The Stockport Times has a front page story on councillor allowances: the total for all 63 Stockport councillors come in at a little under a million pounds, or about 0.2% of all council spending.

Should you be outraged?  Pleased?  Indifferent?

Should councillors get allowances, or should we do the work for free?

First, let’s clear up my expenses.  Apparently, I got £5,954.95 (that’s what the paper says, I assume it’s true) and that’s the lowest of any councillor.  But it’s only the lowest because I joined the council half way through the year.  This year I’ll be somewhere in the middle (I’ll get the basic allowance of about £9,500 and a little extra because I’m vice-chair of one of the council committees).

After that, two questions: do taxpayers get value for money, and what would happen if allowances were significantly cut or abolished.

Value for money

The basic allowance for a backbench councillor is about £9,500 a year.  We pay tax on that income, and it covers all our normal expenses.   I did calculate how much it worked out as for me, given the hours I spend on council business (excluding my political campaigning) and it came out as just a little above minimum wage.

I’m not blowing my own trumpet here – I’m quite certain that the majority of councillors from all parties are in a similar situation.  In terms of hours put in, the allowance doesn’t work out as a fortune, or even an average income.

I firmly believe the public get good value for money from that nearly-a-million pounds for 63 committed councillors working on behalf of their constituents and everyone across the borough.

The Leader, Cllr Dave Goddard, works full time as council leader – and then some.  He leads a council that provides over 600 services to over 250,000 people with a budget of half a billion pounds.  For that, he was paid less than £40,000.  Try finding someone to do that job at that price in the private sector!

What about cutting or abolishing allowances?

The policy the councillors have followed recently is for allowances to rise by the same amount as council staff, which for this coming year means no increase at all.  That seems fair to me.

But couldn’t we make big cuts to allowances?  Why not halve them or abolish them altogether?

Well, we could do that, but I for one wouldn’t be able to stay on the council.  I’m not retired, and I have to earn money to support my family: I simply couldn’t afford to put in the time required to be a good councillor without some sort of allowance, and I certainly wouldn’t want to hang around as a bad one.

If we want our councillors to exclusively be wealthy retired people, abolishing allowances is probably fine.  But if we want people of all ages and all backgrounds to have the opportunity to serve on the council and use their energy and talents for the benefit of the people of Stockport, a sensible allowance is essential.

So don’t congratulate me on taking the lowest allowance this year, but do consider the value for money you get from all your 63 councillors, Lib Dem, Conservative, Labour and Independent, who put in a lot of time and energy overseeing the spending of half a billion pounds.

We all chose to be councillors, most of us enjoy it and get a lot out of it.  But don’t begrudge us sensible allowances that aren’t excessive given the time we put  in an, in many cases, allow us to do the job in the first place.

(As always, these opinions are mine and mine alone, and do not necessarily reflect the views of other councillors, the council as a whole or the Lib Dem group).

   3 Comments