Interesting to see who's stating their case and who is biding their time ...
http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/we-don-t-want-more-money-councillors-1-5268282
Why do CAB and Wells need to wait for the report? Do they not have an opinion?
Has anyone seen this yet? I'm intrigued by the phrase none of the councillors who responded - surely they all responded to such a basic and straight forward question.
HTH has been banging on about this for months with the review panel supposed to publish its findings on basic allowances last September. Still it's nice to see The Snail catching up at last with an interesting survey of councillor views. The Labour crowd don't express their views without consulting their leaders first on what their view should be and, from what our own similar surveys have previously told us, George Morris waits for guidance from his mate, Jim Allen. ;)
Quote from: marky on January 02, 2013, 12: PM
Has anyone seen this yet? I'm intrigued by the phrase none of the councillors who responded - surely they all responded to such a basic and straight forward question.
The replies say a lot.
Pammy, Brash and Hall give their own opinion (no rise) but the rest of the Labour cyphers allow the f**ty Belchers/Marg to speak for them(in reality we tell you what to say) in a group statement- wait for the review result
Not sure if I would agree with you on Ged hall - a typical slithery answer I would say which attempts to pave the way for an increase. Note his reference to the minimum wage even though a councillors basic allowance is intended to be compensation for out-of-pocket expenses and not any kind of wage at all.
Labour have supposedly already given their views to the Review Panel but they seem very reluctant to go public as to what they said - this Mail survey was the ideal opportunity to do so. It doesn't take too much brain work to figure out why.
I can understand Brash doing his own thing; he seems to have figured out some time ago how intellectually challenged his colleagues are but I was surprised to see Paul Beck doing the same.
That's him being told to stand in the corner for a while ;)
Of course, the same could be said of Wells whose response is identical to the Labour response - hardly surprising, really as CAB probably signed it.
It looks like CAB is wanting to accept the increases and plans pushing the responsibility onto the Review Panel. However, they are only recommendations and don't have to be accepted - if this was an election year there would be no chance but I think I can hear the KERCHING from here.
Quote from "The Mob"........... " We didn`t really want the Increase, The Review Panel made us take it"
Only 12 have said no, the rest have failed to give a clear view. I wonder why?
Labour will pretend to listen to the people and vote against an increase in basic allowances whilst voting to increase SRA by a third.
Quote from: perseus on January 02, 2013, 06: PM
Councillor Brash has gone public on his thoughts on this for quite some time. This is off his twitter feed and has been there for a while:
QuoteNo ifs, no buts, no maybes. While people struggle , jobs are lost & services r cut I will NOT vote for an increase to Councillors pay!
Having said that, I think what would be more interesting than what they'd actually VOTE for is what they'd actually DO irrespective of what the review panel decide.
Even IF the review panel recommend a rise, it's always possible to REFUSE it or give it straight to charity or something of that nature. Various councillors read this message board. I'll call any of them out here and now to disclose whether or not they'd refuse the money even if the review panel say they 'deserve' it.
The "Refusing option i can agree with Perseus.......... but i don`t agree with the give it to Charity Option, i would rather it kept someone in a Job....
I dont want to appear mean spirited, but times are hard for us all...
Unless your a couple of councillors whose household income from the public sector would make your eyes water.
If it's voted through then I don't think there's an option to 'turn it down'. Any increase would come net of any additional tax and national insurance and then there's the possibility of the 'extra' impacting on any benefits if a councillor receives any such payments - any increase may well be cancelled out completely by a corresponding loss of benefit. I can see the possibility of things getting quite complicated so best for everyone in the council to vote against any increase.
Also, it's worth noting what Brash says in his response; that any increase in allowances comes straight off those Labour claims that £100,000 would be saved every year after the elected Mayor job has gone.
Interesting that as CAB will be claimed paid absence from LINKS whenever he is on council work during normal office hours, should he really be claiming an allowance from HBC at the same time? Two-Jobs CAB?
People seem to be getting themselves in such a mess over this which is what happens when openness is placed on the back seat. So much secrecy surronds the everyday goings on at the Civic they've only themselves to blame when the public outcry surfaces.
Lets not kid ourselves here it's a foregone conclusion as to what will happen, they have simply gone through the motions ' in part ' by expressing their views to the MAIL and partly to we the electorate,
BUT a rise in allowances will still go ahead as planned.
Fuel for the next election leaflet's. I/WE VOTED NO. LABOUR VOTED YES. We will always Blah. Blah. Blah, you know the rest, same old thing from the same people year in and year out.