Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Union seeks inquiry as finance chief quits transport quango

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: 29 November 2008
UNION leaders yesterday called for an inquiry into the abrupt resignation of the finance boss of Scotland's transport quango.
Guy Houston quit as finance director of Transport Scotland as a report on how it is managing the First ScotRail franchise was published.

Mr Houston, who joined Transport Scotland in May 2006, held shares in First ScotRail's parent firm, FirstGroup
. He attended meetings in March on the review of the franchise.

The train drivers' union, Aslef, demanded a halt to the franchise extension and a full inquiry by the Scottish Parliament, as well as an emergency statement from the Scottish transport minister, Stewart Stevenson.

The Audit Scotland report found First ScotRail had improved train services since taking them over four years ago. But it said the extension of the contract until 2014 could have been handled better – including the "governance" arrangements

"The director of finance and corporate services was present at key meetings in March at which the rail franchise extension was discussed," said the report.

"Good practice requires that members with an interest declare it in advance and take no part in any relevant agenda item.

"The minutes of the meetings do not record if the director of finance and corporate services declared an interest or removed himself from discussions.

"The register of interests and the management commentary in the accounts indicate Transport Scotland has put in place practices to address the potential conflict."

Des McNulty, Labour's transport spokesman, said the report showed an "unacceptable conflict of interest".

Transport Scotland issued a brief statement confirming Mr Houston had stepped down, but refused to comment further.





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 28 November 2008 10:05 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: ScotRail , The railways
 
1

The Online Scot,

... Herald Refugee ... 29/11/2008 08:18:20
Ah, the story is here as well as The Herald.

Yet another call by Labour for an inquiry, sadly it simply another attempt to smear the SNP government. Thus far we have had the infamous Trump concoction of innuendo and half truths, then there was Aviemore now we have yet another attempt at suggesting impropriety on the part of the SNP.

Houston declared everything in the register of interests, this comment from The Herald makes it clear:
“Mr Houston had made his position clear in Transport Scotland's annual report and register of interests.”

Labour MSP Des McNulty states that it shows:
"an unacceptable conflict of interest".

Houston actually joind Transport Scotland in May 2006, under the previous administration, therefore the previous transport minister may wish to explain why he employed someone to the role who may well have had a conflict of interest when the extension was being considered.

This was actually an extension of an original Scotrail franchise announced by Jim Wallace in Oct 2004, he stated then that “The new franchise will run for seven years with a possible extension for an extra three. The cost of the franchise over the next 7 years will be approximately £1.9 billion.”

What we have here is a contract, previously set up by Labour and Lib Dems, that contained provision for an extension.

The person trusted with handling discussions for this extension was put in place by the SAME previous administration. The contract almost certainly would have been constructed in a fashion that made sense to extend it.

Labour are now openly complaining about a system they set up and about personnel they themselves employed.

The SNP minister has merely continued with a process originally set up by the last Labour/Lib Dem administration.
2

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 29/11/2008 12:31:44
This story seems to be about a wrongly taken minute where a declaration of interest was not recorded, or where the person concerned did not absent themself when they should have. It is something which should not have happened and needs to be corrected, but on a scale of one to ten of nefarious activities it rates about a 0.005.
3

truthsleuth,

30/11/2008 23:53:27
As I recall it was SNP ministers who said the First Scotrail franchise should go ahead.

Like all things SNP they have a certain smell about them that is even lower than most things the other parties can achieve.

 

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.