Labour had the right idea early on. 7 of the 8 members of the Council’s executive committee were not selected by their party for these elections, including the Leader. I’d like to think this was largely in protest at foisting one unitary Council on a Northumberland that wanted two (if there had to be any change at all). Concern has been expressed about the loss of experience. But I think it’s better to have good people than experienced people.
Plus, I think there’s a danger of too much experience of the wrong sort. People inevitably get drawn into the web of Government. It’s easier to worry about internal games than making residents lives better by offering better services or lower costs. Or both
To quote Ken Livingstone “…it is hard to believe that a mayor who has served two terms will have the freshness of approach that is required to stay abreast of such a dynamic city. I therefore recommend no mayor should serve more than two terms”. He said that before he had served two terms; he now wants four. My point precisely. He isn’t fresh: he’s trapped in the web where power matters more than principle.
The four candidates for Bamburgh Division have now been announced: Conservative (me) , Independent (someone who wanted to be the Conservative), Labour, and Lib Dem. Three have been councillors for many years. I’m rather pleased to be the one offering a fresh start by not having been involved before: I know local Government is restricted in what it can do by Central Government but I don’t sense those years of experience have coincided with a big improvement in local government services.
I think there’s a big argument for restricting the length of term of politicians. I can see the need for some exceptions to benefit from experience, although how you would define that is not easy. But there should be a restriction on the number of terms a Councillor can serve. I don’t know if I will be elected. If I am, I think I would only stand for one more term.
Plus, I think there’s a danger of too much experience of the wrong sort. People inevitably get drawn into the web of Government. It’s easier to worry about internal games than making residents lives better by offering better services or lower costs. Or both
To quote Ken Livingstone “…it is hard to believe that a mayor who has served two terms will have the freshness of approach that is required to stay abreast of such a dynamic city. I therefore recommend no mayor should serve more than two terms”. He said that before he had served two terms; he now wants four. My point precisely. He isn’t fresh: he’s trapped in the web where power matters more than principle.
The four candidates for Bamburgh Division have now been announced: Conservative (me) , Independent (someone who wanted to be the Conservative), Labour, and Lib Dem. Three have been councillors for many years. I’m rather pleased to be the one offering a fresh start by not having been involved before: I know local Government is restricted in what it can do by Central Government but I don’t sense those years of experience have coincided with a big improvement in local government services.
I think there’s a big argument for restricting the length of term of politicians. I can see the need for some exceptions to benefit from experience, although how you would define that is not easy. But there should be a restriction on the number of terms a Councillor can serve. I don’t know if I will be elected. If I am, I think I would only stand for one more term.
3 comments:
But what happens if you are elected and you are incredibly popular. Surely you will want to try for another term?
CJ xx
Two unlikely events...?!
Seriously, I think I would want a life.
But we might not let you have one!!
Post a Comment