Bemused, she asked me what she should do. Bank it, I said. Don't spend a penny of it, and send them a registered letter telling them what you are doing. Keep a copy. See what happens.
A year later the local authority was still paying her. She had banked more than £20,000, which had generated several hundred pounds in interest.
Fresh attempts were made to rouse the education authority's accountants but they were too busy or too confused to reply.
For perhaps a decade, this tale has been gathering dust along with other local authority anecdotes that have raised questions in my mind about the health of local government.
And so, I was probably one of a very few to raise a silent cheer when Tony Blair's first government introduced the Local Government (Best Value and Capping) Act 1999, and perhaps the only one to offer up an additional huzzah when the Local Government Act 2000 instructed local authorities to adopt new decision making processes.
I'm prepared to accept that, in each case, the practice may not turn out to be as perfect as planned. But the intent seems to be dead right.
Best value arose from a recognition that local government needs to change, and to put the consumer of services first. Local authorities must now measure their performance against government benchmarks and publish their achievements annually. Crucially, the 1999 Act also requires them to have any service that can be delivered on line, live by 2005.
The government guidelines oblige local authorities to undertake a four-stage process: challenge, compare, consult and compete. They must ask: 'Why are we doing this?' They must compare their performance with others inside and, importantly, outside local government. They must seek advice. They must test the results of any changes they make. And they must tell all their stakeholders what they are doing, and why.
The 2000 Act was still more directive. It instructed local authorities to chose from three options: a cabinet with a leader elected by a full council; a directly elected mayor with a cabinet; or a directly elected mayor and council manager. Retention of the traditional committee-based system was not an option. Westminster, just to take one example, has opted for a leader elected by the full council who then selects his or her own cabinet. The committees remain intact, but they shift to a kind of watchdog role — vetting and reporting on the actions of the cabinet.
There will be complaints that these Acts damage democracy. But, as a young reporter, watching the old democracy in action quite often made me sad.
The New Labour rules — bizarrely — introduce something very close to corporate governance to local government. I hope it works.
But there is still one, worrying question left: if the public sector succeeds in sharpening up its act, will the private sector be good enough to keep pace.
It's worth thinking about, isn't it?
Source
The Facilities Business
Postscript
Erik Brown is managing director of the Publishing Business. He has written about property and occupancy for 15 years.