The former leader of Warwick District Council has apologised for breaching confidence over a proposed £10 million spend on heightened environmental standards for new council homes.

Cllr Andrew Day said sorry to his successor as leader Cllr Ian Davison and the council for referring to confidential figures twice in separate public-facing meetings.

It was part of a longstanding debate around how to spend £90 million of funding set to be generated by the West Midlands Investment Zone (WMIZ).

Cllr Day was left "the crankiest I have felt about anything since this administration took charge" at the prospect of going over and above net zero standards on new homes to the tune of £10 million while delaying plans to build a new community stadium for Leamington Football Club.

He revealed the figure at a meeting of Warwick District Council's cabinet – the Green and Labour panel of councillors that takes decisions on major service areas – during a public session in June.

Despite immediately withdrawing the comment having been reminded of its confidentiality by Cllr Davison, the cat was already out of the bag with Cllr Day then referring to the figure again during a meeting for all councillors in September.

That left Cllr Davison "utterly appalled" and while Cllr Day reasoned that it was "in the public domain", the row appeared to rumble on in another meeting in October.

Cllr Davison, fielding a question on the future of Cllr Lowell Williams after he had been found to have been disrespectful to a member of council staff, something he subsequently apologised publicly for, said: "If you ask me which person has made the grossest violation of the code of conduct, I'm not going to name them but it is someone in the opposition.

"When this happened, lots of people came to me and said that action should be taken."

He was halted by meeting chair Cllr Pam Redford at that point. 

The matter was finally brought to a close last Wednesday (December 3) with Cllr Day apologising for both instances. 

"The first time was at cabinet and I apologised straightaway," he said. 

On the second occasion, he added: "I have been advised by officers that despite this figure being in the public domain [...] at the time of the most recent debate, it was a breach of confidence on my part to mention this sum, a breach which I sincerely regret. 

"I therefore ask you as leader if you will accept this apology on behalf of the council."

Cllr Davison thanked him "for being so open and up front", adding: "Yes, definitely."

Cllr Day returned the gratitude and asked: "Revisiting your comments about me at the October 1 council meeting, do you now have confidence in me returning to the trusted role – and it is a trusted role – of a member of your leadership co-ordinating group?"

That group sees party leaders on the district council meet with the cabinet in private to discuss upcoming business, including elements that are not in the public domain.

Cllr Day told the Local Democracy Reporting Service that he had temporarily ceased taking part but will now return after Cllr Davison delivered an understanding response.

"The simple answer is yes," said the leader.

"The longer answer is I don't have trust in any of us to absolutely never say anything wrong. I have huge sympathy for you because the complexity of what is public and what is not gets really difficult.

"If I have messed up I am glad no one has noticed it yet but absolutely, that is fine. We look forward to seeing you at LCG."