Public Money, Openness and Transparency
Regular readers will recall that I wrote to COSLA a little while back - on the subject of spending public money - see post dated 18 June 2011.
The chief executive - Rory Mair - responded by saying, in essence, that as COSLA is not covered by Scotland's FOI scheme - he would not be providing the information requested.
Now I don't find that very satisfactory or convincing - so here's what I said in my reply.
Dear Rory
Public Money, Openness and Transparency
Many thanks for your e-mail dated 8 June 2011.
Can I say, first of all, how pleased I am that you read my blog site - I know that other COSLA staff do so as well, some on a regular basis.
You asked me, in your e-mail, how COSLA can show leadership on this issue - and I am happy to answer your question directly.
To my mind, COSLA should be adopting the same standards as its 32 member councils - from whom the Convention receives almost all of its public funding via the taxpayer. Since Scotland's 32 councils all comply with the Freedom of Information Scotland Act (FOISA) 2002 - I believe it makes absolute sense for COSLA to operate to the same standards as the councils it represents and deals with on a daily basis.
In my view most council taxpayers in Scotland would support COSLA and its member councils being on a level playing field.
In addition, COSLA regularly calls for a 'parity of esteem' between local and national government - which I agree with, broadly speaking.
But the notion of a 'parity of esteem' cuts both ways, surely, and as the Scottish government is also required to observe FOISA - I think it would show leadership for COSLA to adopt the same standard of openness and transparency.
Even though COSLA is not legally obliged to observe FOISA at this point in time, which seems like an oversight to me, the Convention can clearly do so on a voluntary basis.
So in my opinion, this all boils down leadership and political will.
But what I cannot understand is your prickly and defensive attitude - because it is plainly ridiculous that the remuneration of the COSLA President and Vice Presidents should be treated like some kind of state secret - when these payments are being made from public funds.
I have to say that COSLA's attitude seems little different to the behaviour of officials in the House of Commons who tried to prevent the public from learning the truth about MPs' expenses.
I believe the Scottish taxpayer has a right to know how public money is being spent, which is the underlying principle at stake here and if there is nothing to hide, then there is clearly no need for all this secrecy.
I just find it odd that you seem to believe otherwise and that somehow COSLA should be treated differently than its key partners and stakeholders.
Kind regards
Mark
The chief executive - Rory Mair - responded by saying, in essence, that as COSLA is not covered by Scotland's FOI scheme - he would not be providing the information requested.
Now I don't find that very satisfactory or convincing - so here's what I said in my reply.
Dear Rory
Public Money, Openness and Transparency
Many thanks for your e-mail dated 8 June 2011.
Can I say, first of all, how pleased I am that you read my blog site - I know that other COSLA staff do so as well, some on a regular basis.
You asked me, in your e-mail, how COSLA can show leadership on this issue - and I am happy to answer your question directly.
To my mind, COSLA should be adopting the same standards as its 32 member councils - from whom the Convention receives almost all of its public funding via the taxpayer. Since Scotland's 32 councils all comply with the Freedom of Information Scotland Act (FOISA) 2002 - I believe it makes absolute sense for COSLA to operate to the same standards as the councils it represents and deals with on a daily basis.
In my view most council taxpayers in Scotland would support COSLA and its member councils being on a level playing field.
In addition, COSLA regularly calls for a 'parity of esteem' between local and national government - which I agree with, broadly speaking.
But the notion of a 'parity of esteem' cuts both ways, surely, and as the Scottish government is also required to observe FOISA - I think it would show leadership for COSLA to adopt the same standard of openness and transparency.
Even though COSLA is not legally obliged to observe FOISA at this point in time, which seems like an oversight to me, the Convention can clearly do so on a voluntary basis.
So in my opinion, this all boils down leadership and political will.
But what I cannot understand is your prickly and defensive attitude - because it is plainly ridiculous that the remuneration of the COSLA President and Vice Presidents should be treated like some kind of state secret - when these payments are being made from public funds.
I have to say that COSLA's attitude seems little different to the behaviour of officials in the House of Commons who tried to prevent the public from learning the truth about MPs' expenses.
I believe the Scottish taxpayer has a right to know how public money is being spent, which is the underlying principle at stake here and if there is nothing to hide, then there is clearly no need for all this secrecy.
I just find it odd that you seem to believe otherwise and that somehow COSLA should be treated differently than its key partners and stakeholders.
Kind regards
Mark
