SNP ministers have been criticised for failing to live up to their own transparency goals.
The Government is supposed to publish a list of all its spending over £25,000 each month, but the latest data is now 18 months old and refers to April 2017.
The government, which has been repeatedly criticised for knee-jerk secrecy, said it was “working hard to clear a backlog” caused by staff prioritising other tasks.
Opposition parties said it was an example of government hypocrisy eroding public trust.
Although ministers often boast about transparency, the government has been criticised for its approach to freedom of information and interference by political advisers.
The Public Services Reform (SCotland) 2010 imposed a duty on all public bodies to publish an annual breakdown of spending over £25,000 “as soon as is reasonably practicable”.
However the government’s aim is to exceed that requirement by publishing the information on a monthly basis, something it has generally done until now.
Labour MSP Neil Findlay said: “It has been so long since the SNP government updated this supposedly monthly list that Theresa May still had a majority the last time it was published.
“The SNP government promised to be world leaders in transparency, but time and time again it has failed to meet even the most basic of standards.
"The SNP government must recommit itself to transparency or it risks eroding public trust in our politics.”
Scottish LibDem leader Willie Rennie added: "The Scottish Government are now months behind in publishing details of contracts and spending.
"It will not fill the public with confidence that when challenged on this oversight, the excuses were free flowing.
"The SNP should make sure appropriate staffing is available to deliver on this commitment and ensure significant public expenditure is not exempt from scrutiny."
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: “In line with our commitment to openness and transparency we aim to publish details of government spending over £25,000 on a monthly basis.
“We are working hard to clear a backlog that has arisen due to internal pressures and aim to publish the subsequent reports, in batches, as soon as possible.”
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel