On this page:

Consultation on the Key Findings and Recommendations from the National Parks Review: Analysis of Consultation Responses

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

7 APPOINTMENT OF CONVENERS AND DEPUTY CONVENERS

7.1 The Review notes that the National Park Authorities receive almost all their funding from the Scottish Government and that it would, therefore, "be consistent with the need for securing accountability for public funding if the Convener and Deputy Convener were to be appointed by Ministers". It was also noted that "changing the arrangements for Conveners and Deputy Conveners will require change to primary legislation".

7.2 The final question of the consultation asked " What are your views on the recommendation that having Ministers appoint Conveners and Deputy Conveners from among Board Members would help to strengthen the Parks accountability for public funding?"

7.3 As shown in table 7.1, there was limited support for this recommendation with 10 respondents agreeing and 28 disagreeing with the recommendation. All Voluntary/Charitable organisations and both NPAs disagreed. This question was addressed by 45 out of the 58 respondents.

Table 7.1 Ministers appointing Conveners and Deputy Conveners from among board members

Respondent type

Agree

Disagree

Other comment

No response

Individual

2

5

2

5

Voluntary/Charitable

-

10

-

-

Other

2

3

1

3

Community Councils

2

4

2

-

Local Authorities

2

2

1

1

NDPB

1

1

-

4

Land Owner/Farming Interests

1

1

1

-

National Park Authority ( NPA)

-

2

-

-

TOTAL

10

28

7

13

7.4 Responses from those agreeing were fairly short with little in the way of additional comment except for a few provisos:

7.5 "… if such persons have operational experience to ensure accountability can be properly evaluated" (Local Authority).

  • "However it would be important that any process was transparent and that appointments would be made on the basis of merit, with no account being taken of whether individuals were directly appointed, nominated by councils or directly elected". (Other).
  • "… following agreement with the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments in Scotland" (Local Authority).

7.6 Many of those disagreeing with the recommendation said that they are quite content with the current system and the main reasons given were that the present system is democratic, or that the recommendation would have an adverse effect on the democracy of the parks (7 Voluntary/Charitable, 2 Local Authority, Community Council, NPA).

"Park Authorities differ from other NDPBs by their local democratic accountability. Retaining the power to elect their own Conveners and Deputy Conveners is an important part of this democratic structure; this is particularly significant in light of the Park Authorities' role as Planning Authority." (Local Authority)

"We strongly believe that the boards should continue to elect their own Conveners and Deputy Conveners. The locally-elected members and local authority Board Members are currently present on the board having gone through separate democratic processes, and so it would not be consistent to have an appointed Convener, who would perhaps find it difficult to command the leadership of the board if appointed." (Voluntary/Charitable)

7.7 Some respondents also mentioned the fact that boards, or the CEOs are already accountable, this being a function of the Boards (2 Voluntary/Charitable, 2 NPA, 2 Other, Land Owner/Farming Interest, Individual). A Local Authority said "effective accountability for public funds can be achieved without this step".

"Both NPAs believe we have been successful in achieving an appropriate balance of accountability between local and national interests". (National Park Authority)

7.8 Another point to emerge was that the Convener needs the confidence of, or loyalty, respect or support from, board members (2 Voluntary/Charitable, Community Council, NPA).

"The current arrangements, under which the Board elected the Convener from among the Members, has worked well and has the advantage that the Convener has the support and respect of the Board behind him." (National Park Authority)

7.9 Local representation (in the form of a board elected Convener and Deputy Convener) is important in maintaining positive local relationships.

"The Trust considers the present arrangements for election of Conveners and Deputy Conveners should remain with the Boards. This seems a key element in delivering policy to support and maintain loyalty, community engagement and local democracy." (Voluntary/Charitable)

"It is true to say that the National Park Authorities are funded by Central Government and as such there is a requirement to ensure accountability for those funds. However, it must also be remembered that local representation and local accountability are central to ongoing support for and the maintenance of positive local relationships with the National Park Authority." (Local Authority)

7.10 One Local Authority, a Voluntary/Charitable organisation and an NDPB felt that ministerial appointment of Conveners and Deputy Conveners could be interpreted as government or political interference. In addition, the recommendation was viewed as "potentially politicising the position in a wholly inappropriate way" (Other).

7.11 Other comments included:

  • "Parks should be fully accountable for expenditure" (2 Community Councils, one Individual).
  • That Conveners and Deputy Conveners must be impartial (Individual).
  • "The Scottish Minister should appoint a 'Chairman' based on the Independent board model as opposed to Convener s and Deputy Convener" (Local Authority).
  • Support for appointment of the Convener "on non-political ground" (Other).
  • "in any avenue of public administration, organisational structure must properly reflect accountability to Scottish Ministers. This would not automatically be achieved if Ministers were to appoint the Convener and Deputy Convener, but [the respondent] can see the merits of using the existing public appointments process to ensure transparency in the process" (Land Owner/Farming Interest).

In summary,

  • The majority of those commenting on this issue disagreed with the recommendation that ministers appoint Conveners/Deputy Conveners.
  • The key theme to emerge was that the present system is democratic or that the recommendations would have an adverse effect on the democracy of the Parks.
  • Some respondents mentioned the fact that Boards, or their CEOs are already accountable, this being a function of the Boards.

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Page updated: Tuesday, July 7, 2009