By Dave Lord

ONE OF Perth and Kinross Council’s most senior officials has launched an astonishing attack on the local media, appearing to suggest that adverse coverage in The Courier is to blame for low morale and even recruitment problems within the local authority’s under-fire planning department.

In a new report, the executive director of the council’s environment department, Jim Irons, slammed references made in The Courier to a “catastrophic audit report” and “bungling planning staff.”

He insisted such claims “do little to enhance staff morale or ease recruitment problems.”

Mr Irons’ comments refer to reports printed in this newspaper in the wake of an internal audit report that was presented to councillors in January.

It stated that documents relating to almost 30% of applications were found to have been misfiled by staff. In one case, a personal application submitted by a planning officer was evaluated by a colleague then approved by another without external scrutiny.

Significant aspects of the planning approval process were deemed “weak” in the audit review, which flagged up a dozen areas of concern.

The report also concluded that Perth and Kinross Council’s reputation was 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 SportScotland and the Health and Safety Executive.

In several other sample cases, the council had failed to ensure all neighbours were notified of proposed developments.

During investigation of one application, the audit found a condition imposed on a development approved at planning manager level had later been waived by a planning officer, acting on his own authority.

The Courier reported these issues, alongside claims from council officials that the audit had been carried out some time ago and that all areas of concern had since been addressed.

Nevertheless, The Courier received a succession of phone calls from members of the public unhappy with the performance of the planning department.

A number of senior politicians also expressed grave concerns.

Mid Scotland and Fife MSP Murdo Fraser said the audit report provided clear evidence of “serious and long-running problems.”

Meanwhile, councillor Barbara Vaughan insisted council chiefs should not attempt to “defend the indefensible” and branded the report “frightening.”

Fellow councillor Kathleen Baird later said the development control committee–which decides the fate of some of the area’s most controversial applications—had been “in turmoil for years.”

She stated that a lack of consistency left members of the public, and even councillors, completely unaware of which applications might be approved and which should be rejected.

Despite this, Mr Irons clearly believes current problems regarding morale and recruitment can, at least to some extent, be blamed on The Courier.

He branded reference to a “catastrophic report” as inaccurate and pointed out that the current workload undertaken by development management officers was 50% in excess of the maximum caseload recommended in UK Government guidelines.

Mr Irons suggested that press reports should be more positive, so that staff do not feel disheartened.

“It is important the efforts that staff make in responding to these significant challenges are recognised,” he said.

“Any perceptions of poor performance should be placed in context of the significant good work which is undertaken.”

Mr Irons made his comments in the environment service’s annual performance report, which is set to be discussed by councillors on Wednesday.

He concludes that the service’s “general performance” gives no cause for concern and insists officials are aware of where “areas of concern” lie.

“Appropriate improvement plans are in place to address any deficiencies,” Mr Irons said.