No Mayor for Manchester

Article published: Thursday, October 1st 2009

It’s a week before the official report on the governance consultation is released, but the City Council yesterday revealed that the proposal to give Manchester an elected mayor have been met with a ‘no’ by two thirds of those responding.

The council, who seem likely to use the result to keep things just how they are, have declared the mayor issue “dead” and complained that they were forced to undertake the £40,000 consultation by central government – true, but it’s funny how they didn’t complain about that beforehand.

There can be plenty of speculation about what the result means, but the real point for discussion is the turnout. Despite over 220,000 leaflets being handed out and adverts splashed across the local media (hell, even we discussed it) just 3,000 people bothered responding. Questions are going to have to be asked.

Gordon Brown has in the past claimed that low turnout for elections is a sign of satisfaction. His Labour comrades in the City Council haven’t wheeled that excuse out yet, but they have pointed out that a lot more people in Manchester responded than in some of the other consultations taking place in other parts of the country – essentially that theirs has been the ‘least bad.’

Firstly, anyone scratching the surface of the consultation process would have doubts about its credibility. There was no guarantee that the council would act in accordance with the views expressed in the consultation. Secondly, the choice was limited. Call it a Mayor or a ‘New Style Leader’ (what we’re likely to have now), both options involve a centralised, top heavy form of government, both options do little to increase the amount of democratic participation which ordinary people get (and that is supposedly the issue at stake here). Instead of squabbling over different ways to concentrate power at the top, the debate should be about how to give more out at the bottom. Participatory budgeting schemes are one potentially interesting idea in this respect – neighbourhood committees get to decide how public money is spent in their area. Salford City Council have been putting this into practice in recent years, but since a small ‘Fallowfield U Decide’ event last year (residents were given a fairly paltry five grand to run events), Manchester City Council seem to have gone quiet on the whole thing!

The important thing now is that this isn’t the end of the discussion on local democracy, but just the beginning.

Tweet

More: Manchester, Opinion

Comments

1. This may be of interest.

   From Power 2010:

   “When he became Prime Minister, Gordon Brown promised to reform our democracy. He said he’d listen. He said he’d learn. But he didn’t act.

   Over two years have passed since then and a few moments ago the PM finally promised a referendum on electoral reform – but not until after the next election.

   This is not enough.

   Our democracy needs change – we want your ideas about how this should happen. Tell us your ideas here:

   http://power2010.org.uk/yourideas

   Bill – our movement just became all the more important. Today the Prime Minister had the opportunity to commit to real change, but he failed to do so. Delivering change now rests on each of our shoulders rather than his. And for POWER2010 to succeed we need to know about the change you want made to our political system.

   After all – this movement is all about you. Together we can change our politics. Tell us your priorities. They could sit at the centre of our national campaign to change how British politics works.

   http://power2010.org.uk/yourideas

   The challenge has been thrown down – it’s up to each of us to meet it. Tell us your ideas now – because we can’t wait for change.

   Best wishes,

   Pam Giddy
   Director, POWER2010″

   Comment by Bill Harrop on October 1, 2009 at 4:39 pm

2. I’m glad it has been rejected – the best that would have come from it is knowing better who to blame – it almost ce3rtainly would have diminished the role of councillors who actually have proper contact with ordinary people and their issues, and would have made politics more about personality and gimmicks – as we’ve seen with Boris in London!

   Comment by lou on October 1, 2009 at 8:57 pm

The comments are closed.