LIKE a lot of people, I’ve been trying to get my head round what £1.1trillion actually is – even Kent County Council doesn’t deal in such heady numbers.

And like a lot of people, I gave up fairly quickly. Instead, I ended up becoming rather obsessed by watching the strange social protocols involved when international leaders greet one another at global summits.

There was evidently some plan that whenever a leader arrived at London’s Edexcel centre to be greeted by Mr Brown, they were supposed to glide smoothly to a pre-arranged spot where they would shake hands and smile cheesily.

The choreography never seemed to work and instead we saw lots of awkward but hugely entertaining shuffling as the TV cameras caught the protagonists stumbling into view and gazed in bewilderment at the floor as they tried to work out where they should be.

*******

ON the subject of big numbers, I had been hoping to report this week some news about the pay of County Hall’s top earners. The county council has finally capitulated to demands to publish the details of senior officers earning more than £100,000 after stubbornly resisting various Freedom of Information requests for the details.

However, it seems the deadline I was told by which this was to happen has somehow slipped. Perhaps County Hall realised that doing so on April 1 might not be the most sensible timing…

I’m now told the details will be published shortly. Watch this space.

******

On the same subject, it appears that local government remains unhappy over the whole notion of executive pay, despite the very obvious case for the public to be able to find out how much top town hall staff are earning and what bonuses they may – or may not – be getting.

The Government has just started consulting on plans to move towards greater transparency in this area. It wants to see a duty on councils to report previous and current year’s salaries and bonuses (sorry, performance-related pay) as well as additional details of other payments; compensation; benefits in kind and pensions.

But I read today that Alan Warner, who is communications lead for the Public Sector People Managers’ Association, has questioned whether “the public fully understood the responsibilities senior officers carried in return for their salaries.” Hmmm. I can’t say I am wholly convinced by his thinking. Surely it's for authorities to justify what they earn in relation to what they do?

*******

MEANWHILE, it seems not every authority accused by the Audit Commission of “negligence” over investments in Icelandic banks is quite so enraged as KCC, which has been frothing at the mouth with indignation over the findings. (Actually, KCC's indignation was surpassed this week by some of the county's MPs I spoke to about their allowances).

North Lincolnshire council was also among the guilty seven identified by the Audit Commission.

Here’s what its chief executive said in response to the report. “What the Audit Commission’s report does is rightfully and helpfully draw attention to what we and a number of other councils across the country need to get right. Negligent is an emotive word, but we are not getting involved in a battle about the use of that word.”

I think that’s what’s called accepting defeat gracefully.