The Standards Commission has refused to say how much public money it spent on a doomed legal defence against a campaigning councillor.
The watchdog said they would be exposed to “public comment” if they revealed the legal bill in their court battle against Fiona Higgins.
The saga can be traced to public criticism the Glasgow councillor made about former local authority official Martin Booth over proposed teacher cuts.
Background of the case
Booth made a formal complaint and during this process the Commission, which can hold hearings into councillors, blocked documents she wanted to lodge from being part of the probe.
Higgins, funded by rock star Paul McManus, took out a judicial review and Lord Sandison ruled that the Commission had no lawful basis for refusing to admit seven documents.
However, following a freedom of information request by the Record, the Commission will not divulge how much public money they have spent on lawyers.
Commission's refusal to disclose
They claimed disclosure would, or be likely to, “prejudice substantially” the “effective conduct of public affairs”.
They also cited an exemption relating to civil proceedings: “The disclosure of such information in relation to the costs to the Standards Commission of legal proceedings could undermine the ability of the Standards Commission both in relation to the preparation and conduct of ongoing proceedings (as it would expose it to public comment and intervention) and in relation to any potential further or future proceedings as it would reveal information that could prejudice the Standards Commission’s ability to bring or defend proceedings.”
The decision comes in spite of other public bodies, such as the Scottish Government, revealing their legal costs in court cases.
Councillor's response
Higgins said: “I’m disappointed that the Standards Commission are not choosing to be transparent and accountable to the public about how much of its money has been spent on its efforts to deny me a fair hearing.
“Given Lord Sandison’s description of their decision to keep evidence critical to my defence out of my hearing as lacking logic, creating the appearance of pre-judgement and overstating their lawful powers, it is glaringly obvious that the public are entitled to know how much taxpayers’ money has been spent on the Standards Commission’s exercise of extremely poor judgement.”
The Standards Commission is funded by Holyrood.
In his decision, Lord Sandison said there was an "apparent lack of internal logic" in the decisions made by the Commission. The judge said it could "clearly be determined that it lay outwith the lawful powers of the Commission" to refuse seven of the documents.
