Falklands : Falklands Public Meeting Report (24 August 2009)
Submitted by Falkland Islands News Network (Juanita Brock) 27.08.2009 (Article Archived on 10.09.2009)
A public meeting was held in the Court and Council Chamber of the Town Hall at 1700hrs on Monday, 24 August 2009. Chairing
PUBLIC MEETING REPORT (24 August 2009)
By J. Brock (FINN)
A public meeting was held in the Court and Council Chamber of the Town Hall at 1700hrs on Monday, 24 August 2009. Chairing the meeting was Keith Biles. Also on the panel discussing Councillors’ pay were Ms Lisa Johnson and Mr Justin McPhee. They comprise an Independent Panel on Possible Recommendations on Councillors’ Remuneration.” While Mr Biles chaired the meeting he would not continue on the panel because he is now Speaker of the House.
Justin McPhee presented some slides about what the Panel discussed then threw the discussion open to the approximately 30 people who attended the meeting.
Slides showed that the Panel was set up in July 2009 and it will report to EXCO in September. However, the outcome of the discussions and the report will have no affect on the current Assembly as elections will take place in November.
The presentation went on to say that there had been meetings with previous Councillors, young people under 40, and existing Assembly Members with the final consultation being the public meeting.
According to the presentation money is not a priority with young people. Being a Councillor is seen as a part time job and emphasis is put on small changes that could improve the system.
Recommendations begin with a job description but one that is not to be used as a guide to pay. It is felt that Councillors should be paid for the work that they do and that the system of allowances should be retained. Suggested additions could be pension contributions and membership of the Falkland Islands Pension Scheme (FIPS) while in Assembly. Finally, it was thought that female members would benefit from a childcare provision.
Robert Rowlands said he felt that Councillors’ pay was too low and not an incentive for anyone to be elected. “Pay was at the bottom of the scale and we need to better for them,” he said.
A 2 tier system with some full time and others part time was not popular because it would make the 4 councillors on allowances only second class ones.
Roger Spink felt that with pay there was an opportunity to abuse the system. However it is thought that pay for meetings attended was fair.
Steve Dent felt that being a Councillor was a 24-7 proposition but family commitments kept him from running. However, he thought paying Councillors was a great idea.
Early evening meetings also would benefit to those with families.
“Once being paid, would Councillors role as policy makers be changed,” asked Roger Spink. Mr McPhee confirmed It is thought that Councillors would have an increased role in the community.
There would be no additional pay for EXCO members but additional allowances could be arranged. At the moment the allowance is £105.00 a day and £52.50 for half a day.
Keith Biles reminded everyone that there was a limit in pay and allowances as we were constrained by the constitution and for the most part we needed to put up with what we have.
Lewis Clifton mentioned performance related pay for Councillors and Tim Blake reminded everyone that the ballot box also was a good performance indicator.
There were questions about an hourly rate but at £3,477.50 per annum for allowances it is thought the hourly rate was miniscule. Roger Spink asked about benefits in kind and Mr McPhee said no Councillor had claimed any in the past 4 years. It was suggested that there be a basic salary and Stephen Luxton asked for a comparison of what was done on other British Overseas Territories.
Justin McPhee said they had looked at it but pay and conditions widely differed, especially where there was a Ministerial form of government.
It was thought the panel could do work on the rate of pay and that it should be based on what a civil servant made either in middle management or senior management.
Steve Dent said that a young person would lose out on a career. If he took 4 years out it would be difficult to resume a career at 40. In light of that, Robert Rowlands said that £3,477.50 was wrong.
Mr Biles added that any pay should take inflation into account. He also mentioned that the outgoing Assembly fixed the remuneration for their successors. This was one of the final tasks of the outgoing Assembly. He went on to point out that one accompanied overseas passage in 4 years was removed.
Roger Spink mentioned that as a public duty a person could allow more payment to another Councillor who had more need. Robert Rowlands mentioned that kind of public duty would put off someone with good commercial experience. Cllr Cockwell mentioned that means testing of Councillors’ pay wasn’t a good idea. Lewis Clifton agreed. He went on to say that it wasn’t a 9-5 position and that one day there wouldn’t be any calls and the next there may be five calls. Keith Biles suggested that maybe there could be time and a half after 2200hrs.
Steve dent mentioned that one is more highly paid as a worker than as a Councillor. Cheryl Roberts mentioned that Civil Servants were discouraged from running for Council and that the private sector was good at allowing time off for employees who were elected members.
Elected Members worked a certain amount of hours a day/week and this needs to be recorded. Keith Biles mentioned that the general consensus was that the workload is up with the amount of paperwork and reading up also increasing. Richard Cockwell mentioned that e-mails, sometimes 60 or 70 a day had to be dealt with.
Lewis Clifton questioned again about an hourly rate saying that work had to be put in before and after meetings. He said that it wasn’t right for a Councillor to work alongside someone making at least twice as much. He went on to say that £10.00 to £12.00 an hour was not adequate.
In conclusion Juston McPhee said a decision about pay would be made in the next few months and a paper would be presented to EXCO in due course. Full and part time Councillor’s remuneration was not in the group’s remit.
|
