Perth and Kinross Council finds itself at the centre of a formal inquiry by the Scottish Information Commissioner, sparked by the lack of documentation surrounding the termination of a high-profile, £128,000-a-year director position. The Commissioner has initiated an intervention, raising serious questions about the local authority’s record-keeping practices and suggesting a potential attempt to sidestep public accountability.
The saga began when a Freedom of Information request sought details on internal communications regarding the abrupt departure of Alison Williams, who had served just six months as the Director of Economy, Place and Learning. This crucial role oversees a broad spectrum of vital public services within the region. Astonishingly, the council initially asserted that no written records existed related to Ms. Williams’ exit or the subsequent decision by Chief Executive Thomas Glen to abolish the position entirely. This revelation was met with profound concern by the information watchdog.
Further inquiries revealed the council’s contention that all decisions regarding the directorship were made during unrecorded verbal discussions involving Mr. Glen. This explanation only heightened the Commissioner’s apprehension. Following an appeal against the council’s response, the Scottish Information Commissioner issued a strong reprimand in June, instructing the council to conduct a more thorough search for relevant documentation. However, the subsequent re-submission from the local authority once again declared the absence of any records pertaining to the significant change in its senior management structure. Formal Intervention Escalates Scrutiny
In light of the council’s repeated failure to produce documentation, the Scottish Information Commissioner has escalated the matter to a ‘Level 2 intervention.’ This level of scrutiny is specifically designed to address systemic failings in public authority practices and mandates concrete steps to rectify the identified issues. The move underscores the gravity with which the Commissioner views the council’s apparent lack of transparency.
Commissioner David Hamilton expressed his profound concern, stating: At face value, the decision to abolish a director-level post – responsible for the delivery of a wide range of key public services – without a single record being kept, seems astonishing. He further emphasized the critical importance of robust record-keeping for effective governance, citing: As the Code of Practice on Records Management sets out, good record keeping is the lifeblood of an organisation – it helps to support good practice, demonstrate robust decision-making and ensure compliance with the law.
The intervention will delve into two key areas: assessing the extent of the council’s compliance with the official Code of Practice on Records Management, and crucially, investigating whether this was a deliberate policy to evade public scrutiny. Mr. Hamilton affirmed his commitment to recommending remedial action where necessary, highlighting the imperative for public bodies, including Perth and Kinross Council, to uphold the principles of openness and accountability to their taxpayers and the wider community. Council Chief Executive Maintains Stance Amidst Growing Concerns
Despite the formal intervention, Thomas Glen, the £167,000-a-year Chief Executive, continues to defend the council’s actions. He conveyed to reporters that while the Scottish Information Commissioner has notified them of the intervention, he believes the council has consistently responded appropriately to the original enquirer and to the commissioner throughout. He assured full cooperation with the ongoing inquiries, yet his statement leaves many in the community wondering about the underlying reasons for the absence of records regarding such a significant administrative change.
This is not the first instance where Perth and Kinross Council’s transparency has been called into question. Earlier in January, the council issued an apology for erroneously withholding information regarding a £4,500 relocation fee paid to Ms. Williams when she first took up the director role. The council had initially deemed this information not to be in the public interest, a decision that was subsequently overturned. Furthermore, Audit Scotland confirmed in January that the circumstances surrounding Ms. Williams’ departure would form part of their comprehensive 2024/25 review of the local authority’s operations. The cumulative effect of these incidents has placed Perth and Kinross Council’s governance and transparency firmly under the spotlight, demanding clear answers for the residents it serves.
The saga began when a Freedom of Information request sought details on internal communications regarding the abrupt departure of Alison Williams, who had served just six months as the Director of Economy, Place and Learning. This crucial role oversees a broad spectrum of vital public services within the region. Astonishingly, the council initially asserted that no written records existed related to Ms. Williams’ exit or the subsequent decision by Chief Executive Thomas Glen to abolish the position entirely. This revelation was met with profound concern by the information watchdog.
Further inquiries revealed the council’s contention that all decisions regarding the directorship were made during unrecorded verbal discussions involving Mr. Glen. This explanation only heightened the Commissioner’s apprehension. Following an appeal against the council’s response, the Scottish Information Commissioner issued a strong reprimand in June, instructing the council to conduct a more thorough search for relevant documentation. However, the subsequent re-submission from the local authority once again declared the absence of any records pertaining to the significant change in its senior management structure. Formal Intervention Escalates Scrutiny
In light of the council’s repeated failure to produce documentation, the Scottish Information Commissioner has escalated the matter to a ‘Level 2 intervention.’ This level of scrutiny is specifically designed to address systemic failings in public authority practices and mandates concrete steps to rectify the identified issues. The move underscores the gravity with which the Commissioner views the council’s apparent lack of transparency.
Commissioner David Hamilton expressed his profound concern, stating: At face value, the decision to abolish a director-level post – responsible for the delivery of a wide range of key public services – without a single record being kept, seems astonishing. He further emphasized the critical importance of robust record-keeping for effective governance, citing: As the Code of Practice on Records Management sets out, good record keeping is the lifeblood of an organisation – it helps to support good practice, demonstrate robust decision-making and ensure compliance with the law.
The intervention will delve into two key areas: assessing the extent of the council’s compliance with the official Code of Practice on Records Management, and crucially, investigating whether this was a deliberate policy to evade public scrutiny. Mr. Hamilton affirmed his commitment to recommending remedial action where necessary, highlighting the imperative for public bodies, including Perth and Kinross Council, to uphold the principles of openness and accountability to their taxpayers and the wider community. Council Chief Executive Maintains Stance Amidst Growing Concerns
Despite the formal intervention, Thomas Glen, the £167,000-a-year Chief Executive, continues to defend the council’s actions. He conveyed to reporters that while the Scottish Information Commissioner has notified them of the intervention, he believes the council has consistently responded appropriately to the original enquirer and to the commissioner throughout. He assured full cooperation with the ongoing inquiries, yet his statement leaves many in the community wondering about the underlying reasons for the absence of records regarding such a significant administrative change.
This is not the first instance where Perth and Kinross Council’s transparency has been called into question. Earlier in January, the council issued an apology for erroneously withholding information regarding a £4,500 relocation fee paid to Ms. Williams when she first took up the director role. The council had initially deemed this information not to be in the public interest, a decision that was subsequently overturned. Furthermore, Audit Scotland confirmed in January that the circumstances surrounding Ms. Williams’ departure would form part of their comprehensive 2024/25 review of the local authority’s operations. The cumulative effect of these incidents has placed Perth and Kinross Council’s governance and transparency firmly under the spotlight, demanding clear answers for the residents it serves.