Leading the Localities: Executive Mayors in English Local Governance

241 Pages·2006·1.921 MB·English

by  Colin Copus

Leading the localities

Leading the localities
Executive mayors in English local governance
Colin Copus
Manchester University Press
Manchester and New York
distributed exclusively in the USA by Palgrave
Copyright © Colin Copus 2006
The right of Colin Copus to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by
him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
Published by Manchester University Press
Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9NR, UK
and Room 400, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010, USA
www.manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk
Distributed exclusively in the USA by
Palgrave, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York,
NY 10010, USA
Distributed exclusively in Canada by
UBC Press, University of British Columbia, 2029 West Mall,
Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z2
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data applied for
ISBN 0 7190 7186 0 hardback
EAN 978 0 7190 7186 7
First published 2006
15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Typeset
by R. J. Footring Ltd, Derby
Printed in Great Britain
by Biddles Ltd, King’s Lynn
Contents
List of tables and figures page vi
Preface viii
1 Introduction 1
2 Mayors: a new form of local politics or a very English
compromise? 23
3 Local political leadership and mayoral government 48
4 Running the council or leading the community?
A mayoral dichotomy 76
5 Democracy and representation: the rights of mayors 99
6 Elected mayors: a new style of English local politics? 121
7 The elected mayor: lessons from overseas 142
8 Councillors: a new and developing role or a diminished
responsibility? 164
9 Conclusion 191
Postscript: the 2005 mayoral elections 216
Bibliography 219
Index 227
v
List of tables and figures
Tables
2.1 Results in the first thirty English mayoral referendums 26
2.2 English mayoral election results, May and October 2002 32
3.1 Mayoral cabinet composition (pre-May 2004 local elections
and 2005 mayoral elections) 62
4.1 Mayors’ cabinet portfolios (pre-May 2004 local elections
and 2005 mayoral elections) 80
4.2 The results of Comprehensive Performance Assessments in
mayoral authorities, 2002–4 82
4.3 Percentage of councillors agreeing and disagreeing with
statements regarding important roles of the mayor,
by party affiliation 85
4.4 Percentage of councillors agreeing and disagreeing with
statements regarding mayoral priorities 87
7.1 Some distinctions between the US ‘weak’ mayor and
the US ‘strong’ mayor 147
8.1 Percentage of councillors agreeing and disagreeing with
statements regarding executive arrangements for the elected
mayor, by party affiliation 171
8.2 Percentage of councillors agreeing or strongly agreeing that
particular mayoral roles were important, by party affiliation 174
8.3 Percentage of councillors agreeing and disagreeing with
statements regarding aspects of mayoral decision-making,
by party affiliation 177
8.4 Percentage of councillors agreeing and disagreeing with
statements regarding mayoral authority, by party affiliation 178
8.5 Percentage of councillors agreeing and disagreeing with
statements regarding their changed role, by party affiliation 182
8.6 The preferences of councillors on mayoral authorities for
constitutional arrangements, by party affiliation 183
vi
List of tables and figures vii
9.1 Council composition, 2002 (when mayors were first elected)
and 2004 (last full year of mayoral office in four councils) 206
P1 Results of the English mayoral elections 2005 217
Figures
1.1 The mayor and cabinet executive arrangement 8
1.2 The indirectly elected leader and cabinet executive arrangement 9
1.3 The mayor and manager executive arrangement 10
3.1 Factors affecting the development of mayoral governance 70
8.1 The influential councillor 186
Preface
The most controversial element of the local government modernisation
project embarked upon by the Blair government has to have been the
introduction into the English political landscape of the directly elected
executive mayor. Transferring the power to choose the political head
of the council from councillors – selecting the council leader – to the
voters – electing the mayor in an at-large election – has the potential to
fundamentally alter the political dynamics of the council, the community
and the broader local governance network. Moreover, the opportunity
offered to the electorate to change the political leadership of the council
at a single stroke and the opening to political office that such at-large
election provides for candidates from outside the main political parties
were recognised and feared by local party political activists.
The Greater London Authority Act 1999 and the Local Government
Act 2000 gave local government, and local citizens, an opportunity to
experiment with direct election to local executive political office. These
Acts of Parliament set the legal framework within which three different
types of mayor would operate: the mayor of London; and, outside the
new Greater London Authority, the directly elected mayor and cabinet,
and the elected mayor and manager. The advent of elected mayors could,
potentially, disrupt long-standing patterns of political behaviour, the
dominance of political parties over local government and the relationship
that exists between the local political leader and local citizens. Moreover,
it makes very different demands on the way in which councillors conduct
political affairs and council business.
Yet it is vital that the introduction of elected mayors is seen in the
context of the long-term debate about the role of local government in
the political representation of local communities and in the provision of
important public services. Elected mayors have been parachuted into a
landscape in which little else has changed other than the way in which
the local political leader is selected. Lacking from this bold experiment
was any fundamental reassessment of the role and nature of local govern-
ment in England; mayors must govern with what they find when they
viii
Preface ix
arrive. They may be in a position to run the council, and to provide a
high-profile public face of the authority to the local community, but, if
that is all, then we are left with two key questions:
• What is the distinctive contribution elected mayors make, and could
make, to the governance of the English localities?
• Have we given the new mayors sufficient powers and responsibilities
to govern and lead the English localities?
It is these questions the book explores.
The book does not set out to evaluate the performance of the indi-
vidual English elected mayors or to draw unnecessary and unhelpful
comparisons between the skills and qualities of one mayor and those
of another. Neither does it set out to tell the story of particular mayors,
their journeys to office and what they as individuals have or have not
done. Rather, what follows is an exploration of how this new office has
so far contributed to notions of renewing and revitalising local govern-
ment and democracy and refreshing local politics. The book searches
for the conditions necessary to enable English elected mayors to make a
distinctive contribution not only to the governance of their localities, but
also to the wider political process of the country. Thus, the book uses the
early experiences of the office of directly elected mayor to explore what
this new form of local government can tell us about the future of English
local democracy and local politics.
The research for this book was done in 2003/4 and written up to
March 2005; it was conducted in all the mayoral authorities and included
in-depth interviews with elected mayors, in-depth interviews with coun-
cillors and officers from mayoral and non-mayoral authorities, case study
analysis and use of documentary evidence. In addition, a questionnaire
survey was conducted among councillors sitting on mayoral authorities; a
total of 531 questionnaires were circulated (though not to the councillors
of Stoke-on-Trent because some of the questions were not appropriate
for its mayor and manager system), and 253 were returned and usable for
analysis – giving a response rate of 48 per cent.
All the mayors and councillors interviewed were assured that the inter-
view data would be treated with absolute confidentiality and consequently
the vast majority of elaborative quotes and comments used in this book
have been anonymised. My thanks and gratitude go to the mayors who
willingly and enthusiastically gave of their valuable time to be interviewed
and who also provided documentary evidence and other material for the
book. Thanks also go to officers and councillors of mayoral authorities
for their cooperation and involvement in the research.
Throughout the book I have studiously avoided reporting anything
that could result in the formation of any sort of league table for mayors.
This is another reason for making much of the material unattributable.