Tees Valley Mayor Ben Houchen claims publicly owned company was 'never owned by the public'

Tees Valley Mayor Ben Houchen has caused confusion after a radio interview in which he claimed the publicly-owned company at the centre of a share transfer controversy was “never owned by the public”.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s World at One, Tees Valley Mayor Ben Houchen was asked about whether or not there had been a tendering process when shares of Teesworks Ltd owned by the public body South Tees Development Corporation (STDC) were transferred into private hands.

Teesworks Ltd is the company that operates the freeport site that’s being redeveloped on land between Middlesbrough and Redcar on the former steelworks site. The business entity was originally owned completely by private property developers, but was renamed Teesworks Ltd when the STDC acquired 50% of the shareholding in July 2020.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The original private partners in the venture were the companies JC Musgrave Capital and Northern Land Management Ltd, which are owned by local property developers Chris Musgrave and Martin Corney, respectively.

Tees Valley Mayor Ben Houchen caused confusion yesterday when he claimed that Teesworks Ltd had "never" been owned by the public, despite a public body that he chaired owning a 50% stake between July 2020 and December 2021.Tees Valley Mayor Ben Houchen caused confusion yesterday when he claimed that Teesworks Ltd had "never" been owned by the public, despite a public body that he chaired owning a 50% stake between July 2020 and December 2021.
Tees Valley Mayor Ben Houchen caused confusion yesterday when he claimed that Teesworks Ltd had "never" been owned by the public, despite a public body that he chaired owning a 50% stake between July 2020 and December 2021.

The 50/50 public-private split in the company’s equity came to an end in December 2021 when it transpired that those same private partners were now in control of 90% of the shares in Teesworks Ltd.

One of the main unanswered questions that has lead to speculation and accusations of corruption at the Teesworks site centres around this share transfer in particular.

When asked by presenter Sarah Montague about whether there was a public tendering process for the share transfer to ensure best value for the taxpayer, Mr Houchen responded that “there was no public asset,” before adding, “it was never owned by the public.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Pressed again about whether there was a need for a public process when disposing of a publicly-owned asset by transferring the shares, Houchen said that there wasn’t because private developers “had the site, and they transferred fifty percent to us as the public sector.”

“There was no tender process because it was never owned by the public,” he said.

Records for Teesworks Ltd at Companies House prove that STDC, which is entirely publicly-owned, were listed as a “person with significant control” between 31 July 2020 and 26 November 2021 when they held 50 percent of the company.

When asked to clarify Mr Houchen’s comments, a spokesperson for TVCA told The Yorkshire Post that “the site was never wholly publicly-owned.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The interview comes after accusations this week that the Hartlepool Development Corporation (HDC), which Mr Houchen chairs, is selecting assets owned by the town’s local council in secret and without transparency.

A spokesperson for Hartlepool Council told The Yorkshire Post that the list of assets being considered for the HDC has been published despite the fact that a consultation was still being undertaken between Hartlepool Council and the government, and that the proposed list had still not been confirmed.

“There is currently a consultation, which is still open, between Hartlepool Borough Council and the Government, led by the Secretary of State. Therefore, at this stage it is only proposed,” they said. The consultation is open until 9 June.

In response to the accusations of secrecy around HDC, Ben Houchen said that “the controversy was being contrived” because legal advice the local council had received suggested that the list of assets to be transferred should remain secret until all consultations had been completed.