Pit Balls?
WHAT THE PAPERS SAY...
In May 1990, I was elected the youngest member on the Conservative Group on Watford Borough Councillor. It was clear that as we entered the last decade of the 20th Century, local government in England was about to undergo some serious changes. The big debate at the time was whether it was possible and desirable to have so-called 'unitary authorities' to replace the two, sometimes three, councils that existed in many parts of England governing the same area.
It was also a time when the role of the 'volunteer, community minded' councillor was changing. The political left saw local councils as a vehicle to change social attitudes and the sort of political correctness that we now take for granted was on the rise. So the controlling ('old') Labour Group (eventually, there were only three Conservatives against 25-odd Labour members on the Council) started recruitment drives for council employees who would be responsible for such things as gender issues and equal opportunities. In policy terms, Father Christmas was banned from being a traditional figure around Watford Town Hall at Christmas for reasons that were never clear to me - either because he was white or he was a bloke or he was both?!
Of course, I spoke out against these moves (Talk Balls) which in practically all instances took us away from focusing (Eye on the Ball) on the core services that our relatively small administrative body was supposed to provide. Namely, picking up the rubbish, offering basic leisure services to the community and (at that time) managing the social housing stock. This was our business. Not seeking to re-engineer the social attitudes of the people who elected us.
In the end, it was a futile effort to try to stop these changes at that time. The growing unpopularity of the central Conservative Government meant that people used their franchise rights at a local level to protest vote - even if that meant socialism. What the 'old' Labour Party visited on unsuspecting administrative bodies like Watford Borough Council in the nineties culminated in the most egregious act against the spirit of community service on 11 September 2001 (9/11) when a New Labour Government Party apparatchik let known the plans for an enormous increase in councillors expenses (See: It's now a very good day to get out anything we want to bury. Councillors' expenses? ). This encouraged councillors who want to be 'socially active' with public money to take up the mantle fulltime. Even today, the 'expenses' and pensions paid to councillors for what was once a voluntary exercise to oversee a professional 'council executive team' distorts local government decision making and leaves less money for local services.
After several years battling away, I announced that I wanted to 'spend more time with my family' and would not be standing for reelection. The local newspaper, the Watford Observer, ran the editorial above on 23 October 1993.
In May 1990, I was elected the youngest member on the Conservative Group on Watford Borough Councillor. It was clear that as we entered the last decade of the 20th Century, local government in England was about to undergo some serious changes. The big debate at the time was whether it was possible and desirable to have so-called 'unitary authorities' to replace the two, sometimes three, councils that existed in many parts of England governing the same area.
It was also a time when the role of the 'volunteer, community minded' councillor was changing. The political left saw local councils as a vehicle to change social attitudes and the sort of political correctness that we now take for granted was on the rise. So the controlling ('old') Labour Group (eventually, there were only three Conservatives against 25-odd Labour members on the Council) started recruitment drives for council employees who would be responsible for such things as gender issues and equal opportunities. In policy terms, Father Christmas was banned from being a traditional figure around Watford Town Hall at Christmas for reasons that were never clear to me - either because he was white or he was a bloke or he was both?!
Of course, I spoke out against these moves (Talk Balls) which in practically all instances took us away from focusing (Eye on the Ball) on the core services that our relatively small administrative body was supposed to provide. Namely, picking up the rubbish, offering basic leisure services to the community and (at that time) managing the social housing stock. This was our business. Not seeking to re-engineer the social attitudes of the people who elected us.
In the end, it was a futile effort to try to stop these changes at that time. The growing unpopularity of the central Conservative Government meant that people used their franchise rights at a local level to protest vote - even if that meant socialism. What the 'old' Labour Party visited on unsuspecting administrative bodies like Watford Borough Council in the nineties culminated in the most egregious act against the spirit of community service on 11 September 2001 (9/11) when a New Labour Government Party apparatchik let known the plans for an enormous increase in councillors expenses (See: It's now a very good day to get out anything we want to bury. Councillors' expenses? ). This encouraged councillors who want to be 'socially active' with public money to take up the mantle fulltime. Even today, the 'expenses' and pensions paid to councillors for what was once a voluntary exercise to oversee a professional 'council executive team' distorts local government decision making and leaves less money for local services.
After several years battling away, I announced that I wanted to 'spend more time with my family' and would not be standing for reelection. The local newspaper, the Watford Observer, ran the editorial above on 23 October 1993.
|
|
Let's Get Connected. Link up with Gary through LinkedIN
|
