A REVIEW OF
MEMBERS’ ALLOWANCES FOR
MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
THE REPORT BY THE
INDEPENDENT REMUNERATION PANEL
APRIL 2019
South East Employers
The Guildhall
High Street
Winchester
Hampshire
SO23 9GH
Index
____________________________________________________________
Foreword Page 3
Summary of Recommendations Page
4-7
Methodology Page
8
Principles of the Review Page 8
Arriving at the Recommendations Page 10
Recommendations Page 12
Appendix One Page
14
Appendix Two Page
15
Foreword
____________________________________________________________
This report has been produced for Maidstone
Borough Council as part of the Council’s requirement to receive independent
advice from its statutory advisory panel on members’ allowances. The Panel met
on 24th and 25th April 2019 to carry out their four
yearly full review.
The membership of the Panel was Mark Palmer (Development Director, South East
Employers) (Chair), Chris Hare (Kent Invicta Chamber of Commerce) and Chris
Webb (Independent Member).
The Panel last met in March 2018 following their full review carried out in 2015 when the Council changed their governance arrangements to a Committee system from an Executive arrangement. As part of the recommendations made in 2015 the Panel were keen to review the arrangements in place within 18 months to 2 years once the system had been fully embedded. However, this had not been possible due to the Panel Members changing and difficulties in recruiting an Independent Person. Hence the Panel met in March 2018.
The Panel would like to thank those Members
of the Council who completed the questionnaire, some 13 in all, (compared to 22
in 2015) and those Members who were interviewed and contributed to our
discussions.
Our thanks also to the Chief Executive, Director of Finance and Business Improvement and the Head of Policy, Communications and Governance for agreeing to be interviewed in order that their views on members allowances and the governance arrangements could be taken into account.
Finally thanks to Caroline Matthews for
providing the administrative support.
Mark Palmer
Chair
Independent Remuneration Panel
Summary of Recommendations
____________________________________________________________
This summary sets out the main recommendations. The considerations that have
led to these recommendations are set out in the full report.
The proposals are based on a review of background information, interviews with
Councillors and Officers of the Council, a review of oral and written
submissions and a review of benchmark information from other relevant
authorities in the region.
The Panel took into account the statutory guidance relating to Members’
Allowances which falls within the remit of the Ministry of Housing, Communities
and Local Government.
Summary of Recommendations
1. That the updated formula be applied to the basic allowance
as implemented in March 2018 following the revised
local authority profile for Maidstone (NOMIS Official Labour
Market Statistics) to make it more transparent
for future years. This is as follows:-
12 (average hours) x £15.26 (nomis hourly rate by place of
residence for Maidstone 2018) x 52 weeks (minus Public Service
Discount of 45%).
This would equate to £5,237 p.a.
2. That the Deputy Leader be provided
with a Special
Responsibility Allowance in recognition of the work undertaken
by this position in carrying out work delegated by the Leader.
This would be £4,000 (which is 20% of the Leader’s
Allowance).
3. That the Chairman of the newly established Democracy and
General Purposes Committee be provided with a Special
Responsibility Allowance of £4,000 (which is 20% of the
Leader’s Allowance). This is subject to the Panel receiving a
copy of the Committee Work Programme for the year and
being satisfied that there is a sufficient workload to
substantiate a Special Responsibility Allowance.
4. That the Dependent carers allowance be paid at market
rates for specialist carer providers and upon receipts. The
Child-care providers be paid at least the minimum living wage
(as set by the living wage foundation and on production of
receipts).
5. That travelling and subsistence should not be paid to Visiting
Members who are not Committee Members or Substitute
Members except where they have been specifically invited
by the Chairman or Vice-Chairman to the Committee meeting.
6. That Members should not submit expenses claims that are
more than two months old.
7. That role profiles are produced for a) the generic councillor
role, and b) those that attract a Special Responsibility
Allowance to give clarity.
8. That an indexation rise be continued which would be linked to
staff salary increases but would not be applied to the basic
allowance as the allowance is worked out on a specified
formula but would rise every year based on the revised nomis
rate by place of residence from the Office of National Statistics.
9. That there should not be a Special Responsibility Allowance for
Vice-Chairmen.
10. That the Leaders allowance remains the same and the
percentage ratio remains the same for the other Special
Responsibility Allowances but would now include a 2%
indexation rise and are set out below:-
Allowance |
Current Amount |
Recommended Amount
|
Comments |
Basic Allowance
|
£5,065 |
£5,237 (with formula applied but an indexation rise would not apply) |
55 Members |
Leader of the Council/Chairman of Policy & Resources Committee |
£19,610 |
£20,002 (*)
|
1 Member |
Chairman of Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee |
£7,843 |
£8,000 (40% of Leader’s Allowance) (*) |
Committee of 9 Members |
Chairman of Communities, Housing & Environment Committee |
£7,843 |
£8,000 (40% of Leader’s Allowance) (*) |
Committee of 9 Members |
Chairman of Economic Regeneration & Leisure Committee |
£7,843 |
£8,000 (40% of Leader’s Allowance) (*) |
Committee of 9 Members |
Chairman of Planning Committee |
£7,843 |
£8,000 (40% of Leader’s Allowance) (*) |
Committee of 13 Members |
Chairman of Audit, Governance & Standards Committee |
£3,921 |
£4,000 (20% of Leader’s Allowance) (*) |
Committee of 9 Members plus 2 Non-Voting Parish Councillors appointed by the Council for a three year term of office. |
Chairman of Licensing Committee |
£3,921 |
£4,000 (20% of Leader’s Allowance) (*) |
Committee of 13 Members |
Chairman of Democracy and General Purposes Committee |
N/A |
£4,000 (20% of Leader’s Allowance) (*) |
Committee of 9 Members |
Group
Leaders Allowance |
£394.74 |
£402.63 (*) |
Based on Composition of Party x £402.63 (£14,092.05 ÷ 35, 35 being the current composition of Members excluding the Leader’s party) |
Co-opted Members of Audit, Governance and Standards Committee |
£344 |
£350 (*) |
Per Annum, 2 Parish Councillor Members |
Independent Person for Code of Conduct Issues (Audit, Governance and Standards Committee) |
£735 |
£749 (*) |
1 Person |
Chairman
of Licensing Panel Hearing |
£80 per session |
£81.72 per session (*) |
1 Member |
Licensing Panel Hearing Members |
£60 per session |
£61.55 per session (*) |
2 Members |
(*) – All rates include a 2% increase in line with the staff
indexation rise of 2% (Apart from the basic allowance which is
calculated on the specified formula).
Mayor’s Allowance – the Panel recommended that the Mayor’s Allowance
should stay the same but with the indexation rise - £2,653.45 per annum.
Deputy Mayor’s Allowance - the Panel recommended that the Deputy Mayor’s
Allowance should stay the same but with the indexation rise - £1,061.47 per
annum.
11. That the Travel and Subsistence rates not be changed.
12. That the
Member Development and Training arrangements
remain unchanged and that all Members be encouraged to take
up any training offered by the Authority to meet the defined
responsibilities and competencies of the roles undertaken.
Date
of Implementation
The recommendations relating to the Basic Allowance should be implemented
retrospectively with effect from the 1st April 2019 and all other
recommendations should be implemented retrospectively with effect from the 21st
May 2019.
Methodology
______________________________________________________________
The Panel met at the Town Hall in Maidstone on 24th and 25th
April 2019. The Panel meeting was held in private session in order that the
Panel were able to interview Councillors and the Officer in confidence. The
list of the Elected Members and the Council Officers that met with the Panel
are provided in Appendix One.
The schedule for the two days was as follows:-
1) To review background information, in particular, issues raised following the last review carried out in March 2018 and the full review carried out in March 2015.
2) Interviews with Councillors and Officers of the Council (Appendix 1).
3) Review of the consultation sent to Members.
4) Arriving at recommendations.
Whilst
the Panel reviewed a wide range of available information and interviewed a
cross section of Councillors, it also considered responses received from
Members in relation to the consultation document that had been circulated to
all Members prior to the Panel’s meeting (Appendix two). This ensured no
Councillor was denied a voice in the review process. Thirteen (23%) out of a
total of fifty five Councillors responded to the questionnaire.
It is from these processes and deliberations that the Panel has arrived at the
recommendations set out in this report.
Principles
of the Review
______________________________________________________________
Before the Panel arrived at its recommendations it determined that its
deliberations should be underpinned by the following principles, which took
into account the current statutory provisions:-
* The recommended allowances should be of a sufficient level that they
would allow most people to consider becoming an elected Member
without undue financial hardship, whilst not being at such a level
that
allowances would become the primary reason for standing for Council.
* As far as possible the Panel would abide by the precedent and approach
of previous reviews, except where there was a clear and prescient
case
not to do so.
* The allowances should be seen as a contribution and recognition of
the time and skills of councillors, not as an equivalent to a formal
job evaluation exercise and salaries.
* A healthy and resourced opposition is important in maintaining an
appropriate balance within local democracy.
* Any recommendations should be based on a logical and transparent
construction and arrived at in a way that is simple to understand.
* Sensitivities of cost of implementation of any recommendations
should be borne in mind.
The
Panel has laid out a synopsis of its deliberations in this report to assist
Members and the public to understand its approach. Following its
deliberations, the Panel concluded that there was an appetite for small changes
to the current scheme of allowances at Maidstone.
Whilst the Panel’s recommendations are not mandatory, it is hoped that if the
Council disagrees with the actual figures recommended, that the Council would
accept the Panel’s logic. The recommendations presented in this report represent
the view of the Panel and not the official view of Maidstone Borough Council.
Arriving
at the Recommendations
______________________________________________________________
Basic Allowance
The Panel noted the statutory guidance it must pay regard to, in
particular, that the authority’s scheme of allowances must include provision
for a Basic Allowance that is payable at an equal flat rate to all Members.
The Panel were of the view that for the sake of transparency to both Members
and the public, the formula applied previously to show how the basic allowance
was assessed and arrived at should be continued. Albeit that the nomis hourly
rate by place of residence for Maidstone 2018 had increased to £15.26.
Therefore this should be applied to the formula as follows:-
12 (average hours) x £15.26 (nomis hourly rate by place of residence for Maidstone 2018) x 52 weeks (minus Public Service Discount of 45%). This would provide a basic allowance of £5,237 per annum.
The
Panel noted that in response to the question “The present level of basic
allowance payable to all councillors is £5,065, do you think this is
appropriate?”, 69% felt the level was too low. (The consultation exercise
carried out in 2015 indicated that 45% who responded considered that the basic
allowance was appropriate. In 2018 73% of those consulted felt that the rate
was too low).
The
majority of the Councillors interviewed were strongly of the view that the
Basic Allowance did not reflect the level of work carried out. The most common
response was that Members spent on average 21 hours a week on Council business,
compared with 2018 where the average rate was 15 hours a week and in 2015 the
average rate was 26 hours a week.
The Councillors were split on this, two thirds of those who responded to the
consultation felt that the basic allowance was not sufficient and that this was
a barrier to attracting the right calibre of Councillor. However, the
Councillors interviewed felt that if the recommendation of the Panel were to
increase the basic allowance significantly then they doubted this would get
voted through.
Members felt that the burden of responsibility had spread since the new Committee system. One of the aims of the Committee Review was to try to make Councillors aware of their responsibilities. Members who were interviewed felt that there were still a lot of Councillors who were not fully engaged, although active in their own Ward, they rarely participated on Committees.
Special
Responsibility Allowances
The Panel was under a duty to recognise the following statutory guidance in
arriving at recommendations for Special Responsibility Allowances (SRAs):
Special Responsibility Allowance (SRA) may be paid to those members of the
council who have significant additional responsibilities, over and above the
generally accepted duties of a councillor. These special responsibilities must
be related to the discharge of the authority’s functions.
These are important considerations for local authorities. If the
majority of members of a council receive a special responsibility allowance the
local electorate may rightly question whether this was justified. Local
authorities will wish to consider very carefully the additional roles of
members and the significance of these roles, both in terms of responsibility
and real time commitment before deciding which will warrant the payment of a
special responsibility allowance.
It
does not necessarily follow that a particular responsibility, which is vested
to a particular member, is a significant additional responsibility for which a
special responsibility allowance should be paid. Local authorities will need
to consider such particular responsibilities very carefully. Whilst such
responsibilities may be unique to a particular member it may be that all or
most members have such responsibility to varying degrees. Such duties may not
lead to a significant extra workload for any one particular member above
another. These sorts of responsibilities should be recognised as a time
commitment to council work, which is acknowledged within the basic allowance
and not responsibilities for which a special responsibility allowance should be
recommended.
The
Panel were of the view that the current Special Responsibility Allowances
should not be amended at this time as there was not any evidence to suggest
that the levels of extra workload were significant enough for the levels to be
increased further.
Deputy Leader
The Panel discussed with Members and Officers the level of workload that
the Deputy Leader is expected to carry out through delegations from the
Leader. It was a general view that the workload was extremely significant and
that a Special Responsibility Allowance should be applied. The Panel, in
assessing the level of responsibility, recommended that this should be set at
20% of the Leader’s Allowance).
Democracy and General Purposes Committee
Since the last full review in 2015 where Maidstone introduced new governance arrangements from an Executive to Committee system, a Member led review of the Committee System recently took place and a number of recommendations came out of that review, one of those related to the merging of two Committees, Democracy and Employment Committee, into one Committee to be called Democracy and General Purposes Committee. Taking into account the feedback from Members either directly or through the consultation document the Panel considered that as the new Committee had not met, the options were to either wait twelve months to see what the Committee undertook in terms of workload or approve the allocation of a Special Responsibility Allowance subject to being appraised with a copy of the Committee Work Programme for the new municipal year and being satisfied that the probable workload for the Committee was significant enough to attract a Special Responsibility Allowance. The Panel considered that they would approve the Special Responsibility Allowance subject to seeing a copy of the intended Committee Work Programme for the forthcoming municipal year.
Dependent
Carer’s Allowance
The Panel discussed whether the Dependent Carer’s Allowance rates were still
relevant. In discussions with Members, it was noted that the Child-Care
Provider allowance was not deemed appropriate as the market rate for child care
exceeded the living wage. The Panel were therefore of the view that a reasonable
amount should be paid upon receipts but not exceed market rates.
The Panel considered that the Specialist Carer Provider – Currently standing at
£15-£20 per hour be continued but should not exceed Market Rates. Reasonable
travelling time could also be claimed by the carer.
Following comments received from Members, the Panel were mindful that this
needed to be publicised more as it could be an integral consideration for
anyone thinking about becoming a Councillor.
Travel and Subsistence
The Panel recommended that Members continue to be reimbursed for subsistence in
the event that a meal is not provided in the course of their normal Council
duties as long as it is deemed reasonable and on production of receipts.
Travelling expenses can also be claimed for public transport, taxis or car
journeys. The current rate for travelling by car is 45p per mile which is in
line with HMRC recommendations. Claims could only be made for travelling whilst
on approved Council business which the Panel had asked to be clarified within
the Members Allowances Scheme.
Visiting Members
The Panel considered whether Visiting Members should be able to claim travelling expenses. The Panel upheld the previous advice given that travelling expenses should not be paid to those Members who were not Committee Members or Substitute Members of a particular Committee except where they had been specifically invited by the Chairman or Vice-Chairman to attend.
Members Expenses
The Panel felt that the submission of expenses should be made within 2 months of the activity carried out.
Role Profiles
The Panel felt that clear role descriptions should be produced for the Leader, Chairmen and a generic role description for a Councillor in order that Members have a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities.
Indexation Rise
In 2015 the Panel put forward a recommendation to Council that Members
received an indexation rise in line with the staff pay rise increase if they
receive a Special Responsibility Allowance. This is recommended to continue.
The basic allowance should not attract an indexation rise as it was worked out
from a specified formula but would be increased annually by the nomis hourly
rate by place of residence from the Office of the National Statistics.
Special Responsibility Allowance for Vice-Chairmen
At
the meeting in 2015 the Panel had recommended that there should be no
special responsibility allowance for Vice-Chairmen. However, provision
should be built into the Council’s Constitution which allows for a Vice
Chairman to be given the Chairman’s allowance if the Chair is absent for
a significant period of time, say 6 months. The Panel did not feel there
was any evidence to suggest that this should be changed.
Member Development & Training
In 2015 the Panel felt that in the light of the new governance arrangements, all Members should receive Member development and training. Furthermore, in recognition of the increase to the basic allowance, all Members should take up current and future training development opportunities to support the revised governance arrangements. This would also assist Members to meet the defined responsibilities and competencies within the new role descriptions and responsibilities. The Panel did not consider that this should be changed.
Appendix
One
______________________________________________________________
Members and Officers interviewed by the Panel
Name |
Designation |
Councillor Martin Cox |
Leader (Liberal Democrat) |
Councillor Fay Gooch |
Deputy Leader and Group Leader (Independent) |
Councillor Fran Wilson |
Councillor (Liberal Democrat) |
Councillor Malcolm McKay |
Councillor and Group Leader (Labour) |
Councillor Steve McLoughlin |
Councillor (Conservative) |
Councillor Clive English |
Councillor (Liberal Democrat) |
|
|
Alison Broom |
Chief Executive |
Mark Green |
Director of Finance and Business Improvement |
Angela Woodhouse |
Head of Policy, Communications and Governance |
Appendix
Two
______________________________________________________________
Questions Asked on the Member Consultation
1. |
Approximately how many hours do you typically spend on council business each week? |
2. |
How many hours each week are typically spent on Ward work each week, i.e. work that does not fall into the above category of Council business? |
3. |
Do you incur any significant costs which you believe are not covered by the current allowance scheme? |
4. |
Councillors are expected to undertake a third of the hours they spend on Council business without financial remuneration, does this seem broadly right?
|
5. |
The present level of basic allowance payable to all Councillors is £5,065. Do you think this is appropriate? |
6. |
Do you feel that the current Special Responsibility Allowances are appropriate? |
7. |
Visiting Members cannot claim for travelling expenses to attend meetings of the Committees or Sub-Committees where they are not a member or substitute member of the Committee, do you think this is right?
|
8. |
The allowance is currently linked to the annual pay award given to staff. Should this continue?
|
9. |
Are there any other meetings, other than Council or Committee meetings, or meetings where a Member has been formally appointed to by the Council to attend that you feel Members should be allowed to claim mileage/subsistence for?
|
10. |
Please use the box below for any other comments about Member's Allowances
|
11. |
If you would be prepared to be interviewed by the Independent Panel please provide your details below
|