THE story we have put on the front page of today’s Echo asks some probing questions about the way Durham County Council has handled the case of a former employee.

When the council pledged last year to deal with failures in the case Karen Hall “effectively and transparently”, we assumed two things:

Firstly, that the matter would be handled in a manner that settled it in a way that satisfied Mrs Hall, the council and its taxpayers; and secondly, that the press, members of the public and/or councillors would have the opportunity to attend the review.

It was instead held behind closed doors. How can that fulfil the pledge to be transparent?

The council insists it was done this way because the report contained personal information. Councillors and Mrs Hall question the validity of this argument because the people involved in the case had already been named and their testimony made public in employment tribunals where the question of anonymity was not an issue.

At a time when all councils are desperate to make ends meet to protect vital services, Durham County Council could well do without a costly tribunal payout. Mrs Hall has received costs and compensation totalling £1.5m and interest accrued on the money means the council coffers are £1.7m worse off.

What started as an award of just under £60,000 has spiralled horribly as the council, no doubt following instruction from its legal representatives, tried to resolve the matter.

There can be little doubt that the council failed to live up to its “transparency” pledge.

It is more difficult to accuse it of failing to deal with the matter “effectively” as we have not been able see and hear for ourselves the details of the report.

The best way to quell concerns that there has been a cover-up would be for the findings to be made public.