Decision details

35.1     The Committee considered a report from the Director of Law and Assurance and the report of the Independent Remuneration Panel which contained recommendations for the scheme of allowances and expenses from May 2021, for recommendation to the County Council (copy appended to the signed minutes).

35.2     Dr Neil Beer, Chairman of the Panel, introduced the report, commenting that the Panel’s recommendations for a freeze to allowances in 2021/22 were made in the context of the coronavirus pandemic, the impact of the measures taken to deal with it on many of the residents of West Sussex and noting that members had received an increase in allowances for inflation during 2020/21.

35.3     Dr Beer said that the Panel’s recommendation for a reduction in the special responsibility allowances (SRAs) for the County Chairman and Vice-Chairman were to remove increases made by an amendment to the Panel’s report in 2017 and to bring the allowances in line with its agreed methodology. The Panel’s recommendations in relation to allowances for minority group leaders were to bring the allowances in line with comparator county councils. Following comments on the draft report, the Panel had conducted additional research and analysis on allowances for minority group leaders and considers that its recommendations are appropriate.

35.4     Dr Beer commented that the Panel had made a number of other recommendations, including some aimed at encouraging more sustainable travel by members, consolidating the two current cabinet member adviser roles and defining the circumstances in which an SRA would be made to a member on extended leave.

35.5     As leader of the Liberal Democrat Group, Cllr Walsh commented that, in his view, the recommended reduction in the allowances for the minority group leaders is at odds with the other recommendations and was made without evidence of an actual or likely decrease in workload. He felt the proposals ignore the broad role of minority group leaders, their need to consider material, liaise and prepare irrespective of the size of their group and their importance constitutionally to the smooth working of a council. He asked whether the evidence from other county councils supported the Panel’s proposals. Cllr Walsh said he accepted the idea of a linear progression for the allowance based on the number of members but felt that the starting point in the proposal did not do justice to the nature of the role. He proposed that the starting point on the sliding scale should be around that of a committee chairman, i.e. around £9,000. This proposal was not seconded.

35.6     As leader of the Labour Group, Cllr Jones expressed disappointment that, in his view, the Panel had not listened to the legitimate concerns expressed by minority group leaders. He felt that the review had not applied the principles consistently, and that the proposed decreases mainly affected minority party members and did not reflect the effort involved and the value brought to the working of the Council by minority group leaders.

35.7     Cllr Bradbury supported the proposals in the report, particularly in relation to sustainable travel. He also supported the freeze in allowances. He did however express concern about the proposals for defining the role of the merged adviser to a cabinet member post. In his view, it should be for the Leader in consultation with the Cabinet Member to decide what the role of any particular adviser should be and not a role for officers.

35.8     The Leader expressed his thanks to the members of the Panel and his support for the recommendations. He felt that the freeze in allowances was appropriate. He recognised that all members put a lot of work into the Council and formed an important part of the scrutiny of decisions and many put in additional work for which they did not receive an additional allowance. He said he wholeheartedly supported the changes proposed to advisers including assistance from officers in the development of the scope of a particular role. He commented that on occasion minority party members may be best suited to those roles in terms of skills.

35.9     Cllr Lanzer expressed his thanks to the Panel for its work which he felt included a number of important changes for the future, including reference to non-fossil fuel vehicles. He supported the merger of Adviser roles and the freeze in allowances. In relation to the changes in minority group leader allowances he felt that the most important change was the move to a linear, pro-rata allowance, based on the number of members, as in his opinion the number of members in a group is significant.

35.10  Dr Beer thanked the Committee for its support for the recommended freeze on allowances and for the merging of the roles of Senior Adviser and Adviser to a Cabinet Member.

35.11  In relation to the recommendations around allowances for minority group leaders, Dr Beer commented that the Panel had listened to the feedback but had not agreed with the arguments put forward. The Panel had undertaken additional work which was documented in the report. He also referred to the method previously agreed by the Panel to assess roles which attracted SRAs, which was based on responsibility, accountability and workload. Those algorithms had been consistently applied since they were first agreed in 2016, through interim reviews and in the current report. The Panel was apolitical and it considered only the role, not the party of the person who filled it.

35.12  In terms of the changes to group leader allowances shown in the graphs on page 21 of the report, Dr Beer commented that the maximum is slightly higher than the current maximum and the minimum is quite a lot higher than the current starting point. He welcomed the support for a linear approach to minority group leader allowances which the Panel believes balances the tendency of the workload to increase as the number of members in a group increases and that the leader of small group will be stretched quite thinly in providing scrutiny. He commented that the start point and end point of allowance for the leader of a small minority group is roughly that of an adviser and for the leader of a large minority group, between that of a committee chairman and a cabinet member.

35.13  The recommendations were as agreed, as set out below. Cllr Bradbury abstained in relation to paragraph (n) of the Panel’s recommendations and Cllr Jones and Cllr Walsh abstained but were against the recommendation in relation to paragraph (p).

35.14  Resolved – That the Independent Remuneration Panel’s report and recommendations be submitted to the Council on 11 December 2020 for approval.