Hässleholm Committee Rejects Politician Fee Increases
Hässleholm's personnel committee unanimously rejects proposed fee increases for politicians.
Key Points
- • Personnel committee unanimously rejects fee increase proposals for politicians in Hässleholm Miljö.
- • Ulf Berggren criticized the fee increase proposal as 'inappropriate'.
- • Current fees are based on 90% of a Member of Parliament's salary; fee increases typically occur only during a new mandate period.
- • Dahlberg and Caesar's significant increases for their fees were denied, maintaining the current compensation levels.
In a decisive move, the personnel committee in Hässleholm has unanimously voted against the proposed increases in fees for leading politicians within the Hässleholm Miljö board. This decision reflects a collective stance among committee members, including Stefan Larsson (Moderate Party), Joachim Fors (Social Democrats), and Ulf Berggren (Sweden Democrats). Ulf Berggren condemned the fee increase suggestion as 'inappropriate', signaling broader concerns over continued attempts by some politicians to secure higher compensation.
The current fee structure offers salaries equivalent to 90% of a Member of Parliament's salary, amounting to 70,650 SEK. Elected officials such as Andreas Dahlberg (Social Democrats) and Christer Caesar (Christian Democrats) had argued that their roles justified higher fees, with Dahlberg proposing an increase to 30-35% for the chairman and 20% for the vice-chairman, while Caesar supported similar adjustments.
Currently, Dahlberg and Caesar are compensated with monthly fees of 14,130 SEK and 7,065 SEK, respectively. If their proposal had been accepted, Dahlberg's salary would have risen to an estimated 21,195 to 24,728 SEK and Caesar's to 14,130 SEK. However, the committee's resolution implies that any discussions about altering these fees will be deferred until the next electoral mandate period unless major organizational changes occur.
This decision highlights ongoing debates within municipal governance regarding appropriate compensation for public service roles amidst budget constraints and fiscal accountability.