A government regulator has confirmed it will investigate Slough Borough Council’s decision not to release details of a bribery complaint after a request from the Observer.

Under freedom of information laws the Observer had asked the council to release a letter it received suggesting money had been solicited in return for granting planning permission. But the council argued that it could be sued for breaching the confidence of the person who sent it.

Slough Borough Council said: “The information that is being requested has been provided to the Council in confidence and was not provided to the Council with the expectation of it being disclosed.”

It also argued that releasing the letter could harm its ‘effective conduct of public affairs'.

READ MORE: Slough councillor says resignation ‘not linked’ to bribery allegations

But the Observer asked the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to review the council’s decision, arguing the council had not shown it had considered the public interest in releasing the complaint.

The ICO has now confirmed it will investigate the complaint ‘to determine whether the council handled your request in accordance with the legislation.’

Slough Borough Council confirmed in April that it had received information ‘expressing concern about soliciting money in order to secure approval for planning permissions.’ It said it forwarded that information to the police.

The council says it couldn’t investigate as no individual was named in the complaint. Thames Valley Police later said it had ‘no active investigation’ as it had no evidence to support the allegation.

Slough Borough Council passed the allegations to police on April 2, two weeks before councillor Iftakhar Ahmed resigned from the leading group of councillors – the cabinet – where he was responsible for planning.

Councillor Ahmed denies that his resignation was related to the allegations, and was instead due to disagreements with council leader Dexter Smith over changes to roles in the cabinet.

Speaking back in April, he said: “I resigned from my cabinet position as I declined the leader’s portfolio changes. I didn’t agree with the direction of travel the local authority was taking.

“There is no connection; however, the perception that there might be a connection has been created by the leader due to his cabinet reshuffle, which tends to take place just before the AGM every year.”

He added that he had been told of the complaint by councillor Smith but that he had not been informed of the details.

He said: “The letters were never furnished, nor were the contents discussed in detail. I am unaware of which property developers have complained and in relation to what application, as no information has been provided to me.”