You rightly report that I voted to against a 'call-in' of the decision of the council to accept a private bid for Moorburn House in place of the last-minute bid by Largs Initiative.

I did so with some reluctance, and after much thought. Not because I think Moorburn should be kept as a public building. That has never been my position: in my view the building is barely suitable for the purpose it currently serves. What attracted me to the Initiative"s proposals was the element of affordable housing which was a major part of the project and it is a great regret that the possibility, however remote, will now be lost.

However, there are very obvious difficulties with the Largs Initiative offer. It is hedged in with conditions and uncertainties. The proposal is by no means certain to get planning permission for several reasons. Integral to the Initiative"s project is a proposal for a car park in Moorburn Garden. This goes against the planning guidance - guidance which was brought in at the insistence of local councillors to ensure that Largs does not suffer the fate of the unsuitable development which has been allowed to blight Skelmorlie in the last ten years. It also goes against the sales brief for Moorburn and which was agreed by all four local councillors and which contains a specific prohibition on car-parking. It is also a fact that Moorburn House is a listed building, and the plans may not be upheld by the Heritage bodies.

There are also foreseeable difficulties in financing the project: it is not certain to get the necessary grants and these grants cannot even be applied for until mid-2009. And there are problems with the timing of the project: It will be at least 2 years, perhaps more, before it can even start. There are also problems with the maintenance of Moorburn House in the interim, who would be responsible and how it would be paid for. Any one of these difficulties could derail the project, which would mean a possible lapse of a number of years followed, in the end, by a failure to achieve our objectives.

Another strong factor for me was the fact that an existing arrangement between Labour and the SNP to tie the money from the sale of Moorburn to the proposed new Community Hall in Lade Street, could be jeopardised, and the financing of that project may be delayed or perhaps even nullified. On balance, it seemed illogical to break an agreement, and to support a project with an uncertain outcome, in an attempt to keep open an older building at the expense of the provision of a new Community Hall for the town.

I supported the private offer, on balance, because it was immediate and it met the conditions which all four local councillors had previously agreed. Given that the amounts of the offers are not greatly different, it seemed sensible to me to take the offer that would give an immediate and certain return as opposed to a delayed and uncertain return. It is important to point out that the private offer, if accepted, will result in Moorburn House returning to its use as a family house, it will be privately maintained inside and out, with no visual impact on the seafront.

For these reasons I agreed to reject the call-in. I know it is a complicated and, for some people, an emotional matter. Some may believe that I got my decision wrong, but I took it after much thought, and on the risks and facts as I saw them.

Alex Gallagher, Councillor,