A quick quiz for you. One of the Haringey local newspapers, The Hornsey Journal, had this story on 14 May:
Under fire councillors opt to take pay freeze
The recession is about to hit councillors in the pocket, after both Haringey Labour and Liberal Democrat parties decided NOT to take a pay rise …Councillor Claire Kober, Leader of the Labour-controlled council, said, “… This move will mean any savings can go straight into providing essential services for the people of Haringey.”
So, do you think that Labour voted through changes that resulted in the council’s allowances bill:
a) Staying the same, or
b) Increasing by £44,751 (7%)?
I’ll give you a clue. It’s not (a).
The changes produced a sneaky stealth allowance increase because, by shuffling round who held what post, Labour was able to increase the amount of money its councillors receive whilst also claiming that the headline allowance figures were unchanged.
(Some councillors held more than one post which entitled them to a Special Responsibility Allowance (SRA), but could only receive one SRA payment. By giving up their other SRA post to someone else, they still receive the same amount in allowances but the other person gets a boost in their allowances.)
This increase comes at a time when Haringey has recently had its rating drop to one star, a report has just been published into the death of Baby Peter which concluded that his death could and should have been prevented, and there are one or two other expenses stories around. So you can see why Labour might want to try to hide an allowances increase…
Share:
2 Comments
Seems reasonable. SRA councillors can focus on their duties better. There is no pay rise. But those doubling up share the work around. Has to be in the interests of the people that.
Are you suggesting that no Lib Dem authority has a similar story to tell? Or how about a far worse one? Didn’t Bristol Lib Dems fill their boots on getting in, raising amounts, even by a factor of two?
Also raising senior officer pay and having them take responsibility for unpopular decisions as tit for tat?
How was Rochdale – about from Paul “Two Jobs” Rowen taking his allowance even though he had an MP’s trough to get stuck in to?
And how about Liverpool?
And can you assure LDV readers that there has been no criticism from HLDs of exec members etc doubling up?
Bah humbug. 44,000 is one middle manager. It’s not the sea to drink.
should be “apart from” not “about from”