The findings of a Bradford Council probe into its staff's poor handling of the biggest contract in the authority's history are to be kept secret.

The admission follows a damning report by the independent Audit Commission which found basic failings in the £1.2 billion Asset Management Project (AMP).

The process of finding a contractor to invest in Council-owned public buildings and take over their day-to-day running was suspended nine months ago following anonymous allegations about how it was being managed.

That sparked the suspension of a top officer and two inquiries, the first of which reported yesterday and found "significant weaknesses" in Council processes.

A second Council inquiry is still under way, but the authority's interim chief executive David Kennedy admitted it will not report publicly.

"The full details of the external investigation have now been made public but we will not be publishing the details of our internal investigation," he said.

"However, once we have concluded the investigation and re-appraised our position on AMP I shall be reporting publicly on a regular basis to the appropriate Council committees."

Bradford Council's executive member for regeneration and culture, Councillor Simon Cooke (Con, Bingley Rural), was unavailable for comment.

But Councillor Dave Green (Lab, Wibsey), the Labour group's deputy leader and AMP spokesman, told the T&A: "If the implication of what you are being told is that it would all take place behind closed doors that would concern me, would raise concerns among all members and should raise concerns with taxpayers.

"The Council are saying that they spent several million pounds of public money on something that was a disaster and, instead of being open and up-front about it, they are saying we are going to lock the door and it won't see the light of day."

Liberal Democrat group leader Councillor Jeanette Sunderland (Lib Dem, Idle and Thackley) added: "Given the now high level of public interest in the failure of this project all information should be published.

"The report has to go to a committee of the Council. Clearly there are rules of the Council that would protect personal information about employees but, given that the reputation of the Council has been besmirched, all the information should be put into the public domain."