The forthcoming referendum in May has been imposed by central government alongside suggestions of devolving more power - but only if the result comes out in favour of an elected Mayor - and with a question which appears to be slanted towards the result that the government wants. Such behaviour, not for the first time, shows a worrying lack of respect for the democratic process.
Far from necessarily promoting the interests of Birmingham and its citizens, an elected Mayor, being a single individual, would be easier prey for central government manipulation for their own policy ends - for instance in the context of implementing an agenda of cuts and austerity based on what they see around themselves in London and the South East. It is far from certain that the actions of an elected mayor would be towards mitigating national austerity centred policies. Indeed, given their political persuasion they could amplify them. The Government has already shown its willingness to be manipulative in the context of the referendum.
The impression is often given that business is in favour of an elected mayor. But the views of all businesses as a whole are difficult to assess. 'Business opinion' is spoken of in terms of the views of a handful of 'leaders' who may not be representative of a cross section of the Birmingham economy. Furthermore, these 'leaders' are not of course exposed to elections nor, to put it mildly, can we be sure that they have consulted their employees. Indeed it is possible that corporate employees may be marshalled to campaign for the preferences of the CEO or Board of Directors whether they approve of it or not.
The Chief Executive Officers of companies of course are appointed, and not elected, to positions which have a narrow and self interested commercial focus. As we have seen, the effects of globalisation and 'free trade' (quite different matters) do not always work in the interests Birmingham's industry or its citizens. Chief Executives are used to having things their own way ex officio and with little challenge, a characteristic that does not sit well with representative democracy. For lobbying purposes business leaders may well prefer an executive mayor without a cabinet. Who then would be running the city? There are widely expressed concerns of the possibility of cronyism as has been experienced in the United States.
There is also the question of how many of these prosperous entrepreneurs actually live in Birmingham. Although the answer to this question would be quite difficult to establish, I suspect that it is a minority. Of course, this will not prevent a substantial campaigning outlay (I will not say investment) being made to get the result that they so evidently desire.
There is a danger that with the referendum and the local elections that are due on the same day in May that the 'yes' campaign could deliberately be skewed to contain material designed to cause party political damage to individual politicians known to be opposed to an elected mayor. With the local elections to be held on the same day it will be difficult for active politicians to run an effective campaign against a change of governance arrangements and so risk taking the focus off their candidates in council elections that are likely to be closely contested.
In the present system - and the former committee system - there are three councillors per ward who retire in rotation so that people have a direct say three years out of four. They therefore have three times as many chances to either change control of the council or, through reducing the majority of the incumbent administration, to influence the course of policy. There is also talk in some authorities of making councillor elections once every four years only - thus increasing further the democratic deficit.
It follows from the above arguments that a move to an executive mayoral system is undesirable in Birmingham. This upheaval in local governance should be rejected and the Council should either stay with the Leader and Cabinet model along with the respected and traditional office of the Lord Mayor of Birmingham, undiminished or, even better, restore a (refreshed) committee system which served the city and its people so well.
No comments:
Post a Comment