July 8: Why KCC allowances have risen to £1.8m
Comments |
There's no doubt that when KCC councillors voted
last year to accept the recommendations of an independent panel to
increase their allowances by eight per cent over four years, it
provoked a degree of controversy.
The publication this week of the details of how much has been
claimed by our elected representatives in 2009-2010 has not quite
sparked the same degree of controversy although there is a degree
of sensitivity at County Hall about the matter - unsurprisingly,
given the climate of cuts and spending pressures.
The total for 2009-2010 at 1.8m is marginally up - by just under
£50,000 - on the previous year's bill. I know that these figures
often generate a lot of public outrage, often of a synthetic
nature.
KCC allowances published>>>
But it is hard to overlook the fact that for some, the
system of allowances has allowed some politicians to earn the
equivalent of a decent salary.
At County Hall, there are also a significant number
of county councillors who are 'twin-hatters' and also
represent district councils, for which they are also paid.
On the other hand, many councillors do put in signficant hours
attending to council duties, particularly cabinet members.
Nevertheless, I gather that there are some councillors who feel
that there may be a case for making some kind of gesture and taking
less than they are entitled to as they swing the axe on
council jobs and services.
I doubt, however, that it will come to much and to be frank,
they risk being accused of gesture politics if they do.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
One thing that does strike me about the details of councillors
expenses is that most seem reliant on their cars to attend
meetings. In fact, the amount claimed for public transport fares
was fifteen times less than was claimed for mileage and even less
than was claimed the previous year.
I appreciate that it can be tricky to do everything by public
transport but it's not as if Maidstone East station is a long way
away from County Hall...
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It's been a bad week for schools in Kent who were told that
long-awaited plans for new buildings had turned to rubble as
the government axed dozens of schemes from the Building
Schools for The Future programme.
It seems to be turning into an equally bad week for schools
secretary Michaell Gove, who as the bearer of the bad news, has now
had to apologise after a list of schemes that were to be reprieved
included some that were supposed to be on the list of projects not
going ahead.
It'll not be much consolation to those schools to see him squirm
and obliged to make multiple apologies but I expect some heads will
be quietly enjoying his embarrassment.
There could be further trouble down the line. Contractors who
risk losing significant sums are said to be weighing up whether
they can take legal action over the scrapping of various
schemes.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Decisions taken by county transport chiefs to put on hold
various community schemes such as cycle routes and improvements to
bus routes to save £4.1million were, we were told,
taken after consideration of such factors as whether they would
improve safety, cut congestion, were already underway, or had
generated significant match funding.
List of transport schemes put on hold>>>
But might there have been other factors? Opposition Lib Dem
county councillor Tim Prater discovered that a
spreadsheet published by the county council detailing schemes that
were on hold and others that were going ahead had an interesting
'hidden' column.
The column, headed 'comments' was appended inadvertently to the
saved schemes list. Against eight projects, notes were made
alluding to the "high political impact" or the "very high"
political impact of abandoning them.
Perhaps there was another factor taken into consideration. I
gather questions and an explanation are being sought.
UP-DATE: I've just spoken to KCC cabinet member
for highways Nick Chard who tells me that the comments were an
"aide-memoire" made by officers on what was a working document and
that he has not made any proposals based on the political
sensitivities of particular schemes.
Thursday, July 08 2010
The KM Group does not moderate comments.
Please click here for our house rules.