More than the chief executive

CAMDEN Council hit a win/lose a couple of weeks when it finally released information that should have been made public yonks ago: the publicly-funded salaries and bonuses of senior council staff.

Win: A victory for transparent government.

Lose: Union convenors went on the offensive when it became clear what chief executive Moira Gibb (£199,961 + £15,997) and colleagues actually took home.

…but maybe everybody missed the point. What about the salaries paid by Camden to officers hired on a consultant basis? Labour’s housing chief Councillor Julian Fulbrook mentioned no names when he spoke at a recent meeting of the Camden Federation of Tenants and Residents Associations, but he suggested some were working under the radar of the chief officer pay publication scheme yet collecting a higher rate of pay than even Ms Gibb.

For those who don’t pop into Camden Fed meetings, this is what he said:

There are interim acting officers on consultancy fees and when you add up their daily rate, if they were going to be employed for the whole year, they would be earning over a quarter of a million pounds, which is even more than what the chief executive in Camden is earning. That doesn’t seem to be a very wise way to be and we are going to have to get a grip.

3 Comments on More than the chief executive

  1. Whilst that’s shocking, Richard, there is one big difference. Every day Moira continues to work for Camden for her £200k + pa remuneration she is adding to her ENORMOUS gold plated and index-linked pension that will have to be paid and guaranteed by Camden.

    99.9% of Camden residents would regard what Moira Gibb has already accrued as “to die for”. Indeed, you might like to ask what the pension would start at were Moira to leave us anytime soon. While you’re at it you could ask what our Council tenant Frank Dobson’s pension, at the public purse’s expense, would be too.

  2. Local Tory // July 8, 2010 at 6:38 pm //

    “99.9% of Camden residents would regard what Moira Gibb has already accrued as “to die for”.”

    Yeah, and 99.9% of Camden residents couldn’t do her job.

    Is she good enough for the cash, that’s a worthwhile debate. Could we get someone as good for less money, fair question. But “OMG she’s paid a lot !!” is meaningless. Ultimately every user of social services, every school child, everyone with a bin, depends on the services her organisation delivers. I’d say it was reasonable priority to get someone who is up to the job.

  3. Andrew Marshall // July 12, 2010 at 6:08 pm //

    Local Tory makes all the right points. Paul Braithwaite highlights the cost of public sector pensions and there are big issues of public-private sector equity and indeed intergenerational equity around pensions that will take a lot of sorting out. But important not to personalise those around any individual, as officers are not in a position to speak out in public. As an elected politician who was involved directly with performance feedback on Camden’s top managers, I’m very comfortable with the quality and dedication of our senior managers. There’s no doubt though that just as in the private sector, we need in national and local government to keep working out how best to assess performance of top staff, giving the right amount of challenge in these difficult times.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: