Angus Council car lease “fat cats” have been given a mauling after declining to change to a money-saving new scheme.
Last month it emerged that one in 18 Angus staff enjoys the benefit of a council-supplied car in a scheme that costs the authority £800,000 a year. Described by one top official as “generous” and “liberal,” the Angus scheme also costs almost £500,000 more than if a simple mileage allowance payment was made.
Top claimants have 90% of their car lease cost paid by the council which, aiming to curb the runaway costs, has agreed a new cost-neutral system to operate from April.
But the authority hit a snag with chief officers, for whom a car is a contractual perk. At the request of SNP opposition leader Helen Oswald, executive staff were asked if they would voluntarily withdraw from the scheme. Of 33 chief officers who responded, 30 gave the council a firm ‘no’.
In some cases it means highly-paid officials may hang on to their contractual car entitlement at premium rates until 2035.
Their response has been fiercely criticised by a national taxpayers’ body, with Mrs Oswald and the council’s scrutiny convener also sharing disappointment over the outcome.
A Taxpayers’ Alliance spokesman said, “Taxpayers will be disappointed that chief officers at Angus Council are not willing to do their bit to help make savings.
“This generous scheme is just one of the many perks that taxpayers are funding for town hall fat cats. It’s a good start that a new, more cost-effective scheme is now in place and these council officers should waste no time in joining it.”
Mrs Oswald told The Courier, “From April 1 any chief officer appointed by the council will also come on to the new scheme and that is aimed at being cost neutral, which is good news.Disappointed”But I was concerned about the chief officers’ situation, which is why I raised it at a previous committee, and I am surprised and disappointed that 30 out of the 33 refused to voluntarily withdraw.
“What sort of message does this send out to our staff, some of whom are earning very much less per year but still need a car to do their job, when they are being told to move to the new scheme but the chief officers are saying they will not do the same?
“Chief officers are receiving large sums of money and some do not even need a car. I think it was important for them to say, ‘We are all in this together,’ and the response flies in the face of what we are trying to do at all levels of the council to cut costs and save as much money as possible,” she added.
Independent councillor Bob Spink, who heads the scrutiny and audit committee, said, “There is a considerable saving to be made and the committee wholly supported the proposal for the new scheme.
“The car leasing is part of the contract of employment for chief officers and, as part of that scheme, they were asked if they would voluntarily withdraw from the current scheme.
“They decided by a considerable majority that they wanted to stay where they were. It is entirely their choice to do so and we have no alternative to accept the position, but it is a pity and a bit of a disappointment.
“In the round, the changes made to the car leasing scheme will result in considerable savings but there was an opportunity to make some other benefits.
“There is something quite wrong with a system that is much more beneficial to one set of people than another and the changes will be for the better,” added Mr Spink.
Photo by Flickr user Andrew Morrell Photography.