The Conservative majority at Warwickshire County Council are doing rather better than Conservatives from other areas of the country it would seem.
So far they are only twelve months behind the British National Party councillors from Nuneaton and Bedworth borough Council who argued against, but were the only members to vote against and subsequently give away, last years pay rise for councillors on the basis that with the townspeople suffering financially their elected representatives should not be taking a pay rise from their pockets. This story was covered by the British National Party website in February of this year when the two councillors chose a good cause to benefit from our donation: - Principled BNP Councillors Give “Immoral” Pay Rise to Local Good Cause
The Conservative led County Council turned down an inflation busting fifteen percent pay rise recommended by an outside body. Using an outside body is a classic excuse for claiming not to be greedy but it is obvious even to them that in the present economic climate fifteen percent would be massively unpopular.
As reported in the Coventry telegraph: - County councillors vote against big pay rises for themselves
WARWICKSHIRE County Council supremos have refused to accept inflation-busting pay rises proposed by an independent body.
Plans to boost the allowances of council leader Alan Farnell (Con, Nuneaton Weddington) and other senior politicians by up to 15 per cent, were rejected at a Shire Hall meeting, in Warwick, on Tuesday .
The decision came a couple of days before shadow chancellor George Osborne demanded Downing Street learn from the thrift of Tory-run local authorities.
Is this evidence that they are taking principled decisions? I very much doubt it.
I think that this is simply political opportunism when faced with a preposterous suggestion from an outside body. The problem with suggestions from outside bodies with regards to pay is that it is a ‘take it or leave it’ style decision. If you change the decision it immediately calls into question the reason behind appointing the task to the outside body in the first place. I think that if the recommendation had been in the two to three percent range they would have taken it. Accepting this offer would have been seriously politically unwise.
