THE cabinet-style of governance adopted by West Lancs back in 2002 has many faults, not least in that the biggest decisions end up being made by a select few councillors who are all of one politicial persuasion.
The scrutiny committees therefore act very much as a watchdog as its members have the ability to 'call in' items.
Now depending on whether you're in power or opposition, scrutiny can end up being a major pain in the derriere or a vital cog in the democratic proccess, ensuring that decision-makers are held to account.
Bob Pendleton (Labour, Tanhouse) who I'm sure holds the record for the most number of words ever uttered by anyone in the council chamber (I must check on that sometime), told full council last week that the current process is a 'sham' - pointing to the fact that 85% of 'call-ins' went ahead unchanged because the Conservative members are "afraid" of challenging their masters (see story in this week's Midweek Advertiser and Skelmersdale Advertiser).
However, when I spoke to scrutiny committee chairman Cllr Martin Forshaw (Conservative, Hesketh-with-Becconsall) he made a very valid point in that because of the ideologies of the two parties, you're never likely to get them agreeing on much.
He said: "They're a proper opposition in that they'll never agree with us. At the end of the day, the council is a political animal and I'm not sure how else you would make decisions."
Cllr David O'Toole (Conservative, Aughton & Downholland) also laid into Labour saying: "I've not come across any other council in the North West with so many call ins but then most oppositions aren't so frivolous."
So there you are... not only can the Conservative and Labour not agree on anything, they can't even agree on the best use of the scrutiny process which itself is, in part, a forum for disagreement in the first place.
Confused? So am I.
- Post to:
del.icio.us
Digg
Newsvine
Nowpublic
Reddit
« Previous | Home | Next »