THE Scottish Office refused to confirm yesterday that members of
Monklands District Council would not be surcharged over the costs of a
public inquiry into allegations about the way the council has been
running its affairs.
There is now a question mark over the inquiry.
The council had decided on Thursday to go ahead with it provided
Scottish Secretary Ian Lang guaranteed members would not be surcharged
to meet the costs involved.
The council has been accused of nepotism, sectarianism, and a spending
bias in favour of Coatbridge and against Airdrie. It denies the
accusations.
Its chief executive, Mr Maurice Hart, who has written to Mr Lang
outlining the reasoning behind the decision, said yesterday the council
was anxious to have an inquiry because it believed adverse publicity
generated by the controversy had had a detrimental effect on inward
investment and the local economy.
He said: ''The council is well aware that the ultimate decision about
surcharge rests with the Secretary of State. Consequently, we are asking
him to give an undertaking that no such surcharge will be made.''
However, a Scottish Office spokesman said yesterday: ''As Monklands
District Council should be perfectly aware, the Secretary of State is in
no position to give any such assurance on surcharging.
''Surcharging on local authority elected members and officials arises
from recommendations made by the Accounts Commission following the
identification by auditors of illegal or improper expenditure.''
A council spokesman later refused to speculate on the implications of
the Scottish Office statement. He said he would prefer to wait until an
official response to Mr Hart's letter was received from Mr Lang.
He added: ''In the event of the Accounts Commission recommending a
surcharge, the Scottish Secretary would ask the council to justify why
it had held an inquiry.
''The council has spelled that out in advance of an inquiry and I
don't think it is unreasonable to ask Mr Lang to make a decision now,
rather than after the event.''
The three SNP councillors in Monklands said the council should decide
to proceed with an inquiry regardless.
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