Skip to main content

Elected Mayors may be scrapped by voters

The fact that there are campaigns in 4 out of the 11 local authorities that have directly elected mayors may get the government to recognise that this is not the solution of all problems of local government.

The reason why directly elected mayors are less sensitive to lobbying by ordinary votesr is that most things they hear are filtered by advisors. Whereas it is relatively straightforward to see your local councillor, getting to see the Mayor is much harder.

The Mayor, therefore, tends to deliver what the bureaucracy want, such as laying down gravestones - an issue in Stoke. (see linked Times Story)

The point about a council leader is that thay are accountable to the councillors hence councillors can force them to change tack on policies that are unwanted and ineffectual.


Bob Piper said…
Spot on, John. I fear the new Local Government Bill due in the Autumn will attempt to foist elected Mayors on regions as part of this latest regional tier of government. None of the Authorities involved want it, but Kelly, like Miliband, will have her hand forced by the PM, who appears to be the only person advocating this nonsense. The carrot of funding will be offered... but the stick will follow for those who don't bite.

The Councils must stand firm. All party unity against this centralising measure.
PoliticalHack said…
We really must stop meeting like this.

The directly elected mayor has a chance of working in London, where you have a large number of councils, but there is a genuine need for an over-arching control over certain issues - transport across the capital can only work with some element of centralised control.

It isn't required in Birmingham, because we have councillors and a council leader. While there are issues that affect the West Midlands as a region, those issues can be dealt with by formal links between councils - the elected mayor would actually be superfluous.

There is a need for effective and imaginative civic leadership in Birmingham - something that the current coalition has signally failed to provide - but that does not justify an additional elected layer of government.
Bob Piper said…
hack... "because... we have councillors and a council leader." Hey... it is not weanted, I agree, but I think you are wide of the mark in calling Whitless a LEADER!

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.

I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…