Councillors expenses

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by katex

Not sure how your payments work, Ken. When I was working full time and in Manchester .... was paid expenses for travel, however, if I was just going to the office and not out and about visiting customers, it was subject to Income Tax.

If this is the case with you .... short journeys, guess wouldn't be worth the time recording it, etc ? The town hall or Scaitcliffe house the workplace.

There's nothing for visiting residents (which actually takes up the most time) but each visit to Scaitcliffe House or the Town Hall for a meeting to which I was specifically invited can be logged for me as an 8 mile round trip or £4.80. If I decide to drive up to Scaitcliffe to do some paperwork or see a group member then it doesn't count because it isn't an officially scheduled meeting and all expenses and allowances are taxable

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by accysimon

How many Councillors also work Full Time and how many do it as a 'main' job role?

The vast majority of Labour councillors work full-time although I can't speak for the Conservatives.

It doesn't pay well enough to make a career as a backbencher and although it may be a comfortable ride in the Cabinet while you're in favour you are subject to the whims of the Leader and the electorate to keep you there.

Currently, anyone who looks like the might be a threat to the leadership of the Conservatives seems to be kept at arm's length.

[claytonender]

Originally Posted by accysimon

I have quoted nothing but facts in this thread...

Do Councillors claim expenses for attending PACT meetings too?

I certainly don't claim any allowances for attending PACT meetings.

Regarding Neil's post about forgoing allowances - I am chair of Church and Central Area Management Board. The Board does not receive any revenue money from HBC (The Area Management Councils do receive revenue) - I do not claim any allowance for being chair and asked for the money to be given to the Board, the allowance amounts to £756. Cllr Pam Barton, Cllr Malcolm Pritchard and Cllr Janet Storey also do the same and their Area Management Boards each receive the £756.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by claytonender

I do not claim any allowance for being chair and asked for the money to be given to the Board, the allowance amounts to £756. Cllr Pam Barton, Cllr Malcolm Pritchard and Cllr Janet Storey also do the same and their Area Management Boards each receive the £756.

I already know this happens and I have to wonder on its legality.
Who approved that the money could be spent that way. It was allocated for that purpose and is supposed to be your allowance.

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by Neil

I already know this happens and I have to wonder on its legality.
Who approved that the money could be spent that way. It was allocated for that purpose and is supposed to be your allowance.

The legal team would have intervened before now if there was any question of it being illegal, they're pretty good on that score.

This is one expenses irregularity we should probably ignore for the good of the borough?

[MargaretR]

Just because it's legal doesn't neccessarily mean it's moral or ethical.

[DaveinGermany]

Originally Posted by MargaretR

Just because it's legal doesn't neccessarily mean it's moral or ethical.

A point so categorically shown by the "Dishonourable Members" in the H of P !

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by MargaretR

Just because it's legal doesn't neccessarily mean it's moral or ethical.

You're unsure of the morality of politicians giving up money for the good of their residents???

Strike a light, Margaret. I'm glad I don't live in your world.

[MargaretR]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

You're unsure of the morality of politicians giving up money for the good of their residents???

Strike a light, Margaret. I'm glad I don't live in your world.

Don't twist my words - of course any self sacrifice for the common good is very moral. I just draw attention to the fact that legality and morality are neccessarily the same.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

The legal team would have intervened before now if there was any question of it being illegal, they're pretty good on that score.

This is one expenses irregularity we should probably ignore for the good of the borough?

I don't like ignoring irregularities, who knows what would happen with a nod and a wink next. The Council has a constitution that states how expenses can be claimed but it does not mention this in it. I have read the link from above and I can't find it anyway.

Why are the Area Management Boards not given any revenue budget but the Area Management Councils are?
What is the difference between the two?

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by Neil

I don't like ignoring irregularities, who knows what would happen with a nod and a wink next. The Council has a constitution that states how expenses can be claimed but it does not mention this in it. I have read the link from above and I can't find it anyway.

Why are the Area Management Boards not given any revenue budget but the Area Management Councils are?
What is the difference between the two?

I understand that Neighbourhood Management Boards are to cease and be subsumed into the Area Councils. Graham Jones made rather a success of his local NMB and managed to secure more money than Peter Britcliffe could get his own hands on, leading to certain changes.

From speaking to councillors on Neighbourhood Management Boards they worked perfectly well. Another of the Britcliffe control-freak legacies.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

You're unsure of the morality of politicians giving up money for the good of their residents???

Strike a light, Margaret. I'm glad I don't live in your world.

When I first started in politics you didn't get paid (only if you missed work) people became councillors for the right reasons in those days. I know times have moved on and its a different ball game now, but I don't think things have changed for the better

[accysimon]

Originally Posted by jaysay

When I first started in politics you didn't get paid (only if you missed work) people became councillors for the right reasons in those days. I know times have moved on and its a different ball game now, but I don't think things have changed for the better

I agree John. After all, no one forces people to put their name forward to stand as a councillor, it's their choice voluntarily. I appreciate that there may be some money lost if having time off work for meetings, but I know certain Councillors made it clear when they were elected that they could not and would not attend meetings before 6pm. I feel that too many people are doing it for their own gain rather than the good of the public, and these few give the honourable people a bad name.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by accysimon

I agree John. After all, no one forces people to put their name forward to stand as a councillor, it's their choice voluntarily. I appreciate that there may be some money lost if having time off work for meetings, but I know certain Councillors made it clear when they were elected that they could not and would not attend meetings before 6pm. I feel that too many people are doing it for their own gain rather than the good of the public, and these few give the honourable people a bad name.

I wouldn't go as far as to say that Simon, I have always maintained that anybody who stands to be a councillor in this day and age deserves everything they get, and I mean all parties, you only have to see what goes on on here to realise that the general public are a very hard animal to please, after all party politics aside councillors on the whole do a very good job for the people they represent, you soon find out who are the poor ones they don't stay around long

[gynn]

Originally Posted by Neil

I already know this happens and I have to wonder on its legality.
Who approved that the money could be spent that way. It was allocated for that purpose and is supposed to be your allowance.

It would be illegal for the Council to make a payment to the Area Council and treat it as a Members Allowance payment.

However, the Council's constitution allows it to "vire" or transfer funds between budgets, up to prescribed levels. So it is quite in order to transfer money from the Members Allowances budget to the Area Council budget, which has apparently happened in this case.

As long as it is done transparently, then there is no problem.