After reading many official council reports over the past two decades, I lost confidence in the credibility of some SIC officials’ reports to councillors.
It appears to me that a number of SIC officialdom may have colluded to advise the councillors to dismiss projects that are not favoured by certain SIC officials, sometimes losing fantastic opportunities for inward investment in infrastructure, jobs and industry in Shetland.
Every few years we have to elect councillors to serve our communities, we do not however have the opportunity to elect or deselect the officials who appear to have so much influence on SIC policy.
Our elected councillors and community councillors’ actions are presently governed by a code of conduct which includes a duty of honesty, SIC officials are however, not burdened by the duty of honesty in their code of conduct.
Perhaps that is why some officials appear to think they can make outrageous claims in their reports, sometimes appearing to double or even treble the estimated cost of their less favoured projects, often with no calculations to back their figures up, as appears to have been the case when a fish processing company made a request to build two fish factories in Whalsay. The proposal was dismissed on the advice of council officialdom.
The recent Whalsay tunnel offer was also dismissed on the advice of SIC officialdom that appear to have used a concoction of suspicious figures in their reports.
Perhaps the time is long overdue that honesty should be included in the council officials’ code of conduct, perhaps then, we may be able to believe some of the reports SIC officialdom produce.