Sunday 24 July 2005

Appropriate to comment

Thinking about the vast and growing numbers employed in Scotland's "public" sector (see yesterday's item) it does rather look as if some of them haven't quite mastered basic business sense. Perhaps I should make that common sense. Imagine that you're placing a contract for an £80 million PPP construction project. Would you give the job to a company:
despite the fact it does not have an office, Companies House accounts or a history of handling PPP schemes.
Let's not be too hard on the seemingly hapless North Ayrshire public servants. It's not as if the company in question doesn't actually exist. But shouldn't this have triggered off a little warning bell:
CES, which was incorporated as a private company days after the council agreed to the PPP project plan in July 2003, has yet to file any accounts with Companies House, while a recent credit check reads: “This company has an average risk status and should be treated with a degree of caution.”
The Scottish Executive at Holyrood escapes financial responsibility as a result of being funded by Westminster. In similar fashion our local councils get most of their cash directly from the Scottish Executive. And the Executive has indeed commented on this matter by saying:
It would be inappropriate for the Executive to comment.

1 comment:

David Farrer said...

Comments made on previous templates:

Roland Watson
Some haven't mastered spelling either: 

26 July 2005, 12:55:02 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

The control of public spending in the UK is really a matter for the Treasury. 
Many people, including British industry, are getting a bit fed up with its priorities. But what can we do?

25 July 2005, 17:18:46 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Perhaps one of the directors is a relative of a councillor, so they can vouch for their worthiness, and everything was fine all along.

25 July 2005, 13:38:11 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Andrew Duffin
Jeez what a snake-pit. 
I thought this sort of thing only happened in Lanarkshire. 
Worth following up on, I would say.

25 July 2005, 12:37:45 GMT+01:00