The politics of Argyll and Bute

The politics of Argyll and Bute are a curiosity and a spectator sport all of their own. The sad thing is that the rustic pantomimes of manipulation they play out do not reflect the very serious economic growth potential of this place.

Indeed they damage it profoundly in managerial and administrative incompetence and a ready indulgence in the lard of pork barrell politics.

The local political stage

Argyll and Bute is controlled by the 13-strong Alliance of Independents, a rainbow rag bag of disguised political views bound together by nothing more than personal ambition. It has no hinterland, no political philosophy, no economic development strategy for Argyll – nor the capacity to create one.

They need each other to form the majority caucus and their combined pool of ability and expertise is shallow. Some, frankly, could exist in no other world. The more able are unhealthily powerful and run unchallenged by anyone – except by For Argyll. The middle band are able enough at a level of common sense, do a decent enough constituency job and do not trouble themselves beyond that. And the cannon fodder are the cannon fodder.

Of the party groups, there are currently the SNP with 9 members, the LibDems with 6 and the Tories with 2.

Between the Alliance and the party politicals there are currently 3 non-aligned independents and the 3-strong new group, Argyll First. Its members are also independents of varying political persuasion but with a unifying policy of putting Argyll first in the decisions they take on any issue. By this they mean putting the larger interests of Argyll before locality, before party and before special interest of any kind.

They have trodden a very steady path since their inception a year ago and it is fair to say that they are the most generally trusted of the councillors.

The political distortion of the ‘independents’

Currently the SNP have 9 seats, the LibDems 6 and the Tories 2. Labour have none,

A look at the voting figures for the constituency in the 2010 UK General Election demonstrates sharply the disguises under which the various independents must run. In this recent election across the full constituency:

• The LibDems got 31.6% (3% down on 2005).
• The Conservatives were second with 24% (0.5% up on 2005).
• Labour were third with 22.7% (0.3% up on 2005).
• The SNP were fourth with 18.9% (3.4% up on 2005).
• The Scottish Greens, the Jacobite Party and an independent got 2.8% between them.

Proportionately, on this vote and on  35 available council seats (36 members less 1 representing the 2.8% ‘other’ vote) here is pattern to be expected:

• The LibDems should have 11 councillors.
• The Tories should have 8 or 9.
• Labour should have 8.
• The SNP should have 7.

The impact of the independents, largely disguising their personal political affiliations for political gain, is interesting.

In a largely rural constituency whose largest town, Helensburgh, is not industrialised, local politicians with Labour leanings clearly run in camouflage – which means the loss of the social justice agenda one would expect to be a lively part of debate – although debate, as we understand it to be, does not feature in the chamber of Argyll and Bute Council.

There is an obvious consensus to disguise significant Tory sympathies. These are openly expressed for Conservative candidates at the General Election and clearly deflected to Independents known but not declared to be of that persuasion at local authority level.

The disjunction between the LibDem general election vote and its representation at local authority level resists political analysis since its political philosophy – until its membership of the current UK coalition government with the Tories – is generally inoffensive. Anecdotally, the reason for several previously LibDem-aligned councillors running as independents is a tendency within the group for being quarrelsome.

The SNP is the only political group punching above its weight at local authority level. Given its core philosophy of fostering an independent Scotland, it is arguable that candidates proud of a strong Scottish identity would be the least likely to disguise their political affiliation in running for election.

How the council doesn’t work

Conduct in the council is poor. Both the elected membership and the salaried staff are riven by a culture of bullying. Some of this is specific to inadequately managed powerful individuals and much of it is endemic to a system of local government which simply does not fit today’s society – and has not done so for some time. Local government reform is long overdue.

Councillors are accountable – only just – but not responsible. Senior executives are responsible (only just) – but are not accountable.

• Councilors are not paid to be, equipped to be or, by the relevant Code of Practice, allowed to be responsible.
• Senior executives, on the evidence, carry lightly the weight of their responsibilities and willingly shelter behind their non-accountabilty. In the private sector, disastrous projects like Oban Airport, the Port Askaig pier development and the expensive failure to produce competent school closure proposals would incur immediate dismissal or resignation.

These are major public sector problems. It’s only public money, It’s only performance in the public interest. Who”ll notice? Who can prove it? Who cares?

Nobody is effectively in charge of anything. Everyone has some kind of  ‘get out of jail free’ card to play. And they do.

Audit Scotland is the major regulator of their financial conduct and performance,.

The government of the day is their interface with funding.

The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA) – a moribund but territorially protective lobby, is their trade union.

And every four years the electors of Argyll and Bute are in the driving seat.

The 2012 Scottish local government elections will be the most interesting for a long time, the most politicised and fought before the most widely knowing electorate.

This is the inevitable result of the eye-opening experience of so many of Argyll’s communities as they watched and suffered from the council’s astonishingly incompetent and cavalier management of the school closures fandango.

Here is our analysis of the situation in the 2012 local government election. (coming)