Last updated 11:31, Friday, 09 May 2008

I am one of the few councillors who spoke strongly against the overwhelming consensus in favour of the agreed change from a committee system to a cabinet system at Eden District Council.

As my comments may be given some publicity, I would like to be given a little space to give my reasons for being against the change.

The reason given by the Independent Remuneration Committee for giving the leader of the council an ‘uplift’ of an extra 250 per cent of basic allowance for his new role was the extra duties that role would entail.

That the duties previously undertaken by 38 members are now to be given to only seven members surely would involve an increase in workload.

A full-time job, some may think, given the new salary of more than £12,000 for the newly-appointed council leader.

Of course, the new council leader-elect of Eden District Council cannot devote his full time to his new position since he is also a member of Cumbria County Council, attracting an allowance of more than £16,000 for that role in the year 2006/2007.

Already a total of more than £28,000 per year for two part-time positions. That is not counting a travel allowance of more than 50p per mile for Eden Council business.

On to my main reason for opposing the change. Councillors do not initiate decisions. Councillors either accept or reject reports written by council officers. In committee a vote is taken and the report is accepted or rejected by members. If rejected, the officers have to go away and submit another report. That takes time. It is also democracy.

The new system means that officers submit a report to ONE member, a cabinet member, and that member makes the decision to accept or reject. No deliberation to weigh pros and cons. Decision-making will certainly be quicker but will it be better?

MICHAEL EYLES
Eden District councillor - Penrith East