LABOUR members of Warrington Borough Council voted for an annual increase in allowances by 3.2 per cent, which will increase annually over the next three years.
The move by the controlling Labour group was opposed by several Independent Cllrs, lone Tory Rob Tynan and the majority of Lib Dem opposition councillors.
It will mean allowances have increased by more than 20 per cent since 2021/2022 and the proposed 3.2 per cent will increase annually until 2028.
It comes as Warrington Borough Council seeks special financial support from the Government and permission to increase Council Tax above the 5 per cent capped limit.
The average pay increase will be from £10,577.77 a year to £10,916.
There will also be a rise in special responsibility allowances for the likes of the council leader, the mayor and cabinet members.
The leader’s allowance will rise from £25,000 to £27,000 and the deputy from £15,012 to £20,250.
Cabinet members would see an increase from £10,008 to £13,500.
The rises are benchmarked against those for other similar local authorities.
Speaking after the meeting of Full Council at the Parr Hall on Monday evening, when he voted against the increase, Independent Cllr. Stuart Mann confirmed he will freeze his own councillor allowance at the 2021/22 level.
Cllr Mann said his decision is based on the “serious and worsening financial pressures” facing Warrington Borough Council, including a projected overspend, around £30 million in planned cuts for 2025/26, concerns raised in the recent Best Value Inspection, and uncertainty around important community facilities such as Woolston Hub.
“Allowances should absolutely enable people from all walks of life — especially those on lower incomes — to stand as councillors,” Cllr Mann said.
“But given the current financial climate, I don’t feel it’s appropriate for me personally to take an increase right now.”
Cllr Mann said he fully understood the arguments put forward by councillors who supported the rise, many of whom highlighted that Warrington’s basic allowance remains below the level offered by neighbouring authorities.
“Colleagues made thoughtful points about fairness, accessibility and regional comparisons,” he said.
“Everyone’s circumstances are different, and I completely respect that.”
The vote saw a higher number of councillors vote against the uplift than in previous years. Several members raised concerns about what they felt were disproportionate increases in special responsibility allowances for senior roles.
Cllr Mann also acknowledged and welcomed the fact that a number of councillors publicly committed to freezing their own allowances.
“I want to recognise those colleagues who said they would freeze their own allowances,” he added.
“I’ve already emailed officers to confirm my own freeze, and I hope others will follow through with the same simple step so it can be formally recorded.”
“This is a personal decision based on the financial situation the council is in. For many councillors, the allowance is essential support that enables them to serve. This is not about judging anyone — it’s simply about being transparent with residents about the decision I’m making.”
Cllr Mann said keeping his allowance at the level he received on the day he was elected remains, for him, “one of the most responsible choices during such a challenging period for the council’s finances.”
Meanwhile, members of the Lib Dem opposition supported an increase in allowances for “backbench” councillors but opposed the increase for frontbenchers.
Recommendations from the Independent Remuneration Panel were considered by Warrington Council on Monday evening.
Deputy Group Leader Cllr Helen Speed said, “I recognise that allowances should be fair and sufficient to enable people on all levels of income to be able to represent their constituents. I am not opposed to an uplift of 3.2% for members equal to that of staff pay. What I object to, is the proposed greater increase for senior councillors. For this reason, I will be voting against the package.
“At a time when the Council is facing enormous financial pressures, it is totally the wrong time to be requesting excessive increases. What message does this send out to residents when we will be asking them soon to accept service reductions? It undermines public trust and confidence in politicians.”
Cllr Sharon Harris added, “In these difficult times, the workload on councillors is increasing and an increase in line with staff pay is justified. Public service must be accessible to people from all backgrounds and not just those who can afford it. I accept that our allowances may be lower than many of our comparator councils but now is not the time to correct this. We should put the senior councillor increases on hold until we know the outcome of the implementation of the Best Value Review. We are asking the people of Warrington to tighten their belts, so senior councillors should do the same and lead by example.”
Cllr Denis Matthews – Cabinet Member for Finance, Assets and Investments, responded to our statement suggesting voting for an increase in allowances at this time of the year was like a “Turkey voting for Christmas,” saying: “The allowances received by Warrington councillors are well below the average when compared to other similar English authorities. In Scotland they are set nationally, with a basic salary of £21,346 paid in 2024/25. In Warrington it was a basic allowance of £10,577.77.
There have been no significant changes in the councillor allowances since April 2010. The information is on the Council website in yearly reports, and I would encourage anyone to review these should they wish, using the link below:
https://www.warrington.gov.uk/councillor-allowances
Councillors are also residents and council tax payers. They aren’t ‘others’, and the decisions they make impact them the same as the people of Warrington who they serve.
“Councillor allowances are proposed in a report by the Independent Renumeration Panel – All English councils need one.
“Councillor allowances are there to support elected councillors from all parties, or none, to enable them to be able to dedicate sufficient time to meet their obligations to residents and the town.
“Without allowances, only those of independent means would be able to stand for election and serve. That, for me, wouldn’t be any sort of democracy at all.
Councillors financially fortunate enough not to need their allowances to facilitate their service do not need to claim them. That is an individual choice, and should not be forced on others.”
1 Comment
Should never be allowed the mess these councillors have made of finances in the town is a disgrace.