A controversial plan to create five new paid political roles under the direct control of Wandsworth Council Leader Simon Hogg was forced through on Wednesday night by the narrowest of margins, amid claims of cronyism, misuse of public funds, and an utter failure to explain why the changes are needed.
After more than 90 minutes of heated debate at the General Purposes Committee, the scheme passed only after committee chair Cllr Rex Osborn used his casting vote to break a 5–5 deadlock. Independent councillor Malcolm Grimston, opposition councillors, and even some administration figures raised serious concerns about the lack of any clear justification, performance criteria, or cost rationale for the overhaul.
It comes just weeks after Simon Hogg narrowly survived a leadership challenge from his fellow Labour councillor Kate Stock, who was then dismissed from the Cabinet. Hogg has since failed to answer detailed questions from Putney.news about the new roles, which will pay £9,314 each — the maximum allowed under London Council guidelines.
No KPIs, no answers, no alignment
The new roles — Deputy Cabinet Members — are intended to support existing Cabinet Members, yet two of the five do not align with any Cabinet post. The council’s own monitoring officer was unable to explain why these positions were needed, how success would be measured, or what had gone wrong with the Policy Champions, which are now being scrapped.
Ironically, the Policy Champion roles were introduced just two years ago with the exact same reasoning: to “support Cabinet Members” and “build capacity.” There were eight Champions, spread across portfolios. Now there will be only five deputies, costing more and covering less.
Grimston cut through the confusion, saying the council was being asked to approve new payments “without any sense of what went wrong with the previous scheme or how this one will deliver better value. There are no performance indicators, no targets, and no plan for review. How will we ever know if this was worth it?”
It was also revealed that the new £9,314 allowance — paid on top of the basic councillor allowance — sits right at the top of the range recommended by the independent remuneration panel. Meanwhile, other vital council roles, including Overview and Scrutiny Committee Chairs, are currently paid below the minimum recommended rate.
Opposition councillor Peter Graham called the discrepancy “unjustifiable,” adding that “Deputy Cabinet Members are the only ones paid the maximum — while others, doing far more accountable work, are below even the minimum. There’s no rationale. It’s just politics dressed up as policy.”
Councillors also pressed for answers to what may be the most politically sensitive question: had these new roles — and their £9,000 allowances — been promised before or after Simon Hogg’s leadership was challenged and narrowly defended? Graham asked directly, but no answer was given. The implication was left hanging in the air, sharpened by the fact that the plan was published at 10pm on Monday night, giving councillors and the public less than 24 hours’ notice before the meeting.
Graham closed the debate by saying, “The public won’t see this as a cheap shot. They’ll see it as an expensive bribe.”
A vote bought — and a fight ahead
The plan passed only because the committee vote was tied 5–5, requiring Cllr Rex Osborn, the Labour chair, to use his casting vote. Independent councillor Jeremy Ambache, who is expected to become Mayor and chair next week’s full council meeting, abstained, citing the need for neutrality.
The final decision now moves to Full Council, where Labour holds the numbers to push it through. But with internal dissent, financial scrutiny mounting, and political fallout from this week’s meeting, the next vote is likely to be fractious.
Critics say the real decision may already have been made — and paid for with public money.
