Agenda item

Purpose: To set out the recommendations of the West Berkshire Council Independent Remuneration Panel following their meetings on the 23 and 24 September 2020.

The Council considered a report (Agenda Item 16) which set out the recommendations of the West Berkshire Council Independent Remuneration Panel (IRP) following their meetings on the 23 and 24 September 2020.

Prior to the discussion on the item starting the Chairman explained that a revised table setting out the information on pages 177 to 180 of the agenda pack was circulated as a separate annex and was published on the website. The information was the same it was just presented on a single sheet.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Lynne Doherty and seconded by Councillor Lee Dillon:

That the Council:

1.    “considers and, if appropriate, agrees the recommendations of the Independent Remuneration Panel as set out in paragraph 4.19 of the report.

2.    delegates authority to the Service Director: Strategy and Governance to amend Part 14 of the Constitution (Members’ Allowances Scheme) and the associated procedures and guidance in line with any changes agreed by full Council.

3.    circulates the report of the Independent Remuneration Panel for West Berkshire Parish and Town Councils to all of its town and parish councils for information once the rate of the Council’s basic allowance for its councillors is agreed”.

Councillor Doherty in proposing the motion stated that she wished to propose a minor Amendment to the recommendation.

AMENDMENT: Proposed by Councillor Doherty and seconded by Councillor Dillon:

“that the new scheme of allowances to be agreed by the Council be implemented with effect from the beginning of the 2022-23 financial year (01 April 2022), at which time the current scheme of allowances will be revoke.”

Councillor Lynne Doherty in introducing the item noted that when the IRP had met in November 2017 they had proposed that the Panel be reconvened in 2020 to consider the impact of the Boundary Review. The Boundary Review had resulted in a decrease in the number of councillors from 52 to 43 and they felt that it would be an opportune time to assess what impact this had had on the workload of individual councillors. The onset of the Covid pandemic had meant that the meeting had to be delayed until September 2020. She thanked the Panel for the time they had taken to undertake the assessment and for producing the report. Councillor Doherty noted that the basic allowance paid to West Berkshire Councillors was one of the lowest in the county and country.

Councillor Doherty acknowledged the need to increase the diversity of those candidates standing for election and stated that she believed it was important to ensure that a fair remuneration package was in place in order to attract candidates from a range of backgrounds with a range of skills to offer. She stated that in addition to the small increase proposed in the basic allowance the Panel had also recommended changes to the Dependants’ Carers’ Allowance (set out on page 163 of the agenda). She highlighted that the Panel had commended the Council for adopting its Parental Leave Policy for Members and recommended that it be adopted within the Members Allowance Scheme. She also stated that the report recommended that the Council support an active ‘Be A Councillor’ programme to encourage and support a greater diversity of future councillor representation.

Councillor Doherty stated that she was also conscious that the recommendation could not have come at a more difficult time for many of the Council’s residents and she recognised that the proposals might appear to be insensitive and therefore she was proposing delaying the implementation of the recommendations until 01 April 2022.

Councillor David Marsh stated that Members could not predict what the financial situation would be in April 2022 and he therefore could not support the amendment He noted that in 2015 Councillors had received a 16.5% uplift in their allowances, they had received a further 2% increase in April 2018 and 2.75% increase in April 2020. Although he recognised the need to attract more diverse candidates he was of the opinion that a further 3% increase could not be justified and that other initiatives could be put in place to attract more diverse candidates.

Councillor Graham Bridgman commented that the 16.5% increase was a fallacy and the size of the increase was due to the fact that a number of allowances had been incorporated into the basic allowance. He believed that the rebasing was justified when the reduction in the number of councillors was factored in and would still result in an overall reduction in the budget for members allowances. He stated that it was important that the basic allowance be set at the right level to attract diversity and he therefore felt that the recommendations were both fair and justified.

Councillor Tom Marino stated that he was one of the youngest councillors and he had not stood as a candidate for financial gain but that the allowance did assist him with being able to carry out his duties as a councillor. If the Council wished to have greater diversity amongst its councillors and wanted to attract younger councillors a commensurate allowances scheme was needed. He stated that it was appropriate to defer the increase given the times.

Councillor Carolyne Culver was disappointed that the amendment had only been circulated to all Members an hour before the meeting.

Councillor Lee Dillon also supported the need for greater diversity amongst councillors and stated that the allowances could assist with that. It was however important to consider the context the decision was being made in and therefore he supported delaying the implementation.

The amendment was put to the vote and declared CARRIED.

Councillor Tony Vickers commented that Members used to be paid an attendance allowance and he would welcome that type of remuneration system being reintroduced.

Councillor Adrian Abbs stated that he had deliberated a lot with himself over this issue and he was concerned about being portrayed as a money grabber. However he spent around 30 hours per week on Council work and when viewed in that context the remuneration received was less than the minimum wage. The allowance simply enabled members to do this job.

Councillor Carolyne Culver stated that along with staff Members had received an increase of 2.75% in April 2020. She felt that the further 3% increase could not be justified given the current situation for staff and residents.

Councillor Claire Rowles stated that she would like to see more women getting involved in local politics. She stated that it was depressing that there were only six female councillors in post in West Berkshire and she felt that this proposal might encourage more women to stand.  Councillor James Cole stated that the Panel had clearly factored in the amount of time Members were required to spend on council work and meant that members would receive an hourly rate which equated to the minimum wage.

Councillor Jeff Brooks stated that the allowance reflected the effort and commitment a councillor was required to pit into the role. Members were required to spend a lot of time away from their families and often had to give up paid work in order to undertake the work. In his opinion the level of allowances proposed were entirely appropriate. Councillor Tom Marino reiterated that if the Council wished to attract younger councillors they would need to be recompensed at the right level.

Councillor Steve Masters stated that these were difficult times for residents and although he supported having more diverse councillors this was not the route to achieve it. Councillor Graham Bridgman reminded members that members allowances were index linked to staff and if the staff did not receive an increase members allowances would be frozen too.

Councillor Lee Dillon commented that within the Liberal Democrat Group Members had been afforded the opportunity to decide, based on their personal circumstances, whether or not they would take the 2.75% increase offered to them in 2020. He highlighted the proposals around the Dependants’ Carers’ Allowance and parental leave and stated that these could be used to attract a greater range of candidates. He reminded Members that the calculation factored in a 45% public service discount which meant that Members were expected to give about half of their time as a voluntary contribution. He reiterated that even with this increase the allowance paid to West Berkshire Councillors was still one of the lowest and it was important to set a good foundation for future candidates.

Councillor Lynne Doherty stated that everyone wanted greater diversity amongst Members but accepted that there was a difference of opinion as to how to achieve this. She stated that Members were sometimes required to make difficult decisions rather than popular ones and she therefore asked Members to support the proposal.

Prior to the vote being taken a request to record the voting was made and this was supported by the requisite number of Members.

FOR the Amended Recommendation:

Councillors Adrian Abbs, Phil Barnett, Jeff Brooks, Jeremy Cottam, Lee Dillon,  Owen Jeffery, Nassar Kessell, Royce Longton, Alan Macro, , Andy Moore, Erik Pattenden, Martha Vickers, Tony Vickers, Keith Woodhams, Steve Ardagh-Walter, Peter Argyle, Jeff Beck, Dennis Benneyworth, Dominic Boeck, Graham Bridgman, Jeff Cant, Hilary Cole, James Cole, Lynne Doherty, Clive Hooker, Gareth Hurley, Rick Jones, Alan Law, Tony Linden, Ross Mackinnon, Tom Marino, Graham Pask, Claire Rowles, Garth Simpson, Richard Somner, Jo Stewart, Andy Williamson, Howard Woollaston

AGAINST the Amended Recommendation:

Councillors: Carolyn Culver, Steve Masters, David Marsh

The Amended Motion was put to the vote and declared CARRIED.