Archived decisions

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

Decision Report :

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1) Summary of Decision Area:

1.1. To make a recommendation to the County Council concerning the Members Allowances Scheme for 2009/10.

2) Issues Covered in Report:

2.1. The report responds to recommendations made by the Independent Remuneration Panel concerning the amounts of individual allowances.

3) Recommendations:

That it be a recommendation to the County Council:

3.1That approval be given to a Members Allowances Scheme for 2009/10 which takes into account the recommendations of the Independent Remuneration Panel and of the Chief Executive's and the Committee's views.

MAIN REPORT

1) Purpose of the Report:

1.1. To comment on the relevant recommendations of the Independent Remuneration Panel so as to assist the Committee in making a recommendation to the County Council concerning the Members Allowances Scheme for 2009/10.

2) Contextual Information:

2.1. The previous agenda item sets out the context in which the County Council is required to review its Members Allowances Scheme and deals with the Panel's recommendations which exceeded its remit.

3) The Panel's recommendations not responded to in the previous agenda item:

Recommendation 3 We recommend that HCC carries out an annual equal pay audit of its councillors and publishes the results with the annual statement of allowances paid under the Members' Allowances Scheme.

Comment: Not agreed. Appointments to offices which qualify for special responsibility allowances are driven by choices made by the political groups taking a wide range of factors into consideration including not only gender but also skills, experience, time, personal qualities etc.

Recommendation 4 Having considered all the evidence, the IRP recommends no increase in the basic allowance of £11,565.

Comment: The Council has foregone an annual increase previously and allowances at current levels represent a reduction in real terms over those agreed in 2000 for the new Constitutional arrangements. In the circumstances it would not be unreasonable for 2009/10 that the Committee continues with the Members' allowances being indexed to the nation staff pay award. The Council agreed this approach for 2008/09 taking all the issues into account.

Recommendation 5 We therefore recommend that the SRA for the Leader's post is increased to £34,695 on a phased basis by £1696 per annum for the next four years starting in April 2009. In addition, these figures should be appropriately adjusted to take into account any annual indexation increases over the period. By this means the HCC SRA for Leader will reach an amount equal to three times the basic allowance for HCC. This will then place the HCC Leader's SRA in fourth position out of the ten largest county councils.

Comment: It is understood that the Leader of the Council is not minded to accept this proposal but that, following the County Council elections in 2009, the Governance Committee should have the opportunity to revisit this recommendation.

Recommendation 6 We recommend that the Deputy Leader role continues to be combined with that of a Cabinet Member and is paid the same as other equivalent Cabinet posts. We also recommend that this post is subject to a further review by the IRP in two years' time, when a clearer view can be taken of its responsibilities as they have evolved with the present role holder.

Comment: Noted.

Recommendation 7 We therefore recommend that the SRA for Cabinet Members is increased to £20,817 on a phased basis by £1,018 per annum for the next four years starting in April 2009. In addition, these figures should be appropriately adjusted to take into account any annual indexation increases over the period. We recommend the same allowance is applied to the Deputy Leader's post, maintaining the same relationship as presently exists.

Comment: It is understood that the Leader of the Council is not minded to accept this proposal but that, following the County Council elections in 2009, the Governance Committee should have the opportunity to revisit this recommendation.

Recommendation 8 We therefore recommend that the SRAs for these two opposition party leader posts continue unchanged and the formulaic approach continues as at present. We recommend that the SRA of the political party with the smallest number of seats is reviewed after the May 2009 elections.

Comment: Agreed. It is appropriate that the minority groups' responsibilities within the County Council and their accountability to the community at large and those who voted for them are recognised. Subject to any changes which the County Council elections in 2009 might bring, the formulaic arrangement presently in place will be applied if necessary.

Recommendation 9 We recommend no change to the level of the SRA for scrutiny committee chairmen at £11,165.

Comment: In the context of the allowances attracted by equivalent offices in other comparable counties (p40 of the IRP report) a review of the level of the current allowance may be considered appropriate.

Recommendation 10 We recommend the SRA of the Chairman of the Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee of £13,908 continues unchanged.

Comment: agreed.

Recommendation 11 We recommend that the SRA of the Chairman of the Regulatory Committee be increased from £11,165 to £13,908 with effect from the end of April 2009.

Comment: Whilst this office has different responsibilities from Select Committee Chairmen because of the quasi legal nature of the Committee's business, the fundamental principles are similar in terms of leading the meetings, managing the business and taking the lead responsibility for the activity within the County Council. It is suggested that no change be made to the existing arrangement.

Recommendation 12 We recommend that all SRAs to vice-chairmen of

committees be discontinued as soon as possible and not later than the end of April 2009 with the election of a new council.

Comment: The Panel's recommendation is directed at all committees but Members may consider that such a sweeping measure would be inappropriate given the commitments and demands associated with being appointed the vice chairman of a committee. It is implicit that the vice chairman assumes full responsibility in the event that the chairman is not available and, in the absence of the chairman at meetings, it is the responsibility of the vice chairman to take charge of the proceedings. The vice chairman, therefore, needs to be familiar with all the business at hand and to be well briefed and up to date in the relevant service/subject area so as to be competent to act. Given these responsibilities it is considered that the Panel's recommendation should not be supported and that the vice chairmen of the Select Committees, the Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the Regulatory Committee's position should remain unchanged. The vice chairmanship of the Standards Committee is dealt with in the response to Recommendation 16 below and the vice chairmanship of the Governance Committee is dealt with in the response to Recommendation 18 below.

Recommendation 13 We recommend that no change is made to the SRA of £5,583 for the party spokesmen for the principal opposition party.

Comment: agreed.

Recommendation 14 We recommend that the SRA for the principal opposition spokesman on the Regulatory Committee be discontinued as soon as possible and not later than the end of April 2009 with the election of a new council.

Comment: Noted.

Recommendation 15 We recommend that, as soon as practically possible, all the SRAs paid to party spokesmen of the minority opposition party be discontinued and not later than the end of April 2009 with the election of a new council.

Comment: Not agreed. This recommendation fails to recognise the not insubstantial number of electors who voted for the second minority group and the roles of these spokespeople in representing the interests of these electors across all the County Council's services and business affairs.

It could be argued, however, that, an allowance of half that payable to the Liberal Democrat spokespeople should be reviewed given that the Liberal Democrat and Labour Groups on the Council comprise 28 and 4 members respectively . As the Members Allowance Scheme being considered is for 2009/10 it is suggested that this recommendation be reviewed after the 2009 elections when the respective sizes of all the political groups on the new Council will be known.

Recommendation 16 We recommend that the Independent Chairman of the Standards Committee be paid a Special Responsibility Allowance of £1950 (with the basic allowance for Independent Members of the Standards Committee being in addition) with effect from the date of his formal appointment.

Comment: Whilst the number of meetings of the Standards Committee has reduced in recent years, it has had to respond to important government changes concerning the Code of Conduct and to deliver training for all members. It has responsibility for the ongoing maintenance of high standards of probity within the County Council. In addition, the introduction in 2008 of new arrangements by Government requiring the County Council to deal locally with complaints against Members of the County Council as to alleged breaches of the Members' Code of Conduct is considered to be such that this office should continue to qualify for a special responsibility allowance. and in the circumstances, the recommendation of the Panel that the special responsibility allowance should be £1,950 is supported to reflect on the one hand the change in emphasis of the Committee's work and, on the other, the potential complexity of the new local determination arrangements. The impact of the new complaints regime will need to be kept under review as described in recommendation 17 below.

The recommended Chairman's allowance is three fifths less than at present and, should it be considered that this approach should be applied equally to the office of Vice Chairman of the Standards Committee, the result would be an allowance in the region of £560 a year.

Recommendation 17 We further recommend that the basic allowance for the Independent Members of the Standards Committee remains unchanged at £650 per annum. We also recommend that these are reviewed by the IRP in two years' time to examine the actual operation of the Standards Committee over that period and to make a further recommendation to the Council.

Comment: agreed.

Recommendation 18 We recommend that the allowances for both the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman of the Governance Committee be discontinued as soon as possible and not later than the end of April 2009 with the election of a new council. We further recommend that in the unavoidable absence of the Leader of the Council this committee be chaired by the Deputy Leader of the Council.

Comment: The role of the Governance Committee is considered by the County Council and the Audit Commission to be crucial in ensuring good governance across all the County Council's affairs and, accordingly, it is considered that these significant responsibilities merit special recognition and remain in the scheme. It is a function of the County Council itself to appoint the Vice Chairman of the Governance Committee and this will continue.

Recommendation 19 For the time being no SRAs should be paid to the chairmen of HATs. If HCC decides to continue with HATs beyond the present trial period the IRP will consider the case for a SRA for the chairmen of HATs at that time.

Comment: agreed.

Recommendation 20 We recommend that the SRA for the e-champion be

discontinued as soon as possible and not later than the end of April 2009 with the election of a new council.

Comment: agreed given the progress made and the embedding of IT within all services of the County Council.

Recommendation 21 We recommend that the Chairman of the River Hamble Harbour Board be paid a SRA at the same level as the party spokesmen for the main opposition party, i.e. 16.5% of the Leader's proposed SRA, presently £5583, backdated to when the present role holder took on these responsibilities, subject to the normal HCC rule of not more than one SRA being payable.

Comment: It is considered that the question of a special responsibility allowance for this post should be deferred until after the County Council elections in 2009.

Recommendation 24 We recommend that HCC continues with its two long established policies of not paying a member more than one (the higher) SRA and that in total SRAs will not be paid to more than 50% of members.

Comment: This policy will continue but in the context that the 50% figure reflects government guidance and that there may be circumstances which might persuade the County Council that its discretion should not be fettered.

Recommendation 25 We recommend that elected members under 70 continue to be eligible for membership of the HCC Local Government Pension Scheme in respect of both the basic allowance and any SRA in payment.

Comment: agreed.

Recommendation 27 We recommend that the HMRC maximum tax-free allowance rate is used for all those claiming mileage under the HCC Members' Allowances Scheme as soon as possible and no later than the end of April 2009.

Comment: agreed.

Recommendation 28 We recommend that the higher mileage rates paid to members of the Independent Appeals Panel be withdrawn and that members of this Panel be paid the HMRC maximum tax-free allowance rates as soon as possible and no later than the end of April 2009.

Comment: Members of the Independent Appeal Panel are volunteers to whom the County Council is indebted for their service but unable to pay allowances other than the statutory `financial loss' allowance to members of the Panel who are in employment and who might qualify. Given the large number of appeals and the demands these make on the time of the Panel members, most are not eligible to receive the financial loss allowance because their time is largely their own. The Council has previously acknowledged the valuable contribution made by all members of the Panel and, at its meeting in November 2003, it specifically resolved that an exception be made for them vis a vis the level of their mileage allowance. This was supported by the then Executive Member for Education.

The County Council has a statutory duty to make arrangements for parental appeals against the refusal of admission of their child to their preferred school and against permanent exclusion from school to be heard. Action which would render membership of the Panel less attractive to existing and potential appeal panel members runs the risk of resignations which the County Council can ill afford against the background of increasingly complex procedural rules and large numbers of appeals to be dealt with in a very short time. This year it has been necessary to recruit more new members and these are currently undergoing training to assist the County Council in this very demanding area. The financial impact of the higher rate is not significant when balanced against the difficulties the County Council would face were it unable to sustain a substantial and well trained pool of volunteers to enable it to comply with the duty placed upon it. It is suggested that the existing exceptional arrangements should be maintained.

Recommendation 29 We recommend that HCC continue to reimburse only on the production of receipts, but that the hourly rate be moved to £6 an hour from £4.10 for childcare and that the adult dependent carer rate of £8.00 is retained. We recommend that there is no annual cash maximum ceiling on these allowances. The IRP also considers a different approach is warranted where there is a child with special needs or someone lives in an area with no group childcare facilities available or the timing of the council meeting including travelling time does not fit in with group childcare facilities. In these circumstances, HCC officials should have the power and the discretion to pay higher amounts than the maximums recommended here, on the production of

receipts.

Comment: Agreed.

Recommendation 30 We recommend that the basic allowance of £650 for coopted members of the Children and Young People Select Committee continues unchanged.

Comment: Agreed.

Recommendation 31 The IRP formally advise HCC that they have considered the matter of an allowance for IRP members and have no recommendation to make concerning the amount of it. They recommend that this is a matter to be considered by HCC.

Comment: The Committee will make no determination at this time.

Recommendation 32 We recommend that the IRP and HCC continue to consider uprating the Members' Allowances Scheme on a year-by-year basis rather than opting for automatic indexation.

Comment: The Council has not adopted indexation. It will continue to base its decisions on the national staff pay award each year but which it has reduced or rejected in the past giving rise to a total freeze.

Recommendation 33 We recommend that a further comprehensive review of the Members' Allowances Scheme is carried out no later than five years' time if one has not already been carried out for some other reason.

Comment: Noted.

Recommendation 34 We recommend that after every election of a councillor, new or being re-elected, they should be given a copy of the backbench councillor job description and asked to sign a receipt and an undertaking to carry out the duties as described with due diligence and competence. This should be made known publicly.

Comment: All Members of the Council receive a copy of the County Council's Constitution when they are elected. The Constitution is published on Hantsweb; in Part 1: Chapter 2 it contains information concerning the key roles and key tasks of all Members together with information about their rights and duties. The Constitution also contains the County Council's Code of Conduct for Members. Every Member signs up to the Code by way of formally accepting office and also completes a register of their interests. Each of these is a long established legal requirement. The County Council has, however, been considering how to enhance further Members' accountability and the County Council's transparency in the context of moving away from traditional arrangements - see response to recommendation 36 below.

Recommendation 36 We recommend that annual councillor statements of activity and performance should be initiated to cover the year 2008/09 and be available on Hantsweb.

Noted. Work has been progressing with a nominated group of Members from each of the political groups to enhance Member support by way of benchmarking performance and identifying Member development requirements and to increase the transparency of their accountability. The thrust of the Panel's recommendation is, therefore, one of the areas which has been under consideration and this work is proposed for completion by the 2009 elections.

In relation to information about Members' attendance at meetings, the current recording arrangements have operated since October 2000 when the then Standards and Procedures Sub-Committee endorsed the steps taken to monitor members' attendances at meetings following changes to the allowances scheme and the statutory abolition of the attendance allowance. Since then, in addition to the minutes of formal member meetings being routinely published on Hantsweb and containing the names of all Members who were present, Democratic Services have recorded Members' attendances and have responded to enquiries about individual Members' attendance records. However, on the roll out of the range of committee and panel changes arising from the Democratic Review, a number of practical issues were experienced which had an adverse impact on Democratic Services' ability to produce consistent, accurate reporting such that the data during that period became unreliable. Now that the Council's revised democratic structure has bedded in, recording arrangements have been re-established since 1 April 2008. To enhance and modernise these arrangements (and associated with the work mentioned in the previous paragraph), the opportunity was taken earlier this year to commission a new IT system. It is currently the subject of staff training. The output for publication will be considered as soon as the new monitoring system is established and fully operational.

Recommendation 40 We recommend that HCC `freezes' all allowances for 2009/10, saving approximately £32,000.

Comment: The Panel may have suggested that there should be no increase in allowances but it has no authority to make recommendations as to the County Council's expenditure. Those issues will be considered by the County Council at its budget meeting in February 2009.

Recommendation 41 We recommend that HCC gives priority to achieving the £108,000 of possible savings for 2009/10 through the reform of its Members' Allowances Scheme as identified in this review.

Comment: The Panel has no authority to make recommendations as to expenditure or savings by the County Council. As mentioned in the preceding comment, those issues will be considered by the County Council at its budget meeting in February 2009. Savings of £78,000 for the last 4 years have been made and will continue.

4) Outline of Options:

4.1 Option 1:

Not to comply with the requirement to have regard to the Independent Remuneration Panel's report.

4.2 Option 2:

. To comply with the required procedures and make a recommendation to the County Council as to next year's Members Allowances Scheme.

4 Option Analysis / Comparison:

4.1 Best practice demands that the Committee considers the Independent Remuneration Panel's report and makes recommendations to the County Council as to the Members Allowances Scheme 2009/10

5 Conclusions:

6.1 The Committee is asked to put a proposal to the County Council as to the allowances payable to members under its Members Allowances Scheme 2009/10 which will take effect from 1 April 2009 having taken into account the recommendations of the Panel and the views expressed in this report.

6 Recommendations:

Please see Executive Summary for recommendations

CORPORATE OR LEGAL INFORMATION: