£1.2 million bill to pay Stoke-on-Trent City Council's top officers
SENIOR officers at a cost-cutting council pocketed £1.2 million in salary and expenses, as residents faced £36 million cuts and hundreds of workers lost their jobs.
Residents groups today called on Stoke-on-Trent City Council's senior directors to take voluntary pay reductions as a gesture of goodwill as the authority continues to grapple unprecedented budget cuts.
-
John Van De Laarschot, the authority's chief executive, receives a total of £223,203 when salary, expenses and pension contributions are accounted for.
It comes as newly-published records for 2011/12 show that seven executives were paid more than £100,000 in salary, allowances and pension contributions.
The authority said its salaries "reflect the market rate" and help attract high calibre candidates for crucial executive roles.
Save 10% off any cleaner ending 7p with this voucher
i.e. £99.97 would save you £10
All the top brands, Dyson,Miele,Siemens,Panasonic,Sebo,Numatic & more
Clean up with our Sring Cleaner offer
Terms:
Print this voucher and hand in at any store to save 10% off any 7p pricepoint
Shop local and you can always get the belts etc from us as well so you arn't left searching for them.
Contact: 01782 342609
Valid until: Saturday, June 08 2013
Figures for 2011/12, which saw £36 million cuts, reveal:
- The authority's seven biggest earners received a total of £1,257,594 in salary, allowances and pension contributions;
- Chief executive John van de Laarschot's total pay package was £223,203;
- Social care boss Tony Oakman claimed £163,974, while regeneration chief Hardial Bhogal received a total of £149,512.
Accounts for the year include the £358,218 claimed by Sharon Menghini, outgoing director of children and young people's services, who was paid £174,000 to walk away from her job. The authority has a total of 271 employees earning more than £50,000 a year, down from 355 in 2010/11 as the council made redundancies.
Opposition City Independents tabled a failed motion calling on workers earning more than £50,000 to take a voluntary five per cent pay cut at February's budget- setting meeting.
Charlie Stewart joined the city council in the new role of assistant chief executive for the 2012/13 financial year, earning a reported £132,000 a year.
He said: "The city council is a billion pound organisation, delivering hundreds of services, with thousands of employees.
"It's important that the authority's most senior managers have the necessary experience and skills to ensure services are effectively managed and delivered. And it's important we have the best calibre people in place."
Jim Gibson, chairman of Chell Heath residents' association, said: "I would ask them to take a reduction in these pay packets as a gesture to the people of the city. It's the public that suffers with all of the cuts."
Alan Joinson, chairman of East Bentilee residents' association, said: "I think a reduction of ten or 15 per cent would be a brilliant gesture.
"I understand these people have worked their way up to the top jobs but do they really need this much money? They don't live in the real world."
Mum-of-two Melissa Turner, aged 35, of Fenton, added: "They always say it's the best wages to get the best people, but we don't get any benefit from that when all we hear about is cuts."
Comments
by Raymondc1
Tuesday, October 02 2012, 6:13AM
“I do feel that the City Council needs very much to cut the coat according to their cloth, don't spend what they have not got, then expect the people of Stoke-on-Trent to bail them out again,
the Council are in me looking more unstable than the euro-zone, which I may say when comparing the both the Stoke-on-Trent City Council and Euro-zone there is not much different's, if any, the euro-zone was a none-start before if even started and the Council was as the same.
If John Van De Laarschot can't cope with his work load, then get someone who can, further to this, the Council I believe, wish to move from Stoke back to Hanley, which is in my opinion a foolish move to make, they left the People of Stoke-on-Trent with one white Elephant in Hanley been Unity House, to move into Stoke in a new building called the Civic Centre, now they want to move back into Hanley and leave the people of Stoke-on-Trent with another white Elephant been the Civic Centre,
I do feel that Stoke-on-Trent City Council need to get their house in order, indeed, the Leader and his Deputy and the their Cabinet are living above their means, and I suggest that all must go due to the unnecessary cost they have creating, which the people of Stoke-on-Trent could well without.
the Deputy Leader been a Councillor for Fenton must go as he does not even live in Stoke-on-Trent, let alone not living Fenton the Town that he should be fighting for, it does make think the way people in Fenton are voting why vote someone in as Councillor to fight on their behalf knowing the Councillor does not even live Stoke-on-Trent is totally beyond me.
I accept that report is in relation to John Van De Laarschot, but have not got the same problem with the Leader of the Council, the only way the people of Stoke-on-Trent may clean the mess up and stop this over spending is to clear the lot out and restart again, the City is in a mess, this not due to economic climate in which we live, but to bad management of the City Council and they can't get beyond that fact.”
by I_Norris
Saturday, September 29 2012, 7:19AM
“My reply from writing to Grant Shapps over sale of Civic, but think we all must continue to try put Stoke on map for help from ministers
Dear Mr Norris,
Thank you for your letter to the Department on the sale of Stoke on Trent's civic centre. I am sorry for the delayed response.
It is for local authorities to decide how to make best use of their assets, including the relative benefits and costs of holding assets, the relative benefits of the nature/tenure of assets and the disposal of under-utilised assets. This is because they are best placed to know what works and is most appropriate for their local area in a way that central Government cannot.
Local authorities are encouraged to engage with their communities when considering options for managing their assets. Best practice guidelines advise local authorities to consider the preparation of their asset management strategies in consultation with their communities. Therefore, I suggest your best course of action is to put your concerns to your local authority directly.
As your concerns are regarding the finances of your local authority this can be raised with the District Auditor. Their job is to make sure that local government finance is run as it should be according to law. District Auditors are either a member of an independent auditing firm, or an employee of the Audit Commission. To find out how to contact the District Auditor for your area, you will need to contact the Audit Commission on 0844 798 3131 or 0117 975 3131. Alternatively you can email them on public-enquiries@audit-commission.gov.uk.
Yours sincerely,
John Connell”
by usversusthem
Saturday, September 29 2012, 1:53AM
“Muzzer57
Now that you mention it I think I remember you posting something about it. I just thought that if he received hundreds of complaints I don't think he could afford to ignore them. Only hoping of course, but I would ask you to please try again. It might be your email that tips the balance.
Kind regards,
Alan Lear”
by muzzer57
Saturday, September 29 2012, 12:11AM
“Alan
I contacted Mr Pickles earlier this year about our council and he did not want to know, I reckon he is just as bad as our council officers.”
by usversusthem
Friday, September 28 2012, 11:19PM
“Muzzer 57
This man is the governments minister with responsibility for communities, I don't know his full official cabinet title, but his e mail is listed below. I've also put a copy of the e mail I've sent him regarding the planned civic centre move to Hanley. Again could I please ask ask everyone to fill his inbox also. The more people from Stoke-on-Trent who complain to him then the more he is likely to have to step in.
eric.pickles@communities.gsi.gov.uk
Dear Mr Pickles,
I am writing to you in the hope that you can help the people of Stoke-on-Trent. Our Labour controlled council and its cabinet members have suddenly dropped a bombshell saying that they are going to move the Civic Centre from its base in Stoke one mile up the road to a site, the Central Business District in Hanley at a cost of £59 million. The reason they give is that they are becoming the anchor tenant to ensure further investment into the city centre is brought about.
This decision was taken without them informing or involving the full council and in particular, the Independent councillor for the Stoke ward, who was absolutely astounded when he read about it in our local paper.
Very quickly a 1200 signature petition against this move was submitted to the council and the organiser was allowed to speak at the full council meeting. He was told by the Council and Cabinet Leader that the decision to sell the Civic Centre has been made and the move will take place. The Independent Councillor for the ward asked for the decision to be brought forward for scrutiny. Again this was rejected for the same reasons.
This move of some 1300 council employees and the ensuing cost in these days of austerity will have a severe effect on an already struggling city and local business owners see this as the death knell for Stoke. They have tried to get details of the risk and impact assessments but are met with silence or woolly statements regarding the companies purporting to be coming into the Central Business District. The director of the development has stated that major retailers and restaurants have agreed terms and signed up to take units in the new shopping centre. He then states that the firms are under no legal obligation to commit to the project. This is confusing the issue even more as it appears the Council is the only organisation committed to this development.
The residents and business owners are really annoyed with the Labour Councillors and in particular the Council Leader. This is a move that is both a bureaucratic and undemocratic imposition of his decision which will bring ruinous consequences to the local business infrastructure and will take this city deeper into debt through his and his Labour councillors reckless actions.
I am astounded that after the introduction of the Localism Act 2011 this council have failed in their duty to communicate with the people who elected them. They have denied the people the right of participation and involvement in decisions that affect them, which is at the heart of a healthy and democratic Council process. They have failed to allow the people of Stoke the opportunity to exercise influence over decisions that will have a huge impact on both Stoke and Hanley and as a consequence their lives and livelihoods. Whereas the planned cost of £59 million, if spread across all the 6 towns which make up our city, would improve all of our lives considerably.
I don't know if you are able to investigate this decision on our behalf, but we sincerely hope that you can. Failing that we would certainly appreciate your advice on how to bring about a change for the benefit of the people of our city.
Yours sincerely,
Alan Lear”
by rubythursday
Friday, September 28 2012, 11:11PM
“John van der Laarschot has not displayed any of the attributes to reflect what is out there in the market place. As a CEO he came to our city and promptly brought in consultants to do his job for him at further great expense to the people of Stoke-on-Trent.
that's why I call him john vanguard de laarschot”
by truestokie
Friday, September 28 2012, 8:34PM
“Strange how the usual suspects (Labour Len, Johntoe, and Redtone/Tonyjohnt) have not posted on here.”
by muzzer57
Friday, September 28 2012, 2:15PM
“Is there a Government body that can be asked to investigate what is going on with the running of this city?”
by truestokie
Friday, September 28 2012, 1:21PM
“usversushem take our point Alan and go along with it wholeheartedly.
I agree that apathy in the voters is major problem that has to be ovecome.
We pay goodwages but still end up with monkeys and puppets.”
by usversusthem
Friday, September 28 2012, 12:40PM
“Truestokie.
I do take your point about "Common Purpose" however I think that the answer is typified by the Edmund Burke quote "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
It is so important that we start the process ourselves. These Councillors have all been elected. So they call it a democratic system, but we all know that when you look at the percentage turnout figures you see that they have come into office as the result of a very poor turnout and a handful of votes. All it takes is a few hundred devout supporters and anyone can get into a Councillors job. The benefits of belonging to any political party are that the party concerned wants power. They have the infrastructure; funding and they can get volunteers onto the streets during election campaigns which is why we now have a Labour led council. That is what makes it so difficult if you are standing as an Independent.
People need to start putting pressure on those in power, particularly if it is felt that they are not benefitting our community or city. We need to do more than just moan on these kinds of forums. Yesterday I was in Longton collecting signatures for our petition against moving the Civic Centre from Stoke to Hanley. This evening I'm attending the meeting about Marrow House. I've been on the protests regarding the removal of the use of bus passes and in the not too distant past the closing of the children's centres and I'm always writing letters to the Sentinel and/or sending emails to relevant Councillors.
Many of our Councillors are the root of our problems. If they didn't get elected and agree to recruiting these costly and ineffective officers we wouldn't have the problem. So please hold them to account, join protests and take action. Let's prevent the "triumph of evil."
Kind regards,
Alan Lear.”