissioners discussed land he sold to Dandara (part 2)

Mr Lewin continued to maintain that Mr Hoggett’s medical condition was a confidential issue.

Mr Rodan presumed if the meeting had been successful that he would have informed the Chairman.

Mr Lewin explained that if Mr Hoggett had said on the 11^th May he couldn’t accept further instructions it probably would have been discussed then; but as Mr Hoggett didn’t, he didn’t think it necessary to mention it.

Mr Downie stepped in at this point and stated in fairly clear terms that the allegation was that the meeting formed part of the collusion with a developer.

It was most certainly not, was Mr Lewin’s response; and to the amusement of the public gallery, said they were dealing with people of calibre, Queen’s Counsel people - not the lot from Athol Street.

Mr Rodan then asked what had been the intended purpose of the petition to borrow £175,000 for consultants.

“To spend a lot of money” was the facetious reply from Mr Lewin. However, he added it was related to the prison, and that was the figure he told the Commissioners they would need to put a team together to oppose the prison. He had also arranged for them to meet with Mike Fayle, of KPMG, to discuss the issue as well, so he had done all he could do; it was then up to the Commissioners to make the decision and he would then implement it.

So your advice was no to proceed, inquired Mr Rodan.

Mr Lewin made it clear it was not for him to advise the Commissioners not to do something. He would just make sure they had considered all the implications, and taken professional advice, before they made the decision.

Mr Rodan wondered how the Commissioners had then funded the issue after the Department rejected the petition. Mr Lewin said they didn’t need the money as the prison went to Jurby.

Mr Rodan inquired about the contract with Turley, who were engaged in December 2000, and whether Lovejoy were also engaged at the same time. Mr Lewin said there was no contract with consultants, they just appointed them for specific issues; and there could have been an overlap with the two. He pointed out that these were the most eminent U.K. planning consultants.

Mr Downie put it to Mr Lewin that he was aware of internal investigation into a complaint by Mr McKinney against Miss Corlett, and that the Commissioners received a copy of the McGreal report, which resulted in the Commissioners calling for the DLGE to withdraw the draft plan; and asked Mr Lewin to comment.

He said he had been interviewed as part of the investigation, and when he received a copy of the report he sought legal advice, and it said you have to look beyond the perception to see if there is actual bias.

He said the Commissioners at first had supported the withdrawal of the plan - and he had heard Mr Halsall and Mrs Hodge saying, had they known about my sale of land, they would have definitely called for the withdrawal of the plan - but here I get confused, because at a meeting, 22^nd August 2006, the resolution says they are expressing serious concern at the Minister’s unjustifiable reason for withdrawing the plan.

So in 2005 they consider McGreal and call for the withdrawal of the plan, Mr Kennaugh comes to see the Commissioners with all his conspiracy theories, also in 2005; and then when the Minister does withdraw the plan in 2006 they unanimously say it is unjustified. I am baffled, he said, and I think some of the evidence given to you is misleading.

Mr Rodan pointed out that they were running out of time and may need to resume on another occasion but would allow Mr Karran a last question.

Mr Karran put it to Mr Lewin that this highlighted that Mr Lewin’s role was not the secondary role he had portrayed and the reality was some what different. He added he had tried to be independent, and attempted to have himself removed from the Committee, because of his former role as MHK for the area.

Mr Lewin took the opportunity to accuse Mr Karran of making numerous remarks, over the years, about him in Tynwald; and if he didn’t see that as a ‘perception of bias’ there was no help for the rest of us.

He continued, the serious point was that in 2005 they recommended withdrawal of the plan but, in 2006, with the Hansard before them, with the Minister’s speech, and having the benefit of all this advice, they unanimously, including Mr Jessopp who was there, made that resolution. (Editor’s note: Mr Lewin quoted only part of the resolution. The resolution was that a letter would be drafted, along the lines Mr Lewin described, and nothing more. It is also a matter of record that Mr Jessopp voted against the approval of the Minutes of the meeting.)

Matters started to then get a bit heated as Mr Karran brought up Mr Lewin’s salary and wage increases; but the Chairman intervened and said they needed to stay within the remit. He said he had one final question; and asked, when was it that Mr Lewin had applied for the job at Dandara and whether it was advertised.

Mr Lewin said he had been subject to unfair dismissal - sacked after 17 years without any warning, which came as complete shock - and in order to mitigate the massive claim, when it hits the Commissioners, and because he is busy, active person, he phoned up Heritage Homes and they made him an offer.

Mr Rodan asked what his previous involvement with Dandara had been.

Mr Lewin replied, “None”.

“None” inquired Mr Rodan with surprise.

“None” reiterated Mr Lewin.

Mr Lewin confirmed that the plant hire company did, but it had been disclosed, even to the DLGE; but this, which was part of Lewin Farms Ltd, had been sold.

Mr Rodan asked about a new company, Alliance Haulage and Groundworks Ltd.

Mr Lewin confirmed he knew of it, that the Directors were Mark Ellison and Angela East (his former P.A. at Braddan Parish Commissioners); and that he had “no involvement with the company at all”.

Mr Rodan wound up proceedings and said that, once they had considered the morning’s evidence, they may recall Mr Lewin or raise further matters in writing with him.