503 people watched the debate over webcast on the night and 51 people had watched up until noon yesterday. These figures dwarf the 50 plus people in the public gallery on the night. The entire meeting can be viewed here.
Democracy, was the vogue word when 'all up elections' were debated. As I suspected the proposal was defeated but my contribution to the debate can be found here. My views have not changed since an earlier post on this subject but it was noticeable that I was not the only member who thought that the number of councillors should be reduced.
The irony of the debate however did not escape me. There was a comment made that the Conservative group were whipped in the vote at the end. Yes, whilst the majority of the Conservative group voted for the proposal, some voted against it and some opposed it. This is in contrast to the three opposition parties who all voted against it with some being mere lickspittle to their party leaders.
The proposal was to go out to residents to consult them on the change and then have a special meeting whereby a two thirds majority would be required to impose a change. In an earlier debate we had some members criticising that we do not consult the public, yet the same people did not want the public to tell us how they would like to elect us. Just fancy that.
2 comments:
Lickspittle? Moi? Have you ever known me to voice anything but objections to all-up elections? I have all along said that my principle objection was that it exaggerated the worse effects of First Past The Post. I have also said that if you coupled the idea with proportional representation for these elections then I would support it.
For the record there was no Labour line and no Labour whip for this vote, and I genuinely believed (prior to the vote) that we would be split on this issue.
Julian, you may have slightly mis-read my post as I said some were mere lickspittle allowing for the few opposition members who have been principled in their stance.
Post a Comment