An elected dictator in the Council House:
Some time this autumn, when the Localism Bill receives Royal Assent, the 11 largest cities outside London - Birmingham, Coventry, Bradford, Bristol, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Nottingham, Sheffield, Wakefield - will have *shadow elected mayors imposed on them, whether they want them or not. The 'shadow' elected mayor will be the leader of the council - all are Labour except Birmingham (Conservative) and Bristol (liberal Democrat). (The exception is Leicester, where the council has already opted for an elected mayor and the Labour
In May 2012 referendums will be held in those 11 cities to decide if they want an elected mayor system. Other local authorities can also hold referendums if they wish. If they vote yes, an election for mayor will be held in May 2013. In the meantime the shadow mayor will remain in office (even, apparently, if the council leadership changes hands). Dictatorial powers The Localism Bill gives the elected mayor dictatorial powers. The mayor: • is in office for four years and cannot be unseated by a vote of council members; • appoints the cabinet (if a cabinet system is adopted after a mandatory referendum); • it can be as few as three members. Cabinet members do not even have to be councillors, so they could include local • also becomes (if a cabinet system) the chief executive of the council, in charge of the council's head of paid services; • holds all the reins of council power, in charge of, among other things, transport, policing and economic development, with the power to make policy. The council would only be able to overturn a proposal put forward by the mayor if at least two-thirds voted against; • sets the budget, again only subject to council veto by a two-thirds majority; • has the power to hire and fire chief officers, a sanction previously in the hands of a committee of senior councillors. Puppets of government Although elected mayors would be dictators in the council house they would be puppets in the hands of central government. In spite of the spurious rhetoric of 'the new localism', the Localism Bill gives councils no significant new powers, especially not the power to raise income. Local authorities will remain largely the delivery agents of government policy.
In fact the Bill increases government control because it gives the Secretary of State the power to require a council that has an elected mayor and cabinet style of governance to transfer 'local public service functions' to the mayor. There is a very broad definition of this phrase. It includes any function of a public nature where it relates to a public service in the local authority's area or to the inhabitants of the area. This would include the transfer or shared use of property, rights and responsibilities, including employees, from
Under this elected mayor system the role of councillors would be reduced to scrutiny, coupled with constituents' casework. Under the present system scrutiny committees are largely toothless, placing few constraints on the executive. Under an elected mayor they would be even more
15 * Britain The powers of shadow elected Mayors Perhaps the most cynically undemocratic feature of the government's proposals is that almost all of the powers of an elected mayor would be available to the 'shadow' elected mayors, starting this autumn, before there is even a referendum, let alone the election of a mayor in 2013. They are treated as elected mayors except that the obligation to become CEOs and the ability to issue policy reports does not apply.
In reality this is unlikely to happen because it would be seen by the public as a coup d'etat, pre-empting the public vote, and provoke a hostile backlash. Also most local politicians are against it - in fact against elected mayors. For example, Nottingham Labour's Jon Collins says "it's a stupid policy; it was stupid when Labour
page 16 of the scan
16 Why the left should oppose elected mayors proposed it, it's stupid now. Having an elected dictator is not the best way forward." But not just the 10 Labour council leaders; Mike Whitby, Tory leader of Birmingham Council, is also strongly
But if the shadow mayor waits until May 2012, and the electorate votes yes to an elected mayor system in a referendum; then the shadow mayor, bolstered by the popular vote, would have the option of proposing to the council to move towards 'mayoral management arrangements'. These are that the mayor is the most senior officer of the council; that the council's head of paid service reports to the elected mayor; and that the shadow mayor can issue policy action reports. The proposal could only be overturned by a two-thirds majority of the council.
Will there be a yes vote in the referendums? In general, public consultations have shown little interest, and in most cases opinions for and against elected mayors seem to be fairly evenly divided. It is true that elected mayors didn't do well under Labour. Out of over 30 referendums only 13 voted yes, and several local authorities have subsequently abandoned elected mayors and returned to the old system. But the increased powers given by the Coalition government to a single all-powerful and easily identifiable leader, directly elected by the people, apparently above the impotence of petty party politics and able to break through council bureaucracy - may prove attractive to those who don't recognise that the root causes of the malaise of local government lie in the subservience of the local state to capital, mediated by a neo-liberal central government. Elected Mayors are good for business This is precisely the populist message being sold by Cameron, but his agenda is clear. Elected mayors are good for business. Those companies which contract for local government services have made no secret of their support for the mayoral system (as Andy Richards noted in January 2010 on the Socialist Resistance website). Capita, perhaps the biggest, stated in evidence to a House of Lords committee that they like the idea of "a strong leader who can personally commit the council making it easier for firms like theirs to develop partnerships". In other words, dealing with a single business-oriented politician who can act without reference to anyone else makes it much more convenient for firms like Capita to win contracts for local government services.
Not only are elected mayors good to do business with, they are a way of actually recruiting leading business people into local government without them needing to get involved in the messy demands of local party politics. That is the model represented by Michael Bloomberg, billionaire businessman and Mayor of New York, invited by Cameron to speak at the 2007 Conservative party conference. Labour's elected Mayors - working class tribunes or business ambassadors? What about Labour? Millbank will want to ensure that Labour mayoral candidates are reliable acolytes of Miliband, and will no doubt manage local selection processes accordingly. Labour candidates are likely to share the Tories' priority of gaining business support. For example, in Birmingham the front runner is ex-local MP Sion Simon. According to the Birmingham
"He's been holding a series of meet Sion soirees, where Labour supporters, those with no political affiliation, and local business leaders get the chance to have a Although elected mayors would be dictators in the council house they would be puppets in the hands of central government. In spite of the spurious rhetoric of 'the new localism' the Localism Bill gives councils no significant new powers drink with the would-be Mayor and find out where he stands on the major issues of the day. MP's, trade union leaders and constituency Labour parties are being lined up to support him. All in all, his bandwagon is beginning to roll and you have to imagine it will become increasingly difficult to stop Sion Simon from getting the Labour Mayoral nomination."
Simon promised that his cabinet would be a "very inclusive coalition that has to include the business sector". He proposed in a speech to the Chamber of Commerce in 2011 that he could appoint private sector advisors with delegated powers to take executive decisions.
The pressure on elected mayors is to adopt the role of civic ambassador. This entails abandoning any notion of conflicting class interests at the heart of the city and promoting a sanitised and business-oriented public relations image of the city based on an imaginary consensus. For Simon:
"One of the key jobs of an elected mayor is to speak for the city. To be the voice of the citizen. To lead the discussion on who we are, what we stand for, what makes us special. And then to lead the process of articulating and distilling that sense, and then taking the message out to the rest of the country and the rest of the world." the government's policy of elected mayors is to strike a further devastating blow to what remains of local democracy. On those grounds, whoever is the likely winner of an election locally, the left should call for a no vote in the referendum. However, if there is a yes vote in 2012, the task is to use the election in 2013 to campaign for left policies. One obvious option is to stand left candidates, perhaps on an anti-cuts and pro-democracy basis, and the Supplementary Vote system which will be used means that voters can vote for a left candidate first and labour as transferable second preterence.
But the campaign needs to start now. Already party candidates are jockeying for selection. The left needs to raise the issues around elected mayors in the unions and the community. Warning of the dangers is vital but not enough. Everyone knows that the existing system of local government is profoundly undemocratic. The government claims that elected mayors are more democratic: we need to develop a radical credible alternative which combines independent popular self-organisation and action with forms of local governance which enable public participation in decisionmaking.