Pickles and Neill accused of 'kicking the corpse' of Audit Commission
Other local government stories
- Work starts on £77m social housing PFI project
- Birmingham to help army veterans buy homes
- Councils spent half a billion pounds on CCTV in four years
- Council could name bad landlords in bid to protect tenants
- 'Blow to thousands' as Government forges ahead with 'bedroom tax'
Advertisement
Local government ministers were accused today of "kicking the corpse" of the Audit Commission with "completely false" claims about excessive spending.
England's spending watchdog is set to be scrapped by 2012, saving £50 million a year, but its former communications director David Walker warned that its abolition would result in a "hugely greater sum".
Mr Walker told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that Communities Secretary Eric Pickles had scrapped the quango in a "rush to have a headline".
And he said junior local government minister Bob Neill had been "naive" to make claims of disproportionate spending on events at Newmarket racecourse and on press officers.
"Either Mr Neill knew or he didn't know - and if he didn't know, he should have known - that these charges were completely false," Mr Walker said.
"It shows how naive some of these ministers seem to be about organisational life in the private as well as the public sector."
Mr Walker said the commission regularly needed to hold meetings with staff and clients, and Newmarket offered "value for money" on non-race days.
Asked about Mr Neill's description of the watchdog's "army of 48 press officers", he said: "It's the apparent naivety and malevolence of that. An organisation with 48 press officers would need to be pretty large.
"The Audit Commission isn't that big - we in fact, at the time he said that, had two press officers.
"He's obviously got some kind of brief from his teenage special adviser."
Mr Walker added: "The puzzle to me is they've announced our abolition - why go on kicking the corpse?"
The commission, which employs around 2,000 staff, audits £180 billion spent by 11,000 bodies in local government each year.
Mr Pickles announced in August that he planned to scrap the body.
Mr Walker said: "The irony of this is that we were, just before the abolition announcement, proposing to the Communities (and Local Government) Department efficiency savings over two years totalling some £50 million.
"Eric Pickles comes along and says 'I'm going to abolish them and save £50 million'.
"It turns out, when you look at our redundancy obligations and pensions and so on, the cost of abolition could end up to a hugely greater sum."
Ministers should have taken a "little more time" to consult and possibly save the taxpayer millions of pounds, he added.
Mr Neill said: "It was the Audit Commission's own answer to parliamentary questions which revealed last month that they have 48 spin staff costing the public £2.4 million a year.
"This denial just shows how the Audit Commission has lost its way, standing up for Whitehall's vested interests rather than the interests of local taxpayers.
"Spending £66,000 on lobbyists to combat the activities of politicians or using taxpayers' cash on wining and dining at the Reform Club and Shepherds is not value for money, nor is it the kind of behaviour you would expect from the body charged with protecting the public purse."
The commission told MPs on September 14 that it spent £2,352,517 in 2009-10 on 48 communications staff.
These included a "national publishing centre, design team, digital media team, events team, regional communication managers, internal communications team, direct marketing officers and a national press office".
The UK's most up-to-date social housing and public sector news website

Eric - http://
Commented 71 weeks ago
Troutman,
A good point has been raise about the costs associated with the scrapping of the AC & TSA the figures are never given w.r.t these costs.
As a normal person you must show both the cost of demolition and the running cost over a time frame and neither Pickles nor Shapps have done this, all we get is that we will save such and such but nothing about the cost of doing it.
These two men are dangerous for the housing sector in general and they are not looking at the bigger long range picture at what they are doing.
The AC may not be fit for purpose in some cases but as far as the housing sector is concerned I believe that it does a good job, it may need some adjustments to update it’s function and efficiency but it should be kept.
The AC covers many departments as far as I know so how can one man scrap it all or is it only the housing section he is going to scrap.
They seem to be doing this scrapping without thought or consultation of tenants yet the PM want communities to be involved so what is going on with these two headline grabbers.
How can these two jokers know anything about the rented housing sector when they live in big flash houses and do not have to worry about paying the rent each week like some tenants whether private or social and the only people they talk to are the landlord associations, we never hear of a meeting with tenants who have to live under this one sided system, all they seem interested in is looking after the private sector by giving them more freedom instead of tightening things up similar to the HA’s they should look back to pre-war days before the social landlords i.e council housing came along when people feared for the tenancy being taken from them by greedy landlords and the condition of houses in those days, by doing what they think is right we could go back to those days very quickly.