A Reform UK councillor sparked a heated row over Hampshire’s £10bn pension fund after dismissing responses to a public consultation as “pretty pitiful”.

The clash came as councillors considered the fund’s investment strategy statement (ISS) following a consultation in which dozens of respondents called for changes to investments linked to arms companies and the conflict in Palestine.

The consultation received 138 responses, including 62 that referred to Palestine or genocide in relation to the fund’s investment decisions.

A report said similarities in the wording and timing of many submissions suggested there “may have been organised campaigning activity”, although all feedback was considered.

Speaking at a meeting of Hampshire County Council’s Pension Fund Panel and Board on September 25, Reform UK councillor Paul McCormick said he found the consultation results “quite extraordinary” and “frankly pretty pitiful”.

He said: “It seems to me so odd indeed that we’re giving any sort of weight whatever to views of political activists and single pressure groups who are trying to push a particular agenda and hijack.”

Cllr McCormick argued that some of the submissions focused on issues unrelated to the questions being consulted on and said the fund’s primary purpose was to protect the long-term interests of pensioners.

He added: “Someone who’s just piling in comments like that without any regard to the question shouldn’t be given the time again. “I think it’s taken up a lot of paper and a lot of nonsense.”

But Liberal Democrat councillor Jack Davies rejected that criticism, saying people who had taken part in the consultation deserved to be heard regardless of whether councillors agreed with their views.

He said: “Just because you disagree with them doesn’t mean they’re not valid.” Cllr Davies added the fund had a responsibility to consider ethical concerns alongside financial performance.

He said: “There are significant concerns among the general population about the Israel-Palestine situation and it is certainly of concern to me.

“I would hope that any investments made by the pension fund would be on an ethical basis, which is exactly what is set out in this paper.”

The debate intensified when Liberal Democrat councillor David Podger challenged McCormick’s remarks.

He said board members represented pension scheme members and would not be swayed by what he described as “frivolous ideological concerns”.

“I find your comments close to being insulting,” he told McCormick.

Fund officers said they welcomed people taking part in the consultation, while acknowledging that responses had focused heavily on an issue that was not expected to be the main theme.

Of the 62 responses referring to Palestine or genocide, 31 came from people who identified themselves as members of the Hampshire pension fund, while 31 came from respondents who did not state whether they were members.

Councillors ultimately approved the strategy.