Cllr James Hutchings' case against a directly elected mayor in Birmingham continues...
"The extra cost is a factor but not the main reason to oppose the proposal. The biggest objection is the concentration of power in one person without let or hindrance. At present the Leader has to report monthly to his political Group and to the full Council. Similarly the Prime Minister has to retain the confidence of the House of Commons - thus Margaret Thatcher had to resign when she lost support. It is called Representative Democracy. Even in the private sector the CEO of a FTSE company has to account regularly to his Board of Directors
In contrast the EM will only be accountable to the electorate after 4 years and then only if he wants to stand again. A really strong press could help to hold him to account but unfortunately our local press now has a small circulation and fewer good journalists.
Local councillors will be increasingly marginalised. That may not sound a bad idea to some but access is important. People do come to their councillors on large and small matters and expect their councillors to be knowledgable and to help. In a city of a million people few, apart from the Great and Good, will have the opportunity to meet the EM whereas many talk to their councillors.
Lord Heseltine speaks eloquently of how Governments have for decades centralised power in London and that this Government is determined to decentralise power to EMs. I support the intention to decentralise so let us get on with it – devolve power to the Councils – there is no need to wait for EMs.
The Government have not told us what powers will be devolved – they want to discuss the matter with the EM. We are now face the ridiculous referendum to vote for having an EM not knowing what powers will be devolved – a pig in a poke.
Those who have enjoyed “Yes Minister” may doubt whether the mandarins will readily give up their control of the purse strings.
Lord Adonis denigrates Birmingham education and complains that it was like “pulling teeth” to introduce his bright new ideas. We can all sympathise with his impatience but it does take time in a democracy to convince a large and partly hostile education service. Besides, while our education results are not good enough, they are as good as the national average despite our large population with English as a second language; they are above the national average for disadvantaged children. Lord Adonis should pull the teeth of his friend the EM of Leicester which has very inferior results.
No doubt a local dictator would be good at making quick decisions but he might not always be omniscient or benevolent to all interests. The local press says the EM “Must be a Big Figure”. The likely candidates include the local party leaders so no change there! Even if the Big Figure does emerge this first time I doubt that they would continue to emerge in future when they experience the hard slog of delivering so many services with little glamour.
There has been no evidence of better governance under EMs – to date some like the monkey mascot at Hartlepool have done well enough while others like Stoke and Doncaster have failed. Is it not foolish to vote for a system with no evidence of improvement but with no way back?
I conclude that we do not need the cost, risk and disruption of a new system which concentrates too much power in one person and is not evidence based.
Of course the present arrangement is far from perfect. Public ignorance and indifference are perhaps the strongest cause for criticism. The most urgent need is to change the election cycle. Few except activists understand the present system whereby we have local elections in 3 years out of every 4. Instead we should have all out elections every 4 years. That would be simple and understandable. Candidates could campaign on a clear 4 year manifesto.
Because the process would be clear and understandable people would know what they were voting for and public interest would revive."
No comments:
Post a Comment