Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Betta Living
Sponsored by
In association with Betta Living
www.bettaliving.co.uk
 
 
Sunday, 12th October 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Lancashire Evening Post CTY site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

Revealed: How much council 'fat cats' get paid



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 28 March 2008
The six-figure salaries of the executives running local government in Lancashire can be revealed for the first time.
A Freedom of Information Act request by the TaxPayers' Alliance has uncovered the salaries of the top 10 local government bosses in the county.

At the top of the tree and earning £188,677 in 2006/7 was Lancashire County Council chief executive, Chris Trinick.

He is due to stand down later this year and will be succeeded by Ged Fitzgerald who stands to earn £190,000 once he starts work – more than Prime Minister Gordon Brown who takes home £188,849. MPs earn a basic salary of £61,000 a year.

According to the Town Hall Rich List, which shows council bosses earning more than £100,000, Preston Council chief executive Jim Carr took home £122,802, including car benefit of £12,453 and returning officer payments of £4,750.

Ribble Valley MP Nigel Evans said: "We ought to be looking again at salary levels if a chief executive is earning more than the Prime Minister and people are paying more council tax.

"It doesn't take Einstein to work it out.

"We need to see more reflective salaries, which reflect employees' positions and the number of people they are looking after."

Fylde MP Michael Jack said: "If somebody really can save the county council their salary by improving the way their directorate works, then I think a lot of members of the public would welcome that.

"Lancashire has got to make it clear that employees are going to be held accountable for the performance of the directorate, or be shown the door."

Six executives at County Hall are earning more than £100,000 a year, including Sue Mulvany, executive director for children and young people who was on £104,041 in 2006/7, 12.8% less than the year before.

Fylde, Wyre and Ribble Valley councils said they did not pay any members of staff more than £100,000.

Ken Hudson, leader of Preston council, said: "Some of these very high salaries, in excess of £100,000 are probably too much for the ratepayer of the city of Preston."

Hazel Harding, leader of Lancashire County Council, said: "I think if those people were working in the private sector they would be paid a whole lot more.

"We are a billion pound organisiation serving more than a million people. We are the fourth biggest authority, paying the going rate."

Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said taxpayers had a right to know how much officials were being paid.

He said: "Too often, council executives are rewarded handsomely even when they fail. Families and pensioners are struggling with the demands of yet another council tax rise, and councils owe it to them to cut back on executive pay hikes."

Mr Carr was unavailable for comment as he is currently on leave.

Chorley Council boss, Donna Hall, is earning just over £118,000 after moving to the authority from Blackburn.

Fylde, Ribble Valley and South Ribble do not pay any staff more than £100,000.

>> Who is paid over £100,000 in our local Lancashire councils

>> Council staff to share £52m payout

>> Vote in our latest web poll

i-map

The full article contains 545 words and appears in Lancashire Evening Post CTY newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 28 March 2008 3:23 PM
  • Source: Lancashire Evening Post CTY
  • Location: Preston
 
Prev
1
2 3 4
Next
Last
1

barnfarm,

28/03/2008 09:54:38
Hazel Harding: "I think if those people were working in the private sector they would be paid a whole lot more."
So far as I know her new chief executive has never worked at management level in the private sector, so on what basis does she make this statement? How many local authority chief executives HAVE ever reached similar levels in the private sector?
2

time for action,

28/03/2008 10:19:54
I see that 6% of people participating in today's vote really DO think that local council fat cats are worth the money.

Mind you, it's a democracy, and everyone's allowed to vote - even senior council officials.
3

David Becker,

Wolverhampton 28/03/2008 11:44:29
Tell you what, let me play devil's advocate (and no, I'm not on the payroll!)

In an age when the average British resident is taxed through the nose I can understand how the salaries of senior managers in local authorities can irk us. The truth, however, is that a local authority like Lancashire County Council has more staff, greater accountability, broader pressures and – dare I say it – greater importance to the region – than almost any private sector firm anywhere in the county. If Chief Executives in local government opted to work in the private sector (and many could) then they would earn considerably more than they get at a Council.

Nigel Evans MP comments that Chief Executives get paid more than the Prime Minister. Damn right they do! He misses several crucial points, not least that it is supply and demand that dictate salaries. Councils are no more immune to having to pay the going rate than anyone else. Secondly, politicians are elected whilst Chief Executives go through a rigorous recruitment process and then spend the rest of their time being scrutinised and assessed by a central government which expects more for less with every single year that goes by and doesn’t care that the pittance it provides local authorities with means they constantly have to raise council tax against both their wishes and those of local residents. Furthermore there is no Chief Executive in the country who has led us into or supported illegal wars on the basis of lies and deceit, killing thousands in the process. Our local MPs would be far better served congratulating all the workers at local authorities who do an immense amount of good work and who make it possible for MPs to get their pictures in the paper and voices on the radio for work that they’ve actually had very little to do with.

Let’s face it – we never like to hear about people earning salaries that we can only dream about. But as always we are pointing our fingers at the wrong people. Incidentally Nigel Eva
4

David Becker,

Wolverhampton 28/03/2008 11:45:58
ns MP claimed expenses of £135,090 in 2006/07. Michael Jack MP claimed even more. Pot kettle black anyone?
5

NH,

28/03/2008 12:29:07
That is very reassuring following the great hike in council tax bills. You cannont condone this amount just because others get more. What about the people who save lives or risk their lives to save us, dont they matter?
6

Tallula,

28/03/2008 13:11:24
These salaries are higher than in the private sector. It is a fact that the public sector now pays 4% more for all jobs roles across the board when you compare skills and responsibility levels. This doesn't take into account the lovely pensions and holiday benefits public sector workers get, and the job security.

What irks me most is that with a private sector company as a consumer you can choose whether to fund the salaries of the CEOs by buying (or not) their goods. We have no choice with the public sector, my tax goes to pay these people's salaries whether I like the service or not 9I don't).

It recently transpired that £1 in ever £4 of council tax goes towards council employee pensions, at a time when many private sector employees receive no prension funding other than what they pay in themselves.
7

David Becker,

28/03/2008 13:12:03
Like I said, I'm playing devil's advocate ;o) Seriously though, the only other thing I'd add is that council tax rises are completely out of the hands of local authorities given their pitiful current resources. If they didn't make them then services would get even worse, believe me! Local government is receiving less money, less support and more targets from central government by the year and it has reached the point now where services truly are cracking and staff are leaving. And of course the vast majority of people think it is the council's fault and who can blame them? However it is central government who have forced councils across the country to raise council tax. That's why it is absurd for MPs to make it sound as though it's to do with council officer salaries and nothing to do with them. If we spent just a few billion pounds less on warmongering then maybe we wouldn't need to be taxed so much elsewhere.

Just one final afterthought - what calibre of Chief Executive do you think Lancashire would get if it advertised at, say, £75k per annum...?
8

Tallula,

28/03/2008 13:29:00
These salaries are higher than in the private sector. It is a fact that the public sector now pays 4% more for all jobs roles across the board when you compare skills and responsibility levels. This doesn't take into account the lovely pensions and holiday benefits public sector workers get, and the job security.

What irks me most is that with a private sector company as a consumer you can choose whether to fund the salaries of the CEOs by buying (or not) their goods. We have no choice with the public sector, my tax goes to pay these people's salaries whether I like the service or not 9I don't).

It recently transpired that £1 in ever £4 of council tax goes towards council employee pensions, at a time when many private sector employees receive no prension funding other than what they pay in themselves.
9

Tallula,

28/03/2008 13:34:33
Oops, I seem to have posted twice! Sorry all.

I think they would get a very able Chief Exec at that level of pay. Throughout the council the pay is high so each dept SHOULD already be well-managed and the Chief Exec should be able to concentrate on leading and providing vision and controls. He will be able to focus on a few top-level Heads who shoul then be inspiring those below. Perhaps the problem is that those on the rung below the Chief Exec are not very good at their jobs.

I have worked in several £multimillion companies with excellent leaders on that sort of pay.
10

Tanny PNE'R,

Preston 28/03/2008 13:34:49
I agree with the comments by Barnfarm.

If Chris Trinnick or Greg Fitzgerald thinks they can earn more in the private sector as Hazel Harding suggested, let them go & try it.

There will be a queue round County Hall to replace them.
Prev
1
2 3 4
Next
Last

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.