Cut bureaucracy and not democracy - 3rd July 2013

Ryedale like all councils is now faced with more cuts. I believe there are a number of ideas, including some which will not help our district.

One suggestion which is circulating behind closed doors is that the number of councillors should be reduced. This means cutting back on democracy, so that your democratic representation in the corridors of power would be considerably reduced. Making such a saving would be instantly noticeable, while saving very little money. The total sum paid to all councillors in regard to their basic allowances does not exceed the salary of the Chief Executive. So, if the number of councillors is cut from thirty to twenty three, the savings will be relatively small – less than £25,000..

At the same time as consideration is being given to culling councillors, a review is  in place looking at the amount of councillors’ allowances. The point has been made that allowances paid to Ryedale councillors are considerably less than the money paid to councillors in other similar authorities. So one may expect that any reduction in Councillor numbers will be offset by an increase in councillors’ allowances. One suspects that the result will be an overall increase in the cost of democracy – not a reduction.

Another suggestion is to join Scarborough with Ryedale, and create a unitary authority. This to my mind means bringing together two unlike authorities, and would create more problems than it would solve. Ryedale is a country area with a few small market towns, each with its own unique character. Scarborough is a coastal authority dominated by a large sub-regional urban centre. Scarborough town has more in common with York than with any Ryedale town, and has many of the problems of a much larger urban area.

People who know Scarborough will be aware of the attempts that Council has made to develop North Bay, and how an excellent children’s pool and water flume facility has been closed to accommodate it. As in Ryedale, there have been supermarket wars, where the Council has, I believe, ignored the wishes of local residents. Unfortunately for them, the all powerful council did not have to fight a local stakeholder which had the resources to take the Council on – as happened in Malton. Scarborough is an authority which has endeavoured to make the town more attractive to tourists and relieve unemployment by encouraging the building of casinos.

Ryedale has already forged several links with Scarborough. The latest of these is to give Scarborough a contract to enforce on and off-street car parking in Ryedale. This has been done without regard to the difficulties this makes for people who work in local shops and residents who have houses without garages. We all know how yellow lines have been painted on the streets of our towns. Many of these are no longer required, and the restrictions have not been enforced for years. Clearly there are also many areas where the current parking restrictions do need to be enforced, but no attempt has been made to work out where to concentrate enforcement operations, so as not to waste resources on enforcement action which is not needed. Instead the officials from Scarborough have arrived in Ryedale to enforce the law without any sensitivity to local views and with all the heavy handed arrogance of a nazi guestapo. This should give us all a taste of what life would be like if Ryedale were to be absorbed by Scarborough into a single unitary authority.

So, do not listen to the Siren voices of people who promote these ideas. Cutting democracy will not save money, and union with Scarborough would do more harm than good to our district and market towns.