|
|
 |
| |
Rid the lock of dealers
Cllr John Mills argues that
Labour in Camden is different to Labour in Whitehall
IN May there will be local elections in Camden. Some
voters appear to be tempted not to vote Labour in the council
elections because of dissatisfaction with the Labour government
at Westminster. There are two powerful reasons why this is neither
fair nor reasonable – nor in the interests of Camden residents.
Camden Council should surely be judged on its own record.
We are one of the relatively few top-rated councils in the country,
an accolade provided by external assessors against exacting
standards. All the council’s departments are doing well,
constantly winning prizes for their performance, leaving Camden
with more awards than almost any other council in the country.
Of course, it is impossible to satisfy everyone all the time,
but compared to what others achieve, Camden’s record is
excellent. How have we done it? By no means always by slavishly
following government policy. While of course we broadly support
having a Labour government in power, Camden has its own agenda
which is not always the same as Westminster’s. Where we
differ, we think ours is closer to what most people in Camden
really want. We have one of the best Local Education Authorities
in the country and we do not think that the situation will be
improved by imposing new academies on us, rather than spending
the same money on improving our existing schools. We have strongly
opposed the government’s stance on providing insufficient
funding to improve our housing stock, following the vote on
whether an ALMO should be established in Camden.
We objected to the new licensing laws because we thought they
favoured the drinks industry’s interests over those of
residents.
To an extent the differences we have had with central government
reflect a difference in style. Camden does not believe that
the best way to improve services is constantly to change the
way they are delivered. We think the answer is to improve the
way they are managed.
We believe that this approach has enabled us to use our limited
resources to the best advantage in achieving our goals, and
want to do all we can to maintain Camden’s social cohesion,
to minimise deprivation and to produce a green and safe borough.
We therefore think that Camden deserves to stay Labour, judged
by its record of achievement and its aspirations. We are well
aware, however, that there are those who may be tempted to vote
for other parties because of the Iraq War or issues such as
identity cards, which have got nothing to do with Camden Council,
or because of education reforms which most council members oppose.
One big reason for not succumbing to this temptation has to
do with an issue which goes much wider than Camden.
Over the last quarter of a century, the way Britain has been
governed, by both Labour and Conservatives, has involved relentless
centralisation. The powers exercised by Whitehall have steadily
increased while everywhere the capacity of councils to take
decisions has diminished.
Labour in Camden therefore asks you for your vote on two counts.
The first is that the council has been exceptionally well-run
over recent years and shows every sign of continuing to be so
in the future.
The second is that Camden may be Labour, but it has its own
agenda, overlapping but still separate from that of central
government. A Labour vote in the local elections in May 2006
is going to be a vote for local democracy. We believe that it
is for you to decide how Camden is run, not someone in Whitehall.
|
|
|
|
