SIR, I refer to the report in last week’s paper regarding the future of the Chambers Institution trust. I have been approached by a number of people, anxious to know what is behind this decision.

While the thanks to myself as chairman and my colleagues who formed the executive committee of the Chambers Institution trust is appreciated, the public should be aware that for reasons I will explain, I and my fellow members of the executive committee have resigned as office bearers of the trust and those of us who are not appointed by Scottish Borders Council have also resigned as trustees, as has another of the independent trustees, because we find this decision and the way it was arrived at, quite unacceptable.

The report by the chief financial officer to which you refer, recommended that the council support the application by the trust, seeking charitable status. The terms of this report had been previously endorsed by the trustees in August.

However, at the trustees’ meeting on October 29, the day before the report was due to be considered by the council, a report was presented on behalf of the six trustees who represent Tweeddale as councillors, which summarised their position following a meeting they had held the previous day.

This proposed that the report by the chief financial officer be withdrawn and intimated that a motion of amendment to the effect that the chief executive be instructed to produce a report setting out alternative options for the revitalisation of the Chambers Institution.

The approval of this motion by the council has effectively brought about the termination of the efforts by the trustees of the Chambers Institution to achieve what I and my colleagues have endeavoured to achieve over the past three years.

No notification was given to me or to any of the non-councillor trustees that the meeting of councillor trustees referred to was taking place. No prior notification was given to me as chairman of the trustees, that it was the intention of the Tweeddale councillors to present their report.

The trustees have had more than two years to “pause and reflect”, but at no time has any trustee, councillor or otherwise, given me any indication that endorsement by the whole body of trustees of the chief financial officer’s report as drafted, was not acceptable. It is a basic principal of trusteeship that all trustees have an equal responsibility in relation to the trust and it is quite unacceptable that one group however appointed, have seen fit to make decisions which affect the whole trust.

When the trust was revitalised in 2011, it was the clear intention of Scottish Borders Council, with full support of councillors representing Tweeddale, that it should be independent of the council and that it should have charitable status. This was the basis on which the independent trustees were appointed.

The primary aim was to create a facility for Peebles which matches the best in the land and in a modern context, to provide the benefits to the community which Chambers so generously envisaged 150 years ago, by gaining charitable status and the ability to raise finance from outside sources.

With the assistance from trustees appointed from outwith Scottish Borders Council, considerable progress has been made. This decision effectively ends that process.

We are of the view that with proper backing the objectives referred to would have been achievable with the present model, but we have no confidence that the route now proposed will achieve those objectives.

It is with the greatest regret that we have come to our decision to resign, not only because we see it as a lost opportunity, but also in the knowledge that a significant amount of time and public money has been expended.

I am, etc.

Ronald Ireland Edderston Road Peebles