By Dave Lord

A DAMNING report has warned that bungling Perth and Kinross Council employees are undermining public confidence in the authority.

The shock conclusion is drawn in a new review that exposes numerous failings in the way the council deals with planning applications.

Almost 30% of applications were found to have been misfiled by staff and, in one particularly worrying case, a personal application submitted by a planning officer was evaluated by one colleague and then approved by another, without any external scrutiny.

The latest criticism represents a severe blow to Perth and Kinross Council’s hierarchy, coming just seven months after its housing department was described by the Scottish Executive as failing the people of Perth and Kinross and two years after a root and branch review of the education service laid bare leadership, attitude and performance shortcomings.

Significant aspects of the planning approval process have been deemed “weak” in an audit review. The dossier flags up a dozen areas of concern, although local authority chiefs insist they are all being dealt with.

The review was based on a sample of 21 applications, picked for “detailed testing”. The investigation got off to the worst possible start as in a “high proportion” of cases (six out of 21) the audit found relevant documents had been misfiled.

“Given the close public scrutiny to which planning processes are subjected, such administrative errors have a negative impact on the reputation of Perth and Kinross Council,” the report states.

Perhaps most worrying is the reported case of a planning officer whose application was evaluated and approved by colleagues.

“An application submitted by a planning officer resident in the area covered by his own office was found to have been evaluated by his colleague in the area office team and approved by their mutual superior,” the review notes.

“In order to retain public confidence it is essential that Perth and Kinross Council decision-making is not only proper and fair, but also that it is seen to be so. This requirement may be undermined if officers in the same office and/or chain of management are involved in processing such applications.”

Among problems unearthed in the review was a lack of consistency in evaluating applications.

“A lack of guidance in interpreting planning policy imposes avoidable and unnecessary risks and costs on applicants, upon the department and upon Perth and Kinross Council,” the audit states.

The report also concludes that Perth and Kinross Council’s reputation is in danger of being undermined as—in one case—it was found to have failed to respond positively to planning consultees, ignoring advice from the likes of Sport-Scotland and the Health and Safety Executive.

In several other cases the local authority failed to ensure that all neighbours were notified of proposed developments, leading the report’s author to suggest that—once again—the council’s reputation could be undermined.

In one of the sample applications, the audit found that a condition imposed upon a development approved at planning manager level had later been waived by a planning officer, acting on his own authority.

“No evidence was available as to how or why the amendment had been requested or why the waiving of the requirement had been deemed appropriate,” the review says. “The post-approval of planning conditions by planning officers undermines the key control of the approval process.”

The audit flags up the case of works undertaken on a category A-listed building without listed building consent being sought or obtained.

“The service acted in this case without proper regard to legislation, relevant national guidance and the council’s own planning policies,” it notes.

“There is a risk that continued inaction by the service may result in further unauthorised works being undertaken on this and/or other buildings.”

The council insists “management action plans” have been drawn up wherever concerns were noted and all problems have either already been or soon will be resolved—but it seems certain the catalogue of concerns raised will undermine the confidence of local people in the planning system.

Ian Sleith—planning chief at the time from which sample applications were taken—has since left his job. He took early retirement last summer.