I heard that the Comhairle was looking to approve its new Corporate Strategy for our Islands last Thursday. I tuned into themeetings to listen in. I was expecting a lot of debate and some good questions. But everything seemed to go through on the nod.Were my expectations too high? Have I missed something? Dothe real discussions take place somewhere else? Who knows?
Will I be tuning in again? I think not. When some Members spoke, it was like listening to a lesson on how not to deliver speeches written by some-one else. I did learn a few lessons though. I’d like to pass these onto the Group that had the temerity to put forward an amendment (a change/addition aimed at improving things).
Okay, a bit of independent thinking is good. Trying to put across different points of view show that you want to be part ofsomething bigger and better - even if people don’t always agree with you. It also shows that you’re not a follower of the crowd. And, after all, the Comhairle is meant to be Council of independent thinkers and not one of ‘party’ politics?
It seemed that this Group didn’t want to vote against the Strategy – they supported it. BUT then they made a big mistake in trying to have a debate on a host of other things that they believed could have made a difference to people’s lives if they were included in the Strategy and its draft Business Plans. In drafting their amendment, it seems that they tried to be conciliatory and reach out to others. Surely that’s a good thing?
I have now seen what they put forward. They were suggesting things like setting up local decision-making bodies, performance appraisal for Chief Officers, reducing the Council’s carbon footprint, actions to help alleviate poverty, co-opting women onto main Committees, better transport connectivity, supporting employees who are carers, reviewing the baseline budget to protect local services, and civic awards for volunteers. In fact, loads of stuff that sounded quite interesting and nothing totally outlandish?
But, if you ever think of doing this again, then read on, because I have a few suggestions.
Lesson One – Please don’t try and put up different ideas – manyMembers don’t seem to like it. Just stick to approving the recommendations in the report and ‘don’t try and be smart’ by attempting to change or add things because the old hands have been there, and it has been made as complicated as possible in any event.
Okay, you must have known that bits would be challenged but just remember that the Chamber isn’t about freedom of speech – it’sabout suggesting something that must be ‘competent’. No doubt this Group asked and got advice on what is ‘competent’. But maybe they ignored bits of it? Maybe they decided to stay true to their election pledges and submit what they thought was needed to make a difference in their communities? Okay then, they seem to have got a few things wrong but surely all was not lost? TheChair would find a way to make sure that everyone who wanted to could have their say and put forward their ideas?
Lesson Two – it doesn’t matter if you really believe in what you are trying to do – or that you are trying your best – it’s awfully time consuming and a bit trying on everyone else who has to listen to you.
The amendment was eventually ruled ‘incompetent’. It seems it was only one amendment? What was the problem? Okay, it wasmade up of lots of suggestions. But could anyone expect these asamendments given that there were only 7 members wanting to put forward these proposals for discussion and voting?
Lesson Three – keep it simple, and don’t be too ambitious in your thinking. Don’t put up too many ideas at once – it makes it hard on everyone else who has to cope with your enthusiasm.
Someone also implied that it was awfully long - 6 pages - oh dear!
Lesson Four – Dealing with lots of things put by other Memberscan be challenging and once a debate starts, it can be a bit daunting for some to have to reply rather than calling the Officers to do it for them.
There was a bit of complaining because copies of the amendment had been sent out to members the day before. I think things are usually tabled – eh? Isn’t it a good thing when people get a bit ofnotice? People don’t always like surprises? And what about when you’ve taken account of feedback to try and reach consensus and change things or add things that might make a real difference? Does that count for nothing?
Lesson 5 – don’t try and make things easy, even if you are up against a deadline to get things through the system – it just confuses some people even more.
The Chair endorsed the advice from the Officer – fair enough. It seems that a few of the suggestions were a real problem. Some of these problem areas weren’t costed but neither was the strategy? Oh, now I get it, that was what was meant when it was said that it wasn’t a Strategy but an amendment? So, have I got this right? Strategies are inspirational. That doesn’t mean everything, or anything will change but more importantly in this case, they don’t need to be costed. That comes come later? Amendments do however, even if you were making just oneextra proposal that was to be costed for a decision at budget timeat another meeting, when Members could vote it out in any event? Believe me, I had real trouble keeping up by this point! To cut a long story short, the whole thing was declared incompetent – Debate Over – before it had even begun.
Lesson 6 – you get one chance, don’t mess it up and don’t try and be smart. Remember lessons 1-5.
It all seemed a bit convoluted to me. Why wasn’t the Director of Finance & Corporate Services or the Chief Executive asked to provide advice on the disputed bits? Could the Group not have been asked if they wanted to remove the disputed items? Could this not have been done at the stroke of a pen, and the (revised) amendment put, so allowing open debate to follow on? Who knows?
Do the Members (who are the Council) not make their own standing orders? Surely, there must be easier and better ways of doing things Guys? I was hoping to hear a way through from the Chair that was statesman like and inclusive? Or was it just a bit of a hoot for some to hear fellow colleagues’ efforts being knocked on the head? Ah, the politics of it all. Or is it all politics – one wonders. Would all this make someone want to stand for election? Would it make more women want to stand for election?
Lesson 7 – Don’t expect magnanimity or graciousness.
Nowadays, most local authorities appear less inhibited – common sense prevails. They take the view that Chairs should always try and include, not exclude, Motions, Amendments and Questionsput by democratically elected Members. Okay, you mustn’t suggest anything illegal. What you propose should also be relevant. Isn’t it the Chair’s role to help find a way through all gobbledygook and facilitate debate?
Lesson 8 – Many don’t really get this modern, open democracy stuff. Better to play safe, keep things as rule bound and closed as possible. And really, why bother anyway when you don’t have to? When you’ve got others to do your thinking for you? And when you can delegate just about everything and restrict the need for consultation to the chosen few - if need be? Empowering communities seems to be the message of the day? But doesn’t this suggest that all Members to feel, and be empowered as well?
Lesson 9 – between standing for election and being elected – something happens – some Members who want change will lose their voice no matter how hard they try. But don’t worry, it doesn’t have to be infectious!
I say don’t hold back – or let yourselves be held back. Keep speaking up on behalf of your communities. Keep raising issues of local, national or even international importance. Keep sayingthe things that you believe need to be said on behalf of your electorate - even if others would rather you didn’t. That is why we elected you and that is what we pay you to do.
Lesson 10 – Forget lessons 1-9. If you really believe that what you are doing is the right thing to do - keep on going! Doesn’t everyone love a tryer?
