I went in to the Municipal Buildings yesterday to "sign on" as a Councillor. You have to do this to accept the elected office and if you don't do it by a certain date you are out(although why anyone would not turn up after so much campaigning effort is beyond me).
There is actually an opportunity to do this at a sort of ceremony a bit later this month - which is nice for new people. For myself I just want to get going!
6 comments:
Hi Paula, congrats though I couldn't vote for you becuase of my disdain for your libdem colleagues I do wish you well as my councillor.
I was wondering what was your view of Nadia Stewarts defection which secured your parties continued hold over the council?
Whilst I appreciate that peoples views can change over the course of a term to the extent that they may have to leave their chosen party I'm concerned about rumours that talks between the LibDems and Cllr Stewart had been on going for some weeks and that she had agreed to take the whip up to 2 weeks before the election.
In my view this is election fraud in that she did not present the facts about her candidacy, her loyalties or her intentions to voters when they were asked to make the most important of decisions.
Whilst I appreciate that you may not wish to comment directly on this I can't see how someone who has continually talked about encouraging participation can think that such behaviour will do anything but turn people of voting.
On a personal level I think this makes a complete mockery of the political process and the idea of public representation and in a city with pretty much the lowest voter turnout of the Nation I would hope that whatever your party views you would stand up to such low political dealings.
Hi Paula
and congratualtions on your election. I wonder would you give us your thoughts on the elections as a whole and the sitaution with your new colleague Cllr Stewart? are you willing to let us know who you will be backing in the election on monday for your leader?
Rob
Hello both
I am going to keep my voting intentions in leadership contests to myself for the time being.
PM Swimmer - if your chronology was correct I would be yelling blue murder. It is certainly true that Nadia Stewart had been thinking about joining the Lib Dems for a while. But she wasn't elected last week - but back in 2006 (re elected in fact after first winning in 2004) Being a South of the City girl I am not really that au fait with the goings on in Croxteth - but my understanding is that she got pregnant and had a baby some time after being elected, and had a dispute with the Labour party over various things round about that time. (The two are linked as there are allegations of her being bullied while pregnant) She then became an independent on the City Council. It is from this position that she then moved to the Lib Dems. I understand that she had been working for some time in a cross party way with the Lib Dem councillor in Croxteth and I suspect this is part of what made her think about which party she really wanted to be a member of.
I don't know Nadia at all so I don't know what strengths she will bring (she doesn't know me either)
Given the figures when all the results were in , there is actually no way Labour could have put together a co alition to run the City. There were initially 45 Lib Dems which leaves 45 made up of Labour and others. Of this 45 one is the incoming Lord Mayor (so not voting). Two are greens who had already put out a written statement saying they would not do a deal with Labour. That takes the numbers down to 42. And that's before Nadia. So those writers who have claimed that Labour could have put together a co alition to run the City haven't actually looked at it closely enough.
I may well post some more general thoughts on the election, the campaign and the outcomes in the near future. For now I am concentrating on some local issues that had not been dealt with by the person I replaced, and on the massive backlog of work that I found in my office on my return! (Funny how people wait to deposit work until you are not there!!!)
I was at a full coucil meeting a few months ago when the Lord Mayor twice cast his vote when there was a tie
does this not class as voting?
there wouldn't be a tie though.. Lord Mayor is "not voting" unless there is a tie in which case s/he is expected to vote (usually for status quo). However being "not voting" means labour would be one vote down to start with and so if everyone was there and voting labour and others could not get to the tied situation.
you seem yo feel that the idea of a hung council where local liverpool councillors were unable to get through any policies would be a bad thing. given the current state of our councillors I and many many others would see that as an ideal situation.
Post a Comment