Handbags at dawn

The saga of the Comhairle's (non?)position on Local Income Tax rumbles on. And gets more bitter, and hence much more entertaining for us mere mortals, as today's Gazette illustrates.

Next week it is angels on the head of a pin.

As with all email correspondence, you really have to start at the bottom with the oldest message. (Thanks to Deep Throat for forwarding this exchange.)
-------

From: Cllr. Donald Manford [mailto:dmanford@cne-siar.gov.uk]
Sent: 31 July 2008 16:03
To: Cllr. Angus McCormack; Cllr. Angus Campbell
Cc: CNES - Members
Subject: RE: Article in last week's Stornoway Gazette

Angus

You appear not to have read my attachment nor does it appear you have read the decision report.

I am happy that you at least accept my right to a view and I accept your right to disagree with it. You will note from the article I have written that it was for the Ward section of my local paper and to my own electorate. I trust you now accept my right to do that.

I am required to respond because not to do so would allow you to contend that I accept your view, which I do not. However a number of members have advised me that they are very unhappy with continued correspondence in this manner. So while I am happy to receive and respond to your communications I do not propose to circulate further correspondence unless I feel it merits it.

Kind regards, Donald.

---

From: Cllr. Angus McCormack
Sent: 31 July 2008 10:37
To: Cllr. Donald Manford; Cllr. Angus Campbell
Cc: CNES - Members
Subject: RE: Article in last week's Stornoway Gazette

Good morning Donald

I fear that you misinterpret my position. I have absolutely no problem with you having a view of your own and voicing that view. Where you misrepresent the CNES position, as in the Stornoway Gazette article, then that is quite inappropriate.

In regard to CNES decisions, I am quite clear on where my responsibility lies. As Vice Chair of Audit and Scrutiny I act corporately in the interests of the Comhairle and the public. Generally speaking these are compatible. On such an important issue as the future funding of the CNES it is quite irresponsible to argue that reservations should not be voiced to the government regarding their proposals. In doing that the CNES is representing the interests of its people. Should the government come back with proposals as to where future funding is to come from and if the government addresses the other concerns raised, then an entirely different view might be taken.

However I feel that I am bound by the corporate decision and that I should seek to explain it to the public not undermine it as you have done for, it would appear, entirely political reasons. In electing members to COSLA at all levels, I had understood that they should represent the CNES at all times. Otherwise you become political cannon fodder. In your position as a Senior Councillor and Chair of transportation do you put forward the council’s views or your own? I have always had the impression to date that you represented the counci’s views. So wherein lies the difference?

I made it clear in my letter on Sunday Observance that if it were decided that the CNES position should change that I would accept that decision. On LIT you do not accept that. I do not oppose dissent but if you are in a position where you are to represent the CNES then you have a duty to do that or resign. You appear to want to have your cake and eat it. I accept that it is a big dilemma and we are all of us faced with these matters all the time. I would argue that without corporate responsibility governance fails.

Finally on the subject of courtesy I should have to say that I do not believe that I have in any way been discourteous. If you do not want criticism, do not write to the press. This exchange could just have easily taken place in the chamber; indeed it may yet do so.

Kindest Regards

Angus

From: Cllr. Donald Manford
Sent: 31 July 2008 10:31
To: Cllr. Angus McCormack; Cllr. Angus Campbell
Cc: CNES - Members
Subject: RE: Article in last week's Stornoway Gazette

Angus

Before you concur so heartily with sentiments you might consider taking a little time to consider them rather more carefully.

Let us examine the implications of what you consider, corporate responsibility.

A Cllr takes forward an issue of behalf of their community, it is debated at council and lose the vote. By your interpretation the member must not only accept the decision (which is an obvious fact) the member must also agree with it. Meaning presumably by your understanding that, you go back to that community and say not only that you cannot any longer support them but you support the council against them. Do you have any idea how ridiculous that is? To take your position a bit further, should your community feel the issue be taken to the Ombudsman, you could not help them indeed you would promote the council position, which you had previously opposed.

Let us examine another issue. This council has a Sabbath observance policy which you have recently given very public support to. As with every policy it has to come before council for reconsideration. Should that be changed by a majority vote, would you then become an advocate of Sunday Sailing? Surely not but by your own interpretation of corporate governance, you would have to.

Cllr Munro perfectly honorably in my view, still opposes Sound of Harris crossing on the Sabbath; the Comhairle does not want it withdrawn. Should you be calling on Morag to follow the course you advocate for me? I would not support you in that. There are many more examples.

The right to dissent is in the constitution for a very good reason, fortunately those who have gone before us thought deeply about how they wished our people should be represented. Particularly in your role as vice chair of Audit and Scrutiny you should develop a deeper insight in to your own responsibility.

In order to properly be allowed to represent our electorate councilors must be able to continue to register dissent without fear or threat, the alternative is not a democratic option.

Again I feel it would have been courteous for you to have raised these issues directly with me in the first instance. As you have circulated your communication I feel obligated to do likewise, though I think most members will be saddened by the necessity.

Kind regards, Donald.

---

From: Cllr. Angus McCormack
Sent: 29 July 2008 16:40
To: Cllr. Angus Campbell; Cllr. Donald Manford
Cc: CNES - Members
Subject: RE: Article in last week's Stornoway Gazette

Angus

I heartily concur with your sentiments. I hope your letter has gone to the Gazette to redress the balance. However I doubt that it will get a half page spread.

I think, Donald, that you must decide on whether you are going to represent the views of the Comhairle or otherwise. If you are not to be bound by corporate responsibility then you should resign from posts to which you have been appointed by the Comhairle.

Just for the record, the views of the Comhairle do not necessarily represent my personal views but I accepted them as a reasonable corporate response.

Regards

Angus

---

From: Cllr. Angus Campbell
Sent: 29 July 2008 17:28
To: Cllr. Donald Manford
Cc: CNES - Members
Subject: Article in last week's Stornoway Gazette

Dear Donald

I was very disappointed to read in the Stornoway Gazette your comments on our consultation response for Local Income Tax. Although I was not altogether surprised, your comments certainly are not a true reflection of the position of this Comhairle.

The starting position of the Comhairle is that we want a fairer form of taxation for our people. To try and present a picture of anything different, is, to my mind, at best insincere.

One of the concerns of the Comhairle is that the replacement system of local income tax would reduce the overall resources available to the Outer Hebrides.

We have made it very clear that we are not happy with the present system. We want to see those that are unfairly penalised recompensed but we cannot as a Comhairle argue for less resources coming to these islands. If you pursue this line of thought then I challenge you to identify where you are going to make the cuts that would be necessary to balance our budgets. You say the Comhairle response has been done in a way to prevent Councillors standing up and saying they are in favour of the present system. That is totally inaccurate but you have also failed to identify where cuts would be made eg Social Work Home Help services? Education? Or perhaps you feel there is enough to spare from the roads budget? From my own point of view I embrace my responsibility as a Councillor to pursue the best deal for these islands. I would ask you to do the same.

Everybody accepts that people don’t like paying taxes but if you follow your populist view through then there would be no services in the Western Isles. As in all Comhairle decisions I think you have to accept the democratic process. However, this seems to be part of a trend where you do not recognise the Comhairle’s will. It is, of course, your right to be part of an opposition group but I think if that is the route you are taking you should state it clearly and withdraw from office within the Comhairle.

A couple of points in the article give me particular concern. It is totally incorrect to state that the Comhairle wants to discontinue consultation on local taxation – on the contrary we specifically stated that we wish to contribute to an early discussion on securing a fairer local tax for Scotland. I am also disappointed that you seem to be indifferent to the retention of valued jobs within the Western Isles but would be happy to see the jobs transferred off island.

You have done your fellow Councillors a disservice with your comments in the Gazette article. The process that we went through of consultation on a response was as open as I believe you would see in any local authority in Scotland. The matter went to P&R, a separate seminar and then to the Finance and Strategy Working Group of which you are a member. It then went backk for final comments before being presented to Edinburgh. There were very few comments returned and absolutely none from yourself. I would have thought that if you had real issues you would have used the offices of this Comhairle to argue them through and make your case. If you don’t win your case, like the rest of us, you should accept the democratic decision of the Comhairle. to all Members to as

The Comhairle is committed to continuing to work on finding a fairer tax for all residents in the Outer Hebrides.

Regards

Angus