Council leader defends rise in allowances

HUGE increases in councillors’ allowances have been defended by Wiltshire Council leader Jane Scott.

During November’s full council meeting, members voted in favour of recommendations made by the Independent Remuneration Panel for increases that will see Cllr Scott’s allowances rise by nearly 40 per cent a year from £37,335 to £52,227.

Cabinet members’ allowances increased by at least 22 per cent, rising from £15,101 to £18,433 a year, while councillors’ basic allowances went up by one per cent to £12,289 a year.

The move caused public anger and prompted business consultant Paul Gaunt to set up a petition calling for Cllr Scott and her cabinet to resign, which has received over 2,000 signatures.

However, Cllr Scott says that the allowances rise was justified.

In her first public statement on the issue, she said: “We are working in a more efficient way, but that does put an awful lot of pressure on all of us, both members and officers in the organisation, to deliver.

“The independent panel looked at that and they made their recommendation and I think it’s only right for the good running of the council in the future that we take that recommendation, because they thought what they put forward four years ago was wrong.”

She said: “If you compare the leader, for example, in Wiltshire – with nearly half a million people and a budget of nearly a billion – to Bath and North East Somerset, with a leader that gets more than that with about a third of the number of people, you can understand why, when they compared, they said they got it wrong.

“They wanted to make it right, not for me, but for the people who come after me.”

During the summer, the council ran a voluntary redundancy programme in which 252 front-line staff decided to leave the organisation.

Seven of the council's 18 associate directors took voluntary redundancy, while the remaining associate directors saw their wages rise on average by 7.5 per cent.

Mr Gaunt said: “Councillor Scott’s comments just show how out of touch she is with the council tax and business rate payers of Wiltshire, while they are facing such harsh economic times.

“The current controversy surrounding the MPs’ pay rise pales in significance when compared to this allowances rise and I would urge anyone who feels strongly to sign the petition.”

Independent Councillor Jeff Osborn, who has been highly critical of the increases in allowances, said the explanation did not wash. He added: “If she really wants to attract more dynamism, she needs to have a cull of some of the old duffers who are the prime beneficiaries of these increases.”

Comments (27)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:37am Fri 13 Dec 13

gingin says...

"They wanted to make it right not for me, but for the people who came after me."

Well one suggestion is she refuses to take the rise and puts it' where her mouth is. Not only is she out of touch she comes across as greedy, smug and self satisfied! No amount of so called defending or explanations cuts ice, it is the wrong time for anyone to accept large pay or allowance increases however hard they work.
"They wanted to make it right not for me, but for the people who came after me." Well one suggestion is she refuses to take the rise and puts it' where her mouth is. Not only is she out of touch she comes across as greedy, smug and self satisfied! No amount of so called defending or explanations cuts ice, it is the wrong time for anyone to accept large pay or allowance increases however hard they work. gingin

2:37pm Fri 13 Dec 13

brandx says...

I have just heard the the Conservative Local Government minister, Brandon Lewis, has public condemned on Jane Scott's greedy actions. He said it simply cannot be justified when so many people are having their pay frozen. Obvious there are serious splits in the Conservative party.

What is Jane Scott's answer to Mr Lewis?

All I know is the numbers signing the petition is incresasing daily.

If you feel anger about the greedy Wkiltshire Council Leader and her Cabinet please make sure you sign the petition along with your friends. The more the merrier.
I have just heard the the Conservative Local Government minister, Brandon Lewis, has public condemned on Jane Scott's greedy actions. He said it simply cannot be justified when so many people are having their pay frozen. Obvious there are serious splits in the Conservative party. What is Jane Scott's answer to Mr Lewis? All I know is the numbers signing the petition is incresasing daily. If you feel anger about the greedy Wkiltshire Council Leader and her Cabinet please make sure you sign the petition along with your friends. The more the merrier. brandx

7:59pm Fri 13 Dec 13

gingin says...

Just looked at the Wiltshire Times website and comment section there are already 46 comments all of them against the acceptance of the rise and all blaming the leader.

If she survives when even a Tory local government minister has condemned her then nothing the residents of Wiltshire say will ever make a difference again unless we vote them out at the next election! She should do the right thing and resign there is nothing she can say to justify her actions!
Just looked at the Wiltshire Times website and comment section there are already 46 comments all of them against the acceptance of the rise and all blaming the leader. If she survives when even a Tory local government minister has condemned her then nothing the residents of Wiltshire say will ever make a difference again unless we vote them out at the next election! She should do the right thing and resign there is nothing she can say to justify her actions! gingin

10:07pm Fri 13 Dec 13

ChrisTidworth says...

Why did the Council take so long to comment on it ? Wiltshire have worked hard to make cuts and have done a good job of it, so why why why spoil it but saying Yes. Still interested to see how many who voted against it or those from other party's have either refused the rise or given it to a charity ?
Why did the Council take so long to comment on it ? Wiltshire have worked hard to make cuts and have done a good job of it, so why why why spoil it but saying Yes. Still interested to see how many who voted against it or those from other party's have either refused the rise or given it to a charity ? ChrisTidworth

7:02am Sat 14 Dec 13

karlmarx says...

"In her first public statement on the issue, she said: “We are working in a more efficient way, but that does put an awful lot of pressure on all of us, both members and officers in the organisation, to deliver."

I do believe that firemen, police officers, NHS staff etc... are also working 'in a more efficient way', however, they are then seen as targets and have their pay and working conditions decimated.

Look forward to your reply Cllr Scott.
"In her first public statement on the issue, she said: “We are working in a more efficient way, but that does put an awful lot of pressure on all of us, both members and officers in the organisation, to deliver." I do believe that firemen, police officers, NHS staff etc... are also working 'in a more efficient way', however, they are then seen as targets and have their pay and working conditions decimated. Look forward to your reply Cllr Scott. karlmarx

5:54pm Sat 14 Dec 13

karlmarx says...

CALL FOR THE RESIGNATION OF THE LEADER AND CABINET OF WILTSHIRE COUNCIL


TO: LEADER AND CABINET OF WILTSHIRE COUNCIL

We the undersigned being electors in the Wiltshire Council local authority area state that we have no confidence in Wiltshire Council's Leader and Cabinet and call for their resignation.
Why is this important?

On Tuesday 12th November, Wiltshire Council agreed to give a substantial increase in allowances to its members only weeks after making 252 staff redundant.

It means Jane Scott, Wiltshire Council Leader will see her allowance rise by 36.5 per cent a year, affording her an additional £14,892 on her present £37,335, bringing the figure to £52,227.

The increases, to be backdated from May's elections, those Councillors who are members of the Council's cabinet seeing allowances increase by at least 22 per cent from £15,101 to £18,433 a year.

During the summer, the Council ran a voluntary redundancy programme in which 252 front-line staff decided to leave the organisation.

Seven of the Council's 18 associate directors took voluntary redundancy. The remaining associate directors have seen their wages rise by 7.5 per cent, on average.

The rises for those at the top come at the time when front line staff are seeing their numbers reduced, duties increased and minimal pay rises.

This is to the detriment of services and shows a total disregard for service users, the front-line and back office staff at the Council, as well as the Council Tax and Business Rate payers of the county of Wiltshire.

https://you.38degree
s.org.uk/petitions/r
esignation-of-leader
-and-cabinet-of-wilt
shire-council
CALL FOR THE RESIGNATION OF THE LEADER AND CABINET OF WILTSHIRE COUNCIL TO: LEADER AND CABINET OF WILTSHIRE COUNCIL We the undersigned being electors in the Wiltshire Council local authority area state that we have no confidence in Wiltshire Council's Leader and Cabinet and call for their resignation. Why is this important? On Tuesday 12th November, Wiltshire Council agreed to give a substantial increase in allowances to its members only weeks after making 252 staff redundant. It means Jane Scott, Wiltshire Council Leader will see her allowance rise by 36.5 per cent a year, affording her an additional £14,892 on her present £37,335, bringing the figure to £52,227. The increases, to be backdated from May's elections, those Councillors who are members of the Council's cabinet seeing allowances increase by at least 22 per cent from £15,101 to £18,433 a year. During the summer, the Council ran a voluntary redundancy programme in which 252 front-line staff decided to leave the organisation. Seven of the Council's 18 associate directors took voluntary redundancy. The remaining associate directors have seen their wages rise by 7.5 per cent, on average. The rises for those at the top come at the time when front line staff are seeing their numbers reduced, duties increased and minimal pay rises. This is to the detriment of services and shows a total disregard for service users, the front-line and back office staff at the Council, as well as the Council Tax and Business Rate payers of the county of Wiltshire. https://you.38degree s.org.uk/petitions/r esignation-of-leader -and-cabinet-of-wilt shire-council karlmarx

5:18pm Sun 15 Dec 13

brandx says...

I have just realised that not one Tory Wiltshire Councillor has defended Jane Scott's action in grabbing all these allowances. Sorry, I've got it slightly wrong, the Boy Clewer actually reckons he is worth more as he is so young. But what about all the others?. We know one voted against it - Mark Connoly - and one abstained - Graham Payne. However from all the others not a word.

Is this because they are too ashamed to publicly support Jane Scott, knowing how it will go down with their electors?

Why should Jane take all the flak?

They should publicly declare themselves.

Apparently there is a list out there saying who voted which way, but in this dark time Jane needs all the support she can get. Are they really so loyal?

Let's hear from them.
I have just realised that not one Tory Wiltshire Councillor has defended Jane Scott's action in grabbing all these allowances. Sorry, I've got it slightly wrong, the Boy Clewer actually reckons he is worth more as he is so young. But what about all the others?. We know one voted against it - Mark Connoly - and one abstained - Graham Payne. However from all the others not a word. Is this because they are too ashamed to publicly support Jane Scott, knowing how it will go down with their electors? Why should Jane take all the flak? They should publicly declare themselves. Apparently there is a list out there saying who voted which way, but in this dark time Jane needs all the support she can get. Are they really so loyal? Let's hear from them. brandx

7:34pm Sun 15 Dec 13

Morello says...

Clearly a person who has become very impressed with herself.

Many years ago with the British Gas "pigs in the trough" saga I recall how apparent it became that such people had no perceptible ability to understand how much the man on the Clapham omnibus came to loathe everything they stood for.

Not suprised that local conservatives say nothing - too smug until UKIP slay them in the europeean elections - but I haven't seen anything from the local Lab/Libs either.
Clearly a person who has become very impressed with herself. Many years ago with the British Gas "pigs in the trough" saga I recall how apparent it became that such people had no perceptible ability to understand how much the man on the Clapham omnibus came to loathe everything they stood for. Not suprised that local conservatives say nothing - too smug until UKIP slay them in the europeean elections - but I haven't seen anything from the local Lab/Libs either. Morello

11:55pm Sun 15 Dec 13

karlmarx says...

Here's how the sordid affair unfolded, from the South West Wiltshire Liberal Democrats website...

"Then came the the councillors' allowances scheme. A so-called 'independent' panel has recommended large pay increase for top Conservative councillors.

An amendment to reduce Jane Scott's pay by axing her money received as chair of the Health and Wellbeing board was supported by the Lib Dems but rejected by the Conservatives and Independents.

An amendment by Jeff Osborn to restrict increases to 1% was also defeated by the Conservatives. As a recorded vote was taken members of the public will be able to see exactly who voted in favour of huge increases for Conservative cabinet members.

A further amendment to stop any councillor getting more than one special allowance was also rejected.

Next amendment to suspend the increases for one year in the light of the current economic situation was also defeated by the Conservatives on a recorded vote.

Next amendment (Cllr Clark) Not to backdate the increases to April - defeated by the Conservatives.

On the substantive motion to approve the big increases - motion carried by the Conservatives on a recorded vote.

Footnote: Not much sign of a 'coalition working together' was there? Looks pretty much as divided as it could be.
Here's how the sordid affair unfolded, from the South West Wiltshire Liberal Democrats website... "Then came the the councillors' allowances scheme. A so-called 'independent' panel has recommended large pay increase for top Conservative councillors. An amendment to reduce Jane Scott's pay by axing her money received as chair of the Health and Wellbeing board was supported by the Lib Dems but rejected by the Conservatives and Independents. An amendment by Jeff Osborn to restrict increases to 1% was also defeated by the Conservatives. As a recorded vote was taken members of the public will be able to see exactly who voted in favour of huge increases for Conservative cabinet members. A further amendment to stop any councillor getting more than one special allowance was also rejected. Next amendment to suspend the increases for one year in the light of the current economic situation was also defeated by the Conservatives on a recorded vote. Next amendment (Cllr Clark) Not to backdate the increases to April - defeated by the Conservatives. On the substantive motion to approve the big increases - motion carried by the Conservatives on a recorded vote. Footnote: Not much sign of a 'coalition working together' was there? Looks pretty much as divided as it could be. karlmarx

1:12am Mon 16 Dec 13

karlmarx says...

"High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.c
om to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cm
s/s/0/2014e054-f02c-
11e1-b7b2-00144feabd
c0.html#ixzz2nb0Milp
C


Hundreds of thousands of public sector workers have received pay increases despite George Osborne’s “pay freeze”, announced in mid-2010.

The Treasury had hoped to save £3.3bn over two years through the pay freeze. But the Financial Times has learned that six Whitehall departments, as well as the National Health Service, armed forces and police, were unable to impose the full freeze."

Don't forget to include Wiltshire council leaders and councillors as well. They seem to be immune to the 'austerity measures' also.
I assume Wiltshire is still part of the UK?
"High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.c om to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cm s/s/0/2014e054-f02c- 11e1-b7b2-00144feabd c0.html#ixzz2nb0Milp C Hundreds of thousands of public sector workers have received pay increases despite George Osborne’s “pay freeze”, announced in mid-2010. The Treasury had hoped to save £3.3bn over two years through the pay freeze. But the Financial Times has learned that six Whitehall departments, as well as the National Health Service, armed forces and police, were unable to impose the full freeze." Don't forget to include Wiltshire council leaders and councillors as well. They seem to be immune to the 'austerity measures' also. I assume Wiltshire is still part of the UK? karlmarx

3:32am Mon 16 Dec 13

karlmarx says...

Meanwhile, in the land of 'austerity measures'...

16/12/2013

Some 2.5 million people will have to borrow money to heat their homes this Christmas. The shock statistics are published as energy users are hit this month with winter fuel hikes of up to £120.
Research published today by affordable property group Circle Housing suggests that around seven million people will be forced to take out a loan to cover extra costs this Christmas.

While four million people say the loans will be to pay for festive food and drink, more than a third of borrowers will use the cash to pay their winter energy bills.

Worryingly, one in 20 borrowers – 350,000 - will use a payday loan while nearly 150,000 will turn to an unofficial lender or loan shark

Now, if there really was an 'economic recovery' would this be taking place?
Of course not. Well, not in the real world anyway.

What these poor souls wouldn't give to have £19,000 pay rises and 35% increases in their allowances.

We're all in this together?
Meanwhile, in the land of 'austerity measures'... 16/12/2013 Some 2.5 million people will have to borrow money to heat their homes this Christmas. The shock statistics are published as energy users are hit this month with winter fuel hikes of up to £120. Research published today by affordable property group Circle Housing suggests that around seven million people will be forced to take out a loan to cover extra costs this Christmas. While four million people say the loans will be to pay for festive food and drink, more than a third of borrowers will use the cash to pay their winter energy bills. Worryingly, one in 20 borrowers – 350,000 - will use a payday loan while nearly 150,000 will turn to an unofficial lender or loan shark Now, if there really was an 'economic recovery' would this be taking place? Of course not. Well, not in the real world anyway. What these poor souls wouldn't give to have £19,000 pay rises and 35% increases in their allowances. We're all in this together? karlmarx

3:42am Mon 16 Dec 13

karlmarx says...

Call for the resignation of the Leader and Cabinet of Wiltshire Council

We the undersigned being electors in the Wiltshire Council local authority area state that we have no confidence in Wiltshire Council's Leader and Cabinet and call for their resignation.

2,458 of 3,000 signatures so far, only 542 more signatures needed. Sign and Facebook the petition, it would make a lovely Christmas present...

https://you.38degree
s.org.uk/petitions/r
esignation-of-leader
-and-cabinet-of-wilt
shire-council
Call for the resignation of the Leader and Cabinet of Wiltshire Council We the undersigned being electors in the Wiltshire Council local authority area state that we have no confidence in Wiltshire Council's Leader and Cabinet and call for their resignation. 2,458 of 3,000 signatures so far, only 542 more signatures needed. Sign and Facebook the petition, it would make a lovely Christmas present... https://you.38degree s.org.uk/petitions/r esignation-of-leader -and-cabinet-of-wilt shire-council karlmarx

11:39am Mon 16 Dec 13

Richard Clewer says...

It is interesting how the focus here is on a small part of the impact of the changes to Councillor Allowances.

The cost of the Cabinet and Portfolio Holders has actually gone down compared to last year. There is one less Cabinet member and several fewer Portfolio Holders (meaning we are all having to do more). Something the Journal did not report from what I can see but why let fact get in the way of a story.

The main increase in costs has come from the rises to the allowance for Chairs of Area Boards (along with the Chairs of Scrutiny etc). These are posts not held just by Conservatives but by Councillors from across the political spectrum. I am not about to get into percentages of which Councillor has benefitted the most, I don't think that is helpful, but I do think that the public should understand that it is Councillors from across the political spectrum who are benefitting.

Speaking as a young 'boy' of 39 (and while that may be young in terms of Councillors that only proves my point from what I can see), my issue is not that I am 'worth more' because I am young. It is that the job of Unitary Councillor is a pretty serious one. It should not just be the preserve of the retired or independently wealthy.

If being a Councillor pays less than the minimum wage, let alone the living wage, how are we ever going to get a broader cross section of society applying for the position. Previously comparisons have been made with nurses and firemen. The starting pay for a fireman is £21,275 per year plus pension. For a nurse it is £21,388 plus pension. A Wiltshire Councillor gets £12,289 a year with no Pension (although for those who are retired that is not a big factor). A Portfolio Holder with responsibility for say Housing, or Safeguarding of Young People, or our Leisure Centres and Libraries gets an additional £6,912 a year for that job. A total of £19,201 a year with no Pension. Those are in effect full time jobs, they are still lower than the starting salary for a Nurse or Fireman or Policeman (at £22,680). The Chairmen of Area Boards receive the same allowance. Chairs of Planning Committees slightly less and Chairs of Scrutiny Committees somewhat more.
A Cabinet member in Wiltshire Council, responsible for example for Transport or all of Public Health, Housing and Care for the Elderly (not small areas of responsibility) receives £18,433 for that job, a total of £30,722 with their Councillor allowance with no Pension. This is definitely a full time job and carries with it direct responsibility for the area that the Cabinet Member is responsible for.

I guess the question I have is what should we be paying our Councillors, including those who have specific responsibilities?

I understand that many of the comments above are politically motivated but this issue is not, in my opinion, about the party that Councillors belong to but rather about how accessible we want to make the role of Councillor and how we want to reward (or not) people who are directly responsible for major services in Wiltshire. Perhaps all Councillors should do the job for free? Would you be willing to take on a full time job under these circumstances?
It is interesting how the focus here is on a small part of the impact of the changes to Councillor Allowances. The cost of the Cabinet and Portfolio Holders has actually gone down compared to last year. There is one less Cabinet member and several fewer Portfolio Holders (meaning we are all having to do more). Something the Journal did not report from what I can see but why let fact get in the way of a story. The main increase in costs has come from the rises to the allowance for Chairs of Area Boards (along with the Chairs of Scrutiny etc). These are posts not held just by Conservatives but by Councillors from across the political spectrum. I am not about to get into percentages of which Councillor has benefitted the most, I don't think that is helpful, but I do think that the public should understand that it is Councillors from across the political spectrum who are benefitting. Speaking as a young 'boy' of 39 (and while that may be young in terms of Councillors that only proves my point from what I can see), my issue is not that I am 'worth more' because I am young. It is that the job of Unitary Councillor is a pretty serious one. It should not just be the preserve of the retired or independently wealthy. If being a Councillor pays less than the minimum wage, let alone the living wage, how are we ever going to get a broader cross section of society applying for the position. Previously comparisons have been made with nurses and firemen. The starting pay for a fireman is £21,275 per year plus pension. For a nurse it is £21,388 plus pension. A Wiltshire Councillor gets £12,289 a year with no Pension (although for those who are retired that is not a big factor). A Portfolio Holder with responsibility for say Housing, or Safeguarding of Young People, or our Leisure Centres and Libraries gets an additional £6,912 a year for that job. A total of £19,201 a year with no Pension. Those are in effect full time jobs, they are still lower than the starting salary for a Nurse or Fireman or Policeman (at £22,680). The Chairmen of Area Boards receive the same allowance. Chairs of Planning Committees slightly less and Chairs of Scrutiny Committees somewhat more. A Cabinet member in Wiltshire Council, responsible for example for Transport or all of Public Health, Housing and Care for the Elderly (not small areas of responsibility) receives £18,433 for that job, a total of £30,722 with their Councillor allowance with no Pension. This is definitely a full time job and carries with it direct responsibility for the area that the Cabinet Member is responsible for. I guess the question I have is what should we be paying our Councillors, including those who have specific responsibilities? I understand that many of the comments above are politically motivated but this issue is not, in my opinion, about the party that Councillors belong to but rather about how accessible we want to make the role of Councillor and how we want to reward (or not) people who are directly responsible for major services in Wiltshire. Perhaps all Councillors should do the job for free? Would you be willing to take on a full time job under these circumstances? Richard Clewer

5:42pm Mon 16 Dec 13

Dr S Brule says...

The thing is Richard, I can imagine me needing to use a fireman if my house is burning, or a nurse should I injure myself. However you (not personally) are useless to me. I don't need you - individuals, communities, don't need you. This is not meant to sound harsh - I appreciate that you engage with residents on here

As for "Those are in effect full time jobs". What do you mean by "in effect"? What are the hours? Will you need a p45 if you find yourself ousted from one of these roles?

Looking at Wiltshire Council:

Cllr Toby Sturgis - Cabinet Member for Strategic Planning, Development Management, Strategic Housing, Property, Waste.
Job: Farmer, Surveyor, horsetrials organiser.

Seems quite a full plate!.. Which leads me onto:

You say:

" It should not just be the preserve of the retired or independently wealthy."

Cllr Keith Humphries - none (his register of interests actually says "councillor")
Cllr Laura Mayes - None
Cllr Fleur de Rhé-Philipe - none
Cllr Jane Scott OBE - Self employed farmer
Cllr Jonathon Seed - B&B owner, army pension
Cllr John Thomson - None
Cllr Dick Tonge - None
Cllr Stuart Wheeler - Solicitor (non practicising)

Now we just need to find out whether they are independently wealthy!

Thanks
The thing is Richard, I can imagine me needing to use a fireman if my house is burning, or a nurse should I injure myself. However you (not personally) are useless to me. I don't need you - individuals, communities, don't need you. This is not meant to sound harsh - I appreciate that you engage with residents on here As for "Those are in effect full time jobs". What do you mean by "in effect"? What are the hours? Will you need a p45 if you find yourself ousted from one of these roles? Looking at Wiltshire Council: Cllr Toby Sturgis - Cabinet Member for Strategic Planning, Development Management, Strategic Housing, Property, Waste. Job: Farmer, Surveyor, horsetrials organiser. Seems quite a full plate!.. Which leads me onto: You say: " It should not just be the preserve of the retired or independently wealthy." Cllr Keith Humphries - none (his register of interests actually says "councillor") Cllr Laura Mayes - None Cllr Fleur de Rhé-Philipe - none Cllr Jane Scott OBE - Self employed farmer Cllr Jonathon Seed - B&B owner, army pension Cllr John Thomson - None Cllr Dick Tonge - None Cllr Stuart Wheeler - Solicitor (non practicising) Now we just need to find out whether they are independently wealthy! Thanks Dr S Brule

11:16pm Mon 16 Dec 13

Richard Clewer says...

It is very easy to suggest that you don't need Councilors. You do however use the services that Councillors organise and operate every week. From preventing homlessness to waste collection to sure start centres and so on. Councillors both direct how those services are to be run and make sure they are done so in a politically accountable way. The A36 is maintained by the highways agency who are not directly accountable to anyone. It took me 2 years to get a dangerous rut/pothole filled in on the ring road section. If I report a pothole on a Wiltshire Council maintained road it will be filled inside 2 days (on average) and if it is not filled in I get complaints from my residents and being accountable to them make sure it is fixed (the re-surfacing of Fisherton Street three years ago or of Blue Boar Row last month for example). If officers directed and ran the services how accountable would they be then?

I am not sure what point you are making about the list of Cabinet members. Of that list 7 are over the age of retirement. I have no idea how wealthy or not they are, I would not want to ask.

The job of a Cabinet Member takes up well over 50 hours a week, normally more from what I am told. It is a variety of day time and evening work and includes weekends. It is not based around any specific hours but requires the input taken to do the job. You will regularly find Cabinet Members (and Portfolio Holders) starting a day with an 8 am meeting and finishing it at 11 pm as a public meeting winds up having worked the enitre time in between.
It is very easy to suggest that you don't need Councilors. You do however use the services that Councillors organise and operate every week. From preventing homlessness to waste collection to sure start centres and so on. Councillors both direct how those services are to be run and make sure they are done so in a politically accountable way. The A36 is maintained by the highways agency who are not directly accountable to anyone. It took me 2 years to get a dangerous rut/pothole filled in on the ring road section. If I report a pothole on a Wiltshire Council maintained road it will be filled inside 2 days (on average) and if it is not filled in I get complaints from my residents and being accountable to them make sure it is fixed (the re-surfacing of Fisherton Street three years ago or of Blue Boar Row last month for example). If officers directed and ran the services how accountable would they be then? I am not sure what point you are making about the list of Cabinet members. Of that list 7 are over the age of retirement. I have no idea how wealthy or not they are, I would not want to ask. The job of a Cabinet Member takes up well over 50 hours a week, normally more from what I am told. It is a variety of day time and evening work and includes weekends. It is not based around any specific hours but requires the input taken to do the job. You will regularly find Cabinet Members (and Portfolio Holders) starting a day with an 8 am meeting and finishing it at 11 pm as a public meeting winds up having worked the enitre time in between. Richard Clewer

4:16am Tue 17 Dec 13

karlmarx says...

"If being a Councillor pays less than the minimum wage, let alone the living wage, how are we ever going to get a broader cross section of society applying for the position."

Well, you see there are quite a number of people who get a lot less than the national minimum wage and, one suspects that they don't have more than one job or a business, or pension etc... to fall back on...

21 and over ~ 203,000 paid less than NMW
18-20 ~ 57,000 paid less than NMW
under 18 ~ 19,000 paid less than NMW

Source www.gov.uk /NMW

Of course austerity measures appear to only affect the lower quartile of the population while the higher quartile benefit from tax breaks, as if they actually need them.
There's little comparison between councillors and firemen, nurses, paramedics, armed forces, police etc... The pay reflects the actual work, it's dangers and, risk to the individual. I hardly consider attending a meeting to be very risky or, needing much in the way of qualifications either judging by the outcomes of the meetings.
"If being a Councillor pays less than the minimum wage, let alone the living wage, how are we ever going to get a broader cross section of society applying for the position." Well, you see there are quite a number of people who get a lot less than the national minimum wage and, one suspects that they don't have more than one job or a business, or pension etc... to fall back on... 21 and over ~ 203,000 paid less than NMW 18-20 ~ 57,000 paid less than NMW under 18 ~ 19,000 paid less than NMW Source www.gov.uk /NMW Of course austerity measures appear to only affect the lower quartile of the population while the higher quartile benefit from tax breaks, as if they actually need them. There's little comparison between councillors and firemen, nurses, paramedics, armed forces, police etc... The pay reflects the actual work, it's dangers and, risk to the individual. I hardly consider attending a meeting to be very risky or, needing much in the way of qualifications either judging by the outcomes of the meetings. karlmarx

5:38am Tue 17 Dec 13

karlmarx says...

As a footnote to my previous comment, if the rate of inflation is 2.2% per annum then how come those in the public sector can survive a 3 year pay freeze followed by a massive 1% pay rise and councillors, council leaders and MP's can't?

MP's, they need a whopping £7,600 11% per annum pay hike!

Wiltshire Council leaders, £19,000 per annum pay hike and allowance increases of 36.5%!

Members’ basic allowances increase by £122 to £12,289 a year with those councillors who are members of the council’s cabinet seeing their allowances increase from £15,101 to £18,433 a year!

And to add insult to injury...

"The motion, which is being backdated from May’s elections"

Kerching!!!!

And you have the audacity to quote nurses pay and working conditions when they have just had a three year pay freeze followed by a 1% pay rise increased pension contributions, less pension and work longer!!!!

How dare you!
As a footnote to my previous comment, if the rate of inflation is 2.2% per annum then how come those in the public sector can survive a 3 year pay freeze followed by a massive 1% pay rise and councillors, council leaders and MP's can't? MP's, they need a whopping £7,600 11% per annum pay hike! Wiltshire Council leaders, £19,000 per annum pay hike and allowance increases of 36.5%! Members’ basic allowances increase by £122 to £12,289 a year with those councillors who are members of the council’s cabinet seeing their allowances increase from £15,101 to £18,433 a year! And to add insult to injury... "The motion, which is being backdated from May’s elections" Kerching!!!! And you have the audacity to quote nurses pay and working conditions when they have just had a three year pay freeze followed by a 1% pay rise increased pension contributions, less pension and work longer!!!! How dare you! karlmarx

6:09am Tue 17 Dec 13

karlmarx says...

Addendum:

Something else for budding 'peoples representatives' to aspire to, let's see how this one pans out, official enquiry? Don't hold your breath.

"Half the members of the House of Lords clock in and out of Parliament for a few minutes a day in order to claim a £300 daily attendance allowance, a former Conservative peer has said.

Lord Hanningfield made the claim when challenged to explain his own attendance record.

The Daily Mirror alleges on 11 of 19 occasions he attended the Lords in July he spent less than 40 minutes there.

There is no suggestion the peer broke any rules.

Members of the House of Lords are not paid a salary but can claim a daily allowance of £300 if they attend a sitting."

Austerity?
Addendum: Something else for budding 'peoples representatives' to aspire to, let's see how this one pans out, official enquiry? Don't hold your breath. "Half the members of the House of Lords clock in and out of Parliament for a few minutes a day in order to claim a £300 daily attendance allowance, a former Conservative peer has said. Lord Hanningfield made the claim when challenged to explain his own attendance record. The Daily Mirror alleges on 11 of 19 occasions he attended the Lords in July he spent less than 40 minutes there. There is no suggestion the peer broke any rules. Members of the House of Lords are not paid a salary but can claim a daily allowance of £300 if they attend a sitting." Austerity? karlmarx

10:52am Tue 17 Dec 13

Dr S Brule says...

Richard Clewer wrote:
It is very easy to suggest that you don't need Councilors. You do however use the services that Councillors organise and operate every week. From preventing homlessness to waste collection to sure start centres and so on. Councillors both direct how those services are to be run and make sure they are done so in a politically accountable way. The A36 is maintained by the highways agency who are not directly accountable to anyone. It took me 2 years to get a dangerous rut/pothole filled in on the ring road section. If I report a pothole on a Wiltshire Council maintained road it will be filled inside 2 days (on average) and if it is not filled in I get complaints from my residents and being accountable to them make sure it is fixed (the re-surfacing of Fisherton Street three years ago or of Blue Boar Row last month for example). If officers directed and ran the services how accountable would they be then?

I am not sure what point you are making about the list of Cabinet members. Of that list 7 are over the age of retirement. I have no idea how wealthy or not they are, I would not want to ask.

The job of a Cabinet Member takes up well over 50 hours a week, normally more from what I am told. It is a variety of day time and evening work and includes weekends. It is not based around any specific hours but requires the input taken to do the job. You will regularly find Cabinet Members (and Portfolio Holders) starting a day with an 8 am meeting and finishing it at 11 pm as a public meeting winds up having worked the enitre time in between.
Richard;

to be quite honest - and I am aware this reeks of "I'm alright jack" - but I'm really alright, Jack. I don't need you and I don't need the Council. I'm not sure you personally organise stopping homelessness or waste collection (I think that is the domain of council officers) and arguably if governments were run on a more decentralised, open basis I think that residents could probably get access to such things without having to gothrough a councillor.

People often say "without the government who will manage the roads?" - well just look at the roads! We now have apps for smartphones that can report potholes easily - so again I don't think a Councillor is strictly necessary in this regard!

Regarding the list of Cabinet members I was attempting to illustrate that like most elected representatives they are rich old codgers already and I'm not sure an increase in pay is going to change that situation.

How Councillors can vote on their own payrise yet maintain any facade of non vested interests or avoiding conflicts thereof is beyond me.
[quote][p][bold]Richard Clewer[/bold] wrote: It is very easy to suggest that you don't need Councilors. You do however use the services that Councillors organise and operate every week. From preventing homlessness to waste collection to sure start centres and so on. Councillors both direct how those services are to be run and make sure they are done so in a politically accountable way. The A36 is maintained by the highways agency who are not directly accountable to anyone. It took me 2 years to get a dangerous rut/pothole filled in on the ring road section. If I report a pothole on a Wiltshire Council maintained road it will be filled inside 2 days (on average) and if it is not filled in I get complaints from my residents and being accountable to them make sure it is fixed (the re-surfacing of Fisherton Street three years ago or of Blue Boar Row last month for example). If officers directed and ran the services how accountable would they be then? I am not sure what point you are making about the list of Cabinet members. Of that list 7 are over the age of retirement. I have no idea how wealthy or not they are, I would not want to ask. The job of a Cabinet Member takes up well over 50 hours a week, normally more from what I am told. It is a variety of day time and evening work and includes weekends. It is not based around any specific hours but requires the input taken to do the job. You will regularly find Cabinet Members (and Portfolio Holders) starting a day with an 8 am meeting and finishing it at 11 pm as a public meeting winds up having worked the enitre time in between.[/p][/quote]Richard; to be quite honest - and I am aware this reeks of "I'm alright jack" - but I'm really alright, Jack. I don't need you and I don't need the Council. I'm not sure you personally organise stopping homelessness or waste collection (I think that is the domain of council officers) and arguably if governments were run on a more decentralised, open basis I think that residents could probably get access to such things without having to gothrough a councillor. People often say "without the government who will manage the roads?" - well just look at the roads! We now have apps for smartphones that can report potholes easily - so again I don't think a Councillor is strictly necessary in this regard! Regarding the list of Cabinet members I was attempting to illustrate that like most elected representatives they are rich old codgers already and I'm not sure an increase in pay is going to change that situation. How Councillors can vote on their own payrise yet maintain any facade of non vested interests or avoiding conflicts thereof is beyond me. Dr S Brule

11:12am Tue 17 Dec 13

karlmarx says...

If the condition of the roads around here is meant to reflect how well local or even central government is doing then, one can only assume the answer to that is, cr@p.
If the condition of the roads around here is meant to reflect how well local or even central government is doing then, one can only assume the answer to that is, cr@p. karlmarx

11:35am Tue 17 Dec 13

karlmarx says...

Richard Clewer wrote
"It is very easy to suggest that you don't need Councilors. You do however use the services that Councillors organise and operate every week. From preventing homlessness to waste collection"

Well, let's take a look at how well local and National Conservative policies are dealing with these two issues then...

Homelessness:
The Bedroom tax and, shortage of AFFORDABLE housing
Sorry to have to quote the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, again, this time from only two days ago...

"Britons are increasingly becoming homeless as a result of both the shortage of housing and the repercussions of welfare reforms underway by the coalition government, a survey shows.

The study was commissioned by the charities Crisis and Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF), whose report comes out annually under the name of “state of the nation” report.

The report made it clear that six percent more Britons are sleeping rough in England, and 13 percent more in London alone in 2013. 
 
According to the report, a 10 percent rise has been registered in the number of those housed temporarily, including a 14 percent hike in the use of bed and breakfast accommodation.

As demand outstrips supply across the country, the coalition’s welfare cuts are explicitly blamed for developing difficulties, which are the result of the high cost and shortage of housing.

The controversial “bedroom tax” has resulted in a sharp increase in arrears for people in public housing, particularly in the Midlands and North, while the cap on housing benefit made it more difficult to rent from a private landlord, especially in London, the report said.

Government’s own latest statistics show that 57,530 households were in temporary accommodation on September 30, an eight per cent rise on a year earlier. Some 2,100 families with children were in emergency B&B accommodation, the highest figure for a decade.

The new study also found that nine percent of British adults have been homeless at some point in their life.

“We keep hearing that the economy is on the mend. Yet as we watch our GDP figures slowly rise, cuts to housing benefit and woefully inadequate house building will keep pushing up homelessness. Shamefully, it is the poorest and most vulnerable that are bearing the brunt,” said Leslie Morphy, the chief executive of Crisis.

“We need the government to address the chronic lack of affordable housing, take real steps to improve the private rented sector and to urgently consider the impact its cuts to housing benefit are having, particularly in the capital,” added Morphy.

Julia Unwin, the hief Executive of JRF, said, “Homelessness is the tragic consequence of failures in our housing system and carries enormous cost for both the people facing destitution and society as a whole. To avoid these figures going in the wrong direction, we need to address the underlying causes of homelessness urgently. That means building the affordable homes this country desperately needs and providing a proper safety net for when people are unfortunate enough to fall on hard times.”

Refuse collection:
Then, once a week
Now, once a fortnight

Despite our best attempts at recycling it is proving impossible to get two pints into a pint pot. The sheer amount of unnecessary packaging these days is getting worse and worse and, the amount of junk mail is soaring, made worse with utility companies and council mutual back slapping propaganda magazines/leaflets being shoved endlessly through our letter box.

Note: you have raised some valid points Doc that have yet to answered by anyone from the local or regional council, despite all the huffing and puffing of one of the local smoke and mirror generators.
Richard Clewer wrote "It is very easy to suggest that you don't need Councilors. You do however use the services that Councillors organise and operate every week. From preventing homlessness to waste collection" Well, let's take a look at how well local and National Conservative policies are dealing with these two issues then... Homelessness: The Bedroom tax and, shortage of AFFORDABLE housing Sorry to have to quote the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, again, this time from only two days ago... "Britons are increasingly becoming homeless as a result of both the shortage of housing and the repercussions of welfare reforms underway by the coalition government, a survey shows. The study was commissioned by the charities Crisis and Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF), whose report comes out annually under the name of “state of the nation” report. The report made it clear that six percent more Britons are sleeping rough in England, and 13 percent more in London alone in 2013.    According to the report, a 10 percent rise has been registered in the number of those housed temporarily, including a 14 percent hike in the use of bed and breakfast accommodation. As demand outstrips supply across the country, the coalition’s welfare cuts are explicitly blamed for developing difficulties, which are the result of the high cost and shortage of housing. The controversial “bedroom tax” has resulted in a sharp increase in arrears for people in public housing, particularly in the Midlands and North, while the cap on housing benefit made it more difficult to rent from a private landlord, especially in London, the report said. Government’s own latest statistics show that 57,530 households were in temporary accommodation on September 30, an eight per cent rise on a year earlier. Some 2,100 families with children were in emergency B&B accommodation, the highest figure for a decade. The new study also found that nine percent of British adults have been homeless at some point in their life. “We keep hearing that the economy is on the mend. Yet as we watch our GDP figures slowly rise, cuts to housing benefit and woefully inadequate house building will keep pushing up homelessness. Shamefully, it is the poorest and most vulnerable that are bearing the brunt,” said Leslie Morphy, the chief executive of Crisis. “We need the government to address the chronic lack of affordable housing, take real steps to improve the private rented sector and to urgently consider the impact its cuts to housing benefit are having, particularly in the capital,” added Morphy. Julia Unwin, the hief Executive of JRF, said, “Homelessness is the tragic consequence of failures in our housing system and carries enormous cost for both the people facing destitution and society as a whole. To avoid these figures going in the wrong direction, we need to address the underlying causes of homelessness urgently. That means building the affordable homes this country desperately needs and providing a proper safety net for when people are unfortunate enough to fall on hard times.” Refuse collection: Then, once a week Now, once a fortnight Despite our best attempts at recycling it is proving impossible to get two pints into a pint pot. The sheer amount of unnecessary packaging these days is getting worse and worse and, the amount of junk mail is soaring, made worse with utility companies and council mutual back slapping propaganda magazines/leaflets being shoved endlessly through our letter box. Note: you have raised some valid points Doc that have yet to answered by anyone from the local or regional council, despite all the huffing and puffing of one of the local smoke and mirror generators. karlmarx

7:41pm Tue 17 Dec 13

nesspah says...

It’s been revealing to observe Councillor Clewer’s attempts to justify the callous allowance increases. He seems to believe he has some sort of executive management role at the council. In reality he is a councillor fulfilling the role of a councillor.

The council has procedures, processes, resources which are designed to be effective. If they aren’t working then by all means let the councillors raise the issue. Scrutiny is an important aspect of ensuring that the policies decided by the councillors are delivered.

Being elected to represent one’s community is a privilege. Unfortunately the MP’s and perhaps now the councillors want to stick their oar in everywhere and seem to think they are actually doing the work. We need professionals to do the proper work, the politicians are only there to decide what course we should take.

Oh, and please don’t respond Councillor Clewer – “I hear what you say …..” has become a compliment down our street.
It’s been revealing to observe Councillor Clewer’s attempts to justify the callous allowance increases. He seems to believe he has some sort of executive management role at the council. In reality he is a councillor fulfilling the role of a councillor. The council has procedures, processes, resources which are designed to be effective. If they aren’t working then by all means let the councillors raise the issue. Scrutiny is an important aspect of ensuring that the policies decided by the councillors are delivered. Being elected to represent one’s community is a privilege. Unfortunately the MP’s and perhaps now the councillors want to stick their oar in everywhere and seem to think they are actually doing the work. We need professionals to do the proper work, the politicians are only there to decide what course we should take. Oh, and please don’t respond Councillor Clewer – “I hear what you say …..” has become a compliment down our street. nesspah

7:52pm Tue 17 Dec 13

karlmarx says...

Some recent Tory clangers that attempt to support the economic recovery myth by distorting the truth...

1. A government minister has rejected suggestions that austerity policies have led to an increase in food bank use — making the astonishing suggestion that food bank charities are somehow to blame.
Former investment banker and peer David Freud, a minister in DWP, told the Lords this afternoon that the increase in the usage of food banks was ”supply led”.
“If you put more food banks in, that is the supply. Clearly, food from the food banks is a free good and by definition with a free good there’s almost infinite demand.”
In the wake of the longer wait for unemployment benefits introduced by George Osborne last week, Freud also rejected suggestions by leading food bank operators that delays in benefit payments drove demand for emergency food aid.
His comments come after similar straw-clutching from other senior Tory figures — including secretary of state Iain Duncan Smith — that the growing number of food banks is down to advertising in Jobcentres and an increase in volunteers.
Evidently this is what Cameron meant by the Big Society.

2.
With Iain Duncan Smith’s reputation in tatters over the botched delivery of his flagship Universal Credit policy, his shameless millionaire DWP minister Lord Freud — the man who tried to blame food bank queues on charities — has advanced the most fantastic excuse yet for their failure:

“Frankly, why should we hurry with the most vulnerable? My own view is we should take as much time as it takes to get these people safely into the new system.”
Freud has been dubbed ‘Lord Diddums’ after his complaints to colleagues over press coverage of his clangers. With ministers on strict orders to refer to the bedroom tax as a ‘spare room subsidy’ to make it sound less cruel, Freud’s recent clangers include parroting this line — beforereferring to the policy as the ‘bedroom tax’ himself.

3.
Having presided over one of the biggest IT disasters of recent years — £34 million down the Swannee — Iain Duncan Smith has done the honourable thing and … knifed his department’s top civil servant in public.

In the wake of a report slamming the delivery of his flagship Universal Credit policy, non-departmental 
sources close to the Work and Pensions Secretary” were in touch with Telegraph columnist Isabel Hardman, briefing that:

“it was only because it was “his baby” that he began to notice the chasm between what officials were telling him and what was really happening.”

Hardman continues:

“I’m told that “it took until February before Iain completely lost patience with his team”, and brought in outsiders to clean up the project.”

So having having “completely lost patience with his team” by February, the following month he told the Commons — in response to a question on the impact of changes to Universal Credit on the already “drastic delays” and “deliverability of the IT”:

“What we are talking about will have no practical effect on the implementation of universal credit, which, by the way, is proceeding exactly in accordance with plans.”

As with most attacks on the weak and vulnerable by this government the costs far outweigh any savings. So you have to ask yourself why on Earth are they doing these futile exercises?
It's simple, it diverts the publics attention AWAY from the real problem in the city of London square mile. Still no laws there and, no inclination to recoup
all of the money wasted in propping up the highwaymen.
Some recent Tory clangers that attempt to support the economic recovery myth by distorting the truth... 1. A government minister has rejected suggestions that austerity policies have led to an increase in food bank use — making the astonishing suggestion that food bank charities are somehow to blame. Former investment banker and peer David Freud, a minister in DWP, told the Lords this afternoon that the increase in the usage of food banks was ”supply led”. “If you put more food banks in, that is the supply. Clearly, food from the food banks is a free good and by definition with a free good there’s almost infinite demand.” In the wake of the longer wait for unemployment benefits introduced by George Osborne last week, Freud also rejected suggestions by leading food bank operators that delays in benefit payments drove demand for emergency food aid. His comments come after similar straw-clutching from other senior Tory figures — including secretary of state Iain Duncan Smith — that the growing number of food banks is down to advertising in Jobcentres and an increase in volunteers. Evidently this is what Cameron meant by the Big Society. 2. With Iain Duncan Smith’s reputation in tatters over the botched delivery of his flagship Universal Credit policy, his shameless millionaire DWP minister Lord Freud — the man who tried to blame food bank queues on charities — has advanced the most fantastic excuse yet for their failure: “Frankly, why should we hurry with the most vulnerable? My own view is we should take as much time as it takes to get these people safely into the new system.” Freud has been dubbed ‘Lord Diddums’ after his complaints to colleagues over press coverage of his clangers. With ministers on strict orders to refer to the bedroom tax as a ‘spare room subsidy’ to make it sound less cruel, Freud’s recent clangers include parroting this line — beforereferring to the policy as the ‘bedroom tax’ himself. 3. Having presided over one of the biggest IT disasters of recent years — £34 million down the Swannee — Iain Duncan Smith has done the honourable thing and … knifed his department’s top civil servant in public. In the wake of a report slamming the delivery of his flagship Universal Credit policy, non-departmental  sources close to the Work and Pensions Secretary” were in touch with Telegraph columnist Isabel Hardman, briefing that: “it was only because it was “his baby” that he began to notice the chasm between what officials were telling him and what was really happening.” Hardman continues: “I’m told that “it took until February before Iain completely lost patience with his team”, and brought in outsiders to clean up the project.” So having having “completely lost patience with his team” by February, the following month he told the Commons — in response to a question on the impact of changes to Universal Credit on the already “drastic delays” and “deliverability of the IT”: “What we are talking about will have no practical effect on the implementation of universal credit, which, by the way, is proceeding exactly in accordance with plans.” As with most attacks on the weak and vulnerable by this government the costs far outweigh any savings. So you have to ask yourself why on Earth are they doing these futile exercises? It's simple, it diverts the publics attention AWAY from the real problem in the city of London square mile. Still no laws there and, no inclination to recoup all of the money wasted in propping up the highwaymen. karlmarx

1:55pm Wed 18 Dec 13

gingin says...

Reading all the comments above it seems a very clear message "This is not the time for huge pay or allowance increases"

Richard I read your responses and find them slightly full of yourself which spoils any hard work you do for your division and your role as a portfolio holder! The residents of Wiltshire cannot believe this wrong decision which the Tory administration has made and still trying to justify it.

I don't agree with the comment that we don't need councillors however these people are voted to council to represent the residents by the residents and this is not what any resident agrees with at this time, it would not be hard or too expensive to reverse the decision at this time and re visit when things are better for everyone not just the rich retired!
Reading all the comments above it seems a very clear message "This is not the time for huge pay or allowance increases" Richard I read your responses and find them slightly full of yourself which spoils any hard work you do for your division and your role as a portfolio holder! The residents of Wiltshire cannot believe this wrong decision which the Tory administration has made and still trying to justify it. I don't agree with the comment that we don't need councillors however these people are voted to council to represent the residents by the residents and this is not what any resident agrees with at this time, it would not be hard or too expensive to reverse the decision at this time and re visit when things are better for everyone not just the rich retired! gingin

6:01pm Wed 18 Dec 13

aldonreaper says...

an unamed councillor recently quoted,
Unlike nurses firemen doctors ect who follow a vocation councillors are responsible for peoples lives. Im still confused by this
an unamed councillor recently quoted, Unlike nurses firemen doctors ect who follow a vocation councillors are responsible for peoples lives. Im still confused by this aldonreaper

6:32pm Wed 18 Dec 13

brandx says...

I have just heard that the money Central Government is giving Local Government has been cut once again, yet greedy councilliors are upping their own allowances. This means there will be yet more cuts in services for Wiltshire people.

Surely Wiltshire councillors should be taking a cut.

When is this Emergency debate on reversing the massive increases in Wiltshire Councillors' Allowances going to take place? When is the petition to be presented. When will Jane Scott resign?
I have just heard that the money Central Government is giving Local Government has been cut once again, yet greedy councilliors are upping their own allowances. This means there will be yet more cuts in services for Wiltshire people. Surely Wiltshire councillors should be taking a cut. When is this Emergency debate on reversing the massive increases in Wiltshire Councillors' Allowances going to take place? When is the petition to be presented. When will Jane Scott resign? brandx

1:24am Thu 19 Dec 13

karlmarx says...

brandx wrote:
I have just heard that the money Central Government is giving Local Government has been cut once again, yet greedy councilliors are upping their own allowances. This means there will be yet more cuts in services for Wiltshire people.

Surely Wiltshire councillors should be taking a cut.

When is this Emergency debate on reversing the massive increases in Wiltshire Councillors' Allowances going to take place? When is the petition to be presented. When will Jane Scott resign?
Yes, it would be a travesty of justice when Wiltshire council face a -1.6 %
Change in council funding next year and, go ahead with the inflation busting pay rises of £19,000 per annum and, allowance increases of up to 34%.

Wiltshire is still a part of the UK isn't it? Chancellor Osborne!! Look what's happening in WILTSHIRE, where's your austerity measures?
[quote][p][bold]brandx[/bold] wrote: I have just heard that the money Central Government is giving Local Government has been cut once again, yet greedy councilliors are upping their own allowances. This means there will be yet more cuts in services for Wiltshire people. Surely Wiltshire councillors should be taking a cut. When is this Emergency debate on reversing the massive increases in Wiltshire Councillors' Allowances going to take place? When is the petition to be presented. When will Jane Scott resign?[/p][/quote]Yes, it would be a travesty of justice when Wiltshire council face a -1.6 % Change in council funding next year and, go ahead with the inflation busting pay rises of £19,000 per annum and, allowance increases of up to 34%. Wiltshire is still a part of the UK isn't it? Chancellor Osborne!! Look what's happening in WILTSHIRE, where's your austerity measures? karlmarx

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree