Councillors - the new Professionals?

A major report commissioned by the Government reached Hazel Blears, Local Government minister, this week. The Councillors Commission, alleged to be “Independent”, was in fact crammed with Labour supporters.

The effect of the Report is to propose higher salaries and many perks, to set up “golden goodbyes” for unseated councillors and pensions. In fact they would be creating a copy of the political set-up in Westminster.

Among those things proposed are:

• Higher salaries for all councillors, including parish councillors. (Could there be a connection with the fact that from 2006 all Labour councillors have had to pay a direct debit levy from their council income to Party funds?)

• Golden goodbyes – cash handouts to those who lose their seats as the result of an election. These “umbrella” payments would be equivalent to statutory redundancy pay and be linked to time in office.

• State funding for local political parties

• Pensions for all councillors

• A communications allowance – “propaganda on the rates” – money for councillors to communicate with electors (near election time?). In addition, Councils will no longer be constrained in extolling their achievements (- publicity bills are already soaring.)

• Councillors to be permitted to keep any benefits from unemployment, even though they are receiving salaries from the Council.

• Weakened controls on officers who are also councillors. The controls were imposed in the 1980s to reduce corruption.

• Abolishing by-elections (parties to maintain lists of “substitute councillors” to replace from the same party councillors who do not finish their term.) Are the Labour party so pessimistic about their council future?

• Any requirement for councillors to be present and vote at meetings to be abolished. They could vote in absentia! This is to enable councillors to keep or gain other outside jobs.

The implications of all this are many and large. Foremost is the cost of implementation, which nationally would be many millions of pounds. They seem to feel that if council tax payers are required to stump up even more money, then they may be more likely to vote in local elections. Turnout is extremely low, and voters are often disillusioned. Would the money paid to political figures locally, their freedom to use propaganda, and the possibility for increased corruption make voters more enthusiastic?

If they wish to encourage people to vote, much the better way would be to give the councils more real power, instead of being mere agents for London. If people thought that their vote would make a real difference……

In fairness to the Government, spokesmen and “sources” are suggesting that the cost is too great for local taxpayers. We shall see.