That £7,000 party - Right of Reply by Harry Phibbs

Cllr Harry Phibbs

My story last Friday on the £7,184 party for departing H&F Chief Executive Geoff Alltimes triggered much comment, claim and counter-claim with the local media eventually following it up as well. The Council, many of you thought rightly, was heavily criticised for this use of our money.

But this blog is also about a conversation and it's never simply been about bashing one side or another blindly - so I've agreed to carry a 'right of reply' in the form of a guest post from Cabinet Member Harry Phibbs. 

I always get a welter of criticism whenever I do this, irrespective of which party the politician is a member of - so on this occasion can I remind people that I have also carried numerous columns by Labour MP Andy Slaughter. It's about a debate - so whether you agree or disagree with what Harry says below, he deserves credit for engaging with local people on the blog.

So here's Harry, on *that* party:

"Last Friday the Shepherd's Bush Blog ran an item challenging Council spending of £7,000 on a retirement party for Geoff Alltimes who has stood down as Chief Executive of Hammersmith and Fulham Council after 35 years. I can hardly complain about our spending being scrutinised. Part of my job has been to promote this accountability by making our spending more transparent than that of any other council. Not only do we publish payments to suppliers, and senior salaries, but also a detailed breakdown of our Council budget by cost code. We also publish our register of property assets and a Debtometer tracking our progress on reducing Council debt.

But I do believe that in this case the criticism has been misleading and unfair, and astonishingly hypocritical coming from Labour councillors and the Labour MP for Hammersmith, Andrew Slaughter. For his retirement party, Geoff paid for all the alcoholic refreshments himself, the Council paid for the food and the caterers.

Some argue that the Council should have made no contribution to funding the event - which I think would be churlish. Geoff was well paid but that does not mean he was bad value for money. He showed outstanding leadership and professionalism. 

He served both Labour and Conservative administrations with energy and ability in getting their policies implemented. Under Labour administrations he delivered their spending schemes and higher Council Tax. But when residents elected a Conservative administration in 2006 with a radical and controversial agenda including lower spending and cuts in Council Tax he accepted that democratic verdict. Where there were problems for either administration he would be determined to find solutions rather than the more familiar bureaucratic mindset of claiming the obstacles were insurmountable.

With colleagues his behaved with courtesy and would listen, finding this a more effective way of motivating them than shouting and banging his fist.

Others have suggested that £7,000 was too high and a smaller party should have been held. It was certainly a big event with over 450 present - including several Labour councillors and the former Labour council leader Stephen Burke. But many council staff appreciated the chance to go and thank Geoff who had been their boss for many years. He wanted to thank them. Staff morale is important and I think there was a benefit in extending the invitation beyond a few senior managers.

Labour have got an almighty nerve in condemning the reception given their own record. In the summer of 2004 a lavish leaving party was held at Fulham Palace marking the retirement of the Director of Education, Christine Whatford. The full cost, including alcohol, of £20,000 was picked up by the Council Taxpayer. The following summer another extravagant event was held this time for Henry Peterson, departing as the Director of Policy and Administration, at the Corinthian Sailing Club. It was also entirely paid out of Council coffers. Andrew Slaughter was Council leader at the time, Stephen Cowan a Cabinet Member. The idea that they presided over an era of frugality is laughable.

Shortly before the 2006 elections they paid £6,000 for a steel band that had only just performed at Glastonbury the week before to play in the middle of Shepherd's Bush Green for an hour amidst the litter to celebrate a "Smarter Borough". The audience consisted of a couple of drunks and a man with a dog. Few passers-by saw or heard much of the band between the traffic. It was a fiasco.

Even more extraordinary is that Andrew Slaughter should be criticising Geoff Alltimes' pensions arrangements. The comparison with Geoff's predecessor as Chief Executive, Richard Harbord, is instructive. Harbord was brought in when Slaughter was leader in 1999 with a starting salary of £110,000 (equivalent of £150,000 in current prices.) Within a year Harbord was given a pay rise to £140,000, and a further hike in 2001. Harbord's departure from the authority was brought forward a year earlier than planned, in May 2002. This was due to his "lack of progress" in the post. He was given a £110,000 pay-off plus a £62,400 booster to his total pension to over £200,000. This, after just three years, compared to Geoff's service of 35 years for the borough. 

Geoff has got the pension he was contracted to get - not one boosted by an "additional retirement grant" or any pay-off. In fact, Geoff waved £75,000 of redundancy pay that he was legally entitled to, as the post of a Chief Executive solely for Hammersmith and Fulham has been abolished. It should also be remembered that part of the cost of his salary was met by the Primary Care Trust.

It is true that as Council Taxpayers we have paid a lot of money to Geoff. But we should still be grateful because he has played a key role in the last five years in delivering lower Council Tax and improved services. It is his success that has fuelled the Labour Party's resentments, but their complaints are without credibility".