Newark and Sherwood District Council agree to £25,500 increase to continue to pay each portfolio holder’s £8,500 special responsibility allowance in larger cabinet

Councillors have agreed to continue to pay portfolio holders £8,500 each, at an additional cost of £25,500 a year.

A report presented to Newark and Sherwood District Council by leader Paul Peacock set out the findings of the Independent Remuneration Panel which met to consider the impact of the increase in the number of portfolio holders.

The previous Conservative-led council had five portfolio holders, and the current council has eight.

Mr Peacock said: “The report recommends the existing special responsibility allowance of £8,500 is paid to all cabinet members with portfolio, excluding the leader and deputy leader who are remunerated through the leader and deputy leader special responsibility allowance.”

There was also recommendations for changes of wording to clarify what could be claimed by leaders of opposition groups, and a recommendation to increase the Childcare and Dependents Carers’ allowances to a maximum level of the National Living Wage — from £10 to £10.42 per hour.

The increase in payments of £8,500 requires a further budget of £25,500 per financial year — although the 2023 to 2024 financial year will only require an additional £19,125 as new portfolio holders took their roles in July.

The Audit and Governance Committee, which considered the panel’s report, said the £19,125 will be financed from the Corporate Contingency and the future year budget implications will be built into the budget setting process.

Rhona Holloway said: “I would just like to turn to the agenda… and I’d like to focus specifically on the comments that ‘it is believed that the functions in the new cabinet portfolios exceed those of the previous cabinet in both range and depth’.

“I find that statement somewhat insulting, given it was based primarily on conversations with individual portfolio holders who at that point had yet to do anything significant in terms of new policies or projects.

“In the 22/23 cabinet, it was made up of five portfolio holders. Three of those received special responsibility allowances, the leader and the deputy leader do not receive the special responsibility allowances. The number of functions, i.e. the areas of work we were responsible for, was 110 functions.

“That averaged 22 functions per portfolio holder and the cost was £25,500 per annum.

“In the 23/24 constitution, the cabinet is made up of eight portfolio holders, and they look after only 70 functions — so 40 less than the previous cabinet. That averages 8.75 functions per portfolio holder and the cost is £51,000 per annum, double that of the previous cabinet.

“In summary, there is a 60% increase in the number of portfolio holders, a 100% increase in the cost of the special responsibility allowances, a 38% reduction in the total responsibilities of the cabinet as a whole, and a 60% reduction in average responsibilities per portfolio holder.”

She explained this didn’t line up with the quote given from the report, questioned what had happened to the 40 extra functions, and said she and the Conservative group would not support the recommendations.

Jack Kellas added his concerns that, despite speaking to the panel twice, he was not made aware of the remit of the review.

“I just find that concerning,” he added.

“The fact that I didn’t know they were reviewing the childcare, the fact that I didn’t know they were reviewing the leader of the opposition’s pay. I didn’t know that they were reviewing anything but the cabinet portfolio’s pay.

“My view is that we should have been put back in front of the Independent Remuneration Panel to have that piece said, to be given the opportunity to discuss those things.”

He emphasised that the findings of the panel were simply recommendations and did not have to agreed — and highlighted Lincoln City Council as having previously chosen a 1.75% pay increase over the 5% it had been recommended by the panel.

“You can choose to put that money elsewhere and to put the residents first,” he added.

Paul Peacock responded that he was concerned members, particularly Conservatives, were “still seeing though the prism of the last administration” although added that that had accepted a £36,000 increase in allowances recommended by the Independent Remuneration Panel.

He also spoke of the independent audit report into the council’s decisions regarding London Road, which was “damning regarding the governance of this council, its transparency and it’s engagement” and showed there was “not enough people involved in decision making and a lack of accountability”.

Mr Peacock added: “Bad decision making cost this council over £500,000 just on that single occasion. Bad decision making in other areas has had great cost, and even now, as this administration is finding, we’ve got projects that are only half thought through, we’ve got projects that have been dragging on for years, and issues such as the local development plan which have been kicked into the grass for too long. All these things come at a cost.

“Enabling decision making to be more transparent, more accountable and more effective will save the council in the long run.”

He highlighted the work the council was doing, including tackling anti-social behaviour, moving forward with the Yorke Drive regeneration scheme, brining in new tenancy officers to improve repair times for council houses, and focusing on climate change — making the council “better reflect” the community.

He added: “The proposals absolutely reflect value for money.”

The proposals were agreed by 20 votes to 14.