I am relatively new to local politics so I will refrain from trying to discuss the intricacies and make myself look a fool. Thanet Council's new leader Clive Hart is fully committed to working with the other groups at the Council and he is the right leader to bring Labour, the Independents, and the Conservatives together for the good of Thanet.
After eight years in control it was right for a different party to have a chance to take charge, but the nature of the political landscape is one that requires consensual politics. What is needed now is stability, and I believe that Councillor Hart and his newly appointed Cabinet need time to get on with the job of running the Council. I have noticed that Councillor Moores has been complaining already on his blog about the new Labour Cabinet. However I think that every fair minded person would agree that the new Cabinet should be given a chance first, and that attacking them only hours after taking office is pretty ridiculous. The point is that the new Labour administration was elected democratically by Full Council with a plurality of votes.
I hold no executive position within the Labour party or the Council, but if ever the opportunity presents itself to me I will always work with anyone of any party for the good of Thanet. I am confident that this sentiment is shared by nearly every member of Council, but now it is time to put this into practise and implement the politics that the people of Thanet have told us they want by giving no party overall control.
32 comments:
I applaud your overall sentiment Will but democracy did not fare well out of this process. Cllr Worrow was elected as a Conservative and for him and this administration to have any democratic legitimacy he should submit to a by election so that his electorate can endorse a position whereby they elected someone under the Conservative party banner who rapidly went awol and voted for a Labour leader.
That's a very interesting point, but you cannot simply answer it through claims of treachery. Treachery to whom exactly?
Representative democracy has three theories of how representatives perceive their mandate. They are:
-Delegate model where representatives are elected purely to implement the interests of their community.
-Mandate model where representatives are elected on a successful party manifesto and so they should work to implement this.
-Trustee model where a representative is elected with sufficient autonomy to follow their knowledge and experience, i.e. they are elected as the person.
Political scholars tend to favour a hybrid of all three of these theories as the correct model that a representative should follow. So therefore if we follow this advice then Councillor Worrow should in equal measure think about his voters, his party, and his own conscience.
What seems to have transpired is that Councillor Worrow has felt that his conscience has collided with that of his party. His resignation statement would also imply that he is putting the interests of his community first on the issue of parking and live animal exports.
Therefore while you claim that 'democracy did not fare well out of the process' you probably need to clarify precisely what you mean by that. Clearly not all three models have been followed, but Councillor Worrow appears to have followed his conscience and the views of his residents.
Where do you feel allegiance to the party should come in comparison to conscience and the interests of the residents?
Firstly, you used the word 'treachery' not me - perhaps your subconscious speaking for you?! Secondly, you quote political theory in an interesting way whilst missing the point entirely. The point is not what model is or isn't being used or what we would see if we looked into Cllr Worrow's conscience - it is that until the voters have their chance to endorse his move, then his position remains that of someone who has used a political party to gain office and influence only to jettison it within six months of election. No matter which party affiliation, and I recognise that yours has benefitted from this situation, any supporter of genuine democracy cannot surely approve of this state of affairs.
Apologies I didn't mean to put words into your mouth.
The point I was trying to make is that it is not just as simple as that. Who are representatives elected to represent? If its the people of Birchington South then only time will tell if Councillor Worrow is truly working in their interests. If he was elected to represent John Worrow then he is clearly still doing that. However if you believe he was elected to represent the local Conservative party then arguably he has lost his legitimacy. I believe that it is a mixture of all three and as such is not just a case of 'resign now'.
If we were in a system closer to direct democracy then you might have a valid point in calling for a by-election. The system we work under though is representative democracy, i.e. the people elect a representative to make decisions. If the people are not happy with the decisions made by their representatives then they can vote them out at the next election. That is democracy in practice. The Council constitution states that members are elected for four years unless certain conditions are breached - none of which have been.
If we are analysing it on a moral level then you need to specify which interest(s) you deem it most important to represent; party, people or personality. If we are analysing it on a technical level then under the Council Constitution no breach has occurred.
Not an easy situation to look at, and I agree I am biased at the moment because you quite rightly said my side have benefited from it!
When a former Margate Mayor went independent,after being found guilty of animal neglect, their silence was deafening, but when I stand down in support of animal welfare and serious issues that effect REAL people in Birchington, they ask me to call an expensive by-election.
I am on the right side of history!
"Thanet Council's new leader Clive Hart is fully committed to working with the other groups at the Council and he is the right leader to bring Labour, the Independents, and the Conservatives together for the good of Thanet." So why are there no Conservative or Independent Cabinet members?
Will
I have made no comment anywhere on this situation until now. I do so now only because I believe your original points regarding time for a new cabinet are fair and open; and your assertion that the new administration, having made so much in opposition of the accused failure of the previous administration to acknowledge the 'hung' nature of the council, are now faced with the problem of how to make shared power shared, as we were.
As for Mr Worrow, and political theory, no one could be surprised that some would react very angrily to what he has done. Whichever political theory you ascribe to, one cannot claim that the votes in Birchington South were cast in favour of a labour administration, but that is what their votes, through him, have now been used to deliver. How he deals with that is between his conscience and his voters, but his defences are thin, varied, and not all what he complained about when within the party.
Life in Thanet will go on; life in Thanet Council will go on. Since May the Labour group has made many claims that they could do better; we shall all have to wait and see, because they now have their chance.
In some ways I hope the claims are right - because Thanet needs good governance and stable policies during difficult times. We shall all see.wil we not?
There are other ways of working with the groups than just inviting them onto Cabinet.
With the tough budget settlement coming up, it is crucial that all sides work together to get the best settlement for Thanet, and this started at Thursday night's Council. Councillor Everitt put forward a motion that the three group leaders would write a joint letter to the Government requesting a better financial settlement in light of Thanet's situation compared to other Councils. This was agreed by Council and is a positive start for the parties working together for the interests of Thanet.
Only time will tell Chris, and I have faith in the Leader and Cabinet that I voted for on Thursday night.
Hopefully Thursday will have acted as a wake up call to all of us that we need to be less political at Thanet Council (and yes I admit I am probably one of the worst!)
How ironic Will is your swift conversion to less politics when you have the administration. The saddest thing about thursday is the seeming reward of labours highly political opposition in recent months.
That is something upon which we all should reflect.
I really have to agree with Chris on this one!
I'm delighted to hear that Cllr Worrow is on the right side of history and look forward to a resounding performance of 'Tomorrow belongs to me' at the next council meeting!
I better get practicing my role in the chorus then.
Couldn't we do a verse of 'Put on a happy face' instead?
Whichever political theory you ascribe to, one cannot claim that the votes in Central Harbour Ward were cast in favour of a Conservative councillor, but that is what their votes, got by electing a Ramsgate First Councillor in 2007.
It suited Mr Wells, to welcome the former Ramsgate First Councillor, into the Conservative ranks, yet now the shoe is on the other foot he protests.
So you really care about democracy?
Can anyone blame people for thinking that Thanet's Conservative's like to change the rules to suit their own political agenda?
No wonder councillor Worrow decided to put his community before the 'do as I say, not as I do' group!
That's absolutely true anon of 1212am, and Mike Taylor paid for some of that at the ensuing election, in spite of having been a hard working councilor.
I very carefully phrased evrything I said to avoid just such tit for tat mentality - but that is the risk of contributing to blogs at all.
I stated the issue is between Mr Worrow's conscience and his voters; as it was with Mike Taylor and his.
Mr Wells
The difference is, Mike Taylor had no political influence to do things for his ward, and more importantly doesnt have the same political mind as Councillor Worrow, who is a survivor!
Be interesting to see Cllr. Worrow's survival tested at the next election. Assuming that is that he still stands in Birchington as an independent, or might he switch to a safe Labour seat by then. He might as well having been just about everything else.
Returning to more serious matters, like the general good of Thanet, one can but hope that the new administration will deliver. Sadly, though, whatever else it may be, it is certainly not dcemocratic when power is transferred on the vote of a renegade.
Tom
I have no plans to join any poltical party.
Sorry to let facts get in the way, but I have only ever been a member of one proper political party.
The Grey Party was more of a local independent group, supporting the rights of older people etc.
It doesnt matter whether I'm re-elected or not, the important thing is, I did the right thing for the people of Thanet!
Out of the 16 elected councillors, in Birchington, from parish through to county; John is one of only 6 that are democratically elected.
Yet nothing is said about the 10 unelected Birchington councillors. Could that be because most of them are Tories, like in the elected House of Lords?
Thanet Council is a hung council, even if John had not had the courage to vote, Jack Cohen's vote would have done it anyway!
John Worrow, whilst you may think you acted for the people of Thanet let me say, as one of them, that you did not act for me or any other Conservative voter I know. Perhaps, however, you are arrogant enough to think you are the only true Conservative.
Maybe the negative comments about JW are being made by friends of those that have just fell of the gravey train? But of course they will deny it!
Some of us just have a moral perspective on it actually....and it's 'gravy'.
flexible morals
From Worrow and his ilk indeed
Will I know you are studying politics, so I hope you can answer my questions here, or know someone who knows the answers. Last Thursday when Bob Bayford was voted out, the Conservative group put him back up in front of the same people to vote him back in.
Presumably they knew he wouldn’t get voted back in and that fielding another Conservative councillor would have given them some chance or winning.
Historically is this something that has happened before in leadership elections?
What would the groups motives have been?
I have asked a few other councillors and apart from the notion that it was down to some misplaced sense of loyalty, which doesn’t ring true to me, I haven’t had any sort of answer.
Would there be any sort of tactical reason for doing this?
I am not too sure on that one Michael. It was an odd decision on one level because Council was hardly going to re-elect the leader they had just voted out. However on another level it makes sense because he is their designated leader, and I am sure many Conservative's would argue that Bayford's downfall was caused by a defection rather than him doing a bad job.
I will be interested to see whether there will be a change of leader in the aftermath Bayford's defeat last Thursday. Whether there is change or not will go some way to explaining if it was a tactical blunder by the Conservatives or a show of loyalty to their leader.
It is probably rather simpler than either of you consider. Is it the correct position of any political party to permit oyther parties to dictate who their leader should be?
Will the confidence vote was announced well in advance, I can’t think they could have been so confident they would win it, particularly as they lost it on two scores and with the casting vote factor, that there was no plan B.
The loyalty argument is fair enough, up to the point he lost the confidence vote, but after that, well it just doesn’t make sense.
Without being patronising here, I was hoping that a younger mind would be better at thinking out of the box than me.
The enmity between Cohen and Bayford goes back a long way and after the business at the last cabinet meeting they must have seen this a possibility.
Chris I can’t think of any other definition of the loss of a leader confidence vote.
It is perhaps the total lack of understanding of loyalty in certain quarters that is most worrying here. It may well be that in due course a new leader of the Conservatives in Thanet will emerge, but to set such a person up for instant failure would really have been folly.
The Conservatives, once Worrow defected, were not going to win the leadership vote whoever they put up to be knocked down. Mind you, it does give the 'apolitical' Michael another whipping block.
Tom, thanks I can follow your argument, I can see that the most likely outcome will be the Conservative group challenging the leadership with the support of all the independents and a full compliment of Conservative councillors and most likely a different leader.
Much of their ability to this will I suppose be based on how Labour manage the independents, I guess if they want to change the committee membership they will have to call a full council meeting where they will be open to leadership challenge.
Personally I think that what we need is a period of stability, something I don’t think we are likely to get during this term.
I don’t think either political group favour the elected leader model, which is one solution.
In Thanet the problem is as much geographical as political and partly revolves around where in Thanet Councillors and the senior officers, who mostly live outside of Thanet, actually go in Thanet.
As the council offices are in Margate they all have to go there, so Margate tends to at least get noticed, with Ramsgate councillors being Labour and therefore being there, they are at least aware of the problems in the town, so I hope they will at least try to solve some of them.
Will I have added your blog to http://thanetblogs.blogspot.com/ you may find this useful when trying to keep up with the comment, also if you need the recent comments script to put on your sidebar let me know.
When I voted for Roger Gale, I thought we were going to have an Enoch Powell style Conservative party.. instead we have a government that is Liberal.
David Cameron should call an election - i didnt vote conservative to get a Liberal democrat government. Thats something we don't want in Thanet.
The problem is people have been allowed to go above their station!
Post a Comment