Blaylock's black look for keeping council leader

Unless there are two people called Jim Blaylock living in Kirton, there there are apparently quite serious disagreements within the Boston Bypass Independents concerning whether or not an elected Mayor would be a better option for the Borough than an all-powerful leader. Writing in the Boston Standard under the headline “The town needs an elected Mayor,” Jim Blaylock says an elected mayor would put the electorate in the driving seat and let them decide who they wanted to run the council - and if the incumbent failed to deliver he or she would get kicked out.
And he also uses the argument to launch a veiled attack on the present council leader Richard “Papa Dick” Austin.
Councillor Blaylock’s intervention comes after the borough published the result of another of its famous “consultations” in which an inadequate survey both online and included with the council tax bills that drew the predictably indifferent response.
The report in the borough’s monthly bulletin even went so far as to declare “Elected mayor gets thumbs down” - suggesting that the suggestion has been kicked into touch once and for all.
Enter Councillor Blaylock.
He says - quite rightly - that our democratic system gives elected members the right to govern, and for the council of­ficers to carry out the wishes of the elected members – not the other way round
“Over the last 20 years many of the policy decisions made by Boston Borough Council have been officer lead (sic) some with dis­astrous consequences – for example the. PRSA and the Haven Gallery.
“Members have been reactive and not proactive.
“It's time for a change.”
Councillor Blaylock argues that an elected mayor would save money and create a single motivated team.
He cites Mansfield council as a good example of how the system could operate, and where a “transformed” council are delivering regeneration and improved serv­ices.
Controversially, he concludes: “An elected mayor brings better leadership, accountability, and a streamlined decision mak­ing process, which will ensure the council delivers better serv­ices to its community.”
We’re not sure what Councillor Austin might make of this, as we are certain that he wholeheartedly embraces the status quo, where he rules the council with a rod of iron, and sacks any party colleagues who have the temerity to disagree with him.
Not only that, but were he ever to become leader under the proposed new system, he would enjoy even more autonomy - and we’d all be saluting his hat on a pole in the Market Place.
We’ve commented on this issue before, and here’s what we said last November:
“The BBI has produced a rotten executive, and the question is whether whatever replaces it will be any better. The problem with option A (an elected leader) is that we get the mixture as before with the exception that the new leader has absolute authority, which - depending on the leader - could be a very dangerous thing. We've seen what happens in the present council when conflicts of personality collide with spite. The problem with option B (an elected mayor) is that we cannot for the life of us think of anyone who is big enough to be deemed electable as a potential Mr or Mrs Boston.”
The latter remains true, but we applaud Councillor Blaylock’s call for as much debate on the issue as possible.
Cometh the hour, cometh the man.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.