Transcript

Good evening, everybody. This is a meeting of the Wandsworth General Purposes Committee meeting. I am going to ask councillors to introduce themselves and their ward, etc., when they speak in a discussion, with perhaps one exception, which is Councillor Amber. who you might like to introduce yourself now. Councillor Jeremy Ambash, West Park New Ward. I feel singled out, Chair. Yes, you are. Chair, have I done something wrong? I understand there are restrictions on what you can say tonight, so I'm not going to invite you to introduce yourself when you speak. I am Councillor Rex Osborne, and I'm Chair of the General Purposes Committee, and I'm going to move straight to the Wandsworth, and I'm going to move straight to the proceedings, and on my agenda, I have apologies. First of all, I think we have an apology for lateness. Can I have that confirmed, please? So, Councillor Matt Corner, Nine Elmsworth. James Jeffery sends apologies for lateness. Thank you, Councillor Corner. We have officers present who, if they speak, will also introduce themselves during the course of the meeting. And my first item on the agenda, therefore, is the minutes of the last meeting, which was 4th of February. Can we record those as accurate? Agreed? Okay. Are there any declarations of interest this evening? Can anybody who has an interest declare it now, please? Nobody? Unless the fact that we all receive allowances through the allowance scheme should be deemed an interest, but obviously that goes as read. Yes, as councillors, we all receive something, so that should be understood. I want to just make a remark, a verbal, it's a verbal item, informal, I suppose, at this stage, which is to say at the end of the meeting, I will just quickly run through, I suppose for the benefit of the public and the record, those task and finish groups that we've had under the auspices of this committee, and also the visits that we've had to other boroughs under the auspices of this committee. I'm not going to go into detail, but at least I'm going to mention them, and just in case anybody has a pressing need to say something about them at the end of the meeting. That brings me to the first substantial item on the agenda, which is item four, proposed revisions to Article 7 and consequential amendments to the members' allowance scheme. Could I ask Mr. Chowdhury, please, to introduce the background to this? Thank you, Chair. My name is Abdus Chowdhury. I'm the Director of Law and Governance and author of this report for you. It's a short report that proposes revisions to the Council's constitution, particularly Article 7, to introduce deputy Cabinet members who will assist Cabinet members in the delivery of the agenda for change. And there are some consequential changes to the members' allowance scheme because it's proposed that deputy Cabinet members are remunerated and that the current provision for policy champions is removed from the scheme. So, members, as I say, it's a short report. The introduction is only a couple of paragraphs long, so I don't propose to read that out to you. But what I would draw your attention to is that despite the title deputy Cabinet member, the members appointed to those positions will not be members of the executive. They are there to assist the executive. They have no role in attending the meetings of the executives and certainly no role in making any decisions that the executive needs to determine. That's important because that distinction means that they aren't restricted from having membership of any overview and scrutiny committee so that there is that separation, so that they are able to take membership if that is necessary. However, the report sets out that the intent is to ensure that there is a degree of separation, that deputy Cabinet members on specific projects that they work upon or areas that are specific to a particular portfolio, they won't sit on the overview and scrutiny committee that aligns to that. Additionally, and this is an additional restriction on their appointment that's being proposed, it's that they won't sit on the general overview and scrutiny committee which deals with call-in requests as and when they arise. The appointments will be made by the leader, as is the current provision for policy champions. The proposed changes to the Constitution members are set out in paragraph five and for those that are following at home, the proposed changes are set out in bold in the report and the deletions are struck out in that box paragraph. The consequential changes to the members allowance scheme will also take place if this committee recommends that to council and council next week approves it. Those changes are set out in paragraph six, members, and you'll see that the difference that there is between the current provision for policy champions and the provision proposed for deputy cabinet members is also set out there and the difference is approximately £23,000. The legal implications are set out in the subsequent paragraphs but in broad terms, members, aside from specific roles that are set out in the paragraphs quoted in paragraph eight, the reliance here is on the final subparagraph, paragraph five, that members can be remunerated, additionally remunerated for carrying out such other activities in relation to the discharge of the authority's functions as require the member an amount of time and effort equal or greater than it would be required of them by any of the other activities mentioned above. So it is a catch-all provision that allows authorities to make specific provision that is relevant and specific to their authority. So, member, that's a report before you. I'm happy to assist with any questions that you might have of me. Thank you, Mr. Chowdhury. Okay, I'm going to ask for councillors to, first of all, make comments and ask questions. A number of you have caught my eye already in the order that I saw them, starting first with Councillor Appes. Thank you very much. I'm Sarah Appes. I'm a member for Shaftesbury and Queenstown Ward. Deputy Cabinet members, I'll thank you very much for that really clear outline, Mr. Chowdhury. It's a very welcome proposal to have Deputy Cabinet members. We've done so much as a council. We've delivered so much with Access for All, with food waste collections, with a cleaner borough plan, building social homes for rent. And all of that takes time and resources and focus to really get that over the line. And I'm really pleased that the Deputy Cabinet members will be assisting the Cabinet members with that process. And I'm really looking forward to seeing, you know, how those Deputy Cabinet members learn about decision-making and delivery. And really, as we learned from Barnet Council, learning by doing, kind of having that change and making progress through actually being involved in helping to deliver those projects. Obviously, I am WIP, which, for the people who don't know, sort of involves part of that job, involves allocating jobs to particular councillors, allocating committee membership. And obviously, we will be very clear that, you know, those Deputy Cabinet members will not sit on committees that relate to their work. If anything was unexpectedly to come up in relation to their work, then obviously, they would recuse themselves in a normal way that somebody would if, say, they'd been working on a project that then came to committee. So I think it's very clear that we can have very good lines of defined, so to make sure that they can do a really good job, help deliver that important work for the residents in our borough, and then, and also act very, work well as colleagues, as they do at the moment, with all of us, too. So I think it's an exciting development, and I'm looking forward to seeing what they deliver over the next, so I'm looking at the next six months. Okay. Councillor Graham. Thank you. Councillor Peter Graham, on the Common Ward. So, I have a number of concerns about this paper, but I want to start with a preliminary clarification. In paragraph six, it says the schedule of rates at the end of the Members Allowance Scheme consequentially should be amended as follows. Can you tell us which Members Allowance Scheme that applies to? Councillor Graham, this is the current allowance scheme, and I note what you are possibly going to pick up is the schedule of rate effective from 1st of April 2024. That is the last scheme that we have published. Well, that isn't factually correct, is it? Because on the 11th of December, the Council received a report which had two allowance schemes. The first at Appendix 2, which was this one, for 2024-25, and the second published at Appendix 4, which was for 2025-2026. Paragraph 6 says that last year's scheme will be amended and leaves this year's scheme, which is now in force, unamended. Doesn't it? Chowdhury? I will do. I'm terribly sorry, Councillor Graham. If I have made that mistake, I will check that in a moment, and if necessary, I will suggest an amendment to that paragraph. Well, because there is a further issue with this, which I raised at the time, namely by publishing a new allowance scheme effective from 1st of April of this year for 2025-2026, and stipulating the rates as to be the same as the scheme for the last financial year, thereby all councillors' allowances were frozen. That is exactly the way in which we always froze councillors' allowances in the past, by publishing a new scheme, therefore removing the automatic uplift at the end of the previous year, when you don't publish a new scheme. And you only have to publish a scheme once every four years. And so the uplift applies when you go into the next financial year. By publishing a new scheme with the same rates, that's how you can freeze allowances. So I am very concerned, because I was told, despite the fact that that is obvious, and that is how every councillor has always interpreted schemes, that councillors' allowances had not been frozen. In fact, they have been, and now furthermore, we are amending the scheme for last year, which means that none of this paper will have any effect. Okay, is that just... Can I just check, is that accurate, Mr. Chowdhury? Mr. Chair, if that is a mistake, if you allow me a few moments, I will double-check the December paper. If that needs to be, then I will make that amendment and propose that that part of the report is amended, and this committee votes on that amendment. But then, within your context... Is that okay? That's absolutely fine for the monitoring office to look at that. But when he does say, if that is correct, can he confirm that basically everybody's allowance is frozen? Chairs, Cabinet members, basic councillors' rates, apart from this enormous increase for those of the Deputy Cabinet members. Okay, so you have a specific technical question, which the monitoring officer is going to check. Can we move on from this particular discussion and take Councillor Corner, who I saw next? Thank you, Chair. I also have a few questions about this paper and a number of concerns as well that I'd like cleared up, particularly in relation to the now apparently redundant role of the policy champions and how the Deputy Cabinet members will fit in with the overall governance structure of the Council. So could I first ask, who are the Deputy Cabinet members actually deputies to? Because we're told that there will be one for environment, one for housing and one for health, and they map clearly to existing Cabinet member roles. But there will then be two additional Deputy Cabinet members, communities and resident engagement, which would seem to be a much broader role. So they're not actually deputising any Cabinet member. Are they just deputising the Cabinet as a whole? Can we have that clarified, please? OK, a specific question. Thank you, Councillor Corner. Is there an answer to that straight away, perhaps from Councillor Apps? So thank you very much for that question. We're really excited to have the new roles, resident engagement and also around communities. Communities is going to look at issues such as refugees and faith communities. So it's going to be specifically working with one of the Cabinet members responsible for that. And then the residents post is going to be looking at different forms of engagement with residents because we are a listening council and it's really important that we hear from our residents and it's important that we give the time to taking forward that work. OK, I've got... All right, quick follow-up and then I've got Councillor Grimston. Thanks. It is welcome that the Deputy Cabinet members will not be able to sit on an OSC that covers their brief. But in the case of the Communities and Residence Engagement Deputy Cabinet members, their roles would actually cover all OSCs. I think that's a reasonable interpretation. So couldn't it just be confirmed that those Deputy Cabinet members will not sit on OSCs? OK, that's a reasonable question. Councillor Apps? So they're going to work on specific projects but if those projects encompass all committee areas then obviously that would be the fact. But if they only encompass some committee areas then that obviously would not be the fact. So just because you're called Residence Engagement does not mean you're going to be doing Residence Engagement across all departments. It could be looking at specific areas of work and we will obviously... I've already committed to the fact that people will not be members of OSCs that work directly to their work and I stand by that and that's your answer. Well, thank you. I really do welcome that. There is just one final point. You have had one comeback. I can come back to you in a minute if you want or is it essential? It's just sensible on the flow of the meeting. The... Will you... I really am grateful for that. That does make sense. But will you confirm that the Executive will set out a clear scope for the Deputy Cabinet Member's role so that the decision on which committees that they sit on which is taken at the Annual Council just next week can be made with this restriction on OSC membership in mind? Quick confirmation, Councillor X? Yes, that's what I was saying. Yep. OK. Councillor Grimston and I do see you, Councillor Hedges. Thank you, Chair. It's just a general sense of discomfort with this. Last week we just heard that we're among the top five councils in London for overspend on special educational needs. There are a number of areas where there are significant overspends on the budget. And two, at this particular time when there's such enormous cost of living problems out there, I think we need an extremely strong reason for any argument that says we should spend an extra £23,000 on ourselves when that money could be going elsewhere. And what I think the paper is missing is firstly, what are the failings over the last three years that this is designed to? So what has been going so badly that we need to spend an extra £23,000 putting it right? I don't think that is clear in the paper. I also don't think what's clear is what performance indicators are being introduced or being monitored in order to see whether this has improved the value the council gives by at least £23,000, a significant sum as I say. There's no suggestion in here as to what the performance indicators are that will even allow us to come to a view as to whether that money was well spent or not. And nor do I see any sign based on matters to what targets associated with those performance indicators are there. I just wonder what will happen if some of us say out there, well, you know, the politics of this, there's just been a leadership election. How do we defend saying that this is simply buying off people who may have responded in a particular way to the politics of the last few weeks? And I think we do need a very robust answer to that because I think the respect and the sense of Wandsworth as being acting selflessly is something that we need to be able to defend over this. Okay. Thank you, Councillor Grimson. I take that as a comment which kind of demands a riposte. So I'm going to leave it for a bit and go to Councillor Hedges who's burning to get in. Thank you, Chair. Councillor Hedges here. Councillor in Ballam Ward. I've got two questions. Hopefully you can clarify them pretty quickly. One is how will the removal of the policy champions impact ongoing initiatives that they are supporting? For example, Councillor Lee as the Borough of Culture champion, Councillor Rigby as the High Streets champion, and also yourself, Chair, Councillor Osborne as the Heritage champion. How will all the good work you've done be passed over? And then the second question is how will the introduction of these deputy cabinet members improve the delivery of the Council's agenda for change? And also, yeah, I was going to ask about how do you measure and evaluate the deputies, but Councillor Grimson already asked that question. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. So Councillor White haven't said anything yet. Yeah, Councillor White tooting Beckward. I just wanted to ask about the, I suppose, the slight difference between the champions and the deputies. So, and that comes on from what I think you two guys were saying as well, that the, I mean, what particular skill, are we looking for people with particular skills, you know, for these type of roles? And is there a feeling that the need of the cabinet is such that with the amount of work they've got to do, that having deputies would help with that? Is that the feeling? Thank you. Councillor Apps. Oh, yeah, good. Okay. Yeah. So certainly, Councillor White, I would say that we have been a council which has been very focused on delivery and on changing residents' lives and improving residents' lives. And so that, the focus that we've had and the amount that we've delivered goes over and beyond what most councils are doing. And so there is an incredibly kind of, you know, a kind of high workload for all our great cabinet members and congratulations on your new post. And so we do hope that this will form a really good point of kind of support. But coming back to Councillor Hedger's point about what happens to that work, well, those cabinet members have been and remain responsible for those areas. So that legacy from the good work of the champions will continue and they will obviously be responsible for continuing to deliver on those areas. But it's had some focused attention and High Street remains absolutely a key area for us. but what we're going to see is we're going to look at some of the challenges, some of the priorities that we've got that we think are really important to deliver for residents. And I'm really looking forward to seeing talented colleagues who've got a big future ahead of them in delivering services across this council and getting stuck in and delivering on these. So that is why it's important. That is how it's going to help. This also creates a sense of kind of building capacity for the future as well because we will have more councillors with a good understanding and knowledge of how decision-making works within the council. So it's really important to set these kinds of things up so that we can continue to deliver as a council as we have done so far. Okay, I've got Councillor Grimston next. I'm sorry, I may be thinking I didn't quite get the answer as to what performance indicators are being measured because the performance management isn't just a matter of it's essential in being able to go back and look at a scheme and say either this worked well we got what we wanted out of it we'll continue or broadly the right direction but there's a few tweaks here and there or frankly this just hasn't worked so we'll change our minds about that. Performance management is the absolute centre or one of the centres of what we do as councillors we set by our use of targets we set our political priorities out and we then check whether those political priorities have been there and I don't know how at the end of say this year we're going to be able to say this scheme added 10,000 value so it didn't really work or it added 50,000 value and it was really good value for money and can you give me precisely two examples of two or three of the performance indicators and the targets that are associated with this rather than just saying oh it's important that we do this which may or may not be true yeah sure well you know the cabinet members will be responsible for managing this workload so I'd expect them to be the ones who kind of come with the details but what I would say is how do we measure the value of the opposition leader how do we measure the value of cabinet members you know the fact is is that we do need to set objectives and we need to have things which people are delivering against you know important targets but as politicians we generally do we are expected to deliver and the outcome of that is measured in the ballot box as well but certainly they will have key objectives that we will be expecting them to deliver against so and that will be something that the cabinet member themselves will be managing you must have had a reason for choosing five rather than three or seven and that's not set out here I don't see anything in here that explains to us why five is the right number particularly since it doesn't align with the cabinet in a direct way I don't see any explanation in there as to why the champions scheme which was explained in exactly the same terms as we've just done as to why it was such a brilliant idea is now something that we should drop because it's not a brilliant idea presumably so what has led you to that conclusion and without some meat to that without some substance around that I accept things are difficult but you are making a clear proposed change here and changes do need to be defended at that point and I don't see in the paper the explanation as to why it's five what went wrong with the champion scheme that it's had to be dropped having been introduced to such great fanfare and so on I do agree with what Councillor Grimston has said we do need a lot more clarity over why these deputy roles are being created what actual outcomes they're going to drive I do welcome the commitment just now from Councillor that the scope of the deputy cabinet members roles will be published before the annual council it's only a week ahead you said that the scope would be set out will it be published quick correction I said that the scope would be taken into account when looking at which committees that members are on I do think finish your point thank you I do think that the scope of the deputy cabinet members should be defined and published by the council as soon as possible and I think then KPIs can flow from that once they have had a discussion with the cabinet member about those just turning to the champions it's absolutely right that just two years ago on this committee we were told that these were a great new initiative and that they'd be doing extremely valuable work and on this side of the table we all said we need to understand exactly what kind of outcomes they'll be driving what projects they'll be working towards I do accept that some of the champions have done some valuable work including you chair in your history and heritage role but there are a number of champions that have never been accountable in any proper way or given any evidence for any kind of value that they've driven for this council or the communities that we serve how will deputy cabinet members be different and will there be an acceptance that the policy champion initiative has basically been a massive failure and a waste of money for this council and for our residents I think I have a barrage of similar questions do I is that what you're trying to come in with councillor graham or I'd like an answer to my initial question I was preliminary before I get on to my concerns okay very good hold fire I'm going to come I'm going to come to Mr. Chowdhury now thank you chair councillor graham you're right to note the area the table in paragraph six states schedule of rates effective first of April 2024 it should have said 2025 the figures quoted within are the 2025 scheme that was reported to council in December in which case can you answer the point about the fact that because we have a new scheme which has began on the 1st of April which is now still in force as you're suggesting and and that this will be amended to to to change that scheme that those rates for the other allowances have been stipulated and therefore the uplift which would otherwise have taken place to deal with this April has been postponed until next April and all allowances you're asking the question which I was going to ask as chair can I is it all right if in exactly the same terms so what is it that you recommend we do Mr. Chowdhury exactly what is set out in the report chair the only amendment is the date that is on on the table in paragraph six which states that it's 1st of April 2024 it should have said 2025 the figures that are quoted are from the 2025 allowance scheme that was in agreed sorry that was reported to full council in December so can I just on clarification from the chair can I just check the only error is one digit and it's the it's the five at the end of 2025 rather than 2024 that that's the only error is it yes chair with respect that isn't the case because the total maximum cost should say 25 26 not 24 25 so there are at least two just there but more to the point it is precisely because those figures for the panel rate the ones of payable rate total maximum cost and the rest of it are identical to the previous scheme and those are the only two things that do need to be changed that makes the point about allowances haven't been frozen and I've put this point twice now in emails and not got an answer I've now put it twice tonight and not got an answer would the monitoring officer please confirm that everyone else's allowances with the exception of those who have the great fortune to be deputy cabinet members have been frozen is that correct are all the other allowances frozen the chair what was agreed at December council was the application of the inflation increase that is stipulated in the in the scheme and that those that those increases were applied in 24 20 24 25 and that that scheme was published as part of the papers and the applicable rate that is from 1st of April 25 to 20 26 remains the same unless there is a local government sorry there's an inflationary increase that is applied and the scheme is report reported as amended but it's not actually amended because the scheme permits the inflationary rate to be applied I'm going to come back to you in a second can actually because I'm grateful for the point that you were raising thank goodness we have you here I want to take in some comments from councillor apps and then I'm going to come back to you Peter yep just just come back to some of the comments I understand about the need to manage the performance that is going to be an important task of the camp for the cabinet members and I think it's something that the cabinet members should be discussing with their deputy cabinet member and also potentially with OSCs or with other groups you know in terms of how we're delivered I to be honest I'm councillor grimston and I don't have that detail in front of me but I can come back to you on that and clarify that and on the issue about the sort of oh you know are we saying that this means that the champion scheme was not useful of course we are not we're actually building on that success we're we're learning from it and we're actually saying these rules are so important and so useful that we actually want to expand the remit so that they can give more support to the cabinet member but in no way is this I mean some of the camp as you've said some of the champions have done incredible work I mean Joe Rigby has been vociferous in kind of you know helping to clean up the high streets around Ballum and around other town centres we've also had Jack who's done incredible work around school streets and actually you know working to push through our agenda on making sure that as many schools have school streets as possible so actually what we want to do is build on that work it's in no way kind of detracting from the huge successes that I congratulate my colleagues for and but I did also want to move the amendments so if we need to make those amendments and thank you to Councillor Graham if we need to move those at some point I don't know if you want me to do that now or later not right away I want to take Councillor Lawless first thank you Sean Lawless I also am a champion for safe streets thanks everyone for remembering not for long so I just wanted to come back on a little bit on what Councillor Grimson said I wouldn't say that it indicates failures I think when you look at a deputy cabinet member for environment who will be working under Councillor Y I think actually that we're never going to get to zero when it comes to things like fly tipping right but having extra people power to be able to get on top of it and ensure that resources are being allocated to the right areas is actually a good thing and like we have done a lot of work as an administration to try and clamp down on some fly tipping and we've seen a reduction so yeah I think I think there can be definite benefits maybe Councillor White can tell us about what his deputy will be doing what she's already doing and has been doing for a long while yeah I mean from my sorry I'm in the chair sorry would you like to would you like to make a comment please Councillor White I'd love to yeah I think you're having someone because because the thing is there's a question I asked about the capacity was the environment brief is quite large so having someone who's specifically focusing on one thing I was a champion as well and I didn't think you had you know a lot of pull with the officers whereas with a deputy it will be different although the cabinet member will be overseeing it the deputy member will be expected to you know be in control of a certain area and therefore have a little bit more pull although you know the final decision will be with the cabinet member where we go through with certain things I think I also asked about skills actually earlier on as well because you know why would you have particular people as deputies well Jo's success in Balham I think we could all reflect on that she was really really successful in making Balham a much nicer place we expect her now to be rolling that out around the borough but she has got skills to do that and has got you know a history of doing that and a record of doing that so that's I think that's the difference between deputies and a champion is it's a much more direct role than the champions okay Councillor Graham you've been very patient thank you I wonder if Mr. Chowdhury wanted to comment any further having had time to reflect if not I'll make some other points Mr. Chowdhury you know okay in which I'll let me cover what I think happened on on the allowances in December 1st what should have happened to get what the administration wanted was for that 24-25 scheme to be published as appendix 2 the reason it needed to be published at all was because it wasn't easy to apply an automatic uplift because of the way that things events had happened I won't go into that but effectively it had to be stipulated because it wasn't an easy way to to uplift it that's all that needed to be done we didn't need to produce a new scheme for this financial year because that scheme would have rolled over still been valid and the and the inflationary uplift applied automatically now that they would have purchased again in this year this is actually I think in paragraph six correct the problem if you wish to give every councillor an inflationary uplift this year rather than freeze them the problem is the existence of the other scheme if we are now of mending this to amend the new scheme for this year rather than withdraw the scheme for this year and amend the scheme for last year then we have frozen allowances for everybody with the exception of those who are having this amendment that is the position as I understand it now I this should never have got this far because I pushed this point so many times by email and not had adequate answers not had an adequate answer tonight this it is deeply unsatisfactory that we've gone into this meeting without this point being clear and I would say as a point of gratitude actually that this that we're here at all to discuss this given the changes that the administration made to the constitution means they can bypass general purposes it is precisely because general purposes was bypassed in December that these points about the schemes which occurred to me the moment I saw them could not be aired and that we had to go to full council without any ability to clarify these matters and I raised it there as unsatisfactory and said then that it was a problem but because there was no committee meeting it couldn't be dealt with at least by there being a committee meeting tonight despite the fact that there was no obligation on the administration to bring it we've been able to clarify that there is a problem even if the scope of it has not been reached now I'm clearly not going to get a further point on that I would suggest to the administration if they don't wish to freeze everybody's allowances what they actually tell full council to do is withdraw this year's scheme and amend last year's scheme and then they can apply the inflationary uplift at the moment we have the local government pay settlement turning to what we have here my biggest concern looking at this is the ones worth payable rate because if you go through the schemes you'll see that no one is getting the full amount or no one has been getting the full amount indeed many people are getting far less than the full amount an OSC chair under the London Council's recommended rate should be being paid something between fifteen thousand and thirty one thousand pounds they're getting eleven thousand six hundred below the band the chair of audit has the same band as the policy champions had which is three thousand to nine thousand on the recommended level they're getting two thousand nine hundred and ninety one as the chair of audit how is it that the deputy cabinet members instead of being paid somewhere in the middle of that band are getting a hundred percent the maximum possible amount why is it why is it that no one else should get the maximum possible allowed and only them why is it that some people are getting below the recommended amount and yet they're getting right at the top it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever there is no rationale in this paper and we are left to draw our own conclusions as to the motivation on the part of the administration and those conclusions are not attractive okay council Graham you've your comments are in two parts first part about the technicalities to that you've drawn our attention to and then a more general part as the more general part I'm going to come back to in a minute I want to deal with the technicality first and I have seen you councillor corner and I will come to eventually please be patient so first of all mr chowdhury can I just ask again is there an amendment which and I think perhaps councillor apps is also on the same page on this an amendment which puts right the error in the in the paper before us yes chair thank you so councillor Graham's points I've heard carefully if I can explain to members what was put before December council was a report to notify that the inflationary increase that is envisaged in the scheme for 24 every year but so happened for 2425 25 was applied for 24 25 and that was notified to council to apply the inflationary increase to be effective from the first of April to first of April 24 20 20 sorry first of April 2024 as part of that paper what was also included was the scheme which took into account that inflationary increase that would be applicable from the first of April 20 20 25 so the error that is in the report is where it refers to in the table 2024 25 it should say 25 26 and where it says first of April 2024 it should just say 2025 the sums the figures that are contained are from the scheme that is currently applicable okay so what what is the amendment therefore that we need to have on the table before us to put the document right along the lines as described by Councillor Graham actually well chair the amendment that needs to be made is on paragraph six on the table that starts stating starts and states once with borough council members allowance scheme schedule of rates effective from 1st of April 2024 that should read 1st of April 2025 and then in the columns that immediately are below that total maximum cost under the scheme 24 25 should be changed to 25 26 that is those are the only two changes can I come in on this okay my point is precisely that that is the wrong thing to do if if the administration wants to have an inflationary uplift to all allowances that is only the right thing to do if the administration wants to freeze allowances for everybody apart from deputy cabinet members because by changing last year's scheme and withdrawing and it would take the council now to withdraw the scheme for this financial year the inflationary uplift will automatically take place at the previous scheme it is only necessary to publish a scheme once every four years if you publish another scheme for the next year and you put the same rates in it you freeze allowances that is precisely how this council and other councils went about freezing allowances given that they're by law they have to put in schemes that have an inflationary uplift the only way to freeze councillors allowances is by stipulating the following year that the rates will be the same as the previous year and publishing a new scheme rather than uprating the old scheme so what mr chowdhury has said makes absolutely no sense to me it is not consistent with the practice this council in the past or other councils up and down the country and if this amendment is made in this way you will be in a position of freezing all those allowances that you argued it was so important to increase freezing those and yet giving deputy cabinet members this nine ground payout at a hundred percent of the absolute top end of the recommended rate when some people are getting allowances that are below the bottom end of the recommended rate okay i i'm i'm so glad that i have to be neutral in the chair the um uh if if that can i just check check councillor apps you want to come in on something or i was going to check yeah i just wanted to check mr chowdhury i i understand i'm assuming you disagree with what councillor graham is saying or or is he correct so chair um with respect i i do disagree um with councillor graham what was agreed uh by uh council or what was reported to council sorry not agreed because it is a a report rather than for a decision so allow me to just uh remind myself of the recommendations that went before uh council council was asked to note on the 11th of december to note the increase of the basic and special responsibility allowance in line with the local government pay award backdated to 1st of april 2024 and council were then also asked to note the members in our scheme for 2025 26 as set out in appendix four so that uh it is those rates that are quoted in the report the only different uh only amendment is that the date should be 25 26 okay and does uh does anybody have that amendment to hand is that what you were trying to say to me councillor apps you do have that amendment to hand okay yeah so uh you're still disagreeing with it are you councillor graham yes because again again the appendix i don't know how how just a second i don't know how to resolve this you two are saying two diametrically opposed things and we have to get through this somehow and take a decision and go forward i would suggest one way to resolve this would have been for my emails to have been answered it's no good to me now in this position i i agree thank you very much i understand the point you're making but that's no use to me now i need to i need to move this committee meeting forward i do understand that i just wanted to correct one point the very fact that mr chowdhury has described a new allowance scheme as a paper for information and not a decision of the council is part of the problem to produce a new scheme which is something you only have to do once every four years you are taking a decision you do not need to publish a new scheme with a new taking effect date to imply an inflationary uplift when it's done automatically and i come back to it if mr chowdhury was correct it would be impossible to freeze councillors allowances okay i thank councillor graham for his attention to this um but what i would like to say is that i take legal and constitutional advice from our monitoring officer and not from other councillors so i'm going to accept um councillor uh sorry mr abdhurs uh chowdhury's uh oh good god good god mr chowdhury's advice sorry oh no bad night for names um and um propose those amendments from to 20 from 2024 to 25 and then from changing the 24 25 to 25 26 and i think those are the only amendments that are needed and if somebody wants to second that then we can make that amendment i also add by the way that uh in fact to not do as councillor apt suggests is a is a serious trans transgression so uh quite right we we take the the advice that we're given okay so was there a seconder for that uh amendment yes councillor white uh can i see all those in no hang on a second i'm going to take the uh do you want me to take the amendment now or take it at the end i'm anxious to get it out of the way actually okay let's take it now all those in favor of that amendment please those against one okay any abstentions large number uh i make it seven actually oh no six thank you for your patience and forbearance everybody that means we've got through a particular hurdle in the meeting now okay your second part of your intervention councillor graham uh was a more uh political point uh can i uh i'd like to see a discussion on that now if anyone if people can remember what it was um so no no i don't i don't uh you recapped it as you were doing it if i remember rightly so uh yes councillor white did you put your hand in the air just then okay okay very good uh all right so okay now we come to councillor corner then who has been waiting for a while um thank you chair um i do really think we need to hear a good um and substantive um uh rationale for the the amount of money these people being paid in relation to the recommended pay scales because it is well out of whack with every other role on the council which does not um seem appropriate or proportionate um i do understand the argument that um paying people more might might to to pursue the administration's agenda might result in that agenda being implemented more um effectively um but actually what's also happening alongside this um to councillor white's point about getting kind of more people on board to help with the agenda of the executive is what's actually happening is the head count is being reduced because there were eight policy champions there are now five deputy cabinet members so we're actually reducing the number of people who are charged with pursuing the executive's agenda or like supporting cabinet members however you want to put it so it seems to me we're actually paying more on the councillor's allowance for less resource going into the delivery of the executive's uh policies which we're told is is so important and and we need more resource behind it so it would be good to get some kind of rationale for that i'm not sure what it could be based on the paper okay i'm looking around for people who haven't spoken yet this evening see if anybody else wants to come in no okay councillor apps oh uh do you want to give ground to councillor i was just going to ask a quick councillor hedges go on sorry did we say that the um the allowance for the cabinet members has um is it in line with other similar size councils sorry if you said that earlier and i missed it councillor ireland while uh i'm uh seeing if anyone's got a point just a point of clarity um resource doesn't just depend on the number of people surely it depends on the amount of time spent on the job so fewer people doesn't necessarily mean less time spent i think that's the intention okay nobody else wanting to come in on this so you you can confirm that deputy cabinet members will be expected to spend more time on their roles than policy champions were to what extent is that the case is there a confirmation of that or are we are we drawing to a close okay it looks okay possibly i'm looking for the uh for the administration yes councillor ireland just to say that um again sorry thank you so much um just looking at the outline job descriptions i don't have the detail it's clear that there is a higher level of responsibility intended for these roles now i do know this will be developed along with the kpis with the cabinet members so i'm just going on what the information i've got here but it's clear to me just from what's written here that is the higher level of responsibility so yes that might have some bearing on the um allowance i'm i'm thinking we're moving towards a vote on this there's not there's not a huge number of people trying to come in on it uh count we'll take councillor white first yeah i mean further clarity uh having uh a deputy work for me and uh also having been the champion for a champion i would go to a meeting once every two months maybe i think it was once every three months even you know um and uh you know we talk about the ideas i'll come up with and generally they were rejected and you know you just go whereas with your deputy it's something completely different i mean uh i am talking to councillor rigby almost on a daily basis um and some of the ideas she come up some of the ideas we've worked upon will become policy and will become part of our uh what what we're doing with it within environment so it is a different role altogether from my point of view i'm not sure from your point of view whether being a champion was any different councillor laudas councillor apps yep so um i'm liking some of the ideas that i hear from the opposition you know clearly they want to have um some guidance for councillors on how much they should spend per week per month per year on being a councillor perhaps there should be guidance for the opposition leader and how much time they should spend the opposition whip um and others who receive allowances um i'm not against that i think it's part of a bigger conversation about how we run councils but i don't see why we would single out one particular post holders when those don't you know will not provide for cabinet members for councillors you know how many hours do council spend on casework it varies a great deal um so i think that um we should certainly be consistent with how we apply that what i would say what i would say is is that and another point is actually that the opposition leader officially in this council although they've chosen to vary it in various ways to make sure that they support other roles is actually sort of at the top end of the london council's um guidance around opposition leaders um so um actually you know it's it's not true that you know that all the the posts are consistent in that way um so so i do think actually it varies a good deal and the important thing is is that we are mindful of the london council's guidance and that we make sure that we fit within that um the other thing i would say is that it's we have a particular um attitude in our side which we know and we've debated that that we think it's really important that people from all backgrounds are able to come forward and be councillors and be able to contribute fully in the in the council's business and that they're not held back because of financial problems of financial inclusion and that's a really important principle for us um and so we stand by actually giving people reasonable um allowances in order to enable them to do their work i think that is the proper thing to do and i think that's the right thing to do councillor jeffries keen to hear you thank you chair um councillor james jeffries at thamesfield ward um i appreciate some of the clarification that we've um received this evening um that that has been helpful i suppose my query was more around the timings of this um we've heard in many ways that the roles are quite similar so what changed why now and was there a specific trigger for these changes coming forward to general purposes councillor graham you wanted to come in i think well yes because i just heard or i thought i heard councillor app say that it was important that people were paid within the recommended rates provided by the independent panel the independent panel recommends an osc chair is paid between 15 000 and 31 000 pounds the ones worth payable rate is 11 600 outside and below that so if it's important to follow the rec independent panel's recommendations and stay within that band why are all of the osc chairs and the chair award it as another example outside that band and below it okay that is a point you have made previously well i'm not it may be a point that doesn't necessarily get an answer or require one i think it does require an answer yes it may not get one but that would show that there is no defense to offer for what the administration is doing come on only to back up councillor graham's point we've got no justification for the pay of deputy cabinet members it's completely inconsistent with some of the other roles and i actually have a lot of sympathy with her argument that we shouldn't um allow pay to be a barrier to people uh being involved uh coming forward as councillors and contributing at the senior levels of the council so why don't we amend the pay for the other roles which is far which is low at the moment um compared to what's recommended and and bring everyone into line okay so uh are we then moving to a vote on this no no hang on hang on hang on i'm only asking are we moving to a vote on this i mean we we will have to eventually have a vote on it i'm trying to give you your full head so that you can you can make all your points but uh sooner or later we're going to have to come to come to a conclusion on this so i'm going to take i'm going to take just a few more uh contributions i think councillor graham was next actually yes so i'm looking at this and i can see absolutely no rationale or consistency for what is known as the ones with payable rate we are obliged when we take decisions to provide reasons that is an obligation on us this is a paper from the monitoring officer who is obliged to draft papers that provide reasons i can't see a reason for why the ones of payable rate varies so extraordinarily between different roles can he provide a rationale or a reason for it being 9 000 pounds right at the top for a deputy cabinet member but below the bottom for an osc chair okay i'm not sure that's a fair question but carry on carry on councillor corner councillor corner i i have nothing more to say other than that it's outrageous that we're not getting answers to these fair questions that could be completely um predicted um by members opposite let's just have answers about the inconsistencies in the pay scheme which is important for the reasons that council are upset out okay okay can you want to come in um um yes i'm just hoping i could get an answer to my question a few moments ago what was the trigger why these changes now my only point is that i mean as a general rule the question should be directed at councillors and not at officers i'm asking the officer for whether he believes his paper is consistent with the duty to provide reasons for decisions and that is a fair question and if you are blocking that as opposed to allowing him to answer i'd like to know i'm not i'm not blocking it let's let's go over to councillor apps thank you very much for your questions i would say that some of the payable rates are fairly historic they're actually a legacy from the previous administration and if you want to come forward with proposals for overall amending the scheme i'd be very happy to sit down and talk to you about that and see how you want to take that forward but this is the scheme that we've got it's the scheme that we've largely inherited from you and um and perhaps you know you would like to propose a more fundamental rethink of the whole thing would be really interested to have that conversation on councillor jeffrey's point we are an incredibly ambitious council we're delivering an incredible amount on on you know across the borough on our key priorities we're always looking ways to improve the delivery that we're making to residents and that's why this has come forward because we've seen that we need additional capacity to support the cabinet members in some of their key areas and the deputy cabinet members are going to be absolutely key in helping to deliver that so thank you for that question okay mr chowdhury basic answer to the question so yes uh chair thank you um uh i haven't uh got the specific answers with regards to uh reference to the remainder of the scheme um what is uh what i would say to members in considering the level of allowance um that is proposed for um deputy cabinet members there is in the description um and the amendments to the um uh to our um to uh to article seven of the constitution uh description uh a description of the role that they will uh and the duties that they will discharge which are different um uh in some respects from uh the role of policy uh champions um and the the council can and should take account of the uh independent panels report in determining uh remuneration there is a range set out uh within uh within uh within that report and that is quoted within our uh our scheme but it isn't bound to follow it in every instance the circumstances differ from one authority to another um and the uh allowance proposed for other roles that receive a special responsibility uh the special responsibility allowance was considered at the time they were set as is being considered for deputy cabinet members and that is the proposal before you uh you are able to determine whether that is reasonable and uh vote in favor or against it members mr grimston hasn't said anything for a while yeah thank you i i this is not satisfactory i'm afraid from my point of view the comparator for the deputy cabinet members and the allowance is not the champions this is deputy cabinet members in other councils around london and we need and it's over here saying we don't really need to answer these questions because they're just figures that we've chosen but there does need to be an answer as to why in wandsworth we regard the role of the uh uh over the scrutiny chairs as being so much less valuable than the london average so our over the scrutiny chairs do considerably less work than their comparison across london and therefore we pay them underneath the allowance for that whereas our cabinet deputy cabinet members will be the very very best in london and deserve the highest pay now that may be true i don't know i don't know know how we know that when nobody's actually fulfilled these roles yet that's how we know they're going to be the very very best in london and deserving the very top of the pay but at least we need an explanation as to why our overview and scrutiny chairman are so much less valuable that they don't deserve the minimum on this while the deputy cabinet members are so important that they get right at the top and that i quite suspect that question is going to be ducked but it won't be ducked forever there will be quite people who ask this and it is interesting isn't it that the total number of of posts is being posts is being reduced and you don't wonder i'll be interested as to whether it is that some of the uh uh champions just weren't up to the job and that's why their roles have been cut or have they blotted their copy book in some other way over the last two or three weeks can i can i check councillor grinsen are you proposing a review or an overhaul or something as councillor apps was well if such a review were to give us the answer as to why our overview and scrutiny committee chairs are so much less valuable than the london average while our deputies are so much more are right at the top if we can get an answer to that question because i'm interested i'm interested as to why the administration does think the overview and scrutiny chairs are are doing such a bad job that they don't deserve even the minimum that's put forward by london i think that's an interesting question okay just checking what what you were saying it sounded similar to what councillor apps was saying but it's not it's something different yeah yeah it is an interesting question councillor grimston um although what i would say is you should really pose it to the previous administration because we haven't had a major overhaul overall of our of our allowances we haven't had an overall allowances of um the cabinet members for example and the osc chairs and we do have quite a number of osc chairs there's different structures of overview and scrutiny arrangements in different councils um so certainly um that is that's a perfectly valid question but as you know we haven't had a major overhaul of our overall expenses it's not something or allowances our special responsibility allowances it's not something we've done this term um and i'm interested that the opposition are very interested in having a rebalance of the allowances overall and that's certainly something that if they want to discuss it with us we're very open to that discussion well hang on you introduced eight new allowances and you introduced a new cabinet post it's not true there hasn't been significant reform there's been very significant reform thank you thank you councillor grimston councillor graham and councillor councillor white and we really must move to a conclusion on this discussion i know it may be frustrating if you're not getting your way in your answers but we do have to move to a decision eventually we've been at this for about an hour and 15 minutes already so uh i mean we may go on longer but i'm keen that we we think about uh drawing uh into a more conclusive mood if we can thank you so i'd like to ask councillor apps when it was that she first discussed with members of her group the possibility of them receiving a new nine thousand pounds allowance and was it before or after the re-election of councillor hogg as labour group leader councillor white i'd like councillor perhaps to answer well let's we're we're in the middle of a discussion about a specific paper yeah she can people anyone can decline a question in a meeting if they want to councillor white um it's quite interesting because i was a chair as well and i would have been worth every inch of the uh you know the the upper limit of that that chair's allowance um but um but i was quite happy to inherit what the uh previous administration uh was paying chairs so that that was fine i think uh some of the i get the undertone from the other side but uh you know i think every administration has a right to have a look at how things are going how the cabinet is uh being supported what sort of work the cabinet are doing uh i have only been a member of the cabinet for um a short period of time but i do recognize the really really hard work that the cabinet members do um and i think having assistants and and deputies to help them in in that work and to add to that capacity i think is very very important i think that uh um having a look as i said before having a look the way the champions worked for the previous three years i i i i don't know but it's probably felt that uh you know they they weren't supporting in a way that we we really needed they were doing a good job but they weren't there for what we needed them to do whereas as i said now for the third time um as far as the deputy is going to work they are going to do uh uh are going to be working very very hard and supporting the uh the uh the cabinet members in a in a very very real way so it's quite different and as i say every every administration has the right to have a look at what they're doing and say well can we do it better and this might not work who knows but and then we might reassess it again councillor apps yeah yeah um i wanted to be very clear with you that we don't regard you know running this borough as a game we don't regard it as something to have cheap shots about we are we are absolutely focused on delivering for our residents and that's what we're doing and that's why we're introducing deputy cabinet members to support the cabinet members in their work and it's absolutely crucial and i see absolutely no reason to to have a comeback on this because it's absolutely unnecessary given i've been very clear about the remit of their work about the fact that they're needed in order to deliver on our key areas of priorities and quite frankly that's all i really have to say on it thank you okay there's i mean i just wanted to sum up if i can hang on a second councillor graham i think seeing as the objections are mainly ranged on your side of the table i'm going to allow you the last word uh but before you do i'm going to i'm going to say this i'm going to no councillor ambush i'm afraid too late i'm going to move to a vote after councillor graham uh but there has been a debate this evening on this subject it has been um i think a sincere and eloquent debate on all from all sides uh and i understand that feelings are running high on some of this but we do have to come to a conclusion that before i go to councillor graham is this a point of order or something councillor ambush i'm not wanting to interrupt the debate but i just wanted to explain my own position very very briefly and that is i've unusually not taken part in the debate it's not because i'm not interested it's because i'm likely to chair the council meeting next week as the majority group nomination for mayor and this matter is likely to be considered and therefore don't accept the my lack of involvement in the debate as a lack of interest it's because i think it's not appropriate for me to be involved in the debates and in the decision making i just really wanted to make that clear i've tried not to come in earlier because i didn't want to to disrupt what i think has been a very good and a fairly rigorous debate very well chaired by you thank you for your integrity councillor ambush last word councillor graham thank you and i i appreciate that and i also um i think on our side we as as we've noted we welcome uh councillor ambush returning to his role as mayor and we found him to be a very fair and reasonable uh chair of our meetings and and we're glad that he's back um i i i wanted to say um i um it's true it's true um i don't mind heckling i don't mind heckling um look i first of all i would i would reiterate what i said earlier that i think that a fundamental mistake has been made between having two members allowance schemes published and i would urge uh those involved to to look again at that i appreciate your position and others that you're being given legal advice and you do not wish to go against that i think that's completely understandable from your perspective however at the very least i think you would accept that there are some questions there that perhaps have not been fully addressed there is an opportunity for the administration to put that right in the way that i suggested and i hope that they will consider doing so otherwise that we're only going to uh heighten the contrast between the treatment of other councillors and these new deputy cabinet members um i don't think it is reasonable i don't think members of the public watching this will think it is at all reasonable for the to be absolutely no rationale or consistency on how we are paying people and to introduce the most egregious these the most out of line with other allowances uh uh in through this paper you know the deputy cabinet members are the only people being paid at the top of the recommended rate we have others paying below the bottom it is simply unacceptable to not even provide some sort of reason or rationale for that and uh frankly it verges on the unlawful given the duty to provide reasons for decisions perhaps the paper can be amended so that when the council decides on this uh they have those reasons and my final point is simply that um i think council apps described me as making a cheap shot i don't think the public will regard the 23 000 pounds being thrown at these new allowances as cheap and i will think they will find the timing a rather expensive bribe for the administration to carry on thank you thank you councillor graham that um powerful last word do you do you not want to um ask people to be respectful of councillors and their motivations i expect i expect all councillors to be respectful towards all other councillors is there anybody here who isn't no all right and that's the way it's going to be in this this committee when i chair it is that understood good okay um so in that case i'm going to move to a vote on this paper uh which was 25 160 um can i see all those in favor of that uh proposal please okay all those against what have we got five five chairs casting vote making the paper go through thank you okay sorry what's this about councillor ambush oh sorry i didn't ask for abstentions would you like to abstain councillor ambush thanks one okay i said at the beginning is um that um i would make some remarks about some of the activities that have been taking place in between the formal meetings of general properties partly so the public known it's a matter of the uh on the record we have had some task and finished finished groups more informal than this by and large good natured meetings between the different parties about various aspects of our democracy review looking at um matters such as public engagement and scrutiny and getting reports from conferences and meetings around the country and indeed we've also uh embarked upon a program of visiting other boroughs in london to learn from their experience notably uh and please uh mark my gratitude to them uh for their generosity notice notably lewisham and earlier this week barnet uh who've been very helpful and inspiring uh in in this process of examination that we're going through at the moment so uh i've put that on the record if there anybody wants to endorse or question any any of that i wanted to make sure that you have an opportunity to do that this evening all right in that case thank you for your participation this evening meeting closed