The creation of a super-democratic body created by central government called the Standards Board for England, which can exclude members of a local council who were elected on a specific issue platform because ‘their minds are already made up’ has been described in the Telegraph as ‘hampering democracy’. This is rather like saying having your head cut off ‘hampers thinking’… true but more than a tad misleading. British understatement is alive and well it seems.
The Standards Board’s function is to prevent single issue politics by simply disallowing a ‘difficult’ elected councillor from doing what they were elected to do so ‘hampering’ democracy is not an unintended consequence, it is what the Standards Board for England does.
Face it, the whole point of the Standards Board of England is to prevent councillors who are elected on the basis of views unpopular with the establishment from being allowed to disrupt business as usual by asking difficult questions and proving resistant to being pressured by established political groupings.
So let us call the Standard Board for England and their network of ‘ethical standards officers’ what they actually are: Commissars.
Could anyone here refer interested foreigners to an explanation of the British Council system? I’ve heard refernces to “local councils”, “council estates” etc. for years, but have only a vague idea what a “council” is. To my American ears it seems to be some sort of system of community board for government nanny-statism, as opposed to an elected legislative body. Help?
This is why we need a Samizdata party.
Labour have got away with introducing all this shit without barely a peep from the so called Conservatives.
Jeff.
Councils are local governments. There are County Councils which broadly speaking do roads and schools and under them there are “unitary” authorities which do trash collection, social services, code enforcement, zoning. Although, County councils get a say in some of this and it is all subject to central government oversight underlined by the fact that councils get around 80% of their funds from central government as tightly controlled grants. There are also police authorities which are made up of appointees from local councils which control police forces (which are usually bigger than county wide. In addition, there are town and parish councils.
Councils are constituted from elected councillers (like country commissioners) but turnout in elections is dismally low and the councillors have little freedom of action (the subject of this article.)
Councils estates are social housing complexes or projects.
The whole thing is a confused mess. There is no clear public understanding of who does what, no real accountability and no innovation.
Sign me up for the Samizdata party!
The Standards Board for England, through its Adjudication Panel for England is meant to enforce the the Code of Conduct which is part of the terms of accepting the public office of Local Councillor or Mayor etc.
Most of this Code of Conduct involves things like declaring any financial interests or gifts and not coming to blows with other Councillors during meetings etc.
“Behaviour covered by the Code of Conduct
* unlawfully discriminating against someone
* failing to treat people with respect
* doing something to prevent those who work for the authority from being unbiased
* revealing information that was given to them in confidence, or stopping someone getting information they are entitled to by law
* damaging the reputation of their office or authority
* using their position improperly, to their own or someone else’s advantage or disadvantage
* misusing their authority’s resources
* allowing their authority’s resources to be misused for the activities of a registered political party
* failing to report another member’s misconduct to us
* failing to register financial or other interests
* failing to reveal a personal interest at a meeting;
* taking part in a meeting or making a decision where they have an interest that is so significant that it is likely to affect their judgement
* failing to register any gifts or hospitality that they have received in their role as a member worth over £25”
If individual councillors are being unfairly restricted via complaints about their behavior to the the Standards Board, they can also make counter-claims against their opponents.
In the majority of cases, no action is taken see their online search form and look at, for example London.
Would you really prefer it if breaching this Code of Conduct was made into a criminal offence, enforced by the Police, with every “investigation” involving fingerprinting and DNA sampling etc ?
Would you prefer instead, to see the Mayor of London Ken Livingstone’s attitide of “I was elected, so I can do whatever I want to until the next election” which is what he claimed when they found against him over his “concentration camp guard” insult against a journalist ? N.B. Llivingstone somehow forgot to criticise them when they ruled in his favour over his ignorant “get back to Iran” comments against some property developers.
Unless someone has a few million pounds that they do not mind not having any more, a “Samizdata party” will not fly (it might not even if someone was prepared to spend a few million pounds on it).
As for trying to set up a political party without such money – see Mr A. Clarke’s efforts to set up an Independent Libertarian party (a fine man, but there was no real difference between this effort and a live action role playing game).
Even the U.K.I.P. has not really broken the corrupt structure that is British politics.
This is inspite of millions of British people hating the E.U. with a passion (I am one of them), and many skilled writers making the case even in the national press (for example Mr Booker in the Sunday Telegraph every week).
As for the Conservative party – there are still many decent people within it, but anyone who trusts Mr David Cameron to repeal the local government Act of 2000 (on which the Standard’s Board is based) is deluding themselves.
As for the Standards Board itself – many of the people involved in it are, no doubt, nice people who love their children and are kind to animals. So they would be upset at Perry’s description of them.
The British have yet to learn that Lord Keynes was wrong – not just about economics, but about politics as well.
The idea that good people can be trusted with power that it would be terrible to give to bad people, is wrong.
Such powers (in this case the power to censor local councillors) must not be given to anyone.
Not just because of the Lord Acton point about power corrupting.
But because such power (the power to control what other people say and whether they are allowed to vote in councils to which they have been elected) is just WRONG – wrong ON PRINCIPLE.
Such “hard principles” seem difficult for the modern “pragmatic” British to understand.
Being “pragmatic” about such things is not a virtue – it is a vice.
In which case, as I have said before, the system of government we currently have is broken beyond repair. Following from that we have a perfect right to tear it down and start again. If the Samizdata Party wont fly you can sign me up for the revolution.
Failure will brand us terrorists, success will make us heroes.
Isn’t the Standards Board simply doing what you keep clamouring for the House of Lords to do?
– Josh
So… What’s so wrong with councillors being elected on a single issue mandate?
I’ve spent a bit of time in Keswick lately (lovely little town) and the big issue there is the impending closure of their local NHS hospital. Leaving aside any issues the samizdatistas might have with the NHS in general, seeing as this is the overwhelming local issue at the moment what would be so bad about the inhabitants voting in local government officers who care about the same thing the residents do?
Surely, that is what local government is about, unless you’re John Prescott.
Just an example.
We don’t have any real local government in the UK. I don’t think we have had any in the 42 minutes from 33 years of my life.
As an aside, I don’t think there is a need for a samizdata party. I think it would rather spoil the fun here.
Is there a need for other parties. Oh hell, yes!
Probably more than one.
The problem as I see it is not just that there is a need for a party to reprent the likes of the Samizdatista, Commentariat and many, many fellow travellers but that the whole tenor of UK political discourse needs cranking up a few notches. Imagine if the political debate in the UK was between Classical Conservatives and Classical Liberals rather than between Dave, Tony and the utterly farcical Ming. Just imagine…
You want to see the Samizdata Party in action? Look here.
I believe this is what’s called moral relativism.
and
Hey Nick,
Happy Birthday!
Need any abandoned refridgerators?
What on earth are you talking about? If all the Standards Board did was watch for people trousering tax money and kicking people in the cobblers during debates, I would really have no problem with them. But that is not all they are doing.
A councillor should be entirely within their rights to say “My mind is made up on every substantive issue this council will ever deal with and I really do not give a damn what you people ‘deliberate’ about as I, and hopefully the people who voted for me, know exactly how I am going to vote regardless of this charade.”
The effect of Standards Board having the power to rule out anyone with a ‘interest’ (such as having conducted a poll on an issue or having previously strongly lobbied for something, rather than being the director of a tendering company) is to make any person who wants to simply reject the consensus on what are acceptable frames of reference for debate liable to be excluded for what amounts to the offence of ‘having an opinion with intent’.
This makes the Standards Board watchdogs not for impropriety but rather for orthodoxy.
Do I have this right – the Standards Board can go after any councillor who displays false consciousness? What do they do to such offenders?
Actually, there are county councils, and under them come district councils. A unitary authority is one of each rolled into one.
Then there are parish councils, which do virtually nothing: hurrah!
Midwesterner,
Thanks for the birthday wishes…
What with the number of Mancunians moving up to plasma screens I’ve moved on to TVs.
They’re actually throwing out 28″ widescreens round here.
That vac tube pop… Nothing like it.
Councils are just soviets with an english name. They are also just following the same devolvement as the soviets under Stalin did. From wikipedia –
Nick, curiouser and curiouser. How do you detonate them?
@ Perry – the Daily Telgraph article does not actually provide any evidence that the Standards Board for England is itself supressing the freedom of speech of Local Councillors.
The article refers to this report produced by the right wing (?) Cornerstone Group of Conservative MPs:
“A Question of Standards” (.pdf)
However, the examples they give are almost all about possible political bias or officious zealotry by jobsworth “Ethical Standards Officers” or “Monitoring Officers”, who have been appointed by the ruling clique of a particular Council, and who are alleged to be showing bias against minority or single issue Councillors.
Most of the actual complaints to the Standards Board for England per se end up being dismissed.
That is not to say that there is not an officious bureaucratic system in place, but then looking at many of the other complaints, which were upheld, there are actually many Local Councillors who do try to unfairly influence planning applications etc., either through ignorance or malice.
David Adami’s case is an example. Being awkward gets you charged with “impoliteness” and “bring the council into disrepute”. See Paul’s article for his views on what happened.
“watching them, watching us” should read the very list he has posted.
For example, “not treating someone with respect” – what is that supposed to mean?
Not treating the “Chief Executive” and other high officers with due submission?
Since when has politeness been a matter for the law anyway?
If someone does not like how his employer talks to him he should resign and go for another job (oh no “constructive …..” we must go to a “tribunal”).
Or perhaps local government officers do not regard councillors as their employers – “our employer is the people” (which means noone – so the administrators can do as they like, or rather as the central government officials tell them to).
Then there is “having an interest so strong that it will affect their judgement”.
Not a “financial” interest – just “an interest”.
Not just a “single issue candidate” but anyone who really cares about something – i.e. (in practice) anyone who has campaigned against a government policy.
Do I want that made a “criminal offence”
No – but that would be better than this.
I would rather be judged by a jury for this “crime” than be judged by the “Standards Board”.
Even a financial interest should be no bar to speaking or voting.
Sure you can have your “disclosure” – but someone must still be able to say “I will make a packet if you vote the way I advice – but you should still vote that way for other reasons, which are…….”
At present someone can have NO FINANCIAL INTEREST AT ALL – and still be prevented from either speaking or voting (because they have some non financial strong interest). And people can be tossed off a council (and kept off for years) without being convicted of any crime.
“But most of the time the Standards Board lets people off”.
Well that is big of them. Of course one only need to use power a few times to create the proper climate of fear (sorry “respect”).
If I was a councillor and the “Standards Board” told me I could not speak or vote on an issue (and tried to toss me off a council in defiance of the voters) I would tell them to go fuck themselves (as Robin Page has) and see if they were prepared to use violence to back up their “judgement”.
“But without the Standards Board, Red Ken will be allowed to say nasty things”.
My father was Jewish and some of Marks family were sent to the gas chambers – but if Red Ken wants to say anti Jewish things that is up to him.
I would not vote for him (because he is a Red – not because he says nasty things about Jews), but it is up to the voters whether he is Mayor or not.
As for “evidence” – Mr Booker has been providing evidence of the activities of the Standards Board for ages. It is even been in his articles in the Sunday Telegraph (not once, but many times).
The “Standards Board” and the rest of our rulers can shove their heads up their backsides – and if that is not showing them “proper respect” good.
@ Paul – I think that you are criticising the Standards Board too much, and not criticising the officious “advice” of some of the locally employed bureaucratic “monitoring officers” enough.
Why can’t the behavior of Council Executives (formerly “Town Clerks”) and their staff, including the specially recruited “Ethical Standards Officers” but especially the local council nominated (from the ranks of existing Council employees, and therefore subject to pressure from the ruling clique) “Monitoring Officers”, also be subject to the same independent complaints procedure ?
One would have thought that any Local Councillor, if they have any political and publicity skills whatsoever, would be able to gain more public support for their cause, if they are seen to have been censored or treated unfairly by the ruling clique or by any biased or incompetent “monitoring officers”.
Even the Cornerstone Group report admits that the Standards Board takes a more lenient view of say, Councillors’ verbal or written comments against their political opponents, where the argy bargy of politics comes into play, compared with the hectoring of Council employees by Local Councillors.
Ken Livingstone was not suspended for a month (decision still pending appeal in the High Court) because of anti-jewish racism, but for bringing the Office of Mayor of London into disrepute, by repeating his initial off the cuff remarks and refusing to apologise at subsequent international press conferences. He does this on a regular basis without being reported the Standards Board e.g. his sickening comparison of the Tiananmen Square massacre with the Trafalgar Square poll tax riots. The fact that he was elected by only 12 or 13 per cent of the London electorate, does not give him or any any other elected official the right to ignore the minimum set of standards expected of all public officials, which they all agree to comply with upon taking up office.
For each of the cases cited by Mr. Booker, there are also examples where Local Councillors really do try to abuse their postion e.g.the case from North Shropshire District Council and Whitchurch Town Council, where the Councillor was suspended for 18 months for trying to influence a Licesning application in favour of his son and dughter-in-law, and for having an undeclared financial interest in the company which would have benefitted from the License Application.
Are you really sure about that ?
You might prefer this, but I would rather not be arrested, fingerprinted, photographed, have a DNA human tissue sample taken, analysed and retained indefinately pending future analyses, and have all this data stuffed onto the Police National Computer and retained until my 100th birthday.
Under this Labour government, this is now the standard procedure for every arrest (all offences became arrestible offences on 1st January 2006), whether any actual charges are ever laid against you or not, and also whether you found not guilty or not.
“Watching Them Watching Us” – you just do not “get it” (to use the modern term for “understand”).
It is not a question of nice people or nasty people, or local officials or national officials.
If I am an elected councillor – people should not be able to forbid me to speak or to vote. If someone does not like what I have said or how I voted (or holds that I have some base motive for how I voted) – let them put that to the voters at the next election.
If you really can not understand that there is a PRINCIPLE involved here I would advice you to go and see Mr Cameron – he might have a job for you.
As for “if it was not for the Standards Board you would get arrested by the nasty police who would abuse you in various ways”.
And when I tell the Standards Board to fuck off (if they tell me I can not attend a council meeting, or speak, or vote) they are going to come and drag me out of the council chamber themselves?
No of course not – they (or local officials) would send for the police, who would seek to abuse me in all the ways you describe.
That is why a First Amendment (freedom of speech) does not last long without a Second Amendment (the right of armed resistance).
This was understood in the British Bill of Right a century before the American Bill of Rights.
“Oh no we can not have firearms”.
But then you will not even allow freedom of speech – you give us a “choice” between the Standards Board (backed by the Labour government appointed Chief Constables police forces) or just the Labour government police forces.
But then it would all be different if only it was the “Conservative” (i.e. the Cameron) party, rather than the Labour party.
Pull the other one, it has got bells on.
The ESB has become no more than a firewall between corrupt councils and councillors so as to suppress embarassing evidence and maintain the status quo. This extends to blatant deceit and lying to citizens, and colluding with the councils, in effect, conspiring to pervert the course of justice. Feel free to get in touch for details.