Kent County Council Political Assistants: Reform UK Plan Could Cost Taxpayers Up to £98,564 a Year in Salaries (Plus On-Costs)

Kent County Council will be asked at Full Council tomorrow (Thursday 18 December) to approve the creation of Political Assistant (agenda item 11) posts for qualifying political groups— a move advanced in a report signed by Council Leader Linden Kemkaran (pictured) and Chief Executive Amanda Beer. 

The proposal comes with a striking political tension. Reform UK has pitched itself nationally — and locally — as a party determined to cut waste and reduce the cost of politics. Yet the paper going before councillors would open the door to new, taxpayer-funded political staffing at County Hall, in a county that has historically “got by” without such roles.

What councillors are being asked to approve

The report asks Full Council to approve four key steps:

1. Establish political assistant posts for qualifying political groups under section 9 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989. 

2. Delegate changes to the Constitution to the Monitoring Officer, because legislation requires certain provisions to appear in the Council’s Standing Orders.

3. Authorise the Chief Executive to put a local protocol in place — including job description and salary — and to appoint political assistants in consultation with the leaders of the qualifying groups.

4. Authorise the Corporate Director of Finance to find and agree a funding source for 2025/26.

In other words: councillors are being asked to approve the principle now, while key operational details — including the pay actually set (below the cap or at it), whether posts are full-time or part-time, and where the money will come from — are to be fixed later.

That matters, because the “money question” is the one residents will ask first.

Who qualifies — and why this matters in Kent

The law allows a council to appoint up to three political assistants, but only for the largest qualifying groups. In Kent’s case, the report says the groups that currently qualify are Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats.

KCC’s own published political breakdown explains why: it is a council of 81 members, with 48 Reform UK councillors and 12 Liberal Democrat councillors — the only two groups clearly above the 10% threshold in the legislation.

So while the statutory maximum is three posts, the practical question for Kent is whether taxpayers are about to fund two new political staff roles — and for how long.

What a “political assistant” actually does

A political assistant is not a communications officer for the whole council, and not a neutral civil-service-style adviser. The role exists precisely because ordinary council officers are expected to be politically impartial.

The report defines the role as undertaking research and support for members of political groups “in the discharge of any of their functions as elected members of the Council.”

But it also highlights the unusual legal position of these posts. Political assistants are described as “politically restricted”, yet central government guidance notes they are permitted to speak publicly with the intention of affecting support for a political party, and may publish material intended to affect public support — provided they do not present themselves as acting as an authorised party representative.

Unlike normal council recruitment — which must be purely on merit — the report notes that section 9 expressly allows regard to be had to political affiliations and political activities as part of appointing someone to these posts. 

That is the heart of the controversy: this is council-funded staffing that is, by design, politically aligned.

How much are they usually paid?

The report anchors pay to the national local government pay spine: the maximum is NJC spinal column point 38, which it states is £49,282 (FTE) at present — and it underlines that this figure excludes on-costs like employer National Insurance and pension contributions. 

That cap is set in law by the 2021 Remuneration Order. And published NJC pay tables show SCP 38 at £49,282 (from 1 April 2025 in one county council pay schedule), illustrating just how senior this point on the spine is. 

In practice, political assistant roles are often graded high on that spine. For example, a London borough job description for a political assistant role is graded SCP 36–38, and lists duties such as drafting speeches, briefings, policy research, stakeholder management and supporting senior political leadership. 

So while KCC could choose to set pay below the ceiling — and central government guidance urges councils to consider value for money and possibly part-time roles — the legal framework plainly allows a salary level that many residents would recognise as “senior officer money.”

The unanswered question: what will this cost ratepayers?

Here the report becomes notably cautious. It states the pay ceiling and confirms on-costs are extra — but it does not provide:

• a proposed grade or actual salary point below the cap,

• whether roles would be full-time or part-time,

• the total annual cost including employer on-costs and overheads, or

• the budget line from which this will be funded.

Instead, Full Council is asked to authorise the finance director to identify funding options for 2025/26 and agree a funding source later. 

That is likely to prompt a blunt question in the chamber: how can councillors approve new posts without being told the all-in price?

What KCC’s Constitution already says — and the tension it reveals

KCC’s Constitution already contains several provisions that intersect awkwardly with the creation of political assistants.

First, it draws a hard line around political neutrality: officers serve the council as a whole, and officer support “must not extend beyond providing information and advice in relation to matters of Council business” — explicitly not party business.

Second, it restricts how councillors may use council facilities. Members are told they must not use council premises, staff support or equipment for electoral or party political purposes not directly connected to council business (unless paid-for arrangements exist). 

That sits uneasily beside the government guidance quoted in the political assistants report, which acknowledges these posts can engage in public-facing political activity (within legal limits).

Third, KCC’s Constitution already anticipates the existence of political assistants in governance terms:

• It classifies political assistants as a category of politically restricted role. 

• It explicitly allows an exception so that members may take part in the appointment of “assistants for Political Groups” (where they may not take part in other officer appointments). 

• It even recognises that disclosure rules can be affected where documents would reveal advice provided by a “political adviser or assistant”. 

Yet despite these references, the new report says the legislation requires additional Standing Order provisions — hence the request to delegate constitutional amendments to the Monitoring Officer. 

The political argument: scrutiny support or unnecessary new politics spending?

Supporters will argue that political assistants help groups — especially smaller ones — do the serious, time-consuming work of policy development, research and scrutiny, without dragging politically neutral officers into party strategy. Central government guidance itself describes political assistants as providing research and administrative support, enabling separation between professional officer roles and political advice. 

Critics, however, will point out two things.

First: Kent has managed without them — and the government notes only a small minority of English authorities employ political assistants at all.

Second: the decision lands in the middle of a cost-of-living era when councils routinely tell residents that “there is no money” for services — and when a party elected on a “save money” mood is now effectively asking taxpayers to fund partisan support posts.

Or, as a certain Whitehall mandarin might put it: “It’s not an additional cost, Minister — it’s an investment in the efficiency of disagreement.”

What happens next

If Full Council agrees tomorrow, the Chief Executive will develop the protocol, job description and salary details with qualifying group leaders, while the finance director identifies how to fund the roles in 2025/26.

But before councillors vote, the most basic question remains outstanding — and it is the one every Kent taxpayer is entitled to ask:

Exactly how much will these posts cost in total, once salary, National Insurance, pension and overheads are counted — and what existing budget will be reduced to pay for them?

The Shepway Vox Team

The Velvet Voices of Voxatiousness