Author Topic: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?  (Read 27075 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline komadori

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1445
    • komadori's green corner
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #60 on: June 16, 2008, 10:46:43 PM »

It's called democracy.


As is the current system.
If something's worth doing it's worth doing in green. komadori's green c

Offline swindonlad

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 92
    • Vote UK Discussion Forum
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #61 on: June 18, 2008, 07:48:56 AM »
article by the 4 group leaders at the local government association on their views of elected mayors (found from another board)

http://www.lga.gov.uk/lga/core/page.do?pageId=702498

Offline Geoff Reid

  • Twitter: @Geoff_Reid
  • Active But Odd
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10105
  • Gender: Male
  • Bald as a chimps arse
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #62 on: June 20, 2008, 08:33:41 PM »
 

It's called democracy.


As is the current system.

S'true enough, although as far as creating Mayors is concerned one is vastly more so, (from an electors perspective), than the other.  :)

Offline Chav

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2385
  • Gender: Female
  • INNIT!
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #63 on: June 21, 2008, 10:32:12 PM »
Now me finks that Swindon needs a Chav as Mayor innit!

Apart from anyfing else at least the bling would look good innit yeah!
But meanwhile ......................somewhere in Swindon, spotted on the Views from da Hill website


Our one n only Mr W and Mary Ratcliffe....................... Wot a woman !

                                    Chav  :angel: :angel: :angel:
"Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects." -- Lester B. Pearson.

Offline swindonlinkman

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 522
  • Gender: Male
  • The best read publication in town
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #64 on: June 27, 2008, 12:12:05 PM »
The worm turns. Looking back through Swindon Link magazine, I find reports from late 2001 on the council's consultation on whether Swindon should have an elected Mayor. In November 2001 the headline is:

"Swindon to continue shambolic cabinet system, after 56% of citizens panel support directly elected mayor
Petition launched demanding referendum

As the business of the Swindon Borough Council degenerated into chaos on 27 September (2001) after the controlling Labour group resigned following a vote of no confidence, the irony of a decision taken at the very same meeting escaped notice when councillors voted to continue with the leader and cabinet system of local government."


To read the full reports, open up the attached pdf.

Bear in mind that the Conservative group has been in charge of the council ever since, consolidating its power at local elections. Over seven years later, the June 2008 cabinet agreed to implement the report 'Connecting People, Connecting Places' which recommends that the council becomes more answerable to the electorate by becoming more visible and accountable at a local level. The report is attached.

[attachment deleted by admin - Older than 365 days]

Offline swindonlad

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 92
    • Vote UK Discussion Forum
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #65 on: June 27, 2008, 01:12:27 PM »
Bear in mind that the Conservative group has been in charge of the council ever since,


may 17th 2002 labour took over the leadership again
http://ww2.swindon.gov.uk/moderngov/Data/Council/20020517/Minutes/$Minutes.DOC.pdf

Offline swindonlinkman

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 522
  • Gender: Male
  • The best read publication in town
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #66 on: June 27, 2008, 06:24:59 PM »
Thanks for the clarification, though Labour's days in power were numbered. Was it relevant for that short time?

Offline ZPW

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1318
  • Bob Wright better do a stellar job
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #67 on: June 27, 2008, 08:12:21 PM »
From Connecting people, connecting places ( link three posts afore in the worm turning post)


Quote
3.1.2. Swindon residents can better influence decision-making
We want to develop a range of ways to enable local people to influence
what happens and how it happens in their area. We see this as an
opportunity for on-going dialogue about services, and not just a one-off
consultation.
l

'twould seem that the council itself should welcome a referendum on KLFQs new job.
What better way of showing residents that it welcomes full and informed input that a vote on the way the town is run?
An elected Mayor would certainly get on-going dialogue from the peeps. and as we know from the previous survey  56% of those previoulsy engaged wanted and elected Mayor in one guise or another.


KLFQ for Mayor  KLFQ for Mayor KLFQ for Mayor KLFQ for Mayor KLFQ for Mayor KLFQ for Mayor KLFQ for Mayor KLFQ for Mayor

Offline swindonlad

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 92
    • Vote UK Discussion Forum
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #68 on: July 04, 2008, 05:39:56 PM »
FWIW bury voted whether to have an elected mayor & voted no, well the 18.25% of the electorate who voted...

10,338 yes
15,425 no

electorate: 141,740

(looks like 105 spoilt papers, to get back to the turnout figure)

so in % terms:
 7.29% yes
10.88% no
 0.07% spoilt their papers
81.76% could not be bothered to vote

Offline Geoff Reid

  • Twitter: @Geoff_Reid
  • Active But Odd
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10105
  • Gender: Male
  • Bald as a chimps arse
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #69 on: July 05, 2008, 01:14:48 AM »
 
In stark contrast to Swindon Lads cherry picked Bury example, Hartlepool's 2005 Mayoral elections saw 51% of the electorate turn out to re-elect Stuart Drummond. Fact.

Bury is a poor example anyway. Local tv found that very few people in Bury even knew there was a referendum happening.

Having no knowledge of an event isn't the same thing as 'not being bothered to vote'.

Having recently spent the best part of three days reading and understanding the review panel report on the 2001 SBC 'changes to local government' consultations, I reckon I can spot a suspicious 'statistic' being offered as 'proof' of lack of support or interest from a long way off.

And "81.76% could not be bothered to vote" is a bald assumption obviously made without researching the history and background of the Bury referendum.

I expected better from you SL, that was lazy.

Try harder, and be sure the ice will bear the weight of your argument before you step on it.  :)
 

Offline komadori

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1445
    • komadori's green corner
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #70 on: July 05, 2008, 11:23:17 AM »
In stark contrast to Swindon Lads cherry picked Bury example, Hartlepool's 2005 Mayoral elections saw 51% of the electorate turn out to re-elect Stuart Drummond. Fact.

Your choice of Hartlepool looks like an equally ripe cherry to me.

Having recently spent the best part of three days reading and understanding the review panel report on the 2001 SBC 'changes to local government' consultations, I reckon I can spot a suspicious 'statistic' being offered as 'proof' of lack of support or interest from a long way off.

If you're good at spotting suspicous statistics, why are you comparing the turnout for a vote to decide whether to have a directly mayor or not with the turnout for a vote to choose between mayoral candidates? They are not the same thing, by a long way. One is a vote for a particular form of governance, the other is a vote for a particular person to do the governing.

be sure the ice will bear the weight of your argument before you step on it.  :)

Quite.
If something's worth doing it's worth doing in green. komadori's green c

Offline swindonlad

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 92
    • Vote UK Discussion Forum
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #71 on: July 05, 2008, 03:32:37 PM »
re: bury, i perhaps should have added - yesterday bury voted against, as the election was held on thursday- hardly cherrypicking, more reporting the latest vote on this

Offline Geoff Reid

  • Twitter: @Geoff_Reid
  • Active But Odd
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10105
  • Gender: Male
  • Bald as a chimps arse
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #72 on: July 05, 2008, 04:19:20 PM »
 
why are you comparing the turnout for a vote to decide whether to have a directly mayor or not with the turnout for a vote to choose between mayoral candidates? They are not the same thing, by a long way. One is a vote for a particular form of governance, the other is a vote for a particular person to do the governing.

Indeed, thanks for pointing that out. It was the middle of the night when I posted that and should have been more specific.

The referendum is just a simple yes/no, although Swindon Lads 81.x% 'couldn't be bothered to vote' seems to indicate he thinks a local referenda on this issue are a waste of time.  Actually, I know what his views are on the subject are, what I don't know is why he won't publish them. 

My point is, that a low turn out in a referendum doesn't indicate that there will be a lack of interest in subsequent Mayoral elections, e.g Hartlepool.



At this point though, the debate needs winding back to 2001, to examine how and why Bawden, Bates and Evemy shafted the electorate of Swindon in 2001.  Once that little gem is cleaned and polished we can move on to finding out whether the same support for an elected Mayor exists in Swindon now as in 2001, and whether we'll be having an electorate triggered referendum.

There won't ever be a Council led referendum, Councillor Bluh has made that quite clear to me today  :).

 

Offline Terry Reynolds

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2692
  • Gender: Male
  • `13 years of lies lies, sleaze porn 10p fiascos, m
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #73 on: September 09, 2008, 08:08:22 PM »
This petition seems a bit strange to me, why change for the sake of change, the system we have has worked for years with no real harm done, if this country can be run by a Prime Minister who is elected behind closed doors by a load of what now seems to be backstabbers, why should we resort to this, lets get on with running the town and continue the job in hand, forget silly remarks by the north swindon mp, if nothing has been wrong in the last fiver years as he says, what went on before that for 18 years, and he said nothing about it!.
lets have a petition to get two MPs who will vote for the people of Swindon and not what the lobby fodder tell them to vote for....

Offline Tobes

  • Regents
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4951
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #74 on: September 09, 2008, 09:41:01 PM »
Kohima - are you being ironic?

Quote
the system we have has worked for years with no real harm done,

juxtaposed to -

Quote
if this country can be run by a Prime Minister who is elected behind closed doors by a load of what now seems to be backstabbers, why should we resort to this,

You [apparently unwittingly?] are making the most powerful argument as to why this change to our local system SHOULD go ahead!

I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it - [attributed to] Voltaire... 'Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessita' - William of Occam.... 'You have a right to feel offended, but just cos you are offended doesn't mean you are right'

Offline Alligator

  • Twitter - @Alliflowchart
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1846
  • Gender: Male
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #75 on: September 10, 2008, 08:50:37 AM »
This petition seems a bit strange to me, why change for the sake of change, the system we have has worked for years with no real harm done.......

That's a very subjective view.  What may be no real harm to you, may be seen very differently by others.  Personally I think what happened in 2001 when the council chamber pushed through this mode of governance without a debate did do real harm to democracy, so, in my view harm was done.

if this country can be run by a Prime Minister who is elected behind closed doors by a load of what now seems to be backstabbers, why should we resort to this,
Something being inadequate at national level isn't an excuse for inadequacy at local level

lets get on with running the town and continue the job in hand

Who are you directing this towards?  when you say 'lets get on with running the town', do you mean 'let us getting on with running the town'?  If so can you let me know who us is?.......Afterall we (the people) don't run the town, it is currently run by the appointed leader of the largest party in the chamber, someone with a mandate from only 1300 voters in Swindon.

I'm not sure if your statment is a rallying call or a plea, but whatever it is, it makes you sound like a politician with a party political vested interest.   :-\

Offline Terry Reynolds

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2692
  • Gender: Male
  • `13 years of lies lies, sleaze porn 10p fiascos, m
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #76 on: September 10, 2008, 06:13:14 PM »
Our MP thinks that in the last 5 years only, has there been mistakes which nobody has taken the blame for, so why bring up 2001, Mrs BATES WAS A WOMAN OF HER OWN MAKING, that was how Labour run this council in those days, when I say lets get on with running this town, I mean the council and those who take an interest in the town, it doesnt mater how many votes he had, (he had more than the rest), he is the elected one by a system that has been around for yonks and not a lot wrong with that as I see it, the fact that back in labour days, they pulled a fast one, is neither here nor there. Ask Mrs Bates what she did the with 90 million they got for the Brunel centre....

Offline Critique

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 65
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #77 on: September 10, 2008, 06:31:58 PM »
If I remember right the bulk of the £90 million from the sale of the Brunel went to fund a shortfall in the council's pension fund. Why was there a black hole? Because Michael Heseltine, the Environment Secretary in Margaret Thatcher's 1980s Tory government, allowed council's to take a holiday from paying into pensions fund in order to keep rates down (or had council tax been introduced by then?).

History caught the council out on that occasion. Ignoring another historical cock up when the political elite of the town conveniently ignored the majority view in favour of an elected mayor in the consultation of mid-2001 is unacceptable.

Offline Alligator

  • Twitter - @Alliflowchart
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1846
  • Gender: Male
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #78 on: September 10, 2008, 06:40:46 PM »
Our MP thinks that in the last 5 years only, has there been mistakes which nobody has taken the blame for, so why bring up 2001, Mrs BATES WAS A WOMAN OF HER OWN MAKING, that was how Labour run this council in those days, when I say lets get on with running this town, I mean the council and those who take an interest in the town, it doesnt mater how many votes he had, (he had more than the rest), he is the elected one by a system that has been around for yonks and not a lot wrong with that as I see it, the fact that back in labour days, they pulled a fast one, is neither here nor there. Ask Mrs Bates what she did the with 90 million they got for the Brunel centre....

Erm I'm not really sure what you're attempting to say here, but I'd say bringing up 2001 is highly relevant because that was when the council chamber passed the motion to adopt a style of governance which wasn't the preferred model of the majority of the people surveyed.   It was also the night when the council passed from Labour control to Conservative control, so I'm not sure that you could say it was just Labour that pulled a fast one.

I don't see the debate on an elected mayor as being about the actions of any of the leaders, past or present, it's not even about which party you support.  It is about who gets a say in who leads the town.   

The number of votes is clearly important to any model of governance that claims to be democratic.  The fact is that, under the current system, the leader, or any councillor that may become leader, will only have a mandate as a local councillor for a small area of the town and that mandate is only likely to have come from a couple of thousand voters. Therefore I see that the issue of how many votes they have, and what those votes were for, is a very key point.

Not one single Swindon voter has been asked to give any politician in Swindon a mandate to lead the town.  The sad thing is that today being leader of the town comes as a secondary 'fringe' benefit of being the leader of the largest group in the chamber.  Hardly a recognition of, and appreciation for, the importance of the role, but I suppose it is well suited to the interests of the main political parties, which may go some way to explain their actions in 2001.

Offline Tobes

  • Regents
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4951
Re: Should Swindon have its own Boris, Brian or a Ken?
« Reply #79 on: September 10, 2008, 07:19:24 PM »
Quote
Our MP thinks that in the last 5 years only, has there been mistakes which nobody has taken the blame for, so why bring up 2001

Which MP is that? You seem very well informed about the specifics of this MPs view...  ;)

Quote
when I say lets get on with running this town, I mean the council and those who take an interest in the town,

So, Ali, I and plenty of others who take an interest in this town don't qualify, because we take a different stance to you  eh? I'd say that debating this issue is very much about the interests of the town - as is our wish as ordinary members of a disenfranchised and largely disengaged electorate to be fully and effectively represented.

Quote
I don't see the debate on an elected mayor as being about the actions of any of the leaders, past or present, it's not even about which party you support.  It is about who gets a say in who leads the town.


Hear hear.

Quote
Erm I'm not really sure what you're attempting to say here

It looks to me like an obviously politically partisan attempt to drag the debate off into an irrelevent direction...
I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it - [attributed to] Voltaire... 'Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessita' - William of Occam.... 'You have a right to feel offended, but just cos you are offended doesn't mean you are right'