Mr Stuart Hardwicke Carruthers

request-2194-771c3e2b@whatdothey know.com

Our Ref: AW/Aug08/JAA0620

Your Ref:

Please Ask For: Mr Winship

Ext: 267

VIA E-MAIL

3 September 2008

Dear Mr Carruthers

Freedom of Information Request - Functions Council

Thank you for your e-mail dated 24 August 2008 received on 26 August 2008.

You are entitled under section 1(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to know whether the Council holds the information requested and if so, to have that information communicated to you if no exceptions apply. I must point out that what you are entitled to is the information contained in a document, rather than a copy of that document, although very often the easiest way to provide the information may be to copy it.

The information that you requested was as follows:-

Q1 I would like to know the average proportion of time the elected representatives of your authority spend as part of their duties for 2005/2006, 2006/2007 and 2007/2008 on their main activities. The activities that form their duties (employment) as an elected representative are:

Directly resolving complaints against the executive (Council Staff) of the Council by residents; 2 sitting on committee's; 3 acting for the political parties that they represent and/or ceremonial duties (i.e. all time not spent on sitting on a Committee or resolving a complaint against the executive);

The total time spent by an elected representative for a Council on these three activities should be 100 per cent of the time they spend 'working for a Council' as an elected representative.

Response:

The Council does not hold the information in the specific form that you have requested.

The Information is not recorded and, therefore, unavailable. The Council is not required to record this information.

However the Independent Remuneration Panel published its Third Report on Members' Allowances on 28 January 2008. Appendix 3 of that report included an assessment of Members Hours of Work after completion of a questionnaire. A copy of Appendix 3 is attached.

Q2 I would additionally like to know how much in total was paid to local councillors to meet all their duties (including expenses) for 2005/2006, 2006/2007 and 2007/2008 by your authority, and how many elected representatives are (and were) represented on your authority for these years.

Response:

This information is published on the Council's website. Please click on the following link:

http://www.ryedale.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=11347

Q3 I would also like to know how many Complaints in total were submitted to your Council in 2005/2006, 2006/2007 and 2007/2008 for each year. I would further like to know how many of these complaints were formally considered by an elected representative for each of these years.

Response:

Complaints received via our complaints procedure were:-

2005/2006 = 16 2006/2007 = 17 2007/2008 = 10

Elected Members have not considered any complaint under the Council's Complaints Procedure.

Q4. I would further like to know how many complaints against the Executive (Council staff) led to the elected representatives formally identifying that the Executive had acted wrongly for the years 2005/2006, 2006/2007 and 2007/2008, and how many of these formal determinations by the elected representatives identify that there was no wrong-doing by the Executive. How many staff employed by your authority in 2005/2006, 2006/2007 and 2007/2008 ceased to be employed by your authority as a direct result of a complaint against the Executive, and the Councillors identifying this to be the case.

Response:

Complaints received via our complaints procedure are:-

2005/2006 = 16 2006/2007 = 17 2007/2008 = 10

Elected Members have not considered any complaint under the Council's Complaints Procedure.

No member of staff has been dismissed as a result of a complaint made under the Council's Complaints Procedure in the financial years you refer to.

Q5. I would further like to know how much money the Council has paid to a complainant (i.e. victim of a Council's wrongdoing) through its own complaints system (i.e. excluding any intervention by the Local Government Ombudsman, Valuation Tribunal or similar body) in 2005/2006, 2006/2007 and 2007/2008.

Response:

No payments have been made under the Council's Complaints Procedure.

Q6. I would like to know how much money either in the form of local settlement or additional formal finding of maladministration causing injustice the Local Government Ombudsman has recommended that your Council pay in 2005/2006, 2006/2007 and 2007/2008 (for each year) and if the Local Government Ombudsman's recommendations have been met in full (including any non-financial recommendations for each year)). Please detail any recommendation that has not been met in full and provide a copy of the Elected representatives decision. Please additionally identify if these costs were met directly by Council Tax Payers or the Council's insurers (excluding self insurance by a Council)

Response:

You may be aware that the Annual Report of the Local Government Ombudsman for 2007/2008 gives statistics in relation to the number and type of complaints about Councils including Ryedale District Council.

http://www.lgo.org.uk/letters/2007-08/documents/Whole_country_2007-2008_alpha.xls

Against the background of your questions relating to the Council accepting recommendations of the Local Government Ombudsman, the following categories of findings of the Ombudsman would appear relevant to your question:

In the last three financial years, Ryedale District Council has had the following number of the above cases:

Q7. Finally, please provide details of the financial cost of administering all your complaints systems (including FoI and DP) by the Executive for 2005/2006, 2006/2007 and 2007/2008 and the number of staff employed in administering complaints and resolving these (Full time equivalent staffing levels). Please also provide details of your total administrative costs for 2005/2006, 2006/2007 and 2007/2008 and the total number of staff employed by your authority, as well as any pay increase (including increments) made to the Council's Chief Executive (Head of Paid Service) in pounds sterling for each of these years. Please additionally identify if the Chief Executives wages included performance related payments.

Response:

Cost of administering/staffing level to operate the Council's Complaints System

Given the size of the Council, and the number of complaints received, no one officer spends the whole or main part of their time on dealing with complaints under the Council's Complaints Procedure. Council Officer's deal with complaints under the Council's Complaints Procedure as and when they arise. Furthermore, the Council does not currently operate a time recording system to record time spent on dealing with complaints under the Council's Complaints Procedure.

Accordingly the Council does not hold the information requested in relation to the cost of administering the Council's Complaints Procedures and the number of staff employed in administering the complaints system.

Chief Executive Pay Increments

Please note that the Council employed a new Chief Executive on 2 January 2007.

The pay increments made to the Council's Chief Executive were as follows:-

2005/2006 - £6,569

2006/2007 - £3,837

2007/2008 - £12,935

There were no performance related payments.

Total Administrative Costs

The total wage bill for the Council was as follows:-

2005/2006 - £6,961,000

2006/2007 - £7,396,000

2007/2008 - £7,577,000

Total Number of Staff

The total number of staff employed by the Council is a follows:-

2005/2006 = 271

2006/2007 = 276

2007/2008 = 279

Q8. If you do not have this reasonably basic management information related to complaints and/or identify that the costs of accessing the information requested will be more than £450 please state this and identify that your Authority does not have either a functioning or accountable complaints system, and does not maintain any basic management information related to this issue.

Response:

The Council have adopted a complaints system which is in operation.

Q9. If you have a complaints system not fit for purpose please identify which political party currently controls your Council, and if this political party has appointed the current Electoral Registration and Returning Officer through its control of the Council (with date of their formal appointment). Please name the current Electoral Registration and Returning Officer, and identify if they are also Head of Paid Service, and Clerk to your Authority. Please additionally provide any documentation maintained by your Local Authorities Head of Paid Service identifying that they personally do not believe it to be appropriate for your Council to have a complaints system that is fit for purpose. This documentation should be in existence due to the provisions of s4 of the Local Government Act 1989.

Response:

The Council believes it does have a complaints system which is fit for purpose. The Council is a hung Council.

The current Electoral Registration Officer, Returning Officer and Head of Paid Service is the Council's Chief Executive, Ms Janet Waggott who commenced her employment on 2 January 2007.

The duty of the Head of Paid Service to prepare a report pursuant to Section 4 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 only arises if the Head of Paid Service considers it appropriate to do so. To date the Head of Paid Service has not considered it appropriate to produce a Section 4 report specifically about the complaints procedure and associated staffing issues.

We hope you will be happy with our service. But if you are not satisfied with the way your request is being handled, please contact—

Freedom of Information Officer

Ryedale House, Malton, North Yorkshire

or email [Ryedale District Council request email]

and your complaint will be considered by an Appeal Panel.

If, after their decision, you are still not happy, you may appeal to—

The Information Commissioner

Wycliffe House, Water Lane,

Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF

Tel: 01625 545745 Fax: 01625 524510

e-mail: [email address] website: www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk

Yours sincerely

K A WINSHIP

K A Winship

Council Solicitor

Enclosure: Appendix 3 from Third Report on Members' Allowances 28 January 2008.

APPENDIX 3

Analysis of Questionnaire Results

Contents:-

1. Members response rate

1.1) Members profile: age, work status, children and dependants (Parts A & C)

1.2) Working hours, Travel (Part B)

1.3) Members views and comments (Part D&E)

73% of Councillors (22) completed the questionnaire and 4 Members of the Standards Committee

1.1) Members Profile

Age

From the 24 members choosing to answer this question, the following figures emerge:

The average age of those in the sample is 58.61 yrs. The complete range is 42 - 84yrs

Work

20 of the surveyed members currently work. This represents approximately 77%. 7 work full time, 4 part time and 9 are self employed. As percentages of the surveyed population, this can be represented by the graph below.

6 of the 26 members are retired (23%).

Special Responsibility Allowance

9 Members (35%) received this allowance.

Those choosing to give details gave the following reasons for receiving a special responsibility allowance: 3 for being a Group Leader, 1 for being Chairman of Planning Committee, 1 for being the Chairman of Policy and Resources Committee, 1 for being Chairman of Standards Committee, 1 for being Chairman of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee, 1 for Regional Assembly work and 1 for being on LGA Rural Commission.

In summary; the most were for being Committee Chairmen and Group Leaders.

Dependants

Only 5 members (19%) have dependant children, and 5 (19%) have care of other dependants.

Only 1 of the members needed to pay for dependants to be cared for whilst engaged in council work.

1.2 Members Hours of Work

Time Spent on Work NOT attributable to any position of responsibility (Hours per month)

Average hours gained by dividing all figures by 26 which is the number of members that returned the questionnaire.

Time spent on work attributable to any position of responsibility IN ADDITION to the above (Hours per month)

7 members had hours to add in this category. 5 members worked under 20 hours and the other 2 worked between 22 hours and 37 hours.

Average hours gained by dividing the total number of hours for each position of responsibility, by the number of members which spent time on each responsibility.

Time spent by co-opted members NOT attributable to any position of responsibility (Hours per month)

Only 3 members filled anything in for this category. These co-opted members each worked an average of ........ hours

Average hours gained by dividing the total number of hours for each position of responsibility, by the number of members which spent time on each responsibility.

Total Hours Per Month

The following comments were also made on the subject of working hours, and may be taken into account:

Comments relating to hours

1.3 Travel Used by Members

The figures in the table above all relate to percentage use and are based on the number of members who answered this question.

Engine size for the members ranges from 1000cc to 3500cc and the most size ranging from 1400cc - 2000cc.

1.4 Members' views

Public Service

As to the question of whether members should be compensated for ALL the time they spend on Council business, 11 members replied yes (42% of the sample).

Of those that disagreed, suggestions for the percentage of compensation ranged between 50% and 75%. 10 members never suggested a percentage.

“Depends on what time spent, personal circumstances and finances.”

Members' basic allowance

19 members (73%) from the members who returned the survey thought that the current level of basic allowance (£3,465.60) was appropriate.

Suggestions of those who disagreed, ranged from £4,000 - £8,000pa. With £4,500 pa being the most commonly suggested.

Linked to the Council's staff pay scale

With the question of whether Members basic allowance should be linked to the Councils staff pay scale, results were as follows:

“I think Council Membership should remain to be seen as a voluntary activity i.e. Largely unpaid.”

Special Responsibility Allowance

The percentages are based on the number of members who answered this question.

Alternative suggestions for special responsibility allowance

“Chairman of Standards Committee should be set at 50% of the basic allowance.”

“Set allowances as multiple of basic allowances.”

Leaders allowance

14 members (58%) agreed that the Leader should be paid an allowance.

Allowance figures suggested varied from £350 to £10,396. The most popular range quoted was £3,000 to £3,743.

Dependants' carers' allowance

18 members (85%) agreed that this was set at the right level. For those who disagreed suggestions were £10.00 or the minimum rate of pay or the actual cost and only if incurred (not payable to family members).

Travelling and subsistence

The majority of members agreed that the levels of transport and subsistence allowance are currently correct. 6 members, however, disagreed with the travelling allowances and suggested alternative amounts for the motor car allowance varying from between 20p to 60p per mile and for the bicycle allowance an increase to 30p per mile.

1 member suggested that there should be an overall reduction in the travelling and subsistence allowances of 10%.

4 members disagreed with the subsistence allowance and made the following suggestions, breakfast allowance increase to £10, tea allowance increase to £5 and that the evening meal allowance be increased to either £15 or £20.

3 members disagreed with the overnight allowance for out of London and suggested increases to between £50 and £80.

4 members disagreed with the overnight allowance for London only and suggested increases to between £80 and £150.

Travelling and subsistence to Council's staff allowances

13 members (62%) agreed that travelling and subsistence should be linked/limited? to Council's staff allowances.

“I find some questions difficult to answer having only been on the Council since May and not having a full appreciation of all aspects.”

Other Comments referring to travelling

“The members' allowance can in no way compensate members for the amount of time they put into Council work if they do their job properly. However, Council work is largely a voluntary occupation so one would not expect the allowance to be any more than a nominal payment.”

“Allowances are reflected in the Council Tax and must be kept to a minimum and seem to be fair by the public, after all members are volunteers and know the problems and make this choice. It must never be a business perk.”

“Whilst Members commit a considerable amount of time to Council (and related) business, some recognition should be given to the principle of `the voluntary ethos'”.

Co-optees allowance

The results as to whether the co-optees basic allowance of £346.56 is correct are as follows

Suggestions from those who disagreed ranged from £400 - £500.

“May need to be re-visited if workload increase significantly due to local determination.”

The results as to whether the Independent co-opted Chairman receives the right allowance are below:

Those who disagreed put forward suggestions of £500, £1000 and 50% of basic allowance.

“Perhaps should be linked to work necessary.”

“I do not think an allowance is appropriate for a voluntary, independent Chairman.”

Pensions

Members service should be pensionable:

Members and co-opted Members of Standards Committee Yes = 13 (54%) No = 10 (46%)

Elected Members Yes = 10 (50%) No = 10 (50%)

If yes, it should be calculated on members basic allowance alone:

Yes = 5 (50%)

Or the members basic and special responsibility allowance:

Yes = 9 (90%)

“We all have our own pensions (or should) we are not Councillors for money and pensions.”

Indexation and Backdating

Do you think indexation is a good idea?

Yes = 20 (91%) No = 2 (9%)

Withholding Allowances

Certain allowances may be withdrawn as a result of full or partial suspension of a member from the Authority.

Do you think that withdrawal of allowances where members have experienced a full or partial suspension is a good idea?

Yes = 22 (96%) No = 1 (4%)

Do you think that withdrawal of allowances where members fail to attend meetings is a good idea?

Yes = 14 (67%) No = 7 (33%)

“Withdrawal of allowances where members fail to attend meetings is not lawful.”

“This would depend on the number of meetings missed and whether an apology had been received.”

“I would favour a scheme which sets Special Responsibility Allowances as a rate of basic allowances. Chairman of Standards Committee should receive Special Responsibility Allowance. I do not favour an allowance for other co-optees on Standards Committee.

Approved duties

Are you satisfied with the list of approved duties attached at Annex 1?

Yes = 22 (88%) No = 3 (12%)

“Except where illness is the cause - it would be wholly unreasonable in the case of someone suffering cancer or alzheimers.”

“Attendance on outside bodies should attract extra allowance, eg County Council Committees, Regional meetings including hotel accommodation for meetings in remote locations from Ryedale.”

“Attendance at Parish Meetings, travel to Parish Meetings both these need to be done if possible to give better representation in Wards. Also what bout CAP meetings and such like?”

Other Comments

“The issue should be given to an independent organisation to assess. Virtually no Councillors will vote themselves a halfway adequate settlement. It would be regarded as electorally damaging. As a result the allowances have comprehensively failed to keep up with or take account of the demands placed on many Councillors. This is damaging in terms of recruiting new members and with the time required accounts for the age and job profile of the Councillors. Many are either self-employed, retired, or director level able to dictate their hours of work. It does not reflect the make up of the community we serve.”

LEGAL SERVICES

The Local Government Legal Service for Ryedale District

Council Solicitor - K A Winship LLB (Hons)

Website: www.ryedale.gov.uk