There will be a Full Brent Council meeting on September 8th, only the second since the elections in May. The first proved controversial with constitutional changes voted through and then later backbench concern about what had been agreed - especially the reduction in Scrutiny committees.
The meeting was noteworthy also for the public split in the Conservative opposition with the three Tories in Brondesbury Park declaring independence from those in Kenton.
That issue will rear its head again when the Council (56 Labour, 6 Tories and one Lib Dem) vote to decide which of the two Tory factions should be the Principal Opposition Group for the purposes of allowances. Perhaps Central Office will mediate before they expose themselves to ridicule.
Fiona Ledden's paper on allowances that will be put before the Council includes increases in allowances but Ledden claims that they remain some of the lowest in London and below those recommended by an independent review.
The recommendations (previous allowance in brackets) include:
There are clearly debatable issues such as the additional whips for the Labour group but as someone who has been a trade unionist since the age of 16 I am not going to fulminate against these proposals. It is right that people should get the rate for the job and carried out properly these are very responsible positions.
However, as an electorate we know that there is varying performance by councillors in terms of the effectiveness of their casework, including basic tasks such as responding to correspondence and attending surgeries, as well as issues around Cabinet and Committee members making sure they have read and understood the relevant papers thoroughly.
Furthermore there have been problems around attendance records at Council meetings in the past and we deserve our councillors' full-time commitment to their job.
Most workers go through appraisal procedures and teachers are now subjected to performance related pay. Perhaps councillors should be accountable to an annual ward citizens' panel between elections to ensure that they are giving value for money?
That is why the Recall proposal of the Make Willesden Green Campaign in the local elections, which the Green Party alone of the parties contesting the election supported, was so important.
The meeting was noteworthy also for the public split in the Conservative opposition with the three Tories in Brondesbury Park declaring independence from those in Kenton.
That issue will rear its head again when the Council (56 Labour, 6 Tories and one Lib Dem) vote to decide which of the two Tory factions should be the Principal Opposition Group for the purposes of allowances. Perhaps Central Office will mediate before they expose themselves to ridicule.
Fiona Ledden's paper on allowances that will be put before the Council includes increases in allowances but Ledden claims that they remain some of the lowest in London and below those recommended by an independent review.
The recommendations (previous allowance in brackets) include:
The basic allowance for all 63 councillors £10,000 (£7,974)There are a number of other allowances, many of which remain unchanged, that can be found on the Council website HERE
Additional Allowances
Following the replacement of the Executive by the smaller Cabinet, the two allowances saved will be shared amongst the Cabinet members £18,711 (£14,969)
The Leader of the Council £38,964 (£35,222)
Deputy Leader £28, 397 (£24,655)
Chief Whip majority party £5,473 (no change)
Two additional Deputy whips for the majority party are proposed £2,113 where their majority exceeds 50%. Previously there were whip allowances of £5,473 for the other two parties. They appear to have been abolished.
Group leader of the Principal Opposition £12,658 (no change but no deputy principal oppositon group leader allowance.)
Principal Opposition Group Allowance £2,113 (n/a)
There are clearly debatable issues such as the additional whips for the Labour group but as someone who has been a trade unionist since the age of 16 I am not going to fulminate against these proposals. It is right that people should get the rate for the job and carried out properly these are very responsible positions.
However, as an electorate we know that there is varying performance by councillors in terms of the effectiveness of their casework, including basic tasks such as responding to correspondence and attending surgeries, as well as issues around Cabinet and Committee members making sure they have read and understood the relevant papers thoroughly.
Furthermore there have been problems around attendance records at Council meetings in the past and we deserve our councillors' full-time commitment to their job.
Most workers go through appraisal procedures and teachers are now subjected to performance related pay. Perhaps councillors should be accountable to an annual ward citizens' panel between elections to ensure that they are giving value for money?
That is why the Recall proposal of the Make Willesden Green Campaign in the local elections, which the Green Party alone of the parties contesting the election supported, was so important.