The ruling party at Kent County Council faced accusations of “hypocrisy” of wanting to take the money while claiming to deliver savings for Kent residents
Reform UK has defended a decision to fund the appointment of political assistants from a near £100,000 pot of tax-payers’ cash.
The ruling party at Kent County Council faced accusations of “hypocrisy” of wanting to take the money while claiming to deliver savings for Kent residents.
Councils are allowed a maximum of £49,282 per role under the Local Government Act.
Only Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats qualify with 48 and 12 of the 81 seats at County Hall.
The motion to allow political assistants was proposed by KCC leader, Cllr LInden Kemkaran.
The role can involve research and assist the political grouping they are assigned to. Other councils employ political assistants.
Cllr Kemkaran said the post-holder, who has not officially been named, will work alongside the council press office.
It comes off the back of “constant, bordering on the absurd” levels of abuse being slung at her administration by Labour in the House of Commons, she said.
The leader added: “We are coming under daily, hourly attack by the Prime Minister, the deputy Prime Minister, the Chancellor and random Labour MPs no one has ever heard of until they stand up in the House of Commons and talk about KCC and then they get a share of the limelight.”
She explained that KCC press officers cannot be political but a political assistant can act on the leader’s behalf.
The cost to the residents was tiny compared to the Treasury where there are eight political assistants and “an army of civil servants”, said Cllr Kemkaran.
Papers before KCC full council this afternoon (December 18) said: “Political advisers…are permitted to speak to the public with the intention of affecting support for a political party, but their actions must not give the impression that they are acting as the representative of the political party.
“Political advisers are also able to publish or cause to be published written work or other material intended to affect public support for a political party, but they must not give the impression that the publication is authorised by the political party.”
Liberal Democrat opposition leader, Cllr Antony Hook said: “KCC doesn’t have political assistants and we haven’t had them in the past. What other councils do is irrelevant and make decisions according to their circumstances.”
He asked the rhetorical question of whether his group would appoint one if the motion succeeded. To jeers from the Reform benches, Cllr Hook said “I don’t know” and would spend Christmas reflecting on his decision.
Labour Cllr Connie Nolan said: “At Canterbury, when we took over with our Liberal friends the running of the council, we immediately contacted the Local Government Association because they the people who can help when you don’t have a lot of experience in doing something.”
Independent Reformer Cllr Bill Barrett said the proposal was for political purposes but added the authority has a wide range of officers on hand to help.
The Independent Group’s Cllr Paul Thomas said the motion is “the opposite of what you (Reform) stand for”.
Liberal Democrat deputy leader Richard Streatfeild claimed he had not seen so many Reform members “squirming in their seats” because of the “dreadful truth” that tax-payers are being asked to fund political assistants.
KCC deputy leader Cllr Brian Collins said he would not take lectures from Labour members given “the state of the country’s finances”.
He said that Cllr Hook was “very foggy” in his response, saying that he opposed the proposal but might hire a political assistant if the motion went through.
The council voted 65 in favour of political assistants and 26 against with one abstention.
