Copeland Borough Council meeting this evening
CBC met this afternoon at 2pm in the Copeland Centre to set the council's 2015/16 budget.
I was present in the area reserved for the public until shortly after the main budget was passed. This was followed by the report of the independent panel which makes recommendations on the level of allowances which should be paid to councillor, and which this year had its' remit extended to include the salary of the directly-elected mayor.
At this point a Labour amendment to the panel proposals was moved and it was immediately clear that this would be very controversial (so much so that the police were called.)
I removed myself from the meeting at this stage from concern that my presence might place my Conservative colleagues in an invidious position while councillors were voting on a proposal to pay the elected mayor an annual salary of £30,000 instead of the £50,000 recommended by the Independent Panel. Although I don't believe any of the Conservative councillors would have been influenced by my presence to vote for anything other than what they thought was the appropriate salary I did not want them to be open to the accusation that they might have been so influenced.
I am reliably informed, however, that during the debate one of the Labour councillors made a most interesting comment. He said that he personally did not agree with the amendment he was about to vote for and would have preferred to support the Independent Panel recommendation, but that his party group had discussed this and they had agreed that their policy would be to support the amendment, so he would vote with the party whip.
Gilbert & Sullivan put into the mouths of their fictitious first Lord of the Admiralty the words
"I always voted at my party's call,
And I never thought of thinking for myself at all
I thought so little they rewarded me
By making me the ruler of the Queen's Navy"
It appears that Sir Joseph Porter is alive and well and representing Mirehouse ward on Copeland Borough Council. I wonder how many others voted against their actual opinion this afternoon but were less open about it.
I was present in the area reserved for the public until shortly after the main budget was passed. This was followed by the report of the independent panel which makes recommendations on the level of allowances which should be paid to councillor, and which this year had its' remit extended to include the salary of the directly-elected mayor.
At this point a Labour amendment to the panel proposals was moved and it was immediately clear that this would be very controversial (so much so that the police were called.)
I removed myself from the meeting at this stage from concern that my presence might place my Conservative colleagues in an invidious position while councillors were voting on a proposal to pay the elected mayor an annual salary of £30,000 instead of the £50,000 recommended by the Independent Panel. Although I don't believe any of the Conservative councillors would have been influenced by my presence to vote for anything other than what they thought was the appropriate salary I did not want them to be open to the accusation that they might have been so influenced.
I am reliably informed, however, that during the debate one of the Labour councillors made a most interesting comment. He said that he personally did not agree with the amendment he was about to vote for and would have preferred to support the Independent Panel recommendation, but that his party group had discussed this and they had agreed that their policy would be to support the amendment, so he would vote with the party whip.
Gilbert & Sullivan put into the mouths of their fictitious first Lord of the Admiralty the words
"I always voted at my party's call,
And I never thought of thinking for myself at all
I thought so little they rewarded me
By making me the ruler of the Queen's Navy"
It appears that Sir Joseph Porter is alive and well and representing Mirehouse ward on Copeland Borough Council. I wonder how many others voted against their actual opinion this afternoon but were less open about it.
Comments
Would you both like to confirm if you agree with the mayoral salary resolution that was passed by full council on Thursday?
If you dont agree with the resolution passed by full council, would you be willing to say that you won't stand for your respective parties as Mayoral Candidates, unless the salary reflects the role?
The current proposal will mean there will be no independent candidates at all.
If you both stand down, the salary proposals should also be rejected by both Labour & Conservatives.
However, if you both go ahead and stand, and then attempt to get the salary changed after the Election it will be seen as deliberate ploy to have no independent in the race to win the election, in an underhand manner.
If you both say you are not prepared to accept the proposal, this ludicrous decision would have to be reversed.
We already know that the majority view of the councillors was to accept the recommendation of the independent panel.
It has been confirmed to us that Labour were split 11/9 but 9 councillors were forced to vote with the whip.
Democracy is your hands Mr Gibbons and Mr Whiteside. What do you say?
I entirely agree that it was a ludicrous decision - and you can fundamentally undemocratic and essentially corrupt.
The proposals have already been rejected by Conservative councillors who voted against them to a man and woman.
Unfortunately my colleagues do not have a majority on the council and Labour currently do.
However, with the greatest of respect, I don't think this Labour trap was just set for Independent candidates. I am certain that Labour were hoping that I would withdraw.
It would not surprise me in the least if Copeland Labour have a press release already written which was ready to be issued the instant I withdrew, arguing that this proves I am a selfish greedy you-know-what (insert here the list of all the usual insults that Labour throw at Tories at the tinest excuse) who was only in it for the money.
So my problem with your suggestion that I withdraw is that I think it would play right into the hands of the perpetrators of this disgraceful undemocratic farce and give them precisely what they want. Both by giving them ammunition which fits exactly into the narrative of their propaganda that their opponents are greedy fat cats and by enabling their candidate to win unopposed.
In the immensely unlikely event that Steve Gibbons were to withdraw from the election, then I would reconsider my position when I had picked my jaw off the floor, to which it would have fallen in astonishment.
But I will not be holding my breath waiting for this to happen. I think we are more likely to see pigs flying backwards round Copeland Centre.
Yesterday, I posted the same comment on Steve Gibbons Facebook page. He is as perplexed as yourself and has condemned the decision to go against the IRP recommendation.
I too condemn what happened in the council chambers. The use of the whip on this vote was undemocratic.
The Labour Party were split internally with 11 for and 9 against the ammendment. It was a last throw of the dice by a dying party to excerpt control over council and the people.
Mr Gibbons has publicly announced that he would like to see the decision looked at, at the earliest opportunity by full council, after the election. He would also like to see child-care issues looked at for members.
I welcome Mr Gibbons condemnation of the vote and his public criticism of councillors whom he accused of being in denial about the council changing.