Wednesday 22 July 2009

Tories Agree Inflation-Busting Rise In Allowances

Wokingham Conservatives have pushed through a 9% rise in allowances which will see the basic councillor package increase from £6,750 to £7,360pa.

Council leader Cllr David Lee defended the rise because it was recommended by an independent panel made up of residents.

Last year councillors rejected the recommendations for a modest increase which could be sustained without creating wild fluctuations from year to year. Tories argued that the economic pressure facing the council meant it was unfair to create additional burdens at that time.

Meanwhile, opposition LibDems argued that current economic pressures made such a massive rise unjustifiable this year. Group deputy, Cllr Stephen Conway explained that this is an area of high public sensitivity, especially during a period when the council is cutting services in a drastic search for savings (some might say they are scraping the barrel...).

Wokingham Council Tax was increased by a near-maximum 4.68% this year.

Oranjepan asks:
What is the point of an independent panel if you only accept it's recommendations when you like what you hear? This was the point made by Conservatives during the fire authority allowance discussions, so why have they suddenly changed their stance?

-

Click here to find out how much councillors in Wokingham claimed.

Click here for full details of the political expenses scandal in Berkshire.

13 comments:

  1. Anonymous22 July 2009 at 17:32

    Staggering hypocrisy which just shows what a rabble local Tories are, and the contempt in which they hold local people.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous22 July 2009 at 18:27

    This site is soo biased - you never have anything good to say about the Conservatives.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous22 July 2009 at 18:43

    Isn't that because there is nothing good to say about the Conservatives...

    ReplyDelete
  4. random lefty22 July 2009 at 18:49

    How can councillors reject the decision of the panel? If they don't like it they can lump it (or go on strike).

    ReplyDelete
  5. dazmando22 July 2009 at 20:10

    Wow the Tory council really will look bad give these massive increases

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous22 July 2009 at 23:54

    You are forgetting that this is bringing it more in line with, but still below, Reading. Utter hypocrisy from the Libs.

    ReplyDelete
  7. non-aligned23 July 2009 at 01:06

    Tories voted against the allowances freeze in Reading - proposed by the LibDems and passed with the support of Labour and Independent Jones.

    The Tories did not make any proposals - they only tried to block any budget from being agreed while lying about it to the press.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous23 July 2009 at 12:00

    Anon 2354: The leader of Wokingham gets substantially more than the leader of Reading. The average spend per cllr between the two is not dissimilar.

    Windsor & Maidenhead, now that's a different matter....

    Of course, as has been pointed out, the Tories voted against the freeze in Reading.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous23 July 2009 at 13:37

    "Tories voted against the allowances freeze in Reading" - Completley false. Go and do some reasearch.
    Tories proposed an amendment to REDUCE allowances in Reading, that the Tories passed with the support of the Lib Dems and without the support of Labour.

    These allowances, despite the reduction, are still lower than the average backbencher in Wokingham.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous23 July 2009 at 14:09

    Let's see, do Tories think allowances are too high or too low?
    In Reading they say 'let's reduce them to the level of neighbouring areas'. In those areas they raise them by 9%.

    The fat cotroller has been eating too much of his own cake.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous23 July 2009 at 17:12

    Rik Willis at 1337: the Tories in Reading voted against the Budget which froze allownaces. They then came up with a tokenistic and minuscule reduction of less than ten grand.

    I think in Windsor the Tories raised allowances by 90%?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous24 July 2009 at 01:34

    Thank you Anonymous at 17:12, but I'm not Rik Willis.
    Unfortunate to see your position is to waste tax payers money.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous24 July 2009 at 23:08

    As it appears Anonymous is arguing amongst him/herself, i would like to suggest that logic permits that an inflation equalling rise would be fair enough. Any thoughts?

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)



"Reading List... is fantastic, it could help revolutinise politics in Reading"
Matt Blackall

"Prolific"
Matt Brady

"Irrelevant"
Adrian Windisch

"Bizarre"
Reading Geek Night

"A bloggers digest of the Berkshire blogosphere"
DMOZ

"An easily accessible collection of Berkshire's excellent blogs"
The Cookham Blogger

"An excellent digest of the thoughts of local bloggers"
Reading Guide

...