Some choice for York – “Wild Bunch” or “Trotsky’s chums”?

It looks like the coalition, that has run the Council for the last 3 years, will be coming to an end.

The faction that plunged daggers into the back of the last Tory Leader are now re-sharpening their blades. They hope to cut into core public service standards in the City. Four right wingers, emboldened by national changes in the Tory party, are demanding low (or zero) Council Tax increases funded by a widespread close down of public services like libraries. They are disparagingly referred to by other, more moderate, Tories as the “Wild Bunch”.

On the other side of the Council, new Labour Councillors lack experience and historical perspective. They embrace a high tax, high borrowing philosophy. They cite “austerity” as the cause of all evils without actually explaining how any alternative would be funded (or even allowed by central government). Despite adopting locally the Corbynite tactic of never quite explaining their policies (e.g. Europe, single market, tax etc), the Labour group is clearly now far to the left of anything seen in the City during the last 60 years. Many experienced, moderate Labour representatives have quit, or are likely to face the “Momentum” ice pick, before the May 2019 Council elections.

So should the LibDems seek to reach an administration agreement with either of these Groups?

The answer is probably “yes”.

The City faces a difficult year. It is a time when Councillors, from all sides, should put York first. That inevitably means compromise and ideally seeking a broad consensus on dealing with issues.

The Council can now choose to revert to the committee system which was used to run the City until 1995. Councillors from all parties (and none) would be more directly involved in the decision making processes

Council officials – some of whom must bear some of the blame for the current crisis – will need to burn the midnight oil if an alternative constitutional model is to be made available in time for the Council’s annual meeting, which is scheduled to take place on 24^th May.

They will not start with a blank sheet of paper.

There are many other Local Authorities who now operate using the committee model. These include the Nottinghamshire County Council (Tory/Ind majority), Kingston (Conservative), Sutton (LibDem), South Gloucestershire (Conservative), Brighton and Hove (Green when Committee system adopted, now NOC), Newark and Sherwood (Conservative), Barnet (Conservative), Norfolk (Conservative, NOC when Committee system adopted) & Reading (Labour)

Numerous smaller authorities never changed to the “Cabinet/Leader” governance model.

Some councils have chosen to create versions of the Leader/Cabinet system (which means that they do not require a formal change under the Act) that include aspects of the committee system.

The most common arrangement is to set up non-decision making group of councillors, usually corresponding to cabinet portfolios, which examine papers and make recommendations about how decisions should be made. This system worked in a balanced Council in York between 2007 and 2010 (Labour then decided that they would not participate) The decisions are subsequently made at meetings of the cabinet or by individual cabinet members, and may well follow the recommendations of the ‘committees’ although they are not legally required to do so.

Either way, it is time to put personal and party ambitions to one side and do what is best for the City.

Quandary for programme organisers at York Rose Theatre

Yesterdays York Council meeting has piled pressure on the Artistic Director, of York’s soon to be unveiled Rose Theatre, to change the published cycle of Shakespearean plays.

A virtuoso audition at last nights York Council meeting, by former Tory Council Leader David Carr, could see Julius Caesar added to the theatre bill.

Caesar famously abolished the democratic traditions of Rome’s senate before declaring himself “Dictator”. Many of Caesars opponents mysteriously disappeared in the process.

It was left to Brutus and other conspirators to end the regime when they stabbed Caesar in the back (and front, and pretty much everywhere else).

Carr is likely to be at a loose end this summer as he has quit the Tory party so may be persuaded to take on the lead role. Who would take the role of Brutus is still to be revealed. Conservative members will be forming an orderly queue.

In the meantime it is to be hoped that York Councillors will quickly get together to agree a new management arrangement. There have been 5 Council Leaders during the last 4 years with another getting within 2 minutes of appointment last night before the daggers were drawn again.

LibDem Councillor Andrew Waller, who was also the York Council Leader between 2008 and 2011, will be the acting Leader for the next week or so.

By now Councillors should have worked out that a more inclusive way of doing business is required in a balanced authority were no party holds more than 28% of the seats.

It is probably too late to reintroduce the “committee system” before next years all out elections.

However, an agreement to form an all party Executive, to guide the City through what is likely to be a difficult year, could be the best way forward.

But that would require all Groups to behave in a constructive way and for the “gladius” to be sheathed for a while at least

A week’s a long time in …York

The decision by York Tory Councillors to ditch the Council Leader last week wasn’t entirely unexpected. Cllr Carr blundered in the summer when he unilaterally sacked two LibDem members of the Executive. At the time the local standards board had not had the opportunity to investigate the allegations that had been made against them.

The arbitrary action set a precedent, so when a Tory Executive Councillor was accused of failing to declare a pecuniary interest in the Local Plan, the Council Leader had little option to sack him as well.

Whether any of the three have committed any offence has yet to be determined, although the Police have said there is nothing to investigate in the case of the two LibDems.

So where does that leave the York Council?

Cllr Ian Gillies is expected to be installed as the new Council Leader on 22^nd February.

He will be the fifth Council Leader that York has had in just over 4 years (Alexander, Williams, Steward, Carr, Gillies).

That is frankly a ridiculous rate of attrition and is damaging not only to relationship within the City but also to York’s reputation at regional and national level.

It takes a new Leader – no matter how experienced – at least 18 months to establish good working relationship both within and outside the Council. Only then can the real work begin.

Cllr Gillies starts with the advantage of being well known in the City. He has a recent successful year as Lord Mayor behind him. He was a major influence in the years between 2007 – 2011 when the Council was also balanced. His view then was that the City should come above politics. He tried the same approach when Labour had an overall majority, facing some criticism from his own side in 2013 when it was becoming clear that the Alexander regime was doomed.

But with scarcely 15 months to go before the next “all out” Council elections, Cllr Gillies effectively faces a damage limitation challenge. Whether he will even be able to repair relations with the LibDems remains to be seen.

So why have things gone so badly wrong over the last few years?

It is mainly a system problem. All out four yearly elections tend to promote a rapid turn over of Councillors. Fewer these days seem to survive for the 10 years or necessary to build the experience necessary for high office.

Recently few have been able to muster more than 4 years’ experience when they became Leader. Cllr Carr set a record, for inexperience, though, taking the most demanding job at West Offices scarcely 18 months after he was first elected.

Annual elections – where a third of the Council is up for re-election each year – would avoid the extreme shifts in support which usually reflect short term disillusion with whichever party is in power nationally.

The other system failure is the Leader model itself.

The model gives substantial powers – including on the spot “hire and fire” arrangements of the executive committee – to one individual. Effectively if Executive councillors don’t follow his or her instructions then an excuse is found to sack them.

The system simply doesn’t work on a balanced Council. Here the subtleties of discourse and compromise are needed to move forward. Unilateral action by an individual simply promotes mistrust.

There is a warning here for those seeking a Yorkshire Mayor. If she or he chooses to, then they could spend 4 or 5 years completely ignoring the wishes of residents, while pursuing policies based on a fundamentalist ideology or sectional interest.

Recent events are likely to lead to a call for the reintroduction of the “committee system” at Council level. Here all issues are debated openly by committees which reflect the overall political balance of the Council.

It promotes openness and consensus decision making.

It won’t come quickly but perhaps by 2019 electors will be ready to accept that the present system simply isn’t working in York.

Clumsy attempt to score political points by York Tory Council Leader

The agenda for the next City of York Council meeting has been published.

The issues being considered are largely anodyne but are remarkable for an inappropriate attack by Tory Leader Chris Steward on that well known local politician “Jeremy Corbyn”

We hold no respect from many for Corbyn’s views, but using York taxpayers resources to criticise the man and his policies is inappropriate. As is the way with the media, many of Corbyn’s claimed views may, in any event, have been exaggerated or taken out of context.

Either way they are not going to be changed in the York Council chamber.

There is a precedent. Until James Alexander took over as Council Leader in 2011, reports produced for, and published as part of Council agenda papers, were determinedly non (party) political in content. Alexander saw himself as an MP in waiting, so he often strayed into commentary rather than reporting facts. But never, to our recollection, in such a naked and partisan fashion.

Even more surprising, the Council Leader’s report makes no mention of the core public service standards now being provided for residents. A list of performance indicators results was presented to a recent Executive meeting.

Failure to review progress may suggest that some of the promised improvements are slow in coming through?

Lack of progress is marked in the customer contact handling services which are presided over by Cllr Steward himself.

Fewer than 80% of telephone calls to the Council were answered in less than 20 seconds during the summer, while those emailing issues through to the Council may wait for up to 7 days before they are forwarded for action.

Cllr Steward chose to appoint an assistant to help him with his work a few months ago. It is time for that arrangement to produce some more obvious value for taxpayers!