By Mr Peter Perrin
“It is probably right to assume that most people vote for local government councillors according to party allegiance resulting in candidates being selected for party interests with, in some cases, no regard given as too the candidates competence, ability and qualifications.
I acknowledge that there are councillors who are competent and represent the interests and concerns of their constituents in council but there are councillors who do very little, if anything, for the people in their ward and treat them with indifference and contempt.
I sit in the public gallery at meetings of Full Council and see for myself Councillors conspicuous by their absence who do not have the decency or courtesy to apologise for their absence and others who are in attendance but are obviously there under sufferance, do not contribute in any way to the business of the Council and clearly demonstrate they would rather be elsewhere.
Unfortunately, and I speak as a member of the Labour Party, the Labour Group in Thurrock selects candidates who, like lemmings, will blindly and unquestioningly conform to Party doctrine putting party interests and the pursuit of power above the interests of the people.
“I believe where there is considerable support from the public over a local issue, even if the Councillor disagrees, personally or on party political grounds, he/she is duty bound to unequivocally support and accept the will of the people.
Once elected these councillors elevate themselves to VIP status and believe their role is that of Lord or Lady of the manor, opening fetes or pedestrian crossings, and the “mundane” business of Council is an inconvenience they have to endure in order to be seen to justify their pay and allowances. The fact that they are elected to “serve” the people will be of no consequence for four years as they know they can be certain of re-selection by the Party because they have always conformed. It is unlikely that any of those councillors would be elected if they stood without the patronage of a mainstream political Party.
Furthermore, because they are shallow-brained, these Councillors have a predilection, if criticised or complained against, to retaliate with spite and malice and even, as I personally experienced, resort to making unfounded defamatory comments and because the remarks are made by a “respected” Councillor the public, understandably, believe they must be true. They use such despicable tactics safe in the knowledge that the person being defamed is unlikely to be able to afford legal action and should they make a formal complaint to the Council’s Standards Committee it will be arbitrarily dismissed with the comment “The Committee has decided to take no further action” irrespective of whether or not the complaint was justified.
This coalition Government has since made it even more difficult to hold Councillors to account which will, no doubt, be seen by these shallow-brained Councillors as a “green light” to behave even more outrageously than before.
An appropriate title for any Committee set up to investigate complaints from the public regarding the conduct of a Councillor would be the “Committee for the PROTECTION of Councillors”.
I am firmly of the opinion that Local Government elections should be contested on LOCAL issues, leaving NATIONAL issues to MPs and prospective parliamentary candidates at General Elections. Local Government elections have been “hijacked” by the main political parties simply to enhance the prospects of their parliamentary candidate, you only have to read the Councillors election leaflets, to see how Party orientated they are, that is assuming your candidate, unlike mine in 2012,, can be bothered to deliver them or knock on your door for a “friendly” chat.
If prospective Councillors stood on their own feet “unshackled by Party ideology, maybe, just maybe, we would be blessed with high quality Councillors more concerned with people problems rather than the fortunes of a political Party. Furthermore, I suggest that Mayors should be elected by the people thus, hopefully, ensuring that a Councillor would be elected Mayor on merit and popular demand rather than, yet again, on Party political grounds.
Would my suggestions enable people to say to a Councillor you got my vote “because your really worth it”?
Once again Mr Perrin you have hit the name firmly on the head,Sometime ago I had the misfortune to attEnd a full council meeting and what I witnessed was porfoundly disturbing inarticulate debate from,many,indifference from a few,and petty political point scoring from all.
As you quite rightly say Local Elections should be about LOCAL ISSUES
Dear oh dear I hit the send button before completing and editing my post.Of course it should read nail and profoundly!!!
To continue, party politics should play no part we need elected representatives to reflect and act on their electorates wishes not follow the party line.The two independant councillors from East Tilbury appear to embrace that theory.
Oh dear Peters off on one again. Just wished he would get his facts right. The Labour Group does not select the candidates for elections. Anyone in the party can put there own name forward. They are then vetted by a panel from outside Thurrock. Then the members in the ward the candidate wishes to stand in vote for who they want. If there is not sufficent members in the ward the number is made up from the party executive . At no time does the group vote on the selection of candidates. For someone who as been in the Labour Party as long as you have Peter i thought you would have had a grasp of the selection process by now.
I think Mr Perrin is right when he says that there are very poor Councillors sitting (or not, as the case may be) in the Chamber. We need people prepared to work hard for local people, not Party political drones. I don’t think it’s wise to go down the route of elected Mayor, I don’t believe many would turn out to vote and it would, in all likelihood, be too expensive anyway.
Red Rebel as you point out, if there are insufficient ward members then the numbers are “made up” by members of the Party executive, correct me if I am wrong, most executive members are also Labour Group members. As to the vetting panel “from outside Thurrock”, I presume you mean Party members from Eastern Region, whose main concern is the Party and the Parliamentary candidate , “a rose by any other name is still a rose”. So Red Rebel I will not be taking any lessons from you on factual accuracies or the Labour Party selection process.
Wow Labour acting like a box of frogs – just thought it was the Conservatives that like to air their dirty laundry in public.
I know Mr Perrin probably finds my input purile and without much inside knowledge but, to be honest you don’t need much inside knowledge to see where the current Labour administration is going. They seem to be resigned to the fact they will not be in power after the elections next year.
The result of that seems to be a grudging agreement that all current behaviour will be accepted in return for another years earnings. the main beneficiary being the leader presumably because he is the main recipient of tales of wrongdoing about the rest of councillors and will bring them down before they do the same to him.
I’m assuming the way the council works is that he gets his allowance as leader plus the two other portfolios plus expenses. In the mean time I’m assuming the honorouble Mr Kent will be looking for his usual seats on the boards of publicly funded bodies as a non executive director.
As an ex Labour party member I can only lament their fall from the party that used to represent working people that helped to build their party. Unfortunately they are now just one of the wings of the Liberal Elite Party.
Peter excellent blog although not.100% sure a directly elected mayor is a good idea.
Redrebel – your nearly right apart from your vetting procedure!
Peter, will we please be seeing you stand for council at the next elections?
I believe that you could make such a big difference for Thurrock!
I don’t quite understand why there are so many councillors in Thurrock. Surely you could get away with just one in many wards? Maybe that would help to keep the focus on local issues and give independent candidates more of a chance.
NoVoice, I would not be so rude as to even suggest your “input” is puerile,you are entitled to express your opinions in the way you do and I would defend your right to do so. However, there are instances when your apparent intense dislike of the Labour Party, maybe spawned by a personal grievance, borders on hatred. which is a pity as your contributions are otherwise worthy of consideration.
Regarding my comment on an elected Mayor. I am not advocating that an elected Mayor controls the Council or serves for longer than the current one year in the 4 years cycle. I merely suggest that a Mayor elected by the people, from elected Councillors might be preferable to one selected by the Party in power or, as in the case of Ms Cheale and the Labour Party, to keep a Party in power.
Mr Perrin my problem with the Labour party isn’t personal. My problem is that nationally and locally they act like children. They can’t tell the truth. When they get found out they hide behind lies. They blame everyone else for the problems they caused. They can’t stand up and be counted. They drop people that are no longer of use to them like a hot brick.
We all know that mass immigration has caused a huge number of problems in this country. The Labour party spent 10 years defending it and vilifying anyone that spoke out against it. Now the writing is on the wall they come out and say they were wrong and that the current government isn’t doing enough to stop it, That leaves most people with a feeling of disbelief. They don’t say they were wrong because they truly believe they were wrong but because they know it will cost them votes. So now they go all Blue Labour and say they now represent the white working class again. Nice try but it won’t work.
It’s that kind of deceitful selfish behaviour I despise. It’s not just that issue but others as well. Take the issue over council tax and some on benefits now having to make a contribution towards it. The local Labour party had the chance to raise the money to protect people but they chose not to. Now they blame central government.
I know some people call that politics but the Labour party come across as the type of people that would sell their grandmother if they thought they would make personal gain out of it. Most would say that all politicians are like that but the current Labour party both nationally and locally are bereft of an ounce of honesty and they think everyone is a fool. That is the only conclusion I can draw from the way they behave.
All the main parties can rant and rave about UKIP and call them a racist bunch of nutters but the appeal is that their message is simple. It isn’t glossed up with jam tomorrow and large numbers of people actually believe they will do what they say if they were given the chance. The current Labour party couldn’t hope to have that amount of credibility.