Want to read more?
We value our content and access to our full site is only available on subscription. Your subscription entitles you to 7-day-a-week access to our website, plus a full digital copy of that week’s paper to read on your pc/mac or mobile device In addition your subscription includes access to digital archive copies from 2006 onwards
Last week we read of Argyll and Bute Council increasing the fee for shellfish export licenses to a level which threatens to put some exporters out of business. And this at a time when the UK may well have a particular need for all its exports and entrepreneurs to save us from the direst consequences of Brexit.
A few weeks ago we read of how the Minard War Memorial has missed out on essential maintenance funding from a nationwide scheme because Argyll and Bute Council neither made the required application within the stipulated period nor took responsibility for its failure.
This week we read that the Argyll and Bute Council’s chief executive received an annual remuneration package of around £150,000. This must seem to most to be an extremely impressive and generous reward for whatever service that particular gentleman has rendered us.
Now, it is a long-accepted ethical principle that in the realm of public service a high level of reward must only follow a high level of service.
However, it is not at all clear to me – or I would suggest 99 per cent of the public – exactly how the chief executive has rendered such a level of service as merits such a high level of reward.
Putting it into context: Why was so much public money used to reward the chief executive when it could have been put to such uses as properly repairing Minard War Memorial and easing the financial burden on our entrepreneurs?
I think that if the chief executive is to retain any credibility, he has face the public in open forum and answer this question.
I really hope that he has the courage to meet that challenge.