BURNLEY Council’s decision to earmark £25,000 for consultants to recruit a new chief executive has been branded ‘disgraceful’ by the town’s MP.

Liberal Democrat Gordon Birtwistle questioned why the Labour leadership was spending so much on outside help when it constantly complained about the government cash squeeze.

MORE TOP STORIES:

He was joined in his criticism by an East Lancashire peer, a local government union official and the national Taxpayers’ Alliance.

It comes at a time when the authority is trying to save £3million and has lost several senior managers in an executive reshuffle.

Mr Birtwistle said: “It is disgraceful that on the one hand the council’s leaders are always whining about being starved of money by the coalition government but on the other they can spend a disproportionate amount on consultants’ fees for recruiting a new chief executive.

“£25,000 is an exorbitant amount. It’s extortionate for a council that claims it is hard up.

“They have their own in-house staff who could do this without employing consultants and spending this amount of money.”

Borough leader Mark Townsend and his predecessor and Labour general election candidate Julie Cooper defended the spending, claiming proper professional consultants were needed to get the right replacement for outgoing chief executive Steve Rumbelow.

The borough executive board has earmarked up to £25,000 for recruiting the new chief executive.

Town hall officials originally suggested that a budget of £40,000 should be set aside for consultants and advertising costs for the £114,000 a year position.

The spending dwarfs the £21,000 allocated by East Lancashire NHS Hospitals Trust in recruiting an interim chief executive.

Burnley Unison branch secretary Peter Thorne said: “We are concerned.

“It is a lot of money, the equivalent of one reasonably-paid person’s salary for a year.

“We need to get the best candidate but there must be cheaper ways of doing this.”

Lib Dem peer and Pendle councillor Tony Greaves said: “I think having a chief executive is a waste of money, let along spending this sort of money on consultants to recruit a new one.

“Pendle found the right answer to this. They decided they did not need to have a chief executive.

“Spending £25,000 looking for a new one is not what I would have done.”

Council officials stressed the £25,000 to be spent would be paid for by the savings made on the salary of Mr Rumbelow, who is going to take charge of Rochdale Council.

Coun Townsend said: “This is a crucial post for Burnley and it is important for the town that we appoint a chief executive who can continue the important economic growth and regeneration projects which Steve Rumbelow initiated.

“We have already restructured our management to a minimum sustainable level of three senior officers.

“We need to get the best person for the job and to do that you have to pay the appropriate fee for the best professionals to cast the net wide and get the right candidate.”

Coun Cooper said: “It is vital we get the right chief executive.

“Steve Rumbelow did a first class job, led a very progressive agenda and brought millions of pounds into the borough.

“We are not in the same position as Pendle. We have cut our management structure to the bone.

“Spending £25,000 in getting the right person for the job will be well worth it and will be repaid many times.”

Taxpayers’ Alliance campaign manager Andy Silvester said: "It's totally inappropriate for such a huge amount of cash to be spent on recruitment consultants when they're trying to make savings.

“Every penny spent keeping recruiters in sharp suits is a penny that could have been spent on essential services.”