Consistent with its interfering ways, the last Labour Government prescribed two political leadership models for local councils. They required us to choose between the strong leader model and the directly-elected executive mayor model, which is why the Council is currently out to public consultation on the matter.
To be fair, I can see the advantages of strong leadership models over the old committee system of decision-making. The latter method could make local government seem even slower to act than it actually was in the public perception.
Of the available options, the directly-elected executive mayor option can provide some real issues. The successful candidate would not be a councillor and might therefore have no real experience of local government. I can appreciate that some people might see that as an advantage but it can work the other way as well.
The executive mayor would appoint a cabinet of between two and 10 members including themselves and this decision-making body could have any political composition. It could fly in the face of the most recent Council election results and ignore their outcome by picking any councillors. Such Cabinet picking is not always that effective. We have seen London Mayor, Boris Johnson, work through quite a few duff appointments in a short space of time.
Crucially an executive mayor appears to be all-powerful. I am not aware of any mechanism for removal during their term of office. This is an unusual situation in a democratic system. Even the President of theUnited Statescan be impeached as we (almost) saw with President Richard Nixon in 1974.
The absence of a clear line of accountability to the public is complemented by a lack of enforceable accountability to elected councillors. They have no sure means of amending or blocking executive mayor decisions either. It really is a very strong position and a classic example of the over-concentration of power in one pair of hands.
Although with some inevitable personal bias, I do support the indirectly elected leader model. Under legislation, this now has to be for a nominal four-year term, like the executive mayor. The difference is that the indirectly elected leader, appointed by councillors, is accountable to them and must continue to enjoy the support of the political group(s) who appointed them. If a leader acts unreasonably, they can be removed. In particular they cannot abuse the system of appointing a cabinet because there is ultimately some sanction against them.
This is how it should be in democratic politics with a system of checks and balances to prevent the unbridled wielding of absolute power.
Councillor Bob Lanzer, Leader of Crawley Borough Council
20th October 2010