Welcome to my blog. I am a former local journalist who now works in PR and a Conservative and community activist in Woking and Horsell. This blog will keep updated on local issues as well as my interests and quirky news stories.
On May 6, the local elections produced another indecisive result in Woking. There were gains and losses on both sides but despite no Labour representation to consider any more, the political scene in the borough continues to be ambigious. Even in 2007, the first year of overall control since 1998, the result was only 19-17, which when you take account of absences and mayoralty is not really a majority at all.
With the decision of Peter Ankers to go it alone, the numbers have stood at 18-17-1 and so it remains after the local elections. Just 70 more votes across Knaphill and Horsell West could have seen them 20-15-1 and shown a decisive shift – but that is not what the electorate wanted and the council has to listen to that.
It is my personal view therefore that with a Conservative mayor in 2010/11 and the numbers effectively at 17-17-1, the Conservative and Liberal Democrat groups should consider what the parties have done nationally and think about forming a Grand Coalition.
This could entail three members each on a six-strong executive committee with a Conservative chairman and Lib Dem vice-chairman. Such an arrangement would also have the welcome side-effect – although it is not designed for that purpose – of removing the effective casting vote of the council from one independent councillor. No doubt Peter Ankers would use this reasonably – but how much happier that the total considered view of the council should be involved in the first place rather than just via one person’s judgement?
In normal circumstances, it would be up to the party with the mandate to take responsibility and implement its manifesto. But at present, neither party really has a proper mandate with the numbers that exist and the maths of the mayoralty suggest that unless there is broad agreement about the year ahead, a rather unseemly mess could result. That’s not good for the council, nor more to the point for Woking.
No doubt an agreement could be reached whereby some of the key problems can be tackled together and elements of both parties’ manifestos placed into the work programme. The PM clearly thought that it was silly (although I think “uninspiring” was the word he used) to have a minority administration trying to take decisions in the current climate. It appears that Nick Clegg agreed.
I don’t see how that situation is different in Woking given the close make-up of the council. Whether either side would agree to it is of course a completely different matter.
Simon, yes the election result was close, but I cant think of a better way to really put Ray Morgan and the council officers in charge than having a “grand coalition”. We had a Con/Lib Dem/Lab coalition running Woking during the late 90s and early 00s and that arrangement was regarded as a fudge which dodged important decisions – that’s why the Council moved to a single party executive in 2003. Its funny how things seem to move full circle. Whatever happened to clear government and accountability?
Coalition sceptic, coalition isn’t exactly my first choice nationally or locally either. However, I cannot agree with your assumptions. The way hand power to the officers is to perpetuate continuing marginal control, which hampers both a clear vision and strong leadership. If you have an agreed programme and the clear majority to deliver it, that is the important thing; not the political make-up of the council. The previous shared executive wasn’t a “fudge” – it did excatly what you’d expect from a body with three Con, three LD and one Labour ie outvoted the Conservatives 4-3 on a regular basis. That was unfair because we were the largest party and yet couldn’t deliver most of our policies. Also, the shared exec wasn’t a proper coalition (otherwise why was it split so often?) – with hindsight, it was a symptom of getting used to the new executive system.
I’d prefer clear government and accountability too – but without a clear majority and mandate from the voters, no single party in my view has the right to command this at the moment. No doubt this will change in the future but for the moment my feeling is that the uncertainty of minority administration together with the prospect of one independent member having the casting vote creates a situation far more favourable to officers looking to run the show than a formal, albeit temporary, coalition agreement that delivers parts of the parties’ manifestos.