Mike Cox's Leader's Column October 2009

8.56.42am BST (GMT +0100) Fri 16th Oct 2009

Mike Cox explains Hillingdon's problems to popular Radio 4 broadcaster Jonathan Fryer

At the peak of its power New Labour changed the way local government works. Out went committees and the power of ordinary Councillors and in came either an "Elected Mayor" or "Leader and Cabinet".

In 2001 Hillingdon chose the Leader approach as the least worst option. Since 2006 the constitution has been changed to silence opposition and now after 2010 the Leader, elected by a small bunch of Councillors in the ruling party, will be able to act as a quasi dictator for 4 years, whether those that selected him or her like it or not.

This final change alters the whole rationale as to which system is better. An "Elected Mayor" is voted for by all the residents of the borough. There is a direct line of responsibility to the voters. The new system for Leader thrusts more power into back room dealings within the larger political parties. Independents and smaller parties have little chance.

In 2006 2,122 people voted for Cllr Puddifoot in Ickenham yet he is able to wield power over 183,000 eligible voters. 1.15% of Hillingdons electors voted for the current leader. How much more authority and respect would he or she have if 50% of the voters had chosen him or her?

The argument for a "Leader" is that it is more in keeping with the British representative democracy we have had for hundreds of years. But that assumes Councillors are free to hire and fire their leader. In 2010 all that changes.

In Hillingdon residents were supposed to have been consulted on these changes. Like so many things over the last 4 years we have not been. The choice at the moment is simple: An "Elected Mayor" or an "Unelected Leader". Personally I would prefer to go back to the drawing board, but of the two I know which one I would chose.