Labour cut away the “dead wood”, is it our turn to follow?
Rob is an editor of Tory Hoose. He is the 2012 Council Candidate for Kilmarnock East & Hurlford ward and was the 2011 Holyrood Election Agent for Kilmarnock & Irvine Valley. Follow Rob on Twitter Read more from this author
With the Labour party cutting away the “dead wood” for their Council election candidates next year in Glasgow is it about time the Scottish Conservative & Unionist Party do the same?
For too long now both at Scottish Parliamentary elections and Council elections are new candidates turned away due to a ‘loyalty’ associations seem to have towards long standing members of the party.
Taking this approach has not helped the party locally or nationally, we have been seen as the out of touch out, of date party and on more occasions that not, I hear or read in the media the phrase “same old Tory policies and boring candidates”.
We need to move away from this and follow the Labour Party in Glasgow (I also hope in Ayrshire the Labour group will follow) and cut away the “dead wood”, a move which may help us in the up-coming Council elections.
One thing that will be interesting is whether the Labour Party allows Councillors to stand again if they have spent most of their time carrying out their second job and not the one they were elected to do!
Something sits uneasy with me, when we (and other parties) allow their candidates to carry out another full time job whilst they are meant to earning a full time wage at tax payer’s expense as Councillors! This must stop! Yes the Councillors wage is a dib in pay for most however once elected one should carry out the role to its full. Too many times on the door steps I have heard people say they never see their Councillor, or their Councillor very rarely is in the chambers, or their Councillor is very rarely at Community Council meetings. It’s simple; once you are elected you should be turning up to most Community Council meetings and be treating this job as your full time job, if you cannot fulfil the job then don’t apply!
I welcome the Labour Group on their decision in Glasgow; I only hope the Scottish Conservatives carry out this well needed clear out!
You’re absolutely right on the dead wood argument, we need to make sure that there is a good turnover of candidates to ensure new ideas, new energy and challenge comes forward.
In terms of your full-time point, I’ve got to say that you are very wrong here and in danger of stopping a healthy turnover of councillors. At the moment the Councillors salary is set up to be a part-time salary in compensation for lost earnings – the Scottish Local Authority Remuneration Committee admits this in all the reporting they did in the run up to salaries being set and in the recent review.
To have a rule that would make Councillors give up paid employment would effectively make them professional politicians – this is undesirable both in terms of good representation on councils and in terms of promoting a healthy turnover of candidates. If the only thing you can do is continue to sit on a council, having given up a professional job, then you are going to stay there as long as possible. You try explaining to a private employer what being a Councillor entails and you’ll get a blank look – the skills are not transferrable. I have to keep asking myself how much longer I can do the job of Councillor without becoming completely unemployable anywhere else – if I reach the thirty year service mark, I will be the “dead wood” you speak of and probably have lost all the skills I need to work in the private sector. Euthanasia, anyone?
Very fair comment there Neil regarding full timers!
There has to come a point though where Councillors should have a minimum level of commitment to the role. We have too many Councillors take their Council salary, turn up to the full council meeting and hold the once in a blue moon surgery and that it it! Surely this is not effective? What are the alternative options?- Fewer Councillors, however full time?
I had heard Councillors salaries are due to rise as a small percentage of the MSP salary?
I do see where you are coming from, I just feel there needs to be a greater balance between private full time job and being a Councillor.
When I first became a councillor we were paid attendance allowance; e.g. you only got the meagre pittance: no salary then if you turned up to meetings. I had a full-time job and had to work an 18 hour day to fulfil the commitment to my job and to the people who elected me.
Suddenly someone had a bright idea; a flat rate allowance, and overnight, attendance at meeings and outside bodies dropped off by those councillors who had a seat they did not need to work.
I am now infuriated at the councillors who, under STV, were elected and receive a salary, even at part time rates, while keeping on their full-time job. They only attend the occasional meeting and infrequently hold surgeries and never attend any outside body. These “coasters” will probably get elected again as those of us with commitment have to pick up their work.
Perhaps the way to get committed councillors is to go back to an attendance allowance or dock the salary of councillors who do not pull their weight. They might then pay more attention to the people who they are supposed to represent.
Some councillors elected in 2007 have been dead wood for 4 years. Some councillors who have been around for many years are far from dead wood.