Councillors received allowances and expenses totalling more than £1 million in the past financial year, new figures reveal.
The total claimed by members of Brighton and Hove City Council is £124,000 more than the previous year – or up about 14 per cent – to £1,009,628.34.
The 2024-25 figures have been published in the past week and are more than the £885,472.14 figure for 2023-24 and the £912,640.37 total in 2022-23.
Each councillor received a basic allowance of £14,139.04 while the leader, deputy leaders, cabinet members, cabinet advisers, committee chairs and leader of the opposition received special responsibility allowances.
Some money is deducted to cover the cost of bus passes or parking permits.
The highest amount was paid to the Labour council leader Bella Sankey. She received £50,862.01 including a special responsibility allowance of £35,975.35.
Councillor Sankey, who has two young children, also claimed a total of £707.50 in dependent carer allowance and £67.49 in travel and subsistence, minus £27.37 deducted for either a bus pass or parking permit.
Members can claim up to a maximum of £9 an hour for each child for the duration of meetings, plus one hour of travel time to and from meetings.
The second highest payment went to the Labour deputy leader of the council, Jacob Taylor. He received a special responsibility allowance of £16,996.08 and £65 in travel and subsistence. The total came to £31,172.75. Councillor Taylor also had £27.37 deducted.
The former Labour deputy leader Gill Williams received the same basic and special responsibility allowances as Councillor Taylor. She had £351.40 deducted, leaving her a total of £30,783.72.
Conservative councillor Carol Theobald received the highest amount for travel expenses and subsistence – a total of £163.89 for the year.
Green councillor Raphael Hill claimed £98.84 and Labour councillor Tristram Burden claimed £87 in travel and subsistence.
Last month, councillors voted for higher special responsibility allowances for cabinet members – up 14 per cent from £12,938 to £14,797. The basic allowance is due to remain the same.
The current members allowance scheme is expected to cost £1.062 million in the current financial year.
The scheme cost £1.048 million in total in 2024-25 and included payments to the mayor, deputy mayor, independent remuneration panel members and the independent members of the council’s Audit, Standards and General Purposes Committee.
At the annual council meeting, some opposition councillors criticised a decision to halve the mayor’s allowance and create a new special responsibility allowance for the Labour chief whip, a political post.
Labour has a majority of 18 and was able to vote through its proposals after responding to the criticism by saying that the whip’s work was time-consuming and crucial to the smooth running of the council.
And while some councillors are retired and receive pensions, others are younger and some put their careers on hold to undertake the voluntary role of councillor which is nominally part-time.
They do not receive a salary for being a councillor. The allowances are intended to go some way towards covering the costs of carrying out their duties.
Make savings by laying off staff and cutting services. Give public land away for pennies so private contractors can make millions. Award yourselves pay rises and grab as much as you can in expenses. Then raise council tax to pay for it all….
Not sure the data supports your view that people are grabbing as much as they can in expenses. These seem modest claims for obvious expenses such as travel and child care.
Raising council tax is to ensure key services are provided amidst increased financial pressures in adult social care provision and years of underfunding from central government. Alongside a degree of mismanagement by the previous green administration, the choice is to slash services or raise council taxes.
Maybe you could elaborate on what public land has been given away for Pennies?
Lev & partner are still bitter about Kemptown Pride. I heard a rumour they benefited from a holiday paid for by the council at least once due to their continuous complaining.
I agree with Katy. Especially considering some of the health issues that a few of the councillors have had over the year – getting a bus to facilitate their job? More than reasonable.
And Katy is absolutely right, councils across the country have had to do more with less funding over a decade of austerity.
I’ve made this point before, but if a Ward Councillor was a normal job, it would be illegal due to the amount of hours they work for the amount they get.
I’ve never known “younger councillors putting their careers on hold to undertake the voluntary role.”. Usually they have used the position to try to get into a grander (and better-paid) political position, make advantageous contacts or used the title of”councillor” to enhance their (usually inadequate) CV. On the odd occasion some of them have abused their tenure to advance self-interests or that of their friends. How about the multiple computer systems that are useful as a four-fingered chocolate bar? Give me a break!
Since we didn’t elect any cabinets and were never asked, all cabinet members should forfeit their expenses, never mind demanding more. They were elected as Councillors, not cabinet members, shutting other Councillors down and out. Nor should we be paying for Council Leader Sankey’s extra deputy leader who we never consented to and has offered a less-than-stellar performance as an invisible local Councillor prior to his appointment.
This rise in expenses is also way above the inflation rate and does not offer VFM. We need a DOGE to clean up this council.
Mike, as usual, a few corrections.
Cabinets are not directly elected, but that is how councils have operated for decades now. Voters choose councillors, and the majority group appoints a leader who selects the cabinet. This shouldn’t be a revelation to you.
Cabinet allowances are not self-awarded. They are proposed by an independent panel and approved by full council. Cabinet roles come with extra workload and responsibility that justify the award.
All councillors still sit on committees, raise motions, and scrutinise decisions. If someone is underperforming, that is a political issue, not a constitutional one.
Misrepresenting how local government actually functions is a non-starter. We should really focus on a reality-based discussion.
Given the level of responsibility I think councillors should be paid substantially more, but also be able to be held more accountable for their decisions. It should also be a full time position.
Funny how you’re of a completely opposite opinion to Mike. I guess you exclude a certain demographic by it not being a full-time position. As I understand it, many WCs have second jobs or are retired.
I’d really struggle to afford living in Brighton as a WC without a supplementary income, and absolutely couldn’t do it as a volunteer.
I think we should have aristocrats or tech billionaires running local government and then we wouldn’t have to pay them any expenses or allowances. Think of the savings!
(For the avoidance of doubt, that was an ironic response to all the daft comments immediately above)
That Mr Musk fella seems like an upstanding and ethical fellow, we should follow his lead!
Bella Sankey gets a Carer allowance, if £707 who does she look after to get that
Especially as she gets £50,000 and £35,000 which includes responsibility allowance-what’s that allowance never heard of it.
Can’t believe she gets Carers-considering the amount she gets a Year.
Betty, that £707 isn’t a benefit for being a carer. It’s a reimbursement scheme for councillors who need to pay for care while doing council duties, like childcare or adult care during meetings.
Bella Sankey is carer for her elderly parents. She’s human just like the rest of us with family and responsibilities.
Of course she’s human, but we didn’t all have parents who could afford to send us to private schools – so she is far more privileged than lot’s of residents. The article suggests that the carer’s allowance is for childcare, which makes sense, and I think the council provides it on an equal basis to councillors who need child care for late meetings etc.
What you’re suggesting is that she’s getting it to look after elderly parents – for most people caring for elderly parents isn’t something we can readily claim back via public money, and in cases where elderly parents have a certain level of income / savings it’s down to them to fund it themselves – not taxpayers – or their adult children. So I think you’re wrong on the care allowance being paid so she can pay for elderly parent care. As much as I know that can be challenging and I don’t dispute it’s difficult (so sympathise with Bella if she is having to juggle those responsibilities), it’s much more likely the carers allowance is for childcare in this case!
Just a thought but why has Cllr Theobald as Deputy Leader of the Conservative Group received the highest allowance for travel and subsistence?
They’ve done a lot of travel and eaten a lot of food?
I believe she usually sits on the Fire Authority and meetings in Eastbourne but not sure as to whetyitvcomes out of BHCC budget or separate fire authority budget