Express & Star

Parish council allowances in the spotlight in South Staffordshire

Parish councils in South Staffordshire that pay members up to £1,000 a year need to be more transparent and allowances should be reviewed on an annual basis, an independent panel has recommended.

By Kerry Ashdown, contributor Kerry Ashdown
Published

Watch more of our videos on ShotsTV.com
and on Freeview 262 or Freely 565

Just two of the district’s 27 parish councils currently pay members allowances – Penkridge and Perton.

Six parish councils that responded to a survey from South Staffordshire District Council’s Independent Remuneration Panel said they did not pay any allowances however. Reasons included that it was not considered appropriate. or there was a small precept and the allowance wasn’t required.

The panel’s findings were backed by South Staffordshire Council’s Standards and Resources Committee at its latest meeting on January 23. A report to the committee said: “(At) Perton Parish Council members receive an allowance of £1,000 per annum and the chairman has an additional £700 set aside for additional expenditure items. Penkridge Parish Council adopted an allowance scheme on January 8 2004 and members receive an allowance of £1,000 per annum.

“The panel also looked at the findings of a survey that the National Association of Local Councils carried out over the summer to find out parish council views on member allowances; 354 responded, 79 per cent of councils do not offer parish basic allowances, and 21 per cent do. There were very divided opinions on offering parish basic allowances – some councillors are happy with their role being strictly voluntary and with the incentive to give back to their community, whereas others stress that receiving compensation would be useful.

“The panel discussed whether to recommend that no member allowance should be paid or to continue with the current arrangements or to revise the current scheme with a lower allowance. (It) agreed that no changes should be recommended to those parish councils who pay allowances but noted that there doesn’t seem to be a formal scheme in place or advertised on their websites.

“The panel feel that the member allowance scheme must be transparent and should be reviewed on an annual basis especially before the next all-out parish council elections in 2027.”

The committee also considered the panel’s recommendations for how allowances are paid to the chairman and vice-chairman of South Staffordshire District Council. Currently the district chairman can claim £5,653, while the vice chairman can claim £2,826, in addition to the annual basic allowance of £6,502 for all district council members.

The chairman and vice chairman represent the district council at civic events and on ceremonial occasions, in a similar capacity to a mayor and deputy mayor at borough authorities. The report to the committee revealed that last year’s chairman, Meg Barrow, attended 40 events during her year in office and vice chairman Dan Kinsey attended three during the same period.

Councillor Kinsey is the current chairman and has attended 29 events during his first six months in the role. Vice chairman Councillor Phil Davis has attended two events in his civic capacity.

The report said: “The panel noted that the current level of allowance for the chairman was in line with the average paid across similar authorities but that the allowance for the vice chairman varies. The panel considered how the scheme currently operates, the frequency of meetings attended by both the chairman and vice chairman and discussed various scenarios that highlighted the inflexibility of the current scheme.

“For example, the chairman may attend more events and may need to access more budget than currently set whereas the vice chairman may not attend any events and not require access to any budget. Alternatively, the vice chairman may need to attend more events if the chairman is incapacitated and requires a higher allowance than allocated.

“The panel discussed ways in which the scheme could be administered but were keen not to create a scheme that was overly bureaucratic to administer. They agreed to recommend that the chairman receive 50 per cent of the allowance up front with access the further allowance as required.”