Report of the Independent Remuneration Panel of Wiltshire Council

Home , Durham County Council, Wiltshire Council, Wiltshire County Council

Review of the Members’ Allowances Scheme November 2009

Members of the Panel

Mr A Lampey Mr J Payne Mr D Stratton OBE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 4 BACKGROUND ...... 7 PANEL ...... 8 PRINCIPLES ...... 8 PROCESS AND METHODOLOGY ...... 9 BASIC ALLOWANCE ...... 11 Introduction ...... 11 Rate for remuneration ...... 12 Number of hours to be remunerated ...... 12 Level of ‘public service discount’ to apply ...... 13 Conclusions ...... 13 INDEXATION ...... 14 BACKDATING ...... 14 SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITY ALLOWANCES (SRAs) ...... 15 Introduction ...... 15 SRAs per Councillor and the 50% guideline ...... 16 SRA Methodology ...... 17 Leader SRA ...... 17 Deputy Leader SRA ...... 20 Cabinet Member SRA ...... 21 Portfolio Holder SRA ...... 23 Overview and Scrutiny Select Committee SRAs ...... 24 Chairmen of Select Committees ...... 25 Vice-Chairmen of Select Committees ...... 27 Scrutiny fund ...... 28 Chairman of Area Board SRA ...... 29 Chairman of Area Planning Committee SRA ...... 31 Vice-Chairman of Area Planning Committee SRA ...... 32 Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Council SRAs ...... 32 Licensing Committee allowances ...... 33 Chairman of Licensing Committee SRA ...... 34

Member of Licensing Committee SRA ...... 34 Chairman of Strategic Planning Committee SRA ...... 35 Chairman of Audit Committee SRA ...... 36 Chairman of Staffing Policy Committee SRA ...... 37 Chairman of Wiltshire Pension Fund Committee SRA ...... 38 Representative on South West Councils (SWC) SRA ...... 39 GROUP LEADER ALLOWANCES (5) ...... 40 CO-OPTEES’ ALLOWANCES ...... 41 Chairman of Standards Committee ...... 41 Co-opted Independent Members of Standards Committee ...... 42 Co-opted Town/Parish Council Members of Standards Committee ...... 43 Co-opted members of Children’s Services Select Committee ...... 44 APPROVED DUTIES ...... 45 TRAVELLING AND SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCES ...... 46 Travelling Allowance ...... 46 Subsistence and Overnight Allowances ...... 46 ICT / TELEPHONE ALLOWANCES ...... 46 Telephone / Broadband ...... 46 IT Consumables ...... 47 DEPENDENT CARERS’ ALLOWANCE ...... 47 LOCAL GOVERNMENT PENSION SCHEME (LGPS) ...... 48 APPENDICES ...... 49 Appendix 1 – Evidence sources and Councillors who met with the Panel ...... 50 Appendix 2 - Summary of Responses to the Questionnaire ...... 52 Appendix 3 – Comparative data: Basic Allowances and SRAs ...... 58 Appendix 4 - Schedule of Recommended Allowances ...... 60

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

(A schedule of the recommended allowances is attached at Appendix 4)

The Independent Remuneration Panel recommends that:

1. The Basic Allowance is set at £12,167 per annum. (paragraph 32)

2. The Council adopts the LGA day rate as the index by which annual adjustments are made to the allowances within the Members Allowances Scheme for the period up until 2012/13. (paragraph 35)

3. All the allowances recommended herein are backdated to the appropriate date in June 2009. (paragraph 37)

4. SRAs are limited to one per Councillor, with the greatest SRA being the one received. (paragraph 47)

5. The Leader SRA is set at £25,168 per annum (Band 1). (paragraph 66)

6. The Deputy Leader SRA is set at 80% of the Leader SRA or £20,134 per annum (Band 2). (paragraph 70)

7. The Cabinet Member SRA is set at 60% of the Leader SRA or £15,101 per annum (Band 3). (paragraph 77)

8. The Portfolio Holder SRA is set at 30% of the Leader SRA or £7,551 per annum (Band 6). (paragraph 81)

9. The Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Management and Resources Select Committee SRA is set at 35% of the Leader SRA or £8,809 per annum (Band 5). (paragraph 90)

10. The Chairman of the Children’s Services Select Committee SRA, Chairman of the Environment Select Committee SRA, and Chairman of the Health and Adult Social Care Select Committee SRA are set at 22.5% of the Leader SRA or £5,663 per annum (Band 7). (paragraph 91)

11. The Vice-Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Management and Resources Select Committee SRA is set at 22.5% of the Leader SRA or £5,663 per annum (Band 7). (paragraph 95)

12. a. The £10,000 scrutiny fund, which is intended to reward Councillors performing specific scrutiny functions such as chairing task groups and rapid scrutiny exercises, is retained within the Scheme. (paragraph 101)

b. The fund is to be allocated by the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Management and Resources Select Committee, who should be reminded of its intended purpose when deciding how to allocate the fund. (paragraph 101)

13. The Chairman of Area Board SRA is set at 15% of the Leader SRA or £3,775 per annum (Band 9). (paragraph 107)

14. The Chairman of Area Planning Committee SRA is set at 22.5% of the Leader SRA or £5,663 per annum (Band 7). (paragraph 111)

15. The Chairman of Council SRA and Vice-Chairman of Council SRA are set at 40% and 20% of the Leader SRA or £10,067 (Band 4) and £5,034 per annum (Band 8) respectively. (paragraph 116)

16. The Chairman of Licensing Committee SRA is set at 10% of the Leader SRA or £2,517 per annum (Band 10) (paragraph 121)

17. The Chairman of the Strategic Planning Committee SRA is set at 15% of the Leader SRA or £3,775 per annum (Band 9) (paragraph 129)

18. The Chairman of the Audit Committee SRA is set at 10% of the Leader SRA or £2,517 per annum (Band 10) (paragraph 133)

19. The Chairman of the Staffing Policy Committee SRA is set at 10% of the Leader SRA or £2,517 per annum (Band 10) (paragraph 137)

20. The Chairman of the Wiltshire Pension Fund Committee SRA is set at 10% of the Leader SRA or £2,517 per annum (Band 10) (paragraph 140)

21. No SRA is paid to the Council’s representatives on South West Councils (SWC). (paragraph 144)

22. a. The Group Leader Allowance is amended as follows (paragraph 152):

1. A flat rate of £500 per Group Leader, plus £50 per member in the Group.

2. £100 per member in the Group to remunerate those members taking on special Group responsibilities (e.g. Secretary, treasurer, spokesperson).

b. The Group Leaders’ Allowance is exempt from the one SRA per Councillor cap.

23. The Chairman of the Standards Committee’s allowance is set at 22.5% of the Leader SRA or £5,663 per annum. (paragraph 155)

24. The Independent Member of the Standards Committee’s allowance is set at £2,240 per annum . (paragraph 159)

25. The Town/Parish Member of the Standards Committee’s allowance is set at £2,240 per annum. (paragraph 163)

26. The Co-opted Member of the Children’s Services Select Committee’s allowance is set at £896 per annum. (paragraph 166)

27. Payment of a Technology Allowance of £250 per Councillor is included within the recommended Scheme. This annual payment covers all IT consumables and the cost of the Councillor’s broadband, and replaces the current Scheme’s telephone line allowance. The Allowance is given with an expectation that it will be used by Councillors to obtain broadband internet access. (paragraph 170)

28. There is no amendment to the current Scheme’s classification of approved duties, but that the situation regarding site visits is clarified. (paragraph 180)

29. All members of Wiltshire Council are given entitlement to join the Local Government Pension Scheme, and that both the Basic Allowance and Special Responsibility Allowances are treated as amounts in respect of which such pensions are payable (in accordance with a scheme made under section 7 of the Superannuation Act 1972). (paragraph 184)

INTRODUCTION

1. Wiltshire Council’s Independent Remuneration Panel was convened under The Local Authorities (Members’ Allowances) (England) Regulations 2003. The Regulations require all local authorities to set up and maintain an advisory Independent [Members’] Remuneration Panel to review and provide advice on Members’ allowances. All Councils are required to convene their Remuneration Panel and seek its advice before they make any changes or amendments to their allowances scheme and they must ‘pay regard’ to the Panel’s recommendations before setting a new or amended Members’ Allowances Scheme.

2. The Local Authorities (Members’ Allowances) (England) Regulations 2003 also stipulate the statutory content of an allowances scheme, and thereby require the Panel to make recommendations on:

• the level of a Basic Allowance payable to all members of the Council;

• the roles and responsibilities for which Special Responsibility Allowances (SRAs) should be payable and the level of each such allowance;

• the level of allowances payable to Co-opted Members

• the inclusion of child care and/or dependent carers’ allowances and the level of any such payments;

• the level of allowances for travel, subsistence and overnight stays; and

• whether allowances should also be pensionable.

BACKGROUND

3. The Independent Remuneration Panel (‘the Panel’) last undertook a detailed review of the Members’ Allowances Scheme (‘the Scheme’) in 2006, recommending a variety of amendments including the phased reduction of the ‘public service discount’ applied to the Basic Allowance from 50% to 33% through to 2009 . The Panel met again in early 2009 to determine the allowances payable to district councillors co-opted on to committees during the pre-election period (1 April – 4 June 2009).

4. Wiltshire Council’s existing Members’ Allowances Scheme was inherited from the former Wiltshire County Council and does not reflect the new Council’s decision making structure. In a number of important areas amendments to the scheme of Special Responsibility Allowances (SRAs) are required, for example where functions were previously exercised by the former district councils. In addition, the Panel had never reviewed the overall Scheme in detail and there are a number of areas where it requires a holistic review.

PANEL

5. Wiltshire Council’s Independent Remuneration Panel consists of the following Panel Members:

Mr A Lampey

Until 2001, Albert Lampey was Employment Secretary for the South West Provincial Employer’s Organisation. During his last year, he was also secretary to the South West Regional Assembly and regional branch of the Local Government Association (LGA) and was responsible for bringing together the secretarial, financial and constitutional arrangements to enable a combined secretariat for local government’s regional bodies. Since 2001, Mr Lampey has undertaken consultancy assignments, primarily in the human resources area. He is also a member of Cornwall Council’s Independent Remuneration Panel and runs a beef farm with his son.

Mr J Payne

Until 2004, Jeremy Payne was Managing Director of HTV Group. Previously, he was MD of HTV West and Director of Programmes, commissioning and overseeing the production of 570 hours of programmes each year. His media career has encompassed experience in newspapers, radio, public relations and independent commercial film production as well as television in the UK, Australia and New Zealand. Jeremy was founding chairman of South West Screen and currently chairs the South West Film and Television Archive and the charity Brain Tumour UK.

Mr D Stratton OBE

David Stratton OBE ran his family’s farm in Kingston Deverill from 1970 until 2006. He has now handed down the day-to-day management of the farm to his son, but remains a partner in the business. He was High Sherriff of Wiltshire in 2001.

6. The Panel received officer support from Henry Powell, Democratic Services Officer, John Quinton, Head of Democratic Services, and Marie Todd, Area Board and Member Support Manager.

7. A list of Councillors who gave verbal evidence to the Panel is attached at Appendix 1. In addition, fifty-six Councillors responded to an allowances questionnaire. The Panel would like to record its gratitude to those Councillors who provided evidence in either form.

PRINCIPLES

8. In revisiting the current Scheme, the Panel reviewed the principles it had adopted for previous reviews, as well as those adopted by other Independent Remuneration Panels. It resolved to retain the principles it had adopted for past reviews but added an extra principle (the last one listed below) taken from those suggested by the Councillors

Commission in its publication, ‘Models, Issues, Incentives and Barriers’ (CC 2007). The principles adopted for this review are:

1.the level of remuneration should relate to a commonly accepted benchmark, such as the median male non-manual salary

2. a scheme should be simple and easy to understand by the public as well as councillors themselves

3. a scheme should not be bureaucratic

4. Wiltshire Council is one of many local authorities and it should not adopt a scheme which is significantly out of line with others

5. membership of a local authority is a voluntary public service and the level of allowances should reflect that; but people should not be prevented from standing for office on financial grounds

6. a scheme should provide reasonable recompense for the time commitment and duties involved, after allowing for an element of public service, in order to maintain the quality of representation and extend the opportunity for people to serve as councillors

7. a scheme should reflect the substantial time which the average councillor spends on casework, local community work and other council work

8. a scheme should recognise also the additional duties and responsibilities of office holders.

PROCESS AND METHODOLOGY

9. In undertaking the review, the Panel met on four occasions between 7 July and 21 October 2009. They considered a range of evidence, including:

Verbal evidence from Councillors and officers

10. The Panel met with Councillors holding various roles of special responsibility, including the Leader, Deputy Leader, Portfolio Holders, Chairman of an Overview and Scrutiny Select Committee, Area Planning Committees and Area Boards. The evidence they provided is referenced, where appropriate, throughout this report. A complete list of Councillors and officers who provided verbal evidence for the Panel is attached at Appendix 1.

Members’ Allowances Questionnaire

11. A Members’ Allowances Questionnaire was circulated to all ninety-eight members of the Council, requesting their views on the existing scheme and suggestions for any future scheme. Fifty-six responses were received, representing a 59% return rate. These

responses were invaluable to the Panel in providing a Councillor’s perspective on the level of remuneration they receive and highlighting consensuses on how aspects of the existing scheme could be improved. These views and suggestions are referenced throughout the report where appropriate. A summary of the questionnaire responses received is attached at Appendix 2.

Members’ Allowance Schemes adopted by other councils

12. During its initial deliberations the Panel considered member allowance schemes from a number of local authorities, including county, shire, district and unitary councils. In the latter stages of the review, this sample was refined to include only the eleven councils that the Panel felt most closely compared with Wiltshire Council. These were all large unitary councils or councils within the South West region. They were as follows:

• Bath and North East Somerset Council • Bristol City Council • Cornwall Council • Devon County Council • Durham County Council • East Riding of Yorkshire Council • Gloucestershire County Council • Hampshire County Council • Northumberland County Council • Shropshire Council • Somerset County Council

13. The allowances paid by these councils were analysed to discover the average levels of Basic Allowance and SRAs paid and the relationships between them. In recommending a level of Basic Allowance and of all SRAs within the Scheme, the Panel considered the levels paid by comparable councils at length and used these as a benchmarking tool. This assisted it in adhering to one of its agreed principles: “Wiltshire Council is one of many local authorities and it should not adopt a scheme which is significantly out of line with others”.

14. The Panel also received information requested directly from other councils in order to clarify issues arising from their allowances schemes or from the reports of their Independent Remuneration Panels. The Panel would like to record its gratitude to officers from the following councils for responding to its queries: Cornwall Council, Northumberland County Council and Shropshire Council.

15. Details of the sample of comparable councils referred to above and the comparative data presented before the Panel are attached at Appendix 3.

Guidance, literature and other data

16. The Panel considered a number of publications relating to the remuneration of elected representatives, including the statutory guidance from the Government and other advisory literature. One member of the Panel also attended the annual meeting of the Chairs of

Independent Remuneration Panels and their Principal Advisers on 17 September 2009. This was useful networking opportunity and a valuable forum for cross-referencing the work of the Panel with that of other Panels.

17. The Panel also considered statistical evidence from a range of sources including the allowances paid to councillors nationally and the average wage rates paid in Wiltshire and Great Britain. A full list of the evidence sources used is listed at Appendix 1.

BASIC ALLOWANCE

Introduction

18. Under the ‘Local Authorities (Members’ Allowances) (England) Regulations 2003, a members’ allowance scheme must make provision for a Basic Allowance, which must be paid at the same rate for all Councillors. The Statutory Guidance on the Regulations states that the Basic Allowance “is intended to recognise the time commitment of all councillors, including such inevitable calls on their time as meeting with officers and constituents and attendance at political group meetings. It is also intended to cover incidental costs such as the use of their homes.” (ODPM, 2003). Incidental costs can be many, ranging from telephone calls to visiting constituents (Councillors Commission, 2007).

19. The Panel has previously used the following formula to calculate the Basic Allowance:

LGA day rate

X Number of working days in a year

X % to reflect the average number of hours that Councillors say they work

– ‘public service discount’

= Basic Allowance

20. As part of its holistic review, the Panel re-examined all three elements of this formula:

• Rate for remuneration

• Number of hours to be remunerated

• Level of ‘public service discount’ to apply

Rate for remuneration

21. Historically, the Panel has used the Local Government Association’s (LGA) ‘day session rate’ in setting the Basic Allowance. The rate is based on the national male median white- collar wage, derived annually from the previous year’s Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings conducted (ONS, 2008). Though used by many councils in setting their allowances, the rate has no statutory force and local authorities are free to use other indices by which to set or update their allowances if they wish. The Council’s current Basic Allowance was calculated using the 2006 LGA day rate (£130.16). The Council have not used a more recent version of the rate since 2006 as the phased reduction to the ‘public service discount’ referred to in paragraph 3 was seen as providing sufficient uplift to the Allowance on its own. The LGA’s 2009 rate, based on 2008 figures, is £149.34 (LGA, 2009). This represents an increase of 4.6% on the previous LGA rate of £142.77 - a fairly significant uplift. Applying the new rate to the existing formula would therefore provide a significant increase to the Basic Allowance on its own, as the rate currently used by the Council is based on data from 2005.

22. In undertaking the current review, the Panel considered various alternatives to the LGA day rate including various rates used by other councils. The Panel looked at many extrapolations of Basic Allowance using alternative rates such as the median and mean annual full time wages within Wiltshire (ONS, 2008), and the mean basic wage paid by Wiltshire Council (for non-teaching staff calculated by full time equivalent).

23. In conclusion, the Panel resolved to continue to use the LGA day rate, agreeing that its use holds several advantages. It is updated annually, making adjustments to the Basic Allowance a simple matter; It is used by many other councils in setting their Basic Allowance; Its use, whilst retaining the other elements of the formula, yields a Basic Allowance aligned with those of the most directly comparable councils within the sample; and the Panel’s recommendations have historically always been based upon the LGA rate and have generally been accepted by the Council.

Number of hours to be remunerated

24. The IDeA 2008 Survey of Members Allowances reports that backbench councillors without any significant responsibility in all categories of authority committed on average 22 hours per week. National figures show that unitary councillors committed on average 27 hours per week. In response to the questionnaire, Wiltshire Councillors provided an average minimum time input of 20.5 hours per week in order to perform the basic role of Wiltshire Councillor effectively. This represents an increase on the average figure of 70 hours per month (approximately 16 hours per week) provided by members of Wiltshire County Council in 2006.

25. The Panel was concerned that the time input provided by Councillors in response to the 2009 questionnaire was predicated on only three months experience of Wiltshire Council. It was also concerned that applying this time input to the existing formula (described in paragraph 19), with the updated LGA day rate (LGA, 2009), yields a Basic Allowance in excess of those paid by other councils in the sample. This would contravene one of the Panel’s adopted principals: “Wiltshire Council is one of many local authorities and it should not adopt a scheme which is significantly out of line with others.”

26. The Panel acknowledges that the Council is a new organisation and that the role of Wiltshire Councillor may not yet be fully understood or developed. Time may prove that the role makes a greater demand on Councillors’ time than experienced at present, particularly as new initiatives like the Area Boards ‘bed in’. The Panel has resolved, therefore, to go part way toward remunerating Councillors’ reported time input of 20.5 hours per week by remunerating 18 hours per week – an increase of approximately 2 hours on the time input remunerated at present The Panel also recommends that the time input given by Wiltshire Councillors is reviewed in due course if the Council feels that this is appropriate.

Level of ‘public service discount’ to apply

27. In its guidance for panels in setting the Basic Allowance, the Government states that “it is important that some element of the work of members continues to be voluntary – that some hours are not remunerated.” (DCLG, 2001)

28. The discount level applied by Wiltshire County Council was set for some time at 50%. In order to bring the Council’s scheme more into line with other councils a phased reduction brought this ‘discount’ to 33% in 2008/9. Nationally, the 'public service discount' most often used is 30–33%, but can vary between 25 and 50% (Councillors Commission, 2007).

29. In conclusion, the Panel saw no reason to amend the current 33% ‘public service discount’ applied to the Basic Allowance and resolved to maintain this rate.

Conclusions

30. The Panel acknowledges how important the Basic Allowance is to the rest of the Scheme in that it is used as a building block when calculating the Scheme’s SRA. It also acknowledges that the Basic Allowance recommended here represents a fairly significant increase on the current Basic Allowance of £9,875, but this simply reflects the application of an up-to-date LGA day rate and a slight increase to the hours remunerated. However, the Panel feels that the amount recommended is in line with those paid by other major unitary councils and properly reflects the increased scope of Councillor responsibilities under the new Wiltshire Council.

31. The Panel has therefore used the following calculation to arrive at the Basic Allowance it hereby recommends to the Council:

18 hrs per week = 48.6% of a 37 hr working week

£149.34 LGA 2009 day rate x 250 working days in a year

= £37,355 per annum x 48.6%

= £18,160 – 33% public service discount

= £12,167 per annum

32. As stated in paragraph 26, the Panel also recommends that the time input given by Wiltshire Councillors is reviewed in due course if the Council feels that this is necessary.

RECOMMENDATION 1

The Panel recommend that:

The Basic Allowance is set at £12,167 per annum

INDEXATION

33. The Panel were aware in undertaking this review that the Leader had requested it to recommend a Scheme for the life of the Council (i.e. for four years). However, annual adjustments to the Scheme will be necessary in order to reflect inflationary changes and to prevent as steep a rise in allowances as has been recommended here due to the time elapsed since the previous uplift.

34. The Regulations state that a scheme may make provision for an annual adjustment of allowances by reference to an index, which may be specified by the authority. It must not rely on this index to make annual adjustments to the scheme for a period of more than four years (after which it must seek a further recommendation from its Independent Remuneration Panel) (ODPM, 2003).

35. The Panel have used the LGA day rate to calculate the Basic Allowance, the Leader SRA and, by virtue of the latter, all other SRAs recommended herein (see paragraph 49). It therefore sees the LGA day rate as being the most sensible index by which to determine annual adjustments to allowances within the Scheme. Recalculating the Basic Allowance, SRAs and Co-optees’ Allowances with an updated LGA day rate is a simple and transparent method of applying proportionate changes to these amounts.

RECOMMENDATION 2

The Panel recommend that:

The Council adopts the LGA day rate as the index by which annual adjustments are made to the allowances within the Members Allowances Scheme for the period up to 2012/13.

BACKDATING

36. The Panel are aware that the elected and co-opted members of Wiltshire Council have been operating for some months with an Allowances Scheme that does not reflect the decision making structure of the new authority and at a rate that reflects the previous Council’s Scheme. Councillors with roles of special responsibility relating to functions not

reflected within the current Scheme have been performing their roles with no other additional remuneration.

37. With this in mind, the Panel recommends that all of the allowances recommended herein are backdated to the appropriate date in 2009.

RECOMMENDATION 3

The Panel recommend that:

All of the allowances recommended herein are backdated to the appropriate date in June 2009.

SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITY ALLOWANCES (SRAs)

Introduction

38. The Regulations state that “a special responsibility allowance [SRA] may be paid to those members of the council who have significant additional responsibilities over and above the generally accepted duties of a councillor. These responsibilities must be related to the discharge of the authority’s functions.” (ODPM 2003).

39. The Regulations list the categories of responsibilities which might call for an SRA. They state that SRAs may be payable for duties which fall within the following categories:

• acting as leader or deputy leader of a political group

• membership of the executive, where an authority is operating executive arrangements

• presiding at meetings of a committee, sub-committee, or joint committee

• representing the authority at meetings of another body

• membership of a committee or sub-committee which meets with exceptional frequency or for exceptionally long periods

• acting as a spokesperson for a political group on a committee or sub-committee

• membership of an adoption appeals panel or panel dealing with licensing or controlling any activity

• any other activities in relation to the discharge of the authority's functions as to require equal or greater effort of the member than any of the activities listed above.

40. The Regulations also state that where one political group is in control, and where an authority has decided to pay SRAs, the authority must make provision for the payment of a special responsibility allowance to at least one member of a minority group.

41. The Panel noted the Government’s guidance that “it should not necessarily follow that a responsibility which is vested to a particular member is a significant additional responsibility for which an SRA should be paid. Whilst such responsibilities may be unique to a particular member it may be that all or most members have some such responsibility to varying degrees. Such responsibilities should be recognised as a time commitment to council work which is acknowledged within the basic allowance and not responsibilities for which an SRA allowance should be recommended” (ODPM, 2003).

SRAs per Councillor and the 50% guideline

42. The Regulations do not limit the number of SRAs which may be paid, nor do they prohibit the payment of more than one SRA to any one Councillor. However, within the guidance the Government sets an expectation that the proportion of SRAs should not exceed 50% of the total number of councillors. The Government feels that local authorities would find it difficult to justify to the electorate how or why such a proportion of Councillors were carrying out significant additional responsibilities over and above those of a normal councillor.

43. The new unitary council, however, is one of a small group of large rural unitary authorities and there are by definition more posts with special responsibility in such an authority (more committees therefore more chairmen etc). Additionally, Area Boards and devolved governance were a key part of the Council’s bid for unitary status and the Panel accepts that local and transparent decision making also leads to more positions of responsibility. Recent statistics from the IDeA indicate that nationally more than half of all Councillors receive an SRA (53.2%). This varied according to the type of authority – 61.4% in shire counties and 56.4% in unitaries (IDeA, 2008).

44. The Council’s current scheme does not limit the number of SRAs that may be received by an individual councillor, but a significant majority of other councils do cap them at one per councillor (with the highest SRA being the one received). Some councils go part way towards this by allowing those Councillors with two roles of Special Responsibility to receive 100% of the higher SRA and 50% of the lower.

45. Responses to the Questionnaire indicated that Councillors are most in favour of this part- way approach. It asked "Should councillors with more than one role of special responsibility receive SRAs for both, only one, or a reduced amount for the lesser SRA?"

• 40% (19) of respondents felt that they should receive all of the higher SRA and a reduced percentage of the lower SRA.

• 35% (17) of respondents felt that councillors with more than one role of special responsibility should receive both SRAs.

• 21% (10) of respondents felt that they should receive only the higher SRA.

46. Allowing individual councillors to receive more than one SRA has two consequences:

• It makes an infringement of the 50% guideline more likely; and

• It could make the allowances scheme less transparent, in that it is difficult to deduce from the scheme the amount paid to any one individual. It may also produce the anomaly of the Leader receiving a lower total allowance than another Councillor. (Councillors Commission, 2007)

47. These factors, together with the strong tendency nationally for councils to cap SRAs, lead the Panel to recommend that the Scheme includes a cap on SRAs at one per Councillor, with the greatest SRA being the one received.

RECOMMENDATION 4

The Panel recommend that:

SRAs are limited to one per Councillor, with the greatest SRA being the one received.

SRA Methodology

48. The Panel considered several methods of calculating the levels of SRAs, using approaches recommended by the Government and those used by other Panels.

49. The Panel agreed with the Government’s suggestion that “a good starting point in determining special responsibility allowances may be to agree the allowance which should be attached to the most time consuming post on the Council (this maybe the elected mayor or the leader) and pro rata downwards for the other roles which it has agreed ought to receive an extra allowance.” (ODPM, 2001). This approach is one widely and has the advantage that, when future adjustments to the SRAs are required, changing the Leader’s SRA will have a proportionate and easily calculable impact on all other SRAs within the scheme. This approach also provides a clear, transparent and understandable scheme of allowances, particularly when roles with comparable levels of ‘special responsibility’ are banded together (with each band attracting a set percentage of the Leader’s SRA) as they are within the recommended Scheme (see Appendix 4).

50. We have received a wide range of views on the subject of SRAs and these are reflected in our recommendations below. Not all of the views were consistent but in most areas there was a common theme to the views presented both orally and in writing.

Leader SRA

51. The Panel considered several methods of calculating the Leader’s SRA, using approaches recommended by the Government and those used by other Panels. These included:

The factor approach

52. This determines the Leader’s SRA as a multiple of the basic allowance. This method has the advantage of being simple and transparent, but has the disadvantage of building into the SRAs a public service discount not suggested in the statutory guidance. Nor is it easy to establish a rationale for the multiple selected.

53. Overall, the Panel felt that this approach primarily used a time-based approach. It feels that the SRAs should more reflect roles’ levels of responsibility than simply the time input required to perform them.

The analogy approach

54. This draws an analogy between the post of leader and another public sector role, such as a backbench Member of Parliament or the chairman of the local primary care trust.

55. In considering this approach the Panel looked at such analogies as the differential between the salary of the Prime Minister and that of the Head of the Civil Service as a possible model for that between the salary of the Council’s Leader SRA and the salary of its Chief Executive.

56. Overall the Panel felt that the SRAs paid to the Leaders of other comparable councils provided a more relevant benchmark than the salaries of other public sector roles.

The time-based approach

57. This assigns a notional amount of time to the leader’s post in addition to the time notionally rewarded by the basic allowance. The extra time can be rewarded at a higher rate than that used to arrive at the basic allowance. This approach has the advantage of a stronger logic than the factor approach.

Further considerations

58. During the Panel’s discussions with Councillors there has been general agreement about the increasing demands that unitary status will place upon the Leader. These demands are considered to be substantially above those placed on all other members of the Cabinet and indeed the Council as a whole, and therefore the Panel concludes that the role should attract an allowance which reflects this.

59. The Panel noted that the Leader’s role includes setting the strategic direction of the Council, ensuring that the needs and aspirations of Wiltshire’s people are known, spearheading Council management initiatives, monitoring the performance of the Cabinet and promoting the work of the Council in general. The importance of the Leader’s role has increased since the move to an executive structure of local government in 2000.

60. The Leader holds political and strategic responsibility for an organisation with a budget of approximately £850 million and employing around 9,000 people. The Panel are satisfied that the time input required to perform this role would preclude the post-holder from

undertaking 'normal' full-time work - a situation borne by the Leaders of other councils across the country (Councillors Commission, 2007). Indeed, the hours actually committed probably significantly exceed those of a normal working week of 37 hours, and the evidence provided suggests that this is the case at present.

61. The Panel discussed at length the various competing factors faced in appropriately remunerating elected members with positions of such responsibility. Whilst the guidance (and the 5th principle of this the Panel’s review) states that membership of a local authority is a voluntary public service and the level of allowances should reflect this, the Panel were also anxious that level of Leader’s SRA awarded should be sufficient to attract the calibre of candidate required to perform the role effectively.

62. In recommending a Leader SRA the Panel also considered the following factors:

• The current Leader SRA is £20,950. The mean Leader SRA within the sample (see Appendix 3) is £27,905 (range: £20,950 - £36,575). The current Leader SRA is the lowest within the sample.

• The current Leader SRA represents 212% of the current Basic Allowance (£9,875). The average percentage within the sample is 266% (range: 186 – 425%). The current Leader SRA as a percentage of the current Basic Allowance is the third lowest within the sample.

• Of the councils within the sample, Wiltshire Council is in the middle range in terms of the population and geographical size of its administrative area. This would suggest it should be in the middle range in terms of the level of its SRAs.

• The current Leader reported committing an average of 60 hours per week to the role (including time spent on constituency work). She attends on average 3,000 meetings per year and has an average annual ‘business’ mileage of 18,000 miles.

• In response to the Questionnaire, 4 respondents commented that the current leader’s SRA seems particularly low.

Conclusions

63. The Panel concludes that despite Government guidance stating that through Members’ allowances schemes, “[people should be] encouraged to come forward as elected members and that their service to the community [should be] retained” (DCLG, 2003), it is not in a position to recommend a Leader’s SRA to match the salary of a position in the private sector with comparable responsibilities. To do so would be to recommend “a scheme which is significantly out of line with others” (second principle). The Panel notes that there remains a conflict between keeping local elected representation a partially voluntary public service and attracting to it a broad cross-section of society (i.e. not only the financially independent and/or retired). However, it feels it is not within its remit to address on-going national debates on this issue.

64. The Panel therefore resolved that the SRA attached to the post of Leader, whilst not being aligned with the salary of a comparable post in the private sector, should constitute a reasonable allowance and should be approximately aligned with the Leader SRAs paid by other large unitary councils. If over the course of time local authority Leader SRAs become more aligned with the salaries of comparable roles in the private sector then the SRA recommended here may need to be reviewed. However, it should not necessarily follow that all other SRAs should be recalculated to reflect that new Leader SRA.

65. We therefore recommend setting the Leader’s total allowances at the national average median male white collar salary (the figure on which the LGA day rate is based). No public service discount is applied, in order to reflect the responsibilities and time commitment inherent in this role. The resultant total allowance received by the Leader is therefore calculated as follows:

£149. 34 (LGA 2009 day rate) x 250 (working days per year)

= £37,335

£37,335 – £12,167 (recommended Basic Allowance)

= £25,168 per annum

66. Though an increase in real terms, this represents 207% of the recommended Basic Allowance of £12,167 – a slight decrease in terms of the Leader SRA as a multiple of the Basic Allowance.

RECOMMENDATION 5

The Panel recommend that:

The Leader SRA is set at £25,168 per annum (Band 1).

Deputy Leader SRA

67. Like the nine other Cabinet Members the Deputy Leader holds responsibility for an executive portfolio, but performs the additional duty of deputising for the Leader so far as legally possible and permissible in the Leader’s absence. S/he also assists and works closely with the Leader in delivering the Leader’s usual functions and on budgetary planning and policy development.

68. From the evidence presented the Panel are satisfied that the size and breadth of the Leader’s responsibilities in a large unitary council (as detailed above) are also reflected in the role of the Deputy Leader. The role holds significant responsibilities and requires a time input almost comparable to that of the Leader to be performed effectively. This assistive responsibility is obviously in addition to the duties of a regular Cabinet Member.

69. The Panel considered the following evidence in recommending the level of Deputy Leader SRA:

• The current Deputy Leader SRA is £16,760. The mean Deputy Leader SRA within the sample is £19,695 (see Appendix 3). The current Deputy Leader SRA is the second lowest of those in the sample.

• The current Deputy Leader SRA represents 80% of the current Leader SRA. The mean percentage within the sample is 71% (range 55 - 83%). The current Deputy Leader SRA is therefore in the middle to upper range of those within the sample as a percentage of the Leader SRA, though this may be because the current Leader SRA is low.

• The current Deputy Leader has provided a sample two month extract of his diary, which represents an average weekly input of around 45-50 hours.

70. The Panel recommends setting the Deputy Leader SRA at a level equidistant between that of the Leader and that of a regular Cabinet Member. This equates to an SRA set at 80% of the Leader SRA or £20,134 per annum .

RECOMMENDATION 6

The Panel recommend that:

The Deputy Leader SRA is set at 80% of the Leader SRA or £20,134 per annum (Band 2).

Cabinet Member SRA (8 *)

*in addition to the Leader and Deputy Leader

71. The main responsibilities of Cabinet Members are to give political direction to officers working within their portfolio and to support them in the implementation of policy. They are accountable for decisions and performance within their portfolio both internally and externally, to partners and the community. They have an overview of the performance management, efficiency and effectiveness of their portfolio and make executive decisions relating to it. The current Cabinet portfolios include Economic Development, Planning and Housing; Finance, Performance and Risk; Children’s Services and Health and Wellbeing.

72. From the evidence received, the Panel are satisfied that the role of Cabinet Member is third only to that of Leader and Deputy Leader in terms of the responsibilities and time demands of the role.

73. Following the elections on 4 June 2009, the Leader appointed 13 ‘Portfolio Holders’ who sit outside of the Cabinet but whose primary role is to support the workload of Cabinet Members. These are new roles, which have no decision-making powers but carry such portfolios as Vulnerable Children, Organisational Culture, and Transport. The role of

Portfolio Holder is discussed in more detail later in this report (see paragraph 78), but in recommending a Cabinet Member SRA the Panel considered whether the introduction of this new assistive role has reduced the workload or responsibilities of the Cabinet Members.

74. The Panel noted that council Leaders are limited to appointing ten Cabinet Members; a limit which has not been increased in line with the greater scope of Cabinets’ responsibilities in unitary authorities. The Panel also considered the possible effect on a council’s performance of having Cabinet Members with insufficient time to conduct proper research and consultation before taking executive decisions. It was felt that this could encourage an executive to operate in ‘silos’, inhibiting strategic thinking across portfolios and ultimately having a detrimental affect on the operation of the Council.

75. In conclusion, the Panel were satisfied that the new Portfolio Holder roles are additional resources providing extra capacity to the work of Cabinet Members. The Cabinet Member is still the decision maker and ultimately holds responsibility for any decisions taken within the remit of their portfolio. The Panel also noted that the reported time input of Cabinet Members (on top of the time required by their constituency roles) was effectively full time, and so the new Portfolio Holder roles appear not to have significantly reduced the time demands placed on Cabinet Members. The new role of Portfolio Holder was therefore not a significant factor for the Panel when recommending a Cabinet Member SRA.

76. The Panel also considered the following evidence in recommending the level of Cabinet Member SRA:

• The current Cabinet Member SRA is £12,570. The mean Cabinet Member SRA within the sample is £16,285 (range: £12,000 – £24,636) (see Appendix 3). The current Cabinet Member SRA is the second lowest in the sample.

• The current Cabinet Member SRA represents 60% of the current Leader SRA. The mean within the sample is 59%. The current Cabinet Member SRA is therefore in the middle range of those within the sample in terms of its percentage of the Leader SRA. It is relevant, of course, that the current Leader SRA is the lowest within the sample.

• Six Cabinet Members responded to the Allowances Questionnaire and provided an average time commitment of 30 hours per week in performing their role (in addition to the time required to perform the duties of a regular Councillor (range: 22 – 40 hours)).

77. The Panel therefore recommends setting the Cabinet Member SRA at 60% of the Leader SRA or £15,101 per annum .

RECOMMENDATION 7

The Panel recommend that:

The Cabinet Member SRA is set at 60% of the Leader SRA or £15,101 per annum (Band 3).

Portfolio Holder SRA (13)

78. As mentioned in paragraph 73, following the elections on 4 June 2009, the Leader appointed 13 Portfolio Holders who sit outside of the Cabinet but whose primary role is to support the workload of Cabinet Members. They have no statutory decision-making powers but are an additional resource providing extra capacity to Cabinet Members’ work, undertaking in-depth work with Service Directors and also functioning as an extra contact point for non-executive Councillors. They carry such portfolios as Vulnerable Children, Organisational Culture, and Transport. The role also serves as a development position for prospective Cabinet Members. This element of succession planning has been absent from previous executive structures and the departure of a Cabinet Member could have been problematic as a result.

79. The awarding of a new SRA was not something taken lightly by the Panel and it has carefully considered the responsibilities and time demands placed on Portfolio Holders in considering an appropriate level of remuneration. There are arguments for and against remunerating the post. On one hand, Portfolio Holders have no official decision making powers and it is the Cabinet Members who hold ultimate responsibility, even if decisions are heavily influenced by the Portfolio Holder. If indeed it is a development role, perhaps it should be treated as an opportunity for advancement, an honour, and its own reward. On the other hand, the Portfolio Holder is likely to be seen by the Council, the media and the public as the person responsible for any issues falling within their portfolio, regardless of their official decision making powers.

80. The Panel also considered the following evidence when setting a Portfolio Holder SRA:

• 9 of the 13 Portfolio Holders responded to the Questionnaire and provided an average time commitment of 12.5 hours per week in performing the role (range: 4- 25 hours).

• From its discussions with current Portfolio Holders, the Panel were satisfied that they have a role in influencing operational decisions, dealing with the media, outside bodies and attending Select Committee meetings in relation to their portfolio responsibilities. The Panel also noted that the increased capacity provided by Portfolio Holders resulted in a reduction in the number of decisions taken purely by officers, providing greater transparency in the Council’s decision making.

• 90% (44) of Questionnaire respondents felt that the Portfolio Holders should receive an SRA (this was the second most affirmative response to ten proposed SRAs).

• Several other councils have created non-statutory, portfolio-holding positions with similar roles and responsibilities to this Council’s Portfolio Holders, and have chosen to award them an SRA. These include Bristol City Council, Northumberland County Council and Shropshire Council. There is significant variance in the level of the SRAs awarded (range: £1,500 – £7,332)

81. The Panel concludes that the role of Portfolio Holder holds significant responsibilities and requires a significant time commitment to be performed effectively. It is satisfied that the scope of Cabinet portfolios, particularly under unitary councils, warrants the attention of more than one person and the role of Portfolio Holder is therefore a sensible addition to the structure. The Panel is also satisfied that Portfolio Holders, while having no formal decision making powers, are in reality likely to be exerting a strong influence over decisions taken by Cabinet Members and will have to deal with a good proportion of the fall-out from those decisions. The Panel therefore recommends that Portfolio Holders receive an SRA set at 30% of the Leader SRA or £7,551 per annum . This equates to half of a Cabinet Member SRA, which the Panel believes reflects the correct differential between the responsibilities and time demands of the two roles.

RECOMMENDATION 8

The Panel recommend that:

Portfolio Holders receive an SRA set at 30% of the Leader SRA or £7,551 per annum (Band 5).

Overview and Scrutiny Select Committee SRAs

82. In recommending SRAs relating to the Council’s overview and scrutiny function the Panel received detailed briefing on the roles fulfilled by its four select committees and their respective Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen. These select committees each meet 5 – 6 times per year, and are:

• Overview and Scrutiny Management and Resources Select Committee (current Chairman’s SRA: £7,575)

• Health and Adult Social Care Select Committee (current Chairman’s SRA: £5,200)

• Children’s Services Select Committee (current Chairman’s SRA: £5,200)

• Environment Select Committee (current Chairman’s SRA: £0 – new committee)

Chairmen of Select Committees (4)

83. The Panel considered the role of Overview and Scrutiny as a backbench Councillor’s primary forum for challenging and scrutinising the decisions of the Cabinet; contributing to the monitoring of the Council’s performance and to the development of Council policy; and for scrutinising the key partners signed-up to the Local Area Agreement (LAA). The Panel received evidence of scrutiny’s emerging role in assisting ‘local challenge’ in conjunction with the Council’s new Area Boards through mechanisms such as the Councillor Call For Action (CC4A). The Panel were satisfied that the Council’s four Select Committees play an important overall role in the functions listed above and that their Chairmen’s roles in facilitating this was sufficient to attract significant SRAs. These roles include leading their respective select committees as a team, acting as a key link with Cabinet Members and Senior Officers, being accountable to the Council for the actions of their Committees and for the chairmanship of Committee meetings.

84. The Panel also noted the current Government’s plans for broadening the remit of local authority scrutiny committees, which are laid out in its consultation paper ‘Strengthening Local Democracy’ (DCLG, 2009). The paper proposes greater powers for Councillors to scrutinise services other than those provided by the local authority, including those of water and energy providers, parole boards and the Environment Agency. With respect to local Councillors involved in scrutiny, the paper suggests that one way of demonstrating a commitment to the importance of overview and scrutiny would be aligning the SRAs received by overview and scrutiny committee Chairmen with those received by Cabinet Members.

85. The Panel resolved that it was important that SRAs reflect their roles’ current status and responsibilities and not those proposed for the future, which may, or may not, come to fruition. The proposals put forward in the consultation paper ‘Strengthening Local Democracy’ were therefore not a major factor in recommending the scrutiny SRAs detailed below.

86. The Panel considered the rationale for the differentiation between the current SRA paid to the Chairman of the Management Resources Select Committee (£7,575) and the lesser SRAs paid to the Chairmen of the Children’s Services Select Committee and the Health and Adult Social Care Select Committee (both £5,200). The Environment Select Committee is a new committee and therefore its Chairman currently receives no SRA at all.

87. The Panel received evidence that all four of the Council’s Select Committees hold responsibility for overseeing and scrutinising generally distinct services performed by the Council and its key partners. However, the Management and Resources Select Committee holds the additional responsibility of reviewing, developing and advising on the Council’s overview and scrutiny function (this being the “Management” aspect of its remit). While it is not an “umbrella committee” through which the recommendations of the other Select Committees flow, it is the committee responsible for both scrutinising overarching policy issues (e.g. the Council’s transition to unitary status) and for establishing, and defining the remit of, the other Select Committees.

88. The Management and Resources Select Committee’s broader role means that its Chairman is viewed as the corporate lead for the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny function and the post-holder must undertake significant additional work outside of Committee meeting to this end. The Panel was satisfied, therefore, that the Chairman of the Management and Resources holds a greater level of responsibility than the Chairmen of the other Select Committees and that a differentiation in the levels of their respective SRAs remains appropriate.

89. The Panel also considered the following evidence when setting the level of SRA for the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Management and Resources Select Committee:

• The current SRA is £7,575. Within the sample (see Appendix 3), the mean SRA paid to chairmen of councils’ ‘main’ or management scrutiny committee is £9,437 (range: £5,808 - £14,280). Therefore the current SRA is in the low to middle range of the sample.

• The current SRA represents 77% of the current Basic Allowance (£9,875). The mean percentage within the sample is 89% (range: 53-151%).

• The current SRA represents 36% of the current Leader SRA (£20,095). The mean percentage within the sample is 34%.

• In response to the Questionnaire, the current Chairmen of the scrutiny Select Committees reported a mean time commitment of 11.5 hrs per week in performing their roles (range: 3.5 – 16.5 hours). The Chairman of the Management and Resources Select Committee provided a time commitment of 15 hours per week and also met with the Panel to discuss the nature of his role.

90. The Panel concludes that the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Management and Resources Select Committee has an important role with significant responsibilities. However, at present we do not consider its responsibilities or required time commitment to be equivalent to that of a Cabinet Member, who has direct decision making powers. From Councillor responses to the Questionnaire, the time commitment required by the two roles also reflects this disparity. We therefore recommend an SRA below the level of a Cabinet Member, set at 35% of the Leader SRA or £8,809 per annum .

RECOMMENDATION 9

The Panel recommend that:

The Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Management and Resources Select Committee SRA is set at 35% of the Leader SRA or £8,809 per annum (Band 4).

91. The Panel has further concluded that the Chairmen of the Children’s Select Committee, the Health and Adult Social Care Select Committee and the Environment Select Committee play an important role with significant responsibilities, but not to the same degree as the Chairman of the Management and Resources Select Committee. We therefore recommend

an SRA set at 22.5% of the Leader SRA or £5,663 per annum . This approximately maintains the current differential between the SRAs of the Select Committee Chairmen.

RECOMMENDATION 10

The Panel recommend that:

SRAs for the Chairmen of the Children’s Services Select Committee, the Environment Select Committee and the Health and Adult Social Care Select Committee are set at 22.5% of the Leader SRA or £5,663 per annum (Band 6).

Vice-Chairmen of Select Committees (4)

92. The Panel also considered whether the roles of Vice-Chairmen of Select Committees warrant an SRA. The difference in the role of the Management and Resources Select Committee and that of the other Select Committees (see paragraph 87) is also relevant here.

93. The Panel noted that, while on paper the role of Vice-Chairman of the Management and Resources Select Committee is no more onerous than that of other Vice-Chairmen, particular circumstances at Wiltshire Council result in the post-holder performing duties outside of the standard vice-chairing role and playing a key part in the scrutiny function. The Chairman of the Management and Resources Select Committee has historically been a member of the opposition Group and the Committee’s Vice-Chairman similarly a member of the majority Group. Through this arrangement the Committee’s Vice-Chairman effectively becomes the controlling Group’s ‘lead’ on scrutiny and a vital link between the scrutiny function and the Cabinet/majority group - a role that could not realistically be performed by the Chairman (as a member of the opposition Group). The Panel received evidence that the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Management and Resources Select Committee work collaboratively, forming a partnership that is essential to the management and development of the overview and scrutiny function and to ensuring the smooth running of the political process. The Vice-Chairman’s role is therefore an important one to the overall functioning of the Council.

94. The Panel also considered the following evidence in setting an SRA for the Vice-Chairman of the Management and Resources Select Committee:

• One third of councils within the sample award an SRA to the Vice-Chairman of their ‘main’ overview and scrutiny committee. Of those that do pay one, the average rate is £3,895. The average rate is 39% of the relevant committee’s chairman SRA or 13% of the Leader’s SRA.

95. The Panel concluded that the Vice-Chairman of the Management and Resources Select Committee has a role with a comparable level of responsibilities to the Chairmen of the other three Select Committees (though the responsibilities are quite different) and therefore recommends an SRA set at the same rate - 22.5% of the Leader SRA or £5,663 per annum .

RECOMMENDATION 11

The Panel recommend that:

The Vice-Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Management and Resources Select Committee SRA is set at 22.5% of the Leader SRA or £5,663 per annum (Band 6).

96. The Panel considered whether the Vice-Chairmen of the other three Select Committees should receive an SRA. It was satisfied that the significance of the role played by the Vice- Chairman of the Management and Resources Select Committee is due to that Committee’s management and development of the overview and scrutiny function. It did not, therefore, conclude that the Vice-Chairmen of the other Select Committees hold responsibilities significant or onerous enough to warrant payment of an SRA.

Scrutiny fund

97. The current Scheme provides for a lump sum of £10,000 to be allocated to the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee for distribution to “those members performing specific scrutiny functions, the aim of which is to widen and increase the engagement of non-executive members in the decision making process” (wording taken from the Panel’s original recommendation in 2006). This fund was allocated in response to representations regarding the difficulty in getting Councillors to serve on scrutiny task groups and perform other scrutiny duties. It was hoped that it would encourage more Councillors to become engaged in challenging the Cabinet (with all the democratic benefits that this would bring) as well as helping to provide some balance in the amount of allowances allocated between the majority and non-majority groups.

98. In 2007, the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee agreed a method of distributing this money whereby service on scrutiny activities was to be reflected as a share of the Chairman's allocation of funds. The allocation was divided by the number of shares and distributed to members who had attended over 50% of available meetings of any scrutiny committee, task group or project board etc.

99. The Panel were disappointed to learn that the fund has been used in the way described - particularly that is has been used for what could be regarded as an attendance allowance for scrutiny committee members. The Leader also expressed dissatisfaction with this practice, which is anomalous within the Scheme as no other committee members are paid merely for their attendance at committee meetings. The Panel had intended the fund to be used to remunerate Councillors performing specific scrutiny functions such as chairing task groups.

100. With the transition to unitary status the total number of Councillors available to perform scrutiny functions has approximately doubled and this may present some argument for increasing the scrutiny fund. However, the Panel has increased the overall funding of the scrutiny function by awarding of an SRA to the Vice-Chairman of the Management and Resources Select Committee (see Recommendation 11 ). In addition, if the fund is used as

intended, it will not be spread so thinly and deserving Councillors can be remunerated more generously than they have been previously.

101. The Panel does believe that the fund can serve a valuable purpose in remunerating Councillors who play a significant role in scrutiny activities such as task groups or rapid scrutiny exercises. It therefore recommends that the £10,000 fund is retained within the Scheme but specifies that it is intended to reward Councillors performing specific scrutiny functions such as chairing task groups and rapid scrutiny exercises. Choosing the precise method of allocation remains in the gift of the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Management and Resources Select Committee.

RECOMMENDATION 12

The Panel recommend that:

a. The £10,000 scrutiny fund, which is intended to reward Councillors performing specific scrutiny functions such as chairing task groups and rapid scrutiny exercises, is retained within the Scheme.

b. The fund is to be allocated by the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Management and Resources Select Committee, who should be reminded of its purpose when deciding how to allocate the fund.

Chairman of Area Board SRA (18)

102. The creation of Wiltshire’s eighteen Area Boards was a key aspect of the Council’s bid for unitary status and the Panel have received a detailed briefing on the Boards’ operation and the role of their Chairmen. The Area Boards are expected to meet 5–6 times per year but are able to set their own meeting schedule.

103. The role of the Chairmen in Area Board meetings includes ensuring the effective handling of business by allowing all parties to air their views, ensuring respect for all and knowing the key players in each issue. Outside of meetings, the Chairmen are the main point of contact for the public, the media, town/parish councils and other key partners with regards to any issue relevant to their Area Board. They also have such calls on their time as briefings with officers (particularly Community Area Managers) and following-up any issues arising from their Board’s previous meeting. The Panel noted that Area Board Chairmen have no decision making powers over and above those of a regular Area Board member, and therefore their role could be seen as acting as a conduit and spokesperson for the whole Board.

104. From its discussions with several Area Board Chairmen, the Panel were satisfied that Area Board Chairmen will play a key role in the success or failure of the Area Boards. The Chairman’s management of meetings and selection of appropriate agenda items, plus the building of relationships with the public and partners through orchestrating inclusive debate will be key to each Area Boards’ success in taking decision making and influencing to a more local level.

105. Given that membership of the Boards varies from 3 to 10 Councillors, the Panel considered whether all Area Board Chairmen hold the same level of responsibility and have to undertake the same amount of work. The Panel considered several methods of determining the level of SRA awarded, including proportioning it to the size of each Board’s membership, or to its grant funding rank (which is calculated using each Community Area’s population, sparsity and level of deprivation). Having spoken to a number of Area Board Chairmen, however, the Panel were satisfied that neither the size of a Board’s membership nor its funding rank are particularly relevant in determining the responsibilities and time demands placed upon their Chairmen. Many other factors come into play relating to the specific circumstances in each Community Area, for example, more rural (and therefore less populous) Community Areas often encompass more parish councils, which can be more parochial and therefore more complex than their more urban counterparts. The Panel resolved that there is no adequate method of banding the levels of SRA paid to Area Board Chairmen and have recommended awarding the same level of SRA to all.

106. The Panel also considered the following evidence in setting an SRA for Area Board Chairmen:

• 10 of the 18 Area Board chairmen responded to the questionnaire, and reported an average time commitment of 7.5 hours per week in performing their role (range: 3-16 hours).

• 84% (41) of respondents to the Questionnaire felt that the chairmen of Area Boards should receive an SRA (this was the fifth most affirmative response of ten suggested SRAs).

• Several other councils have created area-based committees with some degree of executive powers and have awarded the Chairmen of these committees an SRA (including Northumberland County Council, Nottingham City Council and Surrey County Council). However, it is difficult to draw comparisons between committees that may operate in different ways. The SRAs awarded to their chairmen are therefore not a particularly useful benchmark here.

107. The Panel concluded that the Area Boards are an important vehicle through which the Council will engage with the community and that the Boards’ Chairmen will play an important role in their functioning. While the Chairmen have no decision making powers (over and above those of an ordinary Area Board member), they will act as their Boards’ primary spokesperson and contact point and the Panel is satisfied these duties are onerous enough to warrant an SRA. We therefore recommend that the Chairman of Area Board SRA is set at 15% of the Leader SRA or £3,755 per annum .

RECOMMENDATION 13

The Panel recommend that:

The Chairman of Area Board SRA is set at 15% of the Leader SRA or £3,775 per annum (Band 7).

Chairman of Area Planning Committee SRA (4)

108. Development control was one of the responsibilities undertaken by the former district councils and as such there is no provision of an SRA for the Chairmen of the Area Planning Committees in the current Scheme. The Committees’ role is to determine planning applications and matters such as the designation and amendment of conservation areas, Village Design Statements, Parish Plans, registration of common land for town and village greens, and public rights of way. They will meet on 3 week cycle with approximately 18 meetings per year

109. The Panel had discussions with three Area Planning Committee Chairmen and considered several factors in recommending a level of SRA for their role. It noted the very high level of public interest in (and attendance at) Area Planning Committee meetings and the importance of the role of Chairman in managing effective public engagement in the planning process. It also noted the high frequency of Area Planning Committee meetings and the onerous time demands thereby placed upon their Chairmen. Like the Chairmen of Area Boards, they have no decision making powers over and above those of a regular Committee member, but they must attend pre-meeting briefings and are seen as the primary contact point for the public, the media and town/parish councils with regards to any matter considered by their Committee. With controversial applications, this responsibility is likely to be considerable and onerous.

110. The Panel also considered the following evidence in recommending an SRA for the Chairmen of Area Planning Committees:

• The mean SRA paid by the former district councils for the Chairmen of their area planning committees, was £4,978 (range: £3,114 - £8,440).

• Within the sample (see Appendix 3), the average SRA paid to the Chairmen of area planning committees is £5,888 (range: £3,325 - £9,000).

• Within the sample, the average percentage of the Leader SRA paid to the Chairmen of area planning committees is 21% (range: 9-38%).

• 3 of the 4 current Area Planning Committee Chairmen responded to the Members’ Allowances Survey and made representations to the Panel in person (or in writing). They reported a mean time commitment of 8 hours per week in performing their role (range: 4-10 hours).

111. The Panel conclude that the business of Area Planning Committees is of great interest and importance to the public, and that the role of Chairman is crucial to the successful management of their operation. The role of Chairman requires a significant time commitment due to the frequency of Committee meetings and the level of public and media interest they attract. We therefore recommend that the Chairman of Area Planning Committee SRA is set at 22.5% of the Leader SRA or £5,663 per annum (Band 6) . This places the SRA within the middle range of those paid by Councils in the sample, both in real terms and as a percentage of the respective Leader SRA. It also represents a modest increase on the mean SRA paid by the former district councils for this role.

RECOMMENDATION 14

The Panel recommend that:

The Chairman of Area Planning Committee SRA is set at 22.5% of the Leader SRA or £5,663 per annum (Band 6).

Vice-Chairman of Area Planning Committee SRA (4)

112. The Panel also received representations that the Vice-Chairmen of Area Planning Committees should also receive an SRA. Two of the former district councils paid a small SRA for this role, and one of the current Vice-Chairmen provided an average time commitment of 5.5 hours per week in performing it. The Vice-Chairmen are expected to attend pre-meeting briefings and, due to their frequency, can expect to chair several meetings per year when the Chairman is on holiday or has a prejudicial interest in an application.

113. In conclusion, the Panel are not satisfied that the role of Vice-Chairman of Area Planning Committee carries enough responsibility and workload to warrant payment of an SRA. It therefore recommends that no SRA is paid for this role.

Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Council SRAs

114. As well as presiding over meetings of the Council, the Chairman of Council’s role is to represent the Council at civic functions and on outside bodies and to promote public involvement in the Council’s activities. The Vice-Chairman’s role is to deputise for the Chairman, chairing Council meetings and attending events in the place of the Chairman when necessary. The current SRAs for these roles are £9,875 and £4,937 respectively, representing 100% and 50% of the current Basic Allowance.

115. The Panel considered the following evidence in setting SRAs for the Chairman and Vice- Chairman of Council:

• The mean SRAs for Chairman and Vice-Chairmen of Council in the sample are £10,371 and £3,831 respectively (see Appendix 3).

• The current SRAs for Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Council are equivalent to 47% and 24% of the current Leader SRA respectively. Within the sample the average percentages are 38% and 15% (ranges: 12–74% and 6–38% respectively). There is a broad variance in the level of SRA paid by councils for these roles, with Durham County Council paying 12% percent of their Leader’s SRA for the role while Cornwall Council pays 72%.

• In his response to the Questionnaire, the current Chairman of Council provided an average time commitment of 13 hours per week to fulfil his role.

• The current Vice-Chairman is new to the role and was not able to calculate a weekly average, but estimated attending around 80 events in the coming year in his capacity as Vice-Chairman of Council.

• The Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the new Wiltshire Council effectively replace the four Chairmen and four Vice-Chairmen of the former district councils and those of the former County Council. The number of civic duties requiring the attendance of a Chairman or Vice-Chairman is unlikely to have decreased so these two roles will require a greater time commitment than any of the roles they have replaced.

116. The Panel concludes that the Chairman and Vice-Chairman play an important and time consuming role in representing the Council and therefore recommends that the Chairman of Council SRA and Vice-Chairman of Council SRA are set at 40% and 20% of the Leader SRA or £10,067 and £5,034 respectively. This equates to a slight increase on the previous SRAs and places the SRAs within the middle range of those within the sample as percentages of the respective Leader SRA. The slightness of this increase is deemed appropriate given that the current SRAs are toward the upper range of those paid within the sample.

RECOMMENDATION 15

The Panel recommend that:

The Chairman of Council SRA and Vice-Chairman of Council SRA are set at 40% and 20% of the Leader SRA or £10,067 (Band 4) and £5,034 per annum (Band 8) respectively.

Licensing Committee allowances

117. The Licensing Committee deals with all of the Council’s responsibilities under the Licensing Act 2003 and Gambling Act 2005 and any other associated matters. It meets 2-3 times per year, as the majority of the workload with respect to licensing matters is placed upon the Committee members when they sit on Licensing Sub-Committees to determine individual licensing appeals.

Chairman of Licensing Committee SRA

118. Like development control, licensing was one of the functions previously undertaken by the former district councils and as such there is no SRA for the Licensing Committee’s Chairman within the current Scheme.

119. The Panel considered the following evidence when setting an SRA for the Chairman of Licensing Committee:

• The current Chairman of the Licensing Committee did not provide a time commitment in hours per week, but envisages dealing with 30-40 licensing sub-committees per year, plus meetings of the Licensing Committee itself.

• All councils within the sample with a licensing function pay an SRA to the Chairman of the Licensing Committee. The average SRA for those Licensing Committee Chairmen is £3,962 (range: £3,000 - £5,942). The average percentage of the Leader’s SRA is 14%.

• All four of the former district councils paid an SRA for this role. The mean SRA paid was £2,578.

120. The Panel concludes that the role of Chairman of the Licensing Committee does not carry major responsibilities and does not require a significant time input. The Panel notes that serving on Licensing Sub-Committees is the most onerous task relating to licensing and that the Chairman of the parent Committee is under no more obligation to serve on these than other members of the Committee. The Panel does, however, acknowledge that the Chairman is likely to take a significant role in these Sub-Committees due to his or her prominent role within the Licensing function.

121. The Panel therefore recommends that the Chairman of Licensing Committee SRA is set at 10% of the Leader SRA or £2,517 per annum.

RECOMMENDATION 16

The Panel recommend that:

The Chairman of Licensing Committee SRA is set at 10% of the Leader SRA or £2,517 per annum (Band 10)

Member of Licensing Committee SRA

122. The Panel received representations that members of the Licensing Committee should be remunerated for taking part in Licensing hearings and appeals (Sub-Committees). The Regulations do include provision for paying an SRA to those members of a committee or sub-committee which meets with exceptional frequency or for exceptionally long periods such as licensing committees.

123. The Panel considered at length whether the payment of an allowance to Licensing Committee members would be appropriate. From data and information received from other authorities, the Panel were satisfied that the payment of allowances to individual Licensing members appears to be based on historic data when the licensing of alcohol was transferred to local authorities. Since then it seems that many authorities have removed such allowances from their schemes as the workload has declined. The Council currently projects approximately 40 Licensing Sub-Committee meetings per year, which if shared equally amongst Licensing Committee members would result in approximately 10 meetings per member, per year.

124. The Panel also considered the following evidence when considering the remuneration of Licensing Committee members:

• The Questionnaire showed that there is only weak support amongst councillors (55% in favour) for paying members of the Licensing Committee a daily rate for attending Sub-Committees.

• Of those respondents who felt that a daily rate should not be paid, 23% (5) reasoned that paying such a rate would be unfair on members of other committees with similarly onerous duties (namely, the Area Planning Committees).

• Some councils remunerate only the chairmen of Licensing Sub-Committees, rather than all members. However, these are councils where the Chairmen are fixed every year by Full Council. At Wiltshire Council, Licensing Sub-Committee Chairmen are decided on an ad hoc basis so it would be difficult to administer a Scheme remunerating these roles.

125. The Panel concludes that the case for remunerating Licensing Committee members has not been proven. It feels that the demands of the role are not sufficient to amount to a significant additional responsibility over and above the generally accepted duties of a councillor. We also feel that members of other Committees with similarly onerous workloads (Area Planning Committee members, for example) could justifiably feel short changed were they not given an equivalent allowance. The Panel therefore recommends that no SRA is paid to Licensing Committee members.

Chairman of Strategic Planning Committee SRA

126. The Strategic Planning Committee is responsible for considering large scale planning applications and meets 2-3 times per year. Whilst the Committee may not carry a heavy workload, when it does meet it will be of a high profile nature, overseeing both major strategic planning applications and policies (such as the Regional Spatial Strategy) and the allocation of housing and sites for major waste and mineral applications.

127. The Chairman has no decision making powers beyond those of a regular Committee member but must attend briefings and will be the primary contact point for the public, the media and town/parish councils with regards to any matter considered by the Committee. As with Area Planning Committees, for controversial issues this is likely to be

onerous, but less like Area Planning Committees, this will be a fairly uncommon occurrence.

128. The Panel also considered the following evidence when recommending a Chairman of Strategic Planning SRA:

• This Council’s Strategic Planning Committee performs most of the functions of the old County Council’s Regulatory Committee and meets with similar regularity. The Chairman of the Regulatory Committee received an SRA of £3,000 (14% of the Leader’s current SRA) under a previous Scheme.

• Half of the councils within the sample pay an SRA for this role, but there is broad variance in terms of the amount (range: £1,803 - £12,150) (see Appendix 3).

• Within the sample, the average percentage of the Leader’s SRA is 29%, but across a very broad range (5 - 45%).

• 88% (43) of respondents to the Questionnaire felt that the chairman of the Strategic Planning Committee should receive an SRA (this was equal third most affirmative response to ten suggested SRAs).

129. The Panel considered several factors in recommending a level of SRA for this role. It noted that the business of the Strategic Planning Committees will occasionally be of a high profile, which will increase the importance of the Chairman’s role in managing the meeting and public engagement in the planning process. It will also increase the time demands placed upon them in terms of build-up to and fall-out from Committee meetings. However, the Panel notes that these instances will be relatively uncommon and has therefore recommended an SRA set at 15% of the Leader SRA or £2,517 per annum.

RECOMMENDATION 17

The Panel recommend that:

The Chairman of the Strategic Planning Committee SRA is set at 15% of the Leader SRA or £2,517 per annum (Band 9)

Chairman of Audit Committee SRA

130. The Audit Committee is responsible for internal and external audit functions and supersedes the former Final Accounts and Audit Committee. It meets 4 times per year.

131. The role of Chairman does not attract an SRA under the current scheme as it has traditionally been chaired by the appropriate Cabinet Member and was seen to be part of that SRA.

132. The Panel considered the following evidence in recommending an SRA for the Chairman of the Audit Committee:

• The majority of other large unitary councils do pay an SRA for this role (though only one of the former district councils did so).

• Of those councils within the sample that do pay an SRA for this role, the average is £3,491 (range: £2,660 - £5,942) (see Appendix 3). The average percentage of the Leader’s SRA is 12% (range: 7-18%)

• The current Chairman of Audit Committee reported that he was unable to provide a weekly time input for the role, feeling that he had not been in post long enough.

• 82% (40) of respondents to the Questionnaire felt that the Chairman of Audit Committee should receive an SRA (this was the sixth most affirmative response to ten proposed SRAs).

133. The Panel concludes that this role is not particularly onerous but is important to the maintenance of a successful audit function and therefore it should receive a small SRA. We recommend this is set at 10% of the Leader SRA or £2,517 per annum .

RECOMMENDATION 18

The Panel recommend that:

The Chairman of the Audit Committee SRA is set at 10% of the Leader SRA or £2,517 per annum (Band 10)

Chairman of Staffing Policy Committee SRA

134. The Staffing Policy Committee is responsible for determining, monitoring and reviewing staffing policies, including the power to deal with all matters relating to staff terms and conditions. The Committee also establishes a Senior Officers Employment Sub- Committee and Staffing Appeals Sub-Committee to deal with matters relating to the dismissal or disciplinary action against individual members of staff and staff grievances. The Committee meets 3-4 times a year.

135. There is no SRA for the Chairman of the Staffing Policy Committee within the current Scheme as it has traditionally been chaired by the appropriate Cabinet Member and was seen to be part of that SRA.

136. The Panel considered the following evidence when recommending a Chairman of Staffing Policy Committee SRA:

• Only two councils within the sample pay an SRA for this role (or one similar):

Cornwall Council (HR Committee) £2,362 or 11% of the Leader’s SRA

East Riding (Staff Terms and Conditions Committee) £3,348 or 32% of the Leader’s SRA

• The current Chairman of Staffing Policy Committee reported an average time input for performing the role of 2.5 hours per month.

• 73% (36) of respondents to the Questionnaire felt that the Chairman of the Staffing Policy Committee should receive an SRA (this was only the eighth most affirmative response to ten proposed SRAs).

137. The Panel concludes that this is not a particularly onerous role but also that the effective chairmanship of the Staffing Policy Committee will be important to the Council’s management of staffing issues. We therefore recommend it should receive an SRA set at 10% of the Leader SRA or £2,517 per annum .

RECOMMENDATION 19

The Panel recommend that:

The Chairman of the Staffing Policy Committee SRA is set at 10% of the Leader SRA or £2,517 per annum (Band 10)

Chairman of Wiltshire Pension Fund Committee SRA

138. The Wiltshire Pension Fund Committee comprises five members of the authority plus five co-opted members. It exercises the functions of the Council as administering authority under the Local Government Superannuation Acts & Regulations and deals with all matters relating thereto. It meets 4 times per year.

139. The Panel considered the following evidence when recommending an SRA for the Chairman of the Wiltshire Pension Fund Committee.

• Around half of the councils in the sample pay an SRA for this role, though the SRA currently paid by this council (£2,162) is the lowest of those that do (range: £2,162 - £4,399) (see Appendix 3). The mean SRA is £2,763.

• The current SRA paid to the Chairman of the Wiltshire Pension Fund is equivalent to 10% of the current Leader SRA. Of those councils within the sample that pay an SRA the average is also 10%.

• In response to the Members’ Allowances Questionnaire, the current Chairman of the Wiltshire Pension Fund provided a time input of 4 hours per week to perform this role.

140. The Panel notes that there has been little change for this role in terms of responsibility or workload, so a continuance of the current SRA with some uplift for inflation is considered appropriate. We therefore recommend the role’s SRA should be set at 10% of the Leader SRA or £2,517 per annum . This also reflects the average percentage of the Leaders SRA paid within the sample for this role.

RECOMMENDATION 20

The Panel recommend that:

The Chairman of the Wiltshire Pension Fund Committee SRA is set at 10% of the Leader SRA or £2,517 per annum (Band 10)

Representative on South West Councils (SWC) SRA (3)

141. South West Councils (SWC) has replaced the SWLGA and the South West Regional Assembly (SWRA). Its Strategic Leadership Board (SLB) has become SWC’s executive arm and makes Regional Planning Body decisions in partnership with the South West Regional Development Agency. SWC was established to enable local authorities to act collectively at the regional level. It also encourages local authority involvement through the Regional Improvement and Efficiency Partnership (SW RIEP). All SWC meetings are held either in Exeter or Taunton, which result in full-day commitments for Wiltshire Council’s representatives.

142. The current scheme provides for the Council’s representatives to receive an SRA of £2,162 for representation on the now defunct SWRA. In past years, the time commitment for this role has been considerable, estimated by an existing representative as some 50 full working days per annum. From evidence provided by existing representatives, the Panel are satisfied that SWC’s new structure will reduce this time commitment by around 50%.

143. No other council within the sample pays an SRA to its representatives on the council’s regional body.

144. The Panel concludes that this role does not carry great responsibility nor time demands and it therefore cannot be considered a ‘special responsibility’. We therefore recommend that no SRA is paid for this role.

RECOMMENDATION 21

The Panel recommend that:

No SRA is paid to the Council’s representatives on South West Councils (SWC).

GROUP LEADER ALLOWANCES (5)

145. Group Leaders are the main point of contact for officers and coordinate the activity of all political groups. Under the current Scheme, they receive two allowances:

1. A flat rate of £1,500 per Group Leader, plus £30 per member in the Group. This recognises that the size of the Group may have some effect on the responsibilities of the Group Leader.

2. The second allowance payable to Group Leaders is to reflect responsibilities within their Group (i.e. Secretary, treasurer, spokesperson) and this is paid at a rate of £100 per member, and is allocated by the Group Leader.

146. The current scheme results in the allowances shown in Table 1 .

Table 1 – Political composition of Wiltshire Council and amounts currently paid

1. Group Leader 2. Group SRA Political Group Membership responsibilities Total (£1,500 flat + £30 (£100 per member) per member) Conservatives 61 £3,330 £6,100 £9,430 Liberal Democrat 24 £2,220 £2,400 £4,620 Independent Group 8 £1,740 £800 £2,540 Devizes Guardians 3 £1,590 £300 £1,890 Labour 2 £1,560 £200 £1,760

147. Experience shows that the current Group Leader’s Allowance is not entirely understood, with 44% of Questionnaire respondents expressing that it was not clear or understandable. Neither is it effectively used, with some Group Leaders simply dividing the Group Responsibilities Allowance (part 2. of the scheme above) equally amongst their members rather than remunerating those group members who have taken on special responsibilities.

148. The current Scheme also leads to the smaller Groups receiving far more in proportion to their size than the larger Groups. The leader of the majority Group, for example, currently receives only double the SRA (part 1. of the scheme above) of the leader of the smallest Group, despite leading a Group around thirty times the size.

149. The Panel recommends an amendment to the current Scheme whereby the Group Leader SRA includes a flat rate of £500 (reduced from £1,500), plus £50 per Group member (increased from £30 per member). This better reflects the relationship between size of group and level of responsibility of the Group Leader.

150. The Panel recommends maintaining the current rate of £100 per Group member for the Group Responsibilities Allowance (Allowance 2.), but also recommends that this is used as intended; to remunerate those Group members taking on special responsibilities within the Group (i.e. Secretary, treasurer, spokesperson). The precise allocation of this allowance remains at the discretion of the Group Leader.

151. Table 2 shows the results of amending the Scheme as described above. The allocation better reflects the relationship between size of group and the level of responsibility of the Group Leader. In real terms it roughly maintains the level of allowance awarded to the two largest groups and decreases that awarded to the smallest groups. This method still favours the smaller Groups but reduces the disproportion somewhat.

Table 2 – Political composition of Wiltshire Council with recommended Scheme

1. Group Leader 2. Group SRA Political Group Membership responsibilities Total (£500 flat + £50 (£100 per member) per member) Conservative 61 £3,050 £6,100 £9,150 Liberal Democrat 24 £1,700 £2,400 £4,100 Independent Group 8 £900 £800 £1,700 Devizes Guardians 3 £650 £300 £950 Labour 2 £600 £200 £800

152. In paragraph 47, the Panel has recommended the capping of SRAs at one per Councillor. The Panel recommends that Group Leader’s Allowances are exempt from this cap.

RECOMMENDATION 22

The Panel recommend that:

a. The Group Leader Allowance is amended as follows:

1. A flat rate of £500 per Group Leader, plus £50 per member in the Group.

2. £100 per member in the Group to remunerate those members taking on special Group responsibilities (e.g. Secretary, treasurer, spokesperson).

b. The Group Leaders’ Allowance is exempt from the one SRA per Councillor cap.

CO-OPTEES’ ALLOWANCES

Chairman of Standards Committee (current allowance: £5,200pa)

153. The current SRA for the Chairman of the Standards Committee was set by the Panel in 2006. The rationale in setting the SRA was that the role was commensurate with that of chairing other committees and therefore a similar allowance was seen as appropriate. The workload of the Standards Committee and consequently its Chairman has increased somewhat since 2006, due to it having taken responsibility for the consideration of complaints regarding the conduct of Councillors. These complaints are considered by Sub-

Committees, however, which do not necessarily feature the Chairman of the parent Committee.

154. The Panel considered the following evidence when recommending the Chairman of Standards Committee’s allowance:

• The current Standards Committee Chairman’s allowance is high when compared with that paid by other councils within the sample - £5,200 compared with a sample average of £3,669 (range: £1,486 - £5,719).

• It is also a high percentage of the Basic Allowance – 53% compared with an average of 32% (range: 13 - 53%).

• It is also a high percentage of the Leader SRA – 25% compared with an average of 14% (range: 7 – 25%).

155. The Panel considers that its rationale for setting the Chairman of Standards Committee’s allowance remains correct. The role is commensurate with that of chairing other committees and therefore a similar allowance remains appropriate. It recommends that the allowance is set at 22.5% of the Leader SRA or £5,663 per annum . This represents a slight increase on the role’s current allowance.

RECOMMENDATION 23

The Panel recommend that:

The Chairman of the Standards Committee’s allowance is set at 22.5% of the Leader SRA or £5,663 per annum.

Co-opted Independent Members of Standards Committee (8) (current allowance: £2,010pa)

156. The current allowance for Independent Members of the Standards Committee was based on evidence gathered in 2006. This allows for 15 days of their time including attendance at meetings, travelling and reading time. This input is then multiplied by the LGA daily rate. Since 2006, the workload of the Standards Committee has increased due to it having taken responsibility for the consideration of complaints about councillors. However, the size of the Committee has also been increased to reflect this. On current projections, 15 days per year remains an accurate time input required for this role.

157. An allowance for Independent Members of the Standards Committee retaining the 15 days time input but using an updated LGA rate would equate as follows:

£149.34 (LGA 2009 day rate ) x 15 days (estimated time input)

= £2,240 per annum

158. The Panel also considered the following evidence before recommending an allowance for Independent Members of the Standards Committee:

• The current Independent Members’ allowance is high when compared with other councils within the sample - £2,010 compared with a sample average of £874 (of those councils that pay one).

• It is also a high percentage of the Leader’s SRA – 9.6% compared with a sample average of 3.7%.

159. The Panel considers that its rationale for setting the Independent Members of the Standards Committee’s allowance remains correct. It is also satisfied that the 15 days time input remains an accurate estimate of the time demands of the role. The Panel therefore recommends that the Independent Member of the Standards Committee allowance is updated to reflect the 2009 LGA day rate and is therefore set at £2,240 per annum .

RECOMMENDATION 24

The Panel recommend that:

The Independent Member of the Standards Committee’s allowance is set at £2,240 per annum.

Co-opted Town/Parish Council Members of Standards Committee (8)

(no current allowance)

160. In its review of the allowance scheme for the pre-election period, the Panel agreed to pay the Standards Committee’s co-opted Town/Parish Council members an allowance of £70 per meeting). Following the elections on 4 June 2009, this allowance no longer applies.

161. From evidence received the Panel were satisfied that Town/Parish Council members of the Standards Committee have the same workload as their Independent counterparts (except that they cannot chair Standards Sub-Committees). There are currently five statutory Standards Sub-Committees, four of which are responsible for considering complaints regarding councillor conduct and the other for considering dispensation requests. Under this Council’s procedures, these Sub-Committees must each include one Wiltshire Council member, one Independent Member and one Town/Parish Council member.

162. The Panel also considered the following evidence before recommending an allowance for Town/Parish Members of the Standards Committee:

• Of those councils within the sample that pay an allowance to Independent members, all except one also pays the Town/Parish members (the same amount).

• 69% (34) of respondents to the Questionnaire felt that the Independent members of the Standards Committee should receive an SRA (though this was the ninth most affirmative response to ten proposed SRAs).

• 78% of respondents were in favour of paying Town/Parish members the same allowance as that paid to the Standards Committee’s Independent members.

163. The Panel concludes that Town/Parish members of the Standards Committee have the same responsibilities and time demands as the Committee’s Independent Members and should therefore receive the same level of remuneration. It does not consider their role on the Standards Committee as within their normal duties as a town or parish councillor. The Panel therefore recommends that the Town/Parish Member of the Standards Committee’s allowance is set at the same level as that of the Committee’s Independent Members, or £2,240 per annum.

RECOMMENDATION 25

The Panel recommend that:

The Town/Parish Member of the Standards Committee’s allowance is set at £2,240 per annum.

Co-opted members of Children’s Services Select Committee (9)

(current allowance: £804pa)

164. The current allowance for co-opted members of the Children’s Services Select Committee was set in 2005 and was calculated by multiplying the required time input for the role by the LGA day rate. In 2005, the required time commitment for the role was deemed to be 6 days, which includes attendance at meetings, travelling and reading time, and some allowance for training.

165. From the evidence received, the Panel is satisfied that the required time input of this role has not changed significantly. The same time input multiplied by the 2009 LGA day rate provides the following allowance:

£149.34 (LGA 2009 day rate) x 6 days (expected time input)

= £896 per annum

166. The Panel therefore recommends that the Co-opted Member of the Children’s Services Select Committee allowance is set at £896 per annum .

RECOMMENDATION 26

The Panel recommend that:

The Co-opted Member of the Children’s Services Select Committee’s allowance is set at £896 per annum.

APPROVED DUTIES

167. The Regulations state that an allowance scheme may provide for the payment of travel and subsistence allowances when such expenditure is incurred for a duty specified as ‘approved’ within the Scheme and within categories specified within the Regulations (ODPM, 2003).

168. The Panel considered Councillors’ responses to the Questionnaire in considering any change to the current Scheme’s clarification of an approved duty. The Questionnaire asked “Do you think the classification of approved duties and exemptions should be changed? If so, how?”

• 75% (39) of respondents were happy with the current classification and exemptions.

• 25% (13) of respondents felt that they should be changed.

• Of those who requested a change, 4 respondents felt that site visits should be classed as an approved duty.

169. The latter bullet point was the only consensus identified with regards to Councillors’ views on the current Scheme’s classification of an approved duty.

170. The Panel notes that under the current Scheme Councillors are able to claim travel and subsistence for site visits which are ‘authorised in advance by a Committee or chief officer’ (Appendix 5, Para. (3)(iv)). The Panel are satisfied that this is a reasonable arrangement and that site visits not approved in the way described should remain outside of the classification of an approved duty and are covered by the Basic Allowance. However, the Panel recognises that with the increased time pressures on processing planning applications there may not always be the opportunity for Committees to approve site visits prior to them considering the application. The Panel therefore recommends that Councillors are reminded that the Chief Officer is able to give such authority as is stated within the Scheme.

RECOMMENDATION 27

The Panel recommend that:

There is no amendment to the current Scheme’s classification of approved duties, but that the situation regarding site visits is clarified for Councillors.

TRAVELLING AND SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCES

Travelling Allowance

171. In 2006, the Council agreed that councillors’ travelling rates would be set at the Inland Revenue authorised rate of 40p per mile for the first 10,000 miles and 25p for each subsequent mile. This is the maximum rate that is statutorily exempt from tax and for which there is no requirement for the employer to make a return to the Inland Revenue.

172. Councillors’ responses to the Questionnaire highlighted a little dissatisfaction amongst Councillors with the travelling allowances specified within the current Scheme:

• 4 respondents commented that the current car mileage rate of 40p per mile is insufficient.

173. The Panel acknowledges that feelings on this issue may have increased due to the size of the county and the consequent amount of travel required by councillors. However, it feels that the level of demand for a change to the mileage rates highlighted by the Questionnaire is not sufficient to warrant amendment to the rates at this time. It is also reluctant to recommend the adoption of mileage rates that will require the Council to make returns to the Inland Revenue.

Subsistence and Overnight Allowances

174. The current subsistence rates were recommended by the Panel and accepted by Full Council in 2006. They were based on the allowances paid to Officers on NJC Conditions of Service.

175. Responses to the Questionnaire did not highlight any particular Councillor concerns with regards to this aspect of the scheme. The Panel therefore recommends no amendments to it at this time.

ICT / TELEPHONE ALLOWANCES

Telephone / Broadband

176. The current Scheme provides for the reimbursement of the cost of the rental (and VAT) of one telephone line in a Councillor’s home with the following conditions:

(i) The rental is not paid for from any source other than the member.

(ii) A special responsibility allowance is not received.

(iii) The use of a telephone credit card issued by the Council is not available.

177. The Panel notes that within the Questionnaire, Councillors were asked for their views on a proposal to convert the reimbursement of the rental of a telephone line to an allowance of £15 per month (the average payment of the former district councils) towards the cost of the Councillor’s own broadband:

• Responses to the Questionnaire showed strong support for this proposal (81% in favour)

IT Consumables

178. Under the current Scheme, IT consumables are covered by the Basic Allowance.

179. The Panel noted that the Questionnaire highlighted some minor Councillor dissatisfaction with the current arrangements for reimbursement of IT consumables:

• 4 respondents commented that they would welcome an allowance for stationary, ink cartridges etc, as the cost of replacing these was already mounting up.

180. The Panel concludes that an annual Technology Allowance, set at a rate of £250 per annum, per Councillor provides a simple and easily administered allowance to help cover the cost of all IT consumables and the cost of broadband, and replace the current Scheme’s telephone line allowance.

RECOMMENDATION 28

The Panel recommend that:

Payment of a Technology Allowance of £250 per Councillor is included within the recommended Scheme. This annual payment covers all IT consumables and the cost of the Councillor’s broadband, and replaces the current Scheme’s telephone line allowance. The Allowance is given with an expectation that it will be used by Councillors to contribute to the cost of broadband internet access.

DEPENDENT CARERS’ ALLOWANCE

181. The current Scheme provides for Councillors and Co-opted Members to claim for expenditure incurred through employing a carer for a dependant in order to carry out an approved duty, subject to certain conditions. The current scheme pays the National Minimum Wage for carers of all kinds of dependent. It does not stipulate a daily or annual

limit to these payments, or a limit to the number of dependents the care of whom can be claimed for.

182. The Questionnaire did not highlight any particular issues with respect to the current Dependent Carers’ Allowance. The Panel therefore does not recommend any change to the current Dependent Carers’ Allowance scheme.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT PENSION SCHEME (LGPS)

183. The Regulations state that the Council cannot extend membership of the LGPS to Councillors without a recommendation from the Panel to do so. In 2006, the Panel recommended that Councillors should be eligible to join the LGPS. It also recommended that further work be done on the financial implications of such a move before a final decision was taken by Full Council (at that time, Wiltshire County Council), estimating the likely cost at £90,000. The Council subsequently voted against making Councillors eligible to join the Pension Scheme but agreed that further work should be undertaken on the matter.

184. The Panel remains satisfied that Wiltshire Councillors should be able to join the LGPS if they wish to do so. However, the Questionnaire has not highlighted any great demand from Councillors for eligibility to join the pension scheme (1 respondent made this request). Officers also estimate that introducing this eligibility may add to the costs of the Members’ Allowances Scheme by around 15%. The Panel feels that this cost, together with the current economic climate, should be considered by the Council before it agrees to the Panel’s recommendation that membership of the LGPS be extended to Councillors.

RECOMMENDATION 29

The Panel recommend that:

All members of Wiltshire Council are given entitlement to join the Local Government Pension Scheme, and that both the Basic Allowance and Special Responsibility Allowances are treated as amounts in respect of which such pensions are payable (in accordance with a scheme made under section 7 of the Superannuation Act 1972).

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 – Evidence sources and Councillors who met with the Panel Appendix 2 – Summary of Councillors’ Questionnaire responses Appendix 3 – Basic Allowance and SRAs: Comparative data Appendix 4 – Schedule of Recommended Allowances

Appendix 1 – Evidence sources and Councillors who met with the Panel

Evidence sources

Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE) 2008 (Office for National Statistics (ONS), 2008)

Councillors Commission - Models, issues, incentives and barriers (Councillors Commission, 2007)

Guidance on Members' Allowances for Local Authorities in England (ODPM, 2001)

IDeA Members' Allowances Survey 2008 (IDeA, 2008)

Local Authorities (Members’ Allowances) (England) Regulations (ODPM, 2003)

Members’ Allowances - Daily Rate 2009 (Local Government Association, 2009)

Ministerial Salaries (House of Commons Information Office, 2009)

New Council Constitutions: Guidance on Regulation for Local Authority Allowances (ODPM, 2003)

Strengthening Local Democracy – Consultation (DCLG, 2009)

Wiltshire Council Role Descriptions (included in the Members’ Induction Pack) (Wiltshire Council, 2009)

Wiltshire Strategic Economic Partnership - Quarterly Economic Review January 2009 (Wiltshire Council, 2009)

Members’ Allowances Schemes of the following councils:

BANES Council (2009) Bristol City Council (2008-2011) Cumbria County Council (2009) Cornwall Council (2009) Devon County Council (2009) Dorset County Council (2008) Durham County Council (2009) East Riding and Yorkshire Council (2008) Gloucestershire County Council (2009) Hampshire County Council (2008) Hertfordshire County Council (2009) Isle of Wight Council (2009) Kennet District Council (2008) Leicestershire County Council (2009) Medway Council (2009) Monmouth Council (2009)

North Wiltshire District Council (2008) Northumberland County Council (2009) Nottingham City Council (2009) Salisbury District Council (2008) Shropshire Council (2009) Somerset County Council (2008) West Wiltshire District Council (2008)

List of councillors who met with the Panel

Cllr Richard Beattie Cllr Philip Brown Cllr Allison Bucknell Cllr Richard Clewer Cllr Peter Fuller Cllr Howard Greenman Cllr Mike Hewitt Cllr Jeff Osborn Cllr Sheila Parker Cllr Jane Scott Cllr John Thomson Cllr Chris Williams

List of councillors who provided written representations to the Panel

Cllr Tony Trotman

List of officers who met with the Panel

Dr Keith Robinson

Appendix 2 - Summary of Responses to the Questionnaire

56 out of a possible 98 Councillors responded to the Questionnaire (59% return rate)

Q1. What is the average minimum number of hours per week needed to perform the basic role of Wiltshire Councillor effectively (excluding time spent on roles with Special Responsibilities)?

Mean Hrs Median Hrs

20.5 20

Respondents: 56

Q2. Do you think the current basic allowance of £9,875, is approximately correct? Or do you think that it should be increased – or decreased? If so, why?

Freeze Increase Decrease

20 31 0

39% 61% 0%

Respondents: 51

% Reasons/suggestions for an Increase Total (of those who requested an increase) Combined responsibilities of County and District councils 9 33 Significant travel due to such a large county 7 26 To compensate the high cost of IT consumables 4 15 Current amount excludes people of lower incomes 4 15 Increase to £12K 3 11

Freeze , but… Total

The Basic Allowance does not reflect committee work 2 Committee work should be recognised somehow 1 The Basic Allowance should not be taxed 1

Q3. Should we review the way we calculate the annual adjustments to the scheme? It is currently updated annually to reflect increases to the national ‘LGA day session rate’.

Index Votes %

LGA day session rate 23 52

Average gross salary for full time employees at WC 15 34 Average gross salary f or full time employees within the 1 2 county of Wiltshire Another index (please specify) 5 11

Respondents: 44

Those who opted for “Another index” made the following suggestions:

• Local Government pay award • No automatic increase – a small bonus, up to say 3% could be paid based on a freeze or reduction in the council tax burden on our people for the year – no freeze, no reduction, NO bonus) • Annual pay award such as that of the Armed Forces • Retail Price Index (RPI) • Comparable authorities

Q4. Do you currently hold a position (or positions) that could be seen as entailing Special Responsibilities (e.g. chairman of a committee or Area Board, group leader, cabinet member, portfolio holder etc). If so, what is it?

See Q5.

Q5. Based on current experience, what is the average minimum number of hours per week needed to perform this role over and above the time required to perform duties covered by the Basic Allowance? If possible, please break this time down into specific duties (meetings, briefings, meeting fall-out, correspondence etc). If you are new to the role please indicate that you are providing approximate/anticipated figures

Responses within the report where appropriate.

Q6. Do you think that the SRAs awarded under the existing scheme are set at a fair level when compared with other local authorities? If not, how do you think they should be changed?

Total %

Freeze 16 44

Increase 19 53

Decrease 1 3

Respondents: 41

Reasons/suggestions for increase… Total Increase to be in -line with similar sized 7 authorities Lacks consistency 4

Increase by 10% 2

Increase Leader SRA 2

Q7. Do you think the SRAs awarded under the existing scheme reflect the correct relativity between posts? If not, how do you think they should be changed?

Total %

Yes 20 51

No 19 49

Respondents: 39

No, because… Total Leader SRA too low 4 Chairmen of O&S Select Committees are overpaid 2 Inconsistent, unclear 2 Increase Cabinet Member SRA 2

Q8. Should Councillors with more than one role of special responsibility receive SRAs for both, only one or a reduced amount for the lesser SRA ?

Total % Only the greater SRA 10 21 100% of the greater SRA and a reduced 19 40 percentage of the lesser SRA 100% of both SRAs 17 36 Other 1 2

Respondents: 47 Q9. Are there any SRAs paid within the existing scheme that should not be paid? If so, please specify which, and why?

Role Total

Vice Chairman of Council 4

Q10. Please indicate which of the following roles you think should receive an SRA?

No. Possible new SRAs Total* % 1. Chairmen of Area Planning Committees (4) 45 92 2. Cabinet Portfolio Holders (13) 44 90 3. Chairman of Strategic Planning Committee 43 88 4. Chairman of Licensing Committee 43 88 5. Chairmen of Area Boards (18) 41 84 6. Chairman of Audit Committee 40 82 7. Chairman of Environment Select Committee 39 80 8. Chairman of Staffing Policy Committee 36 73 Co -opted Town/Parish members of the Standards 9. 34 69 Committee (8) 10. Chairman of Appeals Committee 28 57

Respondents: 49

Q11. Do you think the current allowance scheme for Group Leaders is fair, transparent and understandable? Do you think it could be improved? If so, how?

Total %

Yes 24 56

No – it could be improved 19 44

Respondents: 43

Reasons/Suggestions Total Scrap the flat rate but keep the per member allowance 4 The Group Leaders’ scheme is not understandable 4 Scrap the Group Leaders’ scheme entirely 3

Q12. Do you think that members should be paid a daily rate for attending Licensing Sub- Committee hearings?

Total %

Yes 27 55

No 22 45

If yes , why? Total The necessary preparation is time 3 consuming

If no , why? Total It would be unfair on members of other Sub-Committees who are not 5 paid a daily rate

Q13. Do you think town/parish council members of the Standards Committee should receive an allowance? If so, should it be the same as that received by Independent members of the Standards Committee?

Total %

Yes, the same as Independent co-optees 38 78

Yes, but less than Independent co-optees 2 4

No 9 18

No… Total

Expenses only 2

Respondents: 49

Q14. Do you think the classification of approved duties and exemptions should be changed? If so, how?

Total %

Yes 13 25

No 39 75

Respondents: 52

• Of those who requested a change, 4 respondents felt that site visits should be classed as an approved duty. • 2 respondents felt that visiting residents on constituency business should also be classed as an approved duty.

Q15. Do you think that the line rental cost should be converted to an allowance of approximately £15.00 per month towards the cost of broadband for all councillors?

Total %

Yes 43 81

No 10 19

Total respondents: 53

• 83% (43) of respondents answered that it should . • Of this 83% (43), 3 respondents added that it should be higher (i.e. £20-25pm). • 19% (10) of respondents answered that it should not

Q16. Are there any other changes to the current Members’ Allowances Scheme that you would welcome?

Where responses to this question have shown some consensus this has been reflected within the report.

Appendix 3 – Comparative data: Basic Allowances and SRAs

Basic Allowance Deputy Leader Cabinet Member Chairman of Vice-Chairman of Council Leader SRA (ascending) SRA SRA Council SRA Council SRA

Durham County Council £13,300 £36,575 £19,950 £13,300 £4,290 £2,145

Northumberland County Council £12,500 £27,000 £18,090 £14,850 £5,400 £1,620

Shropshire Council £12,000 £24,000 £15,000 £12,000 £9,000 £9,000

Cornwall Council £11,976 £22,309 £17,847 £16,535 £16,535 £4,136

Hampshire County Council £11,848 £28,596 £17,157 £17,157 £17,287 £8,853

Bristol City Council £11,270 £32,272 1 £20,797 £19,809 £19,809 2 £5,942 3

Devon County Council £10,970 £25,000 £20,000 £16,455 £8,775 £3,055

East Riding of Yorkshire Council £10,321 £33,314 £24,985 £13,391 £9,170 £1,153

Wiltshire Council £9,875 £20,950 £16,760 £12,570 £9,875 £4,937

Somerset County Council £9,453 £28,533 £19,119 £17,118 £9,702 £0

Gloucestershire County Council £8,800 £26,399 £21,999 £17,599 £5,808 £2,904

BANES Council £7,039 £29,914 £24,636 £24,636 £8,798 £2,230

AVERAGE (MEAN) £10,779 £27,905 £19,695 £16,285 £10,371 £3,831

1 To be increased to £50Kpa over four years 2 Lord Mayor 3 Deputy Lord Mayor

Chairman Vice -Chairman Chairman 2nd Chairman Chairman Basic Chairman Leader ‘main’ O&S ‘main’ O&S O&S Strategic Area Planning Council Allowance Pension SRA Committee Committee Committee Planning Committee (ascending) Committee SRA SRA SRA Committee SRA Durham County Council £13,300 £36,575 £11,238 £7,014 £1,803 £1,803 £1,803 £3,325

Northumberland County Council £12,500 £27,000 £12,150 £0 £12,142 4 £0 £12,150 £3,713

Shropshire Council £12,000 £24,000 £12,000 £0 £12,000 4 £3,000 £9,000 £9,000

Cornwall Council £11,976 £22,309 £7,086 £0 £7,086 4 £2,362 £7,086 £7,086

Hampshire County Council £11,848 £28,596 £11,438 £0 £11,483 4 £0 £11,438 -

Bristol City Council £11,270 £32,272 1 £5,942 £0 £5,942 4 £0 - £5,942

Devon County Council £10,970 £25,000 £8,000 £4,000 £8,000 4 £2,743 £5,485 -

East Riding of Yorkshire Council £10,321 £33,314 £8,928 £2,323 - £3,348 £10,890 £3,348

Wiltshire Council £9,875 £20,950 £7,575 £0 £5,200 £2,162 to be set to be set

Somerset County Council £9,453 £28,533 £14,280 £2,241 £3,363 £2,283 £5,880 -

Gloucestershire County Council £8,800 £26,399 £5,808 £0 £5,808 4 £0 £5,880 -

BANES Council £7,039 £29,914 £8,799 £0 £8,799 4 £4,399 £8,779 £8,799

AVERAGE (MEAN) £10,779 £27,905 £9,437 £3,895 5 £5,790 £2,763 5 £7,839 £5,888

1 To be increased to £50Kpa over four years 4 Same level as main O&S Committee 5 Of those Councils who award an SRA - Council does not have this committee

Appendix 4 - Schedule of Recommended Allowances

Basic Allowance (2009/10) £12,167 per annum

Technology Allowance (2009/10) (to cover the cost of Councillors’ IT consumables, £250 per annum telephone line and broadband)

£ per Special Responsibility Allowance (SRA)* % of Leader annum *A maximum of one SRA per Councillor, the greatest being the one paid SRA (2009/2010)

Band 1 Leader £25,168 100%

Band 2 Deputy Leader £20,134 80%

Band 3 Cabinet Member (8) £15,101 60%

Band 4 Chairman of Council £10,067 40%

Chairman of Overview and Scrutiny Management and Band 5 £8,809 Resources Select Committee 35%

Band 6 Portfolio Holder (13) £7,551 30%

Chairman of Area Planning Committee (4) Chairman of Children’s Services Select Committee, Chairman of Environment Select Committee, Band 7 £5,663 Chairman of Health and Adult Social Care Select Committee, 22.5% Vice-Chairman of Overview and Scrutiny Management and Resources Select Committee, and

Band 8 Vice-Chairman of Council £5,034 20%

Chairman of Area Board (18), and Band 9 £3,775 Chairman of Strategic Planning Committee 15%

Chairman of Audit Committee, Chairman of Licensing Committee, Band 10 £2,517 Chairman of Staffing Policy Committee, and 10% Chairman of Wiltshire Pension Fund Committee

£ per Co-opted Members’ Allowance annum (2009/10)

Chairman of Standards Committee £5,663

Independent Member of Standards Committee (8) £2,240

Town/Parish Council Member of Standards Committee (8) £2,240

Co-opted Member of Children’s Services Select Committee (9) £896

Group Leaders’ Allowances† £ per annum (2009/10) †Exempt from the one SRA per Councillor cap

£500 flat rate Group Leader’s Allowance (5) + £50 per Group member

Group Responsibilities Allowance (payable to Group Leaders) (for remunerating Group members with roles of responsibility within the £100 per Group member Group (e.g. Secretary, treasurer, spokesperson)

Overview and Scrutiny fund (To remunerate Councillors performing specific scrutiny functions. For £10,000 per annum allocation by the Chairman of the O&S Management and Resources Select Committee.)