The leadership of a fire authority has survived a vote of no confidence following controversy over their firemaster's severance deal and subsequent re-employment.
Joe Lowe and Brian Wallace, the chairman and vice-chairman of Strathclyde Fire Board, faced a no confidence motion from several of its members as it discussed the saga around Brian Sweeney's leaving deal and immediate re-employment.
However, the efforts fell down on political lines, with only SNP councillors from across the west of Scotland supporting the bid to have the Labour pair axed. The motion failed with five votes against 15.
Mr Wallace, who was chairman when Mr Sweeney was awarded the deal, failed to attend yesterday's meeting in Hamilton.
It was also agreed that the board would accept the Accounts Commission's findings and that these would be made public in the coming days.
Mr Sweeney retired last year as Firemaster at Strathclyde Fire and Rescue, collecting a lump sum pension payment. However, he was re-hired a month later in the same £150,000-a-year job, landing council taxpayers with a potential bill of more than £200,000.
A report by Audit Scotland has now said the deal "would not meet the public's expectations of what is an acceptable use of public funds".
Following a seven-month probe, it also found members of the board were not given sufficient information about the cost implications of Mr Sweeney's deal when they met to approve it.
Senior figures in local government have told The Herald the saga has caused major damage to perceptions of public-sector pensions and deals for senior officials.
Glasgow SNP councillor Alison Thewliss, who launched the motion, said: "So many aspects of the report mention the convenor and vice-convenor didn't pass on vital information to the board for over a year. That's completely unacceptable."
A spokeswoman for the board could only confirm the motion and its result.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article