Cllr Jackie Brodie, of Forde Place, Newton Abbot, writes:

In response to the letters regarding the pay increase for Teignbridge’s chief executive. It is unfortunate that Conservative councillors have engaged in personal attacks on Cllr Hook and Cllr Dewhirst rather than concentrating on the subject matter. Perhaps this is because they know that they have lost the argument.

Let’s look at the facts.

The Cabinet Minister responsible for Local Government (Eric Pickles) wrote to every local authority in February 2013 in a letter headed ‘Openness and Accountability in Local Pay’. He states, ‘Members should ensure that pay policy statements are set out clearly, and are accessible. Full Council should be given the opportunity to vote on salary packages of £100,000 or more. This should be made absolutely clear.’ Clearly this was not the case in this instance.

The Localism Act states that with regard to ‘Transparency over senior council officials’ pay, that taxpayers should be able to access information about how public money is spent on their behalf. It is, ultimately, their money.’

Councils only have the public’s money, and the public have every right to know ‘openly and transparently’ how every penny is spent.

Various papers have been brought to council over the last 12 months relating to the restructuring of management. None of these have mentioned any specific financial implications for any of the positions considered.

The most recent such meeting report had a web reference to a document (Statement of Accounts). This is a document of 126 pages of small print and a massive number of figures. I do not believe anyone read that document from start to finish, and I openly and readily confess I didn’t. In that document was a reference to the salary of the CEO. I do not believe this to be ‘open or transparent’ by any definition.

Furthermore it is an insult to many hardworking residents in Teignbridge that have had to take on additional duties in their jobs (as their colleagues have been made redundant, or left, and not been replaced), that the chief executive post should receive a 12 per cent increase due to ‘increased responsibilities’.

I’m sure many of the residents would have liked a similar pay rise as they struggle to cope on low pay, whilst being asked to do more, and with no pay rise in the offing.

In support of our residents, Lib Dems had proposed earlier in the year that those on the lowest pay at TDC should receive the ‘proper’ Living Wage rather than the Government’s new minimum wage. This was rejected, we were told, because the council could not afford it! It is our job to highlight Conservative decisions that do not represent the residents’ best interests and we will continue to do so. Liberal Democrats; Different Party, Different Priorities.

Cllr Alistair Dewhirst, of Dornafield Road, Ipplepen, writes:

Councillors Russell and Hellier Laing are being very disingenuous when they talk about the issue of the chief executive’s pay (Advertiser/Post?letters, October 14).

The simple fact is that – despite the former Conservative Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government’s intention that councils and public bodies should be open and transparent about senior officers’ pay – Teignbridge Council patently obscured the fact that the chief executive was given a £13,000 pay rise.

In his letter to Cllr Jeremy Christophers, leader of TDC, dated February 20, 2013 the Secretary of State specifically stated that ‘Full Council should be given the opportunity to vote on salary packages of £100,000 or more’.

This did not happen and councillors were never given the opportunity to discuss the merits or otherwise of a senior officer’s pay.

Instead we were presented with a technical document on how salaries of senior officers were to be calculated, with no way to actually use that information to calculate exactly what officers will be paid. Indeed, the covering document specifically stated that there ‘were no financial implications’ to agreeing this policy. If that is not obscuring the fact I don’t know what is.

Finally I hold my hand up and confess that I did not immediately pick up the increase in the chief executive’s pay award. It was on page 86 of a 126-page document sent to me from the council via a web link a year after the award was made. But it was found – better late than never!

Had this matter been debated in the council in a democratic manner then councillors Russell and Hellier Laing could have justified this pay increase in the same way that they overturned our group’s suggestion of a pay award for those on the lowest salary scale.