|
Ledbury resident, constituent and tax payer Rich Hadley dropped a metaphorical bomb shell on Ledbury Town council last night when he suggested that the council consider holding elections.
Mr Hadley said that, as there had been rumours circulating about councilors resigning, it would be more democratic to hold elections than to go through a co-option process.
Mr Hadley also suggested, to the sound of scoffing from one councilor present, that the whole council resign en masse, and to hold an election which would enable free and open debate and create a real democratic mandate.
Mr Hadley criticised a council that rarely had elections, but produced councilors through co-option.
Mr Hadley told council "We need the best people, the most competent people [on the council] and... electors need to know what people stand for."
The mayor, Mr Conway, replied to Mr Hadley telling him he was 'happy with his council.'
The deputy mayor, Mr Bradford, described Mr Hadley's words as a 'character assassination' on the council and told him within the council there was 'no conflict.. we debate, we vote, we do not get personal.'
Ward councilor, Mr Watts, asked Mr Hadley if he had considered the cost of an election.
Mr Hadley replied that it was 'a price worth paying for accountability' and that money was set aside for elections. He told council that a 'free and open election' would give 'a statement of democratic aspiration'.
Councilor Roberts, rumoured to be a hopeful future mayor, told Mr Hadley 'people cannot be bothered to turn up' to meetings.
|
Response to a foolish professor (12)
However, times seem to be changing. The huge amount of activism on both sides on the OOTS issue suggests that. Plus, the Localism Bill may well give more power to Town Councils, making accountability more important than ever. Which is why dismissing calls for an election on the grounds that they cost and not many people will vote seems out of touch, to put it no stronger.
To make the sweeping comment that those co-opted have paid back handers to do so is outrageous
However, Rich was making the two points that:
1) There has been an upsurge in interest in the Town Council because of the supermarket issue
2) The powers that the TC will be wielding under the Localism Act are said to be enhanced
This means that public involvement is both more important and more likely than it has been in the past few years.
There has been some misinformed defence of esrtwhile mayoral candidate Roberts in the Reporter, but she is a great example of what we will get if we don't step up to the democratic plate...someone who is prepared to run down our town to make a populist point and who's only defence is that she is willing to give up one night a month to discuss whether we replace the town swing.
Peter Watts' shameful question "how much will it cost?" said it all...especially considering that when i asked the council how much the botched LESS referendum on Supermarkets would cost and was told not to worry as we always had budget for it and the lack of recent elections meant the budget was nice and full...Mr Watts wasn't quite as questioning about his balloon-toting friends.
Is there a good soul out there who could tell me how to get co-opted because I might be interested ..... and so might other, local people.
There is no democracy here, only arrogance and an expectation that 'they' are the chosen ones. Well chosen they might be but it's NOT DEMOCRACY. There should be a full election and every current councillor who wants to stand and face the people of the town should do so. This is not East Germany @ 1970 yet!!!