Agenda item

The Local Democracy Manager presented the Independent Remuneration

Panel for Wales’ (IRP) Draft Annual Report.  It was noted that the proposals include a small increase (£100) in the basic salary for County Councillors and no increase for senior salaries (other than the increase in basic salary).  Feedback was invited and the following points were raised:

·         Clarification was sought regarding the £150 for each member (£500 for special cases).  It was explained that the £100 mentioned was the increase in a County Councillor’s basic salary.  The £150 may be awarded to town and community councillors in certain circumstances.

·         It was suggested that the caring responsibilities allowance of up to £403 should be increased. Declaring an interest because of his caring responsibilities, County Councillor D. Edwards supported the view that £403 was an inadequate amount per month noting that carers, on average, are paid £12.00 p.h. and stated that this point should be brought to the attention of the IRP. It was suggested that concerns about the level of the Carer Allowance should made as part of the consultation response to the Panel.

·         Representation on the National Parks Authority was queried, noting that it was unclear if representatives should represent Monmouthshire generally or more specifically by living in and representing a ward that lies within the National Park.  It was also queried if Monmouthshire should have more than the current two representatives, as it is the second largest area within the National Park.  A response was provided that there is a conflict between local representation and political balance referring to the Environment Act that states that local authorities, when making nominations to the National Park Authority should appoint members who represent wards within the National Park.  This does not override the ability for local authorities to appoint members to committees / joint bodies to reflect political balance.  This can cause problems where members don’t live in the National Park area.  It was stated that it was likely that Monmouthshire CC’s representation on the National Parks Authority will reduce to one member in future.

·         Concern was expressed that it will be difficult to encourage people to become county councillors in future mentioning the varying workload in different councils.  It was accepted that different councils have varying workloads, ward areas and population, and also confirmed that there are no town or community councils in Cardiff.  The inability of some fulltime workers to consider the role in practical terms with a basic salary of £13,400, and the consequent likelihood of missing out on good quality candidates, was also commented upon.  It was felt that this was an important point to raise. It was agreed that the need to attract suitable persons to the role of county councillor is an important point adding that there is conflict between the viability of becoming a councillor in practical terms and the public purse and in order to have a full time councillors, financial constraints would require fewer people to undertake the role. 

·         Regarding the Diversity campaign, the Welsh Government is working with employers to encourage, and release, employees to undertake councillor duties.

·         It was noted that the Local Government Measure permits councils to set the times of their meetings.  It was commented that evening meetings would be much easier for councillors in full time employment to attend. 

·         It was suggested that the Welsh Government and the IRP communicate with residents to educate them about the role of the county councillor, the allowances available and the time contributed individually by councillors to improve perceptions of the role.

·         It was commented that Scrutiny Committee Chairs don’t have enough support noting that in Monmouthshire, there is one scrutiny manager with an increasingly high workload due to the volume of scrutiny required (as acknowledged in the IRP report) and requested that this point is added to any feedback. It was acknowledged that there is an increased demand for scrutiny and whilst the function is working well, there was concern about the amount of support available.  It was explained that the support referred to in the report was the tools to do jobs (laptop, phone etc.) as opposed to the staffing structures within an authority.

·         It was suggested that councillors should have an attendance allowance, noting that a small number of members infrequently attend meetings. A Member supported the suggestion of publishing individual councillor’s allowances and attendance.  Live streamed meetings also allow electors to transparently see and hear the contribution of their representatives.

·         It was agreed to seek the views of members regarding their support requirements, their awareness of allowances and any other comments to compile a formal response. Concern was expressed that members are not using the allowance for reimbursement for the costs of care, possibly due to negative perceptions.