An Elected Mayor Could Not Have Solved The Problems We Face

Published on: 15 Oct, 2016
Updated on: 15 Oct, 2016

From Fiona Curtis

At the University of Surrey’s debate on the Elected Mayor referendum questions were asked about Michel Harper’s financial involvement in the campaign.

Both Mansbridge and Juneja refuted the claims that Harper had contributed money despite his statements to the contrary, so what went on? Would we really want our borough to be run by people with such strong personal motives but whose own judgement calls have been variously highly questionable, illegal or controversial?

Of course, a vote for the elected mayor system would have allowed others to have come forward but the argument that they would have been any more independent is, in my view, unlikely to be true.

Anyone with the necessary skills to have done the job would have presumably lived in Guildford and their location, town or village, may affect decisions. Likewise, they may have a business interest or represent organisations.

One of the key problems we have in Guildford is our overcrowded road network and weak infrastructure. We were told that an elected mayor would not have had the authority to deal with either and hence could not have moved any quicker than the current system.

Whilst I believe that a good shake up could have been beneficial, throwing toys out of the pram in the name of democracy didn’t buy my vote.

Responses to An Elected Mayor Could Not Have Solved The Problems We Face

Dave Middleton Reply

October 15, 2016 at 4:14 pm

The thing that annoys me the most about this whole referendum business is that everyone, including the three principal proponents of the scheme knew full well that it would fail and therefore knew that a significant amount of council tax payer’s money was going to be wasted. Mr Mansbridge is even quoted by the BBC following the failure of his proposal as saying, “We haven’t won the day but in our hearts we knew that that was a more likely outcome.”

I think that he, Ms Juneja and Mr Harper, who all profess to care for Guildford should put their hands in their pockets and pay for the unnecessary expense they have caused.
- Ben Paton Reply
  
  October 16, 2016 at 1:09 pm
  
  If they ‘knew’ in their hearts that the referendum would not support their point of view then what was the moral justification for calling it? Does it show that the petitioners had any consideration for their fellow citizens and for the public purse?
  
  Borough councillors also know in their hearts, no doubt, that building on a number of green belt sites has no moral or environmental justification – but so long as it is not happening in their ward they keep their heads down. Where is the moral justification in seeking election on a mandate to protect something and then doing the opposite once elected?