The interim leader of Warwickshire County Council has defended plans to bring in political assistants costing up to £190,000 per year in the face of outrage from other parties.

Cllr George Finch confirmed he had instigated the proposals that will be considered by all councillors next week.

They would see the biggest three parties at Shire Hall – Reform, the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives – have a dedicated council officer to "undertake research and provide administrative support to members of political groups in the discharge of any of their (council) functions", although the Lib Dems have spoken out to object to the idea.

National legislation allows councils to employ up to three people, one for each of the council's three biggest groups provided they have at least 10 per cent of the seats available. No party can have more than one assistant irrespective of size.

The assistants would be politically restricted in most of the ways that other council officers are but would be allowed to "speak to the public with the intention of affecting support for a political party" and "publish… work or other material intended to affect public support for a political party" provided they don't give the impression they directly represent that party.

They would be full-time jobs with the council anticipating overall costs – salary plus employment expenses – of between £151,000 and £190,000 across the three roles dependent on which end of the relevant salary band the candidates came in at.

With it being an addition to the council's budget set in February, the report says the council's executive director for resources Rob Powell would "identify options for meeting the costs for the remainder of this financial year and determine the most appropriate funding source in consultation with relevant group leaders".

Costs beyond that would have to eat into the council's already restricted budget. 

'Entrenched' council delivering 'poor results'

It comes less than two weeks after the Reform UK cabinet unanimously accepted principles set out in the council's medium term financial plan, which included the assertion that it would "be necessary to set a very high bar for new permanent budget allocations".

However, interim leader Cllr George Finch, who will seek the permanent position at a full council meeting on Tuesday before promoting this idea, insisted it was required because current council staff have been "unable to help come up with the imaginative ideas" to resolve issues related to special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), home-to-school transport, "rapidly declining" apprenticeship opportunities "and many more pressing issues". 

Cllr Finch, who was approached for comment but offered a written statement, wrote: "By establishing political assistant roles, we can begin to work more effectively to bring about the change we have the mandate for.

"The definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over again and expect different results. For too long, WCC has remained entrenched in its views about how we should govern. Those views have yielded poor results.

"For years, the council administration has relied on the corporate policy team to come up with the innovative ideas required to shepherd Warwickshire through the crises we face. We've found this team to be unable to bring about the change we were elected for.

"We need a fresh, bold approach to policy creation in Warwickshire. Establishing the political assistant roles will equip the three main political groups with the tools required to find innovative solutions."

Will it go through? 

The plan will go before councillors and be voted on in the normal way.

With Reform not having a majority, support or at the very least no dissent will be required from at least one other political group. 

Like the leadership battle, the Conservatives appear to be kingmakers with leader Cllr Adrian Warwick confirming his group would be discussing the matter on Friday, indicating they would "need to understand the merits" prior to taking a position.

That will decide which way this goes with the Lib Dems, Green Party and Labour all confirming they will vote against.

It's a no from us… 

Speaking prior to Cllr Finch's statement, Liberal Democrat leader Cllr Jerry Roodhouse said: "I would rather spend £150,000 on family support workers or something that is useful in the community.

"The report is clear that we don't have £150,000 and if we did, I would much rather it went to the frontline to support residents, not political assistants. This is not the sort of thing we are going to support.

"My hope would be that other political groups would rather see money spent on frontline services and not on political assistants. All political groups should be focused on the frontline."

As the fourth-biggest group, the Greens would not get an assistant with group leader Cllr Jonathan Chilvers highlighting how Reform UK stood on a platform of more efficient use of taxpayers' money.

His statement read: "I'm very surprised that the first formal policy Warwickshire Reform has brought forward is to spend more than £100,000 extra per year on more support for politicians.

"Their claim to voters was that they would cut 'wasteful' council spending and yet their very first proposal does the exact opposite. Actions always speak louder than words."

Labour leader Cllr Sarah Feeney echoed those sentiments.

"We are not in support of this," she said.

"Given that we are at a time when there are massive cuts to services to balance the books, this seems like an unnecessary expense.

"These roles were cut soon after austerity in 2010 on the basis that they couldn't really be afforded. 

"Reform is the largest group, if they want someone I'm sure they could find a way to fund it themselves from their group money."

The report also says that "no appointments can be made until posts have been established for all qualifying groups".

If approved, chief executive Monica Fogarty will have delegated authority to work with the group leaders on the framework under which the assistants would be employed. They will be on fixed-term contracts in line with how long the relevant parties are set to be in office.