"Mr McCabe said he felt the delays and cost overruns had been down to chief executives and others failing to give councillors strong advice, ducking tough decisions and allowing drift to set in. In evidence to Holyrood's finance committee, he refused to bail councils out, and said it would be instructive to know the advice chief executives had been giving their councillors on the issue. "Were they discussing the fact that there was a growing problem that would have to be resolved, or were they just looking the other way? I don't know," he said. "If the chief executive of a council is being paid more than £100,000, or if a director of human resources is being paid in excess of £100,000, then there has to be some accountability for the advice that they offer. "We need to legislate to find ways of improving the professional accountability of people who work in local government."
I can think of some other public officials earning more than £100,000 who advise politicians, mostly in the Executive itself. Should they not also be more accountable? Of course, that would mean greater transparency on the advice provided and the action taken by Ministers. In other words, we would see how quickly (or not) Ministers react to advice and how sensible their responses are. But if that is unthinkable for Ministers, why should it be any less so for Council leaders?
Perhaps Mr McCabe should think more carefully before opening up this pandora's box?
No comments:
Post a Comment