The recent disclosure that it could take Scottish Borders Council 117 years to raise the £8.75 million it needs to pay its share of the Borders Railway from house-builders development contributions might have triggered concerns in some quarters, but certainly not within local government circles.
It has taken all of ten years to collect the first £750,000 at a snail's pace average of £74,000 a year which means the outstanding £8 million needs to be garnered in the remaining 24 years allowed under the scheme's business plan.
Unless there is a housing boom of unprecedented proportions sometime soon then at some point the severely cash-strapped council will be forced to take money from its diminishing collection of services and budget heads to meet its railway commitments. A contingency plan is surely a minimum requirement, and council taxpayers should be told where the money will come from should the construction industry fail to fulfil its role as a cash cow.
But in a statement oozing complacency the council's has obviously refused to accept it has a potentially serious financial issue on their hands. According to their man: "The Borders Railway will boost economic activity in the Central Borders. As a consequence it's anticipated there will be an increase in house-building to accommodate a population increase. As the railway is not yet running it is too early to judge how this will turn out in practice - ie over what period we will see more housing contributions."
He went on to concede there had been a slowing down in housing completions in the Borders. But inevitably the slow-down would be followed by growth as the economy recovers. He added: "It is a bit early to get alarmed about underpayment."
There's an unswerving belief within council ranks that even if the levy on new houses lets them down money will be no object. The council's gross budget will be £10 billion over the next 30 year, they argue, so there's loads of scope for wriggle room. And in any case the council is allowed under a legal agreement signed with Transport Scotland to re-phase the annual payments due should the developer contributions not match expectations.
Just two days after the statement predicting an upturn in house-building the Galashiels-based local director of DW Hall, a national firm of chartered surveyors, revealed that the impending delivery of the £350 million Waverley Railway had so far failed to have any dramatic or even discernible effect on Borders property values.
He wrote in his blog: "Local opinion is strongly in favour of the new link, but this has not translated into a general uplift in prices. The significant interest when the project was announced in 2004 appears to have developed into a wait-and-see approach and the likelihood of price increases seems to have been postponed until the line and stations are actually up and running.
"Where the line has had an effect is on seller expectations. Recent prospective sellers in the railway 'catchment area' have been disappointed that their properties have not appreciated as much as they anticipated and in many cases they are selling at or below home report valuation."
Hardly a ringing endorsement for the railway's likely impact on the housing market.
In fact local property prices have a very long way to travel just to get back to 2007 levels. According to the home.co.uk website the average asking price for detached houses in Galashiels has decreased by 21% in the last seven years to £225,183 while flats are down by 43% to £83,800 with the average for all property sales in the town dropping a massive 61%.
There's been little sign of a recovery even in the last twelve months with asking prices for detached properties pitched 15% below August 2013 levels, semi-detached homes down by 9% and flats by 4%. Under those circumstances the construction of new private homes accompanied by the council's £1,734 developer contribution, may not prove to be such an attractive proposition.
Sunday, 31 August 2014
Wednesday, 27 August 2014
Stand by for a remake of The Iron Horse?
Mrs Forrester insisted on a trip to Galashiels on August Bank Holiday Monday to indulge in a bout of light shopping. We hadn't been near the retail capital of the Borders for some time, and I was interested to see how vibrant and bustling the place had become as local businesses and residents gear up excitedly for the railway's return.
We were in for a bit of a shock.
Government agencies and the Borders council may have lavished millions on Gala in recent years to the virtual exclusion of other towns and villages in sheep and rugby country. But the impact appears to have been less than positive and we were certainly not left with the impression that the reopening of the Waverley line in 2015 was generating much confidence among the shopkeeping fraternity.
There appeared to be more empty retail premises than you'd have found in a Wild West town after the gold prospectors left, there didn't appear to be many potential customers about, and had there been a favourable wind I fully expected the tumble weed to be drifting down Channel Street and into the ornately restored Cornmill Square.
Surely by now the development department, or whoever arranges for the arrival of new retailers should be snowed under while trying to cope with demand if the Borders Railway is providing an advance energy boost for the local economy.
On the contrary, this week's Border Telegraph informs us there are 36 empty shop units in Galashiels alone, and there's talk of a special 'task force' being required to address the issue. The council's own report on town centre footfall for 2013 puts the vacancy rate at 15 per cent with similar levels of unused units in Hawick (16%) and Selkirk (15%).
The actual footfall figures paint an equally depressing picture with the Galashiels total down from 9,500 in 2007 to 8,100 last year, a drop of 15 per cent over seven years. Hawick and Selkirk have both suffered massive falls in their totals in the same period - Hawick down from 9,680 to 6,200 (36%), and Selkirk from 3,690 to 2,420 (34%).
Perhaps it is time for a promotional movie about the new Waverley line based on John Ford's classic film The Iron Horse (1924). The beautiful Borders countryside would provide the perfect backdrop for Iron Horse Two (or is it Three), celebrating the end of sheep and rugby country's status as a remote frontier and a new dawning of industrial and commercial conquest.
The 2014 epic could show the outside world how our £350 million rail project is about to forge our individual settlements into a new railway community. Like Ford, the maker of Iron Horse 2/3 could bring in large numbers of Cheviots and Aberdeen Angus, then fade them out to illustrate the industrialisation of Border Country.
In the interests of tourism - maybe VisitScotland will agree to sponsor this particular clip - I hope the producer retains one marvellous story line from the original version. It features a scheming businessman who likes to dress up as a Comanche warrior and scalps people to further his money making schemes. I reckon that would be a real crowd puller, and it shouldn't be too difficult to find a local entrepreneur who'd be perfect for the part..
The Iron Horse towns of the 1860s and 1870s - the period in which the film was set - were flimsy affairs. A town is constructed at the furthest end of the unfinished railroad for workers and hangers-on, "a seedy place, always about to erupt into violence."
When the railroad moves on, this town is abandoned, and the residents build another town further west. Could this be the future for Tweedbank and Hawick? Ah well that's the happy ending sorted!
We were in for a bit of a shock.
Government agencies and the Borders council may have lavished millions on Gala in recent years to the virtual exclusion of other towns and villages in sheep and rugby country. But the impact appears to have been less than positive and we were certainly not left with the impression that the reopening of the Waverley line in 2015 was generating much confidence among the shopkeeping fraternity.
There appeared to be more empty retail premises than you'd have found in a Wild West town after the gold prospectors left, there didn't appear to be many potential customers about, and had there been a favourable wind I fully expected the tumble weed to be drifting down Channel Street and into the ornately restored Cornmill Square.
Surely by now the development department, or whoever arranges for the arrival of new retailers should be snowed under while trying to cope with demand if the Borders Railway is providing an advance energy boost for the local economy.
On the contrary, this week's Border Telegraph informs us there are 36 empty shop units in Galashiels alone, and there's talk of a special 'task force' being required to address the issue. The council's own report on town centre footfall for 2013 puts the vacancy rate at 15 per cent with similar levels of unused units in Hawick (16%) and Selkirk (15%).
The actual footfall figures paint an equally depressing picture with the Galashiels total down from 9,500 in 2007 to 8,100 last year, a drop of 15 per cent over seven years. Hawick and Selkirk have both suffered massive falls in their totals in the same period - Hawick down from 9,680 to 6,200 (36%), and Selkirk from 3,690 to 2,420 (34%).
Perhaps it is time for a promotional movie about the new Waverley line based on John Ford's classic film The Iron Horse (1924). The beautiful Borders countryside would provide the perfect backdrop for Iron Horse Two (or is it Three), celebrating the end of sheep and rugby country's status as a remote frontier and a new dawning of industrial and commercial conquest.
The 2014 epic could show the outside world how our £350 million rail project is about to forge our individual settlements into a new railway community. Like Ford, the maker of Iron Horse 2/3 could bring in large numbers of Cheviots and Aberdeen Angus, then fade them out to illustrate the industrialisation of Border Country.
In the interests of tourism - maybe VisitScotland will agree to sponsor this particular clip - I hope the producer retains one marvellous story line from the original version. It features a scheming businessman who likes to dress up as a Comanche warrior and scalps people to further his money making schemes. I reckon that would be a real crowd puller, and it shouldn't be too difficult to find a local entrepreneur who'd be perfect for the part..
The Iron Horse towns of the 1860s and 1870s - the period in which the film was set - were flimsy affairs. A town is constructed at the furthest end of the unfinished railroad for workers and hangers-on, "a seedy place, always about to erupt into violence."
When the railroad moves on, this town is abandoned, and the residents build another town further west. Could this be the future for Tweedbank and Hawick? Ah well that's the happy ending sorted!
Monday, 25 August 2014
£6 million black hole in council's rail bill?
Research findings from an investigation into Scottish Borders Council's proposals for meeting its £8.75 million share of the £353 million reinstatement of the railway from Edinburgh to Tweedbank suggest the local authority could face a £6.2 million deficit when it comes time to pay the piper.
It probably won't concern those in charge of Borders local government right now as they're unlikely to be in office by 2038 when the account is due to be finally settled. But future generations of local taxpayers will undoubtedly be saddled with any huge outstanding debt. The project's Business Plan makes that abundantly clear.
Back in 2004 when SBC's Executive members endorsed the railway proposals they decided to rely on house builders to contribute £1,000 towards the cost of the Waverley Line from each new dwelling constructed in the Central Borders and North Ettrick & Lauderdale.
They estimated 7,500 new homes would go up in the area between 2004 and 2038 which would cover the original £7.4 million SBC would have to find. When their share of the cost escalated to £8.75 million there was ample wriggle room to increase each developer contribution to £1,500.
Unfortunately the formula appears to have fallen drastically behind schedule from the outset with much lower volumes of construction than expected. And although the levy per house has soared to £1,734 with another review due in April next year only £743,127 had been collected in the ten years from 2004 to June 2014. The mathematicians among you will be able to conclude that another £8 million needs to find its way into SBC's coffers before the Scottish Government calls in the debt.
One of the most worrying aspects of the investigation's conclusions must be the fact that developer contributions have only brought in about £48,000 in the last three years. If the current level of progress is maintained then the "rail fund" will stand at £2.5 million rather than £8.75 million by 2038.
So clearly there is an issue in need of urgent attention. But will the council face up to the fact that its chosen strategy is in deep trouble or will the administration bury their collective heads in the sand and store up the grief and financial problems for their successors while praying for the costs to be written off by a benevolent Scottish Treasury?
It could get even messier. The joint contribution from SBC, Midlothian and Edinburgh councils is currently capped at £30 million at 2012 prices. But if the original 85:15 cost share of the project between national and local government was to be fully implemented at some point in the future then the Borders share could shoot up to £15.35 million. A fairly frightening prospect.
But then again, at the end of the 2012/13 financial year Scottish Borders Council's total debt on General Fund services stood at £193.114 million, equivalent to £1,698 per head of its population. Another £6.2 million wouldn't make much difference, would it?
It probably won't concern those in charge of Borders local government right now as they're unlikely to be in office by 2038 when the account is due to be finally settled. But future generations of local taxpayers will undoubtedly be saddled with any huge outstanding debt. The project's Business Plan makes that abundantly clear.
Back in 2004 when SBC's Executive members endorsed the railway proposals they decided to rely on house builders to contribute £1,000 towards the cost of the Waverley Line from each new dwelling constructed in the Central Borders and North Ettrick & Lauderdale.
They estimated 7,500 new homes would go up in the area between 2004 and 2038 which would cover the original £7.4 million SBC would have to find. When their share of the cost escalated to £8.75 million there was ample wriggle room to increase each developer contribution to £1,500.
Unfortunately the formula appears to have fallen drastically behind schedule from the outset with much lower volumes of construction than expected. And although the levy per house has soared to £1,734 with another review due in April next year only £743,127 had been collected in the ten years from 2004 to June 2014. The mathematicians among you will be able to conclude that another £8 million needs to find its way into SBC's coffers before the Scottish Government calls in the debt.
One of the most worrying aspects of the investigation's conclusions must be the fact that developer contributions have only brought in about £48,000 in the last three years. If the current level of progress is maintained then the "rail fund" will stand at £2.5 million rather than £8.75 million by 2038.
So clearly there is an issue in need of urgent attention. But will the council face up to the fact that its chosen strategy is in deep trouble or will the administration bury their collective heads in the sand and store up the grief and financial problems for their successors while praying for the costs to be written off by a benevolent Scottish Treasury?
It could get even messier. The joint contribution from SBC, Midlothian and Edinburgh councils is currently capped at £30 million at 2012 prices. But if the original 85:15 cost share of the project between national and local government was to be fully implemented at some point in the future then the Borders share could shoot up to £15.35 million. A fairly frightening prospect.
But then again, at the end of the 2012/13 financial year Scottish Borders Council's total debt on General Fund services stood at £193.114 million, equivalent to £1,698 per head of its population. Another £6.2 million wouldn't make much difference, would it?
Friday, 22 August 2014
Energy Agency fails to spark
EXCLUSIVE - by Doug Collie
Ambitious plans for a Borders Energy Agency, which received the full backing of local councillors two years ago, have had to be mothballed before the project could even be launched after the venture failed to attract any funding. The agency is now said to be "hibernating".
A number of organisations, including Scottish Borders Council, were involved in studies and discussions for more than a year before detailed proposals and a final business plan for the BEA were presented to the local authority's Executive members in February 2012. The impressive collection of reports and other papers suggest a considerable amount of time, effort and resources had been devoted to the project.
A joint report from council chief executive Tracey Logan and Director of Environment & Infrastructure Rob Dickson concluded: "The establishment of a Borders Energy Agency will support a range of council objectives and it is intended that although the organisation will be wholly independent, it is important the council should recognise, support and empower the BEA.
"There are specific service areas which could in future be delivered jointly, including fuel poverty/home energy advice, carbon reduction advice to communities and energy management advice on public buildings".
Councillors were told by Ms Logan and Mr Dickson that funding for the BEA had yet to be finalised, but the council was already talking to the main energy companies with wind farms in the Borders and asking them to contribute by providing cash over a 25 year period. Approaches had also been made to two banks specialising in renewable energy funding, plus national and local agencies, and bids would be made to the Climate Challenge Fund and various European Union programmes to help fund the agency.
BEA was to have three members of staff initially, according to the Business Plan, including a £50,000 project manager, and would require a total budget of £150,000 in its first year.
The Executive members who rubber stamped the joint report were assured: "The drive towards a low carbon economy, renewable energy and energy conservation is certain to continue and BEA should prove to be a model which can be transferred to other areas across the country and to similar agencies across Europe and beyond."
But now another of the 'partners' involved in the venture has revealed that far from being a blueprint to be rolled out across Europe, BEA has in fact been shelved meantime after failing to attract any financial backing. It is not clear whether that decision has been conveyed to councillors, and the local authority has made no announcement to either confirm or deny that the project has proved to be a veritable damp squib.
The annual report of the Trustees of the Southern Upland Partnership says: "Our efforts to promote community-scale renewable energy have also continued to be frustrated by the fact that the Borders Energy Agency (which we helped to set up) has not been able to attract any funding. The BEA is currently hibernating in the hope that circumstances change. It seems to be widely agreed that the need for such an agency is still great."
The BEA has been a registered charity since February 2012. But according to the Scottish Charities Register it has not received any income and has recorded no expenditure since its formation.
Ambitious plans for a Borders Energy Agency, which received the full backing of local councillors two years ago, have had to be mothballed before the project could even be launched after the venture failed to attract any funding. The agency is now said to be "hibernating".
A number of organisations, including Scottish Borders Council, were involved in studies and discussions for more than a year before detailed proposals and a final business plan for the BEA were presented to the local authority's Executive members in February 2012. The impressive collection of reports and other papers suggest a considerable amount of time, effort and resources had been devoted to the project.
A joint report from council chief executive Tracey Logan and Director of Environment & Infrastructure Rob Dickson concluded: "The establishment of a Borders Energy Agency will support a range of council objectives and it is intended that although the organisation will be wholly independent, it is important the council should recognise, support and empower the BEA.
"There are specific service areas which could in future be delivered jointly, including fuel poverty/home energy advice, carbon reduction advice to communities and energy management advice on public buildings".
Councillors were told by Ms Logan and Mr Dickson that funding for the BEA had yet to be finalised, but the council was already talking to the main energy companies with wind farms in the Borders and asking them to contribute by providing cash over a 25 year period. Approaches had also been made to two banks specialising in renewable energy funding, plus national and local agencies, and bids would be made to the Climate Challenge Fund and various European Union programmes to help fund the agency.
BEA was to have three members of staff initially, according to the Business Plan, including a £50,000 project manager, and would require a total budget of £150,000 in its first year.
The Executive members who rubber stamped the joint report were assured: "The drive towards a low carbon economy, renewable energy and energy conservation is certain to continue and BEA should prove to be a model which can be transferred to other areas across the country and to similar agencies across Europe and beyond."
But now another of the 'partners' involved in the venture has revealed that far from being a blueprint to be rolled out across Europe, BEA has in fact been shelved meantime after failing to attract any financial backing. It is not clear whether that decision has been conveyed to councillors, and the local authority has made no announcement to either confirm or deny that the project has proved to be a veritable damp squib.
The annual report of the Trustees of the Southern Upland Partnership says: "Our efforts to promote community-scale renewable energy have also continued to be frustrated by the fact that the Borders Energy Agency (which we helped to set up) has not been able to attract any funding. The BEA is currently hibernating in the hope that circumstances change. It seems to be widely agreed that the need for such an agency is still great."
The BEA has been a registered charity since February 2012. But according to the Scottish Charities Register it has not received any income and has recorded no expenditure since its formation.
Wednesday, 20 August 2014
Beware of the Great Tapestry stitch-up
An item on BBC Scotland's evening news probably had a few of us in sheep and rugby country spluttering with a mixture of rage and disbelief tonight as we were informed by broadcaster Cameron Buttle that a custom-built heritage centre was to be developed at Tweedbank to accommodate the Great Tapestry of Scotland.
I could have sworn a decision had yet to be taken on this controversial and highly expensive idea which not all of us favour. We are already faced with a £40,000 bill from consultants who are supposed to be assessing the pros and cons of the venture on behalf of Scottish Borders Council. But I'd no idea the project had been given the proverbial green light.
In fact this week's Border Telegraph carries a report in which our local government supremo and Tweedbank resident David Parker is quoted as saying a preliminary report is expected in October, and an announcement might be made about additional funders in the not too distant future. One thing was for certain, he added, there was no prospect of the tapestry being located in Hawick. So there!
As Mr Buttle disappeared from the TV screen the re-wind button on Sky Plus went into overdrive as I sought confirmation of what appeared to be a BBC exclusive. And yes, sure enough, there was the intrepid reporter at the southern extremity of the Borders Railway route announcing to the world: "This is going to be the home of the Great Tapestry of Scotland" courtesy of that purpose-built heritage centre, which we already know could involve spending up to £5 million of someone's money.
So had the consultant's report been rushed out? Had council leader Parker, a dab hand at cancelling council meetings of late, called the troops in for a special assembly to nod through a recommendation for approval? No mention of it on the council website.
Councillor Parker did appear before the camera to inform us the £350 million railway, due to start operating on September 6 next year, would become one of the most used tourist lines in the country, and we just had to make sure we reap the maximum benefit from it.
I suppose that could have been a hint that many more visitors would flock south if the large collection of textile panels just happened to be hanging out in Tweedbank. But he didn't mention the tapestry by name.
Mr Buttle's next interview was with Alistair Moffat, the award winning writer, and one of the team which developed then produced the tapestry. Mr Moffat appeared to be standing in front of the tapestry as he assured viewers the Borders would soon have the busiest tourist line in Scotland, and so it would be good to have a world class attraction in place. But he didn't mention the tapestry by name.
It appears Mr Buttle had jumped the gun slightly by declaring "this is going to be the home of the Great Tapestry of Scotland" But at the same time the promoters of the project were giving it The Hard Sell, and it will be akin to a miracle if the council decides at the end of the day to shelve the plan completely or even consign it to the back burner. It seems The Great Tapestry of Scotland will be coming to Tweedbank whether we like it or not.
I could have sworn a decision had yet to be taken on this controversial and highly expensive idea which not all of us favour. We are already faced with a £40,000 bill from consultants who are supposed to be assessing the pros and cons of the venture on behalf of Scottish Borders Council. But I'd no idea the project had been given the proverbial green light.
In fact this week's Border Telegraph carries a report in which our local government supremo and Tweedbank resident David Parker is quoted as saying a preliminary report is expected in October, and an announcement might be made about additional funders in the not too distant future. One thing was for certain, he added, there was no prospect of the tapestry being located in Hawick. So there!
As Mr Buttle disappeared from the TV screen the re-wind button on Sky Plus went into overdrive as I sought confirmation of what appeared to be a BBC exclusive. And yes, sure enough, there was the intrepid reporter at the southern extremity of the Borders Railway route announcing to the world: "This is going to be the home of the Great Tapestry of Scotland" courtesy of that purpose-built heritage centre, which we already know could involve spending up to £5 million of someone's money.
So had the consultant's report been rushed out? Had council leader Parker, a dab hand at cancelling council meetings of late, called the troops in for a special assembly to nod through a recommendation for approval? No mention of it on the council website.
Councillor Parker did appear before the camera to inform us the £350 million railway, due to start operating on September 6 next year, would become one of the most used tourist lines in the country, and we just had to make sure we reap the maximum benefit from it.
I suppose that could have been a hint that many more visitors would flock south if the large collection of textile panels just happened to be hanging out in Tweedbank. But he didn't mention the tapestry by name.
Mr Buttle's next interview was with Alistair Moffat, the award winning writer, and one of the team which developed then produced the tapestry. Mr Moffat appeared to be standing in front of the tapestry as he assured viewers the Borders would soon have the busiest tourist line in Scotland, and so it would be good to have a world class attraction in place. But he didn't mention the tapestry by name.
It appears Mr Buttle had jumped the gun slightly by declaring "this is going to be the home of the Great Tapestry of Scotland" But at the same time the promoters of the project were giving it The Hard Sell, and it will be akin to a miracle if the council decides at the end of the day to shelve the plan completely or even consign it to the back burner. It seems The Great Tapestry of Scotland will be coming to Tweedbank whether we like it or not.
Monday, 18 August 2014
They come bearing gifts....
Another Freedom of Information revelation from Scottish Borders Council allows me to pose the following question - what do four bottles of Smirnoff vodka, a day at Kelso races, a golf outing to Turnberry, flights to London with hotel accommodation and dinner, and a £20 box of Thornton's chocolates have in common?
Answer: They were all gifts or hospitality offered to members of the council's staff by private companies during the last three years, and have been logged on the local authority's in-house hospitality register. Apparently every enticement from firms the council has dealings with has to be recorded, but without that FOI request the details would not have been published on SBC's website. Time for a public register perhaps.
Although a significant number of gifts were turned down, a fair number were accepted, and in some cases the register contains comments explaining why the offer received the approval of department managers. But the names of the individuals who were wined and dined, took that trip to London or devoured the chocolates have been carefully blacked out.
We now know that the BTS department (Business & Technology Solutions) at SBC took delivery of the four bottles of Smirnoff (valued at £70) in October 2013 from a company called AVM Education Ltd, of Sunbury-on-Thames, specialists in audio visual and video conferencing.
There is no apparent reason for the gift, and in the manager's comments column the entry reads: "This was accepted by the staff who were unaware of the policy re-gifts etc. The vodka is in IT and we have suggested it is donated to charity."
BTS were also the beneficiaries of Dell/Microsoft's generosity in January 2012 with invitations to a Burns Supper at the Edinburgh International Conference Centre (value £150). The invitation was accepted.
And the same department was offered a £69 Amazon Kindle by the Scottish Information Assurance Forum (SIAF), which was received in December 2012, but was later returned to the organisation. SIAF specialises in information security, and charges public bodies, including Scottish Borders Council, an annual membership fee of £450.
Another supplier called Exactive, whose mission is "to transform the way people work" paid for flights to London (£120), hotel accommodation (£140) and dinner (£80) in a package worth £340. Yet again BTS were the beneficiaries but no details of why the trip was made.
The staff at Newtown St Boswells appear to have been bombarded with at least seven offers from Baillie Gifford, one of the council's four pension fund manager, although all but two appear to have been turned down. The exceptions were a pre-conference dinner at Glengoyne Distillery in March this year,( hospitality valued at £80, according to the register), and dinner at another conference in Dundee in 2013 (£50).
Another staff member in finance received wine worth £60 from the Local Government Chronicle as a thank you for taking part as a speaker in a conference.
A member of the Legal Department enjoyed drinks and dinner at Kelso Races (value £50) courtesy of Walker Love, the company used by the council as Sheriff Officers when court orders are required to pursue council tax debtors.
The register includes an intriguing entry for that £20 box of Thornton's, gifted by Lloyd's TSB to 'Resources' at the council. The manager writes: "This was checked with me before accepting - to return would cost more than chocs and there had been extensive disruption".
And finally, a £65 dinner invitation, also for 'Resources' from Thomas & Adamson, an international construction and property consultancy. The event, the Women in Property annual dinner at Edinburgh's Balmoral Hotel warranted a manager's comment: "Good for the council to be represented at such events as a property owner and sends the message that the council takes gender equality issues seriously".
.
Answer: They were all gifts or hospitality offered to members of the council's staff by private companies during the last three years, and have been logged on the local authority's in-house hospitality register. Apparently every enticement from firms the council has dealings with has to be recorded, but without that FOI request the details would not have been published on SBC's website. Time for a public register perhaps.
Although a significant number of gifts were turned down, a fair number were accepted, and in some cases the register contains comments explaining why the offer received the approval of department managers. But the names of the individuals who were wined and dined, took that trip to London or devoured the chocolates have been carefully blacked out.
We now know that the BTS department (Business & Technology Solutions) at SBC took delivery of the four bottles of Smirnoff (valued at £70) in October 2013 from a company called AVM Education Ltd, of Sunbury-on-Thames, specialists in audio visual and video conferencing.
There is no apparent reason for the gift, and in the manager's comments column the entry reads: "This was accepted by the staff who were unaware of the policy re-gifts etc. The vodka is in IT and we have suggested it is donated to charity."
BTS were also the beneficiaries of Dell/Microsoft's generosity in January 2012 with invitations to a Burns Supper at the Edinburgh International Conference Centre (value £150). The invitation was accepted.
And the same department was offered a £69 Amazon Kindle by the Scottish Information Assurance Forum (SIAF), which was received in December 2012, but was later returned to the organisation. SIAF specialises in information security, and charges public bodies, including Scottish Borders Council, an annual membership fee of £450.
Another supplier called Exactive, whose mission is "to transform the way people work" paid for flights to London (£120), hotel accommodation (£140) and dinner (£80) in a package worth £340. Yet again BTS were the beneficiaries but no details of why the trip was made.
The staff at Newtown St Boswells appear to have been bombarded with at least seven offers from Baillie Gifford, one of the council's four pension fund manager, although all but two appear to have been turned down. The exceptions were a pre-conference dinner at Glengoyne Distillery in March this year,( hospitality valued at £80, according to the register), and dinner at another conference in Dundee in 2013 (£50).
Another staff member in finance received wine worth £60 from the Local Government Chronicle as a thank you for taking part as a speaker in a conference.
A member of the Legal Department enjoyed drinks and dinner at Kelso Races (value £50) courtesy of Walker Love, the company used by the council as Sheriff Officers when court orders are required to pursue council tax debtors.
The register includes an intriguing entry for that £20 box of Thornton's, gifted by Lloyd's TSB to 'Resources' at the council. The manager writes: "This was checked with me before accepting - to return would cost more than chocs and there had been extensive disruption".
And finally, a £65 dinner invitation, also for 'Resources' from Thomas & Adamson, an international construction and property consultancy. The event, the Women in Property annual dinner at Edinburgh's Balmoral Hotel warranted a manager's comment: "Good for the council to be represented at such events as a property owner and sends the message that the council takes gender equality issues seriously".
.
Thursday, 14 August 2014
Problems aplenty, but no need for meetings
The problems and issues confronting local government in the Borders may be well documented... the proposed transfer of cultural services to a trust, public disquiet over changes to the school week, formation of an arms length company to deliver community care, never ending budget cuts, and the abysmally low volume of investment by national agencies in the local economy.
It constitutes a list of topics ripe for debate, a dripping roast of an agenda for any councillor worth his salt to sink his teeth into, and an opportunity to hold our less than perfect administration to account.
Sad to say there will be no verbal exchanges across the Newtown St Boswells chamber this month on any of these important subjects after the ruling group cancelled August 28's full council meeting 'due to a lack of business'. And to make matters worse the cancellation has taken place without any consultation with members of the opposition. A crushing blow for local democracy.
But it gets worse! A quick scan through the programme of meetings displayed on the SBC website reveals that two other meetings scheduled for August have also been abandoned. We are told the Environment & Infrastructure Committee get together planned for August 21 has been cancelled because there is 'no substantive business'
Meanwhile the Petitions Committee, scheduled for the same day, will not meet due to 'lack of substantive business'. Who took these unilateral decisions?
Apparently the cancellation of the full council meeting was conveyed to elected members via email. The reason? Historically, the August meeting is very quiet with only a small number of reports to consider.
But surely reports could have been prepared earlier or the opportunity could have been taken to talk about some of the more pressing issues. Are our councillors unable to debate topics of THEIR choice without a crib sheet filled with hyperbole and gobbledegook from their paid staff? That certainly seems to be the case. Come on boys and girls, take the initiative for a change: give democracy its head.
The fact that members of the Environment & Infrastructure Committee could not or were not allowed to assemble an agenda demonstrates a complete lack of practical sense and imagination. The latest landfill tax figures for the Borders - up by a whopping 27 per cent in two years to £2.9 million require urgent scrutiny, a report on the public reaction to the withdrawal of green bin collections would have been extremely informative, and there must be a host of questions to be asked about the greatest local infrastructure project for more than a century, the £353 million Borders (or is it Waverley) railway.
There hasn't been a meeting of the full council since June 26, and following this month's cancellation our 34 salaried representatives wont assemble as a single entity again until September 25. Money for old rope I hear you cry!
Not so. A proposal by the Local Government Boundary Commission for Scotland - the deadline for public consultation and submissions falls on the same day as those meetings of the environment and petitions committees should have been held - could reduce the number of Borders councillors from 34 to 32.
Cue bluster and outrage at council HQ. In a response SBC warned such a cut in their ranks would almost certainly lead to "overloaded councillors". Larger council wards would mean not only increased workloads, but also increased travel and travel time.
The statement went on: "With fewer councillors, the standard of and length of time for engagement with the public could reduce, response times could be longer or time spent with individual constituents could decrease as councillors would face responsibility for more members of the public".
In light of this week's regrettable cancellations maybe some of you would care to let the Commission have your views on councillor numbers by next Thursday.
It constitutes a list of topics ripe for debate, a dripping roast of an agenda for any councillor worth his salt to sink his teeth into, and an opportunity to hold our less than perfect administration to account.
Sad to say there will be no verbal exchanges across the Newtown St Boswells chamber this month on any of these important subjects after the ruling group cancelled August 28's full council meeting 'due to a lack of business'. And to make matters worse the cancellation has taken place without any consultation with members of the opposition. A crushing blow for local democracy.
But it gets worse! A quick scan through the programme of meetings displayed on the SBC website reveals that two other meetings scheduled for August have also been abandoned. We are told the Environment & Infrastructure Committee get together planned for August 21 has been cancelled because there is 'no substantive business'
Meanwhile the Petitions Committee, scheduled for the same day, will not meet due to 'lack of substantive business'. Who took these unilateral decisions?
Apparently the cancellation of the full council meeting was conveyed to elected members via email. The reason? Historically, the August meeting is very quiet with only a small number of reports to consider.
But surely reports could have been prepared earlier or the opportunity could have been taken to talk about some of the more pressing issues. Are our councillors unable to debate topics of THEIR choice without a crib sheet filled with hyperbole and gobbledegook from their paid staff? That certainly seems to be the case. Come on boys and girls, take the initiative for a change: give democracy its head.
The fact that members of the Environment & Infrastructure Committee could not or were not allowed to assemble an agenda demonstrates a complete lack of practical sense and imagination. The latest landfill tax figures for the Borders - up by a whopping 27 per cent in two years to £2.9 million require urgent scrutiny, a report on the public reaction to the withdrawal of green bin collections would have been extremely informative, and there must be a host of questions to be asked about the greatest local infrastructure project for more than a century, the £353 million Borders (or is it Waverley) railway.
There hasn't been a meeting of the full council since June 26, and following this month's cancellation our 34 salaried representatives wont assemble as a single entity again until September 25. Money for old rope I hear you cry!
Not so. A proposal by the Local Government Boundary Commission for Scotland - the deadline for public consultation and submissions falls on the same day as those meetings of the environment and petitions committees should have been held - could reduce the number of Borders councillors from 34 to 32.
Cue bluster and outrage at council HQ. In a response SBC warned such a cut in their ranks would almost certainly lead to "overloaded councillors". Larger council wards would mean not only increased workloads, but also increased travel and travel time.
The statement went on: "With fewer councillors, the standard of and length of time for engagement with the public could reduce, response times could be longer or time spent with individual constituents could decrease as councillors would face responsibility for more members of the public".
In light of this week's regrettable cancellations maybe some of you would care to let the Commission have your views on councillor numbers by next Thursday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)