Hansard

I thank the committee for giving us the opportunity to discuss our research findings. Members have the report—I hope that you will have had a chance to read it—so I will not go through it in detail. I have circulated graphs to highlight some of the main findings of the report and will talk through those in a couple of minutes.I want to focus on two key questions relating to the research that may interest the committee. The first is whether the sample that we used was representative and the second is whether the results of the research were accurate. I wish then to go over some of the main conclusions that are highlighted in the graphs that I have circulated and some implications that I would draw out of the research, which relate to the recommendations of the renewing local democracy working group. First, was the sample that we used representative? The research was carried out through a daily diary that we issued to a number of councillors. They were asked to fill in the diary over a two-week period in November 1999, giving details at half-hour intervals each day and highlighting the activity that they undertook during that period and the location where they carried out that activity. The diary was issued to all 58 council leaders and conveners in Scotland and to a random sample of 50 per cent of all other councillors. As far as possible, we tried to ensure that the sample that we issued the survey to was representative of gender and political allegiance in all councils.A total of 641 diaries were issued. The responses that we got back were anonymous. People did not write their names on the survey, although we asked for some information on their socioeconomic background so that we could check the returns against what we know of councillors from previous surveys. A total of 191 councillors responded to the survey, which is a 30 per cent response rate, and represents just over 15 per cent of all councillors, which is a high response level for this kind of survey. It can be compared with two other major surveys of councillors that were carried out in recent years. The Widdecombe inquiry in the mid-1980s, which former councillors here may remember, carried out a survey of all councillors in the UK, and it got a 6 per cent response rate; a more recent survey of Welsh councillors, which was carried out in 1995, received responses from 7 per cent of Welsh councillors, so our response rate of 15 per cent of all councillors was high.There is a close correlation between the responses to the survey and the overall sample to whom the survey form was sent, especially when account is taken of gender and the position of councillors on councils. The survey was sent to 58 senior councillors, leaders and provosts, which represented 9 per cent of the survey forms that we sent out, and just over 9 per cent of the survey forms that were returned came from leaders and conveners, which is a close correlation. There was an exact match with regard to gender: 78 per cent of councillors in Scotland are male, and 78 per cent of the responses were from male councillors; 22 per cent of councillors are female, and 22 per cent of responses were from female councillors, so those two key factors were closely correlated.We can compare the responses that we got with a survey of all councillors that we carried out in June 1999, which got a high response rate. The June 1999 survey, which was carried out just after the 1999 council elections, showed that the average age of councillors was 53. The average age of councillors who responded to the current survey was just under 55. There was not an exact match, but from what we can see, there was a fairly close correlation between our sample of councillors and what we know of councillors generally in Scotland.The second question that we wanted to address was the accuracy of the results. It is impossible to say for certain whether the results of any kind of survey are accurate, but if the results of our survey are compared with previous councillor work load surveys, it can be seen that our results are not that far out of step with other surveys.In 1983 there was a major survey—the only major survey of Scottish councillors' work loads that has not been carried out by the SLGIU. It was carried out on behalf of the Planning Exchange, and showed that the average work load of councillors at that time was 31 hours a week. The SLGIU carried out a major councillors' work load survey in 1996, which showed that the average work load of councillors was 46 hours a week, so the average of 36 hours a week that was obtained from the latest survey shows that the figures for the recent survey are probably not inflated, which is the main concern when carrying out this sort of survey. There is a close correlation between the November 1999 survey and the survey that we carried out in 1996.A similar survey of councillors' work load was carried out by Glasgow City Council last August, using a three-week diary-based survey modelled on the form that we issued in this survey. Many of the questions were exactly the same and others were fairly similar. The results of the survey of councillors in Glasgow were similar to the results of the survey that we carried out. For instance, we found that the average work load was 35.7 hours a week; in the Glasgow survey, it was 35.4 hours. Our survey showed that the chairs and deputes throughout Scotland worked an average of 37.5 hours a week; the figure for senior councillors in Glasgow was 38.6. Throughout the results, there was a fairly close match, suggesting that the SLGIU survey results were fairly representative and accurate.I shall talk the committee through some of the graphs that I have circulated to illustrate the key findings of the survey. The detailed figures are all in the research document that was circulated before the meeting. It is easier to pull out the key findings of the survey using graphs.On the sheet that is headed "Weekly Averages", there is a table that shows the weekly average by position. It shows that there are major variations in the work load of councillors, depending on their position on the council. The figure on the left is the average for all councillors, which is 35.7 hours a week. For leaders, the figure is 50.5 hours a week, on average. Minority group back-bench members average 31.4 hours, whereas majority group back-bench members average only 23 hours a week. There is a fairly obvious correlation between the position that someone holds on the council and their work load. There is a much smaller work load for councillors who do not hold positions of seniority or responsibility. Those figures are only averages. A small number of councillors are way off the graph, as their work load is substantially higher than the average. Some councillors also have a much smaller work load than the figures in the graph suggest.The second graph shows the weekly average according to the employment status of councillors. It shows that there is a smaller but still significant variation in work load depending on councillors' employment status. Councillors who identified themselves as full-time councillors with no other employment average 44 hours a week, whereas councillors who are in full-time employment outside the council average 31 hours a week for their council business. That illustrates clearly the fact that full-time councillors spend substantially more time on council business than councillors who are in other full-time employment.Over the page, two graphs show the variation in work load, depending on the size and type of council. We have divided councils into the categories of rural, urban and intermediate, the latter category comprising a small number of councils that are both rural and urban. You will see that the variation between the categories is a lot less significant. Councillors on councils that have a population of more than 250,000 in their area have an average work load of 37 hours a week. Councillors on councils with the smallest populations in their areas have an average work load of 34 hours a week. Additionally, councillors on rural councils average 37 hours a week, whereas councillors on urban councils average 36 hours a week. Some of that difference comprises travelling time, as councillors in rural areas average seven hours a week in travelling and councillors in urban areas average only four hours a week in travel time.The next sheet has coloured graphs on it, the top one showing work load by type of activity. Constituency work covers ward surgeries, councillors' meetings with organisations in their wards and their dealing with individual constituents' problems. External activity covers councillors' representation of the council on external bodies such as the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the police and fire boards and other joint bodies, or their representation of the council on quangos and other such bodies. Internal activity relates to the internal work of the council: going to committee meetings, preparing for committee meetings and meeting officials on council-wide business rather than constituency-related business. Members will see clearly that councillors who are in leadership positions spend a significantly higher proportion of their time on internal council activity than back-bench councillors, who spend far more time on constituency business.The next table on that page shows time of activity by employment status. We have tried to show the variation in the time within which councillors carry out their council duties, according to whether they are full-time councillors, whether they are in full-time employment or whether they have another employment status. The second line from the top shows that full-time councillors undertake approximately 70 per cent of their work in either the morning or the afternoon, and 30 per cent either in the evening or at weekends. The bottom line relates to full-time employed councillors. Just over 50 per cent of the time that they spend on council activities is during the day—slightly more of it in the afternoon than in the morning—and just under 50 per cent is either in the evening or at weekends. The table shows that councillors who work full-time have to spend more time on council duties in the evening or at weekends.The final table, which is on the next page, shows location of activity by type of council. Here we tried to identify the significant variation in where councillors perform their council duties, depending on whether they serve in a rural or in an urban authority. The table shows clearly that councillors in rural local authorities split their time evenly between working from home and working from the main council building. The top line in the table shows that rural councillors spend about 32 per cent of their time carrying out council duties in the main council building and just over 31 per cent at home. Urban councillors perform most of their council duties in the main council building or other council buildings. Only about 16 per cent of their council duties are performed at home. On this matter there is a clear distinction between councillors in rural authorities and councillors in urban authorities.I turn now to the implications of the report and how it relates to the recommendations of the renewing local democracy working group. I agree broadly with that group's recommendations on the action required to reduce councillors' work loads and/or to help councillors to perform their duties more effectively within a realistic time frame. I support the recommendation that councillors should have job descriptions. We must clarify what is expected of councillors.I also support the recommendations on member-support services. It is important that councils examine how they can use IT and internet facilities to reduce councillors' work load, to help them to perform their duties more effectively and perhaps to help them to work from home. That is particularly important to rural councillors, who have more difficulty getting to the main council building. We need to consider options such as videoconferencing either from home or from local council offices. Just before and just after reorganisation the SLGIU carried out a couple of surveys of member-support services. We are planning to undertake in the autumn another major survey of member-support services provided by councils. We would be happy to share the results of that survey with the committee, COSLA and others.Another of the working group's key recommendations was that councils should examine the work loads that committee meetings impose on councillors. That is very important. The issue is not about only the timing and number of meetings, but the way in which meetings are carried out and their function. Many councils began to carry out that work in their reviews during the past year, which fed into last week's leadership advisory panel report.We need to consider the timing of meetings. Most—if not all—councils have their committee meetings during a normal nine-to-five working day. Perhaps they should consider whether late afternoon or early evening meetings would be better suited to the councillors who are also otherwise employed and who have problems getting time off to attend meetings during the day. However, too many council meetings in the evenings would eat into the time that councillors must devote to working in their constituencies or wards. For example, most councillors have ward meetings and meet school boards and other local groups in the evening.Penultimately, as the working group recommended, it is crucial that there are discussions with employers organisations about the time off that employees take for council duties. If one of the aims of the exercise is to encourage more working people to become councillors without their having to give up their jobs to do so, we must consider the issue of paid or unpaid time off for council duties and the implications that that would have for councillors' remuneration from local authorities.Finally, I will highlight some of the points about councillors' remuneration that were raised by the working group. There is a question mark over the recommendation that the basic allowance for councillors should be £12,000. Given most councillors' heavy work load and the fact that, on average, they put in a 35-hour week, we do not know whether that figure is an adequate reward—if one is looking for reward. Is that enough to entice people to give up their jobs to become councillors?There is a question mark over the working group's recommended differential for leadership of the large Glasgow and Edinburgh councils. The recommendation is that these leaders should be remunerated at the same level as MSPs, whereas council leaders in the smallest authorities should receive much smaller remuneration of just more than £24,000. However, given that the Scottish local government information unit survey shows that the work load of council leaders does not vary substantially, is such a high differential justified?There is a further question mark over the inflexibility of the number of councillors that the working group has recommended for special responsibility allowances. The survey illustrates that the number of councillors who put in so many hours' work suggests that more of them should receive the special allowances, as Kerley recommends.There is perhaps a need for more research, although people who carry out research always say that. There is an argument for conducting more council-based surveys of the kind that we conducted. A Scotland-wide survey can give only a broad overall figure and picture, whereas council-based surveys allow each council to discover the impact of its work load and method of operation on its councillors. Glasgow City Council's survey has been very useful in helping the council to find out how it can support councillors, reduce their work load and make them more effective through measures such as changing the committee structure. Such surveys help to identify specific issues and problems for specific councils.Furthermore, there must be a follow-up survey that considers the impact of the new structures that councils are putting in place. What impact does an executive-based authority have on the work load of councillors who are members of executives, and on back-bench councillors in such authorities?Similarly, some councils have gone for decentralisation, and we must consider the resultant impact on councillors' work loads and on the type of work that they do. More work needs to be done to find out councillors' views of their work load and its impact. Does a heavy work load discourage councillors? Does it contribute to the fairly large turnover of councillors? Does it discourage people from wanting to become councillors?I am sorry if I have gone on for a little too long, but I thought that it would be useful to highlight some of our key findings and their implications. I will be happy to answer any questions.