Re: Council tax U-turn

In article <memo.20050925020205.2800E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Colin Rosenstiel <rosenstiel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In article <dh4ka6$tcb$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> adam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Adam Gray) wrote:

> > "Colin Rosenstiel" <rosenstiel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:memo.20050924163640.2196X@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > In article <dh26gf$pqe$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > > adam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Adam Gray) wrote:
> > >
> > >> "John M Ward" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > >>
> > >> > For example, Blair & Co inflicting a less democratic "cabinet
> > >> > plus scrutiny" political system on most local authorities
> > >> > makes it look as if local government is less accountable than
> > >> > it once was. The ignorant fall into that trap so easily...
> > >>
> > >> Could you explain how an executive scrutiny split is "less
> > >> democratic"? No? Thought not.

Only a minority of elected members make most decisions, apart from the
non-political (quasi-judicial) functions of licensing and development
control. With licensing, though, members are not even allowed to
represent their residents at the hearings, unlike for planning -- yet
another erosion of participation by elected members..

> > > How about concentrating power in far fewer hands, meaning that
> > > decisions in reality are subjected to less scrutiny and with
> > > fewer chances for councillor input and the chance of amendment?

That's exactly it.

> > Well, fine - except of course you've just perfectly described the
> > old structure Colin

Eh? In those days *all* elected members participated in the
decision-making process; and all political parties on a council were
involved in the debate and decision-making on every topic. Now,
especially with ever more tight deadlimes, even call-in is of limited
usefulness, as it's often too late to change a decision.

> > - flaws to which you can add: dishonest and a bafflement to the
> > public.

> In your opinion. The opposite from what we can see here.

Here too: more disengagement than bafflement, though we have done very
good work with scrutiny since my group took over the chairmanship of the
scrutiny committees and rationalised them (e.g. down from six to four
committees, scarpping a white elephant "co-ordinating" committee in the
process).

> You seem to be judging everywhere by past dodgy practices in London.

I think it's more fundamental than that: Adam tends to judge everything
done by Labour as "good" and just looks for excuses to justify that
stance. It is evident from a wealth of postings in these UK political
groups ober the years.

--
John M Ward - see http://www.horsted.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
Conservative Councillor for Rochester South & Horsted ward, Medway
* Oppose electoral fraud, especially through postal votes
* Scrap the ODPM, SEERA, and the Standards Board for England
* Return all local decisions to local people
.