It may be that just one of the appointments that Bob Wellington, the labour leader made in May 2008, was illegal, because the chair of the audit committee should be elected by the councillors on that committee. I think that the way the other appointments are made, probably legally, is totally wrong and undemocratic.
The appointments are made by the leader, they are voted for as a package and as the majority of the councillors are included in the package, which includes over £8000 per year extra allowance for each of them, they vote for it. Then, to keep that allowance, they, almost always, vote for every other thing in the way that the leader recommends. Historically anyone who seriously rocks the boat on any major issue is excluded from positions offering an extra allowances and sometimes deselected and/or excluded from the labour party. (Alastair Cunnington can testify to this)
The leader is in a job for life. It is virtually impossible for someone to challenge him. The last leader was decidedly dictatorial, largely disliked and not respected by even labour councillors, let alone the rest of the borough. However so strong an influence has the leader over the lives of his flock that the only challenge made to the previous leadership was doomed to failure, with the challenger sent to the naughty step, with reduced allowances, for a considerable time.
The three Plaid and the two independents who are currently supporting the labour leadership are, like it or not, whether they admit it of not, supporting a virtual dictatorship. They say that their support is "to ensure the supply of essential services to the people of the borough" or other such expressions, but that is the officers job. If the ragbag of independents, Liberals, conservatives etc had taken over in May 2008 essential services would not have suffered, officers would have seen to that. I suggest that within weeks that ragbag would have developed into a co-operative bunch of decision makers, the diverse political opinions ensuring that no one person came forward dictating decisions to the rest of the group, (which is what we have with the present leading group).
The deadwood and loudmouths would have been quickly left aside, where as in the current labour regime that deadwood and those loudmouths are paid SRA's amounting to over £8000 each to do little and sing the praises of their leader, or say nothing. Without an opposition this has worked smoothly over the years. BUT IT IS NOT DEMOCRACY!
I invite comments from all sides.
Update 21st of July. The creation of a new committee, at the May 2009 Annual Meeting, apparently with the main purpose of creating an SRA for a labour councillor (Details here) should bring this matter back into the limelight. On all critical votes, with few exceptions, the split is between those that receive SRA's, who vote with the Leader, and those that receive only the basic allowance. Is there anyone who thinks that this is acceptable?
Sunday 24 May 2009
This Is Not Democracy!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I absolutely agree with what you are saying. The nonsense you hear from cll's who try to justify their actions with pitiful statements such as "we acted to provide stable governance" is seen by the electorate for what it is...crap.
The 'coalition' missed a trick after the 2008 election, they should have discussed with labour the possibilties of a coalition with labour. This would have put the 'famous five' in an invidious position, as there would have been the utilisation of the so called...experience of labour.
The situation with the 'independents' is that they are "fighting like cats in a sack" they cannot agree on anything.
How...on earth can you have a party of independents, some were labour, who failed to be nominated in their wards.Some tried to join labour prior to the elections. One has left the group, one is banned, and several are "considering their positions". Hardly a ringing endorsement for change, is it?
It was always said, that to beat an organisation, you need an organisation. This still runs true today.
You say "The 'coalition' missed a trick after the 2008 election, they should have discussed with labour the possibilities of a coalition with labour." Too true, they should have realised that they needed some people with experience and that is any case there are some excellent people on the labour side.
However I have found no reason to believe that the majority, or at least many of the current opposition were not keen on taking over power as much for the sharing out of the additional allowances as for any other reason; maybe the rewards for the extra responsibility are too attractive. (For instance the lowest SRA is more than £5000 per year for chairing a few meetings, how much work is actually involved?)
Maybe the best people don't put up for council, knowing that under the present system, whatever party, they will have very little real say on policy, this being left to the leader, a few of his selected colleagues and officers. If we had a more democratic system maybe more better people will put up, for all sides.
I really think there is no place for party politics in local government these days, it just creates unnecessary petty arguments but suppresses discussion on real issues. Have you looked at "The Fourth Option", a much better system I think.
You say "to beat an organisation, you need an organisation." True again. But to organise you need an organisation, an alliance, a forum, a coalition or whatever, call it what you like, but labour will deride you by saying you are in a "party" and no longer independent. Surely if there is no whip, and an open agreement that you vote with your conscience or based on the opinions of your constituents, then you are still independent.
Its all happening....
Is there any rumour in the next list of defections !!!!!!
...will Ray Williams be the next to leave the Independant Group
...will Doug Jones be the next to follow....
...will the group remain as a group
...will they reform as the Sissors Sisters
who knows???
watch this space.....
Much is happening in Torfaen that can be reported on in the press. most of it is by outside bodies that lend themselves to the council, or are blatantly hijacked for a photo overlay and name mention. It is hard to understand why a large photo of the Torfaen council leader should be in the Argus with the Morrison article. The photograph has absolutely no meaning or value, in no way does it enhance the content of the article, many may say, oh no, not another and become disinterested. These large enterprises need no help, they have real professionals looking after their interests, they do not require persuading to see or understand the potential of an area, they do their homework, they look for where there is a certainty of a good return on their investment, Possibly all the council really means to them, as it does to many others, is the granting of planning permission. Anyone who subscribes to the Argus would certainly recognise the leader of Torfaen C.B.C should they see him on the street. if these publicity seeking look at me politicians saw themselves, as many ordinary citizen see them, they would certainly seek less publicity.
Concerning the Three Plaid and Two Independents who support the Labour Leader, Nutcracker, on another page of this blog, has said...
"Whilst we are talking about labour's co-conspiritors, they should know of the "utter contempt" they are held in by the labout hierachy.
Thick skinned they must be!!!!"
"My contacts within the labour party - no names no pack drill - tell me that in group meetings they are derided.
Unguarded comments by certain members of the heirachy leave it in no doubt that they are being used.
Yes....I can hear you say, we knew that, but I had no inclination that it was as bad has told to me.
I am also told by a member of long standing that they now realise that Bob (bungalow) Wellington is cause of most of the party's ills locally, and are searching for an alternative."
How can this be, even the best of the labour councillors support him without question, and all of them, plus the famous five vote as one.
Post a Comment