Green councillors urge Mothin Ali to repay taxpayer-funded allowance to Leeds City Council

Coun Mothin Ali is one of the Green Party’s most high-profile figures, yet his granting of a Special Responsibility Allowance has raised concerns from fellow Leeds councillors.

Two Green councillors in Leeds have called on the party’s deputy leader Coun Mothin Ali to repay a taxpayer funded allowance to the council, and urged a probe into the matter.

Following May’s local election, the Leeds Green Party asked for Coun Ali to get a Special Responsibility Allowance from Leeds City Council.

The Harehills and Gipton councillors is one the party’s most high-profile national figures, and was widely regarded as masterminding Hannah Spencer’s victory in the Gorton and Denton by-election in Greater Manchester.

SRAs are allocated by the council, on top of the basic allowance for councillors of £18,000, for additional responsibilities.

For example, the leader of the council is paid an SRA of around £43,000. However, this is usually reserved for the leader, deputy leader and chairs of committees.

Chapel Allerton Coun Cristiana Mirosanu claimed that Coun Ali asked for additional council funds as he felt the “national Green Party isn’t adequately supporting the leadership team including him”.

A party spokesperson has since confirmed that an SRA “was granted for the role of Leeds Green Group spokesperson including leading on youth violence initiatives and mentoring new councillors”.

However, two of the party’s new councillors in Leeds, including Coun Mirosanu, have urged for Coun Ali to repay this to Leeds City Council.

Coun Mirosanu said: “This is not a statement I wanted to make, but I believe that doing the right thing is more important than political expediency .

“I did not get into politics for fame or fortune but to fight for local communities no matter what.”

She said that the private conversations held around the SRA “between the Leeds Green Group have made me deeply uncomfortable”, before adding: “I feel that I cannot remain silent on this matter.”

“I would later learn that there were potential issues with the allocation of this SRA to Coun Mothin Ali, due to council and regulatory requirements to perform special responsibilities in relation to the local authority.”

She claimed that it was only decided that Coun Ali would become the Leeds Green Group spokesperson after Private Eye contacted them regarding an investigation.

Coun Mirosanu has since called on the SRA to be repaid to Leeds City Council, a public apology be issued and for leader Coun Penny Stables and Coun Ali to be suspended.

Little London and Woodhouse Green Coun Eden Hills also called for the funds to be repaid.

She said: “It appeared to me that the group had made an error in allocating the SRA in question.

“I asked for legal advice to be sought and for the group to admit fault and rectify the problem if the SRA was allocated inappropriately, even if we did so in good faith.”

She added: “My position remains that where any funds were allocated in error those funds should be returned to the council along with a full and frank apology.

“I am aware that making this kind of statement is likely to put me at risk politically, but I believe in the values the Green Party stands for and cannot in good conscience stand by and say nothing.”

A spokesperson for the Green Party said: "We don’t comment on internal matters and are continuing to support all councillors and party members in Leeds."

A Leeds City Council spokesperson said: “All Special Responsibility Allowances are payable based on defined and agreed roles and responsibilities in accordance with the Members Allowance Scheme. Allowances are payable by the council to the individual councillor that a group designates to undertake that role.

“The Green Group now has more than 10 per cent of the council's members, so it is entitled to two opposition group officer holder allowances. Groups have discretion over which members they designate to these roles.

“Given the concerns raised, the council has agreed to review the circumstances surrounding the nomination for receipt of the allowance, based on the evidence available to us. As this is an ongoing review, it would be inappropriate to provide further comment at this time.”