Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Minister forced to defend SNH relocation decision

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 10 January 2007
ROSS Finnie yesterday defended a controversial decision to overrule his senior civil servant and order a major quango to move out of Edinburgh at a cost to the taxpayer of more than £20 million.
The environment minister told Holyrood's audit committee he had ruled Scottish Natural Heritage should go to Inverness because the Executive was committed to a policy of moving civil-service jobs away from the capital.

In a highly unusual move, M
r Finnie was called in front of the committee because he had made the relocation decision in 2003 against the recommendation of his most senior civil servant.

John Graham, the head of the department at the time, told ministers that, as the "accountable officer" - with legal responsibility for the stewardship of taxpayers' money - he could not approve the plan.

However, Mr Finnie told the committee, which is investigating whether the move was a proper use of public funds, that Mr Graham came to that decision because of the "narrow ground" that defined relocation moves at the time.

Mr Finnie said he had had to balance the advice from Mr Graham against the Executive's policy.

The move to Inverness was ordered despite the Highland city being ranked fifth on a shortlist of five possible locations, and strong opposition to the move from staff, unions, Edinburgh politicians and the SNH board.

Only 55 staff out of the 270 working at SNH headquarters in Edinburgh decided to make the move to Inverness, leading to redundancy costs of £6.9 million. The cost of recruiting new staff reached nearly £1 million.



Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 09 January 2007 10:11 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Public bodies relocation
 
1

Peter Cherbi,

Edinburgh 10/01/2007 01:54:13

Finnie's well qualified to defend the SNH relocation ... being one of those msp 'mortgage payment relocation' specialists .... despite his experise though .. he comes up short as usual on believability

2

Wisnaeme,

Sent to Coventry. 10/01/2007 05:53:29

Actually, it was a bone thrown to the FibDem curs from Labour's leftovers to keep their executive partners sweet and obliging.At no cost to themselves,don't you know. Typical of Labour to let others carry the can. Poor Finnie,didn't he suss discarded rotten bones carry diseases?

3

Anne,

10/01/2007 07:04:23

It used to be part of the Civil Service contract of employment that you should be prepared to move to another location if the job demanded it.
Has that changed too?
If not, those who do refuse to move are in breach of contract .

4

GP,

10/01/2007 08:31:40

3# still there Anne but is it fair?
Plus they don't really want people to move, get it?
If he defends the same as he did fishing then he will lose big time.

5

S Hamilton,

Embra 10/01/2007 09:43:18

"Mr Finnie said he had had to balance the advice from Mr Graham against the Executive's policy."

So, it disnae matter whether it's right or wrong. So mote it be.

6

Budgie,

10/01/2007 10:34:30

I have visited the new SNH premises in Inverness, and it is very impressive. The staff appeared to be very satisfied, and the location could not be faulted.
I would be surprised if it transpired that any of the 55 staff members have since regretted their move.
It is only right that all areas of Scotland should share in the employment opportunities which have hitherto been the preserve - mainly - of the Capital.
It would be no bad thing if the Hebrides were to be the chosen location for the next major transfer of Scottish Parliament Departmental HQ's.

7

jude the obscure,

edinburgh 10/01/2007 10:57:01

Anne (#3)

just on a point of information Anne - staff of quangos aren't Civil Servants - their terms and conditions of employment and salary scales are quite different. There is also no clause in their (my!) contract on relocating.

8

jude the obscure,

edinburgh 10/01/2007 11:07:50

Budgie (#55)

the 55 staff who did move where more than likely young and single with few commitments. For the rest - they obviously were faced with a choice of moving children from school, away from elderly dependent relatives, spouses with their own careers, and a network of friends and family built up over decades. Obviously most chose to stay in Edinburgh.

Apart from the personal distress this has caused - SNH has lost many competent and experiences staff whose years of expertise have not been easily replaced and therefore its operational effectiveness has been damaged. Oh - and the taxpayer has had to find an additional £20million!

Also - Budgie - Edinburgh has a much lower proportion of ALL public sector job and govenrment spending than many parts of Scotland - particularly Glasgow and west central Scotland (where most jobs have been relocated to).

9

GP,

10/01/2007 11:10:46

8# spot on.
pity the folk didn't do some research into this as I am sure there must be some dirt and possible illegal activities behind some of these staff relocations.

10

Dave From Barra,

Western Isles 10/01/2007 12:25:18

It costs £5,000 a year to cut the grass on the roof of the "impressive HQ" in Inverness.

11

TheGlaswegian,

Edinburgh 10/01/2007 14:32:50

#6 Budgie - I agree with you. Public sector jobs should be shared equally around the country.
I'm sure the buildings and maintenance costs in Inverness are less than in Edinburgh.
Plus, the 200 odd who didn't move shared a massive £6.9Million redundancy package. I'm sure there's none complaining (average £34,000 each)and I'm sure there's none unemployed - before this transfer many public sector jobs Edinburgh weren't filled because of rising house costs.
Inverness has benefited and the civil servants who didn't move benefited. Was it worth it to the taxpayer? Who knows -probably yes - what else were the Exec to do? Offer civil servants even more money to temp them to work in Edinburgh?

(Why do some civil servants always complain? Compared to the those in the private sector, they have a laid back jobs, good holidays, fantastic pension rights and good working conditions. The salary on offer for some posts is incredible. Do you think the workers at Dyson got anything like this redundancy package when manufacturing was moved offshore and the were thrown on the scraphead?)

12

GP,

10/01/2007 14:38:01

11# you are sadly informed.
there are more civil service jobs in the west than in Edinburgh.
please provide details of the public sector jobs that were not filled previously as per your statement.

13

TheGlaswegian,

Edinburgh 10/01/2007 17:16:01

#12 There are more people in the 'west' than in Edinburgh.
Still, Edinburgh has the highest proportion of civil service jobs per 1000 head of population. I can't give exact numbers right now (but the info is out there ont eh web). When compared to Dundee, for example Edinburgh has 4 times as many. Compared to Glasgow, it has 33% more.

A small sample from article from the Scotland On Sunday in 2005-
"A flick through the newspaper recruitment pages, however, shows just how serious the issue has become: there were 158 jobs on offer in Friday's Scottish national papers, and of those 105 were in the public sector"

For more detail please see,
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=2061562005
Google for "Edinburg Public Sector Recruitment problems".
I await your apology.

14

Budgie,

10/01/2007 18:06:53

*8 Jude the obscure, Edinburgh.

@SNH has lost many competent staff......". Well, I suppose they did, BUT, they will have been replaced by equally competent staff, who will have by now gained the experience you attribute to their predecessors.
I cannot question your assertion that Edinburgh has a much lower proportion of Public Sector jobs and Government spending than many parts of Scotland, but I find it difficult to believe. I must check this out.
It is always unfortunate when people lose their jobs- for whatever reason- but the Edinburgh SNH staff who opted to divest themselves of their employment with this body did so with a healthy pay off.

15

GP,

10/01/2007 19:24:14

13# I suggest you appologise.
This article proves my point not yours.
The vast majority of people employed in the west are in public sector roles.

Once again re - read your own article.

16

TheGlaswegian,

Edinburgh 10/01/2007 21:49:13

#15 - lol, that's the best I could find... ;-) but I did read an article abotu how how edinburgh was struggling to recruit public sector workers due to the cost of living.
You are probably correct about more jobs in the west being in the public secotr as vast numbers do not even work. Still per head of population, Edinburgh has more (or perhaps the redistribution strategy has worked).


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.