Call for ‘significant’ pay rise for Stirling, Joondalup, Wanneroo and Swan councillors rejected, offered 4pc

A bid to dramatically increase the pay packets of councillors in Perth’s biggest councils has been rejected by the independent salaries tribunal, saying all local governments faced “unique challenges”. The proposal, made by the City of Stirling, was to create a special group of just four councils — Joondalup, Wanneroo, Swan as well as Stirling — which would see councillors receive “significant” increases in pay. Councillors endorsed the argument, agreeing with the submission that they had more complex roles than peers at smaller local governments Instead, amid the cost of living crisis, ratepayers will be slugged for a four per cent increase in councillor fees and allowances, after some elected officials, including Stirling mayor Mark Irwin, complained of last year’s raise of 1.5 per cent. In its ruling on Friday, Salaries and Allowances Tribunal chair Margaret Seares argued the 4 per cent raise for councillors was adequate, given the nature of the roles. Previous, the Tribunal has labelled the positions as “voluntary” and fees are not meant as full-time salaries. “The Tribunal considered various submissions calling for increases, with the determined increase reflecting a variety of issues raised in the submission,” the determination reads. “The Tribunal maintains that Elected Members fees should be set to compensate costs for the prescribed role of an Elected Member. “The role of an Elected Member was specifically described as not being a full-time occupation.” Councils are allocated into one of four bands, according to size, which determines pay levels for elected officials. As a band one council, Stirling councillors are currently paid $32,960 a year in sitting fees, while Mr Irwin is paid almost $50,000 for sittings on top of a maximum allowance of $93,380. Councillors are also paid allowances for technology and travel. Stirling’s proposal to carve out the four most populous bodies, was not necessary, the Tribunal stated in its determination. “The Tribunal takes into consideration a range of factors when classifying local governments, not just populations and budget. There are a number of factors that lead to a Band 1 classification, as the Tribunal’s framework is broad based. “Some local governments may be best placed at the top of the Band while others may be better reflected at the mid-point or bottom of the Band. The framework allows for individual local governments to manage the unique factors they face within the framework. “Local governments within the Band 1 group have similar responsibilities despite the fact they each face their own unique challenges.” In its proposal, the City of Stirling said the pay rise was to recognise Elected Members at the four “mega councils” had “significantly larger and more complex roles” than those at smaller local governments. “The scale, scope and complexity of the issues traversed is not comparable between a small and large metropolitan local government,” the submission read. “Furthermore, the pace of work is much faster at a large metropolitan local government.” It also claimed councillor positions were not voluntary, given they are highly scrutinised and risk being jailed for offences in the role. “Elected Members are held accountable by the community and they are highly scrutinised and exposed to public opinion,” the submission argued. “They are also elected to the role. The work of Elected Members is high level, strategic and there are significant statutory duties associated with the role. Elected Members can be sentenced to a term of imprisonment for offences in their role. “None of the above is characteristic of a voluntary role.”