Call to cut number of councillors in Blackburn (From Blackburn Citizen)

Or just reduce the expenses...

happycyclist wrote:
Or just reduce the expenses...

They have been reduced already.

''Changing the number of councillors requires a lengthy process including a boundary commission review, consultation sanction by both Houses of Parliament taking up to four years''

The quote from the article is perfectly correct - many folk think that Councillors can just decide on the numbers of councillors per authority - they can't. It's set by the independent boundary commission every 20 years or so.

Welcome back New Labour Rose 1. Did your statistics calculator battery run out?

I've always respected Colin Rigby for being a straight shooter with common sense who tells it like it really is. A question which I have always asked: Why does Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council need 64 councillors, when a significantly larger city like Los Angeles (the second-largest metropolis by population on the North American continent), is more than able to get by with only 15 full-time and non-partisan elected councillors and an elected mayor? The analogy which I've always used to describe the BwDBC council chamber: "A bunch of guppies in a tiny puddle, who are under the delusion that they are actually whales."

Yankee Clipper wrote:
I've always respected Colin Rigby for being a straight shooter with common sense who tells it like it really is. A question which I have always asked: Why does Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council need 64 councillors, when a significantly larger city like Los Angeles (the second-largest metropolis by population on the North American continent), is more than able to get by with only 15 full-time and non-partisan elected councillors and an elected mayor? The analogy which I've always used to describe the BwDBC council chamber: "A bunch of guppies in a tiny puddle, who are under the delusion that they are actually whales."

"A bunch of guppies in a tiny puddle, who are under the delusion that they are actually whales."

Like it. That's what it really is!

Yankee Clipper wrote:
I've always respected Colin Rigby for being a straight shooter with common sense who tells it like it really is. A question which I have always asked: Why does Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council need 64 councillors, when a significantly larger city like Los Angeles (the second-largest metropolis by population on the North American continent), is more than able to get by with only 15 full-time and non-partisan elected councillors and an elected mayor? The analogy which I've always used to describe the BwDBC council chamber: "A bunch of guppies in a tiny puddle, who are under the delusion that they are actually whales."

If you read the article and subsequent comments it tells you !!
*
Numbers of councillors on each authority are decided by the independent boundary commission. So if the commission decides that BwD needs 15 Councillors it gets 15 - if it decides it needs 100 it gets 100 ! You can put your thoughts (as can everyone else) to the boundary commission when it does its periodic review.
*
Los Angeles (as do most US cities) have lots and lots of other public elected representatives other than councillors. For example, it has an elected Mayor on a large salary - something which BwD does not have. There is the LA city legislature, California state legislature, Governor of California's office, then a lot of Congressmen, both state and national reps. The cost of all these is probably greater than in the UK per head.
*
Before using daft analogies, please remember that BwD is the only Council to have been independently voted 'Council of the Year' twice. So the 'guppies' must be doing something right ! And has the lowest Councillor expenses of virtually any unitary council in the country.
*
These are the facts that District 01 hates !

penninelad wrote:

Yankee Clipper wrote:
I've always respected Colin Rigby for being a straight shooter with common sense who tells it like it really is. A question which I have always asked: Why does Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council need 64 councillors, when a significantly larger city like Los Angeles (the second-largest metropolis by population on the North American continent), is more than able to get by with only 15 full-time and non-partisan elected councillors and an elected mayor? The analogy which I've always used to describe the BwDBC council chamber: "A bunch of guppies in a tiny puddle, who are under the delusion that they are actually whales."

If you read the article and subsequent comments it tells you !!
*
Numbers of councillors on each authority are decided by the independent boundary commission. So if the commission decides that BwD needs 15 Councillors it gets 15 - if it decides it needs 100 it gets 100 ! You can put your thoughts (as can everyone else) to the boundary commission when it does its periodic review.
*
Los Angeles (as do most US cities) have lots and lots of other public elected representatives other than councillors. For example, it has an elected Mayor on a large salary - something which BwD does not have. There is the LA city legislature, California state legislature, Governor of California's office, then a lot of Congressmen, both state and national reps. The cost of all these is probably greater than in the UK per head.
*
Before using daft analogies, please remember that BwD is the only Council to have been independently voted 'Council of the Year' twice. So the 'guppies' must be doing something right ! And has the lowest Councillor expenses of virtually any unitary council in the country.
*
These are the facts that District 01 hates !

Why are you comparing us to Americans were not in America or is it because Blair and bush got a bit close and ruined our country and security

There a waste of space no value for money if theses people worked for a private company , they would be laid off ist , good ride cue I say :)

penninelad wrote:

Yankee Clipper wrote:
I've always respected Colin Rigby for being a straight shooter with common sense who tells it like it really is. A question which I have always asked: Why does Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council need 64 councillors, when a significantly larger city like Los Angeles (the second-largest metropolis by population on the North American continent), is more than able to get by with only 15 full-time and non-partisan elected councillors and an elected mayor? The analogy which I've always used to describe the BwDBC council chamber: "A bunch of guppies in a tiny puddle, who are under the delusion that they are actually whales."

If you read the article and subsequent comments it tells you !!
*
Numbers of councillors on each authority are decided by the independent boundary commission. So if the commission decides that BwD needs 15 Councillors it gets 15 - if it decides it needs 100 it gets 100 ! You can put your thoughts (as can everyone else) to the boundary commission when it does its periodic review.
*
Los Angeles (as do most US cities) have lots and lots of other public elected representatives other than councillors. For example, it has an elected Mayor on a large salary - something which BwD does not have. There is the LA city legislature, California state legislature, Governor of California's office, then a lot of Congressmen, both state and national reps. The cost of all these is probably greater than in the UK per head.
*
Before using daft analogies, please remember that BwD is the only Council to have been independently voted 'Council of the Year' twice. So the 'guppies' must be doing something right ! And has the lowest Councillor expenses of virtually any unitary council in the country.
*
These are the facts that District 01 hates !

Thanks for the information ‘peninelad’.

Had to look twice at the password though, the content very similar to ‘new labour rose 1’. No, I don’t hate those supposed facts that you carefully provided in great detail. It’s just the general outlook and falling standards that Blackburn has become that I hate most. But those lowering of standards will never change will they?

Blackburn is ruled by age old political class fears. Just take a look at the voting figures for Wensley Fold to prove that point. Not an area of wealth is it, and no fault of those living there either. They vote that way because they don’t trust the other lot and for no other reason. Being a councillor in those areas are provided with a free ride. Just like the reason that Jack Straw has been travelling to Blackburn for so long. There‘s no opposition!

I dont think this is the answer. if the people cant turn to a councilor for help what will ever get done? Shadsworth 3 councilors are always to hand if you need help. they are loyal and true to their word. how many more cut bavk do we have to put up with as soon this will be a third world country with pot holes jobless people and homeless.

phil kernot wrote:
There a waste of space no value for money if theses people worked for a private company , they would be laid off ist , good ride cue I say :)

So you want a dictatorship then ? Maybe Syria would be your example ?

district01 wrote:

penninelad wrote:

Yankee Clipper wrote:
I've always respected Colin Rigby for being a straight shooter with common sense who tells it like it really is. A question which I have always asked: Why does Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council need 64 councillors, when a significantly larger city like Los Angeles (the second-largest metropolis by population on the North American continent), is more than able to get by with only 15 full-time and non-partisan elected councillors and an elected mayor? The analogy which I've always used to describe the BwDBC council chamber: "A bunch of guppies in a tiny puddle, who are under the delusion that they are actually whales."

If you read the article and subsequent comments it tells you !!
*
Numbers of councillors on each authority are decided by the independent boundary commission. So if the commission decides that BwD needs 15 Councillors it gets 15 - if it decides it needs 100 it gets 100 ! You can put your thoughts (as can everyone else) to the boundary commission when it does its periodic review.
*
Los Angeles (as do most US cities) have lots and lots of other public elected representatives other than councillors. For example, it has an elected Mayor on a large salary - something which BwD does not have. There is the LA city legislature, California state legislature, Governor of California's office, then a lot of Congressmen, both state and national reps. The cost of all these is probably greater than in the UK per head.
*
Before using daft analogies, please remember that BwD is the only Council to have been independently voted 'Council of the Year' twice. So the 'guppies' must be doing something right ! And has the lowest Councillor expenses of virtually any unitary council in the country.
*
These are the facts that District 01 hates !

Thanks for the information ‘peninelad’.

Had to look twice at the password though, the content very similar to ‘new labour rose 1’. No, I don’t hate those supposed facts that you carefully provided in great detail. It’s just the general outlook and falling standards that Blackburn has become that I hate most. But those lowering of standards will never change will they?

Blackburn is ruled by age old political class fears. Just take a look at the voting figures for Wensley Fold to prove that point. Not an area of wealth is it, and no fault of those living there either. They vote that way because they don’t trust the other lot and for no other reason. Being a councillor in those areas are provided with a free ride. Just like the reason that Jack Straw has been travelling to Blackburn for so long. There‘s no opposition!

Why don't YOU stand in Wensley Fold then ? Go on, give Labour a run for their money !
*
I'm sure you are not afraid of a bit of hard work to get elected and with your populist views are a sure fire winner. Go for it !

english rose 1 wrote:

phil kernot wrote:
There a waste of space no value for money if theses people worked for a private company , they would be laid off ist , good ride cue I say :)

So you want a dictatorship then ? Maybe Syria would be your example ?

Oh, - and at least 26 BwD Councillors currently work in the private sector, with another 17 now retired, but who worked in the private sector.

Councillors are in demand with the voters because they get things done. This is of course, after their voter has already tried in vain at the council offices.
However, if you think about it, they are only using their power to circumvent the very rules that they imposed upon the Authority staff.
So, if someone kept a record of the successes of the Councillor and how they did it, we would be able to have those impositions removed by a council vote.
A nice thought but as ever, turkeys don't vote for Xmas, do they?
Reducing red tape would improve both the efficacy and efficiency of the system and have the knock on of relieving the need for so many Councillors.

english rose 1 wrote:

district01 wrote:

penninelad wrote:

Yankee Clipper wrote:
I've always respected Colin Rigby for being a straight shooter with common sense who tells it like it really is. A question which I have always asked: Why does Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council need 64 councillors, when a significantly larger city like Los Angeles (the second-largest metropolis by population on the North American continent), is more than able to get by with only 15 full-time and non-partisan elected councillors and an elected mayor? The analogy which I've always used to describe the BwDBC council chamber: "A bunch of guppies in a tiny puddle, who are under the delusion that they are actually whales."

If you read the article and subsequent comments it tells you !!
*
Numbers of councillors on each authority are decided by the independent boundary commission. So if the commission decides that BwD needs 15 Councillors it gets 15 - if it decides it needs 100 it gets 100 ! You can put your thoughts (as can everyone else) to the boundary commission when it does its periodic review.
*
Los Angeles (as do most US cities) have lots and lots of other public elected representatives other than councillors. For example, it has an elected Mayor on a large salary - something which BwD does not have. There is the LA city legislature, California state legislature, Governor of California's office, then a lot of Congressmen, both state and national reps. The cost of all these is probably greater than in the UK per head.
*
Before using daft analogies, please remember that BwD is the only Council to have been independently voted 'Council of the Year' twice. So the 'guppies' must be doing something right ! And has the lowest Councillor expenses of virtually any unitary council in the country.
*
These are the facts that District 01 hates !

Thanks for the information ‘peninelad’.

Had to look twice at the password though, the content very similar to ‘new labour rose 1’. No, I don’t hate those supposed facts that you carefully provided in great detail. It’s just the general outlook and falling standards that Blackburn has become that I hate most. But those lowering of standards will never change will they?

Blackburn is ruled by age old political class fears. Just take a look at the voting figures for Wensley Fold to prove that point. Not an area of wealth is it, and no fault of those living there either. They vote that way because they don’t trust the other lot and for no other reason. Being a councillor in those areas are provided with a free ride. Just like the reason that Jack Straw has been travelling to Blackburn for so long. There‘s no opposition!

Why don't YOU stand in Wensley Fold then ? Go on, give Labour a run for their money !
*
I'm sure you are not afraid of a bit of hard work to get elected and with your populist views are a sure fire winner. Go for it !

Sorry Rose, but you simply don’t understand do you?

Nobody would stand a chance against a new labour candidate within Wensley Fold. It is a working class area with too many biased voters views handed down generation to generation from the industrial past. Tony Blair took over The Labour Party and his disciples are still there pretending to be something they are not. Tony Blair remains what he has always been. A money machine riding on the back of a party that used to be honourable.

Bring back The Labour Party!

penninelad wrote:

Yankee Clipper wrote:
I've always respected Colin Rigby for being a straight shooter with common sense who tells it like it really is. A question which I have always asked: Why does Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council need 64 councillors, when a significantly larger city like Los Angeles (the second-largest metropolis by population on the North American continent), is more than able to get by with only 15 full-time and non-partisan elected councillors and an elected mayor? The analogy which I've always used to describe the BwDBC council chamber: "A bunch of guppies in a tiny puddle, who are under the delusion that they are actually whales."

If you read the article and subsequent comments it tells you !!
*
Numbers of councillors on each authority are decided by the independent boundary commission. So if the commission decides that BwD needs 15 Councillors it gets 15 - if it decides it needs 100 it gets 100 ! You can put your thoughts (as can everyone else) to the boundary commission when it does its periodic review.
*
Los Angeles (as do most US cities) have lots and lots of other public elected representatives other than councillors. For example, it has an elected Mayor on a large salary - something which BwD does not have. There is the LA city legislature, California state legislature, Governor of California's office, then a lot of Congressmen, both state and national reps. The cost of all these is probably greater than in the UK per head.
*
Before using daft analogies, please remember that BwD is the only Council to have been independently voted 'Council of the Year' twice. So the 'guppies' must be doing something right ! And has the lowest Councillor expenses of virtually any unitary council in the country.
*
These are the facts that District 01 hates !

The "Council of the Year" award actually has nothing to do with either the quality of services provided, or the quality of life in the borough. It is the result of a "tick the box" paper exercise conducted by outside auditors examining whether the local authority is good at record keeping, coupled with the results of a job satisfaction questionaire completed by a sampling of council officers (of which I was one). Now for a little civics lesson for penninelad. Yes, there is a Governor in the State of California, as well as a California State Assembly and California State Senate. However, there is not, nor has there ever been a "LA city legislature." All of the above have little to do with the day-to-day delivery of services provided by the City of Los Angeles. Putting aside your very parochial thinking for a moment, the "daft analogy" being used was to illustrate a simple point: BwDBC and other similar-sized local authorities are wasting valuable financial resources by having overly-bloated council chambers, containing far more elected members than are actually required or necessary. And long-serving Cllr Colin Rigby clearly recognises this and honourably spoke out. Yes, there are a handful of elected members who are honestly attempting to constructively make a positive difference on behalf of their constituents. On the other hand, there are far too many in that same chamber who frankly are a waste of space (irregardless of party affiliation). Many are long past their "sell by date", are in there to build up their delusions of self-importance and take advantage of various perks, and/or to collect council tax-funded stipends to supplement their exisiting salaries or old age pensions. English Rose is quite correct in her comments about the boundaries commission, but that still doesn't excuse the fact that a re-examination of the current numbers of elected members is needed and long-overdue. I would also propose instituting term limits on our elected officials.

I have always had a great respect for Colin Rigby who speaks common sense. Same can't be said of other Councillors.