News2 mins ago
Why Do We Need Local Authorities?
21 Answers
https:/
This council has been in the news and it shows what a bunch of self important busy bodies they are. OK this is a parish council but major town councils are no different. Up and down the country there are thousands like this "running" local services, question is do we really need them? Surely all the local services can be run by employed service management. Then we can dispense with all the election etc cobras. Is the illusion of local "democracy" a high price to pay for getting our bins emptied?
This council has been in the news and it shows what a bunch of self important busy bodies they are. OK this is a parish council but major town councils are no different. Up and down the country there are thousands like this "running" local services, question is do we really need them? Surely all the local services can be run by employed service management. Then we can dispense with all the election etc cobras. Is the illusion of local "democracy" a high price to pay for getting our bins emptied?
Answers
Local government is a misnomer. Local authorities do not “govern”. They undertake a number of functions for which central government has devolved responsibili
11:34 Thu 18th Feb 2021
my own town has about 60 of them! they've created a "cabinet" and pay themselves to go to meetings. Their political persuasions are irrelevant so the council elections are largely a sop to the masses to give some sort of illusion of local "democracy". The nation could save a fortune by abolishing the whole sorry sheet show and hire some management to run the services. Sorted!
bednobs: "I guess it's cheaper! " - no it aint! There was a time when its may have been, when it was a part time unpaid thing but these days there are pro councillors who go from authority to authority milking what they can. Our "cabinet" pay themselves between £20-30k a year. Then the rest charge for every meeting etc.
Local government is a misnomer. Local authorities do not “govern”. They undertake a number of functions for which central government has devolved responsibility to them. All that’s required to administer these services is a small (and I mean small) executive to run them in accordance with central government guidelines. There is no reason why voters need to be involved in selecting this executive because it should have no decisions of any significance to take. It should be running things as directed by Westminster.
There is no rationale behind the devolution of many responsibilities to local authorities. Two of the most significant which spring to mind are education and social care. In my LA these account for two thirds of its total expenditure. Why the country seems to think it is OK to entrust the education of its children and the care of its vulnerable adults to LAs is a mystery.
LAs are really glorified Quangos with the deceit that they are “democratic” thrown in to support their existence. The cost of them is enormous; many of their “Executives” spend their careers simply roaming the country from job to job, trousering handsome “severance” payments every time they are either thrown out or fancy a change. Councillors are an expensive extravagance who only exist to give the Local Authority some legitimacy. Local Government is an expensive gravy train which should be abolished at all levels. Emptying the bins does not require a “cabinet member.” It requires bin men and women and a manager to run the show.
There is no rationale behind the devolution of many responsibilities to local authorities. Two of the most significant which spring to mind are education and social care. In my LA these account for two thirds of its total expenditure. Why the country seems to think it is OK to entrust the education of its children and the care of its vulnerable adults to LAs is a mystery.
LAs are really glorified Quangos with the deceit that they are “democratic” thrown in to support their existence. The cost of them is enormous; many of their “Executives” spend their careers simply roaming the country from job to job, trousering handsome “severance” payments every time they are either thrown out or fancy a change. Councillors are an expensive extravagance who only exist to give the Local Authority some legitimacy. Local Government is an expensive gravy train which should be abolished at all levels. Emptying the bins does not require a “cabinet member.” It requires bin men and women and a manager to run the show.
Town councils are parish councils with different name. Their powers are limited to graveyards and public toilets. That's it. They give their views on planning applications, recommendations that go to the planning authority, almost always a district council. When Bridlington Town Council was re-instituted roughly 15 years ago it had an annual budget of £80,000. One of its first acts was to spend £15,000 on a mayoral chain of office. Says it all really. District councils have the real authority. County Councils should be abolished.
bednobs: "Parish councillors get paid?? " - well they get exes but the main thrust of this post is LAs generally. I'm really referring to town and city councillors that have a "cabinet" and they get paid. All councillors get a smorgasbord of expenses they can claim, often for very little. Stay long enough and they make you the mayor and that's the orient express of gravy trains with all the attendant perks and exes.
-- answer removed --
//…but also shows how some people are so miss informed, should they think this is the one and only task within the running of local services.//
Well I don’t think that at all, tc. In fact if you read my post you will see that I understand quite well that LAs are tasked with doing all sorts of things. My argument is that they should not be. The two I mentioned in particular – education and adult social care – should be undertaken by national government. All children need education and the provision of it should not be under the control of local busybodies who get their kicks from interfering in their constituents going about their lawful business. You only have to look at the reaction by many LAs to the Covid pandemic to see what I mean: stickers on the pavement; pot plants and planters blocking the highways; arrows and “keep left” signs attached to bollards and lampposts; “marshals” patrolling the streets to keep people in check, to name but a few. These people thrive on such a situation.
//…But, how can we put a stop to this infestation?//
We can’t David. Politics is a very lucrative career for so many people. The more levels of government there are, the more avenues there are for them to thrive, multiply and prosper. When their inadequacies and lack of ability are recognised at one level they simply move to another. That's why so many MPs were against us leaving the EU. It is an ideal ground for failed politicians to top up their pension pots. There is no way any government is going to abolish any of the lower levels. Many MPs and Ministers cut their political teeth by being the “Cabinet Minister for Emptying the Bins” somewhere or other. Mrs Thatcher was the last PM to do anything useful in that respect when she abolished the Greater London Council and the Inner London Education Authority in 1986 and 1990 respectively. Her work was undone when the Blair administration resurrected the GLC in the form of the GLA in 2000. They did this by asking Londoners whether they would like an elected Mayor. They didn’t mention too loudly the “Assembly” which went with it and which now employs more than 1,100 people, over 600 of them earning in excess of £50k. Londoners thought they would get a Rudolf Guiliani figure. Instead they ended up with Sadiq Khan. For what it’s worth, it would not have mattered what they had been asked and what their response was. In 2004 voters in the North East of England were asked whether they wanted an elected “Regional Assembly” (part of John Prescott’s idea to introduce them across England). They voted by four to one to reject the idea. It made no difference. They got one anyway (along with everybody else who were not asked). It was (what is termed) “abolished” in March 2009 with its functions being transferred to One NorthEast, the Regional Development Agency, and the Association of North East Councils, the Local Authority Leaders’ Board (no, me neither).
In 2012 nine English cities rejected the idea of an elected mayor when asked by Mr Cameron’s Coalition government. There is simply no appetite for more government, politics and politicians in England. Voters have enough of it and would prefer to see their money spent on something useful.
Well I don’t think that at all, tc. In fact if you read my post you will see that I understand quite well that LAs are tasked with doing all sorts of things. My argument is that they should not be. The two I mentioned in particular – education and adult social care – should be undertaken by national government. All children need education and the provision of it should not be under the control of local busybodies who get their kicks from interfering in their constituents going about their lawful business. You only have to look at the reaction by many LAs to the Covid pandemic to see what I mean: stickers on the pavement; pot plants and planters blocking the highways; arrows and “keep left” signs attached to bollards and lampposts; “marshals” patrolling the streets to keep people in check, to name but a few. These people thrive on such a situation.
//…But, how can we put a stop to this infestation?//
We can’t David. Politics is a very lucrative career for so many people. The more levels of government there are, the more avenues there are for them to thrive, multiply and prosper. When their inadequacies and lack of ability are recognised at one level they simply move to another. That's why so many MPs were against us leaving the EU. It is an ideal ground for failed politicians to top up their pension pots. There is no way any government is going to abolish any of the lower levels. Many MPs and Ministers cut their political teeth by being the “Cabinet Minister for Emptying the Bins” somewhere or other. Mrs Thatcher was the last PM to do anything useful in that respect when she abolished the Greater London Council and the Inner London Education Authority in 1986 and 1990 respectively. Her work was undone when the Blair administration resurrected the GLC in the form of the GLA in 2000. They did this by asking Londoners whether they would like an elected Mayor. They didn’t mention too loudly the “Assembly” which went with it and which now employs more than 1,100 people, over 600 of them earning in excess of £50k. Londoners thought they would get a Rudolf Guiliani figure. Instead they ended up with Sadiq Khan. For what it’s worth, it would not have mattered what they had been asked and what their response was. In 2004 voters in the North East of England were asked whether they wanted an elected “Regional Assembly” (part of John Prescott’s idea to introduce them across England). They voted by four to one to reject the idea. It made no difference. They got one anyway (along with everybody else who were not asked). It was (what is termed) “abolished” in March 2009 with its functions being transferred to One NorthEast, the Regional Development Agency, and the Association of North East Councils, the Local Authority Leaders’ Board (no, me neither).
In 2012 nine English cities rejected the idea of an elected mayor when asked by Mr Cameron’s Coalition government. There is simply no appetite for more government, politics and politicians in England. Voters have enough of it and would prefer to see their money spent on something useful.
Latest Posts
News8 mins ago
Body & Soul9 mins ago
Property Owned As Tenants In Common
Law11 mins ago
Leicester Tigers Vs Bristol Bears - Is...
Sport17 mins ago
