Only yesterday, I read a post on Facebook, that made several good points about SBC and Live Borders and once again it brought this sorry tale to the forefront of my thoughts. Before giving these on this particular subject, I should say that SBC have some excellent staff, working for good service departments and that my experience demonstrates that when SBC and the community work together, we can achieve effective results. Live Borders unfortunately, does not fall into this category.

SBC got themselves into this mess and it behoves them to get themselves out of it without penalising our communities. Several issues concern me. Firstly, the publication of the consultants’ report on Live Borders appeared hurried and without competent executive review. Many in our community agree that the report is full of holes and thin on facts and therefore seriously flawed. If I had published such a report in a previous life, it would have been career limiting.

Secondly, I have heard it said that; “we are where we are and that we should forget the past and move on”. So, are we to sweep the failings of the past under the carpet and then forget them? I think not. SBC would be in danger of repeating this mess all over again!

Thirdly, to my eyes, there appears an attempt to hold Live Borders 100% to blame. Sorry! SBC set up Live Borders, they effectively owned it and as such had responsibility for oversight. In my view SBC have 100% responsibility.

Fourthly, SBC are putting the onus on our communities to defend their own assets and services. This is grossly unfair, at least at this stage. A strong community council, or strong community management can fight a good corner. A weaker community may not be able to put up such a fight at all, regardless of the actual value of the asset to that community. Surely such a lottery is wrong.

SBC are servants of the community and not the other way around, we are the customers, and this customer service at Live Borders is poor, not because I say it is, but because SBC’s own report, commissioned by them says it on page 79. The report notes a lack of strong leadership and governance, the absence of a senior leadership team, unclear strategic direction, limited accountability, weak oversight of financial and operational performance, poor data utilisation, lack of performance driven culture, Inefficient resource allocation and finally suboptimal service planning. If ever there was an indictment of poor executive management and trusteeship, there it is. So, I say again, I do not believe that communities should be punished for management deficiencies that they themselves have no control over.

One last thought on this affair. Could it be that the failure to resurrect the Scottish Border Community Council Network and the recent abolition of the Area Partnerships is designed to weaken the voice of the community? Well, probably not intentioned, but it does have that effect. Therefore, so much for community empowerment!

Peter Maudsley
Chair, Peebles and District Community Council

As always: support or comment to Anne Snoddy (Secretary PCC)