Individual Councillor Replies
Roy Barraclough
Dear Ed TWP
I was also interested to read the number of comments that supported the rise in allowances.
Please will you answer my question to you last night which was to ask you to consider making an appeal to your followers to become local councillors. There is a significant problem in recruiting people who are willing to work the long hours required for the benefit of our community and take strategic decisions on the future. I feel your fb page may attract some willing volunteers. This would be a really positive step forward.
On the matter of the change in allowance calculations. If you look at my individual case because of the way the process has simplified the process and removed some additional responsibility allowances and increased the basic. I will not be receiving a 16% rise.
Very happy to discuss with you personally
Roy Barraclough MIFireE
Keith Bickers
Thanks for your 'e' mail. I support the allowance increase as I feel this will encourage a wide range of residents to engage with local issues and consider standing for election as a Borough Councillor knowing they will receive some compensation for any potential loss of earnings when dealing with civic issues. This will, in my opinion benefit everyone in Worthing
Keith
Cllr. Keith Bickers
Selden Ward - WBC
Michael Cloake
Hi All,
As a councillor I have been following this post closely and I would like to add my thoughts, if I may. I should say from the beginning that I have argued for raising allowances for councillors, as the current level is simply not an accurate reflection of the work they do, the professional role they undertake on behalf of residents and is not conducive to attracting a more democratic cross-section of society into the role.
I think the key issue is not what members earn as an allowance, but moreover the question of why the allowances exist in the first place - member's allowances are meant to be inclusive so that ANY person can sit as a member and carry out the role as best as they are able, personal circumstances notwithstanding. I do not believe the current level of allowances is very inclusive at all. MPs where first given allowances, for example, to prevent the land being governed soley by the rich - do you think not paying allowances to councillors would give you a representative governing body?
Please remember that councillors make decisions on how to spend the £100-200 coming out of your bank account each month. Would you prefer a bunch of retirees with second incomes and not a lot else to do making those decisions, or would you prefer a representative group of people plucked from all walks of life? At present I would say most councillors can only do the role because they can afford to - where does that leave the representation for the unemployed, those on low incomes, young families, our elderly poor struggling on state pension or our young people?
From my perspective as the youngest member on the council, I do not think there are many people my age that could afford to take time out of paid employment to do the job, and that the previous allowances were simply not democratic. Those of us with children are also feeling the pinch perhaps harder and it is only by virtue of flexible employers or by working for ourselves that many councillors can take up the role at all. I believe allowances should be set at a level that does not exclude so many from standing for office, and accurately reflects the role they are taking on - quite simply allowances paid should be set at a level that enables even the lowest paid or unemployed member of society to do the role, not by what is affordable to some.
You may also wish to consider the work of a councillor - you might think it's all tea and biscuits but you would be wrong. I don't really wan to focus on me specifically, but here is my workload as an example: firstly, I am always available to my constituents in Salvington and you will see I have given my mobile number for anyone to contact me if they need or wants to; secondly, there are a lot of important decisions for the town to be considered involving reading plenty of documents and actually turning out for council meetings. Then there are party specific meetings, although these could be deemed outside the role of a councillor but they still happen. Then committees - I for example sit on the Planning Committee, the Licencing Committee and Members Appointments; I also sit on High Salvington Mill Trust, High Salvington Residents Association and Worthing and Bognor Shopmobility. I also work full time and some weeks I do not spend an evening at home and I am not even a cabinet member - they have a lot more to do than I.
It is also not true to say people do not get pay rises in a recession - those that do a good job certainly do. Worthing is doing very well despite the national outlook, and despite councillors have all altruistically frozen allowances year after year meaning the actual real value of those allowances has decreased considerably. It may be some time before the whole country really gets back on its feet, but with the current leadership Worthing will be right out in the front. Unemployment is DOWN in Worthing, investment is UP and we need this to continue for the local economy. The Independent Remuneration Panel resigned because we did not take their recommendation for twoi years running - last year they recommended an increase which was refused, this year they recommended a shake up of how allowances are awarded as regards Sprecial Resposnibility Allowances (SRAs) which we accepted, but changed some of the figures to make it work for all councillors from all parties.
Now, I will not be waiving the 16% increase to my basic allowance as a councillor and do not believe any of the other members should be bullied into doing do so either. Quite apart from the fact I couldn't afford to do so, the changes to the SRAs mean that in reality I will actually be receiving some £500 less a year. Nevertheless, I have argues strongly for the increase and will continue to do so as its justification is rooted in fair democracy for taxpayers and for Worthing.
However, I would support a system that penalises low attendance for councillors - those that consistently do not attend meetings are not doing the job. I could name and shame (but I won't), but I will cite the example of one councillor that turned up for a council photograph recently before a full council meeting, but then seemingly couldn't be bothered to actually attend the 'boring' meeting. These councillors should be your targets as they are taking your money and not doing the work.
Michael Cloake
Daniel Humphreys
Dear Ed,
Thank you for your email and for your interest in the way the Council is run.
I'm not sure how closely you've followed the decision making process in regard to Councillors' Allowances in Worthing but I'm not in a position to give a fully satisfactory answer to your question as it doesn't completely apply to me! By my calculations, based on the old system of allowances my total for the year would have been slightly more than it will be under the new system. As a policy advisor and a member of the planning committee, the decision that we took and which I voted for means that I will no longer get the Special Responsibility Allowances for those roles which will cancel out the rise in the basic allowance.
My total for the year goes from about £4,502 to £4,500. So as you can see I don't have an increase to waive.
However, as I say above I did vote in favour of the new system and I'm happy to give you my reasons for doing so. You quite rightly point out that many people have not had a pay rise for years and that many others give up a lot of time for charity and receive no money for doing so. I was very conscious of these facts when making my decision to vote in favour of the new system. Indeed as someone who was made redundant last year and now does three different jobs to make ends meet I'm well aware of the pressures that people face.
After having served on the Council for twelve months it was clear to me that the allowances system as it stood was not fit for purpose. Long before I became a councillor mistakes were made in setting the rates of allowances and determining who got what that had been left unchanged for too long. The allowances that Worthing Councillors were receiving bore no relation to those that Councillors in other comparable authorities received, they didn't recognise the high level of repsonsibility that is expected - particularly of the Leader, Cabinet Members, Leader of the Opposition and Committee Chairmen, and the Special Responsibility Allowances were arbitrary figures seemingly plucked out of the air at some point in the past.
Therefore I was keen to see a new system put in place that was not just an allowances raising exercise but one that brought clarity and consistency to the allowances given to Councillors in Worthing. I think that we have achieved that.
The new basic allowance brings us closer to, but still not in line with, the average allowances for Councillors in the South East of England. The Special Responsibility Allowances are no longer arbitrary payments but are awarded based on a multipier formula that sees consistency across the board.
I appreciate that a number of people feel that this is not the right time to raise allowances as many people, like me, have either seen a decrease in their household income or a freeze in recent years. While I sympathise with this view I would again argue that the mistake with regard to Councillors' Allowances was made a number of years ago and that it is high time that we grasped the nettle and brought in sensible changes. I think that we have done this. If we had waited and waited for 'the right time' those old mistakes would neve have been rectified.
With regard to the argument that many people give up time for charity for free so why should councillors get an allowance, this has been a thought that was constantly on my mind throughout my considerations on this subject. I take my hat off to people who give up their time freely for charity and community. Myself and the vast majority of Worthing Councillors (both Parties) are among those people who do some free charity and community work. My first counter argument would be this argument could be levelled at anyone who works either full time or part time in the Public Sector or Third Sector. Would we really contenance people suggesting that doctors, nurses, teachers, teaching assistants, refuse collectors, firemen, paramedics, police officers, etc, etc, should not receive payment for the work that they do because other people give up their time for free? Of course not; so we accept that for vital work that must done for the wider good of community and society a payment should be made that enables people to do the job, that recognises the level of responsibility, the time and resources sacrificed and that recognises the calibre of person required to fulfill the role. Hopefully we can agree that it is vital that we have democratically elected and accountable people deciding on the policies that are implemented in Worthing. I also hope that we can agree that those people who fulfill the important roles I mentioned above (Leader, Cabinet Member, Leader of Opposition and Committee Chairmen) are people of sufficient calibre to make intelligent decisions about the future of our town, the level of taxes that we pay and the public sevices that we all depend on.
With regard to the point about the level of responsibility that those people listed above take on I found it quite ridiculous that the people who took such important decisions about our Council, out town and our public services were receiving allowances that were commensurate to part time minimum wage payments in other sectors. The unelected people who are responsible for making decisions in similarly sized bodies in other parts of the public sector and across the private sector receive salaries, allowances, pension contributions and bonuses that Worthing Borough Council Cabinet Members and Committee Chairmen (who only receive allowances and expenses) could only dream of. We are lucky at the moment to have some truly excellent Councillors (in both Parties) but there is a real danger that unless the level of allowances is set at a realistic level, that recognises the skills that we should demand of our decision makers, we could easily end up with a Council of 'has-beens' and 'never-will-bes'. To repeat the analogy above, we would be appalled if our schools and hospitals were being run by people who didn't have skills to do the job, so why would we accept any less from the people who run our councils?
Linked to the last point is the fact that we need to have a system that enables anyone who is elected to fulfill the duties of a Councillor, to be able to do so without finding themselves financially inconvenienced either too much or too often. For people with children/other dependents, full time jobs or their own businesses there is a cost in attending meetings through paying for childcare, loss of earnings or paying for extra staff. At the time that I was elected I was briefly claiming JSA which was promptly withdrawn because being a councillor was a paid role (pretty much the same rate as JSA). It's imperative that we don't put able and electable people off by having a system in place that costs them too much money.
To reiterate:
I hope this helps to explain my reasons for supporting the new system despite not being a beneficiary of it. However, despite not being a beneficiary of it I should add that if I was I would take the rise in allowances. It would be hypocritcal to vote in a new system and then opt out of it. If an MP who voted in favour of lowering the drink drive limit was caught driving over the limit, or an MP who voted for the fox hunting ban was caught hunting foxes, we would correctly be appaled at their hypocrisy. I don't see that this issue is any different. If councillors were opposed to the new system they shouldn't have voted for it. (In fact I think some may have abstained). To vote for it and then not comply with it would be absurd and weak.
You and your readers may not agree with my reasons but I do hope that you're able to understand them. I am more than happy to talk to any of the residents in Castle Ward who I represent about this issue, although none have contacted me about it yet. Just like all of the Councillors on Worthing Borough Council, I live in Worthing and the people that I represent are neighbours and friends. I am a 'real' person, living in the 'real' world. We all face the pressures of 21st century life and my family and I rely on public services in Castle Ward just like the voters who are able to pass judgement on my performance and decisions at the ballot box.
I'd also like to add that the key role of Councillors is to run the Council as efficiently as possible, ensuring that vital public services are provided in the best manner possible without increasing taxes any more than is necessary. The record of your council in recent years is impressive in this regard. Council tax has been frozen at the same rate for three years, unlike many other councils refuse is collected every week and there are no black bin bags piled on the side of the road, we have built new playgrounds for the children of the town and maintain a health and wellbeing centre to support people of all ages. Most impressive of all is that during a period of swingeing government funding cuts we are building a new seafront leisure centre that will be envy of towns across the region.
As I said at the start of this email, I'm not able to reject an increase in my allowances because the new system that I voted for doesn't give me a raise. However, in the interests of Worthing and its Council, I'm more than happy to defend voting for a system that gives a rise in allowances to many of my colleagues.
Thank you once again for your email. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions and do feel free to publish this in full on your Facebook page.
Best regards,
Daniel Humphreys
Conservative Councillor for Castle Ward
Alan Rice
Hi Ed,
Thank you for your e-mail and the opportunity to comment on your recent Facebook discussion.
I will be taking the increase in the basic allowance to uphold the principles I outlined in my post to your Facebook page. We need councillors from all walks of life and not just those who are retired and have independent means. Employers in the current economic crisis are more and more reluctant to let staff take time out to fulfil their civic duty and, although the employer must allow time, they need not pay the councillor for the hours taken. This acts as a deterrent to potential young councillors with families to support who are wholly necessary to ensure their peers are represented and those voices heard. We do not need a council packed with out of touch and "past their sell by date" members .
The new basic allowance of £4,500 for 2012-13 is still below the average district/borough basic allowance for the South East. Not taking the increase and subsequently tying any future increase to that of WBC employees will only perpetuate a rate significantly lower than the average.
It is also worth noting although basic allowances were increased across the board in some cases special responsibility allowances (SRAs) were reduced and indeed for some completely withdrawn.
Regards
Alan Rice
Leader of Worthing Borough Council Liberal Democrat Group
Worthing Borough Councillor for Gaisford Ward
c.c. all Worthing Borough Councillors
Diane Jones
Thanks for your email. The allowance is as it is worded, It is an allowance , it is not a wage, It would be very difficult for the Councillor's to do what they do for nothing, bearing in mind the hours they put in.
I believe that the Councillors for Worthing Borough work hard and therefor we need something back. When the allowance increase was announced myself and Cllr. Keith Sunderland had thought that we would accept the increase and jointly give our combined increase back into Northbrook and ask the residents what they thought we should do with the money.
I thought that a 16% increase was far too much seeing as some people are getting no increase at all. However, I will not be receiving a special responsibility allowance now for Licencing so in fact my increase is actually a decrease.
Diane Jones - Northbrook Ward Councillor
Bob Smytherman
As Deputy Mayor I did not vote on the proposal to increase allowances for Councillors, however I believe the cross-party decision by Cllrs bring our pay in line with similar Cllrs in South East and will I hope encourage a diverse range of people to consider standing for election to be Councillors of the future and not just attract wealthy retired & middle class professionals. I accept this may not be popular but I would hope all Cllrs defend the balanced increase and encourage residents from all walks of life to stand for Council.
Keith Sunderland
I am not accepting my pay rise this year. I agree totally with Ann's and John Woodley's points and believe that we are paid less than others but we have frozen the officers' salaries and it seems to me that I should not accept a pay rise at this time. Some councillors will be earning LESS after this rearrangement of the allowances. Some special payments for historically more demanding committees have been removed so asking all councillors to refuse this raise could make them worse off.
Victoria Taylor
Dear Ed
I have been following this debate with interest and my response to your email is as follows:
My increase is not 16% as I sit on the planning committee and the £324 that I used to get for sitting on that committee has been scrapped so my actual increase is about 6 & ½ %.
One of the main reasons I became a councillor was because I felt the town was run by rich/retired people who were so far removed from my circumstances that I felt that my demographic wasn’t accurately represented on the council. I have 2 young children (aged 3 & 7) and I work 3 days a week and look after my children the other 2 days. I wanted a councillor who knows what it is like to be a young struggling family so instead of moaning about it I decided I would do something about it. One of the points you make on one of the facebook threads is that you assumed councillors don’t rely on this money to pay the bills, unfortunately I do and I know other councillors that do too. Because of my day job & my children, any council work that isn’t in the evenings I have to use my annual leave for & because I have school holidays and childcare to contend with I ran out of holiday last year so this year to enable me to attend all council matters that are in the day time my employers allowed me to buy an extra weeks holiday. That is £277 that comes out of my allowance after tax.
My party also require me to pay them 10% of my allowance which is £450 which goes towards our newsletters to keep residents informed and for election expenses which I certainly wouldn’t be able to afford if I was an independent.
I also volunteer as the treasurer of the Cortis Avenue Wildlife Garden and am the Vice-Chair of my local party which is also a voluntary position.
I appreciate that the timing of this rise is inconsiderate when council employees have had their pay frozen and had the decision been down to me alone I would have deferred it for another year but the ruling party were putting this motion forward and as they hold the majority it was going to be passed regardless.
As an aside, as a private sector worker my employer does not provide a contributory pension scheme and I therefore do not have a pension and at present I can't afford to pay into a private scheme.
With all the above stated I confirm that I will not be waiving my 6 & ½% increase.
If you would like to discuss any of this any further then please do not hesitate to ask.
Kind regards
Victoria Taylor
Councillor for Broadwater ward
Hazel Thorpe
Dear Ed,
Thank you for your message and the opportunity to respond. I would hope that we can discuss other issues concerning the public in similar vein not just cllr allowances which I respectfully suggest won't have such a major impact on your friends and the public at large as decisions made within the Council on major developments, public assets and the future . I have just returned from a few days break at home from duties to be with my grandchildren and family. I was at the first meeting Joint Governance and Audit to discuss this "arrangement" and will state what happened to try to make it clear to those not present and therefore not in full receipt of the facts..
I put forward another recommendation seconded by an Adur Cllr ( being only one of my Party due to political proportionality)
" That the Council should agree the cuts of policy advisors as suggested by the Independent panel but that all other allowances ( for both Parties) be kept at the same rate" (that is to say the status quo for the majority ) - "no increase on the grounds that 1) it would be a saving for tax payers, 2) it would not aggravate officers and members of the public who were not getting any rise at this time ." This recommendation was not agreed by the Cllrs present and fell.
The option put forward by the controlling Conservative group was brought up again in Full Council and an amendment recommendation that both parties ( Leaders and Deputy only ) had some reimbursement of their expenses was agreed.
The Independent advisors who have since resigned, not surprisingly advised two options, neither of which were deemed appropriate at the time of either meeting . Some of their advice was taken however, e.g cutting out Policy advisors SRA which meant a good saving for the Council but also large cuts for individual Cllrs. Both options put forward included a change in the basic allowance for all Cllrs. Some Vice chair allowances were cut under the Independent advice too but I believe these were reinstated. I have a great deal of respect for the Independent advisor's as they were looking across the county and came to their decisions after neutral investigation. It is a great shame that minor changes that could have been discussed with them before the public meetings were not.
I agreed that both parties, Leader / Deputy should have a special allowance - under the Independent options only the ruling group Leader & deputy in the future would be the only ones to get some recompense. (please see explanation later) .
As I sure you are aware that when a motion is put it is every bit of it is agreed at the same time so even if you disagree with a part of it you have to decide to either vote or against it in its entirety. I am sure you see , being an intelligent being, that this can cause some anomalies .
Personally I was unsure about the cuts in allowances for those at the bottom of the tree, those people who give up hours of their time on Licensing, and Planning and many other daytime meetings which can be very controversial, time consuming and stressful but the increase in the basic allowance to cover all allowances goes some way to address the fact that on the ground Councillors worth their salt on these committees read many reports lengthy in tome- my recent planning report is 235 pages long - and are expected to visit the sites , listen to the public expressing their views, read letters, emails and finally sit on the committee which can take several stresful hours. Let's face it you can never please everyone, neither should you.
My question to you is.... Why would Cllrs. voted for by the public, now do their job to the best of their ability - how has your "discussion" encouraged them to work harder ?
Fact . Allowances are just that -they are not a wage - we all have to pay tax on them, and NI if you are under 30years of age - so for the majority of hard working cllrs - yes most of us work behind the scenes with individuals - we don't wish to publish the heart breaking work with have to do to get people rehoused, prevent them being evicted or supported with anti social behavior their neighbours it makes very little difference financially.
Fact ; Allowances help pay for clothes - as I don't suppose you'd like your Cllr to represent you in public in dirty, worn out jeans or shoes with holes in them ?( we do a lot of walking!) Presumably you'd prefer us to look smart ?
Fact ;They help pay for paper, printing, stationery and PC's and their upkeep and maintenance . Petrol , car expenses , phone , Wi fi and internet phone bills, courses should we wish to train further, child minding bills for those young enough to have little ones .... ect ect......
Basically for most of the Worthing Borough Councillors of both parties they have had all their allowances put into one pot the basic allowance. Most of them have had a minimal increase of about £30 a month before tax, some have had their overall allowance decreased and only the Council Leader and his Deputy have had significant increases .
Reading the other comments, strangely enough your debate has had the impact of achieving an unintended outcome which though we have come at it from different perspectives you have achieved a Coaliation of Cllrs of two completely different Parties . That won't last for long though ...
Regards,
Hazel Thorpe Cllr Tarring Ward
Val Turner
Dear Ed,
Thank you for your e-mail regarding councillor's allowances. I feel that I should point out that not all councillors are receiving a 16% increase in their allowance. My current allowance is composed of the basic £3897 plus £528 as a policy advisor making a total of £4425. Under the new allowance system I will only receive the basic allowance of £4500, an increase of £75, and I am still a policy advisor.
I supported the rise in the allowances as I believe they need to be sufficient to attract councillors from a wide range of backgrounds, rather than those who are predominantly no longer in full time work and are able to support themselves. Councillor allowances, unlike pay, are not based on hours worked. There is no upper limit to the number of hours per year that a councillor puts in, and at minimum wage the new allowance would barely allow 14hrs a week. In my profession I could earn the equivalent amount in a lot less hours! Are you prepared to forgo the hours that a councillor puts in from your working week for this allowance?
Needless to say I will not waive my allowance increase of £75 per annum, however, I will hope that maybe the increase will encourage those who are most vociferous against the council to stand themselves and give us the benefit of their talents.
Yours faithfully
Councillor Val Turner
Nicky Waight
Thank you for your email.
I do support the increase in member allowances.
I am currently a Policy Advisor and Vice Chairman for planning. Both roles mean I have many day time meetings. An employed person could find this very difficult without an adequate allowance to compensate for any potential loss of earnings, yet even with the increase, we remain below the average across the South East of England.
Regards
Nicky Waight
Steve Waight
Thanks for your e-mail.
I will be accepting the revised Member Allowance.
Much has been said, but in summary:
After the increase, our allowances will still be consistently below average compared to other Borough/District Councils across the South East.
Our allowances are now linked to changes to staff salaries for at least the next four years.
In my 20 years as a Borough Councillor, there has never been a 'right' time to increase allowances.
I am in no doubt that our low allowances have recently been a significant factor in dissuading people from standing as Borough Councillors.
Regards.
Steve Waight
Cabinet Member for Resources
Tom Wye
I voted against the rise in members allowances when discussed at group level. I abstained from voting at full council (under group rules it was the only option for me). I have informed the Town Hall that I will not receive any increase in my allowances.
Tom Wye
Paul Yallop
Well said Michael Cloake who is one of our newest councillors. I hope the increased allowances will bring more young councillors of his calibre. There is little to stop any adult resident of Worthing from standing for council. I would be happy to speak to anyone about the process regardless of their political or apolitical beliefs.
For my own part I stood for council because I was unhappy with the lack of progress in Worthing. I thought I could do a better job than my predecessors! When I was first elected I had a well paid full time job but it soon became apparent that a good deal of time would need to be committed to make a real difference. I now spend most of the week on council duties and up until very recently worked almost every Saturday, Sunday and bank holiday to make up some of the income I have sacrificed during the week. The increase proposed by the Independent Panel for my position will allow me to stop working at weekends and spend more time with my wife and two children. In fairness to them I shall be accepting the increase. Whilst many will look at the % the amount proposed is still less than most council leaders in this area.
The council will for the next four years link any further changes to member’s allowances to the officers pay award.
Dear Ed TWP
I was also interested to read the number of comments that supported the rise in allowances.
Please will you answer my question to you last night which was to ask you to consider making an appeal to your followers to become local councillors. There is a significant problem in recruiting people who are willing to work the long hours required for the benefit of our community and take strategic decisions on the future. I feel your fb page may attract some willing volunteers. This would be a really positive step forward.
On the matter of the change in allowance calculations. If you look at my individual case because of the way the process has simplified the process and removed some additional responsibility allowances and increased the basic. I will not be receiving a 16% rise.
Very happy to discuss with you personally
Roy Barraclough MIFireE
Keith Bickers
Thanks for your 'e' mail. I support the allowance increase as I feel this will encourage a wide range of residents to engage with local issues and consider standing for election as a Borough Councillor knowing they will receive some compensation for any potential loss of earnings when dealing with civic issues. This will, in my opinion benefit everyone in Worthing
Keith
Cllr. Keith Bickers
Selden Ward - WBC
Michael Cloake
Hi All,
As a councillor I have been following this post closely and I would like to add my thoughts, if I may. I should say from the beginning that I have argued for raising allowances for councillors, as the current level is simply not an accurate reflection of the work they do, the professional role they undertake on behalf of residents and is not conducive to attracting a more democratic cross-section of society into the role.
I think the key issue is not what members earn as an allowance, but moreover the question of why the allowances exist in the first place - member's allowances are meant to be inclusive so that ANY person can sit as a member and carry out the role as best as they are able, personal circumstances notwithstanding. I do not believe the current level of allowances is very inclusive at all. MPs where first given allowances, for example, to prevent the land being governed soley by the rich - do you think not paying allowances to councillors would give you a representative governing body?
Please remember that councillors make decisions on how to spend the £100-200 coming out of your bank account each month. Would you prefer a bunch of retirees with second incomes and not a lot else to do making those decisions, or would you prefer a representative group of people plucked from all walks of life? At present I would say most councillors can only do the role because they can afford to - where does that leave the representation for the unemployed, those on low incomes, young families, our elderly poor struggling on state pension or our young people?
From my perspective as the youngest member on the council, I do not think there are many people my age that could afford to take time out of paid employment to do the job, and that the previous allowances were simply not democratic. Those of us with children are also feeling the pinch perhaps harder and it is only by virtue of flexible employers or by working for ourselves that many councillors can take up the role at all. I believe allowances should be set at a level that does not exclude so many from standing for office, and accurately reflects the role they are taking on - quite simply allowances paid should be set at a level that enables even the lowest paid or unemployed member of society to do the role, not by what is affordable to some.
You may also wish to consider the work of a councillor - you might think it's all tea and biscuits but you would be wrong. I don't really wan to focus on me specifically, but here is my workload as an example: firstly, I am always available to my constituents in Salvington and you will see I have given my mobile number for anyone to contact me if they need or wants to; secondly, there are a lot of important decisions for the town to be considered involving reading plenty of documents and actually turning out for council meetings. Then there are party specific meetings, although these could be deemed outside the role of a councillor but they still happen. Then committees - I for example sit on the Planning Committee, the Licencing Committee and Members Appointments; I also sit on High Salvington Mill Trust, High Salvington Residents Association and Worthing and Bognor Shopmobility. I also work full time and some weeks I do not spend an evening at home and I am not even a cabinet member - they have a lot more to do than I.
It is also not true to say people do not get pay rises in a recession - those that do a good job certainly do. Worthing is doing very well despite the national outlook, and despite councillors have all altruistically frozen allowances year after year meaning the actual real value of those allowances has decreased considerably. It may be some time before the whole country really gets back on its feet, but with the current leadership Worthing will be right out in the front. Unemployment is DOWN in Worthing, investment is UP and we need this to continue for the local economy. The Independent Remuneration Panel resigned because we did not take their recommendation for twoi years running - last year they recommended an increase which was refused, this year they recommended a shake up of how allowances are awarded as regards Sprecial Resposnibility Allowances (SRAs) which we accepted, but changed some of the figures to make it work for all councillors from all parties.
Now, I will not be waiving the 16% increase to my basic allowance as a councillor and do not believe any of the other members should be bullied into doing do so either. Quite apart from the fact I couldn't afford to do so, the changes to the SRAs mean that in reality I will actually be receiving some £500 less a year. Nevertheless, I have argues strongly for the increase and will continue to do so as its justification is rooted in fair democracy for taxpayers and for Worthing.
However, I would support a system that penalises low attendance for councillors - those that consistently do not attend meetings are not doing the job. I could name and shame (but I won't), but I will cite the example of one councillor that turned up for a council photograph recently before a full council meeting, but then seemingly couldn't be bothered to actually attend the 'boring' meeting. These councillors should be your targets as they are taking your money and not doing the work.
Michael Cloake
Daniel Humphreys
Dear Ed,
Thank you for your email and for your interest in the way the Council is run.
I'm not sure how closely you've followed the decision making process in regard to Councillors' Allowances in Worthing but I'm not in a position to give a fully satisfactory answer to your question as it doesn't completely apply to me! By my calculations, based on the old system of allowances my total for the year would have been slightly more than it will be under the new system. As a policy advisor and a member of the planning committee, the decision that we took and which I voted for means that I will no longer get the Special Responsibility Allowances for those roles which will cancel out the rise in the basic allowance.
My total for the year goes from about £4,502 to £4,500. So as you can see I don't have an increase to waive.
However, as I say above I did vote in favour of the new system and I'm happy to give you my reasons for doing so. You quite rightly point out that many people have not had a pay rise for years and that many others give up a lot of time for charity and receive no money for doing so. I was very conscious of these facts when making my decision to vote in favour of the new system. Indeed as someone who was made redundant last year and now does three different jobs to make ends meet I'm well aware of the pressures that people face.
After having served on the Council for twelve months it was clear to me that the allowances system as it stood was not fit for purpose. Long before I became a councillor mistakes were made in setting the rates of allowances and determining who got what that had been left unchanged for too long. The allowances that Worthing Councillors were receiving bore no relation to those that Councillors in other comparable authorities received, they didn't recognise the high level of repsonsibility that is expected - particularly of the Leader, Cabinet Members, Leader of the Opposition and Committee Chairmen, and the Special Responsibility Allowances were arbitrary figures seemingly plucked out of the air at some point in the past.
Therefore I was keen to see a new system put in place that was not just an allowances raising exercise but one that brought clarity and consistency to the allowances given to Councillors in Worthing. I think that we have achieved that.
The new basic allowance brings us closer to, but still not in line with, the average allowances for Councillors in the South East of England. The Special Responsibility Allowances are no longer arbitrary payments but are awarded based on a multipier formula that sees consistency across the board.
I appreciate that a number of people feel that this is not the right time to raise allowances as many people, like me, have either seen a decrease in their household income or a freeze in recent years. While I sympathise with this view I would again argue that the mistake with regard to Councillors' Allowances was made a number of years ago and that it is high time that we grasped the nettle and brought in sensible changes. I think that we have done this. If we had waited and waited for 'the right time' those old mistakes would neve have been rectified.
With regard to the argument that many people give up time for charity for free so why should councillors get an allowance, this has been a thought that was constantly on my mind throughout my considerations on this subject. I take my hat off to people who give up their time freely for charity and community. Myself and the vast majority of Worthing Councillors (both Parties) are among those people who do some free charity and community work. My first counter argument would be this argument could be levelled at anyone who works either full time or part time in the Public Sector or Third Sector. Would we really contenance people suggesting that doctors, nurses, teachers, teaching assistants, refuse collectors, firemen, paramedics, police officers, etc, etc, should not receive payment for the work that they do because other people give up their time for free? Of course not; so we accept that for vital work that must done for the wider good of community and society a payment should be made that enables people to do the job, that recognises the level of responsibility, the time and resources sacrificed and that recognises the calibre of person required to fulfill the role. Hopefully we can agree that it is vital that we have democratically elected and accountable people deciding on the policies that are implemented in Worthing. I also hope that we can agree that those people who fulfill the important roles I mentioned above (Leader, Cabinet Member, Leader of Opposition and Committee Chairmen) are people of sufficient calibre to make intelligent decisions about the future of our town, the level of taxes that we pay and the public sevices that we all depend on.
With regard to the point about the level of responsibility that those people listed above take on I found it quite ridiculous that the people who took such important decisions about our Council, out town and our public services were receiving allowances that were commensurate to part time minimum wage payments in other sectors. The unelected people who are responsible for making decisions in similarly sized bodies in other parts of the public sector and across the private sector receive salaries, allowances, pension contributions and bonuses that Worthing Borough Council Cabinet Members and Committee Chairmen (who only receive allowances and expenses) could only dream of. We are lucky at the moment to have some truly excellent Councillors (in both Parties) but there is a real danger that unless the level of allowances is set at a realistic level, that recognises the skills that we should demand of our decision makers, we could easily end up with a Council of 'has-beens' and 'never-will-bes'. To repeat the analogy above, we would be appalled if our schools and hospitals were being run by people who didn't have skills to do the job, so why would we accept any less from the people who run our councils?
Linked to the last point is the fact that we need to have a system that enables anyone who is elected to fulfill the duties of a Councillor, to be able to do so without finding themselves financially inconvenienced either too much or too often. For people with children/other dependents, full time jobs or their own businesses there is a cost in attending meetings through paying for childcare, loss of earnings or paying for extra staff. At the time that I was elected I was briefly claiming JSA which was promptly withdrawn because being a councillor was a paid role (pretty much the same rate as JSA). It's imperative that we don't put able and electable people off by having a system in place that costs them too much money.
To reiterate:
- I didn't vote in favour of a simple 'allowances raising' measure. I voted for a new system that is far better fit for purpose than the old one;
- If we had kept on waiting for 'the right time', we would never have made these changes which I believe are necessary for the future well being of our town and council;
- We need a system in place that ensures that people don't find themselves in a position of not being able to afford to be a councillor. We've taken a good step in that direction.
I hope this helps to explain my reasons for supporting the new system despite not being a beneficiary of it. However, despite not being a beneficiary of it I should add that if I was I would take the rise in allowances. It would be hypocritcal to vote in a new system and then opt out of it. If an MP who voted in favour of lowering the drink drive limit was caught driving over the limit, or an MP who voted for the fox hunting ban was caught hunting foxes, we would correctly be appaled at their hypocrisy. I don't see that this issue is any different. If councillors were opposed to the new system they shouldn't have voted for it. (In fact I think some may have abstained). To vote for it and then not comply with it would be absurd and weak.
You and your readers may not agree with my reasons but I do hope that you're able to understand them. I am more than happy to talk to any of the residents in Castle Ward who I represent about this issue, although none have contacted me about it yet. Just like all of the Councillors on Worthing Borough Council, I live in Worthing and the people that I represent are neighbours and friends. I am a 'real' person, living in the 'real' world. We all face the pressures of 21st century life and my family and I rely on public services in Castle Ward just like the voters who are able to pass judgement on my performance and decisions at the ballot box.
I'd also like to add that the key role of Councillors is to run the Council as efficiently as possible, ensuring that vital public services are provided in the best manner possible without increasing taxes any more than is necessary. The record of your council in recent years is impressive in this regard. Council tax has been frozen at the same rate for three years, unlike many other councils refuse is collected every week and there are no black bin bags piled on the side of the road, we have built new playgrounds for the children of the town and maintain a health and wellbeing centre to support people of all ages. Most impressive of all is that during a period of swingeing government funding cuts we are building a new seafront leisure centre that will be envy of towns across the region.
As I said at the start of this email, I'm not able to reject an increase in my allowances because the new system that I voted for doesn't give me a raise. However, in the interests of Worthing and its Council, I'm more than happy to defend voting for a system that gives a rise in allowances to many of my colleagues.
Thank you once again for your email. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions and do feel free to publish this in full on your Facebook page.
Best regards,
Daniel Humphreys
Conservative Councillor for Castle Ward
Alan Rice
Hi Ed,
Thank you for your e-mail and the opportunity to comment on your recent Facebook discussion.
I will be taking the increase in the basic allowance to uphold the principles I outlined in my post to your Facebook page. We need councillors from all walks of life and not just those who are retired and have independent means. Employers in the current economic crisis are more and more reluctant to let staff take time out to fulfil their civic duty and, although the employer must allow time, they need not pay the councillor for the hours taken. This acts as a deterrent to potential young councillors with families to support who are wholly necessary to ensure their peers are represented and those voices heard. We do not need a council packed with out of touch and "past their sell by date" members .
The new basic allowance of £4,500 for 2012-13 is still below the average district/borough basic allowance for the South East. Not taking the increase and subsequently tying any future increase to that of WBC employees will only perpetuate a rate significantly lower than the average.
It is also worth noting although basic allowances were increased across the board in some cases special responsibility allowances (SRAs) were reduced and indeed for some completely withdrawn.
Regards
Alan Rice
Leader of Worthing Borough Council Liberal Democrat Group
Worthing Borough Councillor for Gaisford Ward
c.c. all Worthing Borough Councillors
Diane Jones
Thanks for your email. The allowance is as it is worded, It is an allowance , it is not a wage, It would be very difficult for the Councillor's to do what they do for nothing, bearing in mind the hours they put in.
I believe that the Councillors for Worthing Borough work hard and therefor we need something back. When the allowance increase was announced myself and Cllr. Keith Sunderland had thought that we would accept the increase and jointly give our combined increase back into Northbrook and ask the residents what they thought we should do with the money.
I thought that a 16% increase was far too much seeing as some people are getting no increase at all. However, I will not be receiving a special responsibility allowance now for Licencing so in fact my increase is actually a decrease.
Diane Jones - Northbrook Ward Councillor
Bob Smytherman
As Deputy Mayor I did not vote on the proposal to increase allowances for Councillors, however I believe the cross-party decision by Cllrs bring our pay in line with similar Cllrs in South East and will I hope encourage a diverse range of people to consider standing for election to be Councillors of the future and not just attract wealthy retired & middle class professionals. I accept this may not be popular but I would hope all Cllrs defend the balanced increase and encourage residents from all walks of life to stand for Council.
Keith Sunderland
I am not accepting my pay rise this year. I agree totally with Ann's and John Woodley's points and believe that we are paid less than others but we have frozen the officers' salaries and it seems to me that I should not accept a pay rise at this time. Some councillors will be earning LESS after this rearrangement of the allowances. Some special payments for historically more demanding committees have been removed so asking all councillors to refuse this raise could make them worse off.
Victoria Taylor
Dear Ed
I have been following this debate with interest and my response to your email is as follows:
My increase is not 16% as I sit on the planning committee and the £324 that I used to get for sitting on that committee has been scrapped so my actual increase is about 6 & ½ %.
One of the main reasons I became a councillor was because I felt the town was run by rich/retired people who were so far removed from my circumstances that I felt that my demographic wasn’t accurately represented on the council. I have 2 young children (aged 3 & 7) and I work 3 days a week and look after my children the other 2 days. I wanted a councillor who knows what it is like to be a young struggling family so instead of moaning about it I decided I would do something about it. One of the points you make on one of the facebook threads is that you assumed councillors don’t rely on this money to pay the bills, unfortunately I do and I know other councillors that do too. Because of my day job & my children, any council work that isn’t in the evenings I have to use my annual leave for & because I have school holidays and childcare to contend with I ran out of holiday last year so this year to enable me to attend all council matters that are in the day time my employers allowed me to buy an extra weeks holiday. That is £277 that comes out of my allowance after tax.
My party also require me to pay them 10% of my allowance which is £450 which goes towards our newsletters to keep residents informed and for election expenses which I certainly wouldn’t be able to afford if I was an independent.
I also volunteer as the treasurer of the Cortis Avenue Wildlife Garden and am the Vice-Chair of my local party which is also a voluntary position.
I appreciate that the timing of this rise is inconsiderate when council employees have had their pay frozen and had the decision been down to me alone I would have deferred it for another year but the ruling party were putting this motion forward and as they hold the majority it was going to be passed regardless.
As an aside, as a private sector worker my employer does not provide a contributory pension scheme and I therefore do not have a pension and at present I can't afford to pay into a private scheme.
With all the above stated I confirm that I will not be waiving my 6 & ½% increase.
If you would like to discuss any of this any further then please do not hesitate to ask.
Kind regards
Victoria Taylor
Councillor for Broadwater ward
Hazel Thorpe
Dear Ed,
Thank you for your message and the opportunity to respond. I would hope that we can discuss other issues concerning the public in similar vein not just cllr allowances which I respectfully suggest won't have such a major impact on your friends and the public at large as decisions made within the Council on major developments, public assets and the future . I have just returned from a few days break at home from duties to be with my grandchildren and family. I was at the first meeting Joint Governance and Audit to discuss this "arrangement" and will state what happened to try to make it clear to those not present and therefore not in full receipt of the facts..
I put forward another recommendation seconded by an Adur Cllr ( being only one of my Party due to political proportionality)
" That the Council should agree the cuts of policy advisors as suggested by the Independent panel but that all other allowances ( for both Parties) be kept at the same rate" (that is to say the status quo for the majority ) - "no increase on the grounds that 1) it would be a saving for tax payers, 2) it would not aggravate officers and members of the public who were not getting any rise at this time ." This recommendation was not agreed by the Cllrs present and fell.
The option put forward by the controlling Conservative group was brought up again in Full Council and an amendment recommendation that both parties ( Leaders and Deputy only ) had some reimbursement of their expenses was agreed.
The Independent advisors who have since resigned, not surprisingly advised two options, neither of which were deemed appropriate at the time of either meeting . Some of their advice was taken however, e.g cutting out Policy advisors SRA which meant a good saving for the Council but also large cuts for individual Cllrs. Both options put forward included a change in the basic allowance for all Cllrs. Some Vice chair allowances were cut under the Independent advice too but I believe these were reinstated. I have a great deal of respect for the Independent advisor's as they were looking across the county and came to their decisions after neutral investigation. It is a great shame that minor changes that could have been discussed with them before the public meetings were not.
I agreed that both parties, Leader / Deputy should have a special allowance - under the Independent options only the ruling group Leader & deputy in the future would be the only ones to get some recompense. (please see explanation later) .
As I sure you are aware that when a motion is put it is every bit of it is agreed at the same time so even if you disagree with a part of it you have to decide to either vote or against it in its entirety. I am sure you see , being an intelligent being, that this can cause some anomalies .
Personally I was unsure about the cuts in allowances for those at the bottom of the tree, those people who give up hours of their time on Licensing, and Planning and many other daytime meetings which can be very controversial, time consuming and stressful but the increase in the basic allowance to cover all allowances goes some way to address the fact that on the ground Councillors worth their salt on these committees read many reports lengthy in tome- my recent planning report is 235 pages long - and are expected to visit the sites , listen to the public expressing their views, read letters, emails and finally sit on the committee which can take several stresful hours. Let's face it you can never please everyone, neither should you.
My question to you is.... Why would Cllrs. voted for by the public, now do their job to the best of their ability - how has your "discussion" encouraged them to work harder ?
Fact . Allowances are just that -they are not a wage - we all have to pay tax on them, and NI if you are under 30years of age - so for the majority of hard working cllrs - yes most of us work behind the scenes with individuals - we don't wish to publish the heart breaking work with have to do to get people rehoused, prevent them being evicted or supported with anti social behavior their neighbours it makes very little difference financially.
Fact ; Allowances help pay for clothes - as I don't suppose you'd like your Cllr to represent you in public in dirty, worn out jeans or shoes with holes in them ?( we do a lot of walking!) Presumably you'd prefer us to look smart ?
Fact ;They help pay for paper, printing, stationery and PC's and their upkeep and maintenance . Petrol , car expenses , phone , Wi fi and internet phone bills, courses should we wish to train further, child minding bills for those young enough to have little ones .... ect ect......
Basically for most of the Worthing Borough Councillors of both parties they have had all their allowances put into one pot the basic allowance. Most of them have had a minimal increase of about £30 a month before tax, some have had their overall allowance decreased and only the Council Leader and his Deputy have had significant increases .
Reading the other comments, strangely enough your debate has had the impact of achieving an unintended outcome which though we have come at it from different perspectives you have achieved a Coaliation of Cllrs of two completely different Parties . That won't last for long though ...
Regards,
Hazel Thorpe Cllr Tarring Ward
Val Turner
Dear Ed,
Thank you for your e-mail regarding councillor's allowances. I feel that I should point out that not all councillors are receiving a 16% increase in their allowance. My current allowance is composed of the basic £3897 plus £528 as a policy advisor making a total of £4425. Under the new allowance system I will only receive the basic allowance of £4500, an increase of £75, and I am still a policy advisor.
I supported the rise in the allowances as I believe they need to be sufficient to attract councillors from a wide range of backgrounds, rather than those who are predominantly no longer in full time work and are able to support themselves. Councillor allowances, unlike pay, are not based on hours worked. There is no upper limit to the number of hours per year that a councillor puts in, and at minimum wage the new allowance would barely allow 14hrs a week. In my profession I could earn the equivalent amount in a lot less hours! Are you prepared to forgo the hours that a councillor puts in from your working week for this allowance?
Needless to say I will not waive my allowance increase of £75 per annum, however, I will hope that maybe the increase will encourage those who are most vociferous against the council to stand themselves and give us the benefit of their talents.
Yours faithfully
Councillor Val Turner
Nicky Waight
Thank you for your email.
I do support the increase in member allowances.
I am currently a Policy Advisor and Vice Chairman for planning. Both roles mean I have many day time meetings. An employed person could find this very difficult without an adequate allowance to compensate for any potential loss of earnings, yet even with the increase, we remain below the average across the South East of England.
Regards
Nicky Waight
Steve Waight
Thanks for your e-mail.
I will be accepting the revised Member Allowance.
Much has been said, but in summary:
After the increase, our allowances will still be consistently below average compared to other Borough/District Councils across the South East.
Our allowances are now linked to changes to staff salaries for at least the next four years.
In my 20 years as a Borough Councillor, there has never been a 'right' time to increase allowances.
I am in no doubt that our low allowances have recently been a significant factor in dissuading people from standing as Borough Councillors.
Regards.
Steve Waight
Cabinet Member for Resources
Tom Wye
I voted against the rise in members allowances when discussed at group level. I abstained from voting at full council (under group rules it was the only option for me). I have informed the Town Hall that I will not receive any increase in my allowances.
Tom Wye
Paul Yallop
Well said Michael Cloake who is one of our newest councillors. I hope the increased allowances will bring more young councillors of his calibre. There is little to stop any adult resident of Worthing from standing for council. I would be happy to speak to anyone about the process regardless of their political or apolitical beliefs.
For my own part I stood for council because I was unhappy with the lack of progress in Worthing. I thought I could do a better job than my predecessors! When I was first elected I had a well paid full time job but it soon became apparent that a good deal of time would need to be committed to make a real difference. I now spend most of the week on council duties and up until very recently worked almost every Saturday, Sunday and bank holiday to make up some of the income I have sacrificed during the week. The increase proposed by the Independent Panel for my position will allow me to stop working at weekends and spend more time with my wife and two children. In fairness to them I shall be accepting the increase. Whilst many will look at the % the amount proposed is still less than most council leaders in this area.
The council will for the next four years link any further changes to member’s allowances to the officers pay award.