AS MPs discovered to their cost when the expenses scandal unravelled, perceptions are rather important when it comes to the public making judgements about the way in which elected politicians act and behave.

Auditor accepts that admin errors were to blame for councillors expenses mistakes>>>

KCC will no doubt hope that the outcome of a prolonged investigation into complaints about how some councillors have used private taxis and the authority's own chauffeur-driven cars will draw a line under what has, frankly, been a messy saga.

The district auditor says he accepts KCC's explanation that administrative errors were to blame for mistakes made when a small number of councillors submitted claims for travel in their own car when they had actually been travelling in a taxi or chauffeur-driven car.

His eight-page report records that the princely sum of £430.80 has been repaid for these administrative errors by among others, the deputy leader Alex King and the former KCC chairman Bill Hayton.

On the issue of whether Cllr King was within the council's own rules when he used taxis and council cars for a string of meetings to London's St Stephen's Club and the Atrium restaurant, the auditor writes: "I have no evidence to suggest that this explanation is untrue".

So, in the strict sense, the only reason KCC has had a mild rap on the knuckles is because of administrative errors.

But the sensitivity around the issue is reflected by the fact that KCC and the leader Paul Carter "have accepted the use of chauffeur-driven cars for private purposes is inappropriate and have stopped this practice."

And we have already reported how the deputy leader was advised to stop using them to travel to and from his home as there was a question mark over the rules.

Had there not been an investigation triggered by a member of the public, it is highly likely that the council would have continued to allow the practice.

Whether you consider it necessary for county councillors to have access to chauffeur-driven cars or not, KCC has not exactly covered itself in glory over the matter. There may be an argument to be made that providing senior councillors with access to chauffeur-driven cars on some occasions is sensible, especially if the costs of paying members expenses would leave the taxpayer with a higher bill.

But KCC appears to have lost sight of how these things can appear, especially at a time when taxpayers are struggling with bills and pay freezes and indeed many of its own staff face redundancy.

It needs to ensure not just that councillors know the rules, but that the public can be reassured that whatever arrangements are in place, they are not susceptible to abuse or exploitation.

We've reported more on how County Hall has spent public money through its corporate credit cards today, along with some other interesting details about how the taxpayer has picked up the tab for a £4.50 taxi ride made by former chief executive Peter Gilroy.

The County Hall Spending Files>>>

There are some who think we have been wrong to present our disclosures in the way we have; some who think we are being too critical and sensationalising the subject and some who think (wrongly) that there is some other reason for our coverage - which has been based purely on our judgement that it is very much in the public interest and a subject our readers will find interesting to read about - whatever their views.

Others believe that if a public body is embracing transparency, then it cannot pick and choose which transactions it would prefer to be transparent about. One point worth making here is that many of the transactions that we have detailed fall below the £500 threshold set by the government at which all councils will be required to put into the public domain data on all invoices above that sum.

So, had the information not been gathered by a concerned resident and passed to us, a considerable amount of it would never have seen the light of day. KCC has rightly come round to the view that being open is a virtue and one that ultimately will be good for it and the residents it is there to serve.

As its own report unveiling its plans for a new transparency regime says, it is important that residents are able to make judgements about not just the costs they, as taxpayers, are bearing but that they can also make judgments about the value of what is being done with their money.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Interestingly, the new Labour group leader on the Local Government Association has hit out at the government's transparency plans, asserting that they are a waste of time and councils have better things to do. You can read about it here Some of the comments are illuminating.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I've blogged a couple of times about how Ed Miliband might play with the voters of Kent - especially the 80,000+ that deserted the party between 2005 and 2010. I've suggested he might become the Iain Duncan Smith of the party. But I was talking to a colleague who suggested a better comparison might be with William Hague, who had an ill-fated attempt to lead the party out of the wilderness after its nightmare of a defeat in 1997.  Just steer clear of the baseball cap, Ed. 

Former chief executive Peter Gilroy had a controversial reign at Kent County Council, most notably his salary was called into question. To put it into prospective, he earned twice as much as the Prime Minister.

But still, he felt the need to charge the taxpayer for restaurant bills and other expenses.  Alas, we forgive and forget, for they know not what they do. The recent revelation, however, is more odd. 3/4 of a mile taxi ride, for lunch, which cost us £4.50. £240,000 salary and yet, the taxpayer, was billed.

Why is that?

Apparently, Mr Gilroy was recovering from an operation and was unable to walk. Fine, I accept that. However, if the gentlemen was recovering from an operation - then I must ask - why was he at work? KCC statement said Peter Gilroy could not walk or drive. Under Health and Safety guidelines, he should not be in work.

Note to KCC: In future, give staff sufficient time to recover from operations. Much better for the individual and the taxpayer.

There’s a certain irony that the launch of KCC’s transparency revolution has coincided with the publication of fresh disclosures by us of how taxpayers’ money has been spent on corporate credit cards.

The Spending Files: read our report here

First, let’s give KCC credit – it is going much further than it needs to in publishing the data required of it by the government.

I sense a genuine desire to grasp the nettle once and for all over this issue and the move to publish additional details of the pay and expenses of senior staff is particularly welcome.

However, the revelations about how more than £8,000 was spent on celebrating the authority’s success in collecting and being nominated for national awards raises questions about the spending habits in some quarters of County Hall.

I don’t have any problem with staff of any organisation being recognised and thanked for their efforts. It’s something good employers do.

And let’s be fair – KCC’s legal services directorate turns a tidy sum for the authority and its residents each year.

The issue I think some will have is whether it is proportionate – particularly given that it involves public money. I do acknowledge that some may regard the sums involved as modest in the context of the council’s overall budget.

It’s a reasonable point except for the fact that as a public body, perceptions are all important.

Was it really necessary to spend £384 on Thorntons chocolates for 90 staff? Or £224 on commemorative photos? Taxis that came in at £935 when trains would have cost half that?

I wonder whether these expenses would have been made had it been known they would become public.

Yes, awards ceremonies have a habit of overrunning but would  it have really been impossible for those attending the two events in London to travel by train? As we report, there were two trains after the time at which the parties were collected by their taxis to ferry them back to County Hall – which is a stones throw from the station.

KCC has been highly successful in adapting practices from the private sector.

There are, however, some that it can do without and the corporate hospitality culture common to many private sector boardrooms is one of them.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++