|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Aug 15, 2023 11:00:00 GMT
Can I give you the example of the directly elected School Boards set up in 1870 under Forster's Act, abolished in 1904 and powers transferred to education committees of county councils?
An even more direct example are the Poor Law Boards of Guardians, set up in 1835 and directly elected by anyone paying the Poor Rate. Abolished 1930 with powers transferred to lower tier local authorities.
|
|
It used to be Vote 2006
Guest
|
Post by It used to be Vote 2006 on Aug 15, 2023 11:35:12 GMT
What modern precedents are there for replacing a directly-elected body once established with an indirectly elected one to carry out the same functions? (Assuming that reversion to a Police Authority-like structure is what aboltionists are suggesting). The only one I can come up with is the Inner London Education Authority (late 1980s version). Various directly elected mayors have been abolished (Bristol, Hartlepool, Liverpool, Stoke, Torbay) with powers reverting to the council - in at least some cases a leader and cabinet model. Whilst of course the councillors themselves are elected, they're not elected as leader, and certainly not elected in a whole-region vote. Ah yes, I hadn't considered them, thanks. A function of not living in an area that has or ever had them.
I sometimes wonder if you're going to have on a local level both an elected executive post and a legislative body, combining both into a single election - spitzenkandidaten-esque - might make more sense. I believe the Italian system is a bit like that, and possibly the French?
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Aug 15, 2023 11:43:25 GMT
Can I give you the example of the directly elected School Boards set up in 1870 under Forster's Act, abolished in 1904 and powers transferred to education committees of county councils? An even more direct example are the Poor Law Boards of Guardians, set up in 1835 and directly elected by anyone paying the Poor Rate. Abolished 1930 with powers transferred to lower tier local authorities. or the short lived inner London education authority that were directly elected for a single term after the GLC was abolished and then was abolished itself and powers transferred to council boroughs education authority
|
|
It used to be Vote 2006
Guest
|
Post by It used to be Vote 2006 on Aug 15, 2023 11:57:06 GMT
Can I give you the example of the directly elected School Boards set up in 1870 under Forster's Act, abolished in 1904 and powers transferred to education committees of county councils? An even more direct example are the Poor Law Boards of Guardians, set up in 1835 and directly elected by anyone paying the Poor Rate. Abolished 1930 with powers transferred to lower tier local authorities. Again thanks, particularly for laying out the timescales. In particular I'm surprised the latter lasted as long as they did. If I'd had to guess I would've gone for sometime during the 1906-14 Liberal welfare reforms.
I think these two bodies are probably the closest parallels in that they existed across the country (as PCCs do/did), as distinct from various elected mayors which have been/are limited to certain (types of) areas.
|
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Aug 15, 2023 12:42:19 GMT
Can I give you the example of the directly elected School Boards set up in 1870 under Forster's Act, abolished in 1904 and powers transferred to education committees of county councils? I am torn between, on the one hand, my sneaking admiration of Taylorism and the Efficiency Movement which impacted the move to scrap the boards and, on the other, my belief that we should have elected school boards that can transcend boundaries and be directly responsible to taxpayers. Unfortunately, thanks to Robert Morant, they won't ever come back: I'm also torn by my admiration of Morant despite his attempts to get rid of Katherine Bathurst.
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Aug 15, 2023 15:55:15 GMT
There is already a test of the quality of candidates. It's called the election. If you don't like the public officials that produces, take that up with the electorate. I have very little time for the electorate and would reduce the franchise substantially. However it should be pointed out the electorate is very rarely offered a high quality candidate.
|
|
|
Post by uthacalthing on Aug 15, 2023 16:38:17 GMT
There is already a test of the quality of candidates. It's called the election. If you don't like the public officials that produces, take that up with the electorate. I have very little time for the electorate and would reduce the franchise substantially. However it should be pointed out the electorate is very rarely offered a high quality candidate. Cause and effect.
|
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Aug 15, 2023 18:19:44 GMT
Can I give you the example of the directly elected School Boards set up in 1870 under Forster's Act, abolished in 1904 and powers transferred to education committees of county councils? An even more direct example are the Poor Law Boards of Guardians, set up in 1835 and directly elected by anyone paying the Poor Rate. Abolished 1930 with powers transferred to lower tier local authorities. or the short lived inner London education authority that were directly elected for a single term after the GLC was abolished and then was abolished itself and powers transferred to council boroughs education authority
Ironically 'a single term' is exactly how long I attended an ILEA school for, before it became 'grant-maintained'.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,143
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Aug 15, 2023 20:25:34 GMT
At candidate selection, I once witnessed a brutal defenestration when Fraser, once of this parish, asked every candidate if they could tell him how many councilors were on Aberdeen Council and how many each party had. Then he asked them to explain the Single Transferable Vote On Only Connect last night, both teams of three struggled to decide how many MPs there were at Westminster, ball-parking at 300.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Aug 15, 2023 20:34:30 GMT
At candidate selection, I once witnessed a brutal defenestration when Fraser, once of this parish, asked every candidate if they could tell him how many councilors were on Aberdeen Council and how many each party had. Then he asked them to explain the Single Transferable Vote On Only Connect last night, both teams of three struggled to decide how many MPs there were at Westminster, ball-parking at 300. Good grief.
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Aug 15, 2023 21:00:35 GMT
At candidate selection, I once witnessed a brutal defenestration when Fraser, once of this parish, asked every candidate if they could tell him how many councilors were on Aberdeen Council and how many each party had. Then he asked them to explain the Single Transferable Vote On Only Connect last night, both teams of three struggled to decide how many MPs there were at Westminster, ball-parking at 300. Having had to explain what a constituency is to colleagues before now, I think it's always worth remembering that the general public is not like us.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Aug 15, 2023 21:07:56 GMT
On Only Connect last night, both teams of three struggled to decide how many MPs there were at Westminster, ball-parking at 300. Having had to explain what a constituency is to colleagues before now, I think it's always worth remembering that the general public is not like us. Now he tells us!
|
|
|
Post by uthacalthing on Aug 15, 2023 21:31:16 GMT
I think it's always worth remembering that the general public is not like us. They are not like you. And they are also not like me. But I am having none of this us stuff
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Aug 15, 2023 21:52:16 GMT
Having had to explain what a constituency is to colleagues before now, I think it's always worth remembering that the general public is not like us. Now he tells us! We've got to protect ourselves against the outside world as we can. They're not even into puns like we are.
|
|
|
Post by uthacalthing on Aug 15, 2023 21:59:00 GMT
On this board, there are forty threads and 150 posts.
Forty posts are to indicate that a thread exists
Fifty-four are in the thread "Criticisms of the PCC election process"
Soon that thread will account for the majority of traffic on this subject.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Aug 15, 2023 22:01:02 GMT
If we weren't all here agreeing that the election process was useless, we'd be spending all our time agreeing that the PCC posts themselves are a total waste of time.
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Aug 16, 2023 7:51:41 GMT
There is already a test of the quality of candidates. It's called the election. If you don't like the public officials that produces, take that up with the electorate. I have very little time for the electorate and would reduce the franchise substantially. However it should be pointed out the electorate is very rarely offered a high quality candidate. Nobody who calls for reducing the franchise should be treated with respect unless the range of people they want to deny the vote to includes themselves. Even then, they should be ignored, but ignored more respectfully than is otherwise the case.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Aug 16, 2023 10:10:10 GMT
I have very little time for the electorate and would reduce the franchise substantially. However it should be pointed out the electorate is very rarely offered a high quality candidate. Nobody who calls for reducing the franchise should be treated with respect unless the range of people they want to deny the vote to includes themselves. Even then, they should be ignored, but ignored more respectfully than is otherwise the case. The wider the franchise the lower the level of education and understanding and even interest in that electorate. So you are in effect arguing for a position where a more ignorant and irrational electorate decide the affairs of the nation. Is that because your desire for the absolutist principle of inclusion trumps your own inherent rationality of what is obviously best? Or that a large, lazy, ignorant electorate is far easier to manipulate by simple rhetoric and bribery to support you blindly in what you do? A wider franchise must always mean a poorer and weaker and more corrupt outcome. It is a common falsity to regard a universal suffrage to be a given or a good thing, when all the evidence suggests quite the opposite.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 37,863
|
Post by The Bishop on Aug 16, 2023 10:29:26 GMT
What you are doing, quite effectively, is listing some of the undoubted downsides of democracy.
But the thing people like you never demonstrate is how your alternative method (if any is proposed at all) would be better.
This is one instance where a famous (almost cliched) Churchill aphorism still holds true.
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Aug 16, 2023 10:36:49 GMT
Nobody who calls for reducing the franchise should be treated with respect unless the range of people they want to deny the vote to includes themselves. Even then, they should be ignored, but ignored more respectfully than is otherwise the case. The wider the franchise the lower the level of education and understanding and even interest in that electorate. So you are in effect arguing for a position where a more ignorant and irrational electorate decide the affairs of the nation. Is that because your desire for the absolutist principle of inclusion trumps your own inherent rationality of what is obviously best? Or that a large, lazy, ignorant electorate is far easier to manipulate by simple rhetoric and bribery to support you blindly in what you do? A wider franchise must always mean a poorer and weaker and more corrupt outcome. It is a common falsity to regard a universal suffrage to be a given or a good thing, when all the evidence suggests quite the opposite. What I'm arguing is that people who complain about universal suffrage are people who can't deal with the fact that their opinions are unpopular and that they should grow up and learn to deal with it.
|
|