How do WBC justify

[Peter T]

accepting a recommended expenses increase of almost 10% at a time when the council is allegedly ?17 million in debt?

Seems they could be rewarding themselves for failure.

[observer]

When political representation is viewed by most, as a job (a nice little earner), the earnings become the prime motivation rather than any concept of actively improving the wellbeing of the community. NB: The vote to accept 10% will be unanimous!

[Paul Kennedy]

Let's wait and see

[P J]

Even voting on this amount of increase feels like a kick in the teeth given the present economic climate most people have to endure. The recomendation should have been refused out of hand as it is,at best, overgenerous and more honestly stinks to high heaven of hypocricy. But it probably will be passed given that we can't get rid of them for 4 more years.

[Peter T]

When political representation is viewed by most, as a job (a nice little earner), the earnings become the prime motivation rather than any concept of actively improving the wellbeing of the community. NB: The vote to accept 10% will be unanimous!

 

Deja vu observer? Deja vu!!!

[Bazj]

Let's wait and see

 

Do you really think there is anything but the one answer Paul?

 

Under the freedom of information act.... can we request the details of who votes for and against this rise?

[Dizzy]

So WE ALL get a near 5% increase again on our council tax bills and THEY now want a 10% increase on their pocket expenses

 

I moaned when the teachers went on strike over their 10% 'wish' but I take it all back. Give the teachers their 10% and deduct 10% from all council members to balance the books

[observer]

Just for you info Peter: Leaders don't decide these issues, they are vehicles of patronage for their immediate supporters, and if they don't deliver the patronage, their luitenants will quickly dispose of them. Politicians are like rats fighting in a bag; the only thing that contains them and sustains an aura of unity, is a collective self interest.

[Peter T]

Let's wait and see

 

Do you really think there is anything but the one answer Paul?

 

Under the freedom of information act.... can we request the details of who votes for and against this rise?

 

I believe a surprise awaits us next week.

[P J]

Paul, will it be decided by a show of hands or by secret ballot? If it is a show of hands it would be worth me going to the meeting and watching just who does vote against the proposal.

[observer]

It will be by show of hands, but IF someone really wanted to ID the trough snufflers, a recorded vote can be requested. Seems maybe one Councillor is about to become a black sheep?!

[P J]

Then let's hope he isn't alone.

[Paul Kennedy]

I'm not sure that the vote is that important, especially if the overwhelming majority vote one way, for an individual or a small group to vote the other way can seem somewhat tokenistic. Much better that those who feel uneasy with the current scheme of allowances and expenses make a speech offering an alternative so that the rather unedifying spectacle of such matters being debated on an annual basis is resolved.

 

Is the term "blacksheep" still allowed in these so called PC times.

[Paul Kennedy]

I've just been looking in more detail at the "independent" proposals and note that the basic allowance is reduced by 10% to ?6,614 ( just realised and mortified that this is the annual rate, not the weekly rate ) and in/de creases for those with added responsibilities range from -2.5% to + 235% which would give a year on year % increase of 9.8% all very odd how these figures have been arrived at, and I wouldn't have thought anybody will vote for them, so I doubt if there will be any black sheep....least of all me. I understand there were no increases last year, which of course would make any increases this year appear far greater than they are.

 

PS I note in Wigan the basic allowance is ?10,985. I can't understand why there isn't a set national rate and banded according to council size.

[observer]

Think you'll find some Councils up and down the Country have astronomical allowances (don't tell them at WBC!). As with all politicians, an independently advised national rate might be seen to be fairer OR a direct link with the rises of the lowest pay scale in their Authority, which may engender some realisation of the poor wage rates that exist.

[Bazj]

Can you imagine them setting a national rate any lower than the current highest level?

 

Nope.... me neither!

[Paul Kennedy]

Could be Birmingham then, they even get a pension, an interesting read if you get time:

 

http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/Media/Members%20Allowances%20Scheme%202007.pdf?MEDIA_ID=214648&FILENAME=Members%20Allowances%20Scheme%202007.pdf

[observer]

Basically it's an industry, and we all tolertrate it!

[Chrissy]

So, no comment on the vote and the decision?

[Peter T]

Not really.

The result was probably because too many stood to take a drop and too few stood to make a significant gain.

 

The only positive being that the last time this happened, they ALL voted for a massive increase and it went through.

WHY they need an outside recommendation is hard to understand.

 

Maybe they should start earning their corn now.

[observer]

They have an "independent" (I use the term very loosely!) outside panel, because Government rules say they must, but they don't have to abide by it's findings. Meanwhile, Parliament has no such "independent" panel; and their latest scam of setting up a committee, chaired by Speaker (wife spent ?4k on taxis for shopping trips) Martin; is rumoured to be recommending a lump sum payment of ?24,000pa for their second homes, regardless of how much they spend on them, thus no need for receipts and no possibility of public scrutiny. Clearly a license to print money - cos they can! Unfortunately, Democracy won't cure this disease, as they are the products of it.

[P J]

You know that it can't be right when the pigs decide how much slop goes into the trough, unbelievable.

[observer]

With new technology it could be possible to replace them with phone in referendums, but as we know from the TV scams, that can be corrupted too!