THE CONTRAST between the two men is marked. Council leader Harry McGuigan is regarded as the robust, ambitious politician, while chief executive Andrew Cowe is described as an easy-going official with a low public profile.
However, the two leaders now share a common problem - both are facing increasing pressure over the spending fiasco currently dogging North Lanarkshire Council.
Mr Cowe has responded to the criticism by clearing himself and senior councillors of any blame, placing responsibility instead on officials for ''an internal departmental failure of the most serious kind''.
That only appears to have whetted
the appetite of opposition councillors who sense more mileage in yet
another damaging sleaze scandal in Labour's heartland.
They insist that those in charge of a local authority should accept responsibility for the councillors and officials under their leadership, as would be expected in the private sector.
Certainly Mr McGuigan, who faces calls for his resignation, has taken a strong line on sleaze in the past. Just two months after being elected leader of the new North Lanarkshire Council he declared that the authority would be a ''model Labour council for the rest of Scotland to follow''.
His determination was understandable, following a troubled period for the former Motherwell District Council. But more controversy was to follow the new authority after local government reorganisation, culminating in the current row over the discovery of a #4m hole at the centre of the council's direct labour organisation's (DLO) accounts.
Mr McGuigan graduated into the world of politics in 1984 when he
was elected to the Motherwell District Council's Bellshill North Ward. Previously he studied electronics at Strathclyde University and worked in the field of product/system design and
as a secondary school maths and physics teacher.
He quickly gained a reputation within the district council as an able politician after helping to establish the economic development committee in 1986. He gained a public profile through his battle against closures in the local steel industry and efforts to regenerate the area.
However, he also faced criticism, particularly from SNP members angry at councillors taking trips abroad.
In April 1995 he was elected leader of the controlling Labour group on the shadow North Lanarkshire Council.
Several weeks later the authority found itself embroiled once again in the Monklands corruption scandal, as members from that area sought to secure positions in the new council.
Mr McGuigan adopted a hard line, warning councillors that the alleged nepotism and sectarianism in Monklands would not be tolerated under his leadership. Councillors were later cleared but banned from holding high office.
A series of controversies followed. Days after Labour took control of North Lanarkshire in 1996, councillors were accused of taking a junket to Germany, despite having no twinning link with the town of Scweinefurt.
Then Mr McGuigan came under fire when it was revealed his new office
had been decorated with wallpaper
costing #251 per roll. His suite also featured new leather furniture and an
en-suite bathroom with shower and bidet. Mr Cowe defended the spending levels, but Tory leaders described
them as ''obscene''.
In a difficult first year, the council was also condemned for paying out more than #600,000 a year for coun-
cillor's expenses and criticised for
its handling of the world's worst
E-coli outbreak.
Earlier this year a senior Labour councillor was accused of accessing pornography on the Internet, an episode which led Mr McGuigan to admit he believed he was justified in misleading the press.
Chief executive Mr Cowe has enjoyed a much less fraught period as the most senior official at the council.
Appointed to the North Lanarkshire position during re-organisation, Mr Cowe attracted a salary of more than #90,000 - becoming one of the highest paid officials in the country.
Described by those at the council as able and easy-going, he attracted little attention. However, he did experience some controversy in his previous job
as managing director of Renfrew
District Council.
First, Mr Cowe inherited the long-running Lafferty Construction affair, which had seen a #1m overpayment to the company for an unfinished contract. Mr Cowe was handed the task of investigating the matter and he reported back to councillors in 1990.
But his findings were criticised for failing to go far enough. Critics said he had refused to take disciplinary action against those involved and failed to introduce tough measures to prevent a repeat of the scandal.
A year later, Mr Cowe again
faced criticism for a matter which had begun before he took charge of the local authority.
The council's direct labour organisation window factory in Barrhead suffered a range of problems after it was set up in the late 1980s. A report by private consultants in 1991 found evidence of a huge backlog in council house repair work, costly levels of absenteeism, and inadequate stock storage and control systems.
Also suggested by the consultants was that management were only interested in the more lucrative contract work. The report said difficulties remained with aspects of management and training. It added that the bonus scheme for workers also needed urgent review. A number of members of staff were later disciplined over the affair.
Former colleagues at Renfrew District Council said that, despite the high-profile problems during his leadership, the chief executive was generally well-liked by councillors.
One council source said the problem did not necessarily lie with individuals, but with a system of local government dominated in many areas by one party.
North Lanarkshire was not the first and would not be the last local auth-ority immersed in sleaze.
He said: ''We will be hearing a lot more of this sort of thing in the future - the sky is black with chickens coming home to roost.''
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article