Birmingham does not need an Executive Mayor (Part 1)

The campaign for a resounding 'No' vote in the referendum on May 3rd as to whether or not the city should have a directly elected mayor is an all-party endeavour. I have set out a case against in earlier postings on this blog and with his consent I'm posting in two parts the arguments put forward by my council colleague, Cllr James Hutchings. In a much livelier read than some of my own postings, James writes:

"Ever since Oliver Cromwell, the English have been opposed to concentrating too much power in one person. The Irish, Scots and Welsh were opposed even earlier. Joe Chamberlain was a very powerful mayor and achieved great things for Birmingham but he was an elected councillor and worked with the committee system.

Today the Leader of a big city is already extremely powerful. Under the existing system Birmingham Councils of various political leadership, working in partnership, have achieved, and are still delivering, big projects such as the National Exhibition Centre, the International Convention Centre, the National Indoor Arena, the new Library and New Street Station.

I know that some American cities have Executive Mayors (EMs) who are successful and some who have been corrupt. Why are we being compelled to always follow America or the Euro plan?

The local press keep campaigning that “we need a Boris”. Your readers will know that any such comparison is nonsense. London has 32 local authorities who deliver local services. When the old GLC was abolished a co-ordinating authority for the London region was needed so they introduced the Mayor. The Mayor has responsibility for Transport, Fire and Police in the London region while the local authorities are responsible for other services such as Housing, Education and Social Services.

By contrast in Birmingham the EM would not be responsible for Transport, Fire and Police which are organised regionally. He would have no regional authority. He would be responsible for the vast range of other services only in Birmingham.

I have established that Birmingham does not need an EM and that the comparison with Boris is misleading and irrelevant.

Some years ago we did hold a referendum in Birmingham and the people voted in favour of the Leader and Cabinet system. Ever since, the local press has campaigned for an EM. They spent large sums of money with articles almost daily but still they failed dismally to gain the necessary support. Recently Sean Simon, the leading Labour Wannabe EM says he has knocked thousands of doors but found minimal interest.

Of course the Wannabes want the job. At present the Leader receives £65000 and must retain the support of councillors to retain his job. The EM will no doubt take at least £100000 and will have the job for 4 years even if he/she proves incapable. He / she may also appoint many additional advisers from outside the local government civil service."

(to be continued)