What price democracy?

Essex County Council has voted in favour of cancelling local elections in May in order to concentrate on a major shake-up of local government.

The decision comes in response to the government announcing its wish to see fewer councils in England and for each region to have its own elected mayor. In the specific case of Essex, the number of local authorities could be trimmed down from fifteen to as few as two, with a new mayor for the county being voted into office in 2026.

As a former London Borough councillor myself I have some misgivings about such centralising plans. In theory, the greatest level of subsidiarity is desirable to encourage grassroots local democracy, working from the parish council level upwards. The reality of that, however, can be cumbersome, time-consuming and expensive. 

For example, in my home borough of Tower Hamlets I recall the introduction in 1986 by the incoming SDP/Liberal alliance council (later Lib Dems) of a new decentralising policy of neighbourhood administration. It may have been well-meaning but it had unintended consequences, not just in the confusing and costly duplication of services but, in 1993, the election of Derek Beackon as a far-right British National Party (BNP) councillor.

Frankly, though, I believe almost as much damage was done to local democracy by Tony Blair's 2000 Local Government Act, which introduced the 'strong leader and cabinet' or executive mayor model into local councils. His rationale was that the existing scrutiny committee structure of local government was unduly ponderous, hampering dynamic action. In his enthusiasm for more rapid delivery, arguably, he threw the baby out with the bathwater. 

The practical effect of his policy, in the council of which I was a member and many others I'm sure, was that, of the sixty elected members, only a handful ended up with a meaningful role. Only cabinet members had any influence, with real power residing in the Leader. The rest of us were, in effect, there simply to make up the numbers. We were the 'poor bloody infantry' who conducted residents' surgeries, dealt with resultant casework, door-knocked and leafletted during election campaigns and made a good show of accountability in full council meetings. For the rest of the time we were, by-and-large, ignored and often belittled.

It was in reaction to this Blairite top-down control freakery that, after two years of growing disillusionment, I resigned the party whip and sat as an independent councillor. It was a liberating experience and, having myself been a local government officer for years prior to my election, I was pleased that the support of a dedicated officer cadre at the Town Hall enabled me to continue to advocate effectively for the community I represented - more so, perhaps, as an independent than as a party member.

Reform in local government is nothing new of course. The London Borough structure of which I was a part and which continues today was introduced in 1965, with smaller borough councils being amalgamated into larger units to form the thirty-two boroughs plus the Corporation of London which still exist. Blair's Greater London Authority Act 1999 reintroduced the pan-London governance structure abolished by Margaret Thatcher in 1986 in an egregious act of doctrinaire spite which left the capital city without an over-arching authority for fourteen years.

On the ground, while the creation of larger authorities can seem attractive and undoubtedly enables economies of scale, avoiding duplication and making procurement and delivery of goods and services more cost effective, the removal of consultative fora can have a deadening effect on local democracy. Monolithic, geographically remote centralised command structures, particularly at county and regional level, risk distancing the electorate from their elected representatives, both physically and psychologically.

At a time when we are witnessing increasingly low levels of voter turnout at elections, especially local ones, any centralising moves which exacerbate this trend must be a cause for concern. The inherent danger is that local government comes to be be seen purely in terms of greater efficiency in the delivery of services. While this is an important consideration it shouldn't be pursued to the detriment of democratic oversight. 

The more remote government becomes from the people, and the more technocratic, the greater the risk of the services it provides being privatised. If we want democratic control over our public services we need our democracy to be as strong and accountable as possible.

And for democracy to remain strong it needs to be accessible.


Popular posts from this blog

A knight's tale - creative non-fiction

England - 1088 'What's a king without a kingdom?' 'A man, sire. And a man fights for what's his.' The king had been thinking aloud and the thirteen year-old lad's unexpected reply to his rhetorical question caught him off-guard. It was a bold response but, rather than being angered, he felt chastened by it. It was profound coming from one so young and junior in his service though prompted, he knew, by genuine love and loyalty rather than impertinence.  At a moment of grave peril so early in his new reign he valued candour, a commodity in short supply at court. He had followed his father, the Conqueror, as King William II less than a year earlier and now faced widespread rebellion. At such a time he could ill afford self-pity, much less self-doubt. He blamed himself for allowing a brief moment of self-indulgence in front of his page.  Since receiving the devastating news at Eastertide of his brother Robert's challenge the lad had been his closest companio...
Read more

Looking to Africa - long read

As I sit here on an island just off the coast of North-West Africa I can't help pondering the future of that vast and seemingly unknowable continent, so near and yet so far. I'm writing this in Tenerife, one of the eight Canary Islands forming an archipelago off the coast of Morocco and Western Sahara - tantilisingly close and yet a world away from the 'mainland' of continental Africa. As an Autonomous Community of Spain, the Canaries form an outpost of the European Union (EU). Yet, despite their proximity to Africa, their outlook, politically, culturally and economically, is resolutely European. Africa may as well be Mars, though only a narrow gulf of the Atlantic Ocean separates these offshore islands from their continent. I say resolutely European but that resolve may, little by little, be weakening. There is a growing sentiment, especially, though not exclusively, amongst young Canarians, that they have been sold a pup. True, the economy is superficially buoyant, du...
Read more

On old age

"The fact is that when I come to think it over, I find that there are four reasons for old age being thought unhappy: First, that it withdraws us from active employments; second, that it enfeebles the body; third, that it deprives us of nearly all physical pleasures; fourth, that it is the next step to death."  Writing his essay,  De Senectute (On Old Age), in 44 BCE, Marcus Tullius Cicero went on to refute these four supposed reasons in characteristically robust and forthright manner. Cicero wasn't one to sit about moping in his own old age; he remained actively engaged in the political life of the Republic whose survival, in the face of tyranny, he championed so fiercely.  Cicero was nine years younger than I am now when he met his untimely end yet he considered himself already an old man; or, rather, his society judged him to be so. His second point about age enfeebling is more germane. Physical decline had not yet impacted him but, six years on from my retirement, I ...
Read more