H'Angus won in Hartelpool

Let's see if Boston wants an elected mayor - and no monkey business!As the debate rumbles on about whether Boston needs an elected mayor - which would replace the shambolic system we have at present – it seems that people are unclear on what it means.The confusion was compounded in the Observer column in last week’s Boston Standard – but since the writer needs a card with his name  written on it stuck in his hatband as an aide memoir, we are not especially surprised.
When a borough appoints an elected mayor, the historic office is not affected.
The “electricians, truck drivers and businessmen” can still potter around in their ermine robes and silly hats as they have for centuries.
Fortunately in most cases, the mayor has little to do with the real running of a council – except to “impartially” referee a tied vote.
The real power is in the hands of whomever a council elects – or otherwise – as its leader, who then appoints a cabinet of like thinking individuals unlikely to do anything than his or her bidding … but who can be sacked if they don’t.
Defined like this, we can see why the concept of an elected mayor is appealing.
The functionary in this post is put there by a majority vote of local people – in other words, people who consider the candidate the best for the job.
Again the difference from the current system is quite distinct.
At present, a leader's power  comes from the combined votes for his or her party - not as an individual.
And let’s not forget that, often,  elected councillors who won the votes don't  necessarily support their leader’s appointment.
More significantly,  a leader is often unknown to the electors he represents.
Another misconception – which seems widely held in Boston - is that the person campaigning for a referendum will automatically get the job.
All that is happening at present is that local people are being petitioned to call for a referendum which – if one is held – will cost £50,000, and not the £70,000 being touted.
If the petition succeeds, and a referendum is held and a majority votes to elect a mayor,  the next step is open to anyone who wants to throw their hat into the ring.
For example, it could provide an interesting opportunity for a council leader to see if he or she had the real support of the electorate; for a prominent business person to stand; or even – and it’s been done before … in Hartlepool … for the local football mascot to stand; and the man who wore it  it to be elected (see photo at top of page.)
The cost of an elected mayor is, of course, an issue  - and opponents are quick to say that it is unaffordable.
But this year, the "historic" office of mayor  - which is a token piece of pantomime these days - will cost  taxpayers £80,000 ... and even when the budget is trimmed, will be £60,000 a year  - more than £1,000 a week.
Certainly, some improvement to the way that Boston is managed is clearly needed.
The previous council voted for a government structure called “the new Leader and Cabinet Executive (England) Model.”
This required that  “the Leader is elected at the annual council meeting after his/her election to the council and he/she will remain in office for a 4 year term corresponding to his/her term as councillor.”
This key provision regarding tenure in office was designed to ensure that councils were run more harmoniously, more smoothly, and most importantly more efficiently and professionally – but it has already been rejected by the current leader.
Surely then, all bets are  now off.
If voters want  a referendum, they should have  one.
Perhaps the money could come from the reserves – as it has for the up-front funding of the Moulder training pool deal.
And as for the result – all we can say is that it could be interesting!

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