Co-operation and Cabinet

Bristol's Labour Party could decide tonight not to accept places on the new Mayor's Cabinet or to advise the Mayor (see here) and impose a ban on all its members. I hope they dont [**see the series of updates below!]. Local govt co-operation between parties is eminently sensible – and it’s what people have voted for, so this should be recognised provided the new Cabinet is: committed to taking decisions openly and accountably; and its members are able, diplomatically, to speak their minds and not own every single Mayoral decision.

Each individual Councillor and Party needs to change mindset and both scrutinise, criticise and support as appropriate. Conscience first not party – that’s what they are supposed to be doing according to the code of conduct they sign up to in any case! This code includes ‘making decisions on merit’ and reaching ‘their own conclusions on the issues before them and act in accordance with those conclusions’.  Councillors have power through a vote on the council, through committee work and through lobbying the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Asst Mayors when in place. Hopefully some power will be properly and effectively devolved to local councillors and people in neighbourhoods soon too.

Labour were the party with councillors that got the most votes and in next May's local elections Labour are likely to make gains on the council - the Tory and Lib Dem vote has sunk and is unlikely to recover enough for them not to suffer councillor losses. I'm most in favour of people getting into the Cabinet on the basis of merit not party but having said that the Mayor should also take into account which parties the public are voting for.
______________________________
**
[Update 22 November: According to The Post Bristol's Labour Party last night voted against taking up three Cabinet seats offered to them and so have have refused the opportunity to argue for their policies directly with the Mayor and others. Its still unclear to me whether they voted to ban all members from taking part.]

[Update 23 November: According to The Post Labour Councillors in Bristol have agreed to join the Mayor's Cabinet and have gone against the local party vote. Its a good sign that Labour Councillors have asserted themselves. Its Bristol's voters they have to be listening to and not just the local party and they seem to have done that. Which Councillors finally end up doing what is not yet finaliised though.]

[Update 26 November (!!!): According to Bristol 24-7 and ITV West and The Post Labour's South West regional organisation, probably with some central party influence, has prevented Bristol's Labour Councillors from joining the Mayor's Cabinet. This has caused Cllr Peter Hammond the Leader of Bristol's Labour Councillors to resign. It remains to be seen whether individuals choose to defy this intsruction.]

People's paradigm

The idea to get lots of people involved in saying what they want Bristol to be like in the medium and long term is a really good one. See 'Occupy Bristol protesters draw up their vision for Bristol 2050'. There's no meaningful, democratic and effective medium and long term planning in the UK and this clearly needs to change. The intentions of Occupy Bristol are a bit different from the Post headline though - since Occupy advocate wide participation it wont be 'their' vision as such, it will be the visions of the people that come forward to make contributions. So, its over to Bristol's people...send your ideas to occupybristol@riseup.net  I very strongly agree that wider public participation means better decisions, not least because its more likely that local knowledge and good sense is included and people will have ownership of actions that result (as any exercise needs to go beyond ideas) and back them up in their own lives. Here's the story in the Post: 
PLANS to create a vision for the type of place people would like Bristol to be in 2050 will be discussed by protestors on College Green.


The Occupy Bristol camp is planning a series of open meetings to plan a future for the city.

A protester, who gave his name as Luther Blissett, said: "Neither the electoral cycle nor the product planning horizon are far enough away to allow us to be utopian, to hope for better futures. There is very little thinking about the medium and long term.



"The people's 2050 will try to inhabit this vacuum.


"It will not be a top-down document or plan that anyone tries to rigidly enforce, it will not be in that sense 'The Plan'. It will simply be a conversation that develops, spawning hundreds of little plans, counter plans and, crucially, actions.


"We hope that by looking forward 40 years we can provide a platform for the people of Bristol to come up with some interesting ideas about how we want our city and society to be organised."


This project has been inspired by the existing Bristol 2050 project but protesters say that only references the city's business leaders and should include the public.


Mr Blissett added: "There's plenty of evidence that wider public participation in decision-making means better decisions – because it means more knowledge and ideas go into the mix. The people's 2050 is an alternate vision, and we want your input."


The group asked people to send "utopian hopes and desires for Bristol 2050" in word or picture form to occupybristol@riseup.net.