9:00am Saturday 7th October 2006
By Carl Brown
MEMBERS from three different political parties have spoken out in support of a campaign to scrap Newham's elected mayor system.
A cross-party group of activists believes the way Newham is governed by an elected mayor and cabinet is an undemocratic "gravy train" and they have launched the Newham Campaign for Democracy.
A situation has developed in which half of Newham's councillors are paid extra allowances as advisers or cabinet members.
This, according to the campaigners, means the council is not democratic, as too many councillors are on the payroll of Mayor Sir Robin Wales.
Newham Respect Cllr Hanif Abdulhmit said this week: "Everything about the practice of the mayoral system here suggest it leads to less accountability and less democracy.
"A small group of favoured senior councillors run the place with even most councillors excluded from any influence, never mind the public. Huge allowances are paid to Sir Robin's merry men."
Former Cllr Mike Law, who stood for the Conservatives in May's council elections, questioned the necessity of some of the roles in the council.
He said: "Does the mayor really need to pay for advisers for community intelligence and external relations, trade unions and community facilities and electoral engagement and registration?"
There is also dissent among some Labour supporters.
In a joint letter John Saunders and John Whitworth said: "The mayor has almost unlimited powers and now makes nearly all decisions. There is almost no discussion in council, there is little input from most of our elected councillors and scrutiny of the mayor's decisions is virtually non-existent."
A spokesman for the Newham Labour group did not answer questions about why the mayor has so many advisers.
He said: "The evidence suggests the people of Newham like direct accountability and that they like the current mayor Sir Robin Wales.
"This move is likely to be a monumental waste of time and money and detracts from Labour's excellent record and positive agenda for Newham."
-------------------------------------------------
Here are some of our readers' views on this subject.
DOES THE MAYOR REALLY NEED TO PAY FOR ADVISORS?
There may well come a time when the Labour adm-inistration will actually address concerns expressed by Newham residents regarding its methods of governance, but it seems that time is a long way off.
The Stratford Guardian's front page last week reported my involvement in a campaign to do away with the mayoral system in Newham and criticism of the way the current mayor has created a sizeable number of well paid positions for favoured councillors.
Yet, the feeble response relied on the suggestion that my questioning of the structure is just sour grapes but did not refute my arguments.
There is a council of 60 voting members, 30 of whom receive allowances based on portfolios distributed by the mayor. These portfolios offer a range of allowances of the following amounts: £38,842, £25,041, £19.605, £15,246, £11,985, £7,080,; £4,905, and, £3,534.
These are awarded on top of the councillor's basic allowance of £10,476.
The total per annum for these extra allowances is £397,678.
This gives the mayor control of 50 per cent of the council's vote, the same council that has a legislative duty to scrutinise the decisions made by the mayor.
Some of the portfolios req-uire explanation. Housing, regeneration, children and young people and public realm are understandable, but does the mayor really need to pay for advisors for community intelligence and external relations, trade unions and community facilities and electoral engagement and registration?
This is unique to Newham.
I can find no other authority that has an elected mayor and adopts such a system. Most pay a standard rate for cabinet and deputy cabinet members and none have as many as Newham.
While I was a councillor I had made inquiries into the methodology used to evaluate the points awarded to each portfolio.
The mystical nature of the replies would fit comfortably in the pages of a J K Rowling novel. All of this goes some way to explain why I support the current campaign to change the current method of governance.
It was wrongly reported that I lead the campaign, I was one of many local people representing a wide spectrum of political opinion who had been invited to discuss the formation of such a campaign.
MIKE LAW, Royal Docks.
RESPECT HAS SERIOUS DOUBTS OVER NEED FOR A MAYORAL SYSTEM
Respect is the only party which made a manifesto pledge in the local elections to campaign for a referendum on the position of elected mayor.
We have grave doubts about whether a mayoral system offers best value for Newham tax payers.
Comparisons with some local boroughs suggests we are paying twice as much for a mayor as they pay for their council leaders.
Everything about the practice of the mayoral system here suggests it leads to less accountability and less democracy.
A small group of favoured senior councillors run the place, with even most councillors excluded from any influence, never mind the public. Huge allowances are paid to Sir Robin's merry men (and women).
The previous system of leader and committees seems to have been a more open and accountable one, with more effective scrutiny.
Respect is glad if other parties have now decided to speak up against the mayoral system, even if they did not feel strongly enough to make it their party policy, and especially if any opposition from inside the Labour party finds its voice. We will cooperate in any campaign to review the system.
The whole elected mayor show has proved to be another New Labour blunder. Few places have the system and some of them have already started campaigning to abolish it.
We think Newham should do the same, for the sake of efficiency and local democratic accountability.
CLLR HANIF ABDULMUHIT, Newham Respect.
OUST DICTATORIAL SIR ROBIN AND BRING BACK DEMOCRACY
When Newham residents agreed to having an elected mayoral system in Newham, they could not foresee the negative consequences of giving the executive decision-making powers to one person.
I have been to council meetings that occur every two months at East Ham Town Hall and have seen how the Mayor, Sir Robin Wales, behaves like a complete dictator over his' councillors.
But the problem is, Newham residents are completely oblivious as to how Sir Robin Wales runs his council chamber behind closed doors.
Thus councillors bear the brunt of the mayor's power-hungry style of rule as they no longer have the power nor say if they are against a motion approved by the mayor. Unfortunately Labour councillors themselves have become so brain-dead due to their helplessness that the mayor constantly pulls the wool over their eyes and they no longer speak for the constituents who elected them. Take the Queens Market fiasco as an example.
Newham Respect made a pledge in their local election manifesto, that they would launch a referendum on whether Newham should have an elected mayor or not.
The mayor should be exposed for the dictator that he is. Newham Respect will try their utmost to bring democracy back to the town hall.
M MISBAH, Church Road, Manor Park.
© Copyright 2001-2012 Newsquest Media Group
http://www.guardian-series.co.uk