New Year Resoluitions?, Thinking ahead for 2013 - Let's abolish the Councils Options

[On the edge]

Time after time in these threads, the reason for not taking action, doing things or even bad administration is put down to the fact that the Councils have very little real power. Everything they touch is severely constrained by legislation or central diktat.

So then, do we really need some 50 WBC councillors plus an extremely well paid full time executive team of 17, not including their personal assistants or departmental staffs, to run this centrally defined almost impossible to change function? Notwithstanding today's economic conditions, this seems to be a very expensive and unnecessary luxury. What do the Councillors actually do that could not just as easily and probably far more efficiently, be done by half a dozen?

This situation is even worse when seen against the rest of our local administration. The Parish Councils have even less power and even less responsibility. Yet in West Berkshire, there are over 50. That does not include Residents Associations, Neighbourhood Action Groups or Police
Commissioners. Take just one parish, Newbury and there are some 20 plus councillors plus a dozen paid staff.

If we are honest about it, the work involved is hardly complex or dynamic. That's not to say most of the work does not need to be done, rather we need to eliminate the over expensive and unproductive executive layers. Arguably, in a geography the size of West Berkshire a single local administrative function is more than sufficient and that still only generate sufficient work for half a dozen councillors.

So then, New Year Resolution - loose some financial weight; lets have one council and six councillors.

[Jayjay]

Time after time in these threads, the reason for not taking action, doing things or even bad administration is put down to the fact that the Councils have very little real power. Everything they touch is severely constrained by legislation or central diktat.

So then, do we really need some 50 WBC councillors plus an extremely well paid full time executive team of 17, not including their personal assistants or departmental staffs, to run this centrally defined almost impossible to change function? Notwithstanding today's economic conditions, this seems to be a very expensive and unnecessary luxury. What do the Councillors actually do that could not just as easily and probably far more efficiently, be done by half a dozen?

This situation is even worse when seen against the rest of our local administration. The Parish Councils have even less power and even less responsibility. Yet in West Berkshire, there are over 50. That does not include Residents Associations, Neighbourhood Action Groups or Police
Commissioners. Take just one parish, Newbury and there are some 20 plus councillors plus a dozen paid staff.

If we are honest about it, the work involved is hardly complex or dynamic. That's not to say most of the work does not need to be done, rather we need to eliminate the over expensive and unproductive executive layers. Arguably, in a geography the size of West Berkshire a single local administrative function is more than sufficient and that still only generate sufficient work for half a dozen councillors.

So then, New Year Resolution - loose some financial weight; lets have one council and six councillors.

Would like to extend this to MP's. With many of our laws coming from Brussells do wwe really need all our MP's?

[blackdog]

So then, do we really need some 50 WBC councillors plus an extremely well paid full time executive team of 17, not including their personal assistants or departmental staffs, to run this centrally defined almost impossible to change function? Notwithstanding today's economic conditions, this seems to be a very expensive and unnecessary luxury. What do the Councillors actually do that could not just as easily and probably far more efficiently, be done by half a dozen?

Their personal assistants and departmental staff consists of one paid assistant - who I would suggest should be paid by the councillors, not the taxpayer (unless they do away with councillor allowances).

This situation is even worse when seen against the rest of our local administration. The Parish Councils have even less power and even less responsibility. Yet in West Berkshire, there are over 50. That does not include Residents Associations, Neighbourhood Action Groups or Police
Commissioners. Take just one parish, Newbury and there are some 20 plus councillors plus a dozen paid staff.

I suspect that Newbury is the only parish council in the area that has any paid staff - hardly a typical example.

If we are honest about it, the work involved is hardly complex or dynamic. That's not to say most of the work does not need to be done, rather we need to eliminate the over expensive and unproductive executive layers. Arguably, in a geography the size of West Berkshire a single local administrative function is more than sufficient and that still only generate sufficient work for half a dozen councillors.

So then, New Year Resolution - loose some financial weight; lets have one council and six councillors.

Half a dozen full time councillors might be able to cope - but that would turn councilloring into a profession filled with full-time politicians (I reckon we have enough of those in and around parliament) and zero opposition. Six 'super-councillors' would be like the current portfolio holders - unaccountable, secretive, and subservient to the council officers who tell them what to do and say.

I would far rather save money by removing any form of pay for councillors (reasonable travel expenses only) and a return to the old system of committees rather than the overpaid anti-democratic portfolio system. I would also like to see a return to a Berkshire County Council and see some savings from the economies of scale. Do away with the district councils in favour of parish councils (perhaps combining parishes into 3 or 4 parish groups).

[Richard Garvie]

Just to touch on "Blackdog's" points:

1) Paid political advisors should not be funded by the council, but councillors and parties instead.

2) I suspect you look at the parish clerks in other parts of the district, let alone other staff who are paid (especially those who work for a town council)

3) No to full time politicians running the council. No to the Lib Dem vision of a talking shop where nothing ever gets done and meetings last for hours (we already have sub-committees). No to a Berkshire CC where West Berkshire will lose out to bigger towns and cities. Yes to parish council's sharing services, but certainly don't want to see them merge into groups as you propose.

My own view would be to reduce the number of councillors and the cost of the administration within West Berkshire Council. I've already provided plans in previous years as to how I would achieve this.

My own personal resolution is to continue to cement Labour's position as the main opposition to the Conservative Party in West Berkshire, consolidating on the result of the last district wide election almost a month ago where Labour came second and the Lib Dems came fourth.

[Andy Capp]

I see a dilemma: the more democratic something becomes, the less gets done; the cheaper something becomes, the less effectual something is. The work that WBC has to do will largely be determined by what government decide they have to do. I have been given the impression that we have one of the more efficient councils compared to the others.

The biggest problem, if there is a problem, is the electorate don't as a whole care.

[On the edge]

Their personal assistants and departmental staff consists of one paid assistant - who I would suggest should be paid by the councillors, not the taxpayer (unless they do away with councillor allowances).


I suspect that Newbury is the only parish council in the area that has any paid staff - hardly a typical example.


Half a dozen full time councillors might be able to cope - but that would turn councilloring into a profession filled with full-time politicians (I reckon we have enough of those in and around parliament) and zero opposition. Six 'super-councillors' would be like the current portfolio holders - unaccountable, secretive, and subservient to the council officers who tell them what to do and say.

I would far rather save money by removing any form of pay for councillors (reasonable travel expenses only) and a return to the old system of committees rather than the overpaid anti-democratic portfolio system. I would also like to see a return to a Berkshire County Council and see some savings from the economies of scale. Do away with the district councils in favour of parish councils (perhaps combining parishes into 3 or 4 parish groups).

The Councils executive team, according to its organisation chart has ;paid full time 'PA's' for the departmental heads. The CEO Nick Carter has two!! Thatcham has paid people so I understand and most Parishes play a clerk.

The present portfolio arrangement makes the existing set up subservient to the officers, there are very few real examples where they go against. Not really surprising, at the end of the day WBC is simply a service delivery machine.

Wholly agree that professional politicians are wholly undesirable. Nevertheless, that's what we have right now and its reinforced by party politics being played at local level. As the degree of influence they have has significantly reduced over time, Councillors have reinvented the role and they have become almost amateur Social Workers. Round here a self perpetuating oligarchy, after all when do we 'the plebs' ever get the opportunity to influence the two main parties in policy terms?

Yes, bringing back Berkshire County Council might be a good idea; but remember at the end of its life, it was hardly an example of good practice! However, with today's technology and the blurring of old boundaries, there is not need for any subsidiary council. Parishes have demonstrated that they can be at best - just glorified waffle shops. They'd be more productive and useful holding the meetings in the local pub.

Lets be really honest, the only reason people really like parishes is to get the lower community charge. From several I know in Reading, there is a degree of resentment about the freeloaders in Calcot and Tilehurst. Similar situation exists in Newbury, and its near neighbours, Shaw, Greenham, Speen.

With most of the public against 'post code lotteries' real localisation simply won't happen. That means local government really becomes the delivery agent of national government. Lets modernise the democratic control on the basis of this new reality. Why don't the ;public give an XXX about local democracy? Simple; because it doesn't exist!

[Andy Capp]

With most of the public against 'post code lotteries' real localisation simply won't happen. That means local government really becomes the delivery agent of national government. Lets modernise the democratic control on the basis of this new reality. Why don't the ;public give an XXX about local democracy? Simple; because it doesn't exist!

Pure democracy wouldn't work well and I'm not even sure democracy is ideal; however, I think most people don't care because they don't see things as being that bad, or they have other things they feel more concerned about.

[On the edge]

Pure democracy wouldn't work well and I'm not even sure democracy is ideal; however, I think most people don't care because they don't see things as being that bad, or they have other things they feel more concerned about.

Think that's probably quite true today. Indeed, that's exactly how local service delivery is configured. So if the paying public are broadly satisfied - lets just make it far cheaper. Eliminate today's democratic overhead, which in reality is simply just adding to the cost and inhibiting efficiency.

[Andy Capp]

That sounds reasonable on the face of it, but I would imagine you risk going too cheap, to the detriment of the quality of service.

[Exhausted]

We need to be clear in our discussions on this thread. The heading is "Let's abolish councils". So, is it the suggestion that we abolish West Berks Council as an entity or just the elected councillors.? WBC have made some fairly high profile slimming moves and there were some redundancies although one will never know if they did everything they said they would. What the council cannot do is remove the possible burden of a large number of elected councillors

The decision making is mainly done by the permanent non elected employees headed up by Nick Carter. Elected councillors are just a front or media spokesmen who crawl out from time to time and make wonderful assertive statements when it's all going well but who have a happy knack of disappearing when the news is not good. This is often apparent when social services screw up. It's always the full time staff who get the blame without the portfolio holder getting a mention.

The reason we have such a large contingent of councillors is the way the elected council is structured. It is based on party political methods as used in Westminster with every portfolio holder having an opposition member who is supposed to look over his/her shoulder. If the party politics were set aside, goodness knows why we need it, the council could be halved and elected members fulfilling the wishes of the electorate rather than that of the top/majority honcho.

The other reason for getting shot of a few of the councillors has to be their lack of knowledge and expertise in the workings of the department they are "responsible" for. Not many civil engineers, architects and professional planners amongst the elected members. They make, at the called in planning meetings, decisions based on those that the planning department tell them to make along with their uninformed (sometimes) gut feelings about some of the more important proposals.

Town councils and Parish councils are not decision makers but it does make for the locals to believe that they can resolve local problems. Generally they are not paid for their efforts. Probably just as well based on the bickering and mud slinging that went on locally recently. Newbury Town Council has some full time employees but these are mainly to do with the administration of the responsibilities that are allocated to NTC. Cemeteries, Parks, grass cutting etc although this could easily be merged into WBC administration. Once again though the town council is made up of party political elected persons so the good quality person who is not affiliated doesn't get a look in at election time.

[blackdog]

The Councils executive team, according to its organisation chart has ;paid full time 'PA's' for the departmental heads. The CEO Nick Carter has two!! Thatcham has paid people so I understand and most Parishes play a clerk.

Nick Carter and the department heads are council officers, not councillors - their staffing structure is an entirely different question. The Conservatives have a group support officer, paid by the taxpayer. I think the Lib Dems also have such an employee.

I'll grant you Thatcham (as many staff as Newbury?) and Hungerford (£45k staff costs last FY). Parish clerks may get a few quid, but there can't be many on much more than expenses.

Wholly agree that professional politicians are wholly undesirable. Nevertheless, that's what we have right now and its reinforced by party politics being played at local level. As the degree of influence they have has significantly reduced over time, Councillors have reinvented the role and they have become almost amateur Social Workers. Round here a self perpetuating oligarchy, after all when do we 'the plebs' ever get the opportunity to influence the two main parties in policy terms?

Our current councillors are not professional politicians (few of them would survive long in that world) - most are retired and a few fit in councilloring with a full time job (obviously helps if you run your own business like Cllr Jones). If you went to six councillors they would surely have to be full time and paid accordingly.

With most of the public against 'post code lotteries' real localisation simply won't happen. That means local government really becomes the delivery agent of national government. Lets modernise the democratic control on the basis of this new reality. Why don't the ;public give an XXX about local democracy? Simple; because it doesn't exist!

Localism can only happen if you devolve power downwards, which I agree won't happen -but if it were to happen there would need to be a structure to which the power could be devolved. If anyone is serious about localism the parish council is the obvious recipient of the devolved power. Small enough to not require a massive infrastructure yet local enough to reflect truly local opinion. Logically one would then abolish district councils and concentrate the service provision aspect of local government at county level. The service provision is diminishing anyway - soon most schools will have left LG control, the remnant of housing provision could be contracted out to housing associations (as most of the old housing responsibilities already have been). Refuse collection has been contracted out, care in the community has been contracted out. What does WBC do in house these days? Soon it will be little more than a contracts department - which may as well combine with the similar contracts departments in the other district councils.