No expense spared when democracy's at stake

EWAN LAMB brings you the latest allowances paid to local parliamentarians

Readers of the Scottish Daily Mail would no doubt be outraged (aren't they always?) this week to be told in a front page banner headline that South of Scotland Labour Member of the Scottish Parliament (MSP) Claudia Beamish was charging taxpayers 60 pence for cycling to and from Holyrood.

In its usual fair and balanced coverage of all things political in Scotland, the Mail went to town on Ms Beamish for legitimately claiming 20 pence a mile for biking to work. The money would just about cover the cost of oiling the chain of her bicycle and having the machine regularly checked by a reputable dealership.

So how did the elected members with offices in the Scottish Borders fare in the allowances stakes during 2016/17.

Not Just Sheep & Rugby decided to publish the statistics without 'slamming' or praising anyone. The residents of the South of Scotland can comment if they wish, but we will leave the editorial expressions of outrage and anger to the Mail, which does, after all, pride itself on its standards of journalism.

Here are the claims made by Borders representatives during the last financial year. The data covers a period before John Lamont decided to resign his Holyrood seat and stand (successfully) for a Westminster constituency.

John Lamont (Conservative)– office in Hawick - 2016/17 total £34,217 for 436 separate claims. Main headings: Edinburgh hotels £4,111 (35 claims); member’s travel £6,845 (224); office provision £17,775 (108); staff travel £1,627 (37); telecommunications £1,337 (14); surgery advertising £2,489 (16).

 

Previous years totals: 2015/16 £33,896; 2014/15 £36,785; 2013/14 £33,561; 2012/13 £30,385. FIVE YEAR TOTAL - £168,844

 

Christine Grahame (Scottish National Party) –  office in Galashiels - 2016/17 total £19,241 for 176 claims. Edinburgh hotels 0; member’s travel £972.90 (75); office provision £16,458 (75); staff travel £220.75 (9); telecomms £688.38 (10); surgery advertising £813.25 (3).

 

Previous years totals: 2015/16 £19,358; 2014/15 £21,361; 2013/14 £19,997; 2012/13 £18,873. FIVE YEAR TOTAL - £98,830.

 

Paul Wheelhouse (Scottish National Party) – office in Hawick -  2016/17 total £16,169 for 96 claims. Edinburgh accommodation £5,933 (30); member’s travel £375 (12); office provision £9,246 (40); staff travel 0; telecomms £555.24 (13); surgery advertising 0.

 

Previous years totals: 2015/16 £13,332; 2014/15 £16,903; 2013/14 £18,368; 2012/13 £21,190. FIVE YEAR TOTAL - £85,962.

One other Borders politician is included in our list. Rachael Hamilton (Conservative) was elected as a list MSP for the South of Scotland in May 2016 which means her allowance claims cover a 10 month period up to March 2017.

Mrs Hamilton subsequently resigned her list seat and replaced Mr Lamont as a constituency MSP in June this year. During the period covered by the 2016/17 figures on allowances she did not have an office in the Scottish Borders.

During 2016/17 Mrs Hamilton received £13,962 for 118 separate claims.

These included Edinburgh hotels and accommodation £11,034 (17), member’s travel £1,735 (70). office costs £761 (13) for advertising, hall hire for surgeries, printing and photocopying and staff travel £78.60 (12).

 

Borders waste strategy needed urgently

by DOUG COLLIE

A new set of environmental data for 2016 shows Scottish Borders Council sent an extra 347 tonnes of household waste to landfill last year, and local recycling achievements lagged far behind most of the rest of Scotland.

The official statistics released by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency [SEPA] places the Borders in the bottom four of 32 Scottish local authorities when it comes to the percentage of waste buried in the ground.

It means there is no sign that the local landfill tax bill, currently running at £2.50 million per year, will be reduced any time soon. And SBC appears to be failing to persuade its citizens to generate less garbage with the overall total for 2016 up by more than 2,000 tonnes.

Borders consumers of local government services were promised a fit for purpose waste management strategy in 2015 after the catastrophic collapse of a £23 million project to develop a treatment facility at Easter Langlee, Galashiels. The latest wheeze is to take the refuse away in fleets of lorries for treatment elsewhere - a seemingly desperate ploy to beat landfill deadlines at a cost of more than £1 million annually in expenditure on road haulage.

Had elected members stuck with proposals to have a Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) plant up and running at Easter Langlee by late 2013 then the drain on landfill tax could well have been cut by £2 million per annum.

But instead they decided to gamble by incorporating a useless form of incineration into the scheme to convert rubbish into electricity. After four years of delays and major technical hitches the entire waste treatment project was abandoned with taxpayers picking up a £2.4 million bill for absolutely no return.

According to SEPA's statistical tables Scottish Borders generated 51,921 tonnes of waste last year compared to 49,848 tonnes in 2015. The volume sent to landfill (30,702) represented 59.13% of the total. The equivalent figures for 2015 were 30,355 tonnes and 60.9%.

The only three authorities with a higher percentage of rubbish being buried were Glasgow City, Western Isles and Aberdeen City. To demonstrate what SBC might/should be achieving, Dundee City landfilled a mere 6.82%, Renfrewshire 24.2% and Angus 25.5%. The Scottish average - like the average recycling rate - was 45.2%.

It is worth noting just how far Borders is behind targets for recycling which were set by the Scottish Government at the beginning of the present decade. By 2012 authorities were meant to be recycling 50% of waste with that proportion meant to escalate to 70% by 2025. SBC has just recorded  a 39.03% recycling rate for 2016, up from 37.3% in 2015.

Will council sanction copycat application?

DOUGLAS SHEPHERD contemplates a planning dilemma

Councillors in the Scottish Borders who rejected proposals for a £4 million waste transfer station in April on the back of six written objections will soon consider a "revised" planning application which opponents claim is virtually identical and which has attracted 19 objections.

The WTS at Easter Langlee at the site of the region's only public landfill facility is urgently needed following Scottish Borders Council's failure to commission and deliver a suitable waste treatment plant. And attempts to assemble a credible waste management strategy have repeatedly ended unsuccessfully over the last 15 years.

It may seem strange to the layman, but SBC has had to submit two separate requests for planning consent to themselves as planning authority for the area. The WTS would be home to thousands of tonnes of household refuse until it was shipped out by road for treatment at an established facility some distance from Galashiels.

According to waste management experts the cost of this distinctly environmentally unfriendly solution to the council's waste management woes was estimated at more than £1 million a year back in 2009. So the likely price for road haulage thanks to the inability to fund and build a conventional MBT [Mechanical Biological Treatment] plant seems certain to be considerably more in 2017/18.

Opponents of the WTS argue the C class road leading to the Easter Langlee site is totally inadequate for the volume of heavy traffic the development would generate. It is difficult to see what has changed since April when elected members threw out a recommendation from their own staff to give the WTS the go-ahead.

Cynics have commented that the councillors were 'grandstanding' just a few short weeks before the local government elections. But others were convinced planning committee members had listened to the serious concerns of local residents.

So it will be interesting to see whether the second attempt to secure the WTS also ends in failure. It is a potential setback the local authority can ill afford with landfill deadline day looming large in its wing mirrors. Had the MBT been delivered on time in 2013 some 80% of Borders rubbish would have been diverted from landfill and there would have been no requirement for a giant garbage store.

This time round Galashiels Community Council has added its voice to the dissenters. Like other opponents it sees merit in finding a "more suitable" location close to a main route and away from the
hazardous network of country lanes close to Easter Langlee.

In their written submission, the community council state: "The Community Council after hearing all points made wishes to object to this planning application as we do not feel that the conclusions made in the Transport Report are valid.

"Photographs were produced by residents of accidents on the C77 which refute the points made in the report that it can be made safer with lighting; widening at specific areas; implementing a speed limit and erecting various signage.

The size and regularity of large vehicles on this road are a danger to people and children; cyclists and horses. The number of houses adjacent to the C77 has increased over the years, especially the Melrose Gait development (not yet complete, with another phase still to be built."

Comments were raised about the unsuitability of the Lowood Bridge for heavy vehicles but the SBC representatives advised that the bridge repairs and upgrading would accommodate this.

In conclusion the community council claims: "In essence, the view is that the waste transfer station application is flawed, particularly the Transport Report and we object to this and also suggest that the Council should be looking for another location."

Incredible accolade from Audit Scotland

by EWAN LAMB

The Scottish local authority which repeatedly refused to release information about its failed waste management contract and had to be ordered to make top secret documents public on several occasions by the information commissioner has just been described as "open and transparent" by spending watchdog Audit Scotland.

This unlikely and frankly incredible conclusion is reached in Audit Scotland's annual audit report on Scottish Borders Council's accounts for 2016/17 which will be presented to a council committee next week. The finding is about as plausible as the outcome of the audit into the waste contract itself which provided SBC with a clean bill of health despite losing millions of pounds of taxpayers' money.

According to the audit report, beneath a heading Governance and transparency it states:"The Council has appropriate governance arrangements in place that support the scrutiny of decisions made by the Council. The Council is open and transparent in the way it conducts it business and the public can attend meetings of the Council and its standing committees."

But the fact is SBC's own Scrutiny Committee was not allowed to examine the four year fiasco which resulted from the decision to hook up with insolvent contractors New Earth Solutions. And members of the public have been able to attend ALL council committee meetings in Scotland since the 1975 reform of local government. At the same time councillors can decide to hold sections of meetings in private whenever they wish.

Later on, five whole paragraphs are devoted to the council's superb transparency arrangements. In the interests of accuracy and fairness we have decided to quote paragraphs 78-82 of the report verbatim:

78. Transparency means that the public, in particular local residents, have access to understandable, relevant and timely information about how the Council is taking decisions and how it is using resources such as money, people and assets.

 

79. There is evidence from a number of sources which demonstrate the Council's commitment to transparency. Members of the public can attend meetings of the full Council, executive and other committees. Minutes of these committee meetings and supporting papers are readily available on the Council’s website.

 

80. The Council’s website allows the public to access a wide range of information including the register of members’ interests, current consultations and surveys and how to make a complaint.

 

81. The Council makes its annual accounts available on its website. These include a management commentary which provides details of performance against budget, information on the use of reserves and risks and uncertainties facing the Council.

 

82. Overall, we concluded that the Council conducts its business in an open and transparent manner.

On reading this glowing testament to openness, a former councillor told us: "What a lot of claptrap, This stuff is just padding and alluding to what every council is obliged to do.   What's great about public attending meetings or having access to accounts? Who are Audit Scotland trying to fool?"

The very next section of the document deals with SBC's Freedom of Information handling. And here again, despite recent events which saw the council lambasted (twice) for wrongly withholding information it did not want the public to see, Audit Scotland claims everything in SBC's information garden is rosy!

This is what the report says:

83. During 2017 the Scottish Information Commissioner has issued two rulings against the Council regarding its handling of a Freedom of Information (FoI) request from a member of the public. These decisions found that the Council had not complied with the requirements of the FoI legislation and had incorrectly withheld information.

 

84. As part of our audit work we held meetings with Council officers to discuss how the Council had responded to the FoI requests, and to determine whether the Council had identified any lessons to be learned from the handling of the request or any improvements to its process for dealing with requests. Based on the work carried out, we are satisfied that the Council has an appropriate system in place for responding to FoI requests and that improvements have been adopted.

So that's all right then!

Audit Scotland came up with a similar 'lessons learned' conclusion following the failed £23 million project to provide the Borders with a suitable waste treatment facility. It described the massive loss of public funds as "a poor outcome" but maintained SBC followed correct procedures in ditching their useless contractors in 2015.

Unfortunately that audit did not come up with an explanation for the huge gamble taken by elected members in sanctioning a form of rubbish incineration which had never been tested and could not be made to function. An investigation into that aspect of the debacle, and perhaps the role of Audit Scotland in the affair, is still required.

Chuffin' heck: where's the boom?

by DOUGLAS SHEPHERD

A decision by Scottish Borders Council to borrow £7.7 million and settle their share of the Waverley Railway (north section) reinstatement, then use house builders' development contributions to pay off the loan over ten years may turn out to have been a bit risky.

Despite upbeat predictions a decade ago by politicians and estate agents that the second coming of trains in 2015 would spark a house construction boom in Midlothian and the Central Borders, thereby generating large sums of dosh for the two local authorities, there is no sign of a building bonanza in and around Galashiels.

On the other hand new figures published this week by the Scottish Government show house start-ups and completions by the private sector in Midlothian are at record levels. At the same time building industry activity in the Borders has slumped to an all time low.

The housing demand near the northern stretches of the railway line may or may not be directly attributable to the return of the Iron Horse after a gap of 46 years. But the sharp contrast in house building rates in neighbouring council areas is distinctly puzzling.

Here are the statistics which should give local economists, councillors and other stakeholders considerable food for thought. In the Borders case the completions and starts are for the whole region rather than for the narrow corridor where developer contributions are levied. The Scottish Government tables show:

Private Sector housing starts for Midlothian & Scottish Borders:

BORDERS – 2016: 211; 2015: 272; 2010: 215; 2006: 692; 1996: 254. Note: The 2016 figure of 211 is the lowest since 1998 (197).

MIDLOTHIAN – 2016: 847; 2015: 593; 2010: 205; 2006: 309; 1996: 306. Note: 2016 figure of 847 is highest since records began (1996)

Private Sector housing completions for Midlothian & Scottish Borders:

BORDERS – 2016: 235; 2015: 347; 2010: 429; 2006: 618; 1996: 523.

MIDLOTHIAN – 2016: 642; 2015: 583; 2010: 266; 2006: 169; 1996: 209. Note: 2016 figure of 642 highest since records began (1996).

Figures for house completions in the Waverley Developer Contribution area (includes Lauder, Galashiels, Melrose and Selkirk) in the five financial years to 2015/16 can be found in the Scottish Borders Council Housing Land Audit 2016.

The numbers are - 2011/12 89; 2012/13 101; 2013/14 110; 2014/15 91; 2015/16 118.

According to the audit, approximately 32% of all Borders completions fell within the Waverley Developer Contribution area. The report does not specify whether these statistics are for all completions or just the private sector.

But what is clear from both sets of data is that so far the Borders Railway has not kick-started a housing boom in communities bordering the southern sections of track.

It is to be hoped the council attracts enough contributions from house builders to meet the cost of the £8 million loan they took from the Public Works Loan Board [PWLB] in February with an interest rate of 2.05%. This advance is repayable over 10 years.

In April, SBC borrowed a further £10 million from PWLB in April at 1.90%, also over 10 years. Information posted on the PWLB website does not specify what each loan would be used for.

Borders councillors were told at the beginning of this year that by repaying their 'bill' for the railway upfront after borrowing the cash rather than meeting their commitments in instalments through to 2038 by handing over developer contributions they could expect to save around £4 million of public money.

A Freedom of Information request submitted to SBC in June 2014 asked for the total number of development contributions obtained for the railway project so far (2004 to 2014). The council reply showed there had been 241 developer contributions valued in total at £743,127 - far less than the number required to keep up the council's payments. 

Mystery solved by liquidator's report

EXCLUSIVE by EWAN LAMB

The latest revelations from liquidators who are investigating an insolvent offshore investment company have helped to explain why there was no mention of the fund in a series of monthly reports to Scottish Borders Council by contractors commissioned to build a waste treatment facility for the region.

As we reported over the course of the weekend, Deloitte's, the liquidators for New Earth Renewables & Recycling [Infrastructure] PLC (NERR) has told creditors, investors and shareholders in the fund that while £40 million was being paid out to "service providers", there were no subscriptions from investors from January 2014 onwards.

NERR was supposed to bankroll the £23 million waste treatment plant planned at Easter Langlee, Galashiels by contractors New Earth Solutions (NES). But the local authority was fobbed off with one excuse after another between 2012 and early 2015 as the waste management firm and its "funders" failed to put up the cash for the 'cutting edge' project.

Not Just Sheep & Rugby has now taken a fresh look at the monthly "progress" reports which NES sent to SBC throughout 2013 and 2014. These highly sensitive documents were finally released by the council last month on the orders of the Scottish Information Commissioner.

Each report up to February 2014 carries so-called updates on further funding arrangements with regular mentions for the future role of NERR in delivering the much needed Borders facility.

But following the block on new subscriptions into NERR there is a complete absence of funding updates for seven months. And during that time the crucially important development of the closure of subscriptions is not mentioned.

It is only after an inquiry is made about funding by SBC that NES offers this response: "Action is being taken to raise funds to invest in new projects. A senior debt provider is expected to complete arrangements by the end of August with funds being available in September. This will provide a significant sum of money of which the majority will be returned to NERR".

The following month's update includes yet another carrot: "The visit from the New York based fund that may sit alongside NERR went well. They have said that they now wish to explore with NERR how they can provide money both at a NERR shareholder level and directly into projects.

"Scottish Borders was prominent in the discussion. There will however now be a lengthy due diligence programme to establish the means and timing of any investments".

In a telling comment written in the margin of this report a project team member asks 'Is this a six-month process or a six-year process'.

The truth is that by this time NERR had no income but was ploughing millions of pounds of investors' cash - £24 million in total - into the floundering New Earth Solutions companies. The fund was incapable of financing Project Easter Langlee but SBC was still being told NERR had a role to play.

So did an apparent lack of scrutiny and involvement by elected councillors fail to detect the contract was in critical difficulties long before its abandonment in February 2015?

Perhaps an Audit Scotland report on capital projects by local authorities which was published in 2016 contains some telling passages.

It concluded: "Elected members are not able to scrutinise the performance of capital programmes effectively because they are not receiving adequate information on capital investment. The majority of councils' progress reports to elected members on major capital projects focus on reporting capital spending in the current financial year. Some councils do not report cumulative capital spending, covering several years, against the total capital budget for individual projects.

In a specific reference to the failed Borders project the report says:

"Waste Treatment facility

The Scottish Borders Council cancelled the project due to project-specific issues. In particular, the council failed to demonstrate the project's technical viability and was therefore unable to secure funding for the project. External auditors are satisfied that it followed appropriate procedures in relation to this decision."

Fees of £40 million taken from bankrupt fund

EXCLUSIVE by DOUG COLLIE

An investigation by insolvency experts has discovered that a staggering £40 million worth of fees were dispensed by the directors of the 'green' investment fund which was meant to pay for a planned waste treatment plant to serve the Scottish Borders.

The money removed from the Manx-based New Earth Renewables & Recycling [Infrastructure] fund (NERR) to pay controllers, managers, custodians and promoters far exceeded the £23 million required to cover the cost of Scottish Borders Council's proposed treatment facility at Easter Langlee, Galashiels.

Yet NERR could never come up with the resources for the Borders plant in the four years before the local authority's deal with contractors New Earth Solutions (NES) was abandoned in February 2015. By that time SBC had spent £2.4 million preparing a project which never got off the ground.

A newly published report to creditors and shareholders by NERR liquidators Deloitte has also revealed that the fund never received any subscriptions from investors after January 2014, long before Project Easter Langlee had to be scrapped. But it continued ploughing money into the loss making NES companies, providing loans in excess of £24 million.

The report explains: "The Company (NERR) had provided significant finance to support and back the start-up and expansion of the UK Trading Companies (NES) over a number of years. These investments were made into loss making activities and the development of operations which ultimately proved to be unsuccessful."

New Earth Solutions also suffered a financial collapse last year when accountancy firm Duff & Phelps were appointed joint administrators.

Deloitte's state: "The Joint Liquidators (of NERR) have not entered into any form of settlement with the Administrators and retain an open mind in relation to what steps should now be taken. One option available to the Company (as an unsecured creditor) and one which we are presently considering, would be to seek the appointment of a liquidator over NESGL and/or NESFM to investigate the affairs of those companies (including during the period of Administration)."

Shareholders of NERR are told that given the insolvent position of the Company’s investments, the joint liquidators are continuing to investigate the potential for recovery from other sources.

"We have actively been progressing our enquiries into the failure of the Company and, with the assistance of legal counsel in the Isle of Man and the United Kingdom, have focused on specific issues that, based on our and their experience, we consider have the best chance of securing a valuable return to the shareholders and creditors of the Company."

In what is probably the most disturbing section of the report Deloitte's write: "Given that the UK trading companies performed poorly and ultimately failed, our investigations have focused on the actual causes of loss to the Company. 

"As well as the money that was lost in the investments in the UK Trading Companies, large sums of money (in excess of £40 million) were paid out to service providers. Many of these fees were based on the NAV (Net Asset Value) of the fund, which showed significant increases despite the underlying businesses’ failure. Amongst other things, we are focusing on the basis for the valuation of the Company’s assets and the continued investment of investors’ money into failing businesses."

More than 3,000 investors in NERR had been told there was little or no chance of recovering any of their lost cash. But the new report appears to offer a small glimmer of hope.

It says: "As previously stated in our reports, we are limited in what information we can share with you so that we do not prejudice any potential claims. Further, due to the complex nature of the investigations and voluminous documentation, it may be some time before we can provide you with the final results of our enquiries.

"However, based on the enquiries made and legal advice received so far, we are reasonably confident that our investigation will support the making of potential claims for the benefit of creditors and/or shareholders in due course."

But no story about NERR and NES would be complete without a bizarre twist, and this particular tale of woe is no exception.

The assets of NES may have been sold off by Duff & Phelps for a little over £5 million, and the ownership of those subsidiary companies now rests with Irish-based PandaGreen.

But it seems a consortium headed by waste management company Global Gateways together with a group of financial advisors are attempting to put together a bid to take over the assets.

Deloitte's report sets the scene. "Investors may be aware that we have received an informal approach from Ms Jane Sanders, acting on behalf of Global Gateways and a group of Independent Financial Advisors, mooting a scheme whereby Global Gateways would bring some kind of legal claim in an attempt (as previously attempted without success) to gain control of some of the former assets of the UK Trading Companies on terms and for consideration to the Company and its creditors and shareholders which have not been specified. 

"We have sought to obtain further information and supporting evidence from Ms Sanders to enable us to assess whether such a scheme and the legal claim (apparently directed against the Administrators) has any merit or is likely to benefit creditors and shareholders.

"At the date of this report, we have not received any answers or supporting evidence in response to our requests, either from Ms Sanders or Global Gateways. In the absence of such supporting evidence and having obtained specialist legal advice in the Isle of Man and United Kingdom, we are not presently convinced that there is any basis to undo the transactions with third parties who now own former assets of the UK Trading Companies or that there would be a benefit to the creditors and/or shareholders in doing so."

One financial expert commented after reading Deloitte's report: "The scale of fees being creamed off by those in charge of NERR is quite unbelievable. It is becoming abundantly clear that the contract NES had with Scottish Borders Council gave the NERR fund kudos and credibility with potential investors over a four year period. 

"Unfortunately NERR was never in a position to deliver the Borders waste treatment plant, and SBC were kept onside by a string of plausible but worthless excuses. I'd say they were taken for a ride".

Fresh calls for "waste fiasco" inquiry

by EWAN LAMB

There have been renewed calls for some kind of official inquiry into the loss of £2.4 million of public money by Scottish Borders Council following publication of a damning 42-page report into the Easter Langlee waste treatment "affair".

An investigation which took more than two years to complete thanks to the council's refusal to release hundreds of documents linked to the abandoned contract has produced damning evidence and allegations that SBC mismanaged funds by failing to deliver a £23 million facility to deal with the region's 40,000 tonnes of household rubbish.

The catalogue of factual evidence which had to be dragged from the council with the assistance of the Scottish Information Commissioner has been handed to local politicians and media representatives in a bid to have the issue taken further.

Unfortunately Audit Scotland, the organisation normally tasked with such an investigation has shown no appetite to get involved.

And the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman [SPSO] - when supplied with a copy of the report together with a request for advice - recommended passing the document to....Audit Scotland. It would appear that Scotland's regulatory system for public authorities resembles a version of the Magic Roundabout.

But if the regulators see nothing amiss with the loss of £2.4 million together with many millions more which had been invested in New Earth Solutions and its offshore partner New Earth Recycling & Renewables (NERR) fund there has been some strong reaction from experts and others who have read the report.

One of the key findings from the investigation was that councillors in the Borders should have pulled the plug on NES and NERR long before February 2015 when the waste treatment project was finally abandoned for "technical and financial reasons".

An experienced and respected member of the waste management industry told us: "When you look at this in summary it is shocking. How they allowed so much to go on without hitting the stop button beggars belief. What is shocking to me is they had Shanks as a reserve bidder that they could have called when things started to go wrong so quickly". 

He claimed those in charge should have considered "a couple of options", namely:

1. force NES to build the conventional Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) plant as per the contract and set aside the Advanced Thermal Treatment (ATT) facility to be built as phase 2 (as per the original contract.
2. terminate the contract and award to Shanks. At least Borders would have had a treatment facility

The industry expert commented: "It is to be hoped there is a public enquiry of sorts and a number of people are brought to account. The handling of this was nothing short of shocking. I would also question some of the advisers as to why they did not impress on SBC the need to consider termination much earlier."

There seems little doubt that electyed members at SBC took a huge gamble in 2012 when they sanctioned the inclusion of Advanced Thermal Treatment (ATT) in the Easter Langlee project. This decision was taken even though councillors were aware the ATT technology had not even been through research and development trials.

An anti-ATT campaigner said: "There are important lessons to be learned [from the Borders investigation], not least for those councils where history is repeating itself and for other authorities who should be publicly ruling out gasification..

"This document has provided an invaluable service to the whole movement by giving us a rare glimpse behind the curtain of secrecy that usually hides what really goes on between waste companies and waste authorities. Councillors clearly need educating."

And a former councillor who was once in charge of important local government portfolios told us: 

"There is absolutely no doubt that this is an Audit Scotland matter right enough but it appears that they are happy to go along  with the work they commission from private accounting firms acting as external auditors.

"After all it is Audit Scotland that has set out the guidelines for elected member responsibilities for ensuring best value when it comes to spending the 'Public Pound'  due diligence etc."

One local taxpayer merely said he was 'sad and depressed at the sheer incompetence of councillors and officials at SBC' while a number of others claimed it was "criminal" that no-one had shouldered the blame or been held to account for the loss of such a vast sum of public cash.