Wolveryeti
Detty Pig
Does head office play a role in selection and the platform on which they run? And once a council is 'won', does the party leadership have any influence over how decisions are made?
What control do political parties have over their councillors?
- Thread starter Wolveryeti
- Start date
Miss-Shelf
I'll meet you further on up the road
Different things influence it
Depends how closely he consistency party work with each branch of the the party
How democratic each branch is
Wider party rules have a bearing on that local democracy.
What other influence are bearing into that local political scene Eg Momentum, local interest groups
Local candidates are not directly selected by parliamentary parties on the whole. But could be suspended by the parliamentary party
Depends how closely he consistency party work with each branch of the the party
How democratic each branch is
Wider party rules have a bearing on that local democracy.
What other influence are bearing into that local political scene Eg Momentum, local interest groups
Local candidates are not directly selected by parliamentary parties on the whole. But could be suspended by the parliamentary party
AnnO'Neemus
Is so vanilla
They can withdraw the party whip, so effectively make a councillor an independent.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
Where the one Labour councillor to defy the whip got suspended
kebabking
Not a Girly Swot, but I like them....
Conversely, local councillors seem to chop and change their party affiliation with some regularity.
From a national party level managing local councillors is a bit like herding cats - one of the largest reasons for which is the total lack of real competition to be a councillor: of the 10 people who put their names in the hat for a party nomination (any party..) for council elections, at least half should obviously be in prison, and most of the rest should be in a secure hospital. There will often only be one, and often less, candidate that the selection committee would trust with a bag of chips. Councillors know this, know they have no real competition, and therefore know they can pretty much behave as they like because - unless they are found in bed with a 9 year old boy - the party isn't going to do much against them.
I've met a few councillors who've been so thick they can hardly string a sentence together but they fit what's viewed as the right demographic for a particular ward. They get elected but it's made very clear that they need to shut up and do what they're told.
1927
Funnier than he thinks he is.
Welsh Labour in the Senedd in Cardiff seem totally out of step with Labour nationally as if there was no connection at all, so guess that lower down there is d end less accountability and singing off the same hymn sheet going on!
Puddy_Tat
naturally fluffy
or some of the london 'labour' councils who have demolished / want to demolish and 'regenerate' (i.e. turf the plebs out and flog to property developers) council estates...
In Oxford, for example, basic is about £400 a month for a councillor with no additional responsibilities. That's for attending maybe two or three meetings a month, plus whatever you do/don't do in your ward.
In Hackney, it's more like £850 a month, with additional responsibilities tanging from a few grand up to the high £30ks. That's on top of the £850 a month.
Also iirc, (in Oxford anyway) they're entitled to pension contributions too.
So I really wouldn't say 'fuck all'. (Details should be on your council's website.)
It does make you wonder if we should have a third as many councillors, but doing it full time. Paying say a basic wage of 20k( or 30 in London). That would come out more than paying 3 lots of £300 a month, but not "out of the ball park" more.
Obviously all the usual arguments about career politicians etc, but we could have term limits perhaps?
Obviously all the usual arguments about career politicians etc, but we could have term limits perhaps?
Similar threads
