Evening Standard, on UK Politics, 8 November 2026

0.0out of 10Nothing found

Greenwich councillors set for 42% pay rise despite £30m budget gap

No framing issues found.

Greenwich councillors are poised to award themselves a 42 per cent pay rise despite the south London borough facing a forecast £30 million budget gap. Members will next week vote on proposals that would increase the basic annual allowance paid to all councillors from £11,906 to £16,882, adding hundreds of thousands of pounds to the authority's wage bill. The move, championed by the Labour administration and backed by the opposition Green Party, has drawn fierce criticism from Conservatives, who describe it as a "reckless use" of taxpayers' money at a time of mounting financial pressures.

If approved, the package of changes could cost the authority as much as £800,000 a year. All 55 councillors currently receive a basic allowance to carry out their public duties and represent residents. The proposed increase would raise that payment by 41.8 per cent, bringing Greenwich closer to recommendations made by the London Councils Independent Remuneration Panel. The panel concluded in a review that serving as a councillor in London had become increasingly demanding and that relatively low allowances could discourage people from less affluent backgrounds from standing for election.

Council leader Anthony Okereke has defended the proposal despite acknowledging it would be unpopular. Writing in a blog post, he argued that current arrangements risk excluding talented people from local politics because many cannot afford the financial sacrifice involved. He said: "We should want the best looking out for our neighbourhoods. We should want to attract talent." Mr Okereke said some councillors were struggling financially and suggested the role should not require representatives to "get into debt" to serve their communities.

The council leader would personally see his own total annual allowance rise from £68,506 to £82,562 under the plans. Allowances paid to cabinet members and opposition leaders would also increase substantially. Green Party leader Tamasin Rhymes would receive a 57.7 per cent increase, while deputy Green leader Stewart Christie would see his annual remuneration almost double after the reinstatement of a special responsibility allowance. Mr Christie said councillors ideally should not set their own pay but argued a higher allowance could help create a more representative council.

He said the changes could reduce barriers facing residents who wanted to stand for election and help ensure cabinet members were able to dedicate more time to their roles. However, Conservative group leader Charlie Davis accused Labour of sending the wrong message while warning of a £30 million funding shortfall. He said: "Labour's own report to council admits there is a £30 million black hole in the council's budget next year." "This is a reckless use of council taxpayers' money and shows how this administration has got its priorities completely wrong."

With Labour and Green councillors holding 48 of the authority's 55 seats, the proposals are expected to secure approval when they go before full council this week.

Read the original article on standard.co.uk (opens in a new tab)
About this analysis

The Evening Standard reports that Greenwich councillors are expected to vote through a rise of about 42 per cent in their basic allowance while the council faces a forecast £30 million budget gap. It gives the Labour leader's and the Green deputy leader's case for the rise, the independent panel's reasoning, and the Conservative group's objection, each attributed to its source. Nothing in it misleads.

What it gets right

  • “bringing Greenwich closer to recommendations made by the London Councils Independent Remuneration Panel”

    The Standard tells readers the rise follows an independent panel's recommendations rather than presenting it only as councillors helping themselves.

  • “relatively low allowances could discourage people from less affluent backgrounds from standing for election”

    It gives the panel's stated reason for higher allowances, so readers can weigh the case for the rise against the cost.

  • “who describe it as a "reckless use" of taxpayers' money”

    The Conservatives' charge is attributed to them and placed alongside the backers' arguments, not adopted in the outlet's own voice.

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Evening Standard

  1. 8 NovNandy acknowledges ‘trade-offs’ for Britain if it gets closer to EU0.0
  2. 8 NovGovernment issued £33m tax revision for firms after Budget0.0
  3. 8 NovHeathrow Airport’s third runway: Will Andy Burnham support the expansion?3.0
  4. 8 NovAndy Burnham claims closer EU ties will help with cost of living0.0
  5. 8 NovVeterans and politicians to remember fallen at Edinburgh remembrance service0.0

Everything we scored from Evening Standard