" When matters of incompetance or corruption in local goverment are suspected by members of the Public, then they should report thier suspicions to thier local MP, who will undertake a swift and thorough investigation."
A Hypothetical Case
Let us take a hypothetical case where say a builder acts against the Law by doing some structural works, without proper permissions, calculations or regard to adjacent propetry owners.
The Law is quite clear here. If planning or building laws are broken in this manner then it is the local council's resposibility to ensure that such persons are prosecuted under the relevant laws and statutes.
In this case, "The Civic Government (Scotland) Act ,as amended" and "The Building (Scotland) Act , as amended"
These laws are meant to be administered and prosecuted if necessary by the local councils and are not criminal laws, and nothing to do with the police or procurators fiscal or anything like that.
It is a fact that councils in Scotland are certain that this is the case. A senior civil servant at the Scottish Office has stated to the author that he has in fact written to council officials telling them this.
Usually, however in a case like this, what happens is that the builder is given all the permissions in retrospect by council officials, and the builders are never prosecuted at all. Why should this happen ? The reasons are obvious, of course the builder would prefer not to go to the expense of paying for all the drawing up of plans, calculating loads and stresses, paying structural engineers, paying for permissions and building consents, forms to fill out, admin expenses etc., etc.
So, the builder takes a chance and doesn't bother with any of that until, or unless there is a problem and someone complains. Then the builder knows that all that will happen is that he will have to do all these things in retrospect. Council officials will almost always grant what is called an "amendment warrant". This is a device that is meant to be used where for instance you decide to build a bedroom in your loft and later on while building, you decide you need an upstairs toilet as well. You would apply for an "Amendment warrant" to the original plan.
It is difficult to see how council officials can legally grant amendment warrants however to builders who do not have warrants in the first place, but this would seem to be a widespread practice.
As far as the council officials are concerned they can send the matter on to the council solicitors department who will undertake a prosecution in the civil courts under the aforementioned laws, or they can ask the builder to apply in retrospect for an amendment warrant.
In the first instance this will cost the council a lot of bother and money. Works will be held up pending court case. Investigations will have to be made. Reports will have to be drawn up. A whole lot of trouble and at the end of the day the council is likely to be out of pocket. In the second instance however the council is likely to make a deal of money in a very short space of time by the way of fees late payment penalties etc. from the provisos of the aformentioned acts. It is a definite fiscal advantage for the council to "bend the rules" in this manner.
From the information given above it it impossible to tell whether or not council officials acted in an incompetant or corrupt manner, by granting amendment warrants in this way. Perhaps coucil officials have even more sinister reasons for granting warrants like this, but these laws are there for a purpose, and that purpose is to protect the public from unscrupulous business practise. If a builder has no plan then he does not need to worry about the wall falling down when he has gone. He will be hard to trace, and hard to prove just exactly what he did or didn't do if there is no paperwork. It is a fact that builders who operate like this often meet the same officials and can become "friends" over the years.
So then these matters should be reported to your local MP who will carry out a swift and thorough investigation, yes ?
Errr....well not exactly. Even if you go through the indicated proceedure of compaining about your MP, as described in the link at the top of the index page of this site; then you can come to an impasse.