London SE1 community website

More Power to the Mayor? no thanks

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  1 2 3 Next
Current: 1 of 3
Thursday 13 July 2006 3.40pm
More Power to the Mayor, no thanks
We need more public consultation and democracy in planning not an elected dictatorship.

I wonder if it will make him think a bit more before supporting a development if he knows he will be blamed for it.?
Probably not.
Thursday 13 July 2006 4.07pm
He'll just get someone on his side to write a report supporting it.
That way he can stay hands off and speak for the people, referencing "reports".

not bitter at dumbing-down....not at all
Thursday 13 July 2006 7.13pm
This is great news - less interfering from NIMBY's and their luddite views, less public inquiries and all the pointless expensive bureaucracy surrounding them, less delays and holdups for exciting world class projects, more real progress and development for London.
Thursday 13 July 2006 8.11pm
I'm not sure your anti democratic vision of a city with no planning regulation at all . Is how new labour intend there devolvment of power to an elected mayor to be seen.

Any development doesn't constitute progress.

Cart blanch to corporate interest wouldn't be in the public interest and a lap poodle to central government isn't what the people of London need.

If the mayor was representative of the people of London I would think giving him more power would be a good thing.

As it is im not even sure ken Livingston even likes London. Never mind being fit to run it.

However if giving the mayor more power produces a high calibre of candidate at the next mayoral election.
It may be for the good.
In the long run.
But if the calibre of candidate including non politicians doesn't turn up.
It sound like a recipe for disaster.
Thursday 13 July 2006 11.20pm
I'm starting a petition against this today. Please do sign up and forward on to others if you oppose this decision.
Friday 14 July 2006 6.41am
I think this is a real blow to democracy - BECAUSE Ken was so intent on being accepted back into the Labour party. I voted for him when he was INDEPENDENT, which is, I consider, the most important thing for the Mayor. But having Labour controlling London by the back door is outrageous. And phasing out the boroughs from decision making is also scary. Not that I hold SUCH a brief for Southwark Council, but having so much power in the hands of one man is unacceptable. Even if you subscribe to some of his views - power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Friday 14 July 2006 7.11am
If he gets more power, how much more council tax will we have to pay, the congestion charge is already high and I've not seen any changes on public transport apart from the fares going up and up.
Friday 14 July 2006 10.59am
AndyIntyers, i think this pettition should be more widely circulated - have you put it on 'londonist' yet?

link can be found on the 'other local community websites' bit
Friday 14 July 2006 12.45pm
The other point about this is that as the last Mayoral election we voted for candidates that wouldent have these new powers.

So we are now getting something we didn't vote for.

The result also suggested that London's don't want the mayor to have to much power.
Monday 17 July 2006 4.17pm
There is a good article in the evening standard graphically showing why ken Livingston is not the right person to be in charge of planning in London.

It also shows the Tate tower but doesn't mention that it might not get built.
Pages:  1 2 3 Next
Current: 1 of 3

To post a message, please log in or register..
We are part of
Independent Community News Network
Email newsletter

For the latest local news and events direct to your inbox every Monday, you need our weekly email newsletter SE1 Direct.

7,000+ locals read it every week. Can you afford to miss out?

Read the latest issue before signing up

Also on the forum
Views expressed in this discussion forum are those of the contributors and may not reflect the editorial policy of this website. Please read our terms and conditions