REPORT OF THE
DEMOCRATIC SERVICES MANAGER
To agree the Member’s Allowances Scheme 2024/2025 having
taken into account the recommendations of the Independent
Remuneration Panel (‘IRP’).
Decision:
RESOLVEDThat Council:
(1) Considered the report and recommendations of the IRP, as attached as Appendix A of the submitted report.
(2) Agreed the Members’ Allowances Scheme for 2024/2025 as set out in Appendix B of the submitted report.
(3) Expressed appreciation to the IRP for their work over the last year on this report.
REASON FOR DECISIONS: To ensure that the Council meets its statutory requirements of an annual review and adoption of the scheme.
Minutes:
Audio recording – 1 hour 52 minutes 11 seconds.
N.B Councillor Phil Weeder returned to the Council Chamber at 21:28.
The Democratic Services Manager introduced the item ‘Review of Members Allowances Scheme 2024/25’ and stated that:
· The Council is required to agree on an annual basis a Scheme of Allowances for the following financial year.
· When making or amending the Scheme, Council should consider the recommendations from the Independent Remuneration Panel (IRP).
· Council last considered the Scheme at the Council meeting in January 2023, where it was agreed for one year only, therefore the independent Remuneration Panel (IRP) have conducted a full review of the scheme.
· Since the last review a new IRP had been appointed for a 4 year period, consisted of Margaret Waller and Tom Etheridge who were in person at the meeting and Julie Byrom who was attending the meeting remotely.
Margaret Waller, Independent Remuneration Panel member highlighted that:
· The recommendations referred to positions and not the people that occupied those roles.
· The role of a Councillor often came at a personal cost, and although paid a basic allowance the majority of Members had other jobs or income, to supplement this role.
· There were a number of approaches used to test the level of Basic Allowance, following which the IRP concluded that the rate was low and an increase of 6.6% was recommended to provide a solid basis for future Members.
· An attempt was made to depoliticise the Basic Allowance using a formula to baseline the allowance and this was highlighted within paragraph 5.4 of the IRP report. Although this had not been possible with regards to this review the IRP would address it as a key objective in future years.
· With the forthcoming ‘all out’ elections in 2024 and possibility of changes to the governance structure following the elections, it had not been considered prudent to increase the Special Responsibility Allowances (SRA) in excess of the Council pay award of 5.72%, although there were a few exceptions noted namely Chairs of Area Forums, Chair and Deputy of Council, Independent and Reserve Independent Persons of the Standards Committee and Independent Member of the Finance, Audit and Risk Committee.
· The SRA for Area Forum Chairs was to be review next year, as the function of the Area Forums had changed in 2023-24.
· The SRA for the Chair and Vice Chair of the Council and the Independent Persons payment for the Standards Committee and Finance Audit and Risk Committee remained frozen with the details highlighted within paragraphs 11 of the IRP report.
· The Independent Carers allowance was recommended to increase to £13.15 per hour.
· The Travel and Subsistence allowance had been amended to included travel by second class train.
The following Members asked questions:
· Councillor Ian Albert
· Councillor Daniel Allen
In response to questions, Ms Waller advised that:
· It was very apparent that the Basic Allowance was too low. However, the IRP were more cautious towards the SRA payments especially with the likelihood of future structure changes.
· The role of the Chair of the Council depended on the enthusiasm and ability of the Chair, and the amount of time engaged in the role. A Chair in full time employment may not have the time to spend making the role successful, and the relationship and share of responsibilities between Chair and Vice Chair varied.
In response to a question, Mr Etheridge advised that recommendation 6.6 of the IRP report highlighted that clear and publicly transparent performance expectations were recommended for roles which were covered by an SRA.
Councillor Elizabeth Dennis stated that, it was good that the report was depoliticise and this would encourage people from all backgrounds to feel confident to stand. The pay increase was the same as received by Officers and the SRAs were based on the role and not the person. The increase to the dependent carers allowance and the addition of train fares were a positive change, and in line with the Climate Emergency declaration.
Councillor Ruth Brown stated that the IRP had asked extensive questions and conducted interviews to come to these recommendations. A decision was made in 2021 and 2022 to freeze the allowance which as a result the allowance had fallen behind other local authorities, the report aimed to benchmark the allowance to similar Councils. The cost of living crisis is affecting all and whilst this increase was in line with inflation, it was still a cut in real terms. The increase would encourage candidates from a wider audience.
Councillor David Levett stated that to cover inflation there was a need to increase the allowance, however the allowance was not the reason he became a Councillor. The allowance helped towards preforming the duties of a Councillor but was not considered as a wage. Times were hard for everyone and whilst the recommended increase was appreciated, it was not the right time to take it.
Councillor Elizabeth Dennis proposed and Councillor Ruth Brown seconded the motion.
Councillor David Levett proposed an amendment to the recommendations, that Council accepted recommendations 2.1 and 2.3 but chose not to increase the allowances, thereby retaining the current Scheme. Councillor Richard Thake seconded the amendment.
The following Members took part in the debate on the proposed amendment:
· Councillor David Levett
· Councillor Richard Thake
· Councillor Ralph Muncer
· Councillor Nigel Mason
· Councillor Steve Jarvis
· Councillor Tom Plater
· Councillor Daniel Allen
· Councillor Alistair Willoughby
· Councillor Simon Bloxham
· Councillor Val Bryant
· Councillor Daniel Wright-Mason
· Councillor Ian Albert
· Councillor Ruth Brown
· Councillor Chris Lucas
· Councillor Dan Marsh
· Councillor Gerald Morris
· Councillor Keith Hoskins
Councillor Daniel Allen requested a recorded vote.
Points raised in debate included:
· All out elections would occur this year, following which it was more appropriate to then make changes to the Scheme.
· With the increased waste costs, it was not an appropriate time to be increasing Councillor payments.
· Councillors should be there for North Herts residents not for money.
· The IRP is independent to remove politics from any decision making.
· The IRP completed the review, made recommendations, and had presented a report - Members should listen to their advice.
· The report should be accepted but the pay increase frozen.
· Councillors did not have to accept their Basic Allowance payment, or any part of it. A Councillor could give notice to the Democratic Services Manager to forego any part of their entitlement.
· Concerns regarding perception of increasing allowances to residents.
· Only a few Councillors submitted claims for the travel and subsistence allowance.
· The allowance was for the 51 Members that would be elected in May 2024, not necessarily those making the decision.
· It was not the right time but was there ever a right time.
· Last year the same conclusion was made for the allowances at County, and they were accepted.
· To accept the recommendation and payment was a personal view, however other Members may need the increase.
· The allowance should be tracked with inflation, especially as Councillors were from all walks of life, but with the same aim, to represent the residents of North Herts.
· People were being held back from entering politics due to financial restraints.
Having been proposed and seconded and, a recorded vote having been requested, on being put to the vote the amendment was LOST as follows:
YES : 7
ABSTAIN : 1
NO : 29
TOTAL : 37
The individual results were as follows:
Cllr Daniel Allen NO
Cllr Alistair Willoughby NO
Cllr Amy Allen NO
Cllr Bryony May NO
Cllr Cathy Brownjohn NO
Cllr Chris Hinchliff NO
Cllr Chris Lucas NO
Cllr Clare Billing NO
Cllr Claire Strong
Cllr Daniel Marsh NO
Cllr Daniel Wright-Mason NO
Cllr Dave Winstanley NO
Cllr David Barnard ABSTAIN
Cllr David Levett YES
Cllr Elizabeth Dennis NO
Cllr Gerald Morris YES
Cllr Ian Albert NO
Cllr Ian Mantle NO
Cllr Keith Hoskins NO
Cllr Louise Peace NO
Cllr Mandi Tandi YES
Cllr Matt Barnes NO
Cllr Mick Debenham NO
Cllr Nigel Mason NO
Cllr Philip Weeder NO
Cllr Ralph Muncer YES
Cllr Richard Thake YES
Cllr Ruth Brown NO
Cllr Sean Nolan NO
Cllr Sean Prendergast NO
Cllr Simon Bloxham YES
Cllr Steve Jarvis NO
Cllr Tamsin Thomas NO
Cllr Terry Hone YES
Cllr Terry Tyler NO
Cllr Tom Plater NO
Cllr Tom Tyson NO
Cllr Val Bryant NO
As such it was:
RESOLVED: That the amendment was lost.
Councillor David Levett requested that each of the recommendations be voted upon separately.
Councillor Ian Albert requested a recorded vote on the recommendations.
The original motion, having already been proposed and seconded, following a vote, the result of recommendation 2.1 was as follows:
YES : 37
ABSTAIN : 1
NO : 0
TOTAL : 38
The individual results were as follows:
Cllr Daniel Allen YES
Cllr Alistair Willoughby YES
Cllr Amy Allen YES
Cllr Bryony May YES
Cllr Cathy Brownjohn YES
Cllr Chris Hinchliff YES
Cllr Chris Lucas YES
Cllr Claire Strong YES
Cllr Clare Billing YES
Cllr Daniel Marsh YES
Cllr Daniel Wright-Mason YES
Cllr Dave Winstanley YES
Cllr David Barnard ABSTAIN
Cllr David Levett YES
Cllr Elizabeth Dennis YES
Cllr Gerald Morris YES
Cllr Ian Albert YES
Cllr Ian Mantle YES
Cllr Keith Hoskins YES
Cllr Louise Peace YES
Cllr Mandi Tandi YES
Cllr Matt Barnes YES
Cllr Mick Debenham YES
Cllr Nigel Mason YES
Cllr Philip Weeder YES
Cllr Ralph Muncer YES
Cllr Richard Thake YES
Cllr Ruth Brown YES
Cllr Sean Nolan YES
Cllr Sean Prendergast YES
Cllr Simon Bloxham YES
Cllr Steve Jarvis YES
Cllr Tamsin Thomas YES
Cllr Terry Hone YES
Cllr Terry Tyler YES
Cllr Tom Plater YES
Cllr Tom Tyson YES
Cllr Val Bryant YES
As such it was:
RESOLVED: That Council considered the report and recommendations of the IRP, as attached as Appendix A of the submitted report.
Having been proposed and seconded and following a vote, the result of recommendation 2.2 was as follows:
YES : 29
ABSTAIN : 5
NO : 4
TOTAL : 38
The individual results were as follows:
Cllr Daniel Allen YES
Cllr Alistair Willoughby YES
Cllr Amy Allen YES
Cllr Bryony May YES
Cllr Cathy Brownjohn YES
Cllr Chris Hinchliff YES
Cllr Chris Lucas YES
Cllr Claire Strong ABSTAIN
Cllr Clare Billing YES
Cllr Daniel Marsh YES
Cllr Daniel Wright-Mason YES
Cllr Dave Winstanley YES
Cllr David Barnard ABSTAIN
Cllr David Levett NO
Cllr Elizabeth Dennis YES
Cllr Gerald Morris NO
Cllr Ian Albert YES
Cllr Ian Mantle YES
Cllr Keith Hoskins YES
Cllr Louise Peace YES
Cllr Mandi Tandi ABSTAIN
Cllr Matt Barnes YES
Cllr Mick Debenham YES
Cllr Nigel Mason YES
Cllr Philip Weeder YES
Cllr Ralph Muncer NO
Cllr Richard Thake ABSTAIN
Cllr Ruth Brown YES
Cllr Sean Nolan YES
Cllr Sean Prendergast YES
Cllr Simon Bloxham NO
Cllr Steve Jarvis YES
Cllr Tamsin Thomas YES
Cllr Terry Hone ABSTAIN
Cllr Terry Tyler YES
Cllr Tom Plater YES
Cllr Tom Tyson YES
Cllr Val Bryant YES
As such it was:
RESOLVED: That Council agreed the Members’ Allowances Scheme for 2024/2025 as set out in Appendix B of the submitted report
Having been proposed and seconded and following a vote, the result of recommendation 2.3 was as follows:
YES : 37
ABSTAIN : 0
NO : 0
TOTAL : 37
The individual results were as follows:
Cllr Alistair Willoughby YES
Cllr Amy Allen YES
Cllr Daniel Allen
Cllr Bryony May YES
Cllr Cathy Brownjohn YES
Cllr Chris Hinchliff YES
Cllr Chris Lucas YES
Cllr Claire Strong YES
Cllr Clare Billing YES
Cllr Daniel Marsh YES
Cllr Daniel Wright-Mason YES
Cllr Dave Winstanley YES
Cllr David Barnard YES
Cllr David Levett YES
Cllr Elizabeth Dennis YES
Cllr Gerald Morris YES
Cllr Ian Albert YES
Cllr Ian Mantle YES
Cllr Keith Hoskins YES
Cllr Louise Peace YES
Cllr Mandi Tandi YES
Cllr Matt Barnes YES
Cllr Mick Debenham YES
Cllr Nigel Mason YES
Cllr Philip Weeder YES
Cllr Ralph Muncer YES
Cllr Richard Thake YES
Cllr Ruth Brown YES
Cllr Sean Nolan YES
Cllr Sean Prendergast YES
Cllr Simon Bloxham YES
Cllr Steve Jarvis YES
Cllr Tamsin Thomas YES
Cllr Terry Hone YES
Cllr Terry Tyler YES
Cllr Tom Plater YES
Cllr Tom Tyson YES
Cllr Val Bryant YES
As such it was:
RESOLVEDThat Council expressed appreciation to the IRP for their work over the last year on this report.
REASON FOR DECISIONS: To ensure that the Council meets its statutory requirements of an annual review and adoption of the scheme.
Supporting documents: