Colchester councillor have their say after vote to increase allowances

The decision means the basic allowance level for each councillor will now sit at £7,576 per annum.

While the overall allowance budget, which also takes into consideration special responsibility allowances, will also rise to a total £571,200 compared to last year's £554,600.

Out of the city's 51 councillors, 16 voted for the motion, 12 voted against it, 14 abstained (not including Mayor John Jowers) and 8 councillors were absent for the vote.

Four Lib Dems, 11 Labour councillors and one Green councillor voted for the increase. 

Martin Goss - leader of the Liberal Democrats in Colchester (Image: Newsquest)

Liberal Democrat council party leader and general election candidate Martin Goss, said he thought there should be a rethink.

He said: “The majority of Liberal democrats didn’t vote for this increase where Labour seemed hellbent on being whipped into voting for their own allowances increase at the local taxpayers expense actually berating members of the Liberal Democrats at the meeting for having the temerity for not supporting it.

“It was a free vote and the Liberal Democrats don’t have a whip unlike Labour and the Tories."

Mr Goss, who abstained, added: “I didn’t vote for it and personally I think this decision should be brought back to full council for another rethink.”

Division - Conservative council leader Paul Dundas said the bigger division would be about the future number of councillors (Image: Steve Brading)

While conservative council party leader Councillor Paul Dundas, who also abstained himself, said: "Allowances are set by an independent remuneration panel which we normally support.

“However, last Wednesday Lib Dem and Labour Councillors rejected Conservative budget amendments, which were fully costed and approved, to restore over £2.5m of budget to frontline services and instead chose very significant council job cuts. After that happened Conservative councillors felt unable to vote for the recommendation."

He added: “The allowance increase is an overall small amount - the bigger political division and potential cost impact will be over the future number of councillors which is currently being considered by the Boundary Commission.

“The Conservatives have recommended staying at 51 which is perfectly adequate and set in 2016."

Diversity - Labour council party leader Julie Young said local politics needs to attract a range of people including the less well off (Image: Newsquest)

Labour council party leader Julie Young, who voted for the motion along with all of her present Labour colleagues, said: “Councillors are saying that they are spending in excess of 35 hours per week on council business.

“If you look at the uplift in councillors allowance to £7,576.54 as the basic allowance, for those members who don’t have a special responsibility allowance that works out at £4.50 per hour £5.92 below the minimum wage of £10.42.”

Ms Young added: “Councillors receive an allowance, not a wage and we do not have pension entitlements. But I hope this demonstrates how much time is devoted to the important work of the council by councillors.

“Of course, while they are doing this work, they are not working elsewhere earning a wage or spending their time with their families or enjoying leisure time. So, they are absolutely devoting significant time in public service, and I would suggest that it is hard to conclude that people do this role for the money."

Ms Young added that the staff pay increase was independently determined, with councillors only voting to approve recommendations and that we will see if any councillors do “waive” such uplifts which would be a “modest rise of £23 per month per tax”.

She further said that Gazette readers may want to know “that significant sums of money are deployed in printing costs of newsletters that most councillors want to circulate to keep residents informed” and that “this expense comes out of the allowances”.

Ms Young also said that it struck her as "pot calling the pot black" for councillors to abstain for Colchester council but vote through for Essex County Council increase.

"The leader of the [Essex] council, Cllr Bentley's allowance went up to £71,176 including the basic allowance from CCC that puts him on £78,752.54", Ms Young said.

Ms Young added that “shaming” people for accepting an uplift of £23 per month is not likely to encourage a diverse range of people including the “less well-off who cannot afford to volunteer 35 hours”.

She further asked people to read the report showing how councillor's work 35 hours a week on average with unpaid parish or town council time. 

Voting - Green council party leader Richard Kirkby-Taylor said the named vote created more confusion (Image: Newsquest)

Meanwhile, Green party council leader Richard Kirkby-Taylor, who voted for the motion, said: “Every single councillor across the country is either retired, has someone supporting them financially, or is working a day job to subsidise their work as a councillor.

“A 3.8 per cent increase isn't going to change that.

Mr Kirkby-Taylor further said: “As the primary breadwinner in my household for example, there is simply no way I could afford to join the cabinet or chair a committee. We [the council] are already incredibly limited in the talent available, and the financial pressures only add to that.

“What does wind me up is this attempt by the Conservative group to politicise it. Without providing any kind of alternative option, or engaging in a discussion on the topic, they risked wasting the officers' time, and by extension taxpayer money, just so they had something they could complain about in their leaflets.”

Mr Kirkby-Taylor, referring to the named vote on allowances which was held near the end of the four-hour meeting, said: “The way in which it was done is telling as well.

“Officers had no prior notice that they [the Conservative group] would call a named vote, so the proceedings were delayed causing more confusion, and without a debate every single councillor was put on the spot.”

Referring to the councillor allowances issue, he added: “This kind of game playing is endemic to the mainstream way of doing politics, showing economic illiteracy, a willingness to risk public money for a private advantage, and is a beautiful example of why we need the fundamental change of our electoral system.”