Agenda item

To receive a report from the Director of Law and Governance on the Members Allowances Scheme.

Council is asked to approve the allowances for 2020/21. 

Councillor Caliskan moved and Councillor Maguire seconded the report of the Director of Law and Governance on the Members Allowances Scheme.

NOTED

1.           The report recommended that the basic allowance should not be raised to take account of inflation but that there should be an increase in the number of special responsibility allowances.  This was the tenth year in a row that the allowance had been frozen.  Enfield Council has one of the lowest councillor allowances in London.

2.           The view of the Leader of the Opposition, Councillor Joanne Laban, that there should be no increase in either of the basic allowance or the special responsibility allowances.  She felt that in a time of increasing unemployment and uncertainty, it was not appropriate for the Council to increase members’ allowances. 

3.           The view of the Leader of the Community First Group that as the Council’s finances were not in a good state, it was not appropriate to raise special responsibility allowances. She felt that the allowances could have been redistributed without increasing costs. Increasing allowances, in the gift of the Leader, could be seen as undemocratic patronage.

4.           The comments from the majority group: 

·         It was not unreasonable that members taking on additional work such as the new Environment Forum should receive extra recompense in the form of a Special Responsibility Allowance. 

·         It would not be fair to give allowances to some but not all of the members who had taken on extra responsibilities.  Some of the roles such as that on the fostering panel were dealing with difficult and complex issues involving vulnerable people and should be valued and recompensed. 

·         The amount of money involved was a relatively small amount and was being taken from previous underspends.

5.            The comments from the main opposition group:

·         The view that it was unacceptable to raise Council taxes and pay councillors more.

·         That an allowance for sitting on the fostering panel was unnecessary.

·         That those who are being paid to chair scrutiny panels should have excellent chairing skills.

·         That there was a case to look at the basic allowance which had been frozen for ten years, but not to increase the responsibility allowances. 

·         The concern that the creation of extra allowances for the members of the majority administration was being used to create a payroll vote. 

·         The view that giving additional allowances at a time when many families were struggling gave the wrong message. 

6.            The summing up by the Leader, Councillor Nesil Caliskan, rejecting the arguments of the Opposition.  It was only fair that everyone who took on a responsibility should receive an allowance reflective of their responsibilities.  No-one was forced to claim an allowance.  They could be returned.  £36,000 was a maximum estimate of the total cost.  It could be less and no-one would be able to claim more than one allowance

After the debate the recommendations in the report were put to the vote and agreed with the following result:

For:  41

Against:  18

Abstentions:  2

AGREED

1.            That the current Members Allowances Scheme is re-approved as set out in Part 6 of the Constitution, with the amendments set out in the report.

2.            That the automatic increase in allowances by the average earnings as at March 2020 not be implemented for 2020/21 financial year.