Extra-Ordinary - But is it a good idea?
The Tories have called for a special Council Meeting on 25 November to debate the takeover of SCL by GLL . My previous posts go into some detail as to how this outcome was always likely to happen once we heard from GLL in late 2005 as to their relationship with SCL.
John Kennedy was not at the Strategy Committee that approved the change and it is clear from his remarks in the Sutton Guardian that he has not fully read the report on the transfer as he gave no explanation why the Committee's decsion was incorect. Indeed Strategy Committee even followed his advice to look after staff and chose not to make 11 staff redundant in the run up to Christmas and have now properly funded staff pensions - a traditional Tory issue.
As a result I can only presume that having instead read the Council Standing Orders he has convinced his Group Leadership (I suspect the Group as a whole have not discussed this) to call an extra-ordinary meeting which under the 1972 Local Government Act only requires 5 Councillors to make a request. This may sound exciting but is actually counter-productive as I will explain.
Before I give reasons why this might not be a good idea and the alternative ways to have this debate, I should point out that over 20 years I was on the Council the Labour Group never called for an extra-ordinary Council meeting and I knew the Standing Orders by heart! Our view was that it was like a nuclear weapon. You threatened to do it and extracted a few concession from officers, but you never needed to use it as you could always secure a debate anyway with a bit of negotiations.
The reason it will not be a good idea is that:
1. I predict Graham Tope will get up and point out that calling a special Council meeting usually costs £5,000-£10,000 in staff costs, thus the Tories will stand accused of wasting money, thus blunting any attack they do have.
2. The Tories could instead have requisitioned the item and agreed to withdraw all or part of the requisition in return for a debate on the subject at the December Council Meeting, thus not costing the Council an extra penny. Indeed only requisitioning item (ii) or (iii) of the recommendation would have achieved a debate and final endorsement of the decision in December. If the Lib Dems had refused this, then the Tories would have built on the moral highground they established on this issue from the way they debated it last time.
The Tories have made the error in thinking they are in power and their delaying a decision really counts, when the reality is they should remember they are in opposition and their real test is the 2010 elections and the public will not remember this event, so all they required was a debate at the next Council and a few lines in the local press.
As a result of this tactical blunder the Tories have lost part of the moral highground they gained from their previous debate and have instead delayed a delicate legal contract and caused more worry to SCL staff.
John Kennedy was not at the Strategy Committee that approved the change and it is clear from his remarks in the Sutton Guardian that he has not fully read the report on the transfer as he gave no explanation why the Committee's decsion was incorect. Indeed Strategy Committee even followed his advice to look after staff and chose not to make 11 staff redundant in the run up to Christmas and have now properly funded staff pensions - a traditional Tory issue.
As a result I can only presume that having instead read the Council Standing Orders he has convinced his Group Leadership (I suspect the Group as a whole have not discussed this) to call an extra-ordinary meeting which under the 1972 Local Government Act only requires 5 Councillors to make a request. This may sound exciting but is actually counter-productive as I will explain.
Before I give reasons why this might not be a good idea and the alternative ways to have this debate, I should point out that over 20 years I was on the Council the Labour Group never called for an extra-ordinary Council meeting and I knew the Standing Orders by heart! Our view was that it was like a nuclear weapon. You threatened to do it and extracted a few concession from officers, but you never needed to use it as you could always secure a debate anyway with a bit of negotiations.
The reason it will not be a good idea is that:
1. I predict Graham Tope will get up and point out that calling a special Council meeting usually costs £5,000-£10,000 in staff costs, thus the Tories will stand accused of wasting money, thus blunting any attack they do have.
2. The Tories could instead have requisitioned the item and agreed to withdraw all or part of the requisition in return for a debate on the subject at the December Council Meeting, thus not costing the Council an extra penny. Indeed only requisitioning item (ii) or (iii) of the recommendation would have achieved a debate and final endorsement of the decision in December. If the Lib Dems had refused this, then the Tories would have built on the moral highground they established on this issue from the way they debated it last time.
The Tories have made the error in thinking they are in power and their delaying a decision really counts, when the reality is they should remember they are in opposition and their real test is the 2010 elections and the public will not remember this event, so all they required was a debate at the next Council and a few lines in the local press.
As a result of this tactical blunder the Tories have lost part of the moral highground they gained from their previous debate and have instead delayed a delicate legal contract and caused more worry to SCL staff.
posted by Charlie Mansell at 7:18 pm
1 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment
<< Home