ConservativeHome's Local Government Blog

Chief Executive of Somerset to leave

Alan Jones is to stand down as Chief Executive of Somerset County Council at the end of July following the Conservatives gaining control of the Council. The new Conservative leader Cllr Ken Maddock says he wants a "change in direction."

I don't know what pay off Mr Jones negotiated but the matter has apparently been managed in an amicable, diplomatic manner. Anyway his departure is not a great surprise. There was a dispute between Mr Jones and a former Lib Dem councillor Paul Buchanan which resulted in Mr Buchanan being thrown out of the Lib Dem group but gaining the support of the Conservative MP Ian Liddell-Grainger. However a tribunal has upheld charges of Mr Buchanan breaking the Code of Conduct amidst this tale of revenge, fear and loathing.

A "clean break" will be welcome - as Speaker Bercow would say.

Councillors cost £241.5 million a year

An array of Freedom of Information requests have produced some interesting results for the BBC Radio 4 programme The Political Club on the cost and number of the political class in the UK. According the programme: "For the UK's 22,737 councillors and their assistants, the bill for pay and allowances was £241.5m."

There has been lots of attention on this site and elsewhere to councillors allowances. Rather less to the practice of employing full time assistants to councillors. The information the BBC got hold of was that Councils are employing 108 political assistants at a cost of £2.94 million. But the BBC regard this as a "quite significant underestimate." Councils have defined the term as narrowly as possible in their replies to the FOI requests.

It also only concerned with those assistants in a party political role. It would not include scrutiny coordinators, press officers, those assisting councillors with case work, etc, etc.

SNP councillor pulls out of byelection race

Cllr James Dornan, the SNP opposition leader on Glasgow Council, has withdrawn as the Party's candidate in the forthcoming Glasgow North East byelection. This followed a story in the Sunday Herald that he had got into financial difficulties and used a "protected deed trust" as an alternative to bankruptcy to keep creditors as bay. 

Unlike bankruptcy the "protected deed trust" doesn't bar him from elected office. But there is a suggestion that it should have barred him from being a "partner director" with a charitable organisation set up by the Council.

Most of the meetings councillors attend are not Council meetings but those for outside bodies they are appointed to that the Council gives money to or has some other relationship with. As part of this councillors are frequently trustees of local charities. So it would be useful to have the point clarified. In the recession bankruptcies are increasing as are alternative options such as Individual Voluntary Arrangements.

£3.7 million councillors bill for London's poorest borough

There may not be any Conservative councillors in Newham yet but the local Conservatives are certainly holding the Council to account - as this press release from East Ham Conservatives demonstrates.

East Ham Conservatives have described the recent annual pay bill for councillors in the London Borough of Newham as an absolute disgrace and an insult to the tax-paying public as the cumulative cost of paying for elected representatives since their election in 2006 has reached £3.7 million.

Based on the current average, Newham’s councillors and directly-elected Mayor will face the ballot box in May 2010 having clocked up a £4.9 million package of travel and food expenses, basic allowances and special responsibility payments dolled out under the patronage of Labour’s Sir Robin Wales.

The mandatory annual publication by the Town Hall this month revealed the bill had topped £1,299,681 for the period of April 2008 and March 2009, as opposed to £1,265,818 in 2007-2008 and £1,145,290 in 2006-2007 – this is despite the fact that 67% of Newham councillors also work full time.

Kent increases allowances by 8%

Conservative-run Kent County Council has increased their councillor allowances by 8%. It was in line with a proposal from the independent remuneration panel, they haven't had a rise for four years and they promise not to give themselves another rise for another four years. But even so. Does it pass the "smell test" to do this in the middle of a recession and just after an election?

Labour councillor for Ramsgate, Cllr Liz Green, voted against the proposal which takes the basic allowance up to £13,290. She says it is "appalling." I have good news for Cllr Green. She doesn't have to take the increase. She can ask the accounts dept to continue paying her at the old rate.

New Conservative administration in Devon starts saving money

The Conservatives have already shown there will be a change of direction on Devon County Council since they took control a fortnight ago. The bloated councillor allowances which rose sharply under the previous Lib Dem administration are being cut by £80,000 a year.

Savings include a freeze on basic allowances, scrapping a scrutiny committee which paid allowances to its chairman and vice chairman and which duplicated other committees,scrapping allowances for six councillors to support the executive councillors, reducing the leader's special responsibility allowance from  £27,425 a year to £25,000 and that of the deputy leader from £21,940 to £20,000.

Of course the £80,000 saving in the context of the total Council budget is tiny. That is not the point. By making savings themselves the Council leadership will be emboldened in seeking them elsewhere. The new Council leader Cllr John Hart has pledged to "getting tough on administrative costs and waste wherever we can."

Cheltenham Council lose case against their former MD

Lib Dem run Cheltenham Council have lost their court case against their former Managing Director Christine Laird. They were seeking a million pounds from her on the grounds she hadn't fully disclosed details about her health before she got the job. But the judge found that her answers to the questions were not false. She left after a break down in relations between the Council leader Cllr Andrew McKinlay prompting concerns that the case was being pursued against her for vindictive reasons. So far as I can gather we are still awaiting a decision on the awarding of costs. This has been a lengthy legal saga with claim and counter claim. The only clear winners are the lawyers and the only clear losers the Council Taxpayers of Cheltenham.

Laurence Robertson, a local Consevative MP says:

"I have long been concerned about Cheltenham Borough Council's determination to pursue this case, for three main reasons.

"To start with, it was very doubtful as to whether they could succeed in this case and that should always be a major factor when considering taking taking legal action.

Merton Labour councillor denounced by his own leader

A Merton Labour councillor has been denounced by his own Labour Group leader for drawing an annual £8,500 a year attendance allowance while living in Neath. Cllr Leighton Veale stood as a Labour candidate in Wales in the Euro Elections but was not elected.

He has justified remaining a councillor by saying a byelection would have caused the closure of local schools for the election. (Why do we use schools as Polling Stations so much? Very disruptive. Surely we could use churches and other buildings more instead.)

The good news for Cllr Veale is that he could stop claiming his allowance while still remaining a councillor following the example of Cllr Ashley Fox MEP in Bristol. This would avoid the need for a byelection. Over to you, Cllr Veale.

Councillor allowances rise above inflation

A Local Government Association survey shows the average basic allowances paid to councillors has risen from £5,648 in 2006 to £6,099 in 2008. Inflation over the period was about 5% (depending on what measure you use and which month you start from) which would have meant a rise to £5,930.

The average in London is £9,739.

For the extra money paid for being a Council leader the average is £17,753. (An average of £37,486 for London.) I don't think there is anything particularly odd about the pay being lower in, for instance, two tier authorities to a unitary one.  

But what is unfortunate that the LGA is not releasing the full data to enable like for like comparisons to be made between different councils. They did so in 2006 but "given the current climate we would like to be a little more circumspect about disseminating it at thie time." Wrong. Transparency is required more now than ever. Sunshine is the best disinfectant as Justice Lewis Brandeis said.

Tower Hamlets Council tells Chief Executive stay at home

Labour-run Tower Hamlets Council are evidently trying to get rid of their Chief Executive Martin Smith. Last week he was told to stay at home and "consider his future". Although they forgot that as the Election Returning Officer there was a requirement for him to supervise the Euro Elections so he was allowed to do so.

The Conservatives have put in a call for an Extraordinary Council Meeting to find out what is going on.

The £800 a minute councillor

Cllr Phil Briscoe, a Conservative opposition councillor in Tower Hamlets, has done an analysis on the Special Responsibility Allowances paid to his Labour colleagues. Cllr Salim Ullah is Chairman of the Appeals Committee for which is paid a SRA of £8,069 (in addition to his basic allowance of £9,698.)

During the last municipal year 2008/09 the Appeals Committee met once. For ten minutes. That's £800.06 per minute.

Cllr Ullah is a councillor for Bethnal Green South. I wonder what the hard pressed Council Taxpayers of his ward make of it.

Tory Euro MP to stay on as city councillor

Cllr Ashley Fox, newly elected to the European Parliament from the South West region, is to stay on Bristol City Council until May. He will no longer claim his councillor allowances but feels it would be wrong to impose the cost of a byelection.

Cllr Fox says that he will make promoting free trade his priority as an MEP. From his blog it sounds as though he will be an excellent MEP and very much in step with the new Eurosceptic grouping.

But why should he stand down as a councillor in May? I suppose there could be the odd clash of meetings but the European Parliament only meets in full 12 days a year plus a couple of days a month "plenary sessions" in Brussels and Strasbourg. To suggest being an MEP is a full time job is absurd.

Councillors need to take criticism more willingly

Mark Wallace of The Taxpayers Alliance says that councils should welcome scrutiny from his organisation as a "key stakeholder."

The results of any election are always due to a myriad of different factors – particularly local elections. National party campaigns of course have an impact, as do general political scandals such as the current chaos over expenses, and local factors rightly come into play. One strong theme, though, is if that people want politicians who listen – more so than ever now that there is a general feeling the politicians have been taking the public for a ride.

This might seem obvious, but time and again examples crop up of councils and councillors who not only can’t take criticism or disagreement, but actively try to smear it or stamp it out. It is part of the TPA’s job to oppose wasteful and misguided policies, and to support greater accountability, so from time to time we naturally level criticism against a variety of councils. Many react well, putting their case in response or even changing their ways, but some simply lash out. Two such examples of worst practice have crossed my desk in recent days.

Conservative councillor takes pay cut

Cllr Cameron Rose, an opposition Conservative councillor on Edinburgh City Council, says those who can aford to should follow the example of his colleague and take a pay cut.

The Telegraph’s rollercoaster continues to drive the headlines and people might be forgiven for thinking that all politicians are sloppy or dishonest in their personal use of public money.

Last week the Edinburgh Evening News ran an article on Conservative Cllr Gordon Buchan and his approach to expenses.

In his campaign leaflets in advance of the 2007 local elections he committed to take only 90% of the £15,000 salary paid to Scottish councillors. But now he is elected he goes further. I have never seen him consume so much as a cup of coffee paid for at public expense. Monthly council meetings last between five and twelve hours with a lunch supplied in the middle. Gordon always ensures he brings
or buys in his own.

Of course he is making a point. It is a point that not everyone need feel is necessary to make. And some councillors need the money to survive (Gordon has a well paid other job to provide for his family).

But we are all different people in different circumstances and the point he has consistently made is a helpful counterweight to the current media narrative. And there will be people like him in constituencies and councils up and down the land.

The public purse needs to be treated with respect.

Council spending on foreign travel investigated

More4 News are broadcasting an investigation this evening into spending by local councils on foreign travel.

The Independent has a preview this morning mentioning Glasgow, Edinburgh and Sunderland. There is also Nottinghamshire County Council (Labour-run at least until next month) which spends £15,000 on air fares plus £45,000 on hotels. A trip to Brussels involved a delegation staying at the Jolly Hotel du Grand at £223 a night.

Scots councillors expenses buried deep

Cllr Cameron Rose, a Conservative opposition councillor on Edinburgh City Council, says his fellow Scottish councillors should be open about their expenses.

In Scotland published expenses for councillors are difficult find and contain a very limited level of detail.

Google for ‘councillor expenses’ or check the front page of the website of the 32 local authorities in Scotland and you will be very fortunate to find any links leading to councillor expense claims.

For Edinburgh council it was only when I precisely googled ‘elected member expenses’ that I found the data.  For many other local authorities the search is longer and harder. Seldom are there links from the finance pages or from pages giving the personal information and register of interests of councillors.  Dundee city council helpfully has an FAQ ‘Can I get details of Councillors’ expenses?’ Alas, the answer is simply ‘Councillors expenses are published in detail in the local press each year’.

Should councillors expenses be made public?

I really think councillors expenses are pretty modest compared to the staggering sums we have seen MPs claiming. But I expect the indignation towards MPs will spill over into suspicions about councillors. Should there be a rule that all our expenses are detailed on our respective Council website? I think the amounts spent on fees for councillors attending conferences or "training" should be included as well as the train fares and hotel accommodation at such events.

This is not to say that councillors shouldn't get any expenses. For instance senior councillors, Cabinet Members for instance, who work from home instead of taking up the allocation of an office in the Town Hall that they could be entitled too. They may well provide good value for money. They release space for staff to be accommodated in the Town Hall rather than expensive additional offices. If such councillors are paid a couple of hundred pounds towards their phone expenses that is probably reasonable.

BBC survey shows councillors allowances rise

A survey for the BBC's Radio 5 shows councillor allowances rising above inflation. Between 2004 and 2008 inflation totalled 7% but in almost 300 of the 363 Councils surveyed allowances rose by more than inflation - sometimes a lot more. The survey doesn't include 2009 when a lot of Councils (including my own) are freezing allowances.

Cllr Richard Kemp, the Lib Dem leader on the LGA, defended increased allowances saying: "30% of councillors give up after their first term so it can't be that much of a gravy train if people want to get off it that quickly."

But of that 30% how many jump and how many are pushed?

One in ten Manchester Council staff on long term sick leave

An article in the Daily Telegraph highlights the extent of sickness leave among (Labour) Councils in the Greater Manchester area. Manchester Council has the highest nukber of staff on long term sick leave (2,544 staff out its 25,000 taking more than three consecutive weeks.) Tameside Council had 982 out of 9,000 staff taking long term sick leave. Salford Council staff take an average of 13 days off a year - twice average in the private sector.

The Telegraph quote a professor saying those in large organisations feel it "doesn't matter." But there are plenty of large organisations in the private sector. As stated earlier I strongly suspect the problem is the craven attitude to the trade unions - particularly in Labour Councils. The unions are funded with full time people - who then run rings around the Human Resources Department stringing out disciplinary cases,

Fraud rife in Barking and Dagenham

An investigation into fraud by Labour-run Barking and Dagenham Council has resulted in 25 members of staff having resigned or been dismissed. One worker submitted false papers to claim early retirement which would have cost the Council £200,000. Another worker was caught working elsewhere while claiming sick pay.

Fraud is part of a wider problem in local government of a lack of rigour from the management caused by craveness to the trade unions. Barking and Dagenham Council fund, courtesy of the Council Taxpayer, four members of staff on secondment working full time for trade unions. Many councils fund even more trade union posts plus providing trade unions with rent free offices.

The trade unions use their resources to resist any of their members being sacked. Hearings will be strung out for months. Human Resources staff run ragged with procedural delays. Managers find is much less onerous to turn a blind eye. So bad staff are kept on and the Council Taxpayer is the victim.

Mark Wallace: More than 1,000 Town Hall employees are now earning in excess of £100,000 - and some councils still don't want you to know about it

Mark Wallace of the TaxPayers' Alliance explains how the latest TPA research unveils a marked increase in the number of Town Hall employees earning over £100,000 - and names and shames the councils still resisting publishing such information.

It’s that time of year again – the Town Hall Rich List, in which the TaxPayers’ Alliance publishes the full remuneration details, job titles and names for everyone in local government whose pay and perks totalled £100,000 or more in 2007-08, is out today. You can read the full report, and find out the details for the senior staff of your own council, here.

There will certainly be numerous local controversies about the pay and perks of senior officials at various councils around the country – not least, of course, because 2007-08 was the year when so many local authorities were making their disastrous investments in doomed Icelandic banks – but the national picture is pretty shocking, too.

In 07/08, pay in the wider economy was still on the rise, so some increase might be expected. However, Town Hall pay seems to have grown unusually fast. The total number of people on the list grew from 818 to 1,022, so either a lot of executive jobs were created, or the second tier of town hall management saw their remuneration grow at an alarming rate.

The purpose of publishing the list, of course, is to give people the information they need to properly hold their council to account. So, are these Town Hall executives worth the money? The question is best answered locally, council by council by taxpayers themselves who know the details of their tax bill and can see whether the services they get are worth the money. In fact, please let us know in the comments below how your council’s performance compares to the pay packets being handed out in its offices.

"Top" Scottish councillors get huge increase in allowances

The Sunday Herald reports that COSLA, the "representative voice" of Scottish local government, has given a four fold increase in the amount of allowances it pays it to councillors who are its office holders. For instance it has doubled the number of Vice Presidents from two to four and more than doubled the allowances paid to Vice Presidents from £7,000 to £15,000 a time. It looks a bit like twice the money for half the work, doesn't it? This, of course, is in addition to the allowance they get direct from their own Councils. Not exactly sensitive as the private sector faces a painful recession.

I'm not sure how many meetings they are supposed to turn up to in order to get this COSLA money. According to the website page on its structure there is a Convention which meets four times a year. The other question is regardless of how many meetings they go to what practical benefits are provided by COSLA.

Should councillors get pensions?

The campaign by the Taxpayers Alliance against councillors being eligible for Council pension schemes had a fillip from the Sunday Express yesterday. The paper splashed on their front page a piece about "greedy councillors grabbing gold plated pensions."

I haven't joined my Council's pension scheme but this is because the idea didn't occur to me rather than abstemious ideological principle. But I notice councillors are treated like employees with their payment of their allowances being taxed at source so perhaps it is not surprising they have the same rights as anyone else at the Town Hall.

My understanding is that there is little or nothing an individual council can do about financial burden to Council Taxpayers caused by the generous pension provision as this is something that has to be addressed nationally.

What should be done?

Don't apply for a job at North Lanarkshire Council

It's always disappointing to apply for a job and get turned down. But at least you can normally keep it quiet and avoid humiliation. Unless, of course, you happen to have applied for the post of Head of Corporate Communications and Marketing at North Lanarkshire Council. Guido Fawkes pointed out that the Council included the list of rejected candidates on their website. Now the BBC has followed up his scoop and persuaded the Council to remove the names. A bit late for that.

Should councillors allowances be frozen in the recession?

Conservative controlled Worcestershire County Council is saving £22,000 by freezing the allowances it pays to councillors. It is also modestly scaling down its planned Council Tax increase from 3.5% to 2.94%. It has still found money for improved footpaths and and anti flooding measures.

They carried out a consultation exercise although they scarcely needed to know that Council tax rises are unpopular or that freezing member allowances would be welcome.Apart from saving some money and pleasing voters it also sets an example to council officers when asking them for savings.

On the other hand the less money councillors get in allowances the more pressure some are under to earn money from elsewhere thus giving them less time to trying and keep a grip of what the Council is doing. Not all councillors are retired. Of course the thing about a democracy is that once elected some councillors do not very much and pocket the money while others work very hard and probably end up earning the equivalent of below the minimum wage for the number of hours they put in.

But surely in a recession freezing councillor allowances is a reasonable gesture?

Let councillors vote by mobile phone from the pub says Blears

The Daily Mail reports that the Communities Secretary Hazel Blears is proposing to allow councillors to continue being paid allowances, averaging £10,000 even if they never turn up to meetings. She proposed new rules that would allow councillors to vote by mobile phone from a pub or while watching TV in their sitting rooms.

Shadow Communities Secretary Caroline Spelman opposes the Government plans. "Armchair voting and coach potato councillors will cause real cynicism," she warns.

Council boss "kept depression secret"

Christine Laird, the former Managing director of Cheltenham Borough Council is being sued by the Council for £1 million. The Council claim that she withheld in the details of her medical history that she had a depessive illness and was taking anti depressants.

She certainly seems to have had a poor working relationship with the Lib Dem Council leader Andrew McKinlay. She once filed an application for a restraining order banning him from entering the first floor of the Council HQ where she had her office.

Tameside Council's "Boob Jobs on the Rates"

The Leader of the Tameside Council Conservatives has moved quickly to condemn a scheme put forward by Tameside Council, which could allow employees to have time off for cosmetic surgery.

The scheme, entitled 'Absence from Work for Life Choice Procedures', aims to "help the Council demonstrate that it is continuing to maintain a 'people-centric' approach." It was produced after "managers requested guidance on how to manage, yet support employees at what can be a difficult time."

While the scheme refers to practical medical procedures, such as laser eye surgery, it also contains guidelines to support employees when having time off for cosmetic surgery, such a "breast augmentation or
reduction, nose reduction, liposuction and cosmetic facial treatments."

Councillor John Bell, the Tameside Conservative Leader, says:

"While I appreciate that some council employees would need to take time off for procedures such as laser eye treatment I am completely opposed to the idea of 'boob jobs' on the rates.  Such practices are unheard of in the private sector, and there should already be rules in place to deal with such matters.

"I find it appalling that public time and money has been wasted on this matter at a time when the banks are teetering on the edge of collapse, businesses are going into liquidation and taxpayers are struggling financially with the effects of a recession."

"Once again, it a typical example of a politically correct Labour non-policy that hard-working taxpayers will be expected to fund."

Labour councillor in Leicester censured for taking overpayments

The Leicester Mercury reports that Cllr Sean Sheahan took payments of nearly £20,000 from Leicestershire County Council and did not query it as a mistake. The special responsibility payments of £19,620 were paid from 2005 until May this year - but he didn't have any special responsibilities.

Once he was found out he paid back the money and the Council's standards subcommittee found he had breached the code of conduct. They said he would be suspended for two months unless he sent a letter of apology. He has agreed to send the letter - but only to avoid the suspension. "I do not feel as if I have done anything wrong," he says. He thought the cash was "to reward his loyalty to the Labour Group." He admits he noticed the overpayments but said a fellow councillor told him "not to worry about it."

Am I alone in thinking that Cllr Sheahan has the wrong attitude towards public service?

Councillor allowances figures published for London. Are we worth it?

Interesting table in the Evening Standard yesterday on how much councillors are paid in  each London borough. Are we worth it? Do we all justify the money we get by spotting wasteful spending of far greater sums?

Great opportunity for envy. Should a directly elected Mayor really get nearly twice as much as Council leaders? Why do I only get £8,725 for my basic allowance in Hammersmith and Fulham while my comrades in Croydon get £11,596? (I also get a special responsibility allowance for serving on the Adoption Panel.)

I had managed to miss the story but spotted it on Cllr Phil Taylor of Ealing's excellent blog.