Today’s (14th January 2011) Scotsman reveals another example of Argyll and Bute Council asleep on watch.
Its trade union, COSLA, the body representing all of Scotland’s local authorities, agreed with the Scottish Government that the Isle of Seil was not an island because of the Clachan Bridge.
That little agreement meant that Argyll lost £400,000 from its annual revenue grant under the part of it known as SINA – Special Island Needs Allowance.
The Scottish Government has confirmed that: ‘Amendments to the Special Islands Needs Allowance were discussed and agreed by local government and Scottish Government officials, and agreed with Cosla’.
This confirmation closes an escape hatch for Argyll and Bute Council, which claims to have known nothing of the redesignation of Seil or of its impact on Argyll’s SINA grant. The Government statement clearly indicates that local government was involved in discussions on this matter and had agreed to the outcomes – independent of COSLA’s agreement with the Government.
The costly surprises
The Scotsman article has the Council saying it came as a surprise to them. No surprise there for Argyll.
Argyll and Bute Council has regularly claimed to have been surprised of late:
- it was surprised to discover how their annual revenue grant was actually calculated (the GAE mechanism)
- it was surprised to discover that COSLA’s changes to GAE (which they agreed) meant that Argyll and Bute lost another £5.6 million this year
- it was surprised to discover that this was what they’d approved themselves at a COSLA meeting on 19th November 2010
- now it’s surprised that COSLA agreed that the Isle of Seil, with its Bridge over the Clachan Sound built at the end of the 1700s, is no longer an island, with the loss of £400,000 per annum.
- presumably it is also surprised that it agreed the change to SINA independently of COSLA?
The big issue is the lack of awareness, the lack of contact with what is going on. Argyll is like the former HMS Invincible, a hulking carrier now stripped of its engines waiting to be towed off for scrap.
The COSLA issue
The next issue is COSLA. It is not COSLA’s business to be making agreements with the Government on the locally sovereign affairs of a member authority and – allegedly – without that authority’s awareness and agreement.
Like the organisation of local government, COSLA has also outlived its usefulness and is fit for no purpose other than protecting its own territorial interests.
COSLA has now being directly instrumental in two initiatives – that we know about – both hard to defend in logic and both negatively affecting the finances of Argyll:
- the bizarre reintroduction to this year’s calculations of grants removed in 2007 (although their total revenue remained available) known as Supporting People. This cost Argyll £5.6 million.
- the agreement we now know about, that the Isle of Seil is not an island. This has cost £400.000.
The total cost of COSLA to Argyll this year has been £6 million.
Argyll must have a competent administration that is respected by its peers and that stays awake on the tiller.
Scotland must engage with the need for local government reform – and with the replacement of the cost-heavy COSLA (COSTLA?) with something much more simple and much more democratic.
Hopefully Argyll & Bute will have better luck getting a fair share of this:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-12187953
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Tim McIntyre: and no one can say we don’t need this. At one point in 2010, Mull was compelled to do a pothole cut on a particularly notorious stretch of ;road’.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Lest I be seen as some sort of ABC bashing fanatic let me just say here that the prime cause of the current difficulties with the budget do indeed lie with COSLA rather than the Council. It was COSLA who asked for the previously ring fenced grant funding to be recalculated as if these grants still exist (as opposed to the Government which had suggested just working on the 2007 proportions for each Local authority and divvying up the money accordingly). As the request came from COSLA, the Government agreed to it – no doubt presuming that all of the Council’s knew what the implications of doing that were and were agreed to it. To quote Sandy Longmuir on the issue: “someone knew what they were doing”. Sadly that someone was not our own Council who genuinely seem blissfully unaware of what was going on.
So the loss of the grant funding was not a direct consequence of the actions of the Council but it was the result of their inaction and lack of understanding. They may not have been able to avoid these changes (I don’t know enough about the inner workings of COSLA to know what would have happened if ABC had objected) but objecting to it would have left ABC in a stronger case to request special treatment. As it was, the problem has been compounded by the knee-jerk reaction to wrongly strike out at the Government. Had the budget been allocated the way that the Government had suggested rather than COSLA then ABC would have had a budget settlement that was more or less in line with the average.
Time to be very nice to the Scottish Government and an apology from the Council would be a good start.
While we are on apologies, when are we going to see one on the Council’s website for them miscalculating the GAE figures in regard to the school closure proposals? My understanding is that they have now concluded that SRSN is right and they are wrong and yet their earlier press releases remain uncorrected.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
the good doctor is succumbing to the council’s anaesthetic. if cosla didn’t exist something else would. The SINA changes were known in august. the council’s defence is not they didn’t know but that no-one highlighted the cost to argyll & bute. they have some very highly paid staff and politicians who should have read the small print. stop blaming others for our mistakes should the coalition/council new year resolution.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For coracle: Absolutely, Ignorance is no defence – ahd ignorannce does not have to be a permanent condition. One asks.
And as you say, there are officers employed whose job it is to work out the consequences of proposals and changes and alert elected members.
Are they procedurally included where they should be included?
Are they being asked for their calculations and advice?
Are they offering them?
Does no one ask for time before they sign?
What communications of any value exist between members and officials and between the leadership and officials?
Is anything working in Argyll and Bute Council?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I will freely admit to being an A&BC bashing fanatic – now! Something the council have created in me for screwing up so badly and effecting the welfare of my children.
The fact is, all of Argyll & Bute’s residents – and some of them the most vulnerable – are all going to pay the price for their mistakes and ineptitude. What are they paying for it? Nothing, they are getting away scot free without losing an damn thing.
They have failed each and every one of us and those responsible for our situation should be made to pay as well.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
for newsroom – the gravy train is on schedule
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I think the point of my post was perhaps missed (probably lost in the shocking grammar!). Ignorance is indeed no defence under law and so the Council are guilty of failing Argyll’s citizens and its own employees but they are guilty by neglect rather than misdeed.
However, someone at COSLA knew what they were doing and knew that by having the 2007 ring fenced grants revalued their council would do better out of it and someone else would lose (as the pot remains the same). What other reason would there be in making such a strange request (ie having grants that no longer exist valued as if they still did). Whether they are guilty of misdeed or just being savvy is a rather mute point (one man’s terrorist…)
But my other point is that the Council’s attempts to blame the Scottish Government are not only misguided but very likely to backfire. The Government is the only body that can rescue the Council’s chestnuts from the fire and yet the Council is giving them very little incentive to do so.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I wouldn’t give them any money if I was the Scottish Government, not without a significant change of personnel and office-bearers. Look how badly they have mis-managed things so far. Would it not just be pouring more money down the drain? Or certains councillors pockets?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Cosla is not a trade union, so why refer to it as such, is the use of the term trade union pejorative?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Spenic Vent: Not pejorative at all (we’re long confirmed in the one for all and all for one doctrine)> This was simply a shortcut to clarify COSLA’s role as part representative, part lobby and part barricade.
Not sure that describing someone as a milkman could credibly be said (in the instance you may have in mind) to have been intended to indicate, say, reliable delivery, a source of basic corporate health and a cheery whistle into the bargain.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May have been a short cut but whether it clarified or not is open to debate. For those who work, or have worked in local government, and have seen the attitude of cosla towards staff, it is more likely to offend. Your second paragraph now makes me think that you really think that the Herald’s use of the term milkman was more ironic than pejorative!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Splenic Vent: Can’t find any trace of irony in the Herald article – but more than happy never to refer to COSLA as a trade union again.
From the experience of those who have worked in local government, is COSLA seen as protective or dismissive of staff? We don’t want to make assumptions from what you’ve said – and our very real sympathy is with staff who are manifestly ill-led and managed.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Without wishing to monopolise the debate here is an extract from the cosla website which outline their principles, can’t see any mention of staff in there. I am in no doubt that if you have the sympathies you say (and I don’t doubt these); and taking into account your undisputable talent for research, then I assume that this is a leading question on your part and look forward to the replies.
About COSLA
COSLA, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, is the representative voice of Scottish local government and also acts as the employers’ association on behalf of all Scottish councils.
As a membership organisation, one of our highest priorities is to maintain and enhance our relationship with member Councils and the key principles, which underpin our activities recognise that the way we work is as important as what we do. These principles are as follows:
1. Ensure strong working relationships with COSLA’s political structures to ensure that our work at officer level is led and prioritised by elected members.
2. Represent the local authority interest.
3. Fully involve member Councils and individual elected members, as appropriate, to ensure that we are doing the things local government would wish to see us do and in the way it would wish to see us doing them.
4. Promote the local authority role / perspective; ensure that service delivery remains within a framework of local governance and protect against a centralising agenda.
5. Work with partner organisations where appropriate to deliver shared agendas, adding value through partnership, particularly in relation to the achievement of sustainability (economic, environmental & social);
6. Recognise the respective roles of central and local government and Brussels, influencing the formulation of policies to ensure their implementation delivers on local priorities and policies.
7. Ensure that constructive external relationships are maintained with partner organisations, including the Scottish Government and Scottish Parliament and utilising relationships to promote a vibrant and positive local government agenda.
8. Ensure that COSLA adds value and avoids replicating the roles of member Councils in order to make the most effective use of expertise and resources to achieve effective outcomes for local government.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/politics/council-workers-anger-at-dirty-cosla-pay-deal-1.1051095
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Spenic Vent: Message understood. We’re absolutely on the same wavelength.
And we don’t merely sympathise with the staff who pull the loads, we are arguing for changes to better their working lives and restore their morale and their self and public esteem. Every aspect of the council needs a total culture change.
And management research shows that ‘flatter’ (less pyramidal) hierarchies improve performance, job satisfaction and responsibility.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I am hoping that at least some of the powers that be at ABC are starting to realise that we are in a mess. Hopefully some of them are starting to understand that the Council simply cannot continue as it is in light of the financial constraints.
As has been pointed out before, historically it has mainly worked on ‘a nod and a wink’, it just cannot continue like this, we all deserve better. There is a bullying culture which appears to pervade every department and when I talk to staff they are incredibly demoralised and will say, in whispers as there terrified of being overheard, that they just can’t see any end to it. It needs to change and quickly otherwise it will simply implode.
Although we need to focus on the here and now with school closures etc we also need to think about the future as the financial situation will eventually change, therefore how do we start to address both the present and future.
1. Mrs Louden and Councillor Walsh, could I suggest three simple words that might start to heal the rift ‘We are sorry’.
2. For the next year go into a holding situation. Yes of course make cuts where it is obvious that they can be made without causing too much distress and use some of our reserves to compensate for other deficits. We as the public have had to do this with our own finances, we have had to dip into our savings, if we have any. And credit where credit is due, if our reserves are as high as what they say i.e £48 million, then well done but if we are in the worst financial situation ever, then when else would it be appropriate to use them.
3. Everyone is currently sticking there heads in the sand and putting there fingers in there ears and going ‘lah, lah can’t hear you’. Time to make a change and start to make a difference. Therefore, identify staff who you feel can make a real difference in the future and for the next year second them out to other Councils or private companies so they can learn and experience other ways of doing things.
It is not the time for personal ego’s, now is the time to show true leadership.
I would also suggest that all the affiliated political parties should join together to form a new ‘Administration’ and remove the power from the independants group, but I accept that may be just a step to far for some, unfortunately!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Re your last sentence Alasdair, you would probably find 1 or 2 ‘independents’ rejoining a political party to retain power, just as they have previously done it the other way round for a similar outcome. There have been instances of candidates being elected under one banner only to ditch it (immediately), when elected, for the furtherance of their own personal career. (and to hell with the ‘minions’ who knocked doors and put out leaflets for them).
Re Mike, I think most would agree that due to the increased responsibilities/obligations now placed on Councils, that a sensible salary should be paid to all Councillors, and accountable expenses. A return to the one councillor/one ward sysem a priority, and a 33% reduction in the ammount of councillors we have, would be prudent.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Re your comparison with an defunct aircraft carrier:- as far as I know Illustrious is alive and well (without aircraft) I think you may mean “HMS Invincible”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Calum Kennedy:You’re quite right and we will now correct the article.
Illustrious and Invincible are the same type, ‘the Invincible class’, making Invincible the older of the two, as the one for whom the class was named. Illustrious was the second of the three in the class to be laid down, with the asymmetrically named Ark Royal, the third.
Ark Royal and Illustrious were listed for decommissioning in December 2010 and with that and the dispute on the wisdom of that, we named the engineless one wrongly.
Thank you for the correction.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This is Alison’s Hay take on it
http://www.scotlibdems.org.uk/news/2011/01/hay-slams-snp-special-islands-needs-allowance-axed-argyll-bute
The expression ‘people in glass houses’ springs to mind.
I did like ‘at a loss to understand’ in reference to Alison Hay – that should be the tagline on any future political campaigns she has.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It is time to get rid of the Executive group of Councillors on Argyll & Bute Council as they are obviously not capable of doing the job. Since they elected themselves it has been one disaster after another.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
To ‘Treblet’ – a lot of the problem is down to them (the executive) being given poor briefings by the numerous overpaid officials bordering on the twisted in some notable recent instances.
Yes it is true that political parties can be held to account more for their actions, by way of a published manifesto, but if these actions are wrong, (initialy snp, then libdem, in the schools issue) then surely that can be every bit as bad as the current executive’s problems.
The whole crowd of elected members need to realise the implications of their decision making. by that i mean across the spectrum and from top to bottom.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0